Text Size

Cleveland Indians & MLB

Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Talk Tribe, talk baseball in this forum.

Moderators: peeker643, swerb, pup, paulcousineau

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby reppination7 » Wed Dec 31, 2008 11:06 pm

every time i read fans comments about this trade (most are cub fans) they hate it cub fans are relly upset about this trade
Image
User avatar
reppination7
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 2:01 pm
Location: Gibsonburg OH
Favorite Player: Kenny Lofton
Least Favorite Player: quite a few people

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Toxicadam » Thu Jan 01, 2009 2:02 am

I like the trade, but I was a big Stevens backer and would have liked to see him pitch in a Tribe uniform once. Oh well .. he definitely hit some resistance when he came to AAA .. wasn't nearly as dominating as he had been in AA or the AFL of 07. Maybe Shap was trading high on him before he really became exposed in the Bigs. Although, I think his velocity and nasty curve will make him a decent middle reliever down the road. He will just have a few rough years.
User avatar
Toxicadam
 
Posts: 1915
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:53 am

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby davemanddd » Thu Jan 01, 2009 5:27 am

Pufferbelly wrote:Jeff Stevens and Chris Archer and left-hander John Gaub.

Love that part of the deal

BUT HATE THIS PART!!!!------"Though the 33-year-old DeRosa played primarily at second base for the Cubs, the Indians will probably move him to third to avoid disrupting their infield."

DISRUPTING THIS INFIELD WOULD BE A GOOD THING!!!! They cant ever do somthing right all the way through. They always have to screw it up somehow.

I got this from Castrovinces blog. Link to his blog is on indians.com


yeah the dude played 97 games at 2nd base for the cubs and hit 21 home runs and the indians want to move him to 3rd??? yep, makes sense to me. the smart thing to do would be to just leave derosa at 2nd base and move asdrubal cabrera to short and jhonny peralta to 3rd. then again, if the tribe "braintrust" truly was "smart", they wouldn't have made the barfield and marte deals over the last couple of seasons. just putting derosa at 3rd is simply bringing back a 2-years younger version of casey "blank". no thanx!!!
dave . . .
davemanddd
 
Posts: 2043
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 3:07 pm
Location: mansfield, ohio
Favorite Player: joe thomas
Least Favorite Player: lebron james

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby dazindiansfanuk » Thu Jan 01, 2009 6:50 am

I'm a little torn on this one...... I like DeRosa and he does fit very well on this team for 2009. That said, they gave up some talent to get him, albeit very raw talent outside of Stevens.

This is one of those deals that could look terrible in a few years time if Archer and Gaub iron out their flaws and reach their ceilings. However, with as far away as they are from the major leagues, their control/health (in Gaubs case) issues and the Indians having a hole in the infield this is a move that really has to be judged on the here and now..... and right now, it looks like a good gamble to take.

Personally, I'd play DeRosa at 2B, but I guess if/when they finally move Peralta they want to do it for good. As DeRosa is only here for 2009 then the Indians would be backing themselves into a corner of finding another 2Bman for 2010 - which would mean essentially leaving them in the position that they'd need Valbuena to be ready.

If they keep Jhonny at SS for 2009 then they leave themselves two internal development options (Hodges and Valbuena) to fill the vacant spot in 2010. If Valbuena is ready they can move Jhonny then, if not then Hodges might be ready to step right in at 3B.
User avatar
dazindiansfanuk
Tyner Is God
 
Posts: 8986
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:21 am
Location: Cardiff, UK
Favorite Player: Jhonny Peralta
Least Favorite Player: Curt Schilling

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Prosecutor » Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:06 am

dazindiansfanuk wrote:If they keep Jhonny at SS for 2009 then they leave themselves two internal development options (Hodges and Valbuena) to fill the vacant spot in 2010. If Valbuena is ready they can move Jhonny then, if not then Hodges might be ready to step right in at 3B.


I think you may have nailed it there. If DeRosa has a good year in '09 he may become too expensive to keep, especially if they need to free up some money to extend Cliff Lee. And they don't want to be in a position of playing Jhonny at 3rd in '09 and then having to move him back to shortstop in '10. So until they find a long term solution at either 2nd or 3rd, they want to keep things as is.

Ideally, Valbuena has a great season and proves he's ready to take over at 2nd in '10, which enables the Tribe to make the switch at that time. As for now, they have Peralta and DeRosa playing the positions they are most comfortable at, so that's not too bad.

It's a shame Marte didn't pan out; it would have saved the Tribe a lot of money this year.

I always hate to see the Tribe trade prospects with live arms for a 33-year-old, but Tony has these guys rated 15th, 28th, and 50th, so we have a lot of better prospects still on board. I'm not worried about giving up the lefty (Gaud) because we already have Raffie Perez and Sipp is on the way, assuming his arm is OK. As for Stevens, I'd rather lose him than Adam Miller or Meloan.
Prosecutor
Plutonian Outliers
 
Posts: 2870
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 11:59 am

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Stu » Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:28 am

These conversations are getting ridiculous.



