Article: Patience Warranted With Struggling Youngsters

[h2oface]

First, a major obstacle for prospects is to stop excess movement at the plate. The only movement you want, is movement toward the ball. Extra movement causes flaws in the swing. The timing thing is different for everybody. Gary Shefield had huge movement in his bat, but when the pitch was being delivered he always returned to the same cocked position. Parker has some articles with good examples of eliminating movement in swings.

 

The norm. The coaching norm. It totally discounts some of the best hitters. The Ken Griffey Jr hip shimmy, the Joe Morgan elbow twitch. Mike Trout totally doesn't fit ....... and is why so many teams, including the twins, passed on him, the gold mine. In music... the Louis Amstrong puffed cheek armature......... you just never really know. if it works, leave it alone, may be the best coaching of all.

[Alex]

The norm. The coaching norm. It totally discounts some of the best hitters. The Ken Griffey Jr hip shimmy, the Joe Morgan elbow twitch. Mike Trout totally doesn't fit ....... and is why so many teams, including the twins, passed on him, the gold mine. In music... the Louis Amstrong puffed cheek armature......... you just never really know. if it works, leave it alone, may be the best coaching of all.

 

And if a guy strikes out 20- 25% of the time in AA and over 40% in the bigs?

[Rick Niedermann]

Maybe your right Nick. But I am still running out of patience with Hendriks.

[Alex]

Maybe your right Nick. But I am still running out of patience with Hendriks.

 

How about now?

 

Overall, I understand Hendriks hasn't pitched well, but what I don't get is why people seem to have less patience for him than Dozier, especially as Hendriks is younger. As I said in the other thread, they both have about the same time in the majors and neither has shown anything. The difference is Hendriks doesn't have much, if anything to prove in minors at this point. The Twins really should be seeing if he can figure it out up here whereas Dozier spent very little time in AAA and hasn't really had any success above AA.

[Rosterman]

Okay, a guy is labeled as part of the team's future.

His first job is to get regular time playing a position, not riding a bench.

Hicks is getting his at-bats and lessons in the majors. He could be doing the same at Rochester. But right now, you can ask, would it be better if we had Benson or Boggs of Mastro playing everyday up here?

Maybe sending Hicks down will allow him to more slowly work out the quirks he has seen as a leadoff hitter in the majors. Maybe he will just tee off on the influx of AAAA pitchers he faces there. The talent margin between the majors and the minors is big.

In the minors you are either an up-and-coming prospect who will play regularly in the majors so you can get a nice pension, of the top guys on the minor league roster who end up being the 11th/12th pitcher in the bullpen or the bench reserves.

If anything, I cry foul at the Twins line-up construction. Maybe Hicks needs to bat further down in the order and have the bench coach sit with him while he watches early at-bats by others (like be Revere did, perhaps).

Maybe Mauer isn't a #2 hitter. But the Twins have no one to bat leadoff unless you want to put Escobar, Florimon, Carroll or Dozier in there at the moment.

Mauer needs to advance runners and get on base. If he can advance a runner AND get on base, it makes the Willingham and Morneau atbats more valuable. Willingham as #3 isn't seeing much in the way of rbis at the moment.

But back to Hicks. He is overmatched and should't be getting 4/5 at bats every inning right now. Let him pull back to the end of the order. Then move him to the 2 spot at some point. If he starts taking pitches not for strikes, then reconsider leadoff.

But I vote let him take his bumps in this season and learn from the so-called major league coaching staff. If he's the future, let him jump in feet first!

[LaBombo]

Nick, a well-written and interesting read, but it looks like you didn't address the possibility that the decision to give Hicks the CF job was a bad call before the first pitch on opening day.

 

In my book, skipping AAA with a guy who has needed at least a full year at each level and who has consistently had an obvious concern in his game (contact rate) is a textbook example of impatience. Maybe that's only my book, and nobody else's.

 

If the Twins impatiently rushed Hicks to the majors (and that possibility should finally be occurring to even them by now), isn't a prolonged refusal to address the ongoing failure of that poorly calculated risk just stubbornness, not patience?

 

I'm not advocating some sort of weekly merrygoround of promotions and demotions based on tiny sample sizes, and I don't think anyone else is, with Hicks or anyone else. Many people seem to think either that he looks lost and his continued struggles aren't good for him, or that he shouldn't have been put in this position in the first place. Or both.

 

My question is this: Suppose even the Twins braintrust were to admit to themselves that Hicks = opening day CF was a mistake. Are you saying that promoting him from AA to AAA after an ill-advised 10 or 15 game detour in the majors would still be worse than what's happening to him now? Thanks for taking my call. I'll hang up and listen.

[shs_59]

Question is though, (if this continues) do you send HIcks down to AAA or AA ? to re-boot Nick?

