FanGraphs Baseball

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Leonys Martin should be TEX center fielder. He is already on the 40 man, has great defense and is hitting 332/407/500 at three levels in the minors this year.

    Comment by Dandy Salderson — July 26, 2011 @ 12:09 pm

  2. You know, I clicked on this article and went “hey, someone at Fangraphs found out about Leonys Martin”…only to see that there wasn’t the slightest mention of him in this article. While he’s slowed down a tad since his promotion to AAA (though it’s only been 64 PA and all that’s missing is the power), Martin remains the Rangers CF of the future and could easily be ready by September.

    If there’s a reason for the Rangers to focus elsewhere than the outfield, it’s Leonys Martin.

    Comment by Sean O'Neill — July 26, 2011 @ 12:10 pm

  3. Great minds and all that…

    Comment by Sean O'Neill — July 26, 2011 @ 12:11 pm

  4. I really don’t understand the pursuit of Beltran unless it’s just smoke and mirrors for some reason. Though I know Gentry’s offense is never likely to be stellar, he is a pleasure to watch both in the field and on base (once he gets on, that is). And Chavez has been quite good, as noted.

    In short, even if he didn’t cost much — which he apparently will — I don’t get the pursuit of Beltran.

    Comment by Eric — July 26, 2011 @ 12:17 pm

  5. Wow. Hadn’t realized he’d been playing so well in minors. Plate-discipline numbers look excellent.

    Certainly could’ve mentioned his name in article — although point still remains: while Beltran wouldn’t hurt the club, they’d probably be better off addressing other areas (like SPs after Wilson, for example).

    Comment by Carson Cistulli — July 26, 2011 @ 12:19 pm

  6. The thought is that the Rangers will bring up Martin if he continues on his current path during September to get him some major league (and hopefully playoff) experience. Leonys, not Perez.

    Comment by GhettoBear04 — July 26, 2011 @ 12:35 pm

  7. I don’t see any reason why linearly extrapolating based on such a small and odd sample size is a good idea, even if you reign in the results of its (naturally) absurd conclusion.

    Your overall point remains, but I don’t think it’s wise to expect Chavez or (the perfect 5th OF) Gentry to maintain anything close to this pace over the course of the season.

    Realistically, the contract status of Beltran (with no Type A picks) means that he could be an undervalued asset. I would rather the Rangers upgrade their team with Beltran and a good reliever (of which there are many on the market) and not overpay for a marginal starter.

    Comment by GhettoBear04 — July 26, 2011 @ 12:39 pm

  8. I should note that generally I enjoy your work quite a bit, Carson.

    Comment by GhettoBear04 — July 26, 2011 @ 12:43 pm

  9. i think it’s safe to assume that gentry and chavez, no matter how intelligently platooned, are not going to be able to produce the same kind of results as beltran. that said, the difference may or may not be enough to really matter–i guess the question is whether you think the rotation or the CF platoon is more likely to continue overachieving, with leonys martin being a possible option to bolster that platoon. id go for a pitcher, but it’s hardly ridiculous for a team headed to the playoffs to not want to rely on relatively unproven commodities when there’s a pretty good option available.

    Comment by juan pierre's mustache — July 26, 2011 @ 12:47 pm

  10. No problem re: tone or anything like that.

    For me, the big difference is in the added value of Beltran versus, say, Hiroki Kuroda — or even Erik Bedard, who’d cost less than Beltran, I assume.

    I think you trade for Bedard, put him in a coma (lest he hurt himself) till the playoffs begin, and then make him your No. 2 starter beginning with the ALDS.

    Induced coma: the new market inefficiency.

    Comment by Carson Cistulli — July 26, 2011 @ 12:53 pm

  11. Agree completely with your premise, but all the evidence/numbers used to back up your argument, as you come close to admitting, are essentially useless. It does no one any good for you cherry pick WAR/650 >97 PAs… it’s just… as close to useless as you can get. We want to know how good they ARE, not how well they have happened to rolled the dice thus far in 2011. Give us an actual idea of what value they present going forward, as a platoon or however you imagine them being utilized, then compare that to what Beltran would offer. And while the article was pointed in the right direction, it just doesn’t have an ounce of worthwhile quantitative analysis.

    Comment by Telo — July 26, 2011 @ 12:54 pm

  12. “Induced coma: the new market inefficiency.”

    +1

    Comment by Telo — July 26, 2011 @ 12:55 pm

  13. Are you using avoirdupois or troy ounces?

    Comment by Carson Cistulli — July 26, 2011 @ 12:57 pm

  14. Maybe Daniels has picked up Cashman’s game: insert yourself into every trade debate to run up the cost on your competitors.

    Comment by Steve Balboni — July 26, 2011 @ 1:02 pm

  15. I agree. Pretty simple here, when have the Rangers under John Daniels ever broadcast their true intentions? They are usually very under the radar with what they actually pull off. If anything, I say smoke screen here as well.

