I actually see a glimmer of agreement here buried under a lot of bloviating (by both of us). We seem to agree that there are minor league/fringe major league players worth taking a flyer on as righty platoon bats. You just think a contender shouldn’t waste its time (and a roster spot) doing such things unless there’s a high probability of reward. I think that if a contender can give a roster spot to Miguel Cairo, it can take such a chance.

On paper, the Phillies are worse than the Mets, so making an upside play or two could very well win them the division.

“I would say a righty who destroys AAA pitching is worth taking a shot on for league minimum (with scout approval, naturally). It’s never going to be a sure thing or even a highly probable thing, but it’s a smart risk. It’s an upside play that more teams would do well to take.”
It’s a smart risk when you’re the Mariners, and you’re rebuilding and have no real 1B anyways. It’s a dumb risk when you’re the Phillies, and are benching a guy who’s reliable for a .750-.850 OPS, and your divisional competition is so tight that you don’t have a couple hundred spare AB’s to waste on potential reclamation projects. Shelton is a low-risk/moderate-upside move for the M’s. If the M’s waste 100 AB’s on a guy who OPS’s sub-.700, no big loss. If he OPS’s .850 for 250 AB’s then great! Sign him for next year cause he’s one of the most productive bats on the team. But, he’s a moderate-risk/low-upside move for the Phillies. If they waste 100 AB’s on him and he OPS’s sub-.700, then that’s 100 AB’s of .750-.850 OPS they just threw away. If he OPS’s .850 for .250 AB’s, well, then he’s really only a small improvement over what they would have likely gotten anyways.

“Person 1: There are known deposits of Quad-Athrocite in this area, which is a blue rock. I therefore think it’s pretty likely that some of the rocks in that sack over there are blue. I’m on a first name basis with three of the rocks, so I’ll direct your attention to those three.

Person 2: Those rocks are very far away, but from where I stand they don’t look blue.

Person 1: They may very well not be, but my point stands that some of the others in the sack probably are.”
This is going down a road I imagine you have very little interest in, but the difference between your Quad-Athrocite scenario and the baseball players, is that the Quad-Athrocite deposits are observably verifiable on a very basic level, whereas the existence of the type of player we’re discussing is not. Not to mention you open the floodgates regarding the great many problems of induction there. But I doubt you’re here for a lecture on scientific philosophy, and this is becoming a rather tangential discussion anyways, so I won’t go into that unless you prod me further.

“My theory, again, is that there are likely players available for free who could hit lefties significantly better than Ryan Howard. I’ve given you examples of the sorts of players that I would look at, and I’ve given you examples of players who’ve been acquired for free and hit very well at the major league level in the past. I can’t do any more than that.”
Yet you concede earlier that there’s likely a high failure rate. Can the Phillies really afford to be taking gambles for such a marginal upgrade? Doubtful. It’s an unneccesary risk with extremely limited upside. We know what Howard will do. Absolute best case scenario is that this phantom platoonmate will give an additional 4 runs, maaaaaybe 5. The odds of 4 or 5 runs happening are small. That’s looking at a .850+ OPS. More likely the difference would be within +/- 2 runs. There are undoubtably better uses of that roster spot. Like, I don’t know… platooning someone with Ibanez?

“I didn’t say you have to “disprove (my) theory.” I just asked for a compelling reason to think that there isn’t a player available who might succeed in that role. I’m still waiting.”
Dude. Tell me you’re pulling my leg here. Please.

Please.

Your theory = There is a player available who might succeed in that role.
What you’re asking me to do: Provide a compelling reason to think that your theory isn’t true.
How is that not asking me to disprove your theory????

On top of that, I’ll also note THAT I DON’T DISAGREE WITH THAT. There likely are players available for cheap who can outperform Howard vs LHP (though I don’t see the justification for Shelton, Hessman, or Sheffield being that player). My (largely ignored and dismissed) argument, from my very first post, is that Sheffield (since expanded to include Shelton, Hessman & Co.) would be a poor use of that roster spot, and (my more recently developed argument) that whatever incremental benefits could be gained from that platoon would likely not outweigh the risk even if roster limitations were not a factor (which they are, and a big one at that).

