SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Garin Cecchini traded to Brewers for cash
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 11, 2015 16:46:55 GMT -5
He doesn't play an average 3B. And if he played an average LF, that's still not a starter. Plus Holt has speed that Cecchini doesn't have, which probably adds to his batting average. And besides all of that, Brock Holt struck out far less in the minors than Cecchini is. Cecchini has so far to go to even reach Brock Holt's level as a hitter. He had a 69 wRC+ in AAA last year. The last season he had a k-rate under 20% was 2013. You can't look at Cecchini worst season and think that fully reflects the player he is, just like you can't use 2013 salem stats to show how far he has dropped. Sure Cecchini was bad last year, but his minor league numbers and his wRC+ is much better then Holts numbers. Cecchini was a better minor league player in the minors when looking at his whole career. Please stop jumping to a new argument every time your last one was wrong. None of my arguments are wrong. I'm just trying to figure out how to explain something to you that you can understand. I'm tired of this. The argument was that you can't be a good MLB hitter with an ISO under .100 and strikeout rate > 20%. You came up with Brock Holt, who had a strikeout rate less than 20% and isn't a good MLB hitter. He also struck out way less in the minors than Cecchini has. I don't know how you can assume Cecchini can get under 20% and even if he could, he's still not a good hitter. The argument was framed that way because Cecchini has to be a good hitter to overcome his fielding deficiencies at non-premium positions.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Dec 11, 2015 16:49:08 GMT -5
Cecchini has sucked offensively the last two years and his defense is even worse. His only slightly comfortable defensive position (while still being far below average) is left field. And that's a position where if you're going to suck defensively, you want some offense out of.
Right now, Cecchini is nothing close to a major league player, and nothing you want to waste a 40man spot on. Could he turn it around if he stops searching for homers and stops being pull happy? Sure, but the Sox know he probably needs a change of surroundings.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2015 16:56:08 GMT -5
I said there has to be a lot of hitters that had seasons with a good average and on base % and low slugging %. You replied it can't be done and you can't find any players like that because pitchers will overpower them because they have no fear, due to them having no power. If you think that 19.9% is not just about 20% ok your right, but you know your not. Because there is very little difference. The point is that a player can strikeout a lot, have a very low ISO and still be a league average hitter.
Also when you did your search you looked at career numbers not season numbers, big difference.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2015 17:02:49 GMT -5
Cecchini has sucked offensively the last two years and his defense is even worse. His only slightly comfortable defensive position (while still being far below average) is left field. And that's a position where if you're going to suck defensively, you want some offense out of. Right now, Cecchini is nothing close to a major league player, and nothing you want to waste a 40man spot on. Could he turn it around if he stops searching for homers and stops being pull happy? Sure, but the Sox know he probably needs a change of surroundings. in 2014 he was a league average hitter(wRC+ of 99), so I think sucked is a little strong. Yes he sucked in 2015. That's only one year, he picked a bad year to have his worst year!
Where do you get info on his fielding in minors? Fangraphs only has data on his fielding when in majors and that's only a few games. Where do you get the far below average?
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 11, 2015 17:03:46 GMT -5
Also when you did your search you looked at career numbers not season numbers, big difference. That guys can't sustain success that way for a full career is kind of the point. Yeah, you can be an OK hitter with no power and strikeouts. But both of those things do work against hitters and limit their upside. They're not the profile you should ever be banking on.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 11, 2015 17:05:17 GMT -5
Cecchini was one of the most pleasant, sincere, friendly players I've talked to in the system. I hope he figures out whatever his issues were in Milwaukee. I really hope he becomes the next Brandon Moss. As a player Sox didn't think was good enough for our team but goes on to have a very nice career. Coyle and Brentz better help us in some way or form down the road.
