Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • What to do: Eduardo Escobar


    Seth Stohs

    This week, the Twins named their 13th manager and we have been analyzing that decision quite thoroughly. However, it’s also important to know that free agency has started now and the business of baseball continues. So today, I want to start a series on various Twins players and what the offseason could mean for them. Today, I will start with infielder Eduardo Escobar.

    Image courtesy of Rick Osentoski, USA Today

    Twins Video

    Background

    Eduardo Escobar came to the Minnesota Twins on July 28, 2012, along with Pedro Hernandez in exchange for lefty Francisco Liriano. He had been the White Sox main utility infielder that season. That is the role he played for the Twins in the first half of the 2013 season before spending part of the second half in Rochester.

    Escobar will turn 26 years old in early January. He comes from Venezuela and is again playing this winter for the Tigres de Aragua.

    2014 Season

    Out of options, Escobar earned a spot on the 2014 25-man roster. However, about a month into the season, the incumbent shortstop Pedro Florimon was optioned to Rochester. Escobar took over as the regular shortstop, and he was able to keep it thanks to a breakout season.

    He played in 133 games which is eight games more than he had played over his three previous seasons in the big leagues. He hit .275/.315/.406 (.721) which equates to an OPS+ of 102. So, he was two percent better offensively than an average MLB player, which is very good. And, when you put it into perspective relative to other shortstops, he posted a 2.3 WAR (Wins Above Replacement) according to fangraphs.com. Put into another perspective, fangraphs.com also says that he was worth $12.7 million.

    Business of Baseball

    As a player who had not yet reached arbitration, Escobar made just a little big over the league minimum, approximately $510,000. After 2014, he was nearly a Super-2 guy, but he fell just short. In other words, in 2015, he will get a raise, but it will most likely be well less than $600,000.

    Role in 2015

    At Tuesday’s press conference, it came out that the plan is still for Danny Santana to make the move in to shortstop from centerfield. In addition, Trevor Plouffe will man the hot corner, and Brian Dozier will be at second base. Combined, this would mean a return to the utility role for Eduardo Escobar in 2015.

    Is that the right choice? That is certainly debatable and at the heart of this article.

    Danny Santana came up through the minor leagues as a shortstop. There was some hope that he could potentially be a guy whose name is put in the lineup most every day for several years in a row. When he came up to the Twins early in the season, it was to play shortstop, but Escobar earned the job. With Aaron Hicks struggling again with the bat, Santana was given an opportunity to play centerfield. He didn’t give up that job. Santana hit better than anyone could have expected, well beyond the offensive numbers he racked up throughout his minor league career. Although he was not a natural outfielder and struggled with some of the fine points of the position, he played an adequate centerfield. Of course, his defensive reputation at shortstop in the minor leagues was not sterling either.

    One of the reasons there was a desire to move Santana from centerfield was the imminent arrival of Byron Buxton. With Buxton’s frustrating 2014 season, the likelihood of him showing up at Target Field before August or September is probably very low.

    Meanwhile, the 25-year-old Escobar did the job at shortstop. He not only hit, but he played a very solid defensive shortstop. However, the decision to move Santana back to shortstop indicates that the Twins brass sees Escobar’s 2014 as a fluke and believe that he is more valuable to the team as a utility infielder.

    Was Escobar’s 2014 season a fluke? Was Santana’s 2014 season a fluke? Of course, an other factor might be who will be available this offseason in a trade or via free agency.

    Maybe the following question must be asked. Would the Twins be better in 2015 with Eduardo Escobar at shortstop, Danny Santana in center and a question mark in left field, or would they be better with Santana at shortstop, Escobar on the bench and question marks at two outfield positions? Equally important, what is best for the overall future of the Minnesota Twins?

    These are decisions to be made by Terry Ryan and his staff, including Paul Molitor, but they are interesting to consider.

    To Extend or not to Extend

    Along with considering what Escobar's role may be for 2015, there are other discussions that need to be had in the front office (and frankly, may have already been had at the organizational meetings).

