RSS Twitter Facebook YouTube
Expand Menu

Carlos Santana

Talk about the Cleveland Indians, Major League Baseball, and other sports.

Carlos Santana

Postby Hermie13 » Sun Jul 07, 2013 3:42 pm

Wanted to start a separate discussion from the game thread about Santana. Been a lot of talk this year, moreso than in years past, about Santana moving from behind the plate and where he should move too.

One big argument most have against moving Santana is that you would lose offesnse behind the plate. Santana has the 2nd best OPS among AL catchers, and 4th in all of baseball among qualified starters, so hard to argue with that first part. Then again, Yan Gomes heading into today's action actually had a slightly higher OPS, granted in less than 150 plate appearances. I doubt we'd see Gomes hit this well if playing every single day (or near it) behind the plate, but think he's showing that he is worthy of a shot at it should the Indians want. Would need a backup in that case but Marson has shown he's ok in that role when healthy. He may be a lost cause this year but hopefully by next season he can be back. Omir Santos has also had a solid year in AAA (All-Star). Plus would still have Santana around as a backup/3rd catcher if needed.

Obviously the arguments for Santana moving start with defense. Santana is not a natural catcher and while at times in the past he appeared to be making strides defensively, has hit a wall this year and really gone in reverse. Without a legit starter or other options behind the plate you can stick with Santana since his offense outweighs the defense....but again, Gomes has shown to be up to the task and has been pretty solid this year. Marson again when healthy is also a solid defender back there so moving Santana permanently from behind the plate.

Another argument for moving him is injury/avoiding the beatings of catching. Not sure if it's just his luck or mechanics behind the plate (or both) but Santana seems to get hit/nicked more than any catcher I can remember in recent memory. Alomar took a beating but then again he was a big guy....Santana isn't even 6 feet tall, not a lot of mass to get hit back there. Gotta wonder how all those nicks and bruises affect his hitting over the long, rigorous season. Sure can't help things that's for sure.

One other big argument against moving Santana is that his value will diminish as his bat won't play as well elsewhere. While I won't say that's wrong, looking aroudn this league this year it doesn't seem like it's really that true. Again, Santana is 2nd in the AL in OPS, and 4th in all of baseball (among qualified hitters). His .821 OPS heading into today's game would have ranked 5th in the AL among qualified OFers and 14th among MLB OFs. Considering there are 3 times as many OF starters as catchers, would his offensive numbers really play that much worse (if any) in the OF?? Consider too that the Tribe has only 1 current OFer with an OPS over .700 (Bourn at .706) and maybe getting both Gomes and Santana in the lineup is the way to go. Santana played 66 games in the OF in the minors and 50+ at 3B (only 2 at 1B). Arm is pretty decent and while he's not the most athletic guy, don't think he'd be that bad out there (more agile than a lot of cOFers I've seen).

Summing up my point....I'd move Santana to RF next year. I like Stubbs but more a 4th OFer type. Santana has a decent arm and can move ok, at worst I think he'd be a Manny Ramirez type of defensive OFer. Bat as shown would play just fine out there and may even be what he needs to get over the hump and be a true elite offensive weapon. Gomes can catch fine, Marson or someone can back up. I don't like Santana's defense at 1B and think he's too young to waste as a DH just yet. Maybe you even consider 3B if Chiz struggles but still say OF is the way to go. Wouldn't make the move this year unless the Tribe fell way out of it but send him to winter ball and give him all spring in the OF, think he'd be fine out there.

Thoughts? Am I way off base here? Agree, disagree...
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby ChadS17 » Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:45 pm

I am not very active on these boards, but I have been a huge advocate of this for some time now. I have never been a fan of having one of our best hitters catching. Didn't like it with Victor either. Catching takes a toll on the body and takes up time that could be spent working on offensive struggles. Guy has a chance to be a 25-30 HR player; that plays well no matter where you put him IMO. I completely agree that he should be an outfielder with us and that our outfield needs to be upgraded. (See my mini rant on Brantley in the other thread).
ChadS17
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2011 9:32 pm

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby BrianM » Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:58 pm

I would never take Santana completely away from the catching position. He is good enough to at least play the position once or twice a week. I do however think he should be playing first or DH a majority of time. I honestly don't think Santana would have the range to play right field. He's already lumbering and his knees will only get worse whether he continues to catch or not. I think he would be capable of being an above average defensive first basemen if he played there everyday, so if we were going to try him at another position, I think I would want to try him at 3rd first instead of the outfield. He was the arm, has pretty good instincts, and is not afraid to get in front of the ball. It just seems like a better fit. Plus, I think I just read somewhere that Drew Stubbs is like top 20 in baseball in WAR for outfielders, and I'm sure most of that is because of his defense. I really have no interest in benching him.
BrianM
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 2:52 pm

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby GeronimoSon » Mon Jul 08, 2013 2:49 pm

Santana has three years and a club option (with buy out) left on his contract. The guaranteed portion is less than $ 20 MM including the fourth year payout. SO, he's not exactly what you'd call expensive... It should be noted that making a position change will not be easy.. The year or two that it would take to become a ML caliber player at whatever position he's moved to would only benefit the Indians for a season, two at most.

A few questions need to be answered..
-Should Santana remain as a catcher? The simple answer is yes. Yan Gomes can play the spot.. is already becoming a better defender.. has a MUCH stronger/accurate arm..etc.. BUT, this is where Carlos has buttered his bread.. Every club needs two guys who can man the spot. If they can both hit.. so be it...