 

Hate to say i told you so, but i told you so few weeks back. He was not ready. Me saying he'd hit .230 -.240 something in MLB in April/ May/ June was Generous. I look at every box score of every game For Twins minor Leaguers. the past 2 years.... and despite only seeing Hicks play a handfull of times..... i KNEW that spring was a mirrage.... Those Hr's were so fake also.

[70charger]

Nick, a well-written and interesting read, but it looks like you didn't address the possibility that the decision to give Hicks the CF job was a bad call before the first pitch on opening day.

 

I don't think he did either, and neither did I in my reply. The fact is, we're past that point. The decision was made, and when you decide to put a guy like Hicks on your roster, you have to play him, and not sporadically off the bench.

 

Whether the decision to put him on the major league roster prior to April 1 was a good idea is another discussion entirely (and I came down on the side of putting him in AAA). It's also a discussion almost impossible to have without hindsight bias.

 

I just don't think it much matters halfway through April. You're not getting those 10 games back.

[h2oface]

After a day off....... three more strikeouts.

I am guilty.

I am one paralyzed by hope.

I was one tantalized and enticed from spring training brightness.

But it is not to be, at least yet.

Please, it is getting very painful to everyone that is watching, and to Hicks himself.

Please, nobody even knows if he can excel in AAA, yet.

It is time to see.

That is were the confidence is hiding.

It is not on the Twins, right yet.

[Riverbrian]

With Hicks I'm just not sure... Normally... I'd commit to a rookie and let him work out his kinks for awhile. I don't want to do anything knee jerk after a handful of games.

 

He's just struggling way too much. Perhaps if he was just struggling a little but a little doesn't describe what's happening.

 

I hope he rights the ship real quick... The longer this goes on the harder it will be to keep in the majors.

[h2oface]

And if a guy strikes out 20- 25% of the time in AA and over 40% in the bigs?

 

Sorry.......... I got sidetracked. I was no longer referring to Hicks here. Speaking in glittering generalities......... the when it works part. Sorry for the tangent.

[h2oface]

And if a guy strikes out 20- 25% of the time in AA and over 40% in the bigs?

 

Sorry.......... I got sidetracked. I was no longer referring to Hicks here. Speaking in glittering generalities......... the when it works part. Sorry for the tangent.

 

So sorry for the double post. I posted from the link from the front page, and I and it didn't show up. In fact, I am getting nothing showing up past my previous post from the link from the front page, even now. But I see many past from the link from the forum........ site seems to be glitching again.

[jun]

Good Job Nick. It makes perfect sense to me. One thing I was thinking about is the affect of a day off. By my maths, Hicks played more innings than any other ballplayer in the majors this spring. Then he has played all nine innings of every game until last night. It looks like today's game will be rained out. So he might get a three-day break before Friday's game. Hopefully, the rest will refresh his mind so he can start fresh on Friday.

 

Wrong again. He played and went 0 for 5 with 3 strikeouts. He needs to be moved down to the 9th spot until Mastro returns. By then he could be sent down to AAA.

[mako83]

Can anybody post what about droping him in the order. You could also start giving him a rest after five days on. Its not called giving up its called building confidence.

[Pius Jefferson]

If you drop him in the order than you have to find someone to hit lead-off.

[CI Ranger]

Great article, need to give these youngsters a chance, not total mess up their minds with pressure to succeed now.

 

Not hitting or getting on base leading off, take some pressure off Hicks, put him down in the 8 or 9 spot, put your smokin hot hitter last 5 games at leadoff. He will get it, once he starts to roll , move him up a spot or two until he regains and earns the leadoff spot

[CI Ranger]

put hicks at 8 or 9 spot, no pressure, he will work his way and get better

[snepp]

If you drop him in the order than you have to find someone to hit lead-off.

 

http://cdn3.sbnation.com/imported_assets/557675/joe-mauer-2010-bust.jpg

[Brad Swanson]

To me, the Hicks debate comes down to why you want to demote him. If the reason is to somehow help his development, then I can understand. Although, I don't agree and I think the best thing for his development is to work through the struggles. However, that is beside the point and I at least understand this argument.

 

Now, if the reason for demotion is to improve the team, then I don't understand that rationale. First off, there isn't a player capable of truly helping this team win more games, at least not in center field. Second, Hicks is still the best defensive player at the position that the Twins have and has the most offensive upside of the reasonable candidates.

 

Sure, you could platoon Mastroianni and Clete Thomas, but does that platoon really figure to out-produce Hicks if given a full season?

 

Finally, this is a bad team. I know the 4-2 start was fun, but the Twins aren't winning more than 70 games this season, so why not give Hicks these games when the stakes are relatively low? That way, in 2014, when the team might actually start to compete, they will have a better idea as to whether they have their long-term center fielder.

 

He has played 8 games. If he earned the job in Spring Training, he has certainly earned more than three series to show his talent.

