Santana's Defense

[Thrylos]

 

And again, are you ignoring (as others clearly are) that Escobar has been even worse than Santana at the plate this year? People around here keep talking about Escobar deserving to play every day . . . and it doesn't make sense with that .475 OPS.

 

Escobar has been a part time player and it is hard to compare full time with part time stats (because some people need to play regularly.)   If you look as some other stats, the really telling figure is that Escobar sucks because he did not get his swing going (BABIP .225 so far - he averages about 100 points higher) while Santana got his going (BABIP .357, which is a few notches higher than his usual) and still sucks.

Clearly Escobar needs more PAs than Santana at this point.

[USAFChief]

Escobar has been a part time player and it is hard to compare full time with part time stats (because some people need to play regularly.)   If you look as some other stats, the really telling figure is that Escobar sucks because he did not get his swing going (BABIP .225 so far - he averages about 100 points higher) while Santana got his going (BABIP .357, which is a few notches higher than his usual) and still sucks.

 

Clearly Escobar needs more PAs than Santana at this point.

I'm confused...the Twins should play the guy who "did not get his swing going" instead of the guy who "got his going" in hopes the first guy might get his swing going?

 

That doesn't seem so clear to me.

[twinsnorth49]

 

speaking of knowing whether or not to give up on someone, 28-year-old pedro florimon has a .786 ops and 0 errors at pittsburgh's indianapolis aaa affiliate ...

AAA was never Florimon's problem, it was bringing it to the major league level. He never showed he could even remotely handle big league pitching, simply over matched.

[twinsnorth49]

 

I'm confused...the Twins should play the guy who "did not get his swing going" instead of the guy who "got his going" in hopes the first guy might get his swing going?

That doesn't seem so clear to me.

Whew, glad I'm not the only one!

[USAFChief]

AAA was never Florimon's problem, it was bringing it to the major league level. He never showed he could even remotely handle big league pitching, simply over matched.

Actually, I'd wager a cold Molson he doesn't put up a .700 OPS in AAA, either.

 

He hasn't posted a .700 OPS since A ball. His career minor league OPS is below .700.

[Hrbowski]

Well, for anyone interested, PFlo is hitting .314 at AAA.

[Shane Wahl]

And today was pretty indicative.

[Platoon]

Guys, good news, I've got the solution.Just keep waiting. It won't be this year. But maybe it'll be next year. Or surely the year after that. Or at the worst four years from now. And hey, maybe Santana never figures it out, but there's this whole system full of PROSPECTS!!!! Woo!!!!20Something here we come!I'm tired of waiting.

So is everyone, but between injuries, and front office bungling, that's what we are doing. KC struggled more than just one or two years to get going. Guys like Morneau, Plouffe, and even the venerated Hunter took more than 4 weeks to get to where they are. Hunter and Cuddyer never really did overcome a fondness for outside sliders in high leverage AB's. Stocking stuffers like Boyer, Stauffer, Duensing, Nolasco, Thielbar, ad nauseu will guan aged mediocrity far past this year. The Twins bring up prospects at a glacial pace. As long as TR keeps rolling with the safe choice veterans, everyone better relax, it's gonna be awhile.

[Thrylos]

 

I'm confused...the Twins should play the guy who "did not get his swing going" instead of the guy who "got his going" in hopes the first guy might get his swing going?

That doesn't seem so clear to me.

 

Escobar needs to play every day to get his swing going, because the other guy (who got his going) is hitting at the same level and playing horrible defense.

 

Is that more clear?

[Shane Wahl]

Escobar has been playing pretty regularly of late and his OPS has fallen significantly. Are people more confident in his 2014 at the plate than Santana's?

 

If a utility guy can't get his bat going with sporadic playing then there is going to be a problem.

[ashbury]

AAA was never Florimon's problem, it was bringing it to the major league level. He never showed he could even remotely handle big league pitching, simply over matched.

Florimon's high-minor league numbers always screamed "won't hit nearly enough to hold a starting job in the majors". (And there's a lot of nearly equal competition for backup jobs.) A month's worth of good part-time numbers in Indianapolis isn't enough to change my view, any more than last year's far-below-par numbers in the majors represented his true worth either.

[twinsnorth49]

Actually, I'd wager a cold Molson he doesn't put up a .700 OPS in AAA, either.

 

He hasn't posted a .700 OPS since A ball. His career minor league OPS is below .700.

No wager necessary, I think you're right. Didn't mean to imply he was some kind of stud, just that being a reasonably good player that could get streaky in the minors isn't an indication of anything but that.

 

You can still have the Molson regardless.

[jokin]

 

 

Clearly Escobar needs more PAs than Santana at this point.

 

Not that clear to me.

