Article: Are we giving Aaron Hicks a raw deal?

[Shane Wahl]

Given the somewhat peculiar nature of Hicks' progression (slow at each level, but always "getting it" a second time around), this whole conversation seems a bit odd. The Twins just did something wrong last year by starting him out of the gate and out of the gate as the leadoff hitter, when he had not touched AAA at all. He needed time in AAA last year. I do think that he might have about the same MLB stats this year whether or not he was in AAA last year (given his learning curve), but if he hadn't been up in the show last year, people would be way more forgiving of his 2014 output right now. That output is not terrible if you actually understand the entirety of his time in the minors. Right now, he just isn't hitting and slugging. That would be expected from the guy in his first year in the bigs given his history. It will come around. He is going to start driving the ball soon. I guarantee that. This will change the OPS without affecting, too much his OBP in the process.

 

That said, two things:

 

1. The defense is sometimes weird to watch. We were basically assuming MLB-ready defense since he was in A ball. What?

 

2. Paging Parker: is there something different in his swing from last year to this year that might help explain the drop in slugging?

[Otto von Ballpark]

Remember, the Twins apparently pursued Rajai Davis hard this past winter, which suggests they agreed that Hicks could use more AAA seasoning. But then when they didn't get Davis, they made no other CF moves and stood pat with Presley/Mastro (actually took a step backwards with Bartlett), all but guaranteeing that Hicks would be the MLB starter, ready or not.

 

Seems like that was a bigger "raw deal" for Hicks than anything else.

[diehardtwinsfan]

To address the OPs statement, I think addressing this in terms of luck is not a good idea. Just because something falls into a bell curve doesn't mean that the results are random. Things can appear to be random, even though they are not. Hicks simply isn't making contact. If his bat speed is too low, then he's a lost cause.

 

However, I don't think he would have been a highly regarded prospect if this wasn't the case. It's more likely in my opinion that he coudl benefited from the more gradual exposer to tougher pitching so that he can make those adjustments. Going from AA to MLB was too much. I'm hoping that this eventually starts to play out as he figures things out, but I do think that AAA was teh best option for him and at the moment still do. Unfortunately, there's nothing on the 40 man to give that to him.

[Dantes929]

I'm hoping Parmalee;s aggressiveness will impress Hicks and inspire him to be more aggressive. I'd trade a couple of those walks for a double now and then.

But I would not trade a couple walks for each double. Not much different with Parmalee. If his home run rate drops (and it almost certainly will) and he doesn't raise the average and OBP he will be back on waivers.

[TheLeviathan]

1. The defense is sometimes weird to watch. We were basically assuming MLB-ready defense since he was in A ball. What?

 

This, by far, is the thing that bugs me most. This guy was supposed to be a plus fielder in center which would help offset his efforts to learn at the plate. But he's brutal in all phases at this point.

 

It just goes to show that the scouts that seem him twice a month to gauge his defense aren't getting anything close to a clear picture.

[Dantes929]

This, by far, is the thing that bugs me most. This guy was supposed to be a plus fielder in center which would help offset his efforts to learn at the plate. But he's brutal in all phases at this point.

 

It just goes to show that the scouts that seem him twice a month to gauge his defense aren't getting anything close to a clear picture.

I agree with that. Makes me question all the things they say about Buxton as well. Right now I would place Hicks behind Kirby, Hunter, Gomez, Span, and Revere defensively even with Revere's terrible arm and Gomez's erratic arm. This was a guy that was toted enough defensively that you immediately thought his floor would be a fast Span. If he gets a hang of the hitting I like him for a corner, Buxton or no Buxton.

[jokin]

This, by far, is the thing that bugs me most. This guy was supposed to be a plus fielder in center which would help offset his efforts to learn at the plate. But he's brutal in all phases at this point.

 

It just goes to show that the scouts that seem him twice a month to gauge his defense aren't getting anything close to a clear picture.

 

You and Shane have hit on the most puzzling part of this whole situation. It was obvious from Day One, 2013, that his instincts in CF, especially in reading and routing to fly balls, was completely off-kilter. A professional scout even watching him only twice a month, at any of his minor league stops, should have had it revealed to him the obvious deficiencies in his game, ie, the ones we're seeing all-too-frequently-now with the Twins.

[diehardtwinsfan]

This, by far, is the thing that bugs me most. This guy was supposed to be a plus fielder in center which would help offset his efforts to learn at the plate. But he's brutal in all phases at this point.

 

It just goes to show that the scouts that seem him twice a month to gauge his defense aren't getting anything close to a clear picture.

 

I seem to remember Plouffe being trumpeted as an averge defender at SS too.

