Taking a Flyer on Jason Botts?

[JTrea81]

I really don't think I'm "missing" these points, BTerp. But I'd be glad to respond.

I would not advocate as part of the long-term plan that we seek to acquire players who are highly limited on EITHER offense or defense. If our objective in acquiring Botts is that we'll get the mirror image of Luis Hernandez, that's not a real strong argument on his behalf.

I agree with the bolded portion of your argument in # 2. I assume that AM is interested in moving Huff and would pull the trigger if he gets an offer that he likes. His recent track record supports the hypothesis that he moves slowly, but gets excellent value. I'm comfortable with that approach. The key thing for me, though, is that the effort to trade Huff should proceed at whatever pace makes sense on its own terms, and not be artificially accelerated simply to accommodate such trivial moves as adding a Jason Botts. I am hoping that Huff can be traded soon, by this year's trading deadline at the latest -- not because I have an unbearable craving for Jason Botts, but rather because the sooner you move Huff, the more dollars you can potentially recover from his excessive contract, which can then be rolled over to more useful purposes in the rebuild. Ultimately, taking such an approach will give us the best set of options to find and acquire and develop better players. Finally, bear in mind that if we DO succeed in moving Huff at the deadline, that may be a perfect time to recall Scott Moore, who will hopefully get his game recharged by that point. Adding a Jason Botts may foreclose that option.

Adding Botts allows you to keep Moore in the minors to play everyday in the field and it would allow you to push Millar to the bench which makes the bench better. Botts would become the full time DH and you'd play Huff at 1st and 3rd spelling Mora. And Millar can play 1st when Huff plays 3rd and can PH and be a defensive replacement in the same role that Payton is in now. When you trade Huff then you bring up Moore to take his role at the corners.

[JTrea81]

No he wouldn't. Botts was hitting a robust .158 at the time of getting cut- by THE TEXAS RANGERS.

But don't let facts get in the way of your Millar-bashing.

In 38 ABs. He also has a .699 OPS and is only 27 while Millar is 36 and has an OPS of .671 in 99 ABs. If you think Millar has more potential to help this team in the future than Botts does you are kidding yourself. We could cut Millar tomorrow and still be the same team.

And getting cut by the Rangers doesn't mean anything, Daniels is an idiot and his past trades should show you that.

Botts was also playing the OF, maybe concentrating on hitting could allow him to focus at the plate better. Either way this team in the state it is now can absolutely take a chance on Botts.

[hoosiers]

It amazes me that people complain about players like this.

Many of you act as if we think these are players we should build around or that they are guys that we want to play everyday.

You are easily amazed, then.

The number of scrap-heap hitters that CONSISTENTLY emerge to be strong hitters is pretty limited. Guys like these are difficult to find and one looks pretty bad when they don't work out.

I would go out on a limb here and say that the 1B types we signed are just as cost effective as the scrap heaps. The higher investment is generally offset by the better production.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Good post. My opinion of Botts is that he has two huge holes in his swing that can be easily exploited once major league scouting/film identifies them. He is a huge muscle bound guy, much like Gabe Kapler. He crushed minor league pitching much like Gabe Kapler. He hasn't had a tremendous amount of opportunity but it should scare people that a guy with this type of game has had trouble succeeding in Texas in four different seasons. Kapler had his three biggest years from 24-26. Two of those years were in Texas. Botts is now 27. Muscle bound guys don't typically decrease their reaction time or increase their bat speed as they age. Maybe he'll be able to shorten his swing but I doubt it. Even accepting that Botts has a career which mimics Kapler, he will end up a 750ish OPS hitter who can only be platooned against certain pitchers.

If his defense is anything less than average (and it appears to be very bad), a 750ish OPS from a platoon, 1B/DH type isn't much to get excited about. There is a reason he was DFA'ed by Texas. This isn't a Carlos Pena situation IMO.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=3979

It truly amuses me that one page into the thread JTrea has already DEFINITELY said that Botts would easily outhit Millar. LOL

But do we know any of this for sure?

