PDA

View Full Version : Scutaro or Bartlett?



I(heart)Freel
11-21-2010, 10:30 PM
Nice article on a couple of vet SS available on the trade market.

http://soxblog.projo.com/2010/11/bartlett-availa.html

I could see the Reds going one of these routes, especially if the market for a left fielder is thin or overly expensive.

The good thing with either of these guys is that both can and have hit leadoff. I like Stubbs a lot, but I think moving him into the pole position this early in his career is a bad idea for his development.

Do you like either Scutaro or Bartlett?

Brutus
11-21-2010, 10:42 PM
Nice article on a couple of vet SS available on the trade market.

http://soxblog.projo.com/2010/11/bartlett-availa.html

I could see the Reds going one of these routes, especially if the market for a left fielder is thin or overly expensive.

The good thing with either of these guys is that both can and have hit leadoff. I like Stubbs a lot, but I think moving him into the pole position this early in his career is a bad idea for his development.

Do you like either Scutaro or Bartlett?

Definitely don't care for Scutaro whatsoever.

Bartlett, minus one season, seems to be nothing more than an expensive version of Paul Janish. And 2009 was likely as good as it was thanks to his .389 BABIP.

In other words, I pass.

Ron Madden
11-21-2010, 10:56 PM
Nice article on a couple of vet SS available on the trade market.

http://soxblog.projo.com/2010/11/bartlett-availa.html

I could see the Reds going one of these routes, especially if the market for a left fielder is thin or overly expensive.

The good thing with either of these guys is that both can and have hit leadoff. I like Stubbs a lot, but I think moving him into the pole position this early in his career is a bad idea for his development.

Do you like either Scutaro or Bartlett?

I'd pass on both of them, take my chances with Paul Janish and bat him 8th.

Just because a player has hit leadoff before is no indication he can do the job.

TheNext44
11-21-2010, 11:06 PM
I'd rather have Janish/Cozart than Scutero, even if their salaries were the same.

I(heart)Freel
11-21-2010, 11:18 PM
I'd pass on both of them, take my chances with Paul Janish and bat him 8th.

Just because a player has hit leadoff before is no indication he can do the job.

Sure, but Scutaro's 336 OBP in the leadoff slot last year was better than any Red in the leadoff slot last year. That's an indication.

RedLegSuperStar
11-21-2010, 11:23 PM
I hear the Marlins let their stars go for cheap.. How'd Hanley look in a Reds uni?

corkedbat
11-22-2010, 12:55 AM
I'd rather have Brignac then Bartlett, simply becasue he can hit from the left side.

mth123
11-22-2010, 03:23 AM
I'd take Scutaro for a year. He could lead-off and he'd probably put up an OPS in the mid .700s. That's .100 to .150 points more than I expect from Janish if he had to play every day. IF Cozart takes the job away, Scutaro would be great depth.

I'm not as excited about Bartlett and would rather have Brignac in any deal with TB.,

camisadelgolf
11-22-2010, 03:28 AM
Definitely Scutaro for me, too. They'll make about the same amount of money, and I expect similar offensive production, but I like Scutaro's defense more.

lollipopcurve
11-22-2010, 07:31 AM
The Reds got Cabrera at 3 million last year without giving up any players. I don't see them giving up talent to get either of these guys at 5/6 million per, especially with Cabrera still out there and both Janish and Cozart one year further along in their development. Plus, Scutaro battled a shoulder injury last year and ended up playing 2B at the end of the year. At his age (35), he seems especially risky, even if his bat plays pretty well.

Strikes Out Looking
11-22-2010, 08:09 AM
Sure, but Scutaro's 336 OBP in the leadoff slot last year was better than any Red in the leadoff slot last year. That's an indication.

Except, the pitcher did not hit ahead except for interleague play. I'd discount that by a few points.

RedsManRick
11-22-2010, 09:54 AM
I'm not sure I see the logic in either spending millions or trading away players for a marginal upgrade. Neither guy is much in the field any more nor a reliable source of OBP. Over the course of a year, I think you get the same net production from them as you would from a full year of Janish.

