Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Alternate titles: The Buck Stops Here! Molina, Mo Passed Balls. Encarnacioner of a Lonely 22 Home Runs. Okay, I'll stop.

The 2010 infielders started off as a pretty uninspiring bunch. Lyle Overbay and Edwin Encarnación manned the corners, and a couple of middling free agents, John Buck and Alex Gonzalez, were signed to catch and stop short, respectively. The only upside around the horn, seemingly, came in the form of 2009 Silver Slugger, Aaron Hill.

As it turned out, Hill was the least productive of the original five, but is the only one with an assured job going into 2011. Gonzalez' hot start was shrewdly flipped for Yunel Escobar, Buck and Overbay are free agents, and Encarnación is a non-tender candidate - though my guess is he's your 2011 starting third baseman.

This is a 2010 review post, though, not a 2011 outlook, so let's look at how everyone performed this year, and let's do it with a colourful table, because I'm just gonna tell you the stats anyway. Might as well get it all out of the way at once! Also included besides the previously mentioned guys are Jose Molina, John McDonald, and Adam Lind.



So the infield, aside from tiny contributions from guys like Mike McCoy, Randy Ruiz, and Nick Green (remember that?) contributed 13.4 of the team's 42.3 WAR (aside: I suppose this means a replacement-level team would win about 43 games, just FYI). I have no idea what percentage infielders usually account for, but I'm guessing it's higher than the Jays' 32%.

There isn't much left to be said about Buck and Gonzalez: both signings worked out very well. Gonzalez became a young shortstop with upside and a track record (not literally, of course), while Buck handled a young pitching staff with aplomb, made the all-star team, and will net the Jays a draft pick when he leaves.

Overbay had a solid Overbay-like season, and if it was his last a Jay, I'll be sad to see him go. In five seasons with the Jays, he was an above-average hitter every season except 2007, and a very good fielder to boot. But he's 33, doesn't exactly have an "athletic" build, and struck out more times this year than he ever has.

As much as we like to pile on E5 'round here, he didn't have a bad year. He was an above-average hitter despite a .235 BABIP and was actually close to average in the field. (Fangraph's breakdown of Edwin's defensive stats claim that he has above average range, but makes too many errors.) I wouldn't mind the Jays bringing some competition to spring training, like Brad Emaus, but I also wouldn't mind Edwin Encarnción: 2011 Starting Third Baseman.

I've been through Aaron Hill's season before. It was really, really weird. If you don't feel like reading through the entire afore-linked article: Hill was the victim of an absurdly-low BABIP, but he also changed his approach to one that should produce lower BABIPs, but not nearly to the extent it did this year. I think Hill will be fine - regardless of whether he goes back to hitting line drives at a 20% clip like in 2009 or maintains his 2010 uppercut, he should be an above-average hitter, and combined with his defense and position, that makes him an asset.

Adam Lind I'm not too sure about (I've been through him too). His season was just as bad as Hill's (much worse when you consider he's a DH not adding any value with the glove), and his component stats suggest he wasn't unlucky; he was just awful. At this point he looks like a platoon bat to me.

The big acquisition of the season was Yunel Escobar. Escobar played pretty well after arriving, though not quite at his 2009 level in which he put up an excellent 4.3 WAR. Escobar posted the worst power numbers of his career, which can partially be explained by his career-low 3.3% HR/FB. Hopefully we'll see a regression to the mean next year.

I said at the top that the 2009 infield looked like an uninspiring bunch. I can't say that's changed too much; there's more "upside", whatever that means, with Escobar, Hill and Arencibia, but Escobar and Arencibia's upsides might just be what Gonzalez and Buck did this year. At least the middle infield is locked down for the next few years, and if Arencibia performs as his AAA numbers suggest he can, the entire up-the-middle part of the infield is stable, and that's a pretty good start to building a contender, even if none of those guys are superstars.

And that about wraps up the 2010 Infield Review. Johnny Mac and Jose Molina had very nice seasons off the bench, and will presumably still be on that bench next year.
2010 Blue Jays In Review: Infielders | 41 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
earlweaverfan - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 09:28 AM EST (#225241) #
I also wouldn't mind Edwin Encarnción: 2011 Starting Third Baseman

Either there or at DH, I would love to see what the Jays coaching staff could do with EE over a whole, injury-free season.  Here is a guy who in two weeks hit about half of his homeruns.  During those surges, it did not seem to matter who was pitching him, he was just in a fantastic zone.  And although one of the parks where he did this was suspect (Arizona) where fly balls and the buffalo roam, he did it also in Minnesota's new Target field, where HRs had been hard to come by, for every team.  And his strength is massive - the balls don't just scrape themselves over the wall near the foul poles, he can crush them.