[Shane Wahl]

I am ignorant about something here. What is this "two times a month" stuff about scouting? I mean it is the 21st century. Install cameras all over and pay people to analyze film. I do not trust the minor league system, to some extent, in evaluation and how they often play some of these players in ways that seem dismissive of what would be in the best interest of the Twins (for instance, not giving prospects the most plate appearances by stacking them in the lineup). Also, this Hicks defense is puzzling and the Plouffe-at-short thing is atrocious.

[TheLeviathan]

I seem to remember Plouffe being trumpeted as an averge defender at SS too.

 

Right. And my point Shane was that most scouts aren't watching these guys play defense every day. Most reports you hear aren't from the parent club or the minor league staff, it's scouts and sources who rely on scouts.

 

There have been many players hyped for their defense over the last 10-15 years that have been flameouts in that regard. Delmon Young comes to mind for this as well.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Most scouting reports on Plouffe were "yeesh" with an upside of "strong arm, no range". I don't recall anyone honestly believing he was an MLB shortstop without him somehow fixing some glaring problems.

 

Are people confusing Dozier and Plouffe? Dozier was a decent range, steady hands, weak arm scouting report.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Yep. 2008 BA:

 

Weaknesses: Plouffe doesn't stand out in any phase of the game. He figures to bat at the bottom of a big league order. An inconsistent defender, he made 32 errors last season and must improve his footwork to remain a shortstop. His quickness is below average for his position.

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/online/prospects/rankings/organization-top-10-prospects/2008/265485.html

[DocBauer]

I don't think he's getting a raw deal. Had the Twins better constructed their roster I'd guess most fans would agree some time in AAA to refine his game would help a lot. The kid just doesn't appear quite ready yet and that's not his fault. The option needs to be there to send him down so we do what's right by him, but unfortunately that isn't the case right now.

 

We have to hope he plays through it, but there is nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade. Hicks has not been very good or encouraging thus far, but that doesn't mean we should give up on him either.

 

To echo Jokin....THIS.

 

I ran through Hicks' milb stats and compared them to Gomez and Hunter both to satisfy my own curiosity. While Hicks has not completed his second year in ML ball, I also looked at first couple of seasons of the three. I posted those comparisons in another Hicks thread, and to be honest, I just don't have the ambition to post them all again here. LOL

 

In brief, Hunter spent the most time in the minors, Gomez the least, which was probably a mistake considering his 4+ year struggle to establish much. Other than SB numbers, Hicks out performed the others in Avg/OB/Slugging and OPS in almost every category. I used these other two in comparison for obvious reasons, they were both Twins, Hunter signed by the Twins, Hunter sent down by the Twins after his debut, and because others have been using them as comparisons.

 

Look, I know milb number comparisons are not a be-all or end-all. But they are a good reference point to use in this situation: 3 athletic, multi-talented young CF's employed by the Twins who encountered rough spots early on, who were all top 100 prospects, and all 3 probably promoted too soon based on potential, need, hope and want.

 

Interestingly, Hunter didnt really produce until his age 24 season. And his age 25 season showed real improvement. Gomez's best season was his first at age 22, followed by three other non-descript to poor seasons until showing some real life at age 26, his 5th year. (With Milwaukee unfortunately) And Hicks, still early in his second season, is 25.

 

This not any sort of exact science! But the numbers and parallels are very interesting. I think there is no doubt Hicks was rushed due to hope, talent and need. And I'm not going to rehash the bungling situation in CF the past couple of season by the FO. And numbers simply can't measure the progress of every single ball player and pigeon-hole them in to a formula. That would be stupid, short-sighted and unfair. And I simply can't address comparable defensive metrics, production and potential. But I hope this provides some interesting perspective at least.

 

Give the kid a break, enjoy the ride, watch what the coaching staff can do with him the rest of the season and hold out judgement for now.

[Bsharpp]

I think the Twins have made a mess out of Hicks. I don't think there is anything wrong with Hicks. I think there is something wrong with the Twins. He was a slow developer in the minors. He never put up big numbers in the minors. Clearly, he belonged in AAA last year. You would think the Twins would learn from their mistake, but apparently not. They did the same thing this year and got the same result. Duh. Hicks has a world of talent. I put it all on the Twins. I have been a fan for a long time and I've never seen them mishandle a young player like they have Aaron Hicks. I like Ryan, but somebody is still making some poor decisions. The Twins say they don't care about service time. They have wasted a year and a quarter of Hick's service time. He hasn't even cracked .200. How can you say you don't care about service time when other teams rosters have so many former Twins who are better than what we have now but we didn't want to pay them?

[Dantes929]

How can you say you don't care about service time when other teams rosters have so many former Twins who are better than what we have now but we didn't want to pay them?