Johnny Footstool
11-22-2010, 10:24 AM
J.J. Hardy should be cheaper and will probably outperform both of them.

camisadelgolf
11-22-2010, 11:06 AM
I'm not sure I see the logic in either spending millions or trading away players for a marginal upgrade. Neither guy is much in the field any more nor a reliable source of OBP. Over the course of a year, I think you get the same net production from them as you would from a full year of Janish.
The Reds need a lead-off hitter, right?
career OBP as lead-off hitters:
.357 Marco Scutaro
.356 Jason Bartlett
.327 Drew Stubbs
.305 Brandon Phillips

I'm not even going to bother posting what Janish has done for his career, but needless to say, it's dreadful no matter where he's batting in the lineup.

OnBaseMachine
11-22-2010, 11:07 AM
J.J. Hardy should be cheaper and will probably outperform both of them.

Agreed. Pass on Bartlett/Scutaro and focus on J.J. Hardy. He's a better defender and hitter than both of them, and he's reportedly available too.

edabbs44
11-22-2010, 11:21 AM
JJ Hardy or Orlando Cabrera? Seriously...why go out of your way for Hardy when you already know that Cabrera is a good presence on the team?

The numbers look similar and we know Cabrera is fine with the glove.

Hardy was traded for Gomez a year ago and now is available yet again, while in his "prime". He sounds like a real blue-chipper.

This just seems like a case of the grass is greeners.

camisadelgolf
11-22-2010, 11:24 AM
Hardy was traded for Gomes a year ago and now is available yet again, while in his "prime". He sounds like a real blue-chipper.
Huh? You mean Carlos Gomez?

edit: Yes. Easy mistake to make. Proceed.

edabbs44
11-22-2010, 11:41 AM
Huh? You mean Carlos Gomez?

edit: Yes. Easy mistake to make. Proceed.

Whoops...my bad. Edited, thanks for the heads up.

Scrap Irony
11-22-2010, 11:56 AM
Do they make the major league club better?

Yep. Both would.

If the talent going back the other way is as marginal as the upgrade they'll likely provide, I'm all for grabbing either one of them, with Scutaro slightly ahead of Bartlett.

But, yeah, JJ Hardy would be a much better option than either of them and an actual serious upgrade at the position from what Janish/ Cozart is likely to provide.

RedsManRick
11-22-2010, 12:07 PM
The Reds need a lead-off hitter, right?
career OBP as lead-off hitters:
.357 Marco Scutaro
.356 Jason Bartlett
.327 Drew Stubbs
.305 Brandon Phillips

I'm not even going to bother posting what Janish has done for his career, but needless to say, it's dreadful no matter where he's batting in the lineup.

I'm not worried about career OBP. I'm worried about 2011 OBP. Career is only relevant insofar as it helps us predict 2011. Neither Scutaro nor Bartlett are likely to repeat those career figures in 2011. Better than Phillips? Sure. Better than Stubbs? Maybe.

And even then, a myopic focus on one need at the expense of another leads to spinning one's wheels. Adding runs through OBP while giving those runs back via worse defense is a pointless exercise. I want a better SS, not just a different one.

As for Janish, I'll continue to argue that we should take his 2008 & 2009 performances with a massive grain of salt considering his ridiculously low BABIP. He finally had a reasonably decent BABIP in 2010 (.283) and put up a line comparable to what we'd expect from Scutaro or Bartlett (.260/.338/.385). I simply don't see anything unsustainable about his 2010 performance. Everybody expects him to regress, but I'm not quite sure why. 2010 looks like his regression to me.

That does not suggest Janish is a perfect option nor that we should necessarily expect him to produce offense equal to the aforementioned options. But considering that we know he's the best defender of the bunch and in light of my expectations for his offense (an OPS in the 700 range), I'm quite hesitant to give up talent and/or money to acquire a mediocre alternative. I think they're all something like 2 wins players in full-time duty.

blumj
11-22-2010, 12:07 PM
J.J. Hardy should be cheaper and will probably outperform both of them.
Cheaper in talent? Because he should get more than Bartlett in arbitration since he did last year.

edabbs44
11-22-2010, 12:19 PM
As for Janish, I'll continue to argue that we should take his 2008 & 2009 performances with a massive grain of salt considering his ridiculously low BABIP. He finally had a reasonably decent BABIP in 2010 (.283) and put up a line comparable to what we'd expect from Scutaro or Bartlett (.260/.338/.385). I simply don't see anything unsustainable about his 2010 performance. Everybody expects him to regress, but I'm not quite sure why. 2010 looks like his regression to me.

Are you taking his minor league career with that same grain of salt?

RedsManRick
11-22-2010, 12:30 PM
Are you taking his minor league career with that same grain of salt?