Peralta's best position: SS

Cabrera's best position: SS

DeRosa's best position: 2nd



Can someone PLEASE tell me how it makes MORE sense to play 2 guys at a weaker position, rather than just 1?
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Stu » Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:39 am

Prosecutor wrote:And they don't want to be in a position of playing Jhonny at 3rd in '09 and then having to move him back to shortstop in '10.


Why? Why is this such a bad thing? He's not going to forget how to play short in 1 year. Heck, odds are he'll end up at 1st base sometime eventually anyway. If no AAA 1B candidate comes around, and if Victor stays behind the plate, and if Garko continues to suck, we'll need a 1b.
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby British_Pharaoh » Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:09 am

DeRosa has played a full season in the AL before with Texas

and put up really good numbers (admittedly he was playing half his games in Arlington)

.296AVG .357OBP 40 doubles and 74 ribbies
his K/BB ratio seems to improve every year.

if he can hit 280+ and have a .345+ on base average I'm happy
"There is but one thing of real value: to cultivate truth and justice and to live without anger in the midst of lying and unjust men"

-Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
British_Pharaoh
Tony Sipp IS HERE!
 
Posts: 9154
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 9:31 pm
Location: Pardubice, Czech Republic
Favorite Player: Michael Brantley
Least Favorite Player: Alexei Ramirez

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby British_Pharaoh » Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:13 am

.350 batting AVG in the playoffs as well as a 1.022OPS
"There is but one thing of real value: to cultivate truth and justice and to live without anger in the midst of lying and unjust men"

-Marcus Aurelius
User avatar
British_Pharaoh
Tony Sipp IS HERE!
 
Posts: 9154
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 9:31 pm
Location: Pardubice, Czech Republic
Favorite Player: Michael Brantley
Least Favorite Player: Alexei Ramirez

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Mcreek » Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:15 am

Beau Mills will be the firstbaseman come 2010-11 in all likelyhood.
" No big stars on the team is by design. "We can't afford to have the inefficiencies, even for a great talent. We need to function as efficiently as possible in our clubhouse, and that means guys have to know what it means to be a good teammate. We don't want to waste the energy on dealing with all those distractions. Besides, we value character over talent here in Cleveland---Mark Shapiro
User avatar
Mcreek
 
Posts: 1439
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 4:57 pm
Location: Venice, Florida

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Jennifer » Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:53 am

Stu wrote:
Prosecutor wrote:And they don't want to be in a position of playing Jhonny at 3rd in '09 and then having to move him back to shortstop in '10.


Why? Why is this such a bad thing? He's not going to forget how to play short in 1 year. Heck, odds are he'll end up at 1st base sometime eventually anyway. If no AAA 1B candidate comes around, and if Victor stays behind the plate, and if Garko continues to suck, we'll need a 1b.
It isn't that Peralta suddenly will forget to play short. Much of what I have read in the past has suggested that as Peralta ages he will be moved away from short. If you put Peralta at third in 2009, someone establishes himself both defensively and offensively at short in 2009, if the Tribe really wants to move him off of third in 2010 is it really going to be back to short then moving the newly established shortstop elsewhere.

Obviously not. Playing Peralta at third only makes sense if it is contemplated that is where he'll play in 2010. Why? Many of those wanting him to play third are projecting his level of skill and not his skill level on opening day. There is bound to be a learning curve at least until mid-season and probably longer. For DeRosa there is no learning curve. Does anyone doubt that on opening day that DeRosa won't be better defensively than Peralta at third. Indeed, are there many of you who believe Peralta will ever be better than DeRosa at third?

There is also a second consideration that I believe hasn't been raised. Second basemen and shortstops have to learn each other and how to work with each other on double plays. Peralta and Cabrera work well with each other. There will be a learning curve between a Cabrera and DeRosa combination. If DeRosa lasts only one season than there is another learning that will be needed in 2010.

By putting DeRosa at second the defense is weakened at second. By moving Cabrera to shortstop defense is improved. In moving Peralta to third the position is weaker than if DeRosa was playing there. In other words, while DeRosa at second, Cabrera at short and Peralta at third might have each player at his best defensive position (ignoring the questionable assumption that Peralta will be better at third than he is at short) does that really mean overall defense would be better than putting DeRosa at third?

Frankly, while I think DeRosa should play third if the decision is made to play him at second and move Peralta to third I'll just shrug because where they play is just not a big enough issue to get worked-up over.
I never learn anything if everyone always agrees with me.
Jennifer
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:15 pm

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby MadThinker88 » Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:10 pm

Mcreek wrote:Beau Mills will be the firstbaseman come 2010-11 in all likelyhood.


You see Mills being ahead of LaPorta or something else happening with Matt??
MadThinker88
In Tressel We Trust
 
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:01 am

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby slegend » Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:25 pm

1: I like the trade as we sent players that we can replace - two pitchers in the low system, one relief pitcher ready for a MLB career. I guess do like a player that you can control for years in the pen in Stevens more than a one year rental of a 2b/3b. We finally traded from our strength to fill a hole. Nice move by the staff. If the players traded turn out to be MLB studs, Shapiro and company have time to replace them and develop alternative arms in 2-3 years.