So, forgive me, but I just find that fascinating.  It really makes me wonder, what is he doing when he is in his zone and what is he doing when he is out of it?  If you were his hitting coach, could you imagine trying to get him to go on a tear for eight weeks a year, instead of two or three?  What would that mean to his annual production?  After adjusting for his time off or in the minors, in recuperation, he was already a 30+HR hitter, annually.  If his huge surges lasted 8 weeks, he could be reaching Bautista's 2010 totals.

When Bautista was on his season-long tear, or when Snider was coming on strong (both before his injury and near the end of the season,  the commentators would speak in cliches - he is really seeing the ball well, or he's locked in, or some such.  This is just commentator speak for he is hitting awfully well and I can't explain why. 

It would really intrigue me to know whether you could look at video tapes of EE in his surges and then in his doldrums and try to differentitate what he is actually doing.  Could you get him to know what that is and bring it on, to order? 

Or maybe there are just periods of great patience at the plate, when he truly waits (Bautista-like) for his pitch and then much longer periods of impatience.  If so, that seems pretty treatable.

I know that figuring this stuff out has to be a coach's goal for any batter, but for one whose peak weeks are so dramatically better than his average, woudn't the prize of figuring that out be worth a lot of coaching time and attention? 

And, do we know anything about EE's openness to learning?

Figure this out just for EE alone, and the rest of the Jays could focus more on OBP, and still, the overall HR totals might not slide from 2010.

Just saying.
Jonny German - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 10:06 AM EST (#225242) #
Nice work.
 
An Excel tip for numbers like, say, OBP of 0.31:
 
Format -> Cells -> Custom -> type in ".000"
 
Thus 0.31 becomes .310. Tidy!
Mike Green - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 10:10 AM EST (#225243) #
Encarnacion has a weird split.  Over his career, he has done spectacularly poorly in his first PA against the starter- .222/.290/.370 (in 627 PAs).  He's .275/.362/.538 in his second PA and .304/.381/.511 in his third PA.  Normally, batters do somewhat better in their second and third PAs, but the disparity is not of this magnitude.  To my mind, this suggests a hitter who learns mostly from watching on the very day.  He could certainly use to spend some time in the video room. 

The Blue Jays faced disproportionately few LHPs last year (opponents started LHers only 36 times), and it hurt Encarnacion's stats.  With Lind struggling and Snider injured/not in the lineup for much of the year, teams tended to take skip marginal LH starters. 

Richard S.S. - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 10:59 AM EST (#225246) #

     Adam Lind is under contract through 2013, 3 options thereafter, so we are keeping him, baring a trade.   If A.A. signs or trades for a long-term answer at 1B, he will be the D.H.   He will have a chance in Spring Training to win the job over a "make-do" aquisition.   He stopped walking and hitting to all fields, so some effort must be spent here to improve.   I think he can be closer to 2009 than 2010 next year.

     Aaron Hill's last year with this team could be 2011, everything else is decisions on option this Spring Training.   I thought he didn't look comfortable defensively last year.   He should be number-wise, midway between the 2009 and 2010 seasons in 2011.

     Yunel Escobar's first arbitration year means any longer term contracts can wait.   Nothing should change here.

     Edwin Encarnacion's last arbitration year will see him making $4.75+ million if he's tendered a contract.   If A.A. signs or trades for a long-term answer at 3B, he's a non-tender canditate.   If kept, he'll play either 3B or D.H.

     It's very simple, if A.A. is convinced J.P. Arencibia is a starter he's our starting catcher.   If not, he's traded.

John Northey - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 12:32 PM EST (#225248) #
Encarnacion is an interesting case. If he wasn't a Jay we'd probably be saying 'why not get him and see if he rebounds - tons of potential there'.

AA has a few tests here. I suspect he sees 2011 as another rebuild, expecting some drop-off from 2010, before a jump in 2012. If so then EE could be useful - if he gets off to a good start he could be good trade bait, if he doesn't you just dump him once you have a substitute around.

So many balls in the air right now it is hard to say what will happen, but I figure unless the Jays trade for an outfielder or 3B (Bautista moving as needed) we'll see EE offered a contract. I'm certain AA is keeping an eye out for a better player, but it won't be easy.
Magpie - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 02:19 PM EST (#225255) #
An Excel tip for numbers like, say, OBP of 0.31:

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

(What, an old guy like me is supposed to know these things?)
Jevant - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 04:08 PM EST (#225264) #
Encarnacion is an interesting case. If he wasn't a Jay we'd probably be saying 'why not get him and see if he rebounds - tons of potential there'.

An excellent point.  Given our lack of a good replacement option, I think there is no reason not to bring him back.

I don't see the team playing Bautista at 3B for several reasons, not the least of which are that he is worse defensively there than EE, and he doesn't want to play 3B.
Alex Obal - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 04:20 PM EST (#225266) #
Nice.

The big hole at first base is interesting. Figure the Jays will make a big move to get a power bat at some point. If they don't do it now, I assume they will look for an Overbay type on a one-year deal. Maybe someone like Lyle Overbay. I don't think he's finished, and his April disappearance has probably deflated his value.

92-93 - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 04:57 PM EST (#225267) #
How about Lance Berkman for the temporary 1B/DH solution? The power is obviously in decline but he can still get on base and may have something left in the tank if he doesn't have to play the field more than half the time.

I'm confident that Jose Bautista would be the better defensive 3B ahead of Encarnacion if he took his daily reps there.
Jevant - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 05:07 PM EST (#225268) #
I'm confident that Jose Bautista would be the better defensive 3B ahead of Encarnacion if he took his daily reps there.

What about the fact that he doesn't want to play there, and is, at present, worse than EE there? 

I will be utterly shocked if Bautista is playing 3B on anything more than a casual basis next year. 
92-93 - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 05:48 PM EST (#225269) #
I'm curious what your definition of "at present, worse than EE there" means, because Bautista has the better career UZR/150 at 3B. There's a huge difference between preferring to play the outfield and specifically not wanting to play 3B - I've never heard Jose insinuate anything of the sort. He'll go wherever is best for the team and it's probably easier for AA to find OFs than 3Bs unless he's willing to shift Hill over. E5 consistently finds himself ranked among the very worst defensive 3Bs in the game, as exciting as his bat's ceiling may be.
Alex Obal - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 05:52 PM EST (#225270) #
That's what the if is for.

Berkman would probably demand a cold April premium, a distance from Texas premium, an unlikely contender premium, and maybe also a turf premium. But if he's willing to come to Toronto, why not?

scottt - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 07:04 PM EST (#225272) #
Berkman seems a bit too old to  play the Type B lottery on a one year deal. Berkman made 14.5 million in 2010. It would be hard to offer him arbitration. Houston traded him mid-season for Mark Melancon and Jimmy Paredes but sent 4 million to the Yankees.

Meh.


92-93 - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 07:18 PM EST (#225273) #
I'm not sure Berkman has the leverage to be demanding anything at this point or he may find himself quickly on Jermaine Dye's path...
Mylegacy - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 07:29 PM EST (#225276) #
Dominoes Watson, dominoes.

Methinks that AA gets (if possible) the very BEST TWO OF: RFer, or 3rd, or 1st or DH he POSSIBLY can get (most likely by trade - as he's said repeatedly he prefers trades to free agents - why don't we take him at his word). For instance, Wright in a trade with the Mets - if that happened Bautista stays in RF, Wright at 3rd. Or for instance, say he gets Rasmus then Snider to LF, Wells to RF, Rasmus to CF, Bautista to 3rd.

Dominoes Watson, dominoes.
Chuck - Wednesday, November 10 2010 @ 10:07 PM EST (#225280) #
Roy Halladay writes. Well, not really.
Spookie Wookie - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 12:30 AM EST (#225283) #
Regarding wins for a team of replacement-level players: I've always seen it as being around 48. So it may be that the Jays underperformed what would be expected given the individual players' WARs.
Richard S.S. - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 09:07 AM EST (#225288) #
ayjackson - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 10:26 AM EST (#225291) #

If you could land Grienke for Drabek and Stewart (and maybe a throw-in), would you do it?