Absolutely.



Season Team PA BB% K% ISO BABIP AVG OBP SLG wOBA
2006 A 108 6.5% 10.2% .214 .400 .398 .435 .612 .473
2006 A+ 393 9.7% 11.6% .143 .286 .278 .355 .421 .358
2006 AA 16 6.3% 33.3% .067 .400 .267 .313 .333 .301
2007 AA 391 12.8% 16.7% .086 .287 .244 .358 .330 .330
2007 AAA 227 6.2% 15.6% .095 .247 .221 .278 .317 .274
2008 AAA 365 7.1% 22.3% .135 .302 .252 .324 .387 .319
2008 Reds 89 7.9% 22.5% .063 .230 .188 .270 .250 .244
2009 Reds 292 8.9% 15.6% .094 .247 .211 .296 .305 .275
2010 Reds 228 9.6% 15.0% .125 .283 .260 .338 .385 .315

It's pretty straight forward. His poor offensive seasons have been the result of a poor BABIP. Now, I'm completely willing to engage in the conversation about the degree to which those low BABIPs are a function of bad luck or his his talent, but the relationship is clear.

If you think he'll put up a .280ish BABIP in 2011, the reasonable expectation is an OPS around .700.

edabbs44
11-22-2010, 12:32 PM
Absolutely.



Season Team PA BB% K% ISO BABIP AVG OBP SLG wOBA
2006 A 108 6.5% 10.2% .214 .400 .398 .435 .612 .473
2006 A+ 393 9.7% 11.6% .143 .286 .278 .355 .421 .358
2006 AA 16 6.3% 33.3% .067 .400 .267 .313 .333 .301
2007 AA 391 12.8% 16.7% .086 .287 .244 .358 .330 .330
2007 AAA 227 6.2% 15.6% .095 .247 .221 .278 .317 .274
2008 AAA 365 7.1% 22.3% .135 .302 .252 .324 .387 .319
2008 Reds 89 7.9% 22.5% .063 .230 .188 .270 .250 .244
2009 Reds 292 8.9% 15.6% .094 .247 .211 .296 .305 .275
2010 Reds 228 9.6% 15.0% .125 .283 .260 .338 .385 .315

It's pretty straight forward. His poor offensive seasons have been the result of a poor BABIP. Now, I'm completely willing to engage in the conversation about the degree to which those low BABIPs are a function of bad luck or his his talent, but the relationship is clear.

If you think he'll put up a .280ish BABIP in 2011, the reasonable expectation is an OPS around .700.

Right. Either his poor offensive seasons were a result of "bad luck", or his better offensive season were a result of "good luck".

camisadelgolf
11-22-2010, 12:34 PM
I'm not worried about career OBP. I'm worried about 2011 OBP. Career is only relevant insofar as it helps us predict 2011. Neither Scutaro nor Bartlett are likely to repeat those career figures in 2011. Better than Phillips? Sure. Better than Stubbs? Maybe.
Why wouldn't Scutaro repeat the numbers he has put up for his entire career?

RedsManRick
11-22-2010, 12:39 PM
Right. Either his poor offensive seasons were a result of "bad luck", or his better offensive season were a result of "good luck".

Agreed. His peripheral stats are quite consistent, so it basically comes down to those singles falling in or not.

I realize there are shades of gray here (it's not an either/or but rather a where on the spectrum question), given what we know about batted balls generally and the LD% he's put up, I think the smart money is on the former.

Even if his balls in play are generally weaker than average, I don't see a case for believing that his career major league BABIP of .258 to be our expectation for him in 2011.

RedsManRick
11-22-2010, 12:43 PM
Why wouldn't Scutaro repeat the numbers he has put up for his entire career?

That's he's a 35 year old SS and SS tend to decline quickly in their mid 30's is a good place to start.

But let's say he does perform at his career average. Let's say he hits .267/.336/.385, just how much more productive is that than Janish offensively? And furthermore, how much more so when defense is factored in?

For reference, he's a -3.5 UZR/150 SS compared to 10.6 for Janish. Obviously the defensive stats come with a much larger grain of salt than offense, but it should be part of the conversation.

