Pedro Florimon

[oldguy10]

Florimon will hardly equal Ortiz's numbers even if they threw underhand to him for the rest of his MLB at bats.

[kab21]

David Ortiz logged 3895 professional plate appearances (1477 in the majors) when the Twins made the logical choice' date=' and released him. He was 27 years old.

 

The proving line is typically 4000 professional plate appearances--2000 in the majors, before a professional hitter is properly seasoned. With all due respect, I don't think this is the year to give up on Florimon, and his 606 MLB PA's.[/quote']

 

Using this argument Plouffe gets another 1.5 years and Parmelee 3 more years.

 

There should be very little debate that Florimon is a poor hitter and not an option that a teams wants going forward. He's an acceptable stop gap because of his defense but it's a position that the Twins should definitely try to upgrade. I'm not very optimistic that Santana is that upgrade so it will likely have to come from outside the org.

[Don't Feed the Greed Guy]

Florimon will hardly equal Ortiz's numbers even if they threw underhand to him for the rest of his MLB at bats.

 

And Ortiz' defense will never match Florimon's even if he was fielding in a wiffle ball league.

[Don't Feed the Greed Guy]

Using this argument Plouffe gets another 1.5 years and Parmelee 3 more years.

 

There should be very little debate that Florimon is a poor hitter and not an option that a teams wants going forward.

 

Plouffe and Parms can't match Florimon's defense. I find your comment "there should be very little debate..." quite ironic. I find this to be a good, engaging debate. It's a worthwhile conversation. This thread reveals a pretty nuanced conversation regarding the pro's and con's of Florimon's defensive upside, versus his offensive liabilities. I think there's still room for debate.

[DocBauer]

In regard to giving up the value of a 2nd round pick, I don't know the exact percentages of a 2nd round pick reaching the majors and becoming at least a solid, contributing ball player regardless of position. Considering the very unsure and volatile nature of the draft in general, it certainly can't be a high percentage. But simple logic would dictate it is a higher percentage/occurrence than a 3rd round pick, or a 4th or 5th, etc.

 

So I believe the debate has to be the willingness to give up that possibility of potential for a so-called "proven commodity". And in some cases, especially when a team is there, or almost there, the sacrifice is probably a good idea. Conversely, doing this fairly often further deprives a team of actually finding a good young player. Further, a prospect may not even help your team directly, but may be traded directly or packaged to make another move to acquire a helpful player.

 

Losing a second round pick by itself may not have a lasting affect on a team. (Though there is always the risk of missing out on someone good) But there is also the culmative affect of repeatedly doing so, not to mention the affor mentioned trade possibilities. The ability to acquire talent, depth of talent, is a valuable resource in any sport.

 

Certainly not opposed to the Twins improving at SS, but there is the possibility that Floriman improves at least some offensively. Or he may be part of a platoon with Escobar. Or Escobar may yet win the spot outright. And we don't know yet how good Santana may turn out. (Or Goodrum a couple years away) I don't resist change, just don't want t knee jerk a change on a re-building team that does, at least in the short term, have some options to consider. At least in the short term.

[kab21]

Plouffe and Parms can't match Florimon's defense. I find your comment "there should be very little debate..." quite ironic. I find this to be a good' date=' engaging debate. It's a worthwhile conversation. This thread reveals a pretty nuanced conversation regarding the pro's and con's of Florimon's defensive upside, versus his offensive liabilities. I think there's still room for debate.[/quote']

 

Of course they can't match his defense. if they hit like Florimon (minor and majors) they would have been out of baseball years ago.

 

Everybody knows that Florimon plays good defense. The problem is that no amount of defense overcomes a .600 OPS. And I think there is a good chance that he is <.600 OPS this year. Yes, MLB SS's suck at hitting but good teams do not consider that type of player a long term piece. He's a placeholder.

[Guest USAFChief]

David Ortiz logged 3895 professional plate appearances (1477 in the majors) when the Twins made the logical choice' date=' and released him. He was 27 years old.

 

The proving line is typically 4000 professional plate appearances--2000 in the majors, before a professional hitter is properly seasoned. With all due respect, I don't think this is the year to give up on Florimon, and his 606 MLB PA's.[/quote']

David Ortiz OPSd over .900 at every level in the minors except rookie ball.

 

He OPSd .799 or better every year with the Twins except his age 23 season, where he got 25 PAs.

 

I think he was "properly seasoned" before the Twins made one of the the worst "logical" choices in the history of the franchise.

