Minor League Week 6 Games (6/8 - 6/13/21)

[sportscoach]

My argument was never that players should not play multiple positions in the minor leagues. My argument is that our players in our minor leagues are playing multiple positions because our organization has decided to implement top-down an idea that it has tried, to failure, at the MLB level.

You also misstate my second argument, likely deliberately. I stated very early on that I have no issue with MiLB SS being moved to 3B or 2B here and there. Those are very natural transitions that happen with frequency. The near-hysterical references to the players you cite have no bearing on this argument, and you know that. I'm taking issue with what is a very clear pattern at this point of turning every single one of our best hitting prospects into Utility players. Meaning they aren't simply moved off one position, one time. They're bounced around the entire IF (and then OF) and forced to hit along the way.

If you'd like to respond this time by addressing the argument that I am in fact making, I'll help you. Here is my argument: we are stunting the growth of our best hitting prospects by asking them to learn several (read, not just 1 other) positions. Our organization's inability to develop a competent hitting prospect in 10 years supports that's argument, as it at least conveniently coincides with the timing that our approach moved to turning all our best prospects into Michael Martinez before we let them get every day ABs in the majors.

So that you know, we all know that you mischaracterized my position because you had no good response to it. So that you know, it's neither compelling nor inconspicuous. So that you also know, I'll gladly give your recommendation the consideration it deserves.

Back on track, my belief is that that this move is not being made because we suddenly have an abundance of pure Utility guys in the organization. The move is being made because we have a dearth of good hitters on the big league club who fit together in any cohesive way. And our current MO of drafting and signing Intl SS virtually exclusively does not seem likely to remedy that problem any time soon.

What I don't think you are getting the fact we aren't making Freeman into an utility player, we are making sure we know what positions he can play so he isn't blocked when he is ready for the bigs.... He doesn't have the tools to be a big league SS everyday, but the fact he was an SS, means he has enough talent to play elsewhere in the INF and likely enough ability to play Corner OF defensively... So we are testing him outside of SS, So when his opportunity comes up we can put him at the position available...

Plus the Rays won't actually keep you unless you are willing to play multi positions if you can and no offense, with the lowest budget, year in and year out that has just as many wins as the teams with the high budgets, why is using their strategy of development so wrong?!?

 

[CDAV45]

Dicky, I understand your POV, but I don't necessarily agree with you, and I'll explain. I think you're speaking more on the idea of bringing up a SS and instantly converting him to a CFer for example. It's not easy for a player to convert that quickly and I think Tito and Co. realize that. That is probably why you see them developing versatility in the minors, and there's nothing wrong with that IMO because that's what the minors are for.............development. Let's take Arias for example. They've had him play multiple positions, but the majority of the time has been at SS. Having the ability to effectively play different positions doesn't pigeon hole their bat should it prove capable of helping the big league club. Just my $.02.

 

[DickyLeftridge]

What I don't think you are getting the fact we aren't making Freeman into an utility player, we are making sure we know what positions he can play so he isn't blocked when he is ready for the bigs.... He doesn't have the tools to be a big league SS everyday, but the fact he was an SS, means he has enough talent to play elsewhere in the INF and likely enough ability to play Corner OF defensively... So we are testing him outside of SS, So when his opportunity comes up we can put him at the position available...

Plus the Rays won't actually keep you unless you are willing to play multi positions if you can and no offense, with the lowest budget, year in and year out that has just as many wins as the teams with the high budgets, why is using their strategy of development so wrong?!?

I do not and have not for years expected Freeman to be a MLB SS. He's been destined for 2B for quite some time, at least in my view.

But I think you are missing the trend if you expect his last stop to be 3B or 2B. Besides, if Gimenez and Arias prove to be capable defenders at SS and 2B, which seems quite likely, what do you do with Freeman then? Please answer.

 

[CDAV45]

What I don't think you are getting the fact we aren't making Freeman into an utility player, we are making sure we know what positions he can play so he isn't blocked when he is ready for the bigs.... He doesn't have the tools to be a big league SS everyday, but the fact he was an SS, means he has enough talent to play elsewhere in the INF and likely enough ability to play Corner OF defensively... So we are testing him outside of SS, So when his opportunity comes up we can put him at the position available...

Plus the Rays won't actually keep you unless you are willing to play multi positions if you can and no offense, with the lowest budget, year in and year out that has just as many wins as the teams with the high budgets, why is using their strategy of development so wrong?!?

I'm not so sure he doesn't have the ability to play SS at the big league level. While his arm is slightly lacking he has good range, a good glove, and a really quick release. I'd rather he prove that he couldn't rather than label him, and since he's still playing some SS I'd say keep the option open.

