Castro vs. Barney

Provided with no comment (click on the links if you're not familiar with the saber stats)

Darwin Barney (Age 26):

  • 268/309/389 .306 wOBA, 85 wRC+
  • 4.9 BB%, 9.5 K%
  • 31 XBH, 31 RBI, 48 R, 6/7 SB
  • 7.9 UZR, 2.0 WAR

Starlin Castro (Age 22):

  • 272/301/414 .303 wOBA, 83 wRC+
  • 3.9 BB%, 16 K%
  • 32 XBH, 52 RBI, 53 R, 17/27 SB
  • 7.1 UZR, 2.1 WAR

Comments

I'm assuming these are year 2012 numbers, not career stats. The old codger Rush fan in me keeps wanting to write 2112 whenever I refer to 2012. I really hate that. Barney has turned into a better player than I ever thought he would be, actually. And Castro - I think his improving defense (I remember a really low UZR last year) may be impacting his hitting a bit from the standpoint of focus, but for all I know that theory is baloney. I doubt Castro really projects much higher than a .800 something OPS /15 homer guy, but that isn't too bad.

Jed rushed Castro into the bigs. Shoulda been seasoned one more year at Tacoma. / : 0

While I like Barney, I really hope people aren't starting to pass judgement on a 22 year old player who's shown clear indication he works to get better (defense).

Definitely. It's really hard to know how far Castro can go still. I think it's to be expected that he hits a bit of a bump. Hitting at that level is just such a hard thing to do and he started off like he had figured it out really early. But he's struggled some this year. That's okay, so did Josh Hamilton for a really long stretch.

Yeah. Let's not all jump on top of Castro during a slump. My biggest concern about his numbers this year is that his BB% is down instead of up. He'll be the Cub's number 2 hitter in his prime.

I am jumping on him, godamn it! Its b/c of him we are not making the Playoffs this year!!

If only we had Neifi Perez to take his place. That would have saved the season.

"Neifi saved us, Dude" Johnnie B. Baker, 2005

Ha!

Lame ass comment. You know damn well who to blame. I blame Michael Barrett.

I'm not a regular poster here, but it cracks me up to see how many folks around these parts are on the bash a 22-year old wagon. The kid hasn't even filled out yet... I see Castro sliding to 2B and making more of a Brandon Phillips comparison. In 2003, Phillips played 112 games at 22 yrs with a .981 FLD%... was out of the Bigs until 2006 when he posted a .977 with the Reds at 26 yrs, after the tribe gave up on him. Since '06 Phillips has averaged a 3.48 WAR. I'm not saying Castro is going to develop into a GG caliber SS/2B, but offensively he has a very similar in body type as phillips and an average projection of .300-22-85-20 would make him a pretty damn valuable 2B going forward, especially if Baez stays at SS.

While I have been on the Barney bandwagon (which has broken down on LaHair, apparently) since I saw him in the CWS, he seems to be a #8 batter. He is better than Theriot with more range, and unless HoyStein gets something in a package for real value, it seems like he is the kind of player Jed likes up the middle to save runs. It is a great thing to have. As Goldstein says, "He's a baseball player who will play in the Big Leagues for ten years and deservedly so."

It's important to remember context when you quote as well. Goldstein said that while he isn't really a starter but more of a backup.

some Muskat tweet tidbits: today is Rizzo's 23rd birthday cub record thru 108 games is 2011 and 2012 is identical: 43-65 lineup... Jakkkkson sits, Soriano returns: DeJesus, Barney, Rizzo, Soriano, Castro, Castillo, Vitters, Mather (RF), Samardzija

My problem with Barney is that on a really good team you can aford to have a good field no hit 2B. However, on a crappy team you can't afford that luxury. Is it worth keeping him 2 - 3 years until we become good? My vote is no, get something for him while you still can. If he could only draw walks and get his ob% to .340 - .350 or so, he would be worth keeping.