 

Florimon, on the other hand, has had only one level ABOVE rookie ball where he managed to break the .700 level. He is 27 years old.

 

With all due respect, Florimon is never going to hit.

[Don't Feed the Greed Guy]

In regard to giving up the value of a 2nd round pick, I don't know the exact percentages of a 2nd round pick reaching the majors and becoming at least a solid, contributing ball player regardless of position. Considering the very unsure and volatile nature of the draft in general, it certainly can't be a high percentage..

 

Very true.

 

So what is the Twin's #2 selection worth? I took a look at all the players picked #5 in the second round, over the past 25 years or so, dating back to the time when a certain MLB franchise won its first World Series. Yes, a very unscientific study that doesn't factor in compensation rounds, upcoming trades, and other variables that are still pending...

 

The most recent 2nd round #5 draftee to make "The Show" is Anthony Gose (2008), followed by Josh Fields (2007), Chris Tillman (2006), Yovanni Gallardo (2004), Shane Costa (2003), Darrell Risner (2002), Rene Rivera (2001), and Rob Bowen (1999).

 

Other notables?

 

Milton Bradley (1996)

Brian Hunter (1989)

 

 

And, going back a little further....

 

 

George Brett (1971)

Bill Buckner (1968)

[Don't Feed the Greed Guy]

The problem is that no amount of defense overcomes a .600 OPS.

 

Mark Belanger: .580 OPS, career.

Ozzie Smith: .666 OPS for his career (sub .500 for his first four seasons)

Greg Gagne: Sub .500 over his first 350 plate appearances, and then he started raising his slugging percentage.

 

 

Again, there are other examples. It's just that I LOVED seeing these guys bring their talents to the game. They made their teams better.

 

By the way, I ran into a guy from Massachusetts while on vacation last week. He played against Gagne during high school. He remembered Gagne as a pretty average ballplayer, who just kept working on his game. It was a fascinating conversation, especially given the backdrop of this thread. How cool, huh? It's another testimony to hard work.

 

Some scout in the Yankees organization found promise in this hard-working kid from Fall River, MA. Three years later he's traded to the Twins for Roy Smalley (yes, and we picked up Ron Davis too... Yikes!). We know what happened with Davis, but the gem of the deal was a shortstop who kept working on his game and became a fixture in the Twins lineup for seven years--their starting shortstop for fourteen very meaningful postseason games.

 

Thanks for the conversation, guys. I hope to pick it up again during the football games tomorrow afternoon.

[Trevor0333]

Im sorry, Florimon is pretty good defensively but he is not in Simmons or Iglesias level. He has a good arm, very good range but misses to many gimme's. The consistency just isnt there to be at their elite level.

 

its probably

1) Simmons

2) Simmons

3) Simmons

4) Simmons

5) Simmons

6) Simmons

7) Simmons

8) Iglesias

9) Iglesias

10) Igleasias

.

.

.

.

15) Florimon

 

Simmons is that good.

[kab21]

Great... The defense of having a .600 OPS starting shortstop is based on guys that played 2-3 decades ago. And those guys aren't even relevant in this discussion. .660 OPS (Ozzie) is much better than .600 and he was one of the best defenders ever. Florimon is good defensively but he's not even close to that good. Gagne was 24 when he sucked in the majors and he was much better in the minors at much younger ages. If he hadn't improved then he wouldn't have been a starter on any team.

 

The problem I have is this blind optimism that somehow Florimon will just start hitting better because it will be his second season. There is very little to suggest that will be the case. I just hope that he doesn't hit worse.

[Guest USAFChief]

Let's keep on topic and off other posters please.

[cmathewson]

Great... The defense of having a .600 OPS starting shortstop is based on guys that played 2-3 decades ago. And those guys aren't even relevant in this discussion. .660 OPS (Ozzie) is much better than .600 and he was one of the best defenders ever. Florimon is good defensively but he's not even close to that good. Gagne was 24 when he sucked in the majors and he was much better in the minors at much younger ages. If he hadn't improved then he wouldn't have been a starter on any team.

 

The problem I have is this blind optimism that somehow Florimon will just start hitting better because it will be his second season. There is very little to suggest that will be the case. I just hope that he doesn't hit worse.

 

No, it's based on the reality that 700+ OPS guys who play above average defense are hard to acquire and develop. So, many teams settle. I'm pretty sure everybody wants a better shortstop. The options are limited. The biggest barrier to acquiring one right now is Scott Boras.