 

[kriegs]

I do not and have not for years expected Freeman to be a MLB SS. He's been destined for 2B for quite some time, at least in my view.

But I think you are missing the trend if you expect his last stop to be 3B or 2B. Besides, if Gimenez and Arias prove to be capable defenders at SS and 2B, which seems quite likely, what do you do with Freeman then? Please answer.

I think the nuance you're missing, and that the Indians front office gets paid to take into account, is that not every prospect pans out at every position.

You're treating this linear like we know for a fact right now that Gimenez, Arias, and Freeman all pan out as major leaguers. Math tells us this won't happen, even for the best teams in player development. Smart teams know this, so they can't just pigeonhole everyone's position in Low-A Ball like you want them to.

 

[BMAN]

Why’s this guy so angry?

 

[LL3]

I do not and have not for years expected Freeman to be a MLB SS. He's been destined for 2B for quite some time, at least in my view.

But I think you are missing the trend if you expect his last stop to be 3B or 2B. Besides, if Gimenez and Arias prove to be capable defenders at SS and 2B, which seems quite likely, what do you do with Freeman then? Please answer.

A better question might be -- where will Arias go?....Freeman most likely lands at 2b when they are ready to make the move. Freeman may also arrive (on a more permanent basis) before Arias.

 

[DickyLeftridge]

Dicky, I understand your POV, but I don't necessarily agree with you, and I'll explain. I think you're speaking more on the idea of bringing up a SS and instantly converting him to a CFer for example. It's not easy for a player to convert that quickly and I think Tito and Co. realize that. That is probably why you see them developing versatility in the minors, and there's nothing wrong with that IMO because that's what the minors are for.............development. Let's take Arias for example. They've had him play multiple positions, but the majority of the time has been at SS. Having the ability to effectively play different positions doesn't pigeon hole their bat should it prove capable of helping the big league club. Just my $.02.

You don't have to agree. That's fine. But I am asking you all to consider it. Tito and Co. deserve the benefit of the doubt on many things, but this isn't one of them. It hasn't worked!

I'm speaking both to the idea of bringing up a SS and instantly converting him to a CF AND the idea of bringing up a MIF and forcing him to learn 5 different positions just to get on the field consistently. Why? Because we've literally done both. Amed Rosario and Owen Miller providing examples of both the former and the latter this year. I am not talking about simply moving ARod from SS to 3B as someone claimed.

It's literally the first thing we've done with our recent acquisitions--who've been acquired at or very near the big-league level. Rosario has been flipped from IF to OF and back again. Owen Miller has been sprinkled around the entire IF. Naylor went from IF to OF and back again.

We're going to do that with Jones. We're going to do that with Freeman. My personal favorite young prospect/player, Bobby BradGOAT is the only one who seems safe. And that's only because he can't play anyhwere else! lol

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

If we get two plus-players out of Freeman, Arias and Gimenez, we've done things very, very right. The odds of all three becoming plus major leaguers who need every day playing time at a specific position, all at the same time, while not having something like 3B open to Arias, is incredibly small. If it happens, shit, that's an embarrassment of riches and a good problem to have. Trade one of those valuable commodities and land us a big fish to help peak our next contention window.

I'd also point out to Dicky that I haven't misstated shit, especially not deliberately--but I'm guessing any further efforts to continue the conversation are going to prove less than fruitful.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

You don't have to agree. That's fine. But I am asking you all to consider it. Tito and Co. deserve the benefit of the doubt on many things, but this isn't one of them. It hasn't worked!

I'm speaking both to the idea of bringing up a SS and instantly converting him to a CF AND the idea of bringing up a MIF and forcing him to learn 5 different positions just to get on the field consistently. Why? Because we've literally done both. Amed Rosario and Owen Miller providing examples of both the former and the latter this year. I am not talking about simply moving ARod from SS to 3B as someone claimed.

It's literally the first thing we've done with our recent acquisitions--who've been acquired at or very near the big-league level. Rosario has been flipped from IF to OF and back again. Owen Miller has been sprinkled around the entire IF. Naylor went from IF to OF and back again.

We're going to do that with Jones. We're going to do that with Freeman. My personal favorite young prospect/player, Bobby BradGOAT is the only one who seems safe. And that's only because he can't play anyhwere else! lol

Talk in specifics, rather than being generally angry and you'll have more fruitful conversations. Let's look at one case you bring up--Amed Rosario.

Do you feel that Amed Rosario would be better-suited as a SS-only player moving forward? That we would get more productivity out of him at that position over the foreseeable future?

Because I disagree with that take. I don't think he's good enough at short to be there long-term, especially with the plus-defensive SS options we have coming up in the near future. For those reasons, it makes sense to try someone with his athleticism in CF. His bat deserves to stay in this lineup, so we need to figure out what position we should stick him at.