I see this sentiment on Barney a lot from posters and talk shows all over, and I get it. Where it stops for me is -- Barney for who? Is the return worth 1 to 3 WAR value more than Barney? Would the Cubs be just trading a so-so MLB player for someone else's so-so player? That's my take whenever the subject of trading Barney or Castro for Upton or, for that matter, almost any trade (except veterans/big contracts for prospects) at this point in TheJedi's 'rebuilding' project. Fundamentally, I'd like to see Ricketts spend $60-70M on FA's this off-season for no other reason than he probably can. Perversely, I'd like to see him have to decide - better team? or better ballpark? However, what do the Cubs get back? More Crawfords, Lackeys, and Soriano's? Or worse than that - 4 to 5 year deals that when the 'waves' of MLB-ready prospects arrive, there's 4 to 5 pieces of dead weight soaking up $60M in payroll where $500K prospects could produce better. I love adding FA's, but who? For how long? Playing where? Blocking who in 3 years?

Welcome to Miami!

This is my point. Why not have the best defensive 2B in the middle of our infield for a few years? As GA states, realistically, unless it is some kind of a nice package of players, who do you get back for Barney that makes it worthwhile?

Actually, on a crappy team, you CAN afford it. My feeling is that for a guy like Barney, most teams are content to wait for players like him to become available for dirt cheap.

Fontenaught is available. We need more <strike>s</strike><strong>crappy</strong>.

shame he can't field 2nd/3rd worth a damn...his bat is decently bench-quality...but hell, you can get a washed up 1st/OF to outperform that kinda performance without the D.

people can still use UZR while keeping a straight face? also, d.barney is nearing 100 games without an error.

I actually don't even really have the foggiest understanding of UZR. It reminds me a bit of QB ratings in football, which does have this empirical formula that I don't give a shit about in the slightest. In Castro's case, it just so happens that his UZR sucked and now it doesn't, and my eyes also tell me that he has improved in the field.

6:35 (EST) start time for a mid-week game in SD? okay, sure. also, after watching the "away" feed for what feels like a week i can finally watch some len/bob on wgn.

Happy Birthday Tony Four Sacks

dejesus is working hard to make the cubs pay him $1.5m to go away next season rather than paying the full $6.5m to keep him around. i wouldn't complain seeing him next year if he at least picks up the hitting/ob% part of his game. he's not fallen sharply yet, but his minimal power hasn't reappeared and he's in a cruddy 2nd half slump so far...

Wed, 08/08/2012 - 5:06pm — crunch dejesus is working hard to make the cubs pay him $1.5m to go away next season rather than paying the full $6.5m to keep him around. i wouldn't complain seeing him next year if he at least picks up the hitting/ob% part of his game. he's not fallen sharply yet, but his minimal power hasn't reappeared and he's in a cruddy 2nd half slump so far... ========================= CRUNCH: DeJesus signed a three-year $15M contract ($10M guaranteed) last off-season where he gets $4.25M (guaranteed) per season 2012-13 plus a third year club option ($6.5M or $1.5M buy-out) for 2014. So unless he gets traded in the meantime, DeJesus will almost certainly be back in a Cub uniform in 2013.

forgot we were working with a 2/3, not a 1/2...i still think it's a good gamble, though i'd like to see more of the 30-double/10-homer guy he's shown himself to be in the past.

Umpire Bill Miller took a pitch directly to the mask on a fastball where the catcher was crossed up in the bottom of the first inning in Oakland. Later on, twice during the game he rang up a batter on strike two. During the bottom of the sixth, the second base umpire left the game, then came back suited up with the home plate equipment. When the second base umpire came back out with two outs, Miller handed him his baseballs without a word and left. I watched the bottom of the sixth on mlb tv archive, and it looked like the switchover was something the umpires discussed beforehand.

Did the home ump go to second? If he left the game it might be a mild concussion. A fastball upside the head, or on the chin can surely cause one.

He left the game. The ball missed the catcher's glove and hit him at the bottom of the mask.