Looking at offense, a .320 wOBA is equal to 5 runs below average over 600 PA. That's Scutaro's career average. Janish's career average wOBA, .285, equates to 23 runs below average, an 18 run difference. Last year, Janish put up a .315 woBA, 8 runs below average. (for reference, 10 points of wOBA over 600 PA is worth ~5 runs)

If we just look at their career averages, we have Scutaro as a 8 runs below average (-5 wOBA, -3 UZR) and Janish as 12 runs below average (-23 wOBA, 11 UZR). So, is a 4 run bump worth the increase in salary and/or the talent we'd have to give up?

And if we're projecting 2011 and adjusting from those career lines, how does the math change? I find it difficult to make the case that it makes sense trading for one of those guys considering the cost/benefit.

edabbs44
11-22-2010, 12:57 PM
But let's say he does perform at his career average. Let's say he hits .267/.336/.385, just how much more productive is that than Janish offensively?

Depends on your beliefs, but there is a possibility that it is materially more productive. Janish has a much bigger band of where his numbers could land, especially on the downside. .700 OPS is probably Scutaro's floor...Janish could easily land in the low .600s and I don't think it would be a shocker.

Scrap Irony
11-22-2010, 12:58 PM
Janish's floor is quite a bit lower than that 700 OPS some are assuming.

There's something to be said for raising the floor with an acquisition.

Dealing for Scutaro or Bartlett (or signing Hardy, for that matter) would be such a move.

After all, Red Sox GM Theo Epstein once said that it's not the stars you have on your team that put you in contention-- it's the steady, everyday players that play at or just above league average that aren't complete black holes of non-production.

Scutaro, Bartlett, and Hardy are devils you know-- they're likely to be league average or slightly better, positionally.

Janish is the wildcard that could be above average. Or, he could fall completely flat.

If you're Jocketty, you have to ask yourself:

1) If Janish tanks, what other option is there?
2) What is the likelihood of Janish tanking?
3) Even if Janish tanks, how does that hurt the team?
4) How much will it cost to upgrade from a question to a statement and beyond?

The answers, I suspect, as they almost always have in Jocketty's GM history are to lean toward the veteran "sure thing". However:
1) Cozart may be decent and could be ready by June. There is nothing behind Cozart remotely ready, though Valaika and Phillips may do in a pinch.
2) Janish, at this point, looks to be questionable. He's certainly not a sure thing and definitely could tank. The percentages are murky, though we may know better after the yearly prognostications come out. Anybody know?
3) If the team could weather the season Cabrera put up, can it withstand one just as poor from Janish? I don't know if they could, as 3B, bench, and C could all drop precipitously offensively, while CF, 1B, and 2B could drop a bit. In short, the offense needs a better SS this season to compete, especially at the level they're shooting for.
4) There are no SS options that look to be available better than Scutaro, Bartlett, and Hardy. We, as fans, dream of Hanley Ramirez, but, as of now, it's still a pipe dream at best. The cost of upgrading significantly looks to be exorbitant.

camisadelgolf
11-22-2010, 01:15 PM
That's he's a 35 year old SS and SS tend to decline quickly in their mid 30's is a good place to start.

But let's say he does perform at his career average. Let's say he hits .267/.336/.385, just how much more productive is that than Janish offensively? And furthermore, how much more so when defense is factored in?

For reference, he's a -3.5 UZR/150 SS compared to 10.6 for Janish. Obviously the defensive stats come with a much larger grain of salt than offense, but it should be part of the conversation.

Looking at offense, a .320 wOBA is equal to 5 runs below average over 600 PA. That's Scutaro's career average. Janish's career average wOBA, .285, equates to 23 runs below average, an 18 run difference. Last year, Janish put up a .315 woBA, 8 runs below average. (for reference, 10 points of wOBA over 600 PA is worth ~5 runs)

If we just look at their career averages, we have Scutaro as a 8 runs below average (-5 wOBA, -3 UZR) and Janish as 12 runs below average (-23 wOBA, 11 UZR). So, is a 4 run bump worth the increase in salary and/or the talent we'd have to give up?

And if we're projecting 2011 and adjusting from those career lines, how does the math change? I find it difficult to make the case that it makes sense trading for one of those guys considering the cost/benefit.
It all depends on the talent that goes to the other time. I wouldn't miss Carlos Fisher, Daniel Ray Herrera, Phil Valiquette, Jordan Smith, and many other bullpen arms that could be sent in a trade for a shortstop. For me, it's not about upgrading over Paul Janish--it's about getting depth. If Janish goes down, you're stuck with an unproven Cozart or total crap.

