-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter Bucklion
- Start date
LitlBuck
Kevin Warren is an ass
Okay, forget about trading himTheStoicPaisano;2174644; said:
I will grant you the fact that he is probably too young to give up on right now but all I'm saying is that currently Marson is producing while Santana is not so let him sit for a few games during the week. I stated that Marson would eventually cool down and when he does Manny can put back Santana full time or whatever.It is sort of unfair to compare Kotchman with Santana because he is not hitting 5th in the lineup even though he probably gets his bat on the ball more than Carlos. All I am saying is play Marson and let Santana get his act together in batting practice. When Marson cools down or Santana shows some progress in limited game action then he can go back behind the plate 90% of the time.
Upvote
0
Zippercat
Legend
Enough already! Why are all of you repeating the "Santana is still young" mantra? SANTANA IS NOT A YOUNG PLAYER ANYMORE!
He's 26, no longer the 23 he was as a rookie. Sure, he missed some time with injuries. Sure, he's certainly a lot younger than I am. :( But, so far as baseball players go, this guy should be about at his peak. Very, very few players get much better after age 26.
Santana is only a year younger than LaPorta. As of yesterday, Santana has had 1,132 ML plate appearances and LaPorta has had 1,019 PA. Yet, most of us concluded when he was 26 or younger that LaPorta was LaBusta, right? So, why the double standard with Santana?
Fact is, the 2012 Indians are really not a young team, in spite of the front office's attempts to spin that as a crutch. Here are the ages of their position players (per baseball-reference.com) who have appeared so far in 2012:
Chisenhall: 23
Diaz: 23
Kipnis: 25
Brantley: 25
Santana: 26
Cabrera: 26
Marson: 26
Cunningham: 26
Donald: 27
LaPorta: 27
Lopez: 28
Choo: 29
Kotchman: 29
Carlin: 31
Hannahan: 32
Duncan: 32
Hafner: 35
Damon: 38
He's 26, no longer the 23 he was as a rookie. Sure, he missed some time with injuries. Sure, he's certainly a lot younger than I am. :( But, so far as baseball players go, this guy should be about at his peak. Very, very few players get much better after age 26.
Santana is only a year younger than LaPorta. As of yesterday, Santana has had 1,132 ML plate appearances and LaPorta has had 1,019 PA. Yet, most of us concluded when he was 26 or younger that LaPorta was LaBusta, right? So, why the double standard with Santana?
Fact is, the 2012 Indians are really not a young team, in spite of the front office's attempts to spin that as a crutch. Here are the ages of their position players (per baseball-reference.com) who have appeared so far in 2012:
Chisenhall: 23
Diaz: 23
Kipnis: 25
Brantley: 25
Santana: 26
Cabrera: 26
Marson: 26
Cunningham: 26
Donald: 27
LaPorta: 27
Lopez: 28
Choo: 29
Kotchman: 29
Carlin: 31
Hannahan: 32
Duncan: 32
Hafner: 35
Damon: 38
Upvote
0
LitlBuck
Kevin Warren is an ass
I really don't think you should compare anyone on a major-league roster to Laporta. It has just not right:) I see where Hafner is 35. I guess he must be past his peak. Comes back and hits one meaningless home run and then the next day grounds into two double plays with the bases loaded:( Please get rid of him.Zippercat;2175000; said:
I think this team is still fairly young. I would like for you to compare them to some other rosters of teams in the same division. Perhaps the Royals or Twins might be younger and look where they are at. I don't think There is any way that the better teams in the American or National League have an average age that is less than the Indians. Perhaps there is one or two but not anymore than that.
Upvote
0
LitlBuck;2175077; said:
Hafner will be gone next year, as will Damon (if not sooner). The question is what does the front office do now. If they go get somebody, they had best get someone who is at least under contract for a while (like, gulp, Ubaldo) because picking up an expensive rental doesn't make any sense, we already have one of these, Hafner, and he is a yoke on the club right now (2 if you count Sizemore).
Upvote
0
Because Santana has, at times, showed flashed of being a viable, productive major leaguer. LaPorta has barely strung two good games together over those 1,000+ plate appearances.Zippercat;2175000; said:
Upvote
0
Zippercat
Legend
NFBuck;2175122; said:
Career ML facts, rather than antidotal recollections:
LaPorta Santana
PA 1019 1136
AB 920 939
R 105 137
H 218 223
2B 51 60
3B 2 2
HR 30 38
RBI 115 130
BB 81 178
SO 208 222
BA .237 .237
OBP .302 .356
SLG .395 .427
OPS .697 .783
These numbers are sadly quite similar. And unlike Santana, LaBusta had to split playing time with others and never had the chance, earned or unearned, to play every day for extended periods. I still ask: why the double standard in comparing these guys?
Upvote
0
Zippercat
Legend
LitlBuck;2175077; said:
Ages of all roster players are easy to find and you can find the facts to support or disprove your hunches as easy as I can. Saying, or even proving, that other teams are older than the Indians is not the same thing as saying, or proving, that the Tribe is a young team. I say that when NO position starters are under 25 it is not a young team. Your definition of young may vary.
Upvote
0
Nice way to enter the AS break
Indians enter the 9th with a 6-4 lead, and then Chris Perez goes into full implosion giving up 4 hits and 3 runs to lose the game (it started with him giving up a HR to a guy who had 1 HR in 383 career ABs...GG Chris)
Indians enter the 9th with a 6-4 lead, and then Chris Perez goes into full implosion giving up 4 hits and 3 runs to lose the game (it started with him giving up a HR to a guy who had 1 HR in 383 career ABs...GG Chris)
Upvote
0
Beano Cook
Hangin' with Rockne
If Doby and Feller get their shit together the Tribe will roll in the second half.
Upvote
0
tsteele316
Mr. Such and Such
Zippercat;2175182; said:
those numbers really aren't quite similar. you have to look at more than just batting average. a 50 point obp, 30 point slugging and 86 point ops differential is quite a difference.
Upvote
0
Zippercat
Legend
tsteele316;2178390; said:
The numbers are quite similar in that neither set is very impressive: these guys, so far, are both busts. Santana has been given superior chances--he's been able to play nearly every day, allowed to hit with more RBI opportunities and had more protection in the line up behind him. Yet, in spite of that, his numbers are really not that much better.
Upvote
0
tsteele316
Mr. Such and Such
Zippercat;2178466; said:
like i said, the massive differentials in the stats i cited make this untrue. that's why baseball is the ultimate stats game. otherwise, people would look at rudimentary numbers and come up with this type of conclusion.
and that doesn't even get into the positional value argument, in which santana has actually become a decent defensive catcher, while laporta is still a butcher at whatever position he plays, and laporta plays a primary power position in the field in which greater offensive production is expected.
Upvote
0