Sun: A big relief for Salazar

[Dr. FLK]

Maybe it is hard but it is the truth. Gee. what do you want? Keep him around even if he doesn't deserve to stay in Baltimore? They are what they are. Oscar and Felix are bench players. Felix is younger and can paly the OF good enough to be the fourth OF. Oscar plays the IF good enough to be a backup. But neither hits good. These two are not kiddies. Thye know their time in MLB is limited. And they know they can only do so much. Thye are valuable to the O's as bench players but are easy to replace.

Have you looked at Salazar's stats? Like even for a second?

[Anonymous]

I feel like Salazar is being simultaneously underrated and overrated in this thread. First, he has done way more with his opportunity than guys like Terrero, Knott and House. He has hit well and come through in key situations for two years whenever given the chance, and has crushed AAA and Venezuelan League pitching whenever he hasn't been in the majors. At the same time, recognize that his fielding is subpar and he probably wouldn't have the power to be a full time DH. Really, he's the modern day Benny Ayala, good for a spot start here and there and a lot of pinch hitting.

Easily replaceable? I don't think so. These guys aren't that easy to find. There are always a few around but you might burn through 5 guys in 3 years trying to find one. So I wouldn't want to give him up so easily.

The more I think of it, the more I think Andino is the one who is easily replaceable. But I doubt the O's will see it that way.

Given his OPS during the 2008 and 2009 seasons at the AAA and major league levels, and considering that these numbers were generated against both RH and LH pitching -- but more so against his "weaker" RH side -- how many guys project to have a higher OPS in 2010 as a full-time DH than Oscar, if he is handed that job for next year?

(Not to hijack this point too much -- but I also happen to disagree, although to a slightly milder degree, over Andino's easy replaceability. I'd be disappointed to see either Oscar or Andino cut loose. But I can leave that story for another day.)

[Fairfax Bird]

I feel like Salazar is being simultaneously underrated and overrated in this thread. First, he has done way more with his opportunity than guys like Terrero, Knott and House. He has hit well and come through in key situations for two years whenever given the chance, and has crushed AAA and Venezuelan League pitching whenever he hasn't been in the majors. At the same time, recognize that his fielding is subpar and he probably wouldn't have the power to be a full time DH. Really, he's the modern day Benny Ayala, good for a spot start here and there and a lot of pinch hitting.

Easily replaceable? I don't think so. These guys aren't that easy to find. There are always a few around but you might burn through 5 guys in 3 years trying to find one. So I wouldn't want to give him up so easily.

The more I think of it, the more I think Andino is the one who is easily replaceable. But I doubt the O's will see it that way.

There he is again, making the most intelligent post in a thread. Agree completely.

[DrungoHazewood]

Other than Drungo-style intellectual laziness on this issue...

You know, I was going to stay out of this thread because others had made most of the same points I was going to. But this post is simply an insult, and a violation of board rules. In my opinion, you've characterized my position as "intellectual laziness" simply because it disagrees with yours.

I think Oscar Salazar is unlikely to be a long-term asset to the Orioles because of facts:

1) It is exceptionally rare for someone to peak in their 30s. It happens, but it's rare. There are very, very few examples of modern-day position players who couldn't hit enough to even make the majors in their 20s who'd then improve enough in their 30s to be an asset as a MLB DH, the position that requires the most offensive punch.

2) Even if he is peaking right now, he's overwhelmingly likely to decline through his early- and mid-30s. Chances get worse with each successive year that he'll hit enough to be an asset. You've stated that he's a 5-year solution at DH, which implies that he'll be putting up .800+ OPSes in 2014. I wouldn't project an .800+ OPS for David Ortiz at 36.

3) Almost all of the scouting reports referenced here and elsewhere refer to Salazar as a poor defender. I'd asked long ago about him playing the middle infield in winter ball, and was told that he simply doesn't have the defensive chops to play there in the majors. In the absence of a real counter-opinion, I have to give some weight to those reports. In limited samples in the majors he has extrememly poor UZRs at multiple positions, his +/- ratings are below-average, and his PECOTA defensive projection based mainly on his MiLB numbers is below average at first base.