[snepp]

Why can't you demote him both to improve his development and make the team better?

[Alex]

To me, the Hicks debate comes down to why you want to demote him. If the reason is to somehow help his development, then I can understand. Although, I don't agree and I think the best thing for his development is to work through the struggles. However, that is beside the point and I at least understand this argument.

 

Now, if the reason for demotion is to improve the team, then I don't understand that rationale. First off, there isn't a player capable of truly helping this team win more games, at least not in center field. Second, Hicks is still the best defensive player at the position that the Twins have and has the most offensive upside of the reasonable candidates.

 

Sure, you could platoon Mastroianni and Clete Thomas, but does that platoon really figure to out-produce Hicks if given a full season?

 

Finally, this is a bad team. I know the 4-2 start was fun, but the Twins aren't winning more than 70 games this season, so why not give Hicks these games when the stakes are relatively low? That way, in 2014, when the team might actually start to compete, they will have a better idea as to whether they have their long-term center fielder.

 

He has played 8 games. If he earned the job in Spring Training, he has certainly earned more than three series to show his talent.

 

I think that the bottom line is that it's clear if things don't turn around Hicks doesn't belong in the majors right now. Having him way over his head is not working through struggles, it builds frustration, leads to a lack of confidence, and ruins good mechanics as hitters make flailing adjustments (see Dozier last year).

 

Second, whether or not you think this team can compete, saying no one else can help them win games just isn't true. Hicks is one of the two worst hitters in baseball through these first three series, if not the worst, and he's posted the most negative WAR so far. So by almost any standards, any ML CF including Mastroianni, would be able to help the team more. I agree that that may not be the concern if Hicks were just "struggling," as the team just isn't that good, but this is far more than that.

[Brad Swanson]

I think that the bottom line is that it's clear if things don't turn around Hicks doesn't belong in the majors right now. Having him way over his head is not working through struggles, it builds frustration, leads to a lack of confidence, and ruins good mechanics as hitters make flailing adjustments (see Dozier last year).

 

Second, whether or not you think this team can compete, saying no one else can help them win games just isn't true. Hicks is one of the two worst hitters in baseball through these first three series, if not the worst, and he's posted the most negative WAR so far. So by almost any standards, any ML CF including Mastroianni, would be able to help the team more. I agree that that may not be the concern if Hicks were just "struggling," as the team just isn't that good, but this is far more than that.

 

Hicks has been one of the two worst hitters through those 8 games. That doesn't mean he will continue to be one of the two worst hitters for the remainder of the season. That is my point. Over a 162 game season, I think Hicks will outproduce Mastroianni, Thomas, Benson, Boggs, etc. If the Twins feel he is the best player at the position, they should keep playing him, regardless of how he performs in three series. If he has the best talent, he is the most likely to give the best performance.

 

These are all projections based on a tiny sample of games. In addition, we have no idea where his confidence level is right now and we have no idea how frustrated he feels. I also think it is worth noting that if this 8 game stretch of games occurred in the middle of the season, we wouldn't be analyzing it this closely.

 

I am also not saying he should never be sent down. I just think he needs to be given a lot more time before that decision is made.

[Brad Swanson]

Why can't you demote him both to improve his development and make the team better?

 

My argument is that it doesn't make the team better.

[LaBombo]

I don't think he did either, and neither did I in my reply. The fact is, we're past that point. The decision was made, and when you decide to put a guy like Hicks on your roster, you have to play him, and not sporadically off the bench.

 

Whether the decision to put him on the major league roster prior to April 1 was a good idea is another discussion entirely (and I came down on the side of putting him in AAA). It's also a discussion almost impossible to have without hindsight bias.

 

I just don't think it much matters halfway through April. You're not getting those 10 games back.

Thought it was clear I was only talking about sending him down, not benching him, which is obviously a bad idea. Not worried about how much he may have cost the team so far, and not worried a lot going forward unless virtually everything else breaks right for them.

 

Couldn't disagree more that the thought process that lead to him being the opening day CF is now irrelevant to his situation.

 

If the Twins were looking at a very solid, conflict-free body of evidence that Hicks was ready for the majors opening day, then a 'be patient' thread wouldn't, or at least shouldn't, exist. A strong season or even half season in AAA with improvement in his contact rate, and Hicks is a guy in a slump who probably gets at least a month or two before anyone is thinking demotion.

 

Instead, you've got a guy who skipped a level rather than improving his contact rate in AAA, and a lot less to go on about how ready he is, and about what to do next.

 

So I can't imagine how the two different evaluation/decision paths don't affect the odds or timing of demotion, unless the Twins decided before the season opener that he stays for X number of weeks, no matter what he does here. If that's the case, I don't see their line of reasoning.

[LaBombo]

He has played 8 games. If he earned the job in Spring Training, he has certainly earned more than three series to show his talent.

