Fangraphs Analysis on Holliday Demotion

[interloper]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Mateo had 45 games in center field, 38 of them starts, over his 12 seasons of professional baseball before the O's put him out there.

 

He's out there as a reserve and is nowhere near the player Holliday is. They just want to make sure they get it right with him. I realize I'm in the minority here with this line of thought, but this article kind of helps prove my point. 

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, interloper said:

He's out there as a reserve and is nowhere near the player Holliday is. They just want to make sure they get it right with him. I realize I'm in the minority here with this line of thought, but this article kind of helps prove my point. 

I give you an example of the Elias regime putting a guy out there in a middle of the diamond position despite limited playing time there and you just dismiss it?

OK, no convincing you I guess.

Just like the defense matter crowd doesn't seem how that conflicts with O'Hearn and Stevie Wilkerson getting outfield reps.

If it matters it should matter to everyone, not just guys that they need to worry about their service time.

[Jim'sKid26]

There are a number of inconvenient truths for the argument that ME is playing the service time game.

1) Holliday does not have a large amount of time playing 2B which appears to be his likely position on the O's.

2) Holliday was not particularly stellar defensively at 2B during spring training.

3) The O's braintrust has gone on record stating that they value defense quite highly.

4) Holliday barely had a cup of coffee in AAA in 2023. And ME has been consistently careful about "rushing" prospects through AAA.

5) Holliday is 20 years old. Who on this board, with the possible exception of @Tony-OH, is a professional player development expert?

6) Would any of us really be upset if he stayed down in AAA long enough to maintain his rookie status in 2025?

[SteveA]

34 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Mateo had 45 games in center field, 38 of them starts, over his 12 seasons of professional baseball before the O's put him out there.

 

There are several key differences between the Mateo situation and the Holliday situation:

• They put Mateo out there as a backup/occasional starter, so far one time in 6 games  (and that is despite the fact that we have faced a LHP in a very high 50% of our games so far, a % that is destined to go down);    if Holliday comes up he would be playing 2B nearly every day.
• 45 games / 35 starts is still a lot more than Holliday has at 2nd, albeit spread out over a long time,
• Holliday is a 20 year old, still developing, young player.   The promotion to the big leagues will be a huge adjustment for him as it is for any player.   Perhaps they wanted him to achieve a certain comfort level at 2B first so that he wouldn't be undergoing TWO huge adjustments at the same time.   Mateo is, at this point, as "developed" as he is going to get.   He'll either be able to make the transition to CF or he won't.
• The reasoning and importance of the two moves (Mateo playing some CF / Holliday playing 2B) is TOTALLY different.   In the case of Mateo, he is an low value asset with diminishing value but he has a couple things that could be of use to the team as it is constructed (speed, RH bat).   Trying him in CF occasionally vs a LHP is a way to try to squeeze a little more value out of that asset while we have him.   If it fails, no biggie, he'll just be gone a little sooner rather than later.   Meanwhile, the move to Jackson at 2B is a critical move for the franchise for the next 5+ years, given that we have a great young player who may well be locked in as the starting shortstop.   It's absolutely important that his move go well.

Not necessarily saying I think that is Elias' reasoning, but I do think that it is an invalid argument to say (or imply) that playing Mateo for a game in CF in any way proves that the transition to 2nd base is not a factor in Holliday's not being up here yet.

Edited April 4 by SteveA

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, Jim'sKid26 said:

There are a number of inconvenient truths for the argument that ME is playing the service time game.

1) Holliday does not have a large amount of time playing 2B which appears to be his likely position on the O's.

2) Holliday was not particularly stellar defensively at 2B during spring training.

3) The O's braintrust has gone on record stating that they value defense quite highly.

4) Holliday barely had a cup of coffee in AAA in 2023. And ME has been consistently careful about "rushing" prospects through AAA.

5) Holliday is 20 years old. Who on this board, with the possible exception of @Tony-OH, is a professional player development expert?

6) Would any of us really be upset if he stayed down in AAA long enough to maintain his rookie status in 2025?