Jim Hendry piece: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443659204577575300441132144.html?mod=wsj_share_tweet#printMode

he's a good dude, pretty good evaluator imo...but didn't manage the big organizational picture. And for all I know, a lot of that blame could be the ownership in flux, he poured a lot of resources into the major league team, but should have been doing the same into the minor league system at that time (2007 time period of course). But who knows how much flexibility he had... Ricketts seem to get it though and I know TheJedi do...be nice if I knew their timeframe because right now it seems like 2015 which is gonna piss off a lot of fans.

excerpt from Kevin Goldstein on the Brett Jackkkkson call up: <blockquote> If Jackson can close some of the massive holes in his swing, he's a true five-tool player. He has above-average raw power and speed, and the ability to post a string of 20/20 seasons. That gives him excellent long-term potential. However, the "ifs" regarding his swing are gigantic ones. He has a good understanding of the strike zone and is not prone to chasing, but he's not a sound hitter. There isn't an obvious flaw in his swing, or a tendency to chase sliders or something like that, he's just not that good of a hitter. The hope is that he can display enough power, speed and defense to make up for a low batting average.</blockquote> http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=17915

Interesting thing about Jackson is that the sky is the limit. Well, not a Troutish sky, maybe, but it's high. Problem is that the opposite is also true. He could be a permanent member of the Mendoza club.

I'm getting my first looks at Jackson. Maybe Goldstein has seen him a lot, or maybe he is just improvising. But the Jackson I'm seeing is very "prone to chasing." I don't see much difference between Jackson right now and Colvin last year. On two strikes, they start hacking and don't stop till it's strike three. Sveum said this yesterday: "We're learning a lot about him, and it's basically come down to swinging out of the strike zone. It's not like he's swinging through anything." That's the opposite of what Goldstein is saying. A "massive hole" means you swing through pitches. I don't want to get into name-calling, but if you can't figure out that pitchers at this level don't throw strikes if you don't force them to, then you didn't get into Berkeley on your SAT scores.

Jackson has always maintained a high ML On Base %. Colvin didn't even walk in College.

Reports on Jackson in the minors have always been that he has a good command of the strike zone but that he swings through strikes a lot. Maybe Sveum has seen the opposite, but let's trust the larger sample size for now. And maybe Jackson is going through a phase (during his first MLB callup) where <i>is</i> chasing--doesn't mean that's what caused his K rate in his minor league career.

"Reports on Jackson in the minors have always been that he has a good command of the strike zone etc." Professional scouts who write such reports--and also turn in hotel and fast-food receipts--do not file their reports on the internet. We may not have seen reliable reports on Jackson. Sveum has said a few times that he wanted to see the strikeout machine with his own eyes, because the numbers didn't make sense. Sveum has pointed out that even in games where Jackson got a few extra-base hits, the outs would all be strikeouts. It's odd for a player to either hit the ball hard or miss it completely. What happened to the popups and the easy grounders to second and short? The data sample, small though it is, shows Jackson "protecting the plate" or whatever it's called when you swing at everything on two strikes. That approach becomes untenable in the majors and also the high minors, where pitchers have learned how to make hitters look foolish. As for Dr. Aaron's point about Jackson's career OBP versus Colvin's: that's a very good question and I don't have an immediate answer, but I suppose it would be possible to be a very patient hitter until you have two strikes, at which point you go into the panic mode that produces the large number of strikeouts. If the count goes to 3-1, then 3-2, maybe you don't panic, because you can smell a walk. You might get a lot of walks without actually working the count. To me, working the count means getting from 0-2 or 1-2 to 3-2.

I think Brant Brown might end up being a good comp to Bjax. It's something I've largely thought all year. Big kid with some speed and power. Can play CF. Tons of swing and miss in their games. Brant was able to have a couple of good MLB years. He brought us a great pitcher in trade. Ultimately a bit of a letdown.

"Tons of swing and miss" But did Brown have any swing-and-hit? Look at his age-23 and 24 seasons--in AA, for Pete's sake. 5 or 6 home runs, .390 SLG. Jackson: 20 HRs last year, 10 of them in AAA; 15 homers this year. Career SLG: .488. Sometimes I feel sympathy for Cub fans who grew up in the Gary Scott era. In retrospect, I was pretty lucky in the '60s.

1987 was my first really coherent season as a fan.

I'm still waiting to have mine.

Nicely played!