4) Putting up a .900 or even a 1.000 OPS in AA or AAA in your 30s is not evidence that you can have the .850+ OPS that is required to be an asset as a major league DH. In fact, the weighted mean sum of the most similar players to Salazar (as per his preseason PECOTA projections) put up a major league equivalent performance of a low-.700s OPS the next season. If you don't like PECOTA, all of the other projetion systems have him with a league average-ish bat, with a ~.340 wOBA. Even the updated Zips projection, which takes into account his 2009 MLB performance, has him ending up with a .362 wOBA, which is essentially league-average the rest of the way when you take into account his .419 so far.

5) Repeating a minor league level has a demonstrable effect on hitting performance. Up to a point, the more times you go to AAA, the better you perform, without it having a lasting impact on your future major league success. I can probably dig around the 'net for the studies if it's too intellectually lazy for me to not cite the sources.

6) A player with little defensive value and a league-average bat is a replacement player.

Your opinion seems to be solely based on a SWAG of what you think a 31-year-old who rakes in his 7th year in AAA should hit in the majors. Not any kind of systematic analysis. My opinion of Salazar is based on data. Yours, apparently, on guesses. If that's incorrect, I'd be happy to look over your Major League Equivalency system that shows Salazar as a better hitter than the systems I'm familiar with.

I used to argue until I was blue in the face about the utility of Knott and House and Mendez and Cust and others. I still believe that, as I believe in the usefulness of Oscar Salazar. But as platoon players or part-timers, or backup outfielders, or replacements for Jay Payton-level ineptness. You're on a crusade to turn your favorite Ken Phelps All Star into a real All Star. You really seem to think Salazar is going to put up a .850, .900, .950 OPS as a regular, for years to come, with defense better than a marginal center fielder like Luis Terrero. To me, that's kind of inexplicable.

[Fairfax Bird]

Other than Drungo-style intellectual laziness on this issue, ... (I'm not intending to be rude. But how do I respond????)

You really owe Drungo an apology. He is among the best posters here, no reason to be rude and insult him.

[Anonymous]

You know, I was going to stay out of this thread because others had made most of the same points I was going to. But this post is simply an insult, and a violation of board rules. In my opinion, you've characterized my position as "intellectual laziness" simply because it disagrees with yours.

I think Oscar Salazar is unlikely to be a long-term asset to the Orioles because of facts:

1) It is exceptionally rare for someone to peak in their 30s. It happens, but it's rare. There are very, very few examples of modern-day position players who couldn't hit enough to even make the majors in their 20s who'd then improve enough in their 30s to be an asset as a MLB DH, the position that requires the most offensive punch.

2) Even if he is peaking right now, he's overwhelmingly likely to decline through his early- and mid-30s. Chances get worse with each successive year that he'll hit enough to be an asset. You've stated that he's a 5-year solution at DH, which implies that he'll be putting up .800+ OPSes in 2014. I wouldn't project an .800+ OPS for David Ortiz at 36.

3) Almost all of the scouting reports referenced here and elsewhere refer to Salazar as a poor defender. I'd asked long ago about him playing the middle infield in winter ball, and was told that he simply doesn't have the defensive chops to play there in the majors. In the absence of a real counter-opinion, I have to give some weight to those reports. In limited samples in the majors he has extrememly poor UZRs at multiple positions, his +/- ratings are below-average, and his PECOTA defensive projection based mainly on his MiLB numbers is below average at first base.

4) Putting up a .900 or even a 1.000 OPS in AA or AAA in your 30s is not evidence that you can have the .850+ OPS that is required to be an asset as a major league DH. In fact, the weighted mean sum of the most similar players to Salazar (as per his preseason PECOTA projections) put up a major league equivalent performance of a low-.700s OPS the next season. If you don't like PECOTA, all of the other projetion systems have him with a league average-ish bat, with a ~.340 wOBA. Even the updated Zips projection, which takes into account his 2009 MLB performance, has him ending up with a .362 wOBA, which is essentially league-average the rest of the way when you take into account his .419 so far.