    Should the Twins consider offering Eduardo Escobar a contract extension? Every offseason, a fun topic is whether or not there are players who should be signed to a long-term contract.

    Escobar won’t hit arbitration for another season. He also won’t be a free agent until after the 2018 season. So, of course there is no rush to extend him. The difficulty in this decision is that his role over those years will greatly affect his ability to make money. If he is a utility player, the top guys will make between $3-4 million per year. However, if the Twins went year-to-year, he would likely make something like $3 million over the next three years, or $4.5 million over the next four years before becoming a free agent. What dollar value would the Twins need to offer for it to make it worth their while?

    At the same time, if Escobar is a starter, he could make as much as $3 million in 2016 and up from there. So at this point, there is no reason for Escobar to accept an offer that would make any sense for the Twins.

    Assuming the Twins will move him back to a utility role, it makes much more sense to go year-to-year.

    To Trade or Not to Trade

    As we’ve noted, Escobar had a very solid season as a 25-year-old shortstop. It may have been enough for some team or teams to view him as capable of being a regular MLB shortstop. And yet, it’s clear that the Twins brass (based on them pushing him back to a utility role in 2015) believe that he is a utility infielder. There’s no shame in that. His performance in 2014 tells me that he can be one of the better utility infielders in the game.

    However, if the team truly believes that he may have peaked in 2014, would this not be an opportune time to reach out to teams about acquiring pitching, or another area of need, in exchange for him? What if a team offered a Double-A pitcher who is their fifth-ranked prospect and another piece?

    I think it might be wise for the Twins to at least explore the market for Escobar, selling him as an everyday shortstop even if they seemingly don’t believe it themselves.

    SUMMARY

    So there you have it, over 1,250 words on Eduardo Escobar. He performed very well in 2014 when given an opportunity to be an everyday shortstop. However, the team is committing to Danny Santana at that position in 2015. The first question is whether or not Escobar should be given an opportunity to be the Twins shortstop in 2015. Beyond that, should the Twins consider signing him to an extension, or should they try to deal him for pitching?

    Now it’s your turn. Let’s discuss Eduardo Escobar and what this offseason means for him.

    MORE FROM TWINS DAILY
    — Latest Twins coverage from our writers
    — Recent Twins discussion in our forums
    — Follow Twins Daily via Twitter, Facebook or email
    — Become a Twins Daily Caretaker

     Share


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    At least a few people like having depth on the team.  If Santana is the starter then Escobar will still play since he backs up 3 positions.  Players don't stay healthy and they all need a day here and there.  It's a good problem to have.

     

    Escobar still carries very little trade value additionally.  I would be shocked if other teams viewed him as anything but a good utility player despite his nice season.  This isn't a case of trading to fix a problem elsewhere.  It would be a case of trading for depth elsewhere.

     

    I think people are prematurely penciling Sano in a 3B.  My odds are well below 50% that he plays >150 games at 3B in the majors.  Because of that I wouldn't consider trading Plouffe until Sano actually is ready (if ever) to take over at 3B.  My guess is that Sano ends up in the OF for a few seasons before heading to 1B. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I am not diminishing Vargas's power potential, I am just saying Ortiz had better numbers in the minors. No doubt my timeline was off.  But Vargas had a high of 19 HR a year, Ortiz had 30 or more twice.  I am simply suggesting that Vargas "little papi" or whatever it is, is more body type related than that he is a future HOF player.  The media gets carried away with these comps, especially based on appearance.

     

     

    I think you are missing a key point, in that it's difficult to compare their numbers due to Vargas being held back in his development in the minors for many years running. But to compare them more fairly suggests that Vargas has both the hit tool and the power tool to possibly outperform his minor league ratings and the long-term predictions about him.  

     

    First off, 2013 was Vargas' first year of playing full-time pro ball, while at the same age, Ortiz had already played 4 years of full-time pro ball.  Comparing oranges to oranges, Ortiz his 18 HRs in his first full-time year, while Kennys hit 19.  