A player they "didn't think was good enough?" Come on now. They let him go in 2008 and he didn't have a season above replacement level until 2012. When a player takes four years and makes himself into a much different player than what he was when you released him, that's not the team screwing up.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 11, 2015 17:06:32 GMT -5
Also when you did your search you looked at career numbers not season numbers, big difference. Using that link, go season-by-season and look at how many guys break those thresholds each year. There are many seasons in which there are literally none. If you look at the names, you'll find that most of the ones that get any sort of playing time that have that profile are some combination of extremely fast (i.e., they make up for the lack of power by stealing the bases after getting on first), are good defensive catchers who don't play every day, and/or are very versatile defensively. Cecchini is not fast enough to steal bases in the majors and he is well below average on defense. To use Holt as an example, he survives because he is versatile defensively. If he could only play 2B or something, he wouldn't even be in the majors.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 11, 2015 17:06:34 GMT -5
I said there has to be a lot of hitters that had seasons with a good average and on base % and low slugging %. You replied it can't be done and you can't find any players like that because pitchers will overpower them because they have no fear, due to them having no power. If you think that 19.9% is not just about 20% ok your right, but you know your not. Because there is very little difference. The point is that a player can strikeout a lot, have a very low ISO and still be a league average hitter. Also when you did your search you looked at career numbers not season numbers, big difference. Season numbers will be skewed by lucky BABIP seasons. I really don't want to continue this. You can never admit you're wrong. Go ask the Celtics fans in the Celtics threads. Cecchini will never be as good of a hitter as Holt was the last two years with a 20% k-rate and .100 ISO because he's not as fast. Holt will naturally have a higher BABIP.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2015 17:12:46 GMT -5
Also when you did your search you looked at career numbers not season numbers, big difference. That guys can't sustain success that way for a full career is kind of the point. Yeah, you can be an OK hitter with no power and strikeouts. But both of those things do work against hitters and limit their upside. They're not the profile you should ever be banking on. Good points. I just think overtime most hitter will develop a little more power if they are good hitters. I wouldn't think Cacchini would have an ISO under .1 for his career. I mean look at Cecchini's ISO numbers in the minors they are much better then Holts, that's why I think he was a better minor league hitter.
I just love the Holt comp because his former team traded him just like the Sox did with Cecchini for just about nothing. The pirates gave up on him too soon and it gives me hope with Cecchini.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 11, 2015 17:17:21 GMT -5
That guys can't sustain success that way for a full career is kind of the point. Yeah, you can be an OK hitter with no power and strikeouts. But both of those things do work against hitters and limit their upside. They're not the profile you should ever be banking on. Good points. I just think overtime most hitter will develop a little more power if they are good hitters. I wouldn't think Cacchini would have an ISO under .1 for his career. I mean look at Cecchini's ISO numbers in the minors they are much better then Holts, that's why I think he was a better minor league hitter.
I just love the Holt comp because his former team traded him just like the Sox did with Cecchini for just about nothing. The pirates gave up on him too soon and it gives me hope with Cecchini.
The Pirates didn't give up on him. They traded him in the Hanrahan deal in which the Pirates got back Melancon and a pu pu platter of Pimentel, Sands, and De Jesus. Holt was, essentially, traded for something like Pimentel, Sands, and De Jesus. Not quite the same as dealing for cash. I talked to a scout at the time who loved Holt. I'd bet you that you couldn't find a scout who saw Cecchini last year who would recommend acquiring him for anything of value.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2015 17:22:38 GMT -5
I really hope he becomes the next Brandon Moss. As a player Sox didn't think was good enough for our team but goes on to have a very nice career. Coyle and Brentz better help us in some way or form down the road.
A player they "didn't think was good enough?" Come on now. They let him go in 2008 and he didn't have a season above replacement level until 2012. When a player takes four years and makes himself into a much different player than what he was when you released him, that's not the team screwing up. Just hoping he goes on to have a good career, like Moss did. If he becomes the player I hope he does and Coyle and Brentz do nothing then the team did screw up. With Moss a lot of people wanted the Sox to give him some playing time in majors and they never did before getting rid of him, just like Cecchini.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 11, 2015 17:24:06 GMT -5
Good points. I just think overtime most hitter will develop a little more power if they are good hitters. I wouldn't think Cacchini would have an ISO under .1 for his career. I mean look at Cecchini's ISO numbers in the minors they are much better then Holts, that's why I think he was a better minor league hitter.