1. So?  He has more than Manny did when he moved to Third.  He has a higher percentage of games there than Mateo has in CF.
2. I don't recall any issues.  He did fumble one in Norfolk.
3. The O's braintrust have put Mateo and O'Hearn in the outfield so far this season.  Is that valuing defense quite highly?
4. Sure
5. We can both name lots of highly regarded prospects that were in the majors as teenagers, and the folks promoting them were professional player development experts.
6. Yea I would, particularly if the O's don't win the AL East.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, SteveA said:

There are several key differences between the Mateo situation and the Holliday situation:

• They put Mateo out there as a backup, so far one time in 6 games  (and that is despite the fact that we have faced a LHP in a very high 50% of our games so far, a % that is destined to go down);    if Holliday comes up he would be playing 2B nearly every day.
• 45 games / 35 starts is still a lot more than Holliday has at 2nd, albeit spread out over a long time,
• Holliday is a 20 year old, still developing, young player.   The promotion to the big leagues will be a huge adjustment for him as it is for any player.   Perhaps they wanted him to achieve a certain comfort level at 2B first so that he wouldn't be undergoing TWO huge adjustments at the same time.   Mateo is, at this point, as "developed" as he is going to get.   He'll either be able to make the transition to CF or he won't.
• The reasoning and importance of the two moves (Mateo playing some CF / Holliday playing 2B) is TOTALLY different.   In the case of Mateo, he is an low value asset with diminishing value but he has a couple things that could be of use to the team as it is constructed (speed, RH bat).   Trying him in CF occasionally vs a LHP is a way to try to squeeze a little more value out of that asset while we have him.   If it fails, no biggie, he'll just be gone a little sooner rather than later.   Meanwhile, the move to Jackson at 2B is a critical move for the franchise for the next 5+ years, given that we have a great young player who may well be locked in as the starting shortstop.   It's absolutely important that his move go well.

Not necessarily saying I think that is Elias' reasoning, but I do think that it is an invalid argument to say (or imply) that playing Mateo for a game in CF in any way proves that the transition to 2nd base is not a factor in Holliday's not being up here yet.

In what world is 45/35 over more than a decade "a lot more" then 25 (29 now) over two calendar years?

Once again Manny was younger, less highly regarded and had less experience learning a new position.  "You can't mess up the good ones".

It's cover to game his clock.  Elias is willing to sacrifice defense, he's willing to let guys play out of position.  But when it comes along with gaming service time, all the I have to be dotted and the T have to be crossed.

 

[Jim'sKid26]

13 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

1. So?  He has more than Manny did when he moved to Third.  He has a higher percentage of games there than Mateo has in CF.
2. I don't recall any issues.  He did fumble one in Norfolk.
3. The O's braintrust have put Mateo and O'Hearn in the outfield so far this season.  Is that valuing defense quite highly?
4. Sure
5. We can both name lots of highly regarded prospects that were in the majors as teenagers, and the folks promoting them were professional player development experts.
6. Yea I would, particularly if the O's don't win the AL East.

I figured you'd respond.

1. Manny's is a poor comparison. Different management group. Completely different situation.

2. Just because you didn't see any lapses doesn't mean their weren't any (see #5, you are not a professional and you do not have access to detailed info the O's player development folks have)

3. Mateo and O'hearn are not highly regarded prospects who defensive prowess in the coming years is likely to effect the franchise.

4. Thanks for the acknowledgement.

5. Not sure what your point is here. Every prospect is different and every team has different criteria and assessment methods. Were the O's wrong to keep Gunnar down in 2022?

6. Your choice. If he won the award in 2025 playing 2B I would say that validates the argument to keep him down.

Edited April 4 by Jim'sKid26

[RZNJ]

The easiest answer is the one Elias gave.  He and Hyde actually believe that Holliday needs to get more experience at 2B and hitting against LHP.  No one wants to take that at face value.  Even I didn’t but it might be the truth.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Jim'sKid26 said:

I figured you'd respond.

1. Manny's is a poor comparison. Different management group. Completely different situation.

2. Just because you didn't see any lapses doesn't mean their weren't any (see #5, you are not a professional and you do not have access to detailed info the O's player development folks have)

3. Mateo and O'hearn are not highly regarded prospects who defensive prowess in the coming years is likely to effect the franchise.

4. Thanks for the acknowledgement.

5. Not sure what your point is here. Every prospect is different and every team has different criteria and assessment methods. Were the O's wrong to keep Gunnar down in 2022?

6. Your choice. If he won the award in 2025 playing 2B I would say that valid the argument to keep him down.

1.  How is it a poor comparison?  Very young infielder, highly regarded, changing position.  Moving onto a contending ballclub.

Seems to me the only material difference is the GM.

3. Who cares?  How is that relevant?  The process should be the same right?

5.  Young is an excuse.  Guys in his situation have absolutely been promoted to the majors at an even younger age and ended up in the HoF.  What about him or his game screams "He's too young" to you?

6.  Thanks for the acknowledgment.  

[Bemorewins]

3 hours ago, forphase1 said:

Of course not.  Because by the numbers and by any reasonable logic, the only REAL reason why they did it was for service time issues, and nothing really to do with talent or ability.  Again, they of course are saying its to face more good LH pitching (which really isn't in the AAA level) or to work on his defense, but it's just GM speak.  Just as it was GM speak when Elias was blowing smoke up the OH collective rears when talking about how good his chances were to make the team.  I really like Elias and appreciate all he has done.  But he's made some blunders too and right now has us in a position where we have a wealth of riches, but seems unable or unwilling to do anything to clear the logjam.  Going to be an interesting couple next years.  

If it takes 2 additional years to sort this out, Adley will be in what year 5 by then? 

[interloper]

34 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I give you an example of the Elias regime putting a guy out there in a middle of the diamond position despite limited playing time there and you just dismiss it?

OK, no convincing you I guess.

Just like the defense matter crowd doesn't seem how that conflicts with O'Hearn and Stevie Wilkerson getting outfield reps.

If it matters it should matter to everyone, not just guys that they need to worry about their service time.

I'm not trying to dismiss it, but expecting Elias to treat Mateo and Holliday the same is kind of silly. One is expected to play a position very rarely, the other is expected to be a perennial MVP candidate who plays every single day.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

The easiest answer is the one Elias gave.  He and Hyde actually believe that Holliday needs to get more experience at 2B and hitting against LHP.  No one wants to take that at face value.  Even I didn’t but it might be the truth.

Serious question.

How many quality LH pitchers is he likely to face in AAA?

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Bemorewins said:

If it takes 2 additional years to sort this out, Adley will be in what year 5 by then? 

Dodger blue?

[Bemorewins]

27 minutes ago, Jim'sKid26 said:

There are a number of inconvenient truths for the argument that ME is playing the service time game.

1) Holliday does not have a large amount of time playing 2B which appears to be his likely position on the O's.

2) Holliday was not particularly stellar defensively at 2B during spring training.

3) The O's braintrust has gone on record stating that they value defense quite highly.

4) Holliday barely had a cup of coffee in AAA in 2023. And ME has been consistently careful about "rushing" prospects through AAA.

5) Holliday is 20 years old. Who on this board, with the possible exception of @Tony-OH, is a professional player development expert?

6) Would any of us really be upset if he stayed down in AAA long enough to maintain his rookie status in 2025?

Would you agree that how they handled Holliday last season was unlike any prospect that we have had including (Adley, Grayson, or Gunnar)?

Oh and to answer #6 yes I would. That would be ridiculous to keep him in AAA that long especially for players like Urias and Kemp to not perform offensively. I don't think that we are a good enough offensive team to win the AL East with Urias/Kemp getting 450- 500 ABs this year. Our rotation and bullpen as it stands now are not good enough to support winning at a high clip (enough wins to take the AL East) with a non-elite offensive team.

[Bemorewins]

8 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Dodger blue?

I hope that's not the plan. I'm not sure it would be the Dodgers as they just gave their catcher what like a 10 year contract?