-Should Santana play other positions.. tbh, 1B is a bad spot for him. There was mention of 3B.. I'd be more okay with that than this experiment at 1B is concerned.. As far as RF is concerned.. sure, he can play there.. but if you thought Choo was a bad outfielder.. you'll yearn for those defensive wizardry inspired daze..Santana is no OF'er.. a corner IF'er... okay.. 3B.. he may be more of a natural there than he's been given a chance to exhibit. As long as his bat is in the lineup for the next two or three years.. then.. like many of the guys on this squad.. the trade rumors will begin and won't slow down until he's gone..

That's my two cents worth.. comments.
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3904
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby Hermie13 » Mon Jul 08, 2013 2:53 pm

BrianM wrote:I would never take Santana completely away from the catching position. He is good enough to at least play the position once or twice a week. I do however think he should be playing first or DH a majority of time. I honestly don't think Santana would have the range to play right field. He's already lumbering and his knees will only get worse whether he continues to catch or not. I think he would be capable of being an above average defensive first basemen if he played there everyday, so if we were going to try him at another position, I think I would want to try him at 3rd first instead of the outfield. He was the arm, has pretty good instincts, and is not afraid to get in front of the ball. It just seems like a better fit. Plus, I think I just read somewhere that Drew Stubbs is like top 20 in baseball in WAR for outfielders, and I'm sure most of that is because of his defense. I really have no interest in benching him.


I guess I just don't see what you do in regards to 1B. Maybe with a LOT of work he could become ok but he really struggles over there. 1B is not as easy as many think, plus a good 1B can really save a lot of errors for the other infielders. I'd rather let Swisher play there as he's better defensively and as he ages, will put less strain on his shoulder/body. 3B could be an option but only if Chiz flops, which personally am hoping doesn't happen. He has been better of late so hopefully he can finally break out.

Santana also doesn't appear to be "lumbering" at least to me. I mean sure he's no speed demon but compared to many guys we see in the cOF spots, don't see Santana as a huge liability out there. Obviously would be a massive downgrade from Stubbs...though most people would be.

As far as Stubbs...not sure where you saw that he was top 20 in baseball in WAR. fWAR has him at 59th (43rd among qualified OFers) and a 1.1 WAR. Brantley is 48th (36th among qualified) at 1.5. Bourn is 26th (doesn't "qualify" due to lack of PAs) at 1.8. Raburn also doesn't qualfity but is ranked 30th among non-qualfied with a 1.3 WAR.

Baseball Reference's WAR doesn't have him top 20 either; he ranks 50th in baseball there with a 1.3 WAR. Bourn is only 46th, also with a 1.3 WAR, and Raburn is 48th (also with a 1.3 WAR). Brantley meanwhile is 21st with a 2.1 WAR.

I didn't fully check out BP's WARP as they don't list all OFers together (due LF, CF, and RF separately), but Stubbs ranks only 12th among RFers in WARP there.

Not trying to bash Stubbs here, I like him...but he's still to me more a 4th OFer. Unfortunately he's paid like a starter.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby Hermie13 » Mon Jul 08, 2013 3:11 pm

GeronimoSon wrote:Santana has three years and a club option (with buy out) left on his contract. The guaranteed portion is less than $ 20 MM including the fourth year payout. SO, he's not exactly what you'd call expensive... It should be noted that making a position change will not be easy.. The year or two that it would take to become a ML caliber player at whatever position he's moved to would only benefit the Indians for a season, two at most.

A few questions need to be answered..
-Should Santana remain as a catcher? The simple answer is yes. Yan Gomes can play the spot.. is already becoming a better defender.. has a MUCH stronger/accurate arm..etc.. BUT, this is where Carlos has buttered his bread.. Every club needs two guys who can man the spot. If they can both hit.. so be it...

-Should Santana play other positions.. tbh, 1B is a bad spot for him. There was mention of 3B.. I'd be more okay with that than this experiment at 1B is concerned.. As far as RF is concerned.. sure, he can play there.. but if you thought Choo was a bad outfielder.. you'll yearn for those defensive wizardry inspired daze..Santana is no OF'er.. a corner IF'er... okay.. 3B.. he may be more of a natural there than he's been given a chance to exhibit. As long as his bat is in the lineup for the next two or three years.. then.. like many of the guys on this squad.. the trade rumors will begin and won't slow down until he's gone..

That's my two cents worth.. comments.


Agree completely with the bolded statement; however, once Marson is healthy, the Tribe won't have 2 guys that can man the spot, but rather 3. Can obviously deal one but won't get much for Marson and can't see Gomes or Santana being dealt (though would be interesting to see what Gomes's trade value would be). Marson struggled lately but has shown he can be ok with the bat and was ranked the 3rd best defensive catcher in baseball his last healthy season.

Also don't think we'd lose a year value out of Santana simply by moving him to a new position. Shouldn't take guys that long in the bigs to at least become familiar with a new position, especially when they are moving to an easier position. Santana also didn't struggle offensively when moving to 1B on the fly (actually hit better when not catching last year than catching).