2: I just hope that DeRosa is "Casey Blake" - a guy that becomes a starter at the end of their prime AND posts legit numbers. We need a bat in the lineup that can hit for average and a guy to get on base. I would like to see him bat #5/#6 in the lineup behind our combo of Hafner and Martinez. We could force them to pitch to Hafner and Martinez with a veteran that can handle the bat anchoring them in the lineup.

3: Some picked up the starting pitcher topic - we still have the cash to bring a guy in - but it is going to be a veteran retread #5 type starter and not a FOR player. That means we might as well put Laffey and Sowers in the rotation at the #4 and #5 spots. Looking at the roster, the two injuries to Adam Miller and Jake Westbrook are HUGE on the rotation!
User avatar
slegend
Attention Whore
 
Posts: 1066
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 12:00 pm
Location: Washington, DC
Favorite Player: Grady Sizemore
Least Favorite Player: A-Rod

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby WiscTribeFan » Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:26 pm

Mcreek wrote:Beau Mills will be the firstbaseman come 2010-11 in all likelyhood.


I see him as our potential DH with LaPorta playing 1B by then....
Don't go away mad, just go away.
User avatar
WiscTribeFan
Mook
 
Posts: 2681
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 1:10 pm
Location: Kenosha, WI
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Mcreek » Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:38 pm

From what I have heard/read Mills is superior defensively to Laporta at first base but they could easily flip flop between DH/1B. This is how I see the lineup in 2010-11

Sizemore-CF
Cabrera-SS
Choo-RF
Peralta-3B
Laporta-DH
Mills-1B
Weglarz or Brantley-LF
Santanna-C
Valbuena-2b

Alot of upside here with a good mix of vets and youngsters.
" No big stars on the team is by design. "We can't afford to have the inefficiencies, even for a great talent. We need to function as efficiently as possible in our clubhouse, and that means guys have to know what it means to be a good teammate. We don't want to waste the energy on dealing with all those distractions. Besides, we value character over talent here in Cleveland---Mark Shapiro
User avatar
Mcreek
 
Posts: 1439
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 4:57 pm
Location: Venice, Florida

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Stu » Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:53 pm

Mcreek wrote:Beau Mills will be the firstbaseman come 2010-11 in all likelyhood.


im not comfortable penciling players into major league positions who have only A ball experience.
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Mcreek » Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:57 pm

Yea, but pencils have erasers :dingle:
" No big stars on the team is by design. "We can't afford to have the inefficiencies, even for a great talent. We need to function as efficiently as possible in our clubhouse, and that means guys have to know what it means to be a good teammate. We don't want to waste the energy on dealing with all those distractions. Besides, we value character over talent here in Cleveland---Mark Shapiro
User avatar
Mcreek
 
Posts: 1439
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 4:57 pm
Location: Venice, Florida

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Stu » Thu Jan 01, 2009 2:04 pm

Jennifer wrote:It isn't that Peralta suddenly will forget to play short. Much of what I have read in the past has suggested that as Peralta ages he will be moved away from short. If you put Peralta at third in 2009, someone establishes himself both defensively and offensively at short in 2009, if the Tribe really wants to move him off of third in 2010 is it really going to be back to short then moving the newly established shortstop elsewhere.


And if we keep him at Short, and Hodges and Valbuena are ready in 2010, then we still have 4 guys for 3 positions.

Jennifer wrote:Obviously not. Playing Peralta at third only makes sense if it is contemplated that is where he'll play in 2010. Why? Many of those wanting him to play third are projecting his level of skill and not his skill level on opening day. There is bound to be a learning curve at least until mid-season and probably longer. For DeRosa there is no learning curve. Does anyone doubt that on opening day that DeRosa won't be better defensively than Peralta at third. Indeed, are there many of you who believe Peralta will ever be better than DeRosa at third?


Learning curve? He's played there in the minors. He'll play there in spring training. Hes a major league ball player, I think he can handle it.

Jennifer wrote:There is also a second consideration that I believe hasn't been raised. Second basemen and shortstops have to learn each other and how to work with each other on double plays. Peralta and Cabrera work well with each other. There will be a learning curve between a Cabrera and DeRosa combination. If DeRosa lasts only one season than there is another learning that will be needed in 2010.


Is this benefit worth it if you are playing people out of position, just because its familiar who they have to their left and right?

Jennifer wrote:By putting DeRosa at second the defense is weakened at second. By moving Cabrera to shortstop defense is improved. In moving Peralta to third the position is weaker than if DeRosa was playing there. In other words, while DeRosa at second, Cabrera at short and Peralta at third might have each player at his best defensive position (ignoring the questionable assumption that Peralta will be better at third than he is at short) does that really mean overall defense would be better than putting DeRosa at third?


Please explain this again. Did you just say that putting players in their BEST defensive position might not mean having a better defensive infield than if you played them out of position?