And as for Janish's numbers, it would be interesting to see what he can do over a full season. People frequently bring up that they don't trust Hanigan to produce as well when playing everyday, and I'd venture the same might be true for Janish, as well.

RedsManRick
11-22-2010, 01:25 PM
Depends on your beliefs, but there is a possibility that it is materially more productive. Janish has a much bigger band of where his numbers could land, especially on the downside. .700 OPS is probably Scutaro's floor...Janish could easily land in the low .600s and I don't think it would be a shocker.

I don't understand why .700 is Scutaro's floor. His career OPS's are :.690, .701, .747, .693, .697, .788, .721. He'll be 35 next year. From my perspective, the low 700's is a mid-point expectation for him and sub .700 is a very real possibility.

Sure, both guys have confidence intervals around the expected level of performance and Janish's may be a bit big bigger because he has less of a track record. That said, I think you are underselling Scutaro's downside it overlaps much more than you're giving it credit for.

Even then, I'm fully willing to concede the point that Scutaro's expected level of offensive performance is greater than Janish's for 2011. I just don't think that difference is big enough to justify his acquisition, considering the defensive difference and the cost to acquire him.

RedsManRick
11-22-2010, 01:27 PM
It all depends on the talent that goes to the other time. I wouldn't miss Carlos Fisher, Daniel Ray Herrera, Phil Valiquette, Jordan Smith, and many other bullpen arms that could be sent in a trade for a shortstop. For me, it's not about upgrading over Paul Janish--it's about getting depth. If Janish goes down, you're stuck with an unproven Cozart or total crap.


I agree with this. If we can get him for some spare parts and if the salary money wouldn't have been spent elsewhere, I've no problem bringing him in. The depth would be valuable as you point out and it would strengthen the bench regardless of who starts. I just don't think we should look at him as a solution to the "SS problem". It's a depth move.

RedsManRick
11-22-2010, 01:32 PM
Janish's floor is quite a bit lower than that 700 OPS some are assuming.

I hope you're not referring to me. Floor and baseline are two different things. Floor is the worst reasonable possible performance. Baseline is the average expected performance.

I've never argued that .700 is Janish's floor. I have argued that it's his baseline expectation, his mean. As with any player, the reasonable expectations fall within a standard deviation or two; a standard deviation being something on the order of 40 point of OPS.

I think Scutaro's baseline expectation is a bit higher than Janish's, but that their ranges of reasonable performances largely overlaps. And that's just looking at offense. Add in defense and I think you've got two more or less equal guys.

As I mentioned in the point above. I have no problem adding another good option for depth purposes. I just don't think we should expect that person to be materially better than Janish.

camisadelgolf
11-22-2010, 01:35 PM
I agree with this. If we can get him for some spare parts and if the salary money wouldn't have been spent elsewhere, I've no problem bringing him in. The depth would be valuable as you point out and it would strengthen the bench regardless of who starts. I just don't think we should look at him as a solution to the "SS problem". It's a depth move.
Unfortunately, I don't really see a 'solution' available. Stephen Drew and Jose Reyes would both be expensive in terms of talent and money. Juan Uribe would also cost a pretty penny, and he's already in his 30s. What I like about Scutaro is that it's a one-year contract, and it shouldn't take an enormous amount of talent to obtain him.

Scrap Irony
11-22-2010, 01:43 PM
What I'm saying, RMR, is that Janish's baseline is quite a bit lower than Scutaro's, Batlett's, and Hardy's 700 baseline, if things go poorly. His floor is lower, in other words.

You know the veteran baseline/ floor because they have a history. Janish is largely a cipher.

TheNext44
11-22-2010, 02:00 PM
The advantage that Janish has over Scutero is that even if tanks as a hitter, his defense will be above average. At shortstop, that's most important.

I have no interest in bringing in another Cabrera type whose only real advantage is experience. I want a solid defensive shortstop, and will deal with whatever offensive he provides.

RedsManRick
11-22-2010, 02:28 PM
What I'm saying, RMR, is that Janish's baseline is quite a bit lower than Scutaro's, Batlett's, and Hardy's 700 baseline, if things go poorly. His floor is lower, in other words.

You know the veteran baseline/ floor because they have a history. Janish is largely a cipher.

We're disagreeing on where Janish's baseline is. I don't think career average is the right baseline for any player. The baseline for a given year is an informed prediction for the following season which uses recent years' performance as a major input, weighted by recency, along with general knowledge about aging and variance in certain areas.