I just love the Holt comp because his former team traded him just like the Sox did with Cecchini for just about nothing. The pirates gave up on him too soon and it gives me hope with Cecchini.
The Pirates didn't give up on him. They traded him in the Hanrahan deal in which the Pirates got back Melancon and a pu pu platter of Pimentel, Sands, and De Jesus. Holt was, essentially, traded for something like Pimentel, Sands, and De Jesus. Not quite the same as dealing for cash. I talked to a scout at the time who loved Holt. I'd bet you that you couldn't find a scout who saw Cecchini last year who would recommend acquiring him for anything of value. And Holt always had a pretty safe floor as a utility infielder or at least depth at multiple defensively valuable positions in case of injuries. Kind of like a better hitting version of Marrero (who will always have a higher than nothing value because of his glove).
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2015 17:32:25 GMT -5
I said there has to be a lot of hitters that had seasons with a good average and on base % and low slugging %. You replied it can't be done and you can't find any players like that because pitchers will overpower them because they have no fear, due to them having no power. If you think that 19.9% is not just about 20% ok your right, but you know your not. Because there is very little difference. The point is that a player can strikeout a lot, have a very low ISO and still be a league average hitter. Also when you did your search you looked at career numbers not season numbers, big difference. Season numbers will be skewed by lucky BABIP seasons. I really don't want to continue this. You can never admit you're wrong. Go ask the Celtics fans in the Celtics threads. Cecchini will never be as good of a hitter as Holt was the last two years with a 20% k-rate and .100 ISO because he's not as fast. Holt will naturally have a higher BABIP. Well Holt and Cecchini both have very good BABIP in the minors. Look them up. As to Celtics thread and Chad Ford not going to say I am wrong when I am right, the guy has connections/sources, that's a fact
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Dec 11, 2015 17:38:32 GMT -5
Also when you did your search you looked at career numbers not season numbers, big difference. Using that link, go season-by-season and look at how many guys break those thresholds each year. There are many seasons in which there are literally none. If you look at the names, you'll find that most of the ones that get any sort of playing time that have that profile are some combination of extremely fast (i.e., they make up for the lack of power by stealing the bases after getting on first), are good defensive catchers who don't play every day, and/or are very versatile defensively. Cecchini is not fast enough to steal bases in the majors and he is well below average on defense. To use Holt as an example, he survives because he is versatile defensively. If he could only play 2B or something, he wouldn't even be in the majors. Well for one using a 20% strikeout rate and ISO under .1 is the problem. Cecchini ISO was only under .1 in one year, last year. His strikeout rate was only over 20% last two years. If you changed those numbers slightly you would get a lot more players, like Holt included. Strikeouts 18% and ISO .110/.115 or lower, those are more in line with his career minor league numbers.
So you think a league average hitter that plays average D wouldn't be in the majors if he only played one position? That's crazy talk. Based on what?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 11, 2015 19:33:29 GMT -5
Using that link, go season-by-season and look at how many guys break those thresholds each year. There are many seasons in which there are literally none. If you look at the names, you'll find that most of the ones that get any sort of playing time that have that profile are some combination of extremely fast (i.e., they make up for the lack of power by stealing the bases after getting on first), are good defensive catchers who don't play every day, and/or are very versatile defensively. Cecchini is not fast enough to steal bases in the majors and he is well below average on defense. To use Holt as an example, he survives because he is versatile defensively. If he could only play 2B or something, he wouldn't even be in the majors. Well for one using a 20% strikeout rate and ISO under .1 is the problem. Cecchini ISO was only under .1 in one year, last year. His strikeout rate was only over 20% last two years. If you changed those numbers slightly you would get a lot more players, like Holt included. Strikeouts 18% and ISO .110/.115 or lower, those are more in line with his career minor league numbers.