[Brock Beauchamp]

David Ortiz logged 3895 professional plate appearances (1477 in the majors) when the Twins made the logical choice' date=' and released him. He was 27 years old.

 

The proving line is typically 4000 professional plate appearances--2000 in the majors, before a professional hitter is properly seasoned. With all due respect, I don't think this is the year to give up on Florimon, and his 606 MLB PA's.[/quote']

 

Except that David Ortiz was a good hitter, as evidenced by his 120 OPS+ in his last season with the Twins and his career .931 MiLB OPS.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Mark Belanger: .580 OPS' date=' career.

Ozzie Smith: .666 OPS for his career (sub .500 for his first four seasons)

Greg Gagne: Sub .500 over his first 350 plate appearances, and then he started raising his slugging percentage.[/quote']

 

Yay for not adjusting for era and ballpark.

 

Ozzie Smith: 87 OPS+

Mark Belanger: 68 OPS+

Greg Gagne: 83 OPS+

Pedro Florimon: 67 OPS+

 

So you have a point with Belanger. The others, not so much.

 

Smith may have struggled in his early seasons but that's because he was woefully unprepared for MLB pitching. He spent all of one season in the minors, which wasn't terribly uncommon at the time but made for some pretty ugly stat lines early in careers.

 

Pedro Florimon not only spent ~3000 PAs facing MiLB pitching, he wasn't very good at hitting it.

[jorgenswest]

Yay for not adjusting for era and ballpark.

 

Ozzie Smith: 87 OPS+

Mark Belanger: 68 OPS+

Greg Gagne: 83 OPS+

Pedro Florimon: 67 OPS+

 

So you have a point with Belanger. The others, not so much.

 

Smith may have struggled in his early seasons but that's because he was woefully unprepared for MLB pitching. He spent all of one season in the minors, which wasn't terribly uncommon at the time but made for some pretty ugly stat lines early in careers.

 

Pedro Florimon not only spent ~3000 PAs facing MiLB pitching, he wasn't very good at hitting it.

 

I think Gagne had an OPS+ of 52 through the time given time frame and 74 through his first 876 plate appearances. Ozzie had a 48 his second season. His comparisons seem fair, but the difference in age will make it difficult for Florimon to grow his bat over time.

 

As the Twins try to develop young hitters, it is critical they give them a long sustained opportunity through their struggle. Two years of regular consistent at bats (or starts for a pitcher) is necessary. Very few hitters come up to the majors ready to hit major league pitching. Plus defenders can grow towards an adequate hitter over time. It reall takes good scouting to see the potential and patience to wait out the struggle. I am not confident the Twins have either.

 

They certainly have not had patience with Parmelee, but maybe their scouting led them to believe he does not have the potential. They had patience with Casilla over several years, but he never played full time. There investment did not pay off. Did they choose correctly between Florimon and Escobar? Will they have patience?

[Don't Feed the Greed Guy]

Great... The defense of having a .600 OPS starting shortstop is based on guys that played 2-3 decades ago. And those guys aren't even relevant in this discussion. .660 OPS (Ozzie) is much better than .600 and he was one of the best defenders ever. Florimon is good defensively but he's not even close to that good. Gagne was 24 when he sucked in the majors and he was much better in the minors at much younger ages. If he hadn't improved then he wouldn't have been a starter on any team.

 

The problem I have is this blind optimism that somehow Florimon will just start hitting better because it will be his second season. There is very little to suggest that will be the case. I just hope that he doesn't hit worse.

 

Okay, after a few days away, I think I've cooled down enough to respond to your claim that ballplayers' production from different eras is no longer "relevant in this discussion." The whole structure of player analysis is based upon years of collected data, otherwise why keep stats at all? Great... (sorry for the snark)

 

Brock's point in #165 is worth noting--there are some adjustments that can be made for era and ballpark, but those adjustments are hardly statistically significant. At least he backed up his claim with some statistical weight. You just blasted me without making a convincing counter-argument based upon facts.

 

You mention that someone, somewhere must have "blind optimism" that Florimon's numbers will increase during his second year facing major league competition. Let's remember that ballplayers do tend to improve once they have faced big league talent over the course of 2000+ plate appearances. That's a fact--not merely blind optimism.