*emphasis*
The issue isn’t whether or not these players exist (which, to your credit, you did a good job distracted me into debating for a while), but whether giving one a roster spot would be the best allocation of said spot (it’s not) and whether the risk/reward is appropriate for a team in the Phillies situation (it’s not). Please address these if you wish to continue to argue that Shelton/Sheffield/Hessman/etc would be a worthy roster addition for the Phillies.
*/emphasis*

“Thanks, because a person who thinks certain players in the minors probably don’t deserve to be there must live in a backwater and lack formal education.”
Yeah, that’s what I meant. Well, either that or that people who have a tendancy to ignore logic and reason (for example, oh, i don’t know, not understanding why asking someone to provide “compelling reasons” as to why a certain class of thing does not exist is moronic) should probably go about educating themselves in the matter. One of those two. I don’t remember.

“No. To try to put the burden of proof on me and tell me I have to disprove your theory is stupid. It’s up to you to prove that they exist, by providing examples of them.”

I did provide examples of players of the sort that I’m talking about, and you made less than compelling arguments that they aren’t viable options. So I responded by saying that even if they aren’t–and you haven’t convinced me–there are probably others who are. Every year brings a story of a busted prospect or career minor leaguer breaking through in the majors.

I would say a righty who destroys AAA pitching is worth taking a shot on for league minimum (with scout approval, naturally). It’s never going to be a sure thing or even a highly probable thing, but it’s a smart risk. It’s an upside play that more teams would do well to take.

To be absolutely clear: the player chosen for this role could very well fail, but that doesn’t mean the idea was bad.

“Person 1: I have lots of blue eggs in this sack. Like these three for example.
Person 2: But two of those are orange, and I’m pretty sure that third one’s a rock! I don’t believe blue eggs exist. Show them to me.
Person 1: By focusing on the eggs I chose as examples, you don’t do anything to refute my larger point that I have lots of blue eggs in this sack.”

That would work if it went something like this:

Person 1: There are known deposits of Quad-Athrocite in this area, which is a blue rock. I therefore think it’s pretty likely that some of the rocks in that sack over there are blue. I’m on a first name basis with three of the rocks, so I’ll direct your attention to those three.

Person 2: Those rocks are very far away, but from where I stand they don’t look blue.

Person 1: They may very well not be, but my point stands that some of the others in the sack probably are.

“No. To try to put the burden of proof on me and tell me I have to disprove your theory is stupid. It’s up to you to prove that they exist, by providing examples of them.”

My theory, again, is that there are likely players available for free who could hit lefties significantly better than Ryan Howard. I’ve given you examples of the sorts of players that I would look at, and I’ve given you examples of players who’ve been acquired for free and hit very well at the major league level in the past. I can’t do any more than that.

I didn’t say you have to “disprove (my) theory.” I just asked for a compelling reason to think that there isn’t a player available who might succeed in that role. I’m still waiting.

Reiterating: I’m not a scout, nor am I a stats whiz. I can’t point you to one free player who “has a very strong probability to OPS over .750 and a good probability to OPS between .800 and .850.” I just don’t know enough to do that. But Jack Cust, Carlos Pena, and the aforementioned Ludwick and Werth should be proof that such players exist. And they were all of the same ilk before breaking out. Focus on that general class of player, and you’ll probably find a capable right-handed platoon bat.

“Then go sit in on a logic course at your local junior college or something.”

Thanks, because a person who thinks certain players in the minors probably don’t deserve to be there must live in a backwater and lack formal education.

So if I follow you correctly, you’re choosing to base your opinion of how well he can hit major league caliber LHP not by his actual 300+ PA against actual major league caliber LHP, but by his smaller sample size of at-bats against inferior pitching? Hah. Dude, I’m not saying he’s going to continue to run a reverse platoon split. I’m saying that we don’t know if he’s been overperforming against ML RHP or underperforming against ML LHP. Probably both. The fact that his career OPS vs ML RHP is only .008 worse than his career OPS vs MiL RHP leads me to believe that he’s probably overperformed against ML RHP a decent bit. I’m not pretending to know how he’s going to perform, but if I had to take an even money over/under bet on a .800 OPS vs LHP, I’d take under.