If he did earn the job in spring training, then he did it while taking about as few AB's against quality MLB pitchers as he has so far in the regular season, making the sample size a wash.

 

And if the Twins really didn't decide Hicks was ready until seeing him in ST, then that means their contingency plans if he were not ready for CF on opening day amounted to Mastro, who is fine as a placeholder, and Benson, who almost nobody wants to see in the majors again until he shows some signs of life in AAA.

 

So the whole 'Hicksie won the job in ST' meme is the FO either being dishonest and negligent if they decided before ST, or merely negligent. Which do you think?

 

Also, although I know this was touched in an earlier thread, how many non-HOF-caliber Twins position players have been promoted from AA to open the season in the majors, and succeeded, or even stuck? Anybody feel free to jump in. It would be encouraging to hear even a few good examples.

[Pius Jefferson]

http://cdn3.sbnation.com/imported_assets/557675/joe-mauer-2010-bust.jpg

 

Good luck with that. Given his slow start it's more likely Gardy moves Mauer down to third.

[diehardtwinsfan]

But back to Hicks. He is overmatched and should't be getting 4/5 at bats every inning right now. Let him pull back to the end of the order. Then move him to the 2 spot at some point. If he starts taking pitches not for strikes, then reconsider leadoff.

But I vote let him take his bumps in this season and learn from the so-called major league coaching staff. If he's the future, let him jump in feet first!

 

I don't think we'd be having this conversation if he was getting this many at bats per inning

[Alex]

Hicks has been one of the two worst hitters through those 8 games. That doesn't mean he will continue to be one of the two worst hitters for the remainder of the season. That is my point. Over a 162 game season, I think Hicks will outproduce Mastroianni, Thomas, Benson, Boggs, etc. If the Twins feel he is the best player at the position, they should keep playing him, regardless of how he performs in three series. If he has the best talent, he is the most likely to give the best performance.

 

These are all projections based on a tiny sample of games. In addition, we have no idea where his confidence level is right now and we have no idea how frustrated he feels. I also think it is worth noting that if this 8 game stretch of games occurred in the middle of the season, we wouldn't be analyzing it this closely.

 

I am also not saying he should never be sent down. I just think he needs to be given a lot more time before that decision is made.

 

It's one thing if he was crushing AAA and then called up and struggled. It's another thing to have a good (yes, that's really all it was) year in AA and make the jump and then struggle. It might indicate it's not just an "adjustment" period -- there were signs in AA that this could happen (I pointed out his strikeout rate we we first discussed this way back when). It could be a sign they moved him up too fast. I'm not saying they send him down today, but if he shows no improvement, I don't think you can keep him up another series after this. If he shows a little improvement, well, then you decide as you go.

 

 

 

How much time for you?

[Brad Swanson]

I am fine with giving Hicks the full season to figure things out, if that is what it takes. Reasonably, I think a month is almost necessary. If the Twins decide to demote him on May 1, I can understand that. I would not agree with it though. I'd definitely drop him in the batting order prior to sending him to AAA.

 

As for contingency, I think the Twins assumed that one of Hicks, Mastro and Benson would be fine. They made their choice, it may not be working right now, but I still think it was the best choice. I fully expect Hicks to turn things around, so perhaps that is why I am on this side of the discussion. I may end up being wrong, but I'd like to get a good enough look at the guy before I admit that I am.

 

I just have a hard time calling the front office dishonest or negligent, when I do not have all the information. They make decisions based on the information they have in front of them. I've said this before, you can argue with their methods and evaluations, but I don't think it is fair to accuse them of incompetence or conspiracy. I'd say their relatively successful track record with player development and roster construction is something we tend to forget about in the moment.

[Alex]

I am fine with giving Hicks the full season to figure things out, if that is what it takes. Reasonably, I think a month is almost necessary. If the Twins decide to demote him on May 1, I can understand that. I would not agree with it though. I'd definitely drop him in the batting order prior to sending him to AAA.

 

As for contingency, I think the Twins assumed that one of Hicks, Mastro and Benson would be fine. They made their choice, it may not be working right now, but I still think it was the best choice. I fully expect Hicks to turn things around, so perhaps that is why I am on this side of the discussion. I may end up being wrong, but I'd like to get a good enough look at the guy before I admit that I am.

 

I just have a hard time calling the front office dishonest or negligent, when I do not have all the information. They make decisions based on the information they have in front of them. I've said this before, you can argue with their methods and evaluations, but I don't think it is fair to accuse them of incompetence or conspiracy. I'd say their relatively successful track record with player development and roster construction is something we tend to forget about in the moment.

 

Since Terry Ryan, in terms of evaluation, they have moved players up too quickly and have certainly misrepresented players readiness and skillset tto the public.

 

I think for Hick's sake more than anything else, if he doesn't show signs of life, you have to send him down.