Grienke, Romero, Morrow, Marcum, Cecil with Rzep as swingman - that's really good.

Matthew E - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 10:30 AM EST (#225292) #
I don't know if I would. How good is Greinke going to be? How good are Drabek and Stewart going to be? How much is Greinke getting paid? What else could the Jays be using that money/those prospects for?

(Answers: Maybe real good but he didn't show it this year; maybe real good; a lot; a lot.)

If I'm the Jays, it's worth looking into but I'm not sure I want to bite on it.

Mike Green - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 10:33 AM EST (#225293) #
Not unless I had a commitment from ownership to spend a lot in 2011 and 2012. 
Jonny German - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 10:41 AM EST (#225294) #
No. He's under contract for $13.5M a year (reasonable) for the next 2 years (too short). To make that trade you have to assume he's going to perform at a Cy-contending level (which he has only done once in his career), and you have to make other big upgrades to ensure you won't just be a third place team with great starting pitching.
ayjackson - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 10:43 AM EST (#225295) #

I think we'll hear a lot of this over the next 5-6 weeks.  AA will be in on everybody - he'll make the call and do the due diligence - but he's just feeling everything out.  He'll go where ever the opportunity takes him.  I wouldn't be surprised that when Lee's agent says seven or eight teams are in on Lee, that we're the "or eight".  Meaning we called and asked a lot of questions, but the agent felt that's all it was.

I think there's going to be some wheeling and dealing this offseason, but I can't tell who it'll be for.  I'm hoping it's Gonzalez personally.  And don't worry about the money, Mike, if AA makes that move, you can assume the money will be there in 2012-2015.

MatO - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 10:47 AM EST (#225296) #
It's funny.  A few seasons ago after Chacin and Towers had their career years I asked in Da Box whether you would trade both of them for Greinke, who was young, highly touted but disappointing to that point.  I said yes but the general consensus was no.  Today I say no to a deal unless you can get his name on a long-term contract as part of the it.
ayjackson - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 11:04 AM EST (#225299) #

I'm not sure you want the long term contract at this point.  You can still trade him next year if it doesn't look like he'll sign one and you can cut bait in two years if he disappoints.

 

Chuck - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 11:25 AM EST (#225300) #

AA will be in on everybody - he'll make the call and do the due diligence - but he's just feeling everything out. 

Same thing from a Greinke perspective. A ton of teams are going to make simple inquiries to the Royals to see what it might take to get him. In a long, bleak off-season, this qualifies as newsworthy.

cybercavalier - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 11:57 AM EST (#225302) #
Nice review, MatOand Dave. But personally I think Drabek and Stewart are still prospects. It is also marginally acceptable if someone does not agree with their prospect status, simple because Drabek pitched in last September and is closing in to the major league. Chacin and Towers were major league level players when they played for the Jays so the comparison among these two groups of pitchers shall not be so well defined. Personally Chacin and Towers were good after some struggling seasons in MLB (Towers). Greinke was hovering at disappointment. I think there are other factors outside of the three players that your proposed trade did not go through. I can't help to compare this scenario to that of Brent Wallace and Anthony Gose: both above average to excellent players: Wallace has a high minor league track record whereas Gose is still in low minor leagues. Towers and Chacin had showed good performance whereas Greinke was disappointing to that point. I learn from these ideas that AA, armed with the scouting information and brain power with Jays organization, went for Gose. For a trade of Drabek and Stewart for Greinke, a better decision would have been made, with comparison to what is revealed to the us (the public) , because brain power of the Jays has proven powerful during AA tenure (signing of Buck, Gonzalez 2.0 for Escobar etc.)

For the catching situation. Is Jake Fox (played C, 1B/ 3B, LF last season with the Orioles) an option, assuming Buck will be leaving? And sure, this suggestion comes after what roles of Arencibia and Buck are for 2011.

And hands down agreement with Chuck: newsworthy.
cybercavalier - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 12:11 PM EST (#225304) #
http://toronto.bluejays.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20101108&content_id=16033312&vkey=news_tor&c_id=tor

Farrell was quoted as making Arencibia a starting catcher is a goal; but I heard somewhere (I can't recall though) Arencibia would be traded if he is deemed unsuited to play starting catching. May I be affirmed?