“And before you make this argument again, yes, if you do something as silly as signing Raul Ibanez, getting him a platoon partner would be an easier way to optimize your roster, but the lack of a legitimate fourth outfielder doesn’t excuse the Phillies from improving elsewhere.”
It does if they only have one extra roster spot. You have to make smart decisions and maximize the value of your limited roster spots. Platooning Howard while not platooning Ibanez is not a smart decision, and does not maximize the value of your roster space. It’d be great if you could carry 50 players and have a platoon for everyone, but you can’t. You only have so many spots, and you have to use them wisely.

“And no, giving a spot to someone like Shelton is not a poor use of your roster.” Roster spots are a valuable commodity, and it is definitely a waste of a spot if you’re platooning him with a guy who has proven he can OPS ~.780 against LHP, while you’re crossing your fingers and hoping Shelton matches the best season of his life and OPS’s .800, and while there’s a guy patrolling the outfield who is below replacement level against LHP, and when using that roster spot on a platoonmate for him would give you much greater returns. It’s honestly pretty even money as to who would be better against LHP this year, Howard or Shelton. So why would you use up 2 roster spots on your 1B slot when you could just use 1 and get approximately the same results, within a run or two? Especially when there are such obviously superior uses for that roster spot.

“When are there ever guarantees of anything? We can only discuss probabilities. That’s a central tenet of enlightened baseball analysis.”
Replace “virtual guarantee” with “high probability” and quit whining about semantics. Sheesh.

“By focusing on the players I chose as examples of right-handed, Quad-A sluggers, you don’t do anything to refute my larger point. These players are out there, and they’re cheap.”
Are you kidding me right now? Christ. Alright, check this convo:

Person 1: I have lots of blue eggs in this sack. Like these three for example.
Person 2: But two of those are orange, and I’m pretty sure that third one’s a rock! I don’t believe blue eggs exist. Show them to me.
Person 1: By focusing on the eggs I chose as examples, you don’t do anything to refute my larger point that I have lots of blue eggs in this sack.

See the problem? The burden of proof lies with you, you’re the one making the existential claim about these players. It’s not up to me to prove that they don’t exist – what am I supposed to do, go through every player not currently on an ML 25man and demonstrate why they won’t hit .800+? No. To try to put the burden of proof on me and tell me I have to disprove your theory is stupid. It’s up to you to prove that they exist, by providing examples of them.

You’ve yet to do that. So let’s see it. Show me a cheaply or freely available player that has a very strong probability to OPS over .750 and a good probability to OPS between .800 and .850. Let’s see him. Burden of proof is with you, whether you like it or not.

Then go sit in on a logic course at your local junior college or something.

Have you looked at Sheldon’s minor league secondaries? Against LHP he has a .339 BABIP combined with a 16.8 LD%. Seems a bit of luck involved to me.

Nothing indicates that Shelton would be better than Howard against LHP.

When are there ever guarantees of anything? We can only discuss probabilities. That’s a central tenet of enlightened baseball analysis.

I think it’s very likely that SOMEBODY (not necessarily the three players I listed) is available at or near league minimum who could hit lefties significantly better than Howard. A major league front office should be smart enough to find a good candidate for that role.

By focusing on the players I chose as examples of right-handed, Quad-A sluggers, you don’t do anything to refute my larger point. These players are out there, and they’re cheap. Many of them could succeed at the major league in a limited role; some could do much better. Ryan Ludwick and Jayson Werth should be ample proof of that.

And before you make this argument again, yes, if you do something as silly as signing Raul Ibanez, getting him a platoon partner would be an easier way to optimize your roster, but the lack of a legitimate fourth outfielder doesn’t excuse the Phillies from improving elsewhere. And no, giving a spot to someone like Shelton is not a poor use of your roster. Having an offensive player on your bench who is a little too limited for full-time duty is a good idea, just like having a legitimate fourth outfielder would be.

We’re not missing the forest for the trees. We’re saying those aren’t trees at all, and we’re scratching our head as to exactly where this forest you speak of is in the first place.