Frankly, while I think DeRosa should play third if the decision is made to play him at second and move Peralta to third I'll just shrug because where they play is just not a big enough issue to get worked-up over.[/quote]

I know errors are a pretty bad stat to base fielding performance on. However, I just can't get over the fact that DeRosa has 2 more errors in 30% fewer innings at 3rd compared to 2nd. What is the justification that DeRosa is better at 3rd than 2nd.
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby ZenToasty1 » Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:04 pm

Mcreek wrote:From what I have heard/read Mills is superior defensively to Laporta at first base but they could easily flip flop between DH/1B. This is how I see the lineup in 2010-11

Sizemore-CF
Cabrera-SS
Choo-RF
Peralta-3B
Laporta-DH
Mills-1B
Weglarz or Brantley-LF
Santanna-C
Valbuena-2b

Alot of upside here with a good mix of vets and youngsters.


You think VMart's going away after one more season? My wife will give up on baseball...
ZenToasty1
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 7:13 pm

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby MadThinker88 » Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:19 pm

I think Mcreek is only focused on a lineup where current players do not remain beyond their current contracts.

Unfortunately, with the game of baseball, we have to think in those terms from time to time.
MadThinker88
In Tressel We Trust
 
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:01 am

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby consigliere » Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:37 pm

dazindiansfanuk wrote:If they keep Jhonny at SS for 2009 then they leave themselves two internal development options (Hodges and Valbuena) to fill the vacant spot in 2010. If Valbuena is ready they can move Jhonny then, if not then Hodges might be ready to step right in at 3B.


That is an excellent point Daz. And if I mention it in a follow up article this weekend I will certainly credit it to you. Spot on.
Indians Prospect Insider: http://www.indiansprospectinsider.com/
Image
User avatar
consigliere
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:22 am
Location: Painesville Twp, OH
Favorite Player: Jeff Stevens
Least Favorite Player: Carl Willis

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Mcreek » Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:51 pm

Problem with that scenario is a Peralta/Hodges left side of the infield would be a disaster defensively. The FO is at least considering the possibilty that Peralta is growing out of the SS position. That combo would be a nightmare for pitchers like Carmona, Westbrook and Laffey all three groundball pitchers
" No big stars on the team is by design. "We can't afford to have the inefficiencies, even for a great talent. We need to function as efficiently as possible in our clubhouse, and that means guys have to know what it means to be a good teammate. We don't want to waste the energy on dealing with all those distractions. Besides, we value character over talent here in Cleveland---Mark Shapiro
User avatar
Mcreek
 
Posts: 1439
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 4:57 pm
Location: Venice, Florida

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby consigliere » Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:58 pm

Mcreek wrote:Problem with that scenario is a Peralta/Hodges left side of the infield would be a disaster defensively. The FO is at least considering the possibilty that Peralta is growing out of the SS position. That combo would be a nightmare for pitchers like Carmona, Westbrook and Laffey all three groundball pitchers


Said it before, and will say it again, the crap Hodges takes about his defense is way overblown. He's a solid defender. Not great, but not garbage as some keep saying. It is something he is really working on improving, and like Valbuena last year who was not liked because of what many considered average at best defender, if you give him a full year in 2009 to work on it we at least could see some improvements to where he is a steady major league performer there.
Indians Prospect Insider: http://www.indiansprospectinsider.com/
Image
User avatar
consigliere
 
Posts: 10822
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:22 am
Location: Painesville Twp, OH
Favorite Player: Jeff Stevens
Least Favorite Player: Carl Willis

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby MadThinker88 » Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:59 pm

Mcreek wrote:Problem with that scenario is a Peralta/Hodges left side of the infield would be a disaster defensively. The FO is at least considering the possibilty that Peralta is growing out of the SS position. That combo would be a nightmare for pitchers like Carmona, Westbrook and Laffey all three groundball pitchers


You suggesting its possibly worse than Marte and Peralta on that side of infield??

Just checking and trying to get perspective....
MadThinker88
In Tressel We Trust
 
Posts: 2634
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:01 am

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Mcreek » Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:12 pm

Marte is superior defensively to Hodges and is about the same age. Even if Hodges becomes a fringe average defensive thirdbaseman the left side of the infield will be a disaster with Peraltas shortcomings. If you have 3/4ths of your rotation filled with sinkerball pitchers a defensive challenged Wes Hodges and the limited range of Peralta is a formula for failure.
" No big stars on the team is by design. "We can't afford to have the inefficiencies, even for a great talent. We need to function as efficiently as possible in our clubhouse, and that means guys have to know what it means to be a good teammate. We don't want to waste the energy on dealing with all those distractions. Besides, we value character over talent here in Cleveland---Mark Shapiro
User avatar
Mcreek
 
Posts: 1439
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 4:57 pm
Location: Venice, Florida

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Mcreek » Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:35 pm

More on Hodges Glove:

Ben from Ohio asks:
Did Wes Hodges have a shot at the top 10 or has his stock fallen a bit.