Gotta admit, surprised more people think he can handle 3B than the OF. OF is much easier to play. You almost never see a bad OFer move to 3B...but you see bad 3B move to the OF (Braun, Gordon, Cuddyer, etc). We're also talking about the Indians here...the same Indians that have used Russell Branyan, Richie Sexson, Ben Broussard, and Ryan Garko in the OF (heck, already used Santana in the OF before). Would Santana really be any worse than THOSE guys in the OF???
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby daingean » Mon Jul 08, 2013 6:26 pm

I'm a fan of guys being defenders first in the key defensive positions (Catcher, Short, Center) ...... I'm also a fan of having a good bat at 1B but also someone who can save other infielders from errors. A solid defending 1B turns some errors into outs and turns some from being 2 base errors into 1. Most importantly a good catcher (I don't believe controlling the running game is the best way to rate a catcher as most SB's are off the pitcher) will cut down the opponents run production by making his pitchers more effective.

With everything said above, I'd be happy with CS in RF. I think at 1B it would be a waste of his arm and he's not a lumbering player yet (may be if he keeps catching). Plus I think taking away the catching responsibilities would let him blossom at the plate. I'd be willing to sacrifice some def in RF for added offensive production.
daingean
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1535
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 12:06 pm

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby indians1 » Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:39 pm

my feeling of carlos santana is that he is better version of jhonny peralta. Peralta was a guy that people kept saying that if you move him to 3B instead of SS, you lose the value of his bat because he doesn't produce enough power for a corner position.

I think the question becomes is carlos Santana a guy that can get you to the playoffs being "one of the main guys" a couple of years ago, he was supposed to be the guy that this lineup was going to be built around. To me, it doesn't matter if you move him to 1B or RF. I think he should become the full-time DH who plays occasional 1B when swisher needs a day off from first or RF. His defense is horrible and he is not a very intelligent player. He is very lazy behind the plate. Even rick manning and matt underwood make comments about santana on the broadcast with very similar comments when he has a passed ball.

Jhonny peralta's numbers look a lot better with cabrera, victor, and fielder in that lineup. Carlos Santana needs other players around him to make him a better player. He hasn't been the player that makes other around him better. If you take out the first month of the season, he has had a very average season and his low RBI numbers show that.
indians1
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:00 am

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:51 am

indians1 wrote:my feeling of carlos santana is that he is better version of jhonny peralta. Peralta was a guy that people kept saying that if you move him to 3B instead of SS, you lose the value of his bat because he doesn't produce enough power for a corner position.

I think the question becomes is carlos Santana a guy that can get you to the playoffs being "one of the main guys" a couple of years ago, he was supposed to be the guy that this lineup was going to be built around. To me, it doesn't matter if you move him to 1B or RF. I think he should become the full-time DH who plays occasional 1B when swisher needs a day off from first or RF. His defense is horrible and he is not a very intelligent player. He is very lazy behind the plate. Even rick manning and matt underwood make comments about santana on the broadcast with very similar comments when he has a passed ball.

Jhonny peralta's numbers look a lot better with cabrera, victor, and fielder in that lineup. Carlos Santana needs other players around him to make him a better player. He hasn't been the player that makes other around him better. If you take out the first month of the season, he has had a very average season and his low RBI numbers show that.


Santana has the 24th best OPS with runners on base in all of baseball (min 100 PAs), while hitting .306 in such situations. His OPS with runners in scoring position is 1.005! His OPS with runners in scoring positions and 2 outs is .994. His lack of RBIs has nothing to do with his hitting ability. It's guys not getting on base in front of him and the fact that he has hit too low in the order.

Also don't get the Jhonny P reference. Jhonny was never that bad a SS, some Tribe fans just felt this way. He is actually not that bad a defensive SS. I remember just before he was dealt some people (Tony included) saying no team would ever consider him as a SS on the open market...well he is now a 2-time All-Star at the position (while ranking above average there defensively). Santana also doesn't need other players around him to be good. He's been a top offensive player in the AL this year (ranked 16th in OPS, 12th in OBP) with the current lineup. Problem is the Tribe is hitting their best hitter in the 3 hole (Kipnis) and were hitting their 2nd best hitter (Santana) in the 6th spot...which is just terrible lineup management.

Also disagree on him being lazy. Rick Manning and Matt Underwood are two of the worst announcers in baseball, so them calling him "lazy" doesn't mean he is, it's more just bad technique on Santana's part.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby GeronimoSon » Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:41 am

...Also disagree on him being lazy. Rick Manning and Matt Underwood are two of the worst announcers in baseball, so them calling him "lazy" doesn't mean he is, it's more just bad technique on Santana's part.


Matt Underwood clearly defers to the expertise of Rick Manning on all matters involving the on field play. He does so to his detriment in many cases.. The passed ball situations with Carlos comes from two sources..one is that he does have a tendency to use the back hand.. it's not an unusual technique, but is shunned in times when a runner is at 3B and less than two outs.. In what seems like more times than not..the back hand passed ball from Santana is a result of calling a pitch on one side of the plate and having the pitcher deliver it to the opposite side..thereby missing the target by a good two or three feet.. At 90+ MPH w/ movement.. you do well to get the glove there, let alone move your body in front of it.. This is where guys like Yadi Molina are sooooo impressive.. He moves his feet and gets in front of the ball in most cases. Yadi still uses the back hand, but, he's incredibly quick at moving.. something Carlos isn't nearly as good at...

As an aside..imho, Manning should change his name to Mr Blatantly Obvious for many plays and Mr I Don't Know Shit about how to play that position but I'm gonna fill the air with crapola anyway.. Calling Carlos "lazy" is an example of the latter.. It's probably why a growing numbers of viewers turn the STO audio off.. and listen to Tom Hamilton or just watch the game in silence...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3904
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby indians1 » Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:46 am

Well, then do we have to blame the tribe player development of jhonny as to why he is flourishing in detroit?

clearly peralta has people in front of him that are two of the top in the game. so if santana is so good, then why won't a guy with francona's knowledge put santana in the 4th spot when cleary swisher isn't getting it done?

Maybe santana can't handle the pressure of hitting out of the 4th spot? If we are going to contend for a world series, santana has to be a guy that hits 25-30 HR's and goes for 90-100 RBI. We need that guy along with jason kipnis to become elite players.

Right now santana isn't doing enough to help this team win games.
indians1
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:00 am

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:34 pm

indians1 wrote:Well, then do we have to blame the tribe player development of jhonny as to why he is flourishing in detroit?

clearly peralta has people in front of him that are two of the top in the game. so if santana is so good, then why won't a guy with francona's knowledge put santana in the 4th spot when cleary swisher isn't getting it done?

Maybe santana can't handle the pressure of hitting out of the 4th spot? If we are going to contend for a world series, santana has to be a guy that hits 25-30 HR's and goes for 90-100 RBI. We need that guy along with jason kipnis to become elite players.

Right now santana isn't doing enough to help this team win games.


Why would we blame the player development for Peralta? He was one of the best developed SS's in Tribe history. Hit 20+ HRs 3 times for the Tribe (only done that once in Detroit). Has more HRs as a SS than any Indian in history. 3 seasons out of 4 full ones with an OPS+ over 100. 2 of his best seasons were with Cleveland. Tribe developed him fine, if anything the player development team should be praised for developing Peralta, and developing him so quick.

Not sure what you mean with Santana. Agree he needs to be a 25-30 HR guy (has been already). RBI numbers you listed would be nice too but again, Santana is hitting the ball VERY well with RISP. Can't ask him to do much more. Not his fault guys in front of him aren't getting on base enough.

Santana has only hit in the 4 spot 6 times this year...his OPS is over .900, seems to have handled the "pressure" tehre fine this year. With men on base Santana is also hitting .306, OPS nearly 1.000....with RISP it's over 1.000. Handling that pressure just fine too. What more does Santana need to do? Should he go out and pitch too?? Outside of Kipnis, Santana is doing more for this offense than anyone.

As far as why Francona won't put Santana there more....you got me. Best fit on the team for that spot.

Also...you point that Peralta is hitting 6th but has 2 of the best hitters in baesball in front of him, which is true. He has 42 RBIs in 83 games. Santana? Hitting 6th mostly (and 5th) with a struggling Swisher and Cabrera in front of him for mmuch of the year (and a hot Kipnis)....yet somehow he has 41 RBIs in 82 games. He's driving them in as much as Peralta with worse hitters in front of him. Again, WHAT more do you want Santana to do???
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby indians1 » Tue Jul 09, 2013 9:23 pm

Santana did a lot of that damage in the first month. Since april, the guy is hitting .220. That is 2+ months of baseball.

What else can santana do? How about hit a bit more consistently instead of hitting for month and then fading. He has an OPS of .340 since end of april.

Mark Reynolds had a great april and look how bad he has been since end of april

obviously santana hasn't been as bad as reynolds but those numbers are inflated by 1 incredible month followed by a lot of what we have seen in previous years from him.

He doesn't produce consistently to be the #4 hitter in the lineup. that is probably whey santana is not hitting in the cleanup
indians1
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:00 am

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby Bearcatbob » Tue Jul 09, 2013 10:12 pm

indians1 wrote:Santana did a lot of that damage in the first month. Since april, the guy is hitting .220. That is 2+ months of baseball.

What else can santana do? How about hit a bit more consistently instead of hitting for month and then fading. He has an OPS of .340 since end of april.

Mark Reynolds had a great april and look how bad he has been since end of april

obviously santana hasn't been as bad as reynolds but those numbers are inflated by 1 incredible month followed by a lot of what we have seen in previous years from him.

He doesn't produce consistently to be the #4 hitter in the lineup. that is probably whey santana is not hitting in the cleanup


Young guys frustrate. They grow into highly paid veterans that generate a batting order like that of Detroit. We see glimpses of the future. Where will that future be realized?
Bearcatbob
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 9:10 am

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Jul 09, 2013 11:16 pm

indians1 wrote:Santana did a lot of that damage in the first month. Since april, the guy is hitting .220. That is 2+ months of baseball.

What else can santana do? How about hit a bit more consistently instead of hitting for month and then fading. He has an OPS of .340 since end of april.

Mark Reynolds had a great april and look how bad he has been since end of april

obviously santana hasn't been as bad as reynolds but those numbers are inflated by 1 incredible month followed by a lot of what we have seen in previous years from him.

He doesn't produce consistently to be the #4 hitter in the lineup. that is probably whey santana is not hitting in the cleanup


Um...Santana's OBP is .339 since end of April, not his OPS (heading into today). Case you were wondering, Bourn's OBP on the year is .331...

Santana's OPS since the end of April is actually .703. Definitely nothing to get excited about but again, that's better than Bourn' on the year, and not far behind Asdrubal on the year (.722). Santana definitely needs to get more consistent, I agree with you (and others) there...but who on this team has been consistent this year? Kipnis if you don't count April? Raburn? Not really anyone else. Santana is hardly the guy to fault for offensive issues. Swisher and Cabrera are much more to blame, at least IMO.