So you think a league average hitter that plays average D wouldn't be in the majors if he only played one position? That's crazy talk. Based on what?
2015: www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=np&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=200&type=8&season=2015&month=0&season1=2015&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=34809&players=0&page=1_50This is expanded to 200 PA min. 30 players were replacement level or better with .120 ISO or lower, and 18% K rate or higher Catchers: Cervelli, Swihart, Hanigan, Flowers, Avila, Maldonado, Plawecki Stole at least 15 bags: Jackson, Yelich, Hernandez, Deshields, Venable, Maybin, Gose, Bourn +4 or better Def: Cervelli, Jackson, Goins, Swihart, Peterson, Lagares, Romine, Denorfia, Martin, Castillo, Saladino, Maldonado, Plawecki, Urshela, Hardy Versatile defensively: Holt (Didn't bother looking any of the above up) So the remaining list is: Chase Headley - 91 wRC+, 1.5 fWAR Anthony Rendon - 97 wRC+, 0.9 fWAR Travis Snider - 81 wRC+, 0.1 fWAR Shane Peterson - 83 wRC+, 0.0 fWAR So the question is, would this theoretical Cecchini represent the down year Headley had, the injured year Rendon had, or the replacement-level player the last two guys are. Also interesting, when you look at 2014, here are the repeat players and the boxes they checked Christian Yelich: Fast, Defense Juan Lagares: Defense Leonys Martin: Fast, Defense JJ Hardy: Defense Brock Holt: Versatile Anthony Gose: Fast, defense Austin Jackson: Fast Will Venable: Defense Michael Bourn: none (91 wRC+, 0.4 fWAR) Chris Denorfia: none (74 wRC+, 0.4 fWAR) although he does play all 3 OF positions. Not sure if we'd call that "versatile" Cameron Maybin: none (77 wRC+, 0.2 fWAR) Andrew Romine: none (57 wRC+, 0.0 fWAR) So I think by moving the chains, you go from it being impossible to being very, very hard to be a valuable player with that profile without either being a plus defender, having good speed, or being a catcher. I think the Red Sox were banking on the fact that Cecchini wasn't going to be valuable to them without checking any of those boxes, and that's part of why he was being exposed to other positions. And as for your statement about Coyle and Brentz, there is a lot of offseason to go. It's not like they've locked in the entire 40-man.
|
|
|
Post by cologneredsox on Mar 20, 2017 7:13:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 21, 2017 10:14:11 GMT -5
Uh, dude, you haven't hit in three years.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 22, 2017 0:55:43 GMT -5
When I asked the 25-year-old third baseman who instigated the failed adjustment — the Red Sox or himself — he hesitated before answering.
“It wasn’t club driven,” claimed Cecchini after the pause. “You always want see how you can take that next step, but not everybody can be like a Josh Donaldson and work on things like launch angles. I mean, if you talk to Mookie Betts, he doesn’t think about that stuff. Eric Hosmer doesn’t think about that stuff. Looking back, I shouldn’t have changed anything.
A big part of me wants to think otherwise because the Cecchini family are an incredible family that obviously did a great job raising Garin (on day one, he donated part of his signing bonus to the Jimmy Fund which isn't likely a major known charity in his home state) but, I wonder how much having a set of nationally acclaimed amateur baseball coaches as parents influenced his batting decisions.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 22, 2017 1:07:59 GMT -5
Swing plane as outlined by Ted isn't the only problem that batters can have driving flyballs. Lars Anderson is the perfect example. He had the power, swing plane and bat speed to be a monster instead of a ground ball machine. I often thought that if he tried to hit popups rather than squaring the ball that he'd blossom because it seemed he was always topping the ball. That and other factors like pitch recognition, hand-eye coordination, etc are likely the reason pro coaches are unwilling to spring it on everybody. It's more complex than meets the eye and not everybody is Teddy Ballgame.
|
|
|