A: Ben Badler: He was close but ended up on the periphery of the 10. It's questionable whether Hodges will stick at third base, and if he does stick there, he's probably going to be among the worst fielders at his position in the game, probably a -10 to -15 runs guy each year, and it's not like he's getting any younger or more agile. He came into the season in better condition than usual, but if he has to move to first base or if he's that far below average third base, then his value takes a huge hit.
" No big stars on the team is by design. "We can't afford to have the inefficiencies, even for a great talent. We need to function as efficiently as possible in our clubhouse, and that means guys have to know what it means to be a good teammate. We don't want to waste the energy on dealing with all those distractions. Besides, we value character over talent here in Cleveland---Mark Shapiro
User avatar
Mcreek
 
Posts: 1439
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 4:57 pm
Location: Venice, Florida

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Jennifer » Thu Jan 01, 2009 5:48 pm

Stu wrote:
Jennifer wrote:It isn't that Peralta suddenly will forget to play short. Much of what I have read in the past has suggested that as Peralta ages he will be moved away from short. If you put Peralta at third in 2009, someone establishes himself both defensively and offensively at short in 2009, if the Tribe really wants to move him off of third in 2010 is it really going to be back to short then moving the newly established shortstop elsewhere.


And if we keep him at Short, and Hodges and Valbuena are ready in 2010, then we still have 4 guys for 3 positions.

Jennifer wrote:Obviously not. Playing Peralta at third only makes sense if it is contemplated that is where he'll play in 2010. Why? Many of those wanting him to play third are projecting his level of skill and not his skill level on opening day. There is bound to be a learning curve at least until mid-season and probably longer. For DeRosa there is no learning curve. Does anyone doubt that on opening day that DeRosa won't be better defensively than Peralta at third. Indeed, are there many of you who believe Peralta will ever be better than DeRosa at third?


Learning curve? He's played there in the minors. He'll play there in spring training. Hes a major league ball player, I think he can handle it.

Jennifer wrote:There is also a second consideration that I believe hasn't been raised. Second basemen and shortstops have to learn each other and how to work with each other on double plays. Peralta and Cabrera work well with each other. There will be a learning curve between a Cabrera and DeRosa combination. If DeRosa lasts only one season than there is another learning that will be needed in 2010.


Is this benefit worth it if you are playing people out of position, just because its familiar who they have to their left and right?

Jennifer wrote:By putting DeRosa at second the defense is weakened at second. By moving Cabrera to shortstop defense is improved. In moving Peralta to third the position is weaker than if DeRosa was playing there. In other words, while DeRosa at second, Cabrera at short and Peralta at third might have each player at his best defensive position (ignoring the questionable assumption that Peralta will be better at third than he is at short) does that really mean overall defense would be better than putting DeRosa at third?


Please explain this again. Did you just say that putting players in their BEST defensive position might not mean having a better defensive infield than if you played them out of position?

Frankly, while I think DeRosa should play third if the decision is made to play him at second and move Peralta to third I'll just shrug because where they play is just not a big enough issue to get worked-up over.


I know errors are a pretty bad stat to base fielding performance on. However, I just can't get over the fact that DeRosa has 2 more errors in 30% fewer innings at 3rd compared to 2nd. What is the justification that DeRosa is better at 3rd than 2nd.[/quote]I suggest that you read my earlier post, reread the post you quote and then ask me any questions you have.
I never learn anything if everyone always agrees with me.
Jennifer
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:15 pm

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby TitoFrancona » Thu Jan 01, 2009 6:22 pm

Mcreek wrote:Marte is superior defensively to Hodges and is about the same age. Even if Hodges becomes a fringe average defensive thirdbaseman the left side of the infield will be a disaster with Peraltas shortcomings. If you have 3/4ths of your rotation filled with sinkerball pitchers a defensive challenged Wes Hodges and the limited range of Peralta is a formula for failure.


Marte is also a 5'5" 110lb weakling with a bat in his hand. The guy has 0 power. Which might not be so bad if he actually hit for an adequate avg. But he has done neither.
TitoFrancona
 
Posts: 1634
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:37 pm
Location: Sacramento, Ca
Favorite Player: Tito Francona
Least Favorite Player: Jim Thome

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Stu » Thu Jan 01, 2009 6:43 pm

Jennifer wrote:I suggest that you read my earlier post, reread the post you quote and then ask me any questions you have.


Not likely.
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Rocky55 » Thu Jan 01, 2009 6:58 pm

TitoFrancona wrote:
Mcreek wrote:Marte is superior defensively to Hodges and is about the same age. Even if Hodges becomes a fringe average defensive thirdbaseman the left side of the infield will be a disaster with Peraltas shortcomings. If you have 3/4ths of your rotation filled with sinkerball pitchers a defensive challenged Wes Hodges and the limited range of Peralta is a formula for failure.


Marte is also a 5'5" 110lb weakling with a bat in his hand. The guy has 0 power. Which might not be so bad if he actually hit for an adequate avg. But he has done neither.


Not trying to nitpick Tito, because I agree that Marte can't hit period, but "0 power"?

Marte won the AAA HR Derby in ('06?) in my hometown of Toledo and was hitting them on to Monroe Street. Some were hitting the buildings on the other side of the street.