And we have not seen Santana inflate his stats by one month in the past, at least not recent past. Last year he struggled in May and June but OPS's were over .800 in April, July, August and September last year. Here's hoping we continue that trend from Santana... :cool

Santana is not hitting cleanup because Francona is almost too much a player's manager. Doesn't like to shake things up that much. Swisher was his guy in the cleanup spot to start so he's sticking with him. Santana has been better on the year, has more power, more run producing ability. Swish has hit a bit better since may 1st though (only a .751 OPS though himself).
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby indians1 » Wed Jul 10, 2013 6:54 pm

I guess my frustration with current indians hitters is that i think we as fans have grown accustomed to them not being great.

Since travis hafner ,grady, and victor had those great years in the mid-2000's, we have seen very little consistency and very little of players performing at elite levels.

I don't think santana is the problem in terms of that he is a bad player. He hits above average for a catcher. But in the grand scheme of things, if he is one of your best players, we need him to hit and have an OPS of over. 800-.850 consistently.

As a small market team, you need elite play from your core to compete year in and year out. That is why the twins, oakland, tampa, have had success in recent years and for a sustained period. Not the one playoff appearance in 12 years like we have seen with this regime.

In the 90's, we didn't spend a ton of money on free agents. We got really good because we got elite play from kenny lofton, albert belle, manny, and thome. You could count on those guys for many year to produce at all-star/eite levels.

Carlos Santana when given that 5 or 6 year contract was expected to provide the major power for this team and be a major run producer. I am not criticizing him because i want to be negative. I think the indians of this regime don't know how to acquire and develop elite talent that can produce consistently for a 5-6 year window.

The reason why we have had so much inconsistency over the last few years is because we haven't had a consistent leadoff hitter, cleanup hitter, and the starting pitching hasn't been there like we did in the 90's.

The indians of the 90's drafted and developed albert belle, manny, thome, giles, richie sexson in a 5 or 6 year period. Albert was drafted in the 80's and it did take him some time but those other guys either produced or we traded them for things we needed . And those guys did produce for a while as well when they went to other teams.

I'm not asking santana to be a 40 HR guy. It would be nice to know that you can count on him for .280=.290 and an OBP close to .400 and a slugging of .450-.500. I think that was the expectation of him coming out of the minors. He was considered a stud in the minors and he is not coming close to those numbers.
indians1
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:00 am

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby GeronimoSon » Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:08 pm

indians1 wrote:I guess my frustration with current indians hitters is that i think we as fans have grown accustomed to them not being great.

Since travis hafner ,grady, and victor had those great years in the mid-2000's, we have seen very little consistency and very little of players performing at elite levels.

I don't think santana is the problem in terms of that he is a bad player. He hits above average for a catcher. But in the grand scheme of things, if he is one of your best players, we need him to hit and have an OPS of over. 800-.850 consistently.

As a small market team, you need elite play from your core to compete year in and year out. That is why the twins, oakland, tampa, have had success in recent years and for a sustained period. Not the one playoff appearance in 12 years like we have seen with this regime.

In the 90's, we didn't spend a ton of money on free agents. We got really good because we got elite play from kenny lofton, albert belle, manny, and thome. You could count on those guys for many year to produce at all-star/eite levels.

Carlos Santana when given that 5 or 6 year contract was expected to provide the major power for this team and be a major run producer. I am not criticizing him because i want to be negative. I think the indians of this regime don't know how to acquire and develop elite talent that can produce consistently for a 5-6 year window.

The reason why we have had so much inconsistency over the last few years is because we haven't had a consistent leadoff hitter, cleanup hitter, and the starting pitching hasn't been there like we did in the 90's.

The indians of the 90's drafted and developed albert belle, manny, thome, giles, richie sexson in a 5 or 6 year period. Albert was drafted in the 80's and it did take him some time but those other guys either produced or we traded them for things we needed . And those guys did produce for a while as well when they went to other teams.

I'm not asking santana to be a 40 HR guy. It would be nice to know that you can count on him for .280=.290 and an OBP close to .400 and a slugging of .450-.500. I think that was the expectation of him coming out of the minors. He was considered a stud in the minors and he is not coming close to those numbers.



If you're not asking for 40 homers.. then what can be taken from the comment: "..[Santana is]expected to provide the major power for this team and be a major run producer..." other than:

A. You're asking for 40 homers or

B. You're a whiney wannabe narcissistic spoiled fan with no knowledge of the nuance of the game who's only avenue to express this whiney BS attitude is to come onto the IBI forum and cry about how it used to be in the 1990's?..

Yes.. answer B.. is the correct answer....

You offer nothing of substance. Players aren't GIVEN contracts.. they earn them. You have no concept of what is or isn't great and you definition of great is ubiquitous, at best.. You have a memory of convenience.. your definition of elite varies as much as your definition of market size. Your convenient memory eludes you in the amount of money that was spent by Mr Jacobs (top five in salary, year after year.. look it up.. then change your focus/definition of what you meant to say about this too). If winning is the only panacea that will give you solace, perhaps you might take up Golf.. it's a game you cannot win, you can only play..

Your postings are useless / whining tripe..
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3904
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby Hermie13 » Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:16 am

indians1 wrote:I guess my frustration with current indians hitters is that i think we as fans have grown accustomed to them not being great.