[JTrea81]

I don't think this is accurate. Your point is that Botts is cheaper than Millar and MAY put up the same numbers. That is reasonable or at least defensible, but we already have Millar. Are you actually advocating CUTTING Millar, who we would have to pay anyway, just to give Botts a shot? If not, I don't see why we would be interested. That would seem to be Pickles point and it is valid IMO. If we have Millar and Huff, why would we be interested in this guy. He is a minor and redundant piece at this moment.

Now, if you can trade Millar for some value, that is a different story. That is far from a likely scenario at this point.

You put Millar on the bench let Huff rotate between 1B and 3B spelling Mora and Millar can PH and be a defensive replacement and play 1B the days Huff is at 3B. Botts becomes your full time DH.

[JTrea81]

Why in the world would you advocate giving a starting job to Botts and benching Millar? Other than your fanatical dislike of him, what possible reason could you have?

How about the fact he's hitting .222 with a .671 OPS and is our worst batter with RISP with a .194 AVG and .600 OPS? He's not a starter anymore and would be more valuable on the bench as a PHer or a defensive replacement.

Why in the world do you want to keep Millar as a starter when he's showing he can no longer hit? His whole career has been based on being patient at the plate and he's no longer doing that...

[BaltimoreTerp]

No, I don't. Are you willing to bench guys to find out if he can do any better?

Let's see: benching a 36-year-old declining player, in the last year of his contract with as much a stake in the future of this team on the field as me, for a 27-year-old player with (at least some) potential, who costs nothing and can be discarded if he doesn't work, in a season where we are going nowhere.

Yeah, I might need to hire some extra people to help me think about this one.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Why in the world would you advocate giving a starting job to Botts and benching Millar? Other than your fanatical dislike of him, what possible reason could you have?

He's old, he won't be here next year, and he isn't hitting now?

[BaltimoreTerp]

You are easily amazed, then.

The number of scrap-heap hitters that CONSISTENTLY emerge to be strong hitters is pretty limited. Guys like these are difficult to find and one looks pretty bad when they don't work out.

I would go out on a limb here and say that the 1B types we signed are just as cost effective as the scrap heaps. The higher investment is generally offset by the better production.

Even if the younger guys actually have a chance of being better?

[JTrea81]

He's old, he won't be here next year, and he isn't hitting now?

Ding, ding we have a winner. Look Millar may be good for the clubhouse, but he can still be a 3.8 million dollar cheerleader on the sidelines...

[BaltimoreTerp]

BTW, I've already written that I have no problem picking him up and letting him play against left hand pitching to see if we get lucky. However, he has to earn the job by performing better than his competition. He has not done that at this point. Handing him a starting job would just completely undermine everything Trembley is trying to instill in this team. I don't want it to happen.

I'd also feel differently if we were able to trade Millar or Huff, but we haven't done that at this point. Teams don't make trades at this point. They want 50-60 games at least to see what they've got. It will be a bit before the trades start.

Terp, honestly, I'm shocked that you do.

Why are you shocked that I want this team to make the best possible moves to become a long-term winner?

Botts' chances of being a part of that might be tiny, but that is exponentially more then Millar's chances. And, if Botts fails, as is likely, you find the next guy.

[JTrea81]

Check out these splits on Botts for 2005-2007.

He is striking out in over 35% of his at bats.

He is a switch hitter and really isn't doing well from either side, but the right side is a bit better.

He does perform better in Texas, but it is bad home and away

Check out his numbers against power pitchers - a 458 OPS with 29 K in 72 ABs - the guy can't get around on a good fastball

His OPS is almost 80 pts lower as a DH vs OF - 628

Count 2-2 and 3-2, his OPS is 521 and 497

These are really ugly stats. There are lots of warning signs here.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=6355&type=batting3

You are looking at small sample sizes, check out and see what he's done in AAA.

http://www.minorleaguesplits.com/pl/434/434664OklPCLb06.html

http://www.minorleaguesplits.com/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?pl=434664&tm=OklPCL&bp=b

Look at the park adjusted factor and the MLE. An .840 OPS is nothing to sneeze at...