Chuck - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 01:36 PM EST (#225309) #

And hands down agreement with Chuck: newsworthy.

Except that I was being sarcastic.

Jonny German - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 01:43 PM EST (#225310) #
How do you know he wasn't agreeing with the sarcasm?
Chuck - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 01:52 PM EST (#225313) #

How do I know you're not being sarcastic now?

"Ambiguity, the devil's volleyball."
- Emo Philips

 

Dewey - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 02:37 PM EST (#225318) #
And don't worry about the money, Mike, if AA makes that move, you can assume the money will be there in 2012-2015.

That’s one *huge* assumption, ayj, given the precariously volatile state of the U.S. and Canadian economies; not to mention increasing competition in future for Rogers’s captive customers.  Wheelbarrows (to carry your currency to the grocery store) might be a good investment by 2015.  But, of course, I hope you’re right in your assumption.
ayjackson - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 07:05 PM EST (#225338) #
My point was AA likely won't commit more than one fifth of his budget on a signing of his.
TamRa - Thursday, November 11 2010 @ 07:05 PM EST (#225339) #
It's funny.  A few seasons ago after Chacin and Towers had their career years I asked in Da Box whether you would trade both of them for Greinke, who was young, highly touted but disappointing to that point.  I said yes but the general consensus was no.  Today I say no to a deal unless you can get his name on a long-term contract as part of the it.

While I agree with the conclusion (Don't pay a ton for Grienke)  I'm fairly stunned at the claim you used to support it.

THIS crowd formed a consensus AGAINST trading Chacin and Towers for Grienke?
I hate to be the cynic here but I find that idea impossible to conceive. Towers was never "bought into" around here and i don't remember even a clear consensus that Chacin wasn't a fluke. .

MatO - Friday, November 12 2010 @ 09:41 AM EST (#225361) #
To be fair I just sort of threw it out there.  It's not like there was any rumour out there just a hypothetical on my part but I don't recall anyone really supporting it and one prominent member of Da Box (don't remember who) would definitely have been against such a deal.  Maybe consensus was too strong a word.  Anyway, a couple of months into the subsequent season you wouldn't have gotten Greinke's cleats for those two guys.
Mike Green - Friday, November 12 2010 @ 10:13 AM EST (#225362) #
Chacin and Towers had their big years in 2005.  That was the year Greinke went 5-17, and went into the depression that kept him out of major league ball for essentially all of 2006 and rendered him ineffective for 1/2 of 2007.  No one would have doubted that Greinke had way more potential at that point than the combination of the two, but it would not have been a lead-pipe cinch to make the trade taking into account money and perceived competition windows (the Jays had an 88-74 Pythagorean in 2005 despite getting only 1/2 a season out of Halladay, and had a young Hill, Adams and Hudson in the middle infield).  They did finish second in 2006 despite Towers' struggles.  It undoubtedly would have been (in hindsight) shrewd to trade Chacin and Towers at that point, but more likely for an asset that would contribute something in 2006. 
bpoz - Friday, November 12 2010 @ 10:43 AM EST (#225364) #
I agree completely with Jonny German.
Any big SP acquisition the Jays make must play at Cy Young level because we already have good SPs in quantity. Thats my opinion.

Other personal thoughts:-
1) I don't think he is as good as P Hentgen. If he is as good then get him because we are going to need a Game #1 starter when we make the playoffs.
2) I really liked Chacin. Great rookie who IMO "could" have developed into our #3. I like LItsch just as much and think he can be as good or close to Marcum. What I base these opinions on is Era, if Era is under 4.00 over 15-30 starts then I believe in him.
3) Any one can get injured M Fidrych, C Carpenter, D McGowan and may or may not recover.
4) Career years happen maybe in rookie year or later.

You can't do much with an injured player. But do you trade or sign long term a career year player if you can tell that it is a career year. OR just arbitration.

One more thought/question, in Arb 2011 do Marcum & Morrow get $3-5mil or higher and what about the $ for J Bautista in Arb. Now just wildly guessing J Bautista Arb offer $7mil & Asking $13mil... AA can still trade him right? Winter meetings would already provide a clue to his trade value and now everyone knows the $ region.