    Comment by Hove — July 26, 2011 @ 1:14 pm

  16. @Carson- That’s an entertaining thought regarding induced comas. Still, I think you should take a closer look at the Rangers rotation currently. They have at least 3 guys who are on the level of what Kuroda has put up this year and another in Holland who is a highly variable player that doesn’t seem like a bad option for the 4th spot in the rotation. I know this means your 2010 HeartFave Colby Lewis gets left out of the picture, but I’m not sure it makes sense to trade for a starting pitcher unless they are at an AllStar level this year.

    The Rangers overall pitching stats look mediocre this year due to the truly horrid bullpen performance. Even with that, the strength of the rest of the team puts them almost on the level of the Red Sox and Yankees if one uses FanGraphs team runs created statistics.

    Comment by GhettoBear04 — July 26, 2011 @ 1:29 pm

  17. this article is everything wrong with saberblogging these days. an absolute traveshamockery of sabermetric principles.

    not to mention the BEAUTIFUL use of arbitrary endpoints to complete inflate endy chavez’s game and true talent level.

    absolutely terrible.

    Comment by fjmanuel — July 26, 2011 @ 1:36 pm

  18. Yes, Carson, your wVOCAB is off the charts, Bondsian even. Congratulations. Try working on your Mendoza line MATH+.

    Comment by Telo — July 26, 2011 @ 1:51 pm

  19. Now THIS is the type of hard-hitting analysis I come to FanGraphs for. Nowhere else can you find such stimulating debates and insights like this. I believe Endy Chavez is criminally underrated and is a difference maker in the outfield. My dream outfield would consist of Chavez, Gary Matthews Jr, and one of the angels from the movie “Angels in the Outfield”. With of course Jeff Francoeur serving as 4th OF. Bravissimo Cistulli!

    Comment by Thomas Gore — July 26, 2011 @ 2:08 pm

  20. They may just be trying to drive up the price. They don’t want their competition to get him for a song. Although, I don’t think this is nearly as possible with the current Mets’ front office as it would have been with the previous one.

    Comment by Bill — July 26, 2011 @ 2:39 pm

  21. So, your problem with the analysis is “Endy Chavez is awful because he’s Endy Chavez?” Endy Chavez has played very well this year. The numbers show this very clearly. I doubts that he can continue to play this well, whereas Beltran has shown in the past that he can continue to play on the level he is currently playing. The Rangers may not be satisfied with centerfield for the same reason the Yankees aren’t satisfied with their pitching. They don’t believe the level of play they have seen to date is sustainable.

    Comment by Bill — July 26, 2011 @ 2:44 pm

  22. There is simply no reason to believe that Chavez will remain this productive. Maybe just as importantly, the Rangers’ best outfielders, Hamilton and Cruz, have both had numerous DL trips. Acquiring Beltran would give them a very formidable lineup when all are healthy, and a lineup that would still be very good if one of them went down.

    Since Beltran doesn’t come with any draft pick compensation to the acquiring team and is just a short term rental, the cost shouldn’t be prohibitive. The Rangers would significantly increase their chances of making the playoffs and winning once they got there with a Beltran acquisition. Does anyone really think the Rangers would be better off with Chavez/Gentry starting in CF in the playoffs?

    Comment by t ball — July 26, 2011 @ 2:58 pm

  23. Their lineup is loaded as is, CF is fine if they can catch the ball ok. You don’t need a good lineup to win the WS – signed, the San Francisco Giants!

    Comment by tdotsports1 — July 26, 2011 @ 3:36 pm

  24. Telo you have the internet equivalent of “little man syndrome”

    Comment by Mr. wOBAto — July 26, 2011 @ 4:02 pm

  25. Textbook – if you ever want to put together an instructional video on how to play centerfield, you could just use clips of Chavez. He isn’t the fastest, but he gets to just about every ball; doesn’t have a cannon, but makes strong, accurate throws. He lines everything up, takes great routes to the ball and is a joy to watch. I’d take him on my team in the role the Rangers are using him.

    Comment by Dave I — July 26, 2011 @ 4:06 pm

  26. “they’d probably be better off addressing other areas (like SPs after Wilson, for example)”
    …..

    But who would you drop from the 4-man rotation?

    Wilson, Ogando and Harrison have all been excellent, and Colby was a monster in October last year.

    Comment by Bill — July 26, 2011 @ 5:15 pm

  27. Hyperlink Code

    Comment by Anthony — July 26, 2011 @ 7:57 pm

  28. http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=17132663

    That’s what I meant to do (not very computer literate)

    Comment by Anthony — July 26, 2011 @ 7:59 pm

  29. Apparently I don’t know what I’m doing. First link is the right one.

    Comment by Anthony — July 26, 2011 @ 8:01 pm

  30. I can buy the general idea, but my impression is that there aren’t any pitchers who can fill the front-end of the rotation available.

    Comment by Ben Hall — July 26, 2011 @ 8:09 pm

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


Close this window.

0.208 Powered by WordPress