I understand that you have less confidence in Janish than Scutaro, that he's less likely to produce at or near the baseline figure, but that doesn't change the baseline itself.

Janish is not a cipher my book. We have a whole lot of information about his skills as he has been quite consistent in displaying them in both the minors and majors. One thing has been primarily responsible for the variation in his performance, batted ball average. We know it has a high degree of variance from year to year and Janish has only had about 1 season's worth of PA over the last 3 in the majors. We also know that batted ball average is strongly correlated with LD% and Janish's LD% have been solid, suggest a significantly higher BABIP than he's put up. The responsible thing to do is take what we know about Janish specifically and regress towards what we know about players generally (not completely mind you, just in proportion to what we know).

Janish is going to walk a certain amount, strikeout a certain amount and put the ball in play a certain amount with a certain degree of authority. There is variance around all of those expectations, but not nearly as much as you are suggesting.

Nor should we be treating veterans as absolute certainties. All players carry around a certain degree of uncertainty, 35 year old SS's more than most. And all of this continues to focus on the offensive difference. As I pointed out above, even if Scutaro out OPSs Janish by 60 points, it's still a break-even proposition more or less.

lollipopcurve
11-22-2010, 02:38 PM
All players carry around a certain degree of uncertainty, 35 year old SS's more than most.

A 35-year-old SS who had a rotator cuff problem in his throwing shoulder in 2010.

Health is a KEY consideration with Scutaro. I'm surprised people are ignoring his injury.

Mario-Rijo
11-22-2010, 07:16 PM
Bartlett and by quite a bit IMO. He is 30 so he is still in his prime, he is a good defender, the main reason for the great turnaround in '08 was their defense and he made up a ton of that difference from '07. Yes he is roughly similiar with the bat but we are looking for a leadoff hitter and Bartlett at least has some useable speed on the basepaths. I think the case for Bartlett over Scutaro begins and ends at age. Also we all know Hardy is no leadoff hitter, heck he is lucky to make contact at times. Yeah I'd be ok with Hardy but we do need a reasonably decent leadoff type and I think Bartlett is the best bet of those "available".

The downside to Janish being the starter is the "Hanigan effect". People often suggest Hanny doesn't have a starters endurance but that is what I seen out of Janish last year. He was solid with plenty of rest but when he had to play a awhile he started to show signs of fatigue. There is also the depth issue we are facing so it seems we need to pick up someone. Not saying it's a given Paully can't do it but there is reason to doubt and in that case I say add another guy.

Alonso, Francisco or Dorn & Fisher to TB

Bartlett & Joyce to Cincy.

Bartlett SS
Stubbs CF
Votto 1B
Bruce RF
Rolen 3B
BP 2B
Joyce/Heisey LF
Hernandez/Hanigan C

mth123
11-22-2010, 07:22 PM
Edabbs is right in my case that the Grass is greener has something to do with it. The Reds need a lead-off bat and a mid-order bat. Part of the reason for wanting one of these guys to lead-off is that it leaves LF for some power to hit in the middle of the order. The other reason is a lack of faith in Janish to put up decent numbers on a full-time basis. Last season he was used fairly sparingly and it kept him strong. I think a worn down Janish would end the season in the neighborhood of .220/.290/.290. If there wasn't so much downside everywhere else I might be content to let him gobble up everything defensively and live with it, but Rolen, Hernandez, Hanigan, Heisey, Cairo, Nix if he's back and even Votto are likely to have a drop in production.

I think a lot of Janish poor BABIP in his down years has been inability to it the ball with much authority. I've heard the stories of his increased strength and maybe that will help, but IMO, he'll hit better if he's isn't an every day guy. The Reds need some one to spell Rolen and Phillips as well. Another IF who might fill one of the offensive roles seems a good idea. I had forgotten about Scutaro's injury and I'm not so high on Bartlett, so I might rethink my position concerning the acquisitions, but if Scutaro is healthy, he's a clear upgrade IMO even if he ends up going back to his-utility days and playing 3B twice a week, SS 3 times a week with a start at 2B a couple times per month.

Scrap Irony
11-22-2010, 08:38 PM
We're disagreeing on where Janish's baseline is.

You're right. We disagree. I think Janish as a starter is a completely different animal than the one we saw in some limited time last season. You saw him struggle offensively the more he played last year, especially late.

If Janish gives the team more than a 650 OPS as a full-time starter, I'd be pleasantly suprised.