Morales Defensive Value

[Ultimate]

The overwhelming opinion among Jays fans and so called Jays experts is that Morales is only a DH and can only play 1B occasionally. While this may be true or somewhat true the evidence that these people keep using is extremely lacking.

 

Everyone cites the number of games Morales played in the field the last 2 years as clear evidence that he is only a DH now. People seem to think that if he were to play in the field any more than 10-15 games a year he will either get hurt or that his D will significantly hurt the team.

 

Lets think about this for a second. Just because Kendrys only played a handful of games defensively in KC does not mean that he wasn't capable of playing more or even a lot more. It may have just made sense for the Royals to DH him based on their specific situation. The Royals had 1B in Eric Hosmer who is A) very good defensively and Young and healthy enough that he doesn't need a lot of time off and C) a good bat you want to keep in the lineup. There was no reason or need for the Royals to turn to Morales for defense. But maybe if there had been a need he could have handled it just fine.

 

Ross Atkins comments about playing Morales possibly a great deal at 1B seem to be consistent with this thinking.

 

Either way if you want to make the argument that he should only be a DH you need to bring more than simply "He only played X games in the field the last 2 years".

 

I am wondering if he could handle 40-80 games at 1B just fine which could theoretically allow the possibility of an Edwin resigning (although I don't think that will happen) or could still allow for Donaldson, Tulo, Martin to still get some DH days throughout the year.

[jays4life19]

The overwhelming opinion among Jays fans and so called Jays experts is that Morales is only a DH and can only play 1B occasionally. While this may be true or somewhat true the evidence that these people keep using is extremely lacking.

 

Everyone cites the number of games Morales played in the field the last 2 years as clear evidence that he is only a DH now. People seem to think that if he were to play in the field any more than 10-15 games a year he will either get hurt or that his D will significantly hurt the team.

 

Lets think about this for a second. Just because Kendrys only played a handful of games defensively in KC does not mean that he wasn't capable of playing more or even a lot more. It may have just made sense for the Royals to DH him based on their specific situation. The Royals had 1B in Eric Hosmer who is A) very good defensively and Young and healthy enough that he doesn't need a lot of time off and C) a good bat you want to keep in the lineup. There was no reason or need for the Royals to turn to Morales for defense. But maybe if there had been a need he could have handled it just fine.

 

Ross Atkins comments about playing Morales possibly a great deal at 1B seem to be consistent with this thinking.

 

Either way if you want to make the argument that he should only be a DH you need to bring more than simply "He only played X games in the field the last 2 years".

 

I am wondering if he could handle 40-80 games at 1B just fine which could theoretically allow the possibility of an Edwin resigning (although I don't think that will happen) or could still allow for Donaldson, Tulo, Martin to still get some DH days throughout the year.

 

Nope. Yost just thinks he's good.

[King]

Lost me at Eric Hosmer is good defensively.

[John_Havok]

The overwhelming opinion among Jays fans and so called Jays experts is that Morales is only a DH and can only play 1B occasionally. While this may be true or somewhat true the evidence that these people keep using is extremely lacking.

 

Everyone cites the number of games Morales played in the field the last 2 years as clear evidence that he is only a DH now. People seem to think that if he were to play in the field any more than 10-15 games a year he will either get hurt or that his D will significantly hurt the team.

 

Lets think about this for a second. Just because Kendrys only played a handful of games defensively in KC does not mean that he wasn't capable of playing more or even a lot more. It may have just made sense for the Royals to DH him based on their specific situation. The Royals had 1B in Eric Hosmer who is A) very good defensively and Young and healthy enough that he doesn't need a lot of time off and C) a good bat you want to keep in the lineup. There was no reason or need for the Royals to turn to Morales for defense. But maybe if there had been a need he could have handled it just fine.

 

Ross Atkins comments about playing Morales possibly a great deal at 1B seem to be consistent with this thinking.

 

Either way if you want to make the argument that he should only be a DH you need to bring more than simply "He only played X games in the field the last 2 years".

 

I am wondering if he could handle 40-80 games at 1B just fine which could theoretically allow the possibility of an Edwin resigning (although I don't think that will happen) or could still allow for Donaldson, Tulo, Martin to still get some DH days throughout the year.

 

Interesting argument.

 

But you haven't actually made a case for why you think he could be a useful defender except for "another manager played him in the field sometimes last year so maybe he's not actually bad at it and could play more."

 

There's no metric or eye test available that would back up your hypothetical. All objective and subjective evidence gathered on Morales' defense can be summed up in two words "he's bad."

 

When a manager puts Morales in the game at 1b or anywhere else I promise you the thought process is not "well he's an okay defender so we don't need to worry about that today." It's more like "f***, our regular needs a day off/oh f*** our regular is injured....please please don't have a ball hit to Morales today, please please please holy f*** please no."

[Bobthe4th]

You've got a good point - we all thought EE's days at 1B were over and he did OK last season.

 

We could see Morales playing around 50 games at 1B allowing Tulo, Martin etc rest days from the field.