Since travis hafner ,grady, and victor had those great years in the mid-2000's, we have seen very little consistency and very little of players performing at elite levels.

I don't think santana is the problem in terms of that he is a bad player. He hits above average for a catcher. But in the grand scheme of things, if he is one of your best players, we need him to hit and have an OPS of over. 800-.850 consistently.

As a small market team, you need elite play from your core to compete year in and year out. That is why the twins, oakland, tampa, have had success in recent years and for a sustained period. Not the one playoff appearance in 12 years like we have seen with this regime.

In the 90's, we didn't spend a ton of money on free agents. We got really good because we got elite play from kenny lofton, albert belle, manny, and thome. You could count on those guys for many year to produce at all-star/eite levels.

Carlos Santana when given that 5 or 6 year contract was expected to provide the major power for this team and be a major run producer. I am not criticizing him because i want to be negative. I think the indians of this regime don't know how to acquire and develop elite talent that can produce consistently for a 5-6 year window.

The reason why we have had so much inconsistency over the last few years is because we haven't had a consistent leadoff hitter, cleanup hitter, and the starting pitching hasn't been there like we did in the 90's.

The indians of the 90's drafted and developed albert belle, manny, thome, giles, richie sexson in a 5 or 6 year period. Albert was drafted in the 80's and it did take him some time but those other guys either produced or we traded them for things we needed . And those guys did produce for a while as well when they went to other teams.

I'm not asking santana to be a 40 HR guy. It would be nice to know that you can count on him for .280=.290 and an OBP close to .400 and a slugging of .450-.500. I think that was the expectation of him coming out of the minors. He was considered a stud in the minors and he is not coming close to those numbers.


Agree with the bolded part (actually would like to see him closer to .900+). He actually has been pretty close to your numbers though. Over .800 OPS every year but last year when he dipped to .785.

You mentioned Santana as an above average hitter for a catcher...true. He'd also be an above average hitter for an OFer as his .820 OPS would be 13th best in baseball. He'd be above for a 1B (11th in baseball just behind Prince Fielder's .830 OPS and ahead of Trumbo). He'd be above average for a 3B (10th in baseball). Santana is simply an above average hitter, period. Not just an above average hitting catching, as he's ranked 42nd in all of baseball in terms of OPS. He's been our 2nd best hitter behind Kipnis...being 42nd in all of baseball isn't too shabby then.

Now is Santana an elite hitter? Not currently. Has shown that ability at times. Reason I started this thread was about moving Santana from behind the dish. Not trying to say Santana will all of sudden become an elite hitter just by moving to a less stressful position, but I do think it will help. He was given that contract but remember, it didn't buy out much other than just his arby years. Not like he got crazy money. With how he's hit, we really are looking smart as we will likely have saved ourselves some money.

One thing to remember too when trying to compare Santana to guys from previous years...the game has seen a change. PEDs aren't gone but they do seem to be much less previlant even from the early to mid 00s. Pitching also seems to have improved (don't believe this is only cause of lack of PEDs but obviously it plays a part). Just something to consider, here are the average team OPSs in the AL since 2000:

2013: .729
2012: .731
2011: .730
2010: .734
2009: .763
2008: .755
2007: .760
2006: .776
2005: .754
2004: .771
2003: .760
2002: .755
2001: .761
2000: .792

We all remember those great 90s/early 2000s powerhouse offenses...as you can see though, things have changed a lot and not just in Cleveland. Since 2008/2009 when testing started to get serious, OPS's have taken a nose dive. Santana's .800 OPS really does play anywhere on the diamond in today's game. Again, would love to see him get that up and get more consistent, but his numbers aren't bad and really shouldn't be compared to even guys from 2005.


Also, your memory of the 90s Indians teams seems a bit off. The Tribe actually did spend a lot on free agents, at least a lot for the time period. Remember, guys weren't getting $10M plus much. Belle was the first guy in 97 and that was seen as insane money at the time. Tribe spent big to get guys like Murray, Martinez, Hershiser, McDowell, R. Alomar, Lofton, etc and racked up some big payrolls. Yes, that 95 team was built on a good combo of home grown talent with some vets mixed in, but later in the 90s the Tribe lost it's way some and started spending and making some trades (sending a cheap Jeff Kent to SF for Matt Williams). Tribe had some of the highest payrolls in all of baseball in the 90s, higher than even the Yankees at times.

Do absolutely agree we need production from guys like Santana, Kipnis, Chiz, Cabrera, and Brantley (some guys we brought up thru the system). Need the big free agents to play well too though (Bourn and Swisher need to step it up big time).
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby Edible14 » Sat Jul 13, 2013 6:10 am

indians1 wrote:In the 90's, we didn't spend a ton of money on free agents. We got really good because we got elite play from kenny lofton, albert belle, manny, and thome. You could count on those guys for many year to produce at all-star/eite levels.