Matthew E - Friday, November 12 2010 @ 10:56 AM EST (#225365) #
2) I really liked Chacin. Great rookie who IMO "could" have developed into our #3. I like LItsch just as much and think he can be as good or close to Marcum. What I base these opinions on is Era, if Era is under 4.00 over 15-30 starts then I believe in him.
3) Any one can get injured M Fidrych, C Carpenter, D McGowan and may or may not recover.

The other thing you have to look at is strikeouts, though. Carpenter and McGowan are both decent strikeout guys (and so is Litsch, if I recall his numbers properly, on a lower level), so that's fine, but Chacin and Fidrych weren't. I thought the Jays should have traded Chacin right after his big year with the Jays; they didn't, and got nothing for him. I don't think he ever could have been a top starter for this team. Litsch? He's still got a chance, but his problem is that the  Jays have too many other guys who are probably better than him.
Chuck - Friday, November 12 2010 @ 11:53 AM EST (#225368) #

2) I really liked Chacin. Great rookie who IMO "could" have developed into our #3. I like LItsch just as much and think he can be as good or close to Marcum. What I base these opinions on is Era, if Era is under 4.00 over 15-30 starts then I believe in him.

The metrics K/9, BB/9 and HR/9, all considered together, typically have better predictive value than ERA. 

Mike Green - Friday, November 12 2010 @ 12:19 PM EST (#225370) #
Chacin had a FIP of 4.26 that year.  It was more the shape of it that was worrisome.  Nonetheless, of his 10 BBRef age comps, four (Joe Blanton, Bill Swift, John Curtis and Rick Waits) went on to decent careers.  But, if you look at pretty much any good young pitcher, the comps will be about like that. In Ricky Romero's case, there are seven who went out to have decent careers with Freddy Garcia being the best.  FWIW, after Greinke's rough age 21 season, he had 3 very good comps, Red Ruffing, Vern Law, Pol Perritt, and  Jeremy Bonderman.
John Northey - Friday, November 12 2010 @ 12:31 PM EST (#225371) #
Chacin was fun at first but I was nervous about him (iirc) from the beginning. Rookie year: 203 IP, 3.1 BB/9 (higher than ideal) vs 5.4 K/9 (anything sub-6 is a warning) 0.9 HR/9 (decent, but nothing special).

Year 2 his HR/9 jumped to 2 per 9 IP which is way too high. His BB/9 got worse, his K/9 dropped. In relief for Houston this year he got 38 1/3 IP with a 7.3 K/9 rate (good) but a 4.7 BB/9 rate (scary range) but got his HR/9 down to 0.7 (solid).

Chacin in the minors pre-callup was walking over 3 per 9 pretty regularly (once under, 5 over) and peaked with a 7.2 K/9 rate in AA/AAA his last year down there. Outside of 15 1/3 rehab innings in 2006 (9.4 K/9) he hasn't been close to that 7.2 rate in the minors since.

For comparison, Brett Cecil was the only one of the big 4 to be sub-7.5 K/9 this year, at just 6.1. However, in the minors he was 9K/9 IP or better outside of his 49 innings in Vegas in 2009 (just 5.9 K/9, 6.7K/9 in Toronto over 93 1/3 IP). I suspect he was pushed a bit too fast there. At no level except the majors in 2009 has he cracked 1.0 for HR/9 (1.6 in 2009).

That is a big difference there. Cecil regularly has shown an ability to strike out hitters and avoid the dinger. Chacin didn't. Chacin needed pin-point control to survive and he didn't have it. The big 4 here don't need that, but if they get it they'll be All-Stars rather than just solid players.

Litsch is much like Chacin when it comes to K/9 (outside of 9 innings in 2009 his K rate in the majors has been sub-6 all along, and in fact sub-5 as a rookie and in 2010). But his walk rate hasn't cracked 3.0. His HR/9 is mediocre at 1.0-1.4 and that will kill him unless he gets that down sub-1.0. In the minors he never walked more than 2.0 per 9 (very nice), K rates of 8.8/7.7/6.6/8.1/5.6 (7.5 overall) showing he can get guys out although the higher he got the harder it got. His HR rate pre-2010 was never over 0.7 (1.2 this year) and dropped as he climbed the ladder (good sign).

Litch is a major step up from Chacin. However, he isn't at the level of the big 4 thus will probably end up as an extra piece in a trade at some point.
2010 Blue Jays In Review: Infielders | 41 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.