Its not all about that. They paid Nishioka a pretty penny rather than Hardy so I don't think it was fiscal related. Wasn't about money with Ortiz. Garza was traded. Span, Revere and Santana traded also though Santana was about the money. Who would prefer to have Span right now over Alex Meyer? Revere over May? Revere and Span way below Hicks in OBP which is the main ingredient they each bring to the table. I'll say again, as long as Hicks gets on base you won't hear too much complaining from me. Still think he should have stayed a right side hitter rather than switch hitting.

[DocBauer]

I think the Twins have made a mess out of Hicks. I don't think there is anything wrong with Hicks. I think there is something wrong with the Twins. He was a slow developer in the minors. He never put up big numbers in the minors. Clearly, he belonged in AAA last year. You would think the Twins would learn from their mistake, but apparently not. They did the same thing this year and got the same result. Duh. Hicks has a world of talent. I put it all on the Twins. I have been a fan for a long time and I've never seen them mishandle a young player like they have Aaron Hicks. I like Ryan, but somebody is still making some poor decisions. The Twins say they don't care about service time. They have wasted a year and a quarter of Hick's service time. He hasn't even cracked .200. How can you say you don't care about service time when other teams rosters have so many former Twins who are better than what we have now but we didn't want to pay them?

 

Not denying the Twins haven't handled Hicks very well. Been beating that drum for two offseasons now. But so many former Twins who are better than what we have but didn't want to pay them?

 

Could definitely argue about a big mistake about Hunter. Smaller arguement about Cuddyer. But who else?

[tobi0040]

To echo Jokin....THIS.

 

I ran through Hicks' milb stats and compared them to Gomez and Hunter both to satisfy my own curiosity. While Hicks has not completed his second year in ML ball, I also looked at first couple of seasons of the three. I posted those comparisons in another Hicks thread, and to be honest, I just don't have the ambition to post them all again here. LOL

 

In brief, Hunter spent the most time in the minors, Gomez the least, which was probably a mistake considering his 4+ year struggle to establish much. Other than SB numbers, Hicks out performed the others in Avg/OB/Slugging and OPS in almost every category. I used these other two in comparison for obvious reasons, they were both Twins, Hunter signed by the Twins, Hunter sent down by the Twins after his debut, and because others have been using them as comparisons.

 

Look, I know milb number comparisons are not a be-all or end-all. But they are a good reference point to use in this situation: 3 athletic, multi-talented young CF's employed by the Twins who encountered rough spots early on, who were all top 100 prospects, and all 3 probably promoted too soon based on potential, need, hope and want.

 

Interestingly, Hunter didnt really produce until his age 24 season. And his age 25 season showed real improvement. Gomez's best season was his first at age 22, followed by three other non-descript to poor seasons until showing some real life at age 26, his 5th year. (With Milwaukee unfortunately) And Hicks, still early in his second season, is 25.

 

This not any sort of exact science! But the numbers and parallels are very interesting. I think there is no doubt Hicks was rushed due to hope, talent and need. And I'm not going to rehash the bungling situation in CF the past couple of season by the FO. And numbers simply can't measure the progress of every single ball player and pigeon-hole them in to a formula. That would be stupid, short-sighted and unfair. And I simply can't address comparable defensive metrics, production and potential. But I hope this provides some interesting perspective at least.

 

Give the kid a break, enjoy the ride, watch what the coaching staff can do with him the rest of the season and hold out judgement for now.

 

I completely agree about the parallels between Hicks and Gomez. I had seen enough regarding Gomez and was absolutely shocked we were able to get Hardy for him. I would have traded him for a big mac. Having been 100% wrong on him and seeing how long it took for him to click, we need to have patience with Hicks.

 

I think we need to look at it in terms of age and MLB at bats. Gomez clicked in the back half of 2011, his OPS splits that year were .660/.819. The next year at 26 he had a .768 OPS and .800+ the following year. At the end of the 2011 season, Gomez was 25 and had 1,678 at bats under his belt spanning five seasons. Hicks will be 25 next month and has only 468 MLB at bats. I am not saying Hicks also needs 1,600 at bats given is age, but he needs more than 460.

 

They are a different kind of player, Gomez will always have better power and not walk much, Hicks maybe the opposite. But both are young and talented and needed a little time.

[jay]

FWIW, Hicks DRS ranks 17th of 21 qualified CFers, while his UZR ranks him 18th of 21. "Not terrible"? Let's just say "not good", then.

 

As far as his alleged "May resurgence" at the plate goes (per post #7 above)....for the month, his .592 OPS ranks him 29th among CFers. For the season, he actually has a slightly higher OPS (.595) overall.

 

As far as the BB% goes, it just seems a matter of time before his numbers start to fall from this year's 16.8%, towards his 2013 BB% of 7.7%, as pitchers adjust. Hicks will have to change his passive ways, or the OBP will inevitably fall.

 

I'm not sure it makes sense to use small samples to illustrate how he's not good (defense and OPS) AND argue that his small sample numbers (BB%) are due for regression in the same post.

 

FWIW, I don't personally think Hicks will become the regular that many are hoping for (.750 OPS w/ plus defense). Assuming Buxton arrives, he'll need that at least that .750 OPS to be a relevant corner OFer and I just can't find a way to make that realistic. However, I do think he could be a strong 4th OFer on a WS contender.

[Shane Wahl]

Brock, the Plouffe point still stands though: they still brought him up as a SS and then a 2B!

[Brock Beauchamp]

Brock, the Plouffe point still stands though: they still brought him up as a SS and then a 2B!

 

I think that was more out of necessity than any desire to see Plouffe play shortstop. Thanks to various blunders, the Twins were out of options at short. They were drilling through the bottom of the barrel when Plouffe got the call.

 

My point is that people are selectively remembering scouting reports. On BYTO, pretty much everybody knew Plouffe was a butcher at short because scouting reports had been saying it for years. That doesn't mean every scouting report said he was awful but I remember most clearly stating he was bad at the position.

 

So the data was there. Whether people chose to acknowledge it is another matter entirely.

[troyhobbs]

I'm not sure it makes sense to use small samples to illustrate how he's not good (defense and OPS) AND argue that his small sample numbers (BB%) are due for regression in the same post.

 

FWIW, I don't personally think Hicks will become the regular that many are hoping for (.750 OPS w/ plus defense). Assuming Buxton arrives, he'll need that at least that .750 OPS to be a relevant corner OFer and I just can't find a way to make that realistic. However, I do think he could be a strong 4th OFer on a WS contender.

 

Too soon to say he won't cut it as a starter, plus there can't be much of a drop off from a starting OF on a bad team and a strong 4th OF on a world series contender. He'll get there.

[jokin]

I'm not sure it makes sense to use small samples to illustrate how he's not good (defense and OPS) AND argue that his small sample numbers (BB%) are due for regression in the same post.

 

FWIW, I don't personally think Hicks will become the regular that many are hoping for (.750 OPS w/ plus defense). Assuming Buxton arrives, he'll need that at least that .750 OPS to be a relevant corner OFer and I just can't find a way to make that realistic. However, I do think he could be a strong 4th OFer on a WS contender.

 

Uhhh....except that all of the numbers illustrated would reflect what we've become accustomed to within the larger numbers over the last 2 years- I responded to a comment that alleged how strong of a defender he currently is.....and there's virtually no evidence to suggest that Hicks is currently a good defender, by the numbers, or the eye test. And we know from last year, that he changed his style to become a more aggressive hitter mid-season that resulted in a falling BB% rate...and it turns out, we reach generally the same conclusion, as you so aptly pointed out in your last paragraph.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I think that was more out of necessity than any desire to see Plouffe play shortstop. Thanks to various blunders, the Twins were out of options at short. They were drilling through the bottom of the barrel when Plouffe got the call.

 

My point is that people are selectively remembering scouting reports. On BYTO, pretty much everybody knew Plouffe was a butcher at short because scouting reports had been saying it for years. That doesn't mean every scouting report said he was awful but I remember most clearly stating he was bad at the position.

 

So the data was there. Whether people chose to acknowledge it is another matter entirely.

 

funny how memories differ. I remember a lot of people wondering how it is he had survived at SS that long and how the scouting reports didn't capture how truly horrible he was on defense.

[Brock Beauchamp]

funny how memories differ. I remember a lot of people wondering how it is he had survived at SS that long and how the scouting reports didn't capture how truly horrible he was on defense.

 

I don't know if most people expected him to be as bad as he was but given his bat profile, it was pretty clear that he wasn't going to cut it at short. The guy didn't have a single redeeming trait of your typical shortstop.

 

Of course, things changed somewhat once his bat came around a bit.

[Sleestax]

I love to anticipate Hicks' good eye. Down 0-2 last game and drawing a walk. If things go really really sour I guess he could go down, but now as it stands everybody is helping out on the wins. I would like Hicks to play for us for years and eventually moving into Right. Buxton has been losing time due to injuries. He might not get his chance until 2016. I trust him in the outfield but kinda let down by his throwing. Is'nt he supposed to have a good arm too? Nothing seems to be on target that way. Still...lets hang in there and pull for Hicks together. 24 years old.

[Marta Shearing]

They need to once and for all put an end to the switch hitting experiment and send him down until he figures it out, however long it takes, and completely change his approach to hitting. Working the count is fine, but this is ridiculous. You have to want to swing the bat.