Actually, we *did* spend quite a bit on free agents in the 90s. The Indians of the mid-90s consistently had top 10 payrolls, luring free agents like David Justice, Marquis Grissom, Orel Hershiser, Jack McDowell, Matt Williams, Roberto Alomar and Travis Fryman. It's only in the late 90s/early aughts when payrolls started to explode that the Indians no longer could afford such players and keep them. It's also worth noting that Jim Thome was signed to a 3 year, $21M deal when he was an outright free agent and in the prime of his career. That's how different salaries were then compared to now. If the payroll boom had started earlier, we would have had him for three fewer years.
User avatar
Edible14
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1045
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:49 am

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby MadThinker88 » Sat Jul 13, 2013 11:35 am

Not sure about your luring free agents comment. Justice and Grissom arrived via trade. They extended once here for a few months. Williams also came via take and was dealt after one season, bringing back Fryman.
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1748
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby Hermie13 » Sat Jul 13, 2013 2:24 pm

MadThinker88 wrote:Not sure about your luring free agents comment. Justice and Grissom arrived via trade. They extended once here for a few months. Williams also came via take and was dealt after one season, bringing back Fryman.


The luring free agents part is accurate even if the players listed weren't. Signed Martinez, Murray, Hershiser, McDowell, Lofton, and alomar.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby Edible14 » Sun Jul 14, 2013 4:32 am

Hermie13 wrote:
MadThinker88 wrote:Not sure about your luring free agents comment. Justice and Grissom arrived via trade. They extended once here for a few months. Williams also came via take and was dealt after one season, bringing back Fryman.


The luring free agents part is accurate even if the players listed weren't. Signed Martinez, Murray, Hershiser, McDowell, Lofton, and alomar.


Yeah, that. I was lumping in trades and free agents - but the point is that a fair amount of talent that was brought on to the team was not *home grown*, and that even the guys that were from our farm system were able to stay around longer because of the Indians' ability/willingness to outspend the competition. It was a very different league back then. I think one of the best illustrations of this comes by clicking through this link. The Indians ran a top ten payroll, and as high as 3rd highest payroll, from 1995 all the way to 2000. The way they could build a team was much different.
User avatar
Edible14
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1045
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:49 am

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby MadThinker88 » Sun Jul 14, 2013 11:04 am

Edible, on that point I completely agree. The team was run and financed differently but the reason was not simply the owner. It's been rehashed elsewhere about the other differences but one item that people overlook: while 90M was top 10, maybe top 5 at that point, today that same level is not even mid-point in the league.
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1748
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Jul 16, 2013 2:23 am

Just an update on Carlos and his numbers now that we are at the break...

His .848 OPS ranks 2nd in the AL and 4th in MLB among catchers....42 pts higher than Castro (Astros lone All Star rep) and 137 pts higher than Salvador Perez...who also made the All-Star team...

His .848 OPS....would rank him 10th among ALL MLB OFers at the break, and 4th among AL OFers, ahead of Bautista and only 4 pts behind Nelson Cruz.

His .382 OBP ranks 2nd in the AL and 4th in MLB among catchers.....His .382 OBP would rank 4th among ALL MLB OFers and 2nd in the AL (Trout).

His 35 extra-base hits ranks 3rd in the AL and 4th in MLB among catchers....his 35 extra-base hits would rank 17th (tied) in all of baseball and 8th in the AL (ahead of All-Star Torii Hunter).

His 0.83 K/BB ratio is 1st in the AL and 2nd in MLB among catchers.....it would rank 3rd in all of baseball among OFers and 2nd in the AL (Crisp).

Would rank top 5 in a few other SABR stats among MLB OFers too.

Really only thing of value he doesn't rank well in is HRs, would "only" be 28th in baseball and 13th in the AL. Isolated power would be top 20 though in all of baseball.

I say again...Santana's bat plays in the OF.... :cool

He's also been blistering hot in July yet again. OPS up over .900 this month. Only 1 HR is a bit disappointing but can't really argue with a OBP over .400 and SLG over .500. Is driving in runs too despite the lack of HRs, 9 in 12 games....hopefully he can keep this going like he did last year....
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby daingean » Tue Jul 16, 2013 11:47 am

Hermie13 wrote:Just an update on Carlos and his numbers now that we are at the break...

His .848 OPS ranks 2nd in the AL and 4th in MLB among catchers....42 pts higher than Castro (Astros lone All Star rep) and 137 pts higher than Salvador Perez...who also made the All-Star team...

His .848 OPS....would rank him 10th among ALL MLB OFers at the break, and 4th among AL OFers, ahead of Bautista and only 4 pts behind Nelson Cruz.

His .382 OBP ranks 2nd in the AL and 4th in MLB among catchers.....His .382 OBP would rank 4th among ALL MLB OFers and 2nd in the AL (Trout).

His 35 extra-base hits ranks 3rd in the AL and 4th in MLB among catchers....his 35 extra-base hits would rank 17th (tied) in all of baseball and 8th in the AL (ahead of All-Star Torii Hunter).

His 0.83 K/BB ratio is 1st in the AL and 2nd in MLB among catchers.....it would rank 3rd in all of baseball among OFers and 2nd in the AL (Crisp).

Would rank top 5 in a few other SABR stats among MLB OFers too.

Really only thing of value he doesn't rank well in is HRs, would "only" be 28th in baseball and 13th in the AL. Isolated power would be top 20 though in all of baseball.

I say again...Santana's bat plays in the OF.... :cool

He's also been blistering hot in July yet again. OPS up over .900 this month. Only 1 HR is a bit disappointing but can't really argue with a OBP over .400 and SLG over .500. Is driving in runs too despite the lack of HRs, 9 in 12 games....hopefully he can keep this going like he did last year....


I'd also add that if Carlos was in the OF (or 1B or 3B), he would be able to concentrate more on hitting and you would see more improvement. Now as it is, 50% of his development time is spent on catching (scouting reports, bullpens, defence). He'd get about 25% of that added to hitting.