     

    Secondly, going on to 2014, Vargas hit 26 HRs- with 9 of those at the major league level.  By contrast, Ortiz hit 31 HRs in his second year across three minor league levels, including 4 in the homer-friendly PCL.  

     

    Perhaps I'm more optimistic than some, but this kid seems eager to learn, appears unflappable after striking out, has no built-in biases against RF in TF, has a great attitude about the game, perhaps a little chip on his shoulder, and he looks like a late bloomer, as well.  I'm certainly not predicting a HoF career, but I think he easily could have a breakout year this year, if given the opportunity, and perhaps gets some decent plate protection behind him in the order in the form of Arcia/Plouffe/Sano.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

    Escobar still carries very little trade value additionally.  I would be shocked if other teams viewed him as anything but a good utility player despite his nice season.  This isn't a case of trading to fix a problem elsewhere.  It would be a case of trading for depth elsewhere.

     

     

     

     

    Very true, all you would get in return would be another guy not quite good enough to be a starter, or another Tommy Milone-type SP.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    At the time if the trade, Escobar projected to a Nick Punto type career. If Santana's glove is not solid at SS, he could have a Bonifacio type career. Great to have both players on the roster.

    Edited by jorgenswest
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    We're pretty close.  I like him.  I was on the bandwagon to give him PA over Florimon a year ago.  I just see him a half-grade lower.  (C instead of C+, or whatever.)

    To further illustrate my point about starting, Greg Gagne was the SS for both the '87 and '91 Twins. He never put up a single-season OPS+ of 100 in his career. His lifetime OPS+ was 83. Escobar (only 700 PAs) is a lifetime 85 OPS+ and in over 450 PAs this year put up a 102 OPS+. Gags was probably a superior glove to Esco, but not by much. I would say Escobar is "good enough". However, Santana and a couple of other minor league shortstops have a chance to be much better than good enough. Edited by stringer bell
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think you are missing a key point, in that it's difficult to compare their numbers due to Vargas being held back in his development in the minors for many years running. But to compare them more fairly suggests that Vargas has both the hit tool and the power tool to possibly outperform his minor league ratings and the long-term predictions about him.  

     

    First off, 2013 was Vargas' first year of playing full-time pro ball, while at the same age, Ortiz had already played 4 years of full-time pro ball.  Comparing oranges to oranges, Ortiz his 18 HRs in his first full-time year, while Kennys hit 19.  

     

    Secondly, going on to 2014, Vargas hit 26 HRs- with 9 of those at the major league level.  By contrast, Ortiz hit 31 HRs in his second year across three minor league levels, including 4 in the homer-friendly PCL.  

     

    Perhaps I'm more optimistic than some, but this kid seems eager to learn, appears unflappable after striking out, has no built-in biases against RF in TF, has a great attitude about the game, perhaps a little chip on his shoulder, and he looks like a late bloomer, as well.  I'm certainly not predicting a HoF career, but I think he easily could have a breakout year this year, if given the opportunity, and perhaps gets some decent plate protection behind him in the order in the form of Arcia/Plouffe/Sano.

     

    Vargas made his debut on his 24th birthday.  Ages 21-23, Oritz had a total of 400 at bats at the big league level.  15 games as a 21 year old, 86 as a 22 year old, and 10 as a 23 year old.  I will concede he was farther along the development curve that Vargas, but that is a far cry from four full MLB years.

     

    I am not saying Vargas does not have potential. I am not saying he won't exceed his MILB production. I am actually optimistic about the kid.  My point is we should not compare him to a hall of fame player because of those things. I think we tend to do this based on appearance often times.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So it is Vargas that is a future HoF? Ok, I'll buy you dinner if he's a HoF. Or am I still missing the point about not trading a possible HoF for a second time? I admit it, I'm confused right now. Maybe I should go back to bed, and just not work today.

     

    On the topic.........I don't think we know with any certainty at all that Esco has a significantly better glove than Santana. And no, he's not close to Gagne. Not. Close.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I didn't really mean to start a side discussion on Vargas and Arcia.   It was only a suggestion that IF Rosario, Buxton and Hicks flourish we would have an elite outfield.   From where we are standing today that is a big IF.    It really shouldn't be a debate at this point if we would be losing an Ortiz in Arcia or Vargas since there is room for both right now and by the time a decision needs to be made we will have much more data on both.     Vargas appears more polished right now but I think if Arcia can fall in love with batting average more than home runs he is the guy with more upside.    HIS minor league numbers were great.  This is related to Escobar in that we need a speedier outfield and Santana still fits the bill for making 2015 outfield a lot faster.    As long as Escobar can hold the position at short it just makes sense.   Long term I don't see him as the answer but we have done worse.   Don't trade him unless it is for the value of a .280 batting good fielding every day shortstop with decent power which is a fairly rare commodity.   If you don't get that kind of value then keep him for SS now, depth and utility later.   He has already given us way more than I thought he would when we traded Liriano for him.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So it is Vargas that is a future HoF? Ok, I'll buy you dinner if he's a HoF. Or am I still missing the point about not trading a possible HoF for a second time? I admit it, I'm confused right now. Maybe I should go back to bed, and just not work today.

     

    On the topic.........I don't think we know with any certainty at all that Esco has a significantly better glove than Santana. And no, he's not close to Gagne. Not. Close.

     

    I was talking about his nickname little papi or whatever it is. and replying to the comment that we should not trade David Ortiz for the second time (which was a reference to the comparison).

     

    I just think we should cool it on the comp to a HOF player. That's all, back to the topic...

    Edited by tobi0040
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So it is Vargas that is a future HoF? Ok, I'll buy you dinner if he's a HoF. Or am I still missing the point about not trading a possible HoF for a second time? I admit it, I'm confused right now. Maybe I should go back to bed, and just not work today.

     

    On the topic.........I don't think we know with any certainty at all that Esco has a significantly better glove than Santana. And no, he's not close to Gagne. Not. Close.

     

    Yeah, Mike... better go back to bed... you're overthinking this one by a wide degree, and still missing the point. :wacko:   Perhaps you've reached the life stage where "cantankerous old coot :angry: " fights for control with "reasoned and seasoned middle-ager" :rolleyes: ?  You're still my guy, though.  :cool:

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I was talking about his nickname little papi or whatever it is. and replying to the comment that we should not trade David Ortiz for the second time (which was a reference to the comparison).

     

    I just think we should cool it on the comp to a HOF player. That's all, back to the topic...

     

    This happens every time, and every time comps are made, the person doing the comparing is NOT saying the prospect is going to the Hall, just exploring potential career arcs.  No one said Vargas is destined for the HoF, no one.  What was said was it would be extremely premature to look to move Vargas out already, based on his current perceived value- reminiscent to what happened with Ortiz- the HoF reference in relation to Vargas, was of course, tongue in cheek, and related to their physical and statistically similar profiles- and just as he's getting his career established and shown glimpses of what's possible.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This happens every time, and every time comps are made, the person doing the comparing is NOT saying the prospect is going to the Hall, just exploring potential career arcs.  No one said Vargas is destined for the HoF, no one.  What was said was it would be extremely premature to look to move Vargas out already, based on his current perceived value- reminiscent to what happened with Ortiz- the HoF reference in relation to Vargas, was of course, tongue in cheek, and related to their physical and statistically similar profiles- and just as he's getting his career established and shown glimpses of what's possible.

     

    I am the one that brought up the HOF, because his nickname and a poster made a comp to David Ortiz.  I guess I don't see how a comp to a guy that is going to the hall of fame is not a reference to Vargas potentially being a HOF player. 

     

    The career arc discussion is fairly vague.  All you have to do is find a HOF player that did not rip up the minors and compare them to a guy in the minors not doing that well.

     

    just my pet peeve about comparisons.

    Edited by tobi0040
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Vargas made his debut on his 24th birthday.  Ages 21-23, Oritz had a total of 400 at bats at the big league level.  15 games as a 21 year old, 86 as a 22 year old, and 10 as a 23 year old.  I will concede he was farther along the development curve that Vargas, but that is a far cry from four full MLB years.

     

    I am not saying Vargas does not have potential. I am not saying he won't exceed his MILB production. I am actually optimistic about the kid.  My point is we should not compare him to a hall of fame player because of those things. I think we tend to do this based on appearance often times.

     

    Again, please re-read what I said carefully.... I said absolutely nothing about "four full MLB years", what I did say was the number of years playing full-time professionally at the same age was "Four", and that his professional PAs was some 1100 more than Vargas at the same age.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    To further illustrate my point about starting, Greg Gagne was the SS for both the '87 and '91 Twins. He never put up a single-season OPS+ of 100 in his career. His lifetime OPS+ was 83. Escobar (only 700 PAs) is a lifetime 85 OPS+ and in over 450 PAs this year put up a 102 OPS+. Gags was probably a superior glove to Esco, but not by much. I would say Escobar is "good enough". However, Santana and a couple of other minor league shortstops have a chance to be much better than good enough.

    Gagne was a very underrated part of those championship teams, so it's flattering to most players to even be mentioned in the same breath, and it appeals to me, no doubt.  A point in favor of Escobar, one that I don't think I ever heard with regard to the Flori-monster.  (A nickname that was applied hopefully at one point, but now is just emblematic of a sad era.)

     

    I think Esco's 102 was built on an abnormally high BABIP, and he also hasn't yet been thrown into the fire as an everyday player, where I worry that he will both wear down and no longer benefit from any possible cherry-picking of opportunity by his manager.1 

     

    As for his defense, I'll admit to a certain bit of sample bias, because in one of the few games I've ever watched him in person, he had a terrible night and messed up I think it was 4 plays (not all charged as errors, obviously) where an out wasn't registered that should have.  I'm not on-board with him being a Steady Eddie type, quite yet.

     

    If he gets the chance to be a regular, and reaches a truly Gagne-esque level of production, it would be a great thing.  It's possible he has that ceiling, though I still doubt it.  And he might not get that chance, if TPTB decide he doesn't have the capability to do it, which will have some circularity and be unfair to the young man - but that's baseball.

     

    1 Maybe there's none of that picking-of-his-spots happening.  I'd have to go back and see whether in his part-time play he was the guy held out against the tough pitchers or if he was the guy thrown to the wolves, or just luck of the draw.  That's one problem with assessing part-timers, it's just not quite the same as going out there every day, and of course you don't know until you try it with him.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Again, please re-read what I said carefully.... I said absolutely nothing about "four full MLB years", what I did say was the number of years playing full-time professionally at the same age was "Four", and that his professional PAs was some 1100 more than Vargas at the same age.

     

    I guess I thought "four years of full time pro ball" and "four full MLB years" were the same thing.

    Edited by tobi0040
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I am the one that brought up the HOF, because his nickname and a poster made a comp to David Ortiz.  I guess I don't see how a comp to a guy that is going to the hall of fame is not a reference to Vargas potentially being a HOF player. 

     

    The career arc discussion is fairly vague.  All you have to do is find a HOF player that did not rip up the minors and compare them to a guy in the minors not doing that well.

     

    just my pet peeve about comparisons.

     

    Again, the comment I made was tongue in cheek in response to a poster that suggested it might already be time to move Vargas, when IMO, it clearly is not.  I appreciate and can understand your pet peeves in comparing HOFers to prospects.  But is comparing a HOF to a prospect now completely disallowed as another "unwritten rule" of baseball, even when it's tongue in cheek?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I guess I thought "four years of full time pro ball" and "four full MLB years" were the same thing.

     

    And we both now are on the same page is acknowledging that they're not the same thing, right?

    Edited by jokin
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Again, the comment I made was tongue in cheek in response to a poster that suggested it might already be time to move Vargas, when IMO, it clearly is not.  I appreciate and can understand your pet peeves in comparing HOFers to prospects.  But is comparing a HOF to a prospect now completely disallowed as another "unwritten rule" of baseball, even when it's tongue in cheek?

     

    When we started I did not realize it was a tongue and cheeck comment.

     

    I also don't think we should trade the guy.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    When we started I did not realize it was a tongue and cheeck comment.

     

    I also don't think we should trade the guy.

     

    From this point forward, I'm going to use a slash and some sort of tongue in cheek smiley... such as / :whacky028:

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Good comments from everyone.  My opinion:  If we can package Escobar and get a Gee or Niese from the Mets it's time to sell high on EE. We have Polanco, Gorden, and others in the pipeline.  Santana at SS with Schafer and Hicks in CF until we square away the timetable for Buxton and Sano is fine with me.  You can NEVER have too many pitching options...EVER.  And the wild card in this is Rosario.  He could be the LF'er sooner than we think.  I also don't mind the idea of Joe Mauer in LF either even if he was rated the 2nd best defensive 1B-man in the A.L. using advanced metrics.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This is a pretty balanced article, but it has convinced me that Escobar should be the everyday SS at the beginning of the 2015 season.

     

    The estimation that his 2014 performance was fluke-ish (as mentioned in comments, not the article) is weakly conceived (a guess without significant statistical or historic support). At age 25, entering his third major league season, a better guess is that his best performance lies ahead (a guess based on the historic trend of players having breakout seasons around the ages of 26 and 27). Steamer projections (http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=6153&position=3B/SS) for 2015 do anticipate a drop in production, seemingly along with a return to a utility role, but the drop is not dramatic and would not be enough to classify 2014 as a fluke. Do you guys think it's even worth trying to guess that a player will perform worse and subsequently adjust his role with the team based on that guess? Obviously players are given opportunities to play based on hopes and/or projections of improvement in performance, but how often is the reverse attempted (aside from aging veterans)? In the case of Escobar, anyway, I think that he has earned the job.

     

    As for Santana, I think that he has earned the season opening CF job. It would be nice to put him at SS, but that job is Escobar's to lose, I think, and there really is not an alternative in CF until Buxton is ready. I like Hicks, and I would like to see him get another solid opportunity, but I think Santana's offensive emergence and ability to hold down CF eliminates Hicks. When you have one player successfully performing in a position, how can you justify replacing him with a player with a track record like Hicks' based on a hope that he will improve? (what a horribly constructed sentence- sorry).

     

    So does that push Hicks over to LF? Between Hicks and Santana, does it make a difference who plays LF and who plays CF? Hicks is obviously better in CF, but Santana is more used to CF than to LF, and if Hicks does get it together at the plate, wouldn't he be facing a move to LF with the arrival of Buxton? And then there is this notion of Mauer in LF, which horrified me the first time I heard it, but I seem to be warming to it now- maybe under the effect of repetition. I think my initial cringe was due to how poorly Mauer's bat profiles in LF, not that it profiles any better at 1B- and then I had to acknowledge I was just discussing Hicks in LF, so you can have a three time batting champ or a two time sub mendoza champ. And as others have said, Mauer should be able to handle LF. As we all know, anybody can play LF, just ask Travis Ishikawa.

     

    The last thing I wanted to respond to here, is the possibility that Sano makes the team out of spring training. In this case, I think that he should start at 3B and Plouffe should move to LF and Mauer can stay in his 1B/DH role with Vargas. This probably undermines what I've already said about ousting a successful player from his position based on hopes for another, but Sano is special, right? He warrants exception, and should get the chance to stick at third.

     

    One thing I hope to see, eventually, from Molitor, in contrast to Gardy, is an ability to figure out these roles and lineup places earlier in the season. I always felt that even in the Twins' successful seasons under Gardy, it often took him until near the all star break to settle on a consistent lineup. Obviously, with the team in rebuild mode, much experimenting lies yet ahead.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

    Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...