[mickeymental]

 

AAA was never Florimon's problem, it was bringing it to the major league level. He never showed he could even remotely handle big league pitching, simply over matched.

i'd argue that for shortstops, a .661 ops with 9 hr, 17 2b, 44 rbi, 15/21 sb and 446 plate appearances in 2013 is more than "remotely" handling big-league pitching.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Guys, good news, I've got the solution.Just keep waiting. It won't be this year. But maybe it'll be next year. Or surely the year after that. Or at the worst four years from now. And hey, maybe Santana never figures it out, but there's this whole system full of PROSPECTS!!!! Woo!!!!20Something here we come!I'm tired of waiting.

im with you Paul. The sad thing is, we'll never know how good Santana could be. Not ever.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Between the two of them: ZERO walks and 40 strikeouts.

Really, that's kinda amazing.

[USAFChief]

i'd argue that for shortstops, a .661 ops with 9 hr, 17 2b, 44 rbi, 15/21 sb and 446 plate appearances in 2013 is more than "remotely" handling big-league pitching.

Florimon had a .611 OPS (68 OPS+) for the Twins in 2013, not .661.

 

Career big league OPS .565.

[Shane Wahl]

I only brought the great PFlo into this conversation in order to compare defense. It seemed, at least, that he became more consistent defensively with big league time. Concentrating really hard on every play is actually exhausting--it is a kind of endurance training that players need to go through unless they just get it naturally or developed it through playing as a kid.

[Kwak]

 

Escobar needs to play every day to get his swing going, because the other guy (who got his going) is hitting at the same level and playing horrible defense.

 

Is that more clear?

Very clear. Play the lesser player who has lower upside, in hope that he will become an average MLB player because average ballplayers are the path to long-term success.  Sounds a lot like gardenhire's claim that the Twins can have one guy who doesn't hit provided all of the others are "doing their job".

[mickeymental]

 

Florimon had a .611 OPS (68 OPS+) for the Twins in 2013, not .661.

Career big league OPS .565.

no idea how my eyes saw .661 ... but they stand corrected.

[Thegrin]

I think of it this way...Every game Santana does not have an error is a good day. Every day he gets a hit is a better day. Days when he has hits and no errors (or brain farts) is a great day.

Escobar should be compared with LNP (Little Nicky Punto) or Alexi Casilla, not Florimon. 

[jokin]

 

Florimon had a .611 OPS (68 OPS+) for the Twins in 2013, not .661.

Career big league OPS .565.

 

With a power hitters K%-  25%....  And career OPS+ of 57....

 

9 year minor league career OPS of .681 translates pretty closely to his big league OPS of .565.

 

Folks, there are good reasons that PFlo has spent most of his 10 years as a professional player in the minor leagues.

[ashbury]

Florimon had a .611 OPS (68 OPS+) for the Twins in 2013, not .661.

Which, in the context of his minor league numbers, may in retrospect turn out to be his Career Year.

[eLee612]

 

...

 

I don't believe that Polanco sticks at SS so it really is important for the Twins to find out if he can succeed for the next 6years.

 

 

The Twins must have decided that Santana would be a better long term option at SS than Polanco. ...

 

You both sound pretty sure about that... just [genuinely] curious what makes you think he won't cut it? 

[curt1965]

I agree with the points made by Blake and jokin, and appreciate all the other opinions in favor of Escobar.

It's a good discussion.

Let me state this first: Santana is probably my favorite player and I think he should be the Twins SS. However, I was at today's 13-3 win, and came away with these two observations about the play of Santana. First, he missed an easy throw from Vargas in the 8th that lead to an unearned run. Secondly, he didn't have the greatest AB's after his first AB (when he was given a gift hit from the official scorer on a blatant error-IMO)

I think we all have to remember that this is his first season as a starting SS in the big leagues. He makes mistakes. I also happen to agree with TR that Santana's issues are largely due to concentration problems.

He is still very young, too, and I believe too emotional at times. But we need to find out if he is the answer at SS, and how much slack are we willing to cut him to find out. I think he's going to be an excellent hitter, and it would be terrific if he improves defensively. I don't think you take a .300 hitter and send him to the minors, and tell him to work on his defense. (BTW- share the job with Polanco, too!)

It was pointed out that Plouffe and Dozier were not so graceful in their earlier years. The Twins are 1 game over .500, and Santana hasn't cost us any games. I say-let's see what we've got- what do we have to lose!

[Platoon]

The Santana/Escobar debate rages on! I think it boils down to a relatively simple decision. Do you want to win a couple more games, maybe, this year? Or take a chance on being better in the future? Escobar likely gives you a win or two this year, but will eventually impede your upside. Santana gives you a chance for that upside. A chance, not a guarantee. I don't care if the Twins win 71 games, or 73 games. I just want to see something looking forward. One of the few forward thinking decisions the team has made this year is to play Santana and see what they have, or do not have. I think that's a wise choice.

