Escobar's slash line since the Santana demotion

[Brock Beauchamp]

.286 .364 .469 .833 in 55 PAs.

 

It's enough to make me want to tear my hair out. Half this board called for Escobar to start FOR MONTHS before he finally got "the job", albeit sharing duties with Nunez.

 

Speaking of Nunez, here's his slash line: .259 .286 .296 .582 in 28 PAs. Meh, whatever. Bad but only 28 PAs.

 

Escobar isn't an .833 player over the long term but this kind of output is exactly why he should have been starting in May.

 

I want to like Paul Molitor but I find crap like this baffling and completely unacceptable. How many wins did the Twins leave on the table by running Santana out there two months past his expiration date?

[puckstopper1]

I agree Brock, but I put this a bit less on Molitor though.  He was trying to piece together a line-up based on the players he was given.  Arcia's season long struggles, and having Shaffer and Robinson as outfield "help" left the Twins way too thin in the outfield.  Thus Molitor needed to keep juggling Santana, Escobar and Nunez around.  Once Hicks and Rosario solidified things, Molitor gave Santana every chance to work thru his struggles.  I don't have any issue with that.  When Santana continued to struggle, he was sent down - yes probably weeks later than he should have been.

[HitInAPinch]

I still believe Danny Santana could have been an above average CF if given the chance he deserved for what he did in 2014.  Stats be damned! 

[twinsnorth49]

Everytime the conversation began about Escobar starting at SS, it would inevitably turn to him not being a major leaue SS this and not being the long term answer that, instead of just focusing on the fact he was the best available option they had at the time, and right now.

[nytwinsfan]

**** Yeah! And I will say this as someone who wanted Santana to start at SS (although I also thought Escobar was perfectly adequate). I was wrong.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Everytime the conversation began about Escobar starting at SS, it would inevitably turn to him not being a major leaue SS this and not being the long term answer that, instead of just focusing on the fact he was the best available option they had at the time, and right now.

Exactly. Hell, I might roll into 2016 with Escobar at short if better options don't present themselves this offseason. He's not the guy you *want* starting at short but given the potential in Santana, Polanco, and later Gordon, he might be acceptable as a stop-gap player.

 

People tend to forget Escobar is only 26 years old with ~1050 MLB PAs. In those latest 760 PAs, he has an OPS+ of 96.

 

On the other hand, I'd do everything in my power to avoid letting Suzuki vest his option and stick with the team in 2017. That should be priority #1 this offseason and something needs to be done to avoid that situation.

[Shane Wahl]

 

.286 .364 .469 .833 in 55 PAs.

 

It's enough to make me want to tear my hair out. Half this board called for Escobar to start FOR MONTHS before he finally got "the job", albeit sharing duties with Nunez.

 

Speaking of Nunez, here's his slash line: .259 .286 .296 .582 in 28 PAs. Meh, whatever. Bad but only 28 PAs.

 

Escobar isn't an .833 player over the long term but this kind of output is exactly why he should have been starting in May.

 

I want to like Paul Molitor but I find crap like this baffling and completely unacceptable. How many wins did the Twins leave on the table by running Santana out there two months past his expiration date?

I could handle one month of trying Santana out for an extended bad run, but one month is a decent amount of time to assess the current state of things. What is *totally bizarre* about it is that Molitor was all about Escobar being in the lineup earlier in the year when he was struggling (DH and LF). Keep an infielder in the infield and maybe his bat heats up? Imagine that!

[jimmer]

I think what we've seen is that his last 4 starts has really boosted up those numbers in a 55 PA sample size.

 

Last 7 days, 16 PAs: .400/.438/.733.  (6 hits)

 

Which helps the below:

 

Last 14 days, 34 PA: .267/.354/.467. (8 hits, which includes the 6 from last 16 PAs)

 

When looking at the last 55 PAs, he did through the roof amazing the last 16 PAs. He got 6 hits in 16 PA, and 8 hits in the previous 39. Basically, he had a hot week, which skews a short sample size.

 

While I agree with Brock that Eduardo has been the better option, and have said so at various times throughout the year, there's a reason we shouldn't draw conclusions on 55 PA.  One might argue he did just as well in his 65 PAs in June.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I could handle one month of trying Santana out for an extended bad run, but one month is a decent amount of time to assess the current state of things. What is *totally bizarre* about it is that Molitor was all about Escobar being in the lineup earlier in the year when he was struggling (DH and LF). Keep an infielder in the infield and maybe his bat heats up? Imagine that!

Escobar did the same thing last year as well. I spotted two segments of the season where he consistently played at short:

 

5/11-6/10 - .749 OPS

 

7/3-9/28 - .723 OPS

 

That looks like an acceptable shortstop to me. Eduardo appears to be something close to neutral defensively so that's not killing him, either. He's a -1 DRS in 1350 career innings at short.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Exactly. Hell, I might roll into 2016 with Escobar at short if better options don't present themselves this offseason. He's not the guy you *want* starting at short but given the potential in Santana, Polanco, and later Gordon, he might be acceptable as a stop-gap player.

 

People tend to forget Escobar is only 26 years old with ~1050 MLB PAs. In those latest 760 PAs, he has an OPS+ of 96.

 

On the other hand, I'd do everything in my power to avoid letting Suzuki vest his option and stick with the team in 2017. That should be priority #1 this offseason and something needs to be done to avoid that situation.

 

Honestly, I would role with Escobar at SS.  He's been slightly better than league average when playing there.  I can live with that until Polanco or Santana claims it. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

The most puzzling thing is that they actually demoted Santana, then recalled him a few weeks later when Buxton got hurt -- and immediately began starting Santana at SS again!  As if the only reason they sent him down with his .525 OPS was because of a roster crunch or something...

[Shane Wahl]

 

I think what we've seen is that his last 4 starts has really boosted up those numbers in a 55 PA sample size.

 

Last 7 days, 16 PAs: .400/.438/.733.  

 

Which helps the below:

 

Last 14 days, 34 PA: .267/.354/.467. 

 

I mean, he did through the roof amazing the last 16 PAs, how bad must he have done the previous 18 PAs. In fact, he got 6 hits in his last 16 PAs, and 8 in the other 37 PAs.(when looking at his last 55 PAs).  Basically, he had a hot week, which skews a short sample size.

 

While I agree with Brock that Eduardo has been the better option, and have said so at various times throughout the year, there's a reason we shouldn't draw conclusions on 55 PA.  One might argue he did just as well in his 65 PAs in June.

 

Note that I am not a huge fan of Escobar, but I think there is something to be said about defensive position affecting offensive production. Any infielder sent out to the OF for the Twins has to fear looking like JB from last year . . .

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

 

I think what we've seen is that his last 4 starts has really boosted up those numbers in a 55 PA sample size.

Yeah, I am always suspicious of such numbers quoted right after a big game.  Although you don't even need those numbers to clearly see that Escobar should be the starting SS now, and should have been so since May at the latest.

[jimmer]

 

Yeah, I am always suspicious of such numbers quoted right after a big game.  Although you don't even need those numbers to clearly see that Escobar should be the starting SS now, and should have been so since May at the latest.

based on our options, he should have always been the shortstop. better defender, more realistic and sustainable offensive numbers (not offensive numbers based on a ridiculous BABIP).

[DJL44]

I'