 

My main gripe, Kab, is your categorical dismissal of a point-counterpoint debate. You did the same in the 2014 mock draft thread--dismissing Bill James' analysis of drafting college-level talent vs. high school prospects without presenting facts that support a logical counter argument. All you said was that the data is too old. That's not convincing unless you can support your claim with a compelling counter claim.

 

Finally, we are "discussing" a player who showed significant statistical improvement in OPS over his last three years in the minor leagues. (.741 in 2011 and .670 in 2012) in spite of some pretty horrendous number is the lower levels of the minors. Florimon yo-yo'ed back and forth between A-/A+ and AA for several years. Even though Pedro struggled as he climbed up through the minors, his second year in each level showed marked improvement, most notably in 2010-11 when he was at AA Bowie in the Orioles' farm system where he raised his OPS from .483 to .781. There's a trend here, if you bother to look at the data. Florimon has consistently struggled each time he's moved up the ladder, but he has adjusted with each level and improved along the way. Like you, I hope he doesn't hit worse in 2014. The numbers seem to indicate that he could/should improve. I'd like to see that happen in a Twins uniform. If not, I owe you a beer. You name the pub, and I'll be glad to buy.

[Major League Ready]

You mention that someone' date=' somewhere must have "blind optimism" that Florimon's numbers will increase during his second year facing major league competition. Let's remember that ballplayers do tend to improve once they have faced big league talent over the course of 2000+ plate appearances. That's a fact--not merely blind optimism.

 

Finally, we are "discussing" a player who showed significant statistical improvement in OPS over his last three years in the minor leagues. (.741 in 2011 and .670 in 2012) in spite of some pretty horrendous number is the lower levels of the minors. Florimon yo-yo'ed back and forth between A-/A+ and AA for several years. Even though Pedro struggled as he climbed up through the minors, his second year in each level showed marked improvement, most notably in 2010-11 when he was at AA Bowie in the Orioles' farm system where he raised his OPS from .483 to .781. There's a trend here, if you bother to look at the data. Florimon has consistently struggled each time he's moved up the ladder, but he has adjusted with each level and improved along the way. Like you, I hope he doesn't hit worse in 2014. The numbers seem to indicate that he could/should improve. I'd like to see that happen in a Twins uniform. If not, I owe you a beer. You name the pub, and I'll be glad to buy.[/quote']

 

Seems reasonable and damn we are due. It would be a pretty big deal too. If Florimon comes around, our infield looks to be set for quite a while once Sano gets here. Although I do wonder if Rosario might end up at 2nd and Dozier gets traded to fill other holes.

[snepp]

Let's keep the topic on Florimon specifically, and off other posters.

 

Also, dragging in beefs from another topic not only isn't productive, it's against forum policy.

 

Thanks.

[twinsfan34]

For the subjective:

 

It's too early to give up on Florimon. He can get better. And I believe he will be better than he was last year.

 

To someone with more validity than myself: Fangraphs

 

I don't have a Jamesian-esque batting performance projection system, a BPPS if you will, (yet), that I trust. So I'll borrow one: Steamer and Oliver (Fangraphs) both predict an increase in AVG and OBP. It's slight, but it's an improvement.

 

(back to the subjective)

I actually expect more of an improvement than what they have. Sorry to lump all these expectation on you Pedro, but it appears the Twins FO also is expecting you to do better. Either that, or they think Barlett is going to go 2009 on the world again.

 

On Staying Topic:

 

I didn't really sense the 'beef' other than to asking for someone to consider other statistics, instead of a blind blanketing statement. It's also asking to not repeat behavior here. Which if asked, one should do their best to comply. They also gave context. Maybe it should be a PM, but it shouldn't be discouraged. But still felt Florimon and the context of the discussion was trying to be redirected to Florimon versus averting to historical tendencies.

 

Back to factual and historically relevant information:

 

Also, Greg Gagne's 1985 (.225/.279/.317) would compare very well to Pedro Florimon's 2013 (.221/.281/.330). You'd actually be hard pressed to find a similar MLB experience, position, and AVG/OBP/SLG combo anywhere as close as Gagne/Florimon. Gagne played in a more offensive LG and park in 1985 as well. The minors (AAA), Gagne also played in a more offensive IL with similar numbers.