+ a bunch

'87 was the middle of a long dormant period for me--far from Chicago, WGN cable not locally available, etc. Woke up briefly in '98 for Soto-McGuire, then for good about the time Dusty arrived. Without looking it up, can't place Scott or Brown accurately in the 80's-90's.

Brant Brown came on the scene during the 98 season. He played a serviceable CF and flashed some power, and hit 290-ish. Looked like he might be a player. We dealt him that offseason for Jon Lieber.

I thought he played LF? Isn't that where he dropped the famous milwaukee non-clinch flyball?

Perhaps can't place Soto in 90's-00's? Got to love autocorrect.

it certainly would be out of the realm of possibility that a rookie was a bit overanxious in the majors in 3 games and may not be reflective of how he played in the minors.

Hey man, you can trust years of scouting or you can trust the few days of observation from the guy who's successfully leading the Cubs to a record just under .400. I'll trust the major league manager; it's what my gut tells me.

Recent comments

The first 600 characters of the last 16 comments, click "View" to see rest of comment.
  • I was running something that probably slowed it down. Should be much better now
  • Is it me, or is the site taking fo-r-ev-er to load?
  • Seems to be working. Unfortunately, I can't get it to work with anything other than plain text! Javascript from editor messes up the AJAX posting. Feedback welcome
  • Trying to make comments dynamic such that one displays to everyone in the comments section as well as in the recent comments blocks immediately after it's posted (i.e. no refresh required). Second test
  • It's Magic. http://tinyurl.com/osa2pm2
  • "never been a fan of using closers in non-save situations." Tie game at home in the ninth, there can never be a save situation. So you're saying, don't use your best reliever today.
  • Sorry if this was covered in a different thread, but while I overall like this new design, the white type on the dark background is a killer. I may be in the minority on that. But again, nice job.
  • It was almost like Javy was saying, "see, O&B, same old Javy here." Guy's gotta learn you don't need to swing hard to knock a Chapman ball out of the park. Choke up, dude, follow Rizzo's lead.
  • The magic number is now 24.
  • Kershaw uses his 132nd pitch for his 15th K (Marlon Juice Byrd, with the tying run at 2nd), and the Dodgers sweep the Giants. Also, Pirates lose to the Brewers for the 5th straight time. So...with 30 to play, we are 6.5 up on SF (7 in loss column) and 8 up on the Nats, and still in contact (4.5 back) of the Pirates. Man, what a roller coaster the last 2 days -- fantastic stuff.
  • Schlitter still pitching for Iowa? Guess nobody wanted him?
  • JOHN B: Pierce Johnson and Rob Zastryzny were likely 2015 AFL candidates (I mentioned them as likely candidates to get assigned to the AFL in an article about the AFL last month) because they are starting pitchers who missed part of the season due to injuries and they need to accrue more innings.
  • I personally don't think managers use closers enough in tie games in the 9th. The mindset and adrenaline should be just like a save situation. You get the outs, you have a great chance of winning. You don't your team is screwed.
  • Also - what did Bosio say when we went to talk to Rondon? "OK, Hector, tie game, 9th inning, 2 outs, 2-0 count on the hottest hitter in the game. Let's try the ol' fastball right down the middle and see how that works, hmmm?" Terrible pitch. I've never been a fan of using closers in non-save situations -- they are used to pitching with adrenaline pumping and celebrating the last out of the inning. I realize it was a a swinging bunt and an error that caused the problem, but that may have been the worst pitch I have seen Rondon throw in a long time.
  • Ugly series save a few clutch Homeruns. 2 first inning Homeruns allowed. 2 complete innings (out of 27) with a lead (8th and 9th game 2). 6 Leads/Ties given up top half of the inning after scoring. 9 9th inning unearned runs. Brutal roadtrip coming up while SF plays 22 straight against teams with losing records. Like the Cubs odds, obviously, but long way to go.
  • No more f'n Pajama Parties, Joe! Losing a series at home to the Reds (who have a worse record than the Brewers) in September is not what we are looking for, gentlemen. 3 series losses in a row -- let's get that fixed immediately. Bad error by KB as Crunch describes -- almost like he was surprised the ball was hit to him. I think if he makes that play we win the game.