Comments on: Baselining Third

By: CodyG

CodyG — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 04:14:24 +0000

To be fair AZ, the argument had nothing to do with freese. GDM and I were simply arguing for the title of Batman.

By: Matt

Matt — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 01:40:52 +0000

CardfaninGA- If we don’t sign Holliday, we’ll need to make more than one upgrade to the offense, IMO. Getting 2 WAR for a good price is great, but not if you need to replace 5 WAR.

It’s like the 5th starter. Having Boggses and Garcias are great when you have one spot to fill for the minimum, and you may be getting more than you pay for with each one, but a rotation full of them can only take you so far.

By: Easy

Easy — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 23:53:37 +0000

I strongly believe that Freese should get first shot at third base whether or not we sign DeRosa. Therefore we would be signing DeRosa as a starting left fielder with options to use him elsewhere if needed. I kind of agree with some of the posters that, at his age and with his recent surgery, he might not be worth the money and the years that it would take to lure him away from the other suitors. If we do sign Holliday (I’m hoping not) it would surely be silly to try to sign DeRosa. If we don’t sign either I’d like to have Freese at third and a platoon of Craig and a veteran lefty hitting outfielder who creams righties in left field. The problem would getting TLR to go to war with a couple of rookies in the lineup.

By: RobertoRydeWagner

RobertoRydeWagner — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 18:29:11 +0000

DeRosa peaked with the Rangers and Cubs. With a 2 year deal, he will be 35 and 36. He’s not exciting for LF or RF, best at 3B and utility. The Cards should let him leave, collect a draft pick.

By: erik

erik — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 17:48:55 +0000

I agree. Crede hasn’t played more than 100 games per season for a while now, while still being a 2 WAR player. Crede is a bargain, however. He signed for $2.5M w/some incentives last season. That’s just about 1.5 M for win. Freese would make the league minimum, but if AZ’s gut is right about Freese, Crede wouldn’t be a bad insurance policy.

Crede could start w/ Freese either in Trip-A or the bench until Crede inevitably gets hurt again.

By: erik

erik — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 17:43:51 +0000

DeRosa’s bat plays just fine at 3B, and his defense in the outfield corners has been very good over his career. His value at 3B (about 2 WAR) is the same in LF.

By: CardfaninGA

CardfaninGA — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 07:19:57 +0000

I don’t understand Matt’s comment about “if we don’t sign Holliday.” I think the point of this posting, which I wholeheartedly agree with, is that we should go with Freese whether we sign Holliday or not. Allocating good money (like $8M+ a year it would take to sign Beltre or DeRosa) for a small marginal gain doesn’t make sense when you have more room for improvement in other areas.

I also have to disagree with the idea of DeRosa making sense for this team, due to his versatility. His bat doesn’t play that well at third; playing him in LF would be even worse. I think the better move would be simply to sign a leftfielder, whether that be Holliday or someone else, and stick with Freese at third.

By: Matt

Matt — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 05:44:31 +0000

I think he’ll perform similar to what we could expect if we signed Joe Crede, and for the minimum, with backup options in Mather and Craig, I’ll take it. If we don’t sign Holliday, however, that’s a different story.

By: tom s.

tom s. — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 03:22:31 +0000

Something I’ve long suspected about the numbers for freese – that they would show pretty marginal gains over the expensive free agents out there. My gut is he ends up a plus fielder (5-10 UZR) and underperforms his offensive #s a bit but comes in right at 2 WAR.

The depth at third is not terrible either – any guesses on the value of craig at third? I’d think 0 to 1 WAR with a (not much)subzero UZR, off the top of my head. Not great but ok.

By: Easy

Easy — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 23:03:00 +0000

Good analysis. I’m very high on the Cardinals giving him the shot, not because his ceiling is exciting but because it seems to make so much sense for them right now. I think the projections for him to be a slightly better than average player over the next few seasons are about right. The thing is that that would be a huge improvement over what we competed with this last year at the position, it would save us money to fill in other positions and it would give us time to develop a more exciting option. I’d love to have a more exciting closer, starter or left fielder than to spend big money for a slightly better third baseman.