[JTrea81]

OK, that is clear enough. I'm just surprised that you don't believe that bringing in Botts and displacing Millar would be a risk to what Trembley and MacPhail are trying to do here. BTW, in the eyes of the clubhouse, that scenario is much different than trading Millar and Botts becoming the starter by default. IMO, it is tough to breed team, subjugating individual performance, etc... if you bench a guy who is a much better historical player AND one of the main cogs in the team concept to try out some guy with a poor track record who is 27 years old. The team concept gets even harder to sell if the "excuse" for benching the team guy with the record is that he doesn't have good individual stats in 96 ABs this year (after good results in 4000 career ABs).

You can sell trading Bedard for AJ plus four other players to the clubhouse. You can sell trading Tejada. You might even be able to sell trading Roberts for the right return. You wouldn't be able to sell benching Millar for Botts. Bott's track record and upside juxtaposed against Millar's contribution both between the lines and in the clubhouse just simply don't justify the move IMO.

Something is clearly going right on this team at the moment. I don't want to risk messing with that for what I consider a pipe dream. You do. OK. We'll just agree to disagree.

Millar isn't hitting so he's benched to give somebody else an opportunity until he can prove he belongs in a starting role. If you don't hit you don't play. He's a major leaguer so he should get that. He hasn't proven he should be starting this year. It doesn't matter what he's done in 4000 AB previous. He was younger then and his skill set wasn't declining. Just look at how he performed the second half of the season in 2007. That's a warning sign. Frankly if you don't bench Millar you are sending a message to guys that his weak hitting is acceptable. You don't want veterans to think that they don't have to work to produce to have a roster spot. And right now that is the message that is being sent as Trembley keeps running Millar out there everyday in the #4 hole despite his lack of production. Eventually Markakis is going to get sick of being pitched around and that could cause problems too.

If you think the team is going to collapse if Millar is benched, then obviously you think he'll be a clubhouse cancer if he doesn't get playing time. He's not helping the lineup one bit right now other than getting the occasional single and being a good defensive first baseman. He can still do these things in a bench role and get plenty of time coming in as a defensive replacement, PHer and filling in for Huff when he spells Mora at 3B. Right now Millar on the bench and Botts at DH makes this team better.

[JTrea81]

Do you understand how bad your argument is? You keep saying Millar isn't hitting, but he is hitting JUST as well as Jason Botts. The only difference is that Botts track record says this is probably real and Millar's track record says it is probably not real. I can't say it any more clearly. The team would laugh if you tried to sell them that Jason Botts was going to supplant Kevin Millar because Millar hadn't hit and you have to "earn your spot". It is ludicrous on its face. Botts has earned NOTHING.

I can't even believe you're seriously trying to advocate the argument that this starting Botts and benching Millar is justified on the merits. You'd be much better off to just point at their ages and say Millar will be gone when we can contend. It is still a weak argument because Botts is 27, but it at least doesn't make me laugh out loud.

Do you really think the team would revolt against Trembley if he benched Millar (I'll use the age and future argument) to play Botts to see if he could be our future DH? You really think they'd slack off on their play just because Millar was on the bench and not on the field?

[RShack]

Botts' chances of being a part of that might be tiny, but that is exponentially more then Millar's chances. And, if Botts fails, as is likely, you find the next guy.

You're talking as if these are just parts you plug into a machine, and then throw them out a get another part from the used parts heap. That's fantasy baseball, not real baseball. DT has an Actual Team to worry about. You don't go benching main guys after a month and start playing musical chairs with garbage from other teams, going through rejects until somebody doesn't do terrible. That doesn't build a winning attitude. That's the exact opposite of what rebuilding a winning atmosphere means. If these guys are playing with their heads high in August, a lot of it will be due to stuff you don't see in stats. Running through scrubs who nobody else wants isn't gonna help anything, and it'd hurt the important things that stats can't see. AM should only get guys who he actually wants to have here.