 

I happened to like Greg Gagne, and we won 2 World Series ('87 & '91) with him as our SS. So at a similar stage, Florimon is ever so slightly better offensively and better defensively if you consider (dWAR, Fld%, or RF) to be of any significance in assessing a player's defensive abilities.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Also, Greg Gagne's 1985 (.225/.279/.317) would compare very well to Pedro Florimon's 2013 (.221/.281/.330). You'd actually be hard pressed to find a similar MLB experience, position, and AVG/OBP/SLG combo anywhere as close as Gagne/Florimon. Gagne played in a more offensive LG and park in 1985 as well. The minors (AAA), Gagne also played in a more offensive IL with similar numbers.

 

Greg Gagne was 23 years old in 1985.

 

Greg Gagne also posted an OPS of .800 in ~700 AAA plate appearances.

 

Way too many bad comparisons are being thrown around in this thread. Players of Florimon's age and MiLB track record do not have a history of significant improvement entering their late 20s. They just don't, which leaves many Florimon supporters basically hanging their analysis on hopes and prayers, which isn't the most sound reasoning to argue a player's worth.

 

That doesn't mean Florimon can't improve. He could buck the trend and become a .700+ OPS player. But that's rare. Extremely rare and not the sort of thing you bank on when crafting a MLB roster.

[Craig Arko]

Maybe we can talk I Don't Give a Darn out of retirement to be our shortstop.

[diehardtwinsfan]

Players who stick in the majors tend to eventually reproduce their minor league numbers. It might take a season or two of adjustment for that happen, but very rarely do players outperform their minor league numbers by any sort of significant margin.

 

This is where I come from on Florimon, and I think this is where Brock is as well. He has thousands of PAs in the minor leagues all of which say that he is not a good hitter. Could things suddenly click and he turn into a good hitter? Yes, it's possible. But I would think the odds at this point are incredibly low, especially given his age.

 

Personally, I'd rather roll the dice with Escobar at short. He has shown that he has the ability to hit, though he has not done it consistently. He's also younger. I'd rather give him a full season of the job and see if the Twins do need to go after JJ Hardy next year (or go with Drew this year) than to give Florimon another shot. SS is a big hole on this team, and it will be for the forseeable future. That's probably the one area where the next wave still doesn't have a long term option (unless Polanco can shine at SS this season).

[Brock Beauchamp]

Players who stick in the majors tend to eventually reproduce their minor league numbers. It might take a season or two of adjustment for that happen, but very rarely do players outperform their minor league numbers by any sort of significant margin.

 

This is where I come from on Florimon, and I think this is where Brock is as well. He has thousands of PAs in the minor leagues all of which say that he is not a good hitter. Could things suddenly click and he turn into a good hitter? Yes, it's possible. But I would think the odds at this point are incredibly low, especially given his age.

 

I'd argue that players don't even replicate their MiLB numbers in MLB. My lazy observations over the years noticed that the average player generally matures into a MLB player at -.050 to .000 OPS compared to their MiLB numbers.

 

And that does not bode well for a 27 year old Pedro Florimon, whose 2013 OPS was ~.065 below his MiLB career numbers. He might become a .630 OPS player. That still makes him a bad MLB starter. He could also fall off the map entirely and post a sub-.600 OPS, which is often what happens to marginal MiLB players upon entering the show.

 

Another thing you have to factor into MiLB numbers is relative age to competition. For example, Miguel Cabrera routinely outperforms his MiLB numbers. He was also extremely young at every level so that's not terribly surprising.

 

Pedro Florimon, on the other hand, is on the opposite side of that spectrum. He has been older at every level, which means that his MiLB numbers should be well over what you expect from him as a mature MLB player. Again, this looks bad for Pedro Florimon as a hitter.

[ericchri]

I think it would be interesting to see (somebody more ambitious than me can take a crack at it if they want) to see a general poll of who people would like to be our shortstop next year assuming we don't go get somebody else. We have Florimon and Escobar as the apparent choices, and a few people still interested in Dozier getting another shot. Heck, you could theoretically throw Plouffe back into the mix, too, though I doubt anyone would actually be in favor of that one.

 

Barring going out and getting Drew, I'd probably be in favor of Escobar getting a chance over Florimon. Reports and personal observations make me think he can be about as good defensively (less flash, more steady), and he looks like he could be a little better hitter to me (maybe a ~.650 OPS to Florimon's ~.600).

[Brock Beauchamp]

I think it would be interesting to see (somebody more ambitious than me can take a crack at it if they want) to see a general poll of who people would like to be our shortstop next year assuming we don't go get somebody else. We have Florimon and Escobar as the apparent choices, and a few people still interested in Dozier getting another shot. Heck, you could theoretically throw Plouffe back into the mix, too, though I doubt anyone would actually be in favor of that one.