5) Repeating a minor league level has a demonstrable effect on hitting performance. Up to a point, the more times you go to AAA, the better you perform, without it having a lasting impact on your future major league success. I can probably dig around the 'net for the studies if it's too intellectually lazy for me to not cite the sources.

6) A player with little defensive value and a league-average bat is a replacement player.

Your opinion seems to be solely based on a SWAG of what you think a 31-year-old who rakes in his 7th year in AAA should hit in the majors. Not any kind of systematic analysis. My opinion of Salazar is based on data. Yours, apparently, on guesses. If that's incorrect, I'd be happy to look over your Major League Equivalency system that shows Salazar as a better hitter than the systems I'm familiar with.

I used to argue until I was blue in the face about the utility of Knott and House and Mendez and Cust and others. I still believe that, as I believe in the usefulness of Oscar Salazar. But as platoon players or part-timers, or backup outfielders, or replacements for Jay Payton-level ineptness. You're on a crusade to turn your favorite Ken Phelps All Star into a real All Star. You really seem to think Salazar is going to put up a .850, .900, .950 OPS as a regular, for years to come, with defense better than a marginal center fielder like Luis Terrero. To me, that's kind of inexplicable.

I apologize, Jon. I should make my point more delicately.

Your approach in cases like this, as I understand it, is to apply an equal weighting over the entire lifetime of minor league ABs that a player has amassed in projecting future performance. I find it inexplicable that a guy who is obviously as brilliant as you analytically and with respect to your knowledge of the game (and I don't mean that in a patronizing fashion) should take such an approach other than through intellectual laziness in applying this particular methodology. I don't believe for a moment that you seriously think that a better performance in, say, the year 2002, makes it likelier that Oscar will have a higher OPS in the year 2010 - do you? It's one thing to discount the over-emphasis on truly tiny sample sizes; it's quite another, and most obviously fallacious, to go to the other side of the spectrum in assigning any weight whatsoever to completely ancient statistics, like 2002 or 2003 or 2004. Do you disagree with this?

It's silly and untrue to assert that I characterize a position as intellectual laziness merely because it disagree with mine. I've now given the reason, though, why I have characterized it in such a manner.

Your point # 1 is well stated. I am more optimistic than you about the outlook for Oscar over the next half-decade -- but am satisfied to project merely one year ahead at this time. I don't see any basis to expect him to decline next year.

I agree with you on point # 3. I see him as a DH plus emergency (meaning 3rd string at best) at all other positions except for catcher and CF. But a good DH has considerable value -- and a # 3 emergency fill-in also has material value.

As to # 5 and # 6, Oscar has done pretty much everything a guy can do offensively in the opportunities he has been provided at AAA last year and this, and in the majors last year and this. There seems no reason, in my view, for him not to be given a shot at full-time DH for the rest of this season if we can move Scott to 1B in connection with a trade of Huff and/or Mora, which is the way I'd like to see things shake out. If ever there's an instance of a 30+ career minor leaguer primed to jump to above league-average performance, this seems to be a case study for it. I'd like to see us let 'er rip and find out if Oscar disproves his case.

You are indeed relying on data -- too much data, IMO. Just because data exists doesn't mean it's relevant. What evidence exists that performance from a decade ago improves future projections? None, I dare say with considerable confidence. One doesn't need a statistical study for such a conclusion any more than one needs statistics to say that when you look up in the sky, you see the sun during the day and the moon at night. We can throw around the PECOTAs and SHMECOTAs all we want -- and it doesn't change basic common sense on an extreme assertion such as this: that OPS in say, 2002, has any added value whatsoever in projecting OPS in 2010.

So, once again, I apologize if I have inadvertently crossed the line from an intellectual argument to one that seems personal. But I do find it frustrating to see these old bromides trotted out time and time again which simply make no sense to me. Analytical approaches are absolutely fine with me. I am not without such vices myself. But blind adherence to an analytical approach that makes no sense ... simply makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

You really owe Drungo an apology. He is among the best posters here, no reason to be rude and insult him.

Done ... before I saw your post. I'm trying to get this back on the substance of the argument, and hopefully my follow-up post will have achieved that. It's precisely because I respect the gray matter in Drungo's head so much that I find it so frustrating that he would use arguments that I consider so obviously fallacious, and that I have a feeling, when push comes to shove, he would concede that he doesn't really believe.