 

Unless we sign another 1B to make Smoak the back up of course (fingers crossed!).

[Bobthe4th]

Interesting argument.

 

But you haven't actually made a case for why you think he could be a useful defender except for "another manager played him in the field sometimes last year so maybe he's not actually bad at it and could play more."

 

There's no metric or eye test available that would back up your hypothetical. All objective and subjective evidence gathered on Morales' defense can be summed up in two words "he's bad."

 

When a manager puts Morales in the game at 1b or anywhere else I promise you the thought process is not "well he's an okay defender so we don't need to worry about that today." It's more like "f***, our regular needs a day off/oh f*** our regular is injured....please please don't have a ball hit to Morales today, please please please holy f*** please no."

 

I think he's coming from the angle of if Morales is a DH only, Smoak is playing far too many games at 1B, and the DH is tied up when we want to rest Tulo et al.

 

Sure Morales will suck at 1B, but then a lot of 1B players do. If they were better fielders, or more athletic, they'd normally be in another position.

[LGBJ29]

If you're gonna make an argument that a player may be good defensively, you need to offer more than "well he just has never had the chance"

 

In every chance he has had he's been putrid. He's aging and immobile there's no evidence to suggest he may have success there. Also don't let GG nominations fool you, Eric Hosmer is a garbage first basemen.

[Bobthe4th]

If you're gonna make an argument that a player may be good defensively, you need to offer more than "well he just has never had the chance"

 

In every chance he has had he's been putrid. He's aging and immobile there's no evidence to suggest he may have success there. Also don't let GG nominations fool you, Eric Hosmer is a garbage first basemen.

 

He's not saying he thinks Morales will be good though, just that he could be adequate enough that he doesn't need to be dropped if he's not DH'ing.

[Pendleton]

So basically the argument here is that he hasn't been used enough defensively to prove he's horrible at it?

[Bobthe4th]

So basically the argument here is that he hasn't been used enough defensively to prove he's horrible at it?

 

Haha yes, plus that at 1B, age and mobility are nowhere near as important as other positions.

[Maico450]

The overwhelming opinion among Jays fans and so called Jays experts is that Morales is only a DH and can only play 1B occasionally. While this may be true or somewhat true the evidence that these people keep using is extremely lacking.

 

Everyone cites the number of games Morales played in the field the last 2 years as clear evidence that he is only a DH now. People seem to think that if he were to play in the field any more than 10-15 games a year he will either get hurt or that his D will significantly hurt the team.

 

Lets think about this for a second. Just because Kendrys only played a handful of games defensively in KC does not mean that he wasn't capable of playing more or even a lot more. It may have just made sense for the Royals to DH him based on their specific situation. The Royals had 1B in Eric Hosmer who is A) very good defensively and Young and healthy enough that he doesn't need a lot of time off and C) a good bat you want to keep in the lineup. There was no reason or need for the Royals to turn to Morales for defense. But maybe if there had been a need he could have handled it just fine.

 

Ross Atkins comments about playing Morales possibly a great deal at 1B seem to be consistent with this thinking.

 

Either way if you want to make the argument that he should only be a DH you need to bring more than simply "He only played X games in the field the last 2 years".

 

I am wondering if he could handle 40-80 games at 1B just fine which could theoretically allow the possibility of an Edwin resigning (although I don't think that will happen) or could still allow for Donaldson, Tulo, Martin to still get some DH days throughout the year.

 

I think we are going to find out. He can get played at 1B quite a bit in ST, which will give Gibby a pretty good idea if he is capable of playing the position.

[Ultimate]

Interesting argument.

 

But you haven't actually made a case for why you think he could be a useful defender except for "another manager played him in the field sometimes last year so maybe he's not actually bad at it and could play more."

 

There's no metric or eye test available that would back up your hypothetical. All objective and subjective evidence gathered on Morales' defense can be summed up in two words "he's bad."

 

When a manager puts Morales in the game at 1b or anywhere else I promise you the thought process is not "well he's an okay defender so we don't need to worry about that today." It's more like "f***, our regular needs a day off/oh f*** our regular is injured....please please don't have a ball hit to Morales today, please please please holy f*** please no."

 

 

I am not making a case for anything. I am simply saying that the case that's been presented is not strong enough and I am asking for a stronger case to be presented.

[Ultimate]

So basically the argument here is that he hasn't been used enough defensively to prove he's horrible at it?

 

The argument is that he could be average, below average or horrible and either way he probably would have played the same number of games at 1B in KC that he did.

 

If someone thinks he is only a DH there needs to be a better explanation for it.

[Ultimate]

You've got a good point - we all thought EE's days at 1B were over and he did OK last season.

 

We could see Morales playing around 50 games at 1B allowing Tulo, Martin etc rest days from the field.

 

Unless we sign another 1B to make Smoak the back up of course (fingers crossed!).

 

Thank you. THere have been a lot of popular conceptions about a players defensive value here that turned out to be inaccurate. Usually it went the other way though.