I know it's just batting practice but I'd have trouble hitting a seven iron that far.
Rocky55
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 9:47 pm

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Mcreek » Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:04 pm

Marte is also a 5'5" 110lb weakling with a bat in his hand. The guy has 0 power. Which might not be so bad if he actually hit for an adequate avg. But he has done neither


That wasn't MadThinkers question. This was:

You suggesting its(The Hodges/Peralta combo ) possibly worse than Marte and Peralta on that side of infield??

Just checking and trying to get perspective


It would be much worse defensively. Hodges actually made 8 more errors in the AZFL in only 21 games. The guy is a butcher and he is no kid. He will turn 25 later this year
" No big stars on the team is by design. "We can't afford to have the inefficiencies, even for a great talent. We need to function as efficiently as possible in our clubhouse, and that means guys have to know what it means to be a good teammate. We don't want to waste the energy on dealing with all those distractions. Besides, we value character over talent here in Cleveland---Mark Shapiro
User avatar
Mcreek
 
Posts: 1439
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 4:57 pm
Location: Venice, Florida

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Jennifer » Thu Jan 01, 2009 7:57 pm

Stu wrote:
Jennifer wrote:I suggest that you read my earlier post, reread the post you quote and then ask me any questions you have.


Not likely.
Guess you didn't really want the answers to the questions I already answered.
I never learn anything if everyone always agrees with me.
Jennifer
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:15 pm

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby noles1 » Thu Jan 01, 2009 8:38 pm

Jennifer wrote:
Stu wrote:
Jennifer wrote:I suggest that you read my earlier post, reread the post you quote and then ask me any questions you have.


Not likely.
Guess you didn't really want the answers to the questions I already answered.


Don't worry he seems to do that quite a bit. Actually reading and comprehending others' points seems to be too much work. He'd much rather prefer to think what he wants and put words in posters' comments.
Playing here is the closest thing to heaven. Really, I mean it's amazing to be in a place where the fans truly cherish their football team and stick behind them win or lose. We players love them, too. I feel a sense of accomplishment playing here, we are a special breed of football players with a great opportunity." ~ tOSU LB Brian Rolle
User avatar
noles1
 
Posts: 2114
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 2:32 pm
Location: Clarion, PA
Favorite Player: Jason Kipnis
Least Favorite Player: Mark May's Parents

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Stu » Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:35 pm

Jennifer wrote:
Stu wrote:
Jennifer wrote:I suggest that you read my earlier post, reread the post you quote and then ask me any questions you have.


Not likely.
Guess you didn't really want the answers to the questions I already answered.


Fine I'll bite. I reread them, and neither of your 2 posts in this thread address 3 of my 4 responses to you:

1. Peralta's learning curve at 3rd and if one actually exists.

2. How playing guys out of their best position is better than playing them where they would likely be most effective.

3. Why DeRosa should play 3rd when he has more errors there in 30% fewer innings than at 2nd.
Last edited by Stu on Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Stu » Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:36 pm

noles1 wrote:Don't worry he seems to do that quite a bit. Actually reading and comprehending others' points seems to be too much work. He'd much rather prefer to think what he wants and put words in posters' comments.


If you have an issue with me because of the Rooney rule discussion, leave it in the Browns forum.
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Jennifer » Fri Jan 02, 2009 12:17 am

Stu wrote:
Jennifer wrote:
Stu wrote:
Jennifer wrote:I suggest that you read my earlier post, reread the post you quote and then ask me any questions you have.


Not likely.
Guess you didn't really want the answers to the questions I already answered.


Fine I'll bite. I reread them, and neither of your 2 posts in this thread address my 2 responses to you:

1. Peralta's learning curve at 3rd and if one actually exists.

2. How playing guys out of their best position is better than playing them where they would likely be most effective.
Stu -- I'm not trying to pick a fight with you. I asked you to reread and restate your questions I had not already answered. Your latest post seems to have done that.

As to your first question I'm not at sure how to answer that because frankly it boggles my mind to think that anyone believes that a player who played a limited amount of third at the major league and minor league levels -- and not since 2004 -- and by the start of the season willl only have added only winter league and spring training games will be at his fielding mean. Garko at the end of his second season at first was still improving. Cabrera no doubt is still improving at second. If Sizemore was switched to a corner outfield position while he might play it well from the start would still show improvement the more he plays.

So much of both hitting and fielding is "muscle memory." "Muscle memory" is a function of repetition.

As to your second question I do feel I answered it but I'll supplement it. We are discussing total infield defense (with first included) and marginal increase or decrease in moving players around. DeRosa's best position might be second (but see below) but having him at second weakens defense at second because he is not as good as Cabrera at second. The move would, therefore, second base defense.

Cabrera at short increases defense at short.

While Peralta might be better at third he is not better than DeRosa at third.

So the question becomes would the improvement of defense at shortstop exceed the the weaker defense at second and third.