[QBsILLEST1]

This is a strange post. If you disagree please be more specific. Are you making a historical reference or are you saying I misused the terminology?

You really think Salazaar is cannon fodder? Please, go find me the last bench player we have had that has hit as well as he has? This dude is capable of playing every day and producing atleast 20 HR's a year if we needed him to. He is a very valuable bat off the bench which we havent had in years.

Sure it wouldnt kill the team if we lost him, bvut he is much more important than you realize. Him stepping in to play a fielding position as a backup doesnt hurt the offense one bit. And this is important and why he is valuable, not to mention he is clutch.... Id rather hold him than Wiggy.....

[Anonymous]

You really think Salazaar is cannon fodder? Please, go find me the last bench player we have had that has hit as well as he has? This dude is capable of playing every day and producing atleast 20 HR's a year if we needed him to. He is a very valuable bat off the bench which we havent had in years.

Sure it wouldnt kill the team if we lost him, bvut he is much more important than you realize. Him stepping in to play a fielding position as a backup doesnt hurt the offense one bit. And this is important and why he is valuable, not to mention he is clutch.... Id rather hold him than Wiggy.....

Ideally, if in a fantasy world we can trade Huff and Mora, I'd rather hold him AND Wiggy.

[Fairfax Bird]

Done ... before I saw your post. I'm trying to get this back on the substance of the argument, and hopefully my follow-up post will have achieved that. It's precisely because I respect the gray matter in Drungo's head so much that I find it so frustrating that he would use arguments that I consider so obviously fallacious, and that I have a feeling, when push comes to shove, he would concede that he doesn't really believe.

Cool ... but I am pretty sure he believes them.

[Tx Oriole]

The anti-Oscar stuff is getting downright JTreaish in its mind-numbing repetition of untruths (although JTrea, ironically, happens to get it with Oscar). Why do you feel compelled to assert that Oscar doesn't hit well, when this is clearly not the case? (See my prior post on his OPS for 2008 and 2009.)

On the flip side, why do you make a statement that Oscar plays the IF well enough to be a backup? That statement gives him too much credit on the defensive end, as he is no better than an an emergency option at any position other than catcher and CF (with RF perhaps his best position, from what I can gather). I have no problem conceding Oscar's weaknesses. But why must you fudge so egregiously in covering up his strengths?

All i am trying ot say is he is a backup. But he will not hit enough to be the DH. Do you honestly beleive Oscar can be the DH?

[Dr. FLK]

All i am trying ot say is he is a backup. But he will not hit enough to be the DH. Do you honestly beleive Oscar can be the DH?

I believe he can form a pretty nasty DH-platoon with Luke. He's not an every day player, but he certainly has value.

[TonySoprano]

At the same time, recognize that his fielding is subpar and he probably wouldn't have the power to be a full time DH.

What kind of power do you need to be a full-time DH? Edgar Martinez had one year out of eighteen where he hit for more than thirty home runs and I'd take him on my team. Harold Baines' career-high for a season is twenty-nine homers.

[JTrea81]

I believe he can form a pretty nasty DH-platoon with Luke. He's not an every day player, but he certainly has value.

He's the guy that you can use to PH against a tough LHP in later innings when the Orioles are trying to mount a comeback.

And while his defense is pretty poor, he can always spell somebody at the IF corners for a game a week if need be. His defense won't be that much of a detriment in a bench role IMO. And the value of his bat trumps his value lost by defense.

[Tx Oriole]

Have you looked at Salazar's stats? Like even for a second?

Nope. He is not now nor will he ever be good enough to be the DH. Why can't you understand the man is a backup. Should be case clsoed. He does not hit enough to be the DH. He is what all teams have and need is a backup. To beleive he can be the DH is thinking wrong to me. He is a nice little story. But palyers like that are a dime a dozen. I am not down on the man or down of Pie. But IMO they are just backups that can be replaced. I am not trying to be ugly or mean spirited about Oscar at all. My opinion about him is just different, thats all i am trying to say. Golly gee.