[Brock Beauchamp]

This is what happens when a team rebuilds. Young players sometime play bad baseball. The Twins have to play Santana at short because he's the kid with the most upside.

[Thegrin]

 

You both sound pretty sure about that... just [genuinely] curious what makes you think he won't cut it? 

If the Twins thought Polanco was going to be the SS of the future, why waste a year playing Santana at SS when Escobar has proved he already is a Major League SS and carries a decent stick as well.  The conclusion is, that the Twins do not see Polanco as the long term solution.  :0

[DocBauer]

Great discussion. (Again on this topic)

 

First: I like Escobar. I like him a lot and actually think he's underrated. I also think the guy can hit, as can Santana, and last year and ST shows the potential of both. Forget bad starts, they can and will hit. And both are starting to.

 

Second: any way you wish to slice it, the younger Santana has more range, more athleticism, and more overall offensive and defensive potential than Escobar. Talent alone doesn't make a successful player. But athletic potential is a fact in this case.

 

Third: despite all of his talent and his potential and his surprising and tremendous success last season, Santana was promoted early, was forced to mostly play out of position and excelled.

 

Santana absolutely, positively needs to learn to focus better and keep his head in the game more at times. It's making the "every play" and not just the great play that defines a great, or even good, defensive player. And while I am not making direct comparisons, I think a little perspective may be in order for a young, talented, early-promoted-and-forced-to-play-out-of-position-before-returning-to-his-natural-position-shortstop is tossed to early under the bus for some early errors.

 

HOFer Cal Ripken had 6 seasons of 20+ errors, including 6 of his first 7. The one season less than 20 was 19 errors split between SS and 3B.

 

Tony Fernandez had one season of 20 errors, and 3 more of 13 or more, which is VERY impressive.

 

Ozzie Guillen: 4 seasons of 20+ errors, 4 of 16 or more.

 

Omar Vizquel: 1 season of 20+, 2 of 15 or more errors. Again, VERY impressive.

 

Ozzie Smith...the Wizard of Oz ( or Ahhs if you prefer)...had 5 seasons of 20+ errors, another 4 of 15+.

 

Future HOFer, recently retired Derek Jeter, had 2 seasons of 20+ errors, and 5 at 15+.

 

I am NOT saying Santana is going to be any of these great shortstops. But then again, they weren't them until they became them.

 

I'm just saying...perspective...patience...do you really toss out a talented player with his potential for some errors and lapses at this point?

[jokin]

 

Great discussion. (Again on this topic)

First: I like Escobar. I like him a lot and actually think he's underrated. I also think the guy can hit, as can Santana, and last year and ST shows the potential of both. Forget bad starts, they can and will hit. And both are starting to.

Second: any way you wish to slice it, the younger Santana has more range, more athleticism, and more overall offensive and defensive potential than Escobar. Talent alone doesn't make a successful player. But athletic potential is a fact in this case.

Third: despite all of his talent and his potential and his surprising and tremendous success last season, Santana was promoted early, was forced to mostly play out of position and excelled.

Santana absolutely, positively needs to learn to focus better and keep his head in the game more at times. It's making the "every play" and not just the great play that defines a great, or even good, defensive player. And while I am not making direct comparisons, I think a little perspective may be in order for a young, talented, early-promoted-and-forced-to-play-out-of-position-before-returning-to-his-natural-position-shortstop is tossed to early under the bus for some early errors.

HOFer Cal Ripken had 6 seasons of 20+ errors, including 6 of his first 7. The one season less than 20 was 19 errors split between SS and 3B.

Tony Fernandez had one season of 20 errors, and 3 more of 13 or more, which is VERY impressive.

Ozzie Guillen: 4 seasons of 20+ errors, 4 of 16 or more.

Omar Vizquel: 1 season of 20+, 2 of 15 or more errors. Again, VERY impressive.

Ozzie Smith...the Wizard of Oz ( or Ahhs if you prefer)...had 5 seasons of 20+ errors, another 4 of 15+.

Future HOFer, recently retired Derek Jeter, had 2 seasons of 20+ errors, and 5 at 15+.

I am NOT saying Santana is going to be any of these great shortstops. But then again, they weren't them until they became them.

I'm just saying...perspective...patience...do you really toss out a talented player with his potential for some errors and lapses at this point?

 

Thanks for the context Doc.    I was aware of Ozzie and was going to bring him up earlier and continue the food fight.     Strictly    based on athleticism, Santana is right there with the best of them.    He's still not a cinch to hold the spot long-term, but the Twins are correct to give him an extended tryout, especially after he practically took a year off at the position last season.