DeRosa, 33, spent most of time last year at second base, but he packs light. He played six different positions last year, including 95 games at second, 38 in right field, 27 in left, 22 at third and 10 each at first and shortstop. A source close to the Cubs said third base is his best defensive position
(Emphasis added).

http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/
I never learn anything if everyone always agrees with me.
Jennifer
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 7:15 pm

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby TitoFrancona » Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:35 am

Rocky55 wrote: Not trying to nitpick Tito, because I agree that Marte can't hit period, but "0 power"?

Marte won the AAA HR Derby in ('06?) in my hometown of Toledo and was hitting them on to Monroe Street. Some were hitting the buildings on the other side of the street.

I know it's just batting practice but I'd have trouble hitting a seven iron that far.


Yeah, I well remember the HR derby he won and all the reports of his tape measure power.

Unfortunately, he has never shown even a little power in the majors. And he's not showing any now in winter ball. I seriously doubt any hitting instructor would take someone who had 25+ hr potential and purposely turn him into a singles hitter. If they did, they shouldn't be hitting coaches.
TitoFrancona
 
Posts: 1634
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:37 pm
Location: Sacramento, Ca
Favorite Player: Tito Francona
Least Favorite Player: Jim Thome

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby bookelly » Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:43 am

If DeRosa hits half as good as his wife looks :wow: , we're fine.
Nobody, I mean nobody, voluntarily becomes a Cleveland sports fan.

"This team could fuck up a ham sandwich." -CDT
User avatar
bookelly
Happy Easter!!
 
Posts: 3437
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 11:58 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Favorite Player: My bunny hunny
Least Favorite Player: Elmer Fudd

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby TribeNut » Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:52 am

Stu wrote:These conversations are getting ridiculous.



Peralta's best position: SS

Cabrera's best position: SS

DeRosa's best position: 2nd



Can someone PLEASE tell me how it makes MORE sense to play 2 guys at a weaker position, rather than just 1?

Exactly who is it that feels that DeRosa's best defensive position is 2B? It certainly isn't the Cubs, who frequently would move DeRosa to the OF late in games and bring Fontenot in to play 2B. Also isn't the Cubs, who feel that they can replace DeRosa with a Miles/Fontenot platoon.

Shapiro has already said that he feels that DeRosa's best defensive position is 3B. If such is the case, then I don't see the harm in leaving Jhonny and Cabrera where they are at. DeRosa will be gone after 2009 anyway- he will either play like the super utility guy that he is and find a multiyear deal elsewhere, or finally get off the sauce, be a disappointment and slink away.


bookelly: pictures of DeRosa's wife are necessary to fully understand your post.
User avatar
TribeNut
Late Inning Defensive Replacement
 
Posts: 774
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 1:54 am
Favorite Player: Lou Marson
Least Favorite Player: Aj Pierzinski

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Ziner » Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:55 am

TribeNut wrote:
bookelly: pictures of DeRosa's wife are necessary to fully understand your post.


Ill help you out bookelly, good enough for you tribe nut?

Image
In the end, we're all "only for a limited time," you guys.
User avatar
Ziner
Tot-Lovin' Hippy
 
Posts: 7058
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Favorite Player: Tater Tots
Least Favorite Player: Yam Fries

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby tribefan333 » Fri Jan 02, 2009 3:19 am

Ohhhhh, that explains it.

THAT'S why Cubs fans are pissed.
User avatar
tribefan333
Cleveland Rocks
 
Posts: 1109
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 1:37 am
Location: Green, OH
Favorite Player: Grady/Fausto/Cabrera
Least Favorite Player: Joba Chamberlain

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Jhonny » Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:26 am

Stu wrote:DeRosa's best position: 2nd


This is debatable, and unclear. His bat profiles better at second, but with the Indians that is not the issue. There's been some reports that he's better at 3b. I'd rather move Jhonny to third myself, but I see what the Indians are doing.
User avatar
Jhonny
 
Posts: 320
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 6:44 am

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Mcreek » Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:44 am

Shapiro has already said that he feels that DeRosa's best defensive position is 3B


Oh, Shapiro said. If you are putting stock into what Shapiro says then Alex Escobar is an impact five tool player, Both Andy Marte and Josh Barfield are core prospects, Dave Dellucci is now playing like the player we thought we were getting when we signed him (Comments made last season), Ramon Vazquez is a better fit than Brandon Phillips. If we have learned anything its not to trust anything coming out of Shapiros mouth.

I have yet to see any evidence that Derosa is a better thirdbaseman with the bat or glove then his natural position playing secondbase. Shapiros opinion is meanigless too me.
" No big stars on the team is by design. "We can't afford to have the inefficiencies, even for a great talent. We need to function as efficiently as possible in our clubhouse, and that means guys have to know what it means to be a good teammate. We don't want to waste the energy on dealing with all those distractions. Besides, we value character over talent here in Cleveland---Mark Shapiro
User avatar
Mcreek
 
Posts: 1439
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 4:57 pm
Location: Venice, Florida

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Stu » Fri Jan 02, 2009 8:15 am

Mcreek wrote:
Shapiro has already said that he feels that DeRosa's best defensive position is 3B


Oh, Shapiro said. If you are putting stock into what Shapiro says then Alex Escobar is an impact five tool player, Both Andy Marte and Josh Barfield are core prospects, Dave Dellucci is now playing like the player we thought we were getting when we signed him (Comments made last season), Ramon Vazquez is a better fit than Brandon Phillips. If we have learned anything its not to trust anything coming out of Shapiros mouth.

I have yet to see any evidence that Derosa is a better thirdbaseman with the bat or glove then his natural position playing secondbase. Shapiros opinion is meanigless too me.


Sadly I agree with this. Not a lot of stock in it.
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Stu » Fri Jan 02, 2009 8:19 am

TribeNut wrote:Exactly who is it that feels that DeRosa's best defensive position is 2B? It certainly isn't the Cubs, who frequently would move DeRosa to the OF late in games and bring Fontenot in to play 2B. Also isn't the Cubs, who feel that they can replace DeRosa with a Miles/Fontenot platoon


Just because Fontenot is better than DeRosa at 2nd, doesnt mean that DeRosa is better at 3rd than 2nd. It means Fontenot is better at 2nd.
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Stu » Fri Jan 02, 2009 8:20 am

tribefan333 wrote:Ohhhhh, that explains it.

THAT'S why Cubs fans are pissed.


Thats why we are here! :thumb up:
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby Stu » Fri Jan 02, 2009 8:40 am

Jennifer wrote:As to your first question I'm not at sure how to answer that because frankly it boggles my mind to think that anyone believes that a player who played a limited amount of third at the major league and minor league levels -- and not since 2004 -- and by the start of the season willl only have added only winter league and spring training games will be at his fielding mean. Garko at the end of his second season at first was still improving. Cabrera no doubt is still improving at second. If Sizemore was switched to a corner outfield position while he might play it well from the start would still show improvement the more he plays.


I'm not sure you can compare the learning curves of moving a short stop to third and a stocky, slow footed catcher to first base.

Jennifer wrote:So much of both hitting and fielding is "muscle memory." "Muscle memory" is a function of repetition.


While its a different angle and speed, repetition is still similar. Plus many agree Jhonny already has the arm for 3rd.


Jennifer wrote:As to your second question I do feel I answered it but I'll supplement it. We are discussing total infield defense (with first included) and marginal increase or decrease in moving players around. DeRosa's best position might be second (but see below) but having him at second weakens defense at second because he is not as good as Cabrera at second. The move would, therefore, second base defense.

Cabrera at short increases defense at short.

While Peralta might be better at third he is not better than DeRosa at third.

So the question becomes would the improvement of defense at shortstop exceed the the weaker defense at second and third.


The disagreement we have boils down to whether or not DeRosa really is better than Peralta at 3rd. I think Peralta can be a good defensive 3rd baseman, even with a learning curve. If thats the case, then we have improvement at SS, decline at 2nd, no change or maybe improvement at 3rd in my scenario. You disagree about Peralta's fielding. Until we see for ourselves, oh well.

Lastly, I was not trying to pick a fight with you either. But most people wouldn't appreciate receiving a reply that simply says, reread this, that, and the other and then you can talk to me.
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby IronMike » Fri Jan 02, 2009 8:55 am

Regarding Hodges being inadequate as a third baseman at this stage of his career.

This scenerio might apply.

When the Indians obtained Craig Nettles from the Twins he was awful as a third baseman. Nettles with the help of the coaching staff and pure desire ... fielded 100 ground balls per day over an extended period of time and made himself into not only a good third baseman but later became a Gold Glover with the Yankees.

If Hodges can hit, and he will and has desire he can make himself a good third baseman and that is probably what will happen.
Sooner or later REALITY must take over the situation ... and it finally did!
User avatar
IronMike
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:00 pm
Location: Strongsville, Ohio
Favorite Player: Astrubal Cabrera
Least Favorite Player: N/A

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby chitownmike » Fri Jan 02, 2009 9:01 am

Peralta to 3B may be inevitable, but I get the logic of keeping him at SS in 2009:
1. Improving the left side of the IF means Garko/DeRosa on the right side. Yikes.
2. If Hodges proves ready for prime time and Valbuena not so much, where does he play?
Shapiro is just keeping his options open.
Mike
chitownmike
 
Posts: 258
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 5:27 pm

Re: Indians trade Stevens and others for Mark DeRosa

Unread postby TitoFrancona » Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:35 pm

chitownmike wrote:Peralta to 3B may be inevitable, but I get the logic of keeping him at SS in 2009:
1. Improving the left side of the IF means Garko/DeRosa on the right side. Yikes.
2. If Hodges proves ready for prime time and Valbuena not so much, where does he play?
Shapiro is just keeping his options open.Mike


IF Shapiro makes out the lineups then why is Wedge here?
TitoFrancona
 
Posts: 1634
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:37 pm
Location: Sacramento, Ca
Favorite Player: Tito Francona
Least Favorite Player: Jim Thome

PreviousNext

Return to Cleveland Indians & MLB

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Who is online

In total there are 2 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 181 on Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests