Text Size

Cleveland Indians & MLB

Garko & Blake

Talk Tribe, talk baseball in this forum.

Moderators: peeker643, swerb, pup, paulcousineau

Garko & Blake

Unread postby pod2dawg » Fri Apr 27, 2007 7:37 pm

Look I understand the platoon thing ,but sometimes perhaps we take it to an extreme: LF, RF, 1B, 3B.

Let's leave Garko @ 1st & Blake @ 3rd for awhile, let's say 143 more games or so. We can continue to micro manage the corner outfield positions so those players never get into a hitting rhythm if necessary.
User avatar
pod2dawg
Warrior Poet aka Thread Killer
 
Posts: 1317
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:34 pm
Favorite Player: Phil Gordon
Least Favorite Player: Lane Kiffin

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:53 pm

I'd prefer to let Marte have 3B back when he's ready to go. I think he'll be fine there given time. Blake's a nice supersub who can cover when a guy needs a day off or when an injury like Marte's occurs. Despite his deficiencies, Blake has good patience at the plate and isn't a bad hitter when there's no one on base. He's adequate defensively in a lot of spots.

I agree on Garko. Todd Dery makes a great case on the front page right now for Garko to be every day. He's right. Garko can hit and is a 20+HR a year guy. He's not a superstud at 1B, bu the gets the job done on offense and defense. I also think he can top out in the 30HR range with fairly low Ks for that kind of power, a good OBP, and a good average in the upper .200s. We might have to reconsider 1B if and when another 1B comes through the system or in through trade. Mulhern is starting up okay at Buffalo, but he's got a ways to go before he can pass Garko. Next closest might be Max Ramirez if they move him from C. I think Head's out of it with a poor start at Kinston.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby Hoover » Fri Apr 27, 2007 10:43 pm

What is Blake with RISP? Like 1-17? Bench him or let him go. To be honest, if they traded him tomorrow, I could care less. He's a net zero with a cancer bat. His utility role could be done by Inglett.
User avatar
Hoover
 
Posts: 1307
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:50 pm

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:07 pm

Hoover wrote:What is Blake with RISP? Like 1-17? Bench him or let him go. To be honest, if they traded him tomorrow, I could care less. He's a net zero with a cancer bat. His utility role could be done by Inglett.


Inglett's not doing so hot in Buffalo and doesn't provide the utility that Blake does. Casey can play at pretty much all positions except CF, C, and P. He probably could player CF in a pinch, but Choo or Francisco from Buffalo are more likely candidates in CF.

Inglett's not a great defensive sub. He's a middle infielder who isn't so great at 1B or 3B. We're short on guys who can play 3B. Luna can, though not well and removing Blake shorts us on OF depth.

I'm not a Blake apologist, but he's not a net zero. He's no stud, but he can get on-base. He sucks with men on - and that's why he should hit at the top of the order, as Buff observed today. If we had someone better then I'd be all over him, but we don't. I was down on Blake too, but we really can't replace what he does at this point.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby unvme2 » Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:11 pm

I'll take neither Blake, Marte or Inglett. There is a glaring hole at 3rd, but I agree we need to pick a player and leave him there. And another fine job Wedge on your batting order. Blake is not a #2 hitter
User avatar
unvme2
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 4:15 pm
Location: North Canton

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:22 pm

unvme2 wrote:I'll take neither Blake, Marte or Inglett. There is a glaring hole at 3rd, but I agree we need to pick a player and leave him there. And another fine job Wedge on your batting order. Blake is not a #2 hitter


He's better at #2 because he doesn't have as many men on when he comes to the plate - he especially doesn't get so many in scoring position. Casey is actually historically pretty good with no one on. He's been best this season with a man on 1B or with no one on and an out or two on the board. He's batting .312 in those situations with an OPS over .900. That's why he's in the 2-hole.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby leadpipe » Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:35 pm

A number two hitter over the course of the year is going to get many more opportunities over the course of the year to drive in runs, than say, the seventh hitter. Based on ab's alone. Enough about risp or bases empty, if you hit second on a good team you need to H-I-T.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6559
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Fri Apr 27, 2007 11:46 pm

Lead Pipe wrote:A number two hitter over the course of the year is going to get many more opportunities over the course of the year to drive in runs, than say, the seventh hitter. Based on ab's alone. Enough about risp or bases empty, if you hit second on a good team you need to H-I-T.


Disagree. The 7th hitter in this lineup likely has Martinez, Garko, and Peralta. It's possible that Hafner could be moved back to #4 so the 7th hitter would have Hafner, Martinez, and Peralta.

The #2 hitter has Dellucci, Michaels, Nixon maybe or others in the #8, Barfield in the #9, and Sizemore at #1. Sizemore's a threat to be on base, but the others are less of a threat than guys the #7 hitter would have in front of him.

It's conceivably that Blake could be moved to #9 if Barfield hits and he doesnt - and I'm fine with that.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby leadpipe » Sat Apr 28, 2007 12:07 am

The number 2 hitter will get sooo many more at bats than the number seven over the course of the year it makes this not even close. Also, if your argument is the guy doesn't hit with runners on base, you don't move that guy up in the order. You just don't.
User avatar
leadpipe
The Reverend
 
Posts: 6559
Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:58 am

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Sat Apr 28, 2007 12:41 am

Lead Pipe wrote:The number 2 hitter will get sooo many more at bats than the number seven over the course of the year it makes this not even close. Also, if your argument is the guy doesn't hit with runners on base, you don't move that guy up in the order. You just don't.


There's the possibility of runners on-base at every position in the order. There are other alternatives that may be better, but Blake at #2 isn't entirely illogical.

Personally, My preference is for Nixon to bat #2, someone other than Hafner to hit 3rd, Hafner at 4, Martinez at 5, Garko at 6. A good Peralta would be ideal at #3. Then you have your LF platoon at #7, Blake at #8, and Barfield at #9.

Yet I understand the reasoning behind Blake at #2. His ability to draw walks was the largest factor. With Nixon now at .300 with a .375 OBP, I'd guess that he might move back. It's all about production, though, and we've been winning with Blake at #2. He's been at #2 since Monday and we haven't lost a game. Something's working and Blake hasn't been absent. He's got a .708 OPS for the week and has the same batting average as Sizemore for the week (.250).
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby pod2dawg » Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:26 am

OK, For you numbers freaks, what is Blake historically RISP & cross reference that with playing frequency. I'm an equal opportunity hater so until we lose a game......keep getting Garko extra grounders, explain to Blake the "idea" is to get the baserunner in....Peralta (see Garko) & mix in a salad.
User avatar
pod2dawg
Warrior Poet aka Thread Killer
 
Posts: 1317
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 8:34 pm
Favorite Player: Phil Gordon
Least Favorite Player: Lane Kiffin

Unread postby furls » Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:47 am

Hitting behind Sizemore and ahead of Hafner, Blake needs to get on base and advance runners. #2 hitter in the line up needs to set the table for Hafner. If he just goes up there and strikes out than that leaves sizemore at first with the big wood at the plate and one out.
Coming from a Wolverine, we're the football equivalent of a formerly abused wife of a meth addict who just remarried the safe nice guy. We're just glad we have someone who's aware that it's a rivalry and that tackling on defense is integral. Baby steps.

-Kingpin74
User avatar
furls
Buckeye Insider
 
Posts: 6414
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Chic Harley
Least Favorite Player: Desmond Howard


Return to Cleveland Indians & MLB

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests

cron

Who is online

In total there are 3 users online :: 1 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: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests