Bates called up

[Dojji]

Whose spot will he take?

 

Kotsay's. Combine Bates and a healthy Baldelli and Kotsay is obsolete.

[a700hitter]

Kotsay's. Combine Bates and a healthy Baldelli and Kotsay is obsolete.

I don't see that happening, plus Baldelli is not healthy.

[Dojji]

Seems fine right now. it's not like we can't go to Bubba Bell if Baldelli is actually hurt,

[Cocos Disciples]

Bubba Bell: If you thought you hated Aaron Bates...

[a700hitter]

Seems fine right now. it's not like we can't go to Bubba Bell if Baldelli is actually hurt' date='[/quote']Baldelli isn't injured. He has an unpredictable medical condition that makes him unavailable on certain days and keeps him from finishing some games that he starts. Bubba Bell? This is how you want to build a reliable professional bench... Bubba Bell and Bates? Good plan.:dunno:

[Dojji]

He'll more than do for an emergency option (Bell).

[Dojji]

Baldelli isn't injured. He has an unpredictable medical condition that makes him unavailable on certain days and keeps him from finishing some games that he starts. Bubba Bell? This is how you want to build a reliable professional bench... Bubba Bell and Bates? Good plan.:dunno:

 

Almost as good as relying on below average singles hitting walknophobe OF/1b's. At least Bates and Bell have a bit of talent and some major league upside, Kotsay's just Kotsay and not only will he not get better, he'll get worse.

[Cocos Disciples]

He'll more than do for an emergency option (Bell).

 

His .501 OPS in Pawtucket is awesome.

[a700hitter]

Almost as good as relying on below average singles hitting walknophobe OF/1b's. At least Bates and Bell have a bit of talent and some major league upside' date=' Kotsay's just Kotsay and not only will he not get better, he'll get worse.[/quote'] Bates and Bell would get down on their knees and thank God if they could have Kotsay's career.

[example1]

Boy' date=' that "bag of balls" line is still bothering you. I didn't use the "bag of balls" line until you said that bates could be a 4th or 5th piece of a package for a larger deal. Even I hadn't evaluated him so harshly. The 4th or 5th guy in a package is usually just a throw in that never amounts to much, hence the "bag of balls" reference. You were the one who judged him to be a throw in, not me. [/quote']

 

I moved it, because I LOVE this conversation.

 

The bag of balls line didn't really bother me, it was just indicative of your initial view of this kid. I used the 4th or 5th piece of a package thing because I see that as valuable, not a throwaway. Isn't there a reason that other teams WANT 4th or 5th pieces of deals? My assumption is that other teams don't just put up a list of players and throw a dart at that list to determine who they finalize a deal with.

 

A young guy with lots of college experience, trained in the Sox offensive system to be able to play 1B and a bit of OF, who has 20+ HR power and a big frame (6-4, 230)... gets MLB minimum for 4 years and then arbitration. Seems at least somewhat valuable to me.

 

My fear--and this isn't directed at you specifically a700--is that people are going to become overly enamored with soxprospects.com's rankings of prospects and believe that everyone who isnt' in the top 10 is basically the equivalent of pennies underneith your carseat and able to be thrown away. Combine that with a propensity for fans to want the name they know rather than the name they don't, and suddenly we're playing a losing game of investing in the known entity and risking overseeing someone who is actually good.

 

There are lots of good players on the 2nd page of Soxprospects (or the later pages of the BA Prospect Handbook) who I believe will be harder to get than their "ranking" indicates. Bates would have been one (he's barely on the first page), but it includes guys like Mailman, Wilson, Lavarnway, Price, Huntzinger, Tejada, Middlebrooks, Almanzar, Hissey and maybe even Jason Place. With one good season any of those guys would be in the top 10 of the prospects list. With a number of decent seasons they could see time at the MLB level. With a bit of misfortune on the 'big club, they could see regular time for a stint (a la Nick Green, who wasn't a Sox Prospect but who--from afar--had no place manning the Sox SS position on a daily basis until he proved he coudl make it).

 

Long story short, all of these guys are extremely talented young baseball players. We will obviously leave it up to the Sox FO to determine who has skill and who just won't make it, but I think it is wise to assume that any of the AA or AAA guys could come up and hold their own for short periods on the Sox--even if they aren't the caliber we are used to at this level. My guess is that an internal goal for the FO minor league director is to have lots of players in the minor league who are literally above replacement level, so if a player goes down they have reason to believe the understudy, and the understudy's understudy, are better than the league average. That may be a function of coaching or training or drafting, but I would be that's a goal. So far I think Bates has shown that he can put the bat on the ball and pick an errant throw.

 

Also, I wouldn't say that Bates is blocked by Anderson. If Bates got his s*** together and Anderson didn't then I would say Anderson would be the one pressing for a spot. It's all about production.

[a700hitter]

A young guy with lots of college experience' date=' trained in the Sox offensive system to be able to play 1B and a bit of OF, who has 20+ HR power and a big frame (6-4, 230)... gets MLB minimum for 4 years and then arbitration. Seems at least somewhat valuable to me.[/quote']Most teams have one or more guys like this or better in their systems. If he played middle infield, CF or catcher, he would have more value. If he doesn't make the Sox, I think he would bring very little back in a trade.

 

My fear--and this isn't directed at you specifically a700--is that people are going to become overly enamored with soxprospects.com's rankings of prospects and believe that everyone who isnt' in the top 10 is basically the equivalent of pennies underneith your carseat and able to be thrown away. Combine that with a propensity for fans to want the name they know rather than the name they don't' date=' and suddenly we're playing a losing game of investing in the known entity and risking overseeing someone who is actually good.[/quote']The rankings are fluid and they change from year to year. I think that is a function of the unreliability of prospect evaluation.

 

Long story short' date=' all of these guys are extremely talented young baseball players. We will obviously leave it up to the Sox FO to determine who has skill and who just won't make it, but I think it is wise to assume that any of the AA or AAA guys could come up and hold their own for short periods on the Sox--even if they aren't the caliber we are used to at this level.[/quote']I don't have a problem with this type of utilization of prospects. I had a problem with the Bates situation, because the Lowell situation has been known for quite some time. It was known that he would be missing 12-15 games and that Kotsay's physical condition has not been the best. I think that they should have acted sooner to put in place a contingency plan to cover the risk of Lowell's health. I really didn't want to see a green kid thrown into the fire for one or two weeks or more. I have no problem with bringing him up for a game or two to sit on the bench or start, but not to start games for a week or more, and certainly not to be the contingency plan for Lowell.

 

lso' date=' I wouldn't say that Bates is blocked by Anderson. If Bates got his s*** together and Anderson didn't then I would say Anderson would be the one pressing for a spot. It's all about production.[/quote']I think there are certain organizational pressures to do everything they can to help the top prospects be successful. Eventually, it does come down to performance, but if Bates and Anderson perform equally, Anderson gets the call.

[Dojji]

His .501 OPS in Pawtucket is awesome.

 

Do we regularly decide player's futures based on sample sizes of 70 AB's or less?

 

No. No, we do not. And Bell has hit well enough in the last 2 years to deserve more credit than you're giving him.

[a700hitter]

Do we regularly decide player's futures based on sample sizes of 70 AB's or less?

 

No. No, we do not. And Bell has hit well enough in the last 2 years to deserve more credit than you're giving him.

But they usually don't get promoted while they are slumping badly.

[Cocos Disciples]

I wouldn't trust him for more than a spot bench place. His AA numbers are solid, but what has he done to earn a MLB spot?

[Dojji]

But they usually don't get promoted while they are slumping badly.

 

Granted, but Bates was a polished hitter when he was drafted, it wasn't that much of a stretch to think he could handle a pitcher or two who hadn't seen him too many times before and didn't have a book on him.

 

I look at Bates and I see a Ryan Garko type. Polished, capable and disciplined, without a ton of upside and probably best suited for a platoon or bench role longterm, but fully capable of playing a solid starting 1B in the absence of better options. And every now and again one of those guys goes from Ryan Garko to Ryan Howard.