 

Barring going out and getting Drew, I'd probably be in favor of Escobar getting a chance over Florimon. Reports and personal observations make me think he can be about as good defensively (less flash, more steady), and he looks like he could be a little better hitter to me (maybe a ~.650 OPS to Florimon's ~.600).

 

If we have to use the ugliness already on the roster, I think a platoon makes the most sense. Escobar faces lefties and Florimon gets most of the righties, with Escobar getting a few PAs against RHP to see if he can improve.

 

Overall, Escobar has some room for growth so he should be given a bit of a longer leash but when you get right down to it, both Escobar and Florimon are pretty bad options as starters.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I don't have a Jamesian-esque batting performance projection system, a BPPS if you will, (yet), that I trust. So I'll borrow one: Steamer and Oliver (Fangraphs) both predict an increase in AVG and OBP. It's slight, but it's an improvement.

 

Those projection systems basically just regress to the mean. At that low on the spectrum (and Florimon's 2013 was pretty low), basically every player's mean projection is going to be a slight improvement. The projection systems aren't "picking up on something" in Florimon's record or anything -- it's just that they figure it would be hard for a MLB player to be worse than that. (Or if he is worse, he won't be a MLB player much longer.) Oliver actually projects him to the exact same OPS, and Steamer gives him an extra 9 points in OPS, which might be worth ~2 extra points on his OPS+. Not statistically significant, and basically a repeat of 2013.

 

Also, Greg Gagne's 1985 (.225/.279/.317) would compare very well to Pedro Florimon's 2013 (.221/.281/.330). You'd actually be hard pressed to find a similar MLB experience, position, and AVG/OBP/SLG combo anywhere as close as Gagne/Florimon. Gagne played in a more offensive LG and park in 1985 as well. The minors (AAA), Gagne also played in a more offensive IL with similar numbers.

 

In addition to the above points about Gagne's age and MiLB numbers, Gagne had about half the MLB PAs at that point in his career as compared to Florimon.

[twinsfan34]

Greg Gagne was 23 years old in 1985.

 

Greg Gagne also posted an OPS of .800 in ~700 AAA plate appearances.

 

Way too many bad comparisons are being thrown around in this thread. Players of Florimon's age and MiLB track record do not have a history of significant improvement entering their late 20s. They just don't, which leaves many Florimon supporters basically hanging their analysis on hopes and prayers, which isn't the most sound reasoning to argue a player's worth.

 

That doesn't mean Florimon can't improve. He could buck the trend and become a .700+ OPS player. But that's rare. Extremely rare and not the sort of thing you bank on when crafting a MLB roster.

 

 

Do you have some sort of statistic (medical records) to the physical age of Gagne's body versus Florimon's at 26 that would suggest they are different, other than the count of revolutions of the earth around the sun since they emerged from the whom?

 

Everybody ages differently. Natural age and birth age have been shown to vary greatly.

 

I personally find the MLB time to be more significant and projectionable.

[twinsfan34]

 

 

In addition to the above points about Gagne's age and MiLB numbers, Gagne had about half the MLB PAs at that point in his career as compared to Florimon.

 

Not at bats to be statistically relevant? 2900 PA's vs 2200 PA's isn't similar enough for you?

 

352 to 606. How much better was Gagne's next 4 months of baseball?

 

Here's the game logs for 1986....have at it. He hit pretty poorly in April and May.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=gagnegr01&t=b&year=1986

 

Splits...

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=gagnegr01&year=1986&t=b

 

You'd have to go about 2 weeks into Aug. You'll find Gagne near .240 AVG...

 

But again, the LG BA was 20 pts higher as a whole you want to take a little guess at how much higher it was at the dome?

 

Do a weighted average to Gagne's stats...

[ericchri]

If we have to use the ugliness already on the roster, I think a platoon makes the most sense. Escobar faces lefties and Florimon gets most of the righties, with Escobar getting a few PAs against RHP to see if he can improve.

 

Overall, Escobar has some room for growth so he should be given a bit of a longer leash but when you get right down to it, both Escobar and Florimon are pretty bad options as starters.

 

I don't disagree with you, I've just noted a lot of people advocating Escobar get a chance, and a few still wonder if Dozier couldn't switch back. Your platoon probably makes the most sense, though, as I have a hard time seeing how we start the season without both of Escobar and Florimon, regardless.