Yeah, but the thing is he’s not really a good fit no matter how you spin it. Your point that he can’t play the outfield supports that. Compare Ibanez and Howard starting vs LHP. Ibanez will likely OPS between .650 and .700 vs LHP, and play -10 to -20 UZR/150 defense in the field (gotta be below replacement level), while Howard will post an OPS vs LHP of between .750 and .800, and play defense in the -5 to +5 UZR/150 range. Tell me, which one of those two needs a platoonmate more? If your answer is anything other than Ibanez, then this discussion is a lost cause.

I’ll throw this out there in very simple logic, feel free to point out what premise(s) you disagree with:
P1: Phillies likely only have 1 potentially available roster spot.
P2: Ibanez is in greater need of a platoon than Howard.
P3: The current roster contains an adequate platoonmate for neither.
P4: Sheffield cannot platoon with Ibanez (cannot play OF).
P5: Player X can easily be obtained to platoon with Ibanez
P6: The benefits of a Player X/Ibanez platoon are greater than the benefits of a Sheffield/Howard platoon
Therefore
C: Sheffield is not a good fit.

I think that’s a pretty logically airtight argument, so to show that Sheffield is a good fit, you have to disprove one of my 6 premises.
My justifications for the premises:
P1: Bruntlett/Dobbs (primary backup IFers) aren’t going anywhere, and the Phils seem commited to Cairo as super utility guy. Stairs seems expendable only in favor of an Ibanez platoonmate, and I don’t think the Phils have gone with an 11 man pitching staff in a while.
P2: Already explained above, he’s below replacement level against LHP
P3: Platooning either Howard or Ibanez with any of Stairs/Bruntlett/Cairo/Dobbs would make the team worse
P4: You said it yourself, the man just can’t play the OF anymore.
P5 & P6: Basically, Sheffield over Howard provides MAYBE a .050 gain in OPS and honestly Sheff’s probably worse defensively than Howard. ~200 AB of Howard’s line vs LHP (.240/.315/.470ish) would be worth about .5-1.5 wRAA, while ~200 AB of Sheff’s line vs LHP (.250/.350/.450ish) would be worth 3-4 wRAA. Given Sheff’s age and the fact that he’s played 59 innings in the infield since 1993 (2 @ 3B in 2004, and 57 @ 1B in 2006 – his only 57 at 1B in the majors ever), I can’t imagine he’s very good at defense either. At best I’ll give him equal to Howard, at worst, he’s 0 UZR/150 worse than Howard (maybe extreme, but the dude is OLD and he’s never really played the position).

Best case scenario for Sheff, his 200 AB are worth 4 wRAA, and his defense is equal to Howards, while Howard (theoretically, had he been given the 200 AB) would only have put up .5 wRAA, a net difference of 3.5 runs. Worst case for him, he puts up 3 wRAA while Howard (theoretically) would have put up 1.5 wRAA, and plays defense at 10 UZR/150 worse than Howard, which, over ~500 innings, would make him worth 2.7 less than Howard, for a total of -1.2 runs.

Best case: add 3.5 runs, I’ll be generous and round up to 4.
Worst case: subracts 1 run, with a generous round to 1.

In order to add 3.5 wins over Ibanez in 200 AB/500 Innings (let’s give him a .260/.320/.370, and a UZR/150 between -20 and -10, for total run contribution of between -5.5 and -10, composed of -2 to -3 wRAA and a UZR between -3.5 and -7), we either need to find an equally abysmal fielder with a mildly above average bat (in the .270/.330/.440 range), or an average defender with a batting line vs LHP slightly better than Ibanez’s, or a plus defender (10+ UZR/150) with a downright miserable bat, or something in between any of those. From the sounds of it, those seem like AAAA guys who should be laying around everywhere, though I don’t have the time to go looking for them myself right now. Off the top of my head though, Wlad Balentein of the M’s seems like a very good fit (in the -5 to -15 UZR/150 but sweet bat vs LHP mold) who could likely be had for a middling pitching prospect or two. Balentein/Ibanez platoon and full-time Howard is likely better than full-time Ibanez and a Sheff/Howard platoon for 2009, and definitely has more upside for the future.