[FrozenRopes]

As long as he doesn't play in the OF he should be okay.

[RealAccountant]

How about offensive value ? Morales was second worst in WRC among DHs last year

[jays4life19]

I am not making a case for anything. I am simply saying that the case that's been presented is not strong enough and I am asking for a stronger case to be presented.

 

There's a reason why the case has not been presented though. It's because he f***ing blows. I really like the bat, and i think he's going to outperform his projections and i like the signing but yeah...he's a DH with the spot start here and there at first.

 

...and seriously if they put him in the OF then Gibbons can f*** off aha.

[guylaroche5]

How about offensive value ? Morales was second worst in WRC among DHs last year

 

Morales last 8 seasons: wRC+

 

2009: 136

2010: 128 (51 games played)

2012: 119

2013: 119

2014: 72 (98 games played due to Boras qualifying offer situation)

2015: 130

2016: 110

 

Pretty consistent above average hitter to me. You have to look at the big picture when it comes to hitting.

[RealAccountant]

You're prob right.

[vic city]

You've got a good point - we all thought EE's days at 1B were over and he did OK last season.

 

We could see Morales playing around 50 games at 1B allowing Tulo, Martin etc rest days from the field.

 

Unless we sign another 1B to make Smoak the back up of course (fingers crossed!).

 

I would even go as far as saying EE did better than OK at 1st and I didn't even notice a difference between him and Smoak. Without looking at the stats, EE made some great plays at 1st and I don't recall him making many errors. At least that's how my memory serves me....

[John_Havok]

I am not making a case for anything. I am simply saying that the case that's been presented is not strong enough and I am asking for a stronger case to be presented.

 

You'll be waiting a while. There's a good reason why there is no case being presented for him being valuable defensively. Because no human being with a logical thought process a could actually form one that makes sense.

[John_Havok]

I would even go as far as saying EE did better than OK at 1st and I didn't even notice a difference between him and Smoak. Without looking at the stats, EE made some great plays at 1st and I don't recall him making many errors. At least that's how my memory serves me....

 

Great plays stick out in people's minds as do bad plays. Realistically, great and bad plays make up a tiny percentage of a fielder's overall plays. It's the 95% of the other plays that determine whether a guy is good or not.

 

That's why defensive metrics were created, to cut through the bias of the plays that stick out in memory.

[Ultimate]

You'll be waiting a while. There's a good reason why there is no case being presented for him being valuable defensively. Because no human being with a logical thought process a could actually form one that makes sense.

 

You seem to be misunderstanding my point. I am not suggesting there should be a case for him being valuable defensively.

[Ultimate]

Great plays stick out in people's minds as do bad plays. Realistically, great and bad plays make up a tiny percentage of a fielder's overall plays. It's the 95% of the other plays that determine whether a guy is good or not.

 

That's why defensive metrics were created, to cut through the bias of the plays that stick out in memory.

 

They are still far from an imperfect stat and we can't really rely on the small sample size in Morales case.

[Ultimate]

I would even go as far as saying EE did better than OK at 1st and I didn't even notice a difference between him and Smoak. Without looking at the stats, EE made some great plays at 1st and I don't recall him making many errors. At least that's how my memory serves me....

 

IMO opinion Smoak isn't even all that good. He's okay on balls in the dirt. So Edwin could have been just okay and then still been as good as Smoak.

[Abomination]

Great plays stick out in people's minds as do bad plays. Realistically, great and bad plays make up a tiny percentage of a fielder's overall plays. It's the 95% of the other plays that determine whether a guy is good or not.

 

That's why defensive metrics were created, to cut through the bias of the plays that stick out in memory.

 

1st basemen are probably a little more difficult to calculate, as you have things like holding a runner on (which reduces range) and picking bad throws (I think this is partially accounted for?).

[wamco]

Have him play 1b in inter league games and 10-15g otherwise during the year to give others rest. The world will keep on spinning.

[Ultimate]

Have him play 1b in inter league games and 10-15g otherwise during the year to give others rest. The world will keep on spinning.

 

I think the problem with that is that you want to have a better idea of what you have or don't have right now so that you can make other decisions.

 

IE whether or not the Jays should be considering a player like Beltran who would also need to at least DH a fair bit.

[wamco]

No room for another dh type

[Key22]

The problem with most fans is they assume that EVERYONE on the free agent market is willing to play for the Toronto Blue Jays. Some guys just don't want to. And we have no way to know which ones fall into that camp. The numbers are one thing but the Jays are trying to build a winner - and that means allocating dollars to fill several positions. AL teams need a DH - Morales should do a more than a decent job filling that need with the bat. He himself isn't enough. But the argument that we could cycle through the DH - well Boston didn't and it worked out for them. Granted Morales is no Ortiz but then who is.

 

This team, if it wins, will win on the backs of the pitchers. Our offense was mediocre last year and we still made the playoffs - our offense as it sits right now is mediocre. Add a few more pieces - have a bunch of platoons that can allow Gibby to play the hot guy and sit guys who go into a slump is a more than decent approach.