I think, long-term, he is best-suited as an OF. I'd say his next most-likely sticking spot in the majors is 2B. After that, 3B and SS. Playing him at those positions is getting this team ready for success.

 

[DickyLeftridge]

A better question might be -- where will Arias go?....Freeman most likely lands at 2b when they are ready to make the move. Freeman may also arrive (on a more permanent basis) before Arias.

It's a different question. But why is that better? Whether it's Freeman, Arias, or Gimenez, you're taking a key asset acquired in trade or a long-time prospect and turning him into a AAAA Michael Martinez special. Maybe I should ask you again so you don't think it's rhetorical--why is that better? It's only the same thing I've been arguing against for the last 2-3 pages. Better for my argument, perhaps. But I don't think that's what you intended.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

It's a different question. But why is that better? Whether it's Freeman, Arias, or Gimenez, you're taking a key asset acquired in trade or a long-time prospect and turning him into a AAAA Michael Martinez special. Maybe I should ask you again so you don't think it's rhetorical--why is that better? It's only the same thing I've been arguing against for the last 2-3 pages. Better for my argument, perhaps. But I don't think that's what you intended.

Can you show that positional versatility leads to worse performance offensively?

Because if you can't, then you consistently comparing guys to Michael Martinez just because they have positional versatility is nothing short of trolling.

It's really interesting that you seem to both say that moving Freeman around turns him worse, but if someone brings it up, you say:

I stated very early on that I have no issue with MiLB SS being moved to 3B or 2B here and there.

Kinda sounds like you're talking out both sides of your mouth. Methinks this comes from a place of emotion rather than rationality.

 

[DickyLeftridge]

Talk in specifics, rather than being generally angry and you'll have more fruitful conversations. Let's look at one case you bring up--Amed Rosario.

Do you feel that Amed Rosario would be better-suited as a SS-only player moving forward? That we would get more productivity out of him at that position over the foreseeable future?

Because I disagree with that take. I don't think he's good enough at short to be there long-term, especially with the plus-defensive SS options we have coming up in the near future. For those reasons, it makes sense to try someone with his athleticism in CF. His bat deserves to stay in this lineup, so we need to figure out what position we should stick him at.

I think, long-term, he is best-suited as an OF. I'd say his next most-likely sticking spot in the majors is 2B. After that, 3B and SS. Playing him at those positions is getting this team ready for success.

Yeah, we're not doing this. One post after "recommending" that I leave the personal attack BS behind (which was a poorly disguised and misplaced personal attack to begin with), your next post literally begins with a personal attack. That's not hyperbole, that's literally what happened. I see you likewise gave your recommendation the consideration that it deserved.

You've got about 3-4 different points from my last response to you that remain unanswered. You can't start there if you'd like to have a discussion with me. Or not. I'm good either way.

 

[LL3]

You don't have to agree. That's fine. But I am asking you all to consider it. Tito and Co. deserve the benefit of the doubt on many things, but this isn't one of them. It hasn't worked!

I'm speaking both to the idea of bringing up a SS and instantly converting him to a CF AND the idea of bringing up a MIF and forcing him to learn 5 different positions just to get on the field consistently. Why? Because we've literally done both. Amed Rosario and Owen Miller providing examples of both the former and the latter this year. I am not talking about simply moving ARod from SS to 3B as someone claimed.

It's literally the first thing we've done with our recent acquisitions--who've been acquired at or very near the big-league level. Rosario has been flipped from IF to OF and back again. Owen Miller has been sprinkled around the entire IF. Naylor went from IF to OF and back again.

We're going to do that with Jones. We're going to do that with Freeman. My personal favorite young prospect/player, Bobby BradGOAT is the only one who seems safe. And that's only because he can't play anyhwere else! lol

Amed was in a tough spot because he is not a very good SS....that said, they like his bat and general skill set. They are trying to find a place for him...SS aint it, but here we are.

 

[LL3]

It's a different question. But why is that better? Whether it's Freeman, Arias, or Gimenez, you're taking a key asset acquired in trade or a long-time prospect and turning him into a AAAA Michael Martinez special. Maybe I should ask you again so you don't think it's rhetorical--why is that better? It's only the same thing I've been arguing against for the last 2-3 pages. Better for my argument, perhaps. But I don't think that's what you intended.

I responded to your question about Freeman in particular. I think he is the best of the three and has a more certain, though certainly not guaranteed path. Arias is very intriguing but not a certainty...probably not as good with the glove as Gimenez, but if his bat can play they will find a spot for him. Gimenez could be an everyday SS, but at the least looks to be a utility guy -- tbd...as everything is. I'm not sure what is better, just know we may have to flexible to make it all work.