I'd also say a defensive catcher who handles a staff is worth his weight in gold........
daingean
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1535
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 12:06 pm

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby Edible14 » Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:34 am

MadThinker88 wrote:Edible, on that point I completely agree. The team was run and financed differently but the reason was not simply the owner. It's been rehashed elsewhere about the other differences but one item that people overlook: while 90M was top 10, maybe top 5 at that point, today that same level is not even mid-point in the league.


I wasn't insinuating that it was just the owner (I'm something of a Dolan apologist, I think the guy is pretty good for the Indians all things considered). I just don't like the notion that the Indians were this amazing "home grown" team in the 90s. Because that's not an accurate assessment. Some of the premier offensive pieces were - Thome and Ramirez especially. But a lot of them were brought in through other means. Vizquel, Sandy, Baerga and Lofton were traded for as well, but more as prospects, so they're about as "home grown" as Santana, ACab, Choo, etc. It's tiresome when people say that the Indians rely "too much" on trading for other prospects or acquiring free agents, because that's what made them successful in the 90s!

And another point... What do you think the difference is between the value of Jason Kipnis versus Manny Ramirez or Jim Thome, given their respective eras? It's actually about the same. In his age 26 year this year, he's at 148 WRC+ with a 3.4 WAR in about half a season. Thome's 26 year old year was his best ever - 7.4 WAR over a season and 163 WRC. If you take it more as Kipnis' 2nd full season and compare it to Thome's second full season - 1995, the comparison favors Kipnis (6.0 WAR for Thome, 158 WRC). Manny's numbers for WAR and WRC are lower no matter which way you slice it. But obviously they had gaudier numbers. So what gives (aside from the obvious defensive shortcomings of Thome/Ramirez)?

It's the era, silly. Run production is down all across baseball right now. Home runs are down, runs are down, there's just not as many juiced up monsters like Ramirez running amok. So when someone says that Indians fans are "accepting mediocrity" by being okay with Jason Kipnis putting up his numbers, they are simply not aware of the state of the league currently. Jason Kipnis and Carlos Santana are elite players at their positions. If you can't recognize that, it's because you don't recognize the state of the league.
User avatar
Edible14
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1045
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:49 am

Re: Carlos Santana

Postby indians1 » Thu Jul 25, 2013 7:23 pm

Edible14 wrote:
MadThinker88 wrote:Edible, on that point I completely agree. The team was run and financed differently but the reason was not simply the owner. It's been rehashed elsewhere about the other differences but one item that people overlook: while 90M was top 10, maybe top 5 at that point, today that same level is not even mid-point in the league.


I wasn't insinuating that it was just the owner (I'm something of a Dolan apologist, I think the guy is pretty good for the Indians all things considered). I just don't like the notion that the Indians were this amazing "home grown" team in the 90s. Because that's not an accurate assessment. Some of the premier offensive pieces were - Thome and Ramirez especially. But a lot of them were brought in through other means. Vizquel, Sandy, Baerga and Lofton were traded for as well, but more as prospects, so they're about as "home grown" as Santana, ACab, Choo, etc. It's tiresome when people say that the Indians rely "too much" on trading for other prospects or acquiring free agents, because that's what made them successful in the 90s!

And another point... What do you think the difference is between the value of Jason Kipnis versus Manny Ramirez or Jim Thome, given their respective eras? It's actually about the same. In his age 26 year this year, he's at 148 WRC+ with a 3.4 WAR in about half a season. Thome's 26 year old year was his best ever - 7.4 WAR over a season and 163 WRC. If you take it more as Kipnis' 2nd full season and compare it to Thome's second full season - 1995, the comparison favors Kipnis (6.0 WAR for Thome, 158 WRC). Manny's numbers for WAR and WRC are lower no matter which way you slice it. But obviously they had gaudier numbers. So what gives (aside from the obvious defensive shortcomings of Thome/Ramirez)?

It's the era, silly. Run production is down all across baseball right now. Home runs are down, runs are down, there's just not as many juiced up monsters like Ramirez running amok. So when someone says that Indians fans are "accepting mediocrity" by being okay with Jason Kipnis putting up his numbers, they are simply not aware of the state of the league currently. Jason Kipnis and Carlos Santana are elite players at their positions. If you can't recognize that, it's because you don't recognize the state of the league.


I think there is a difference in developing your own and trading. If you go back to 2002 when the trade for colon brought in sizemore, phillips, and lee, that trade was supposed to accelerate the rebuild. That was supposed to make them more competitive quicker because it does take time to develop guys from your farm system. They were successful in their plan early on.

If you look at the last rebuild, that started back in 2009. Until this year, we have seen really bad baseball for 5 years.
We got cabrera, choo, and santana because we were really bad. We got mcalister, kluber, masterson from trades because we again were out of contention.

It is really hard to build any consistency if you are not good at developing talent from your farm system that is home grown. That is why we are only competing 1x every 5-6 years. If you are popping up an impact prospect every 2 or 3 years with solid players to fill in the gaps, a team can be competitive much more consistently.

I would say this, though, that you can trade for young players if you are trading your vets at the right time for guys ready to contribute right away. But that is very hard.

The indians had some success in 2005 and 2007 because of the trades for sizemore, hafner, lee, but there was no second act which is why we have seen such bad baseball until this year.
indians1
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 12:00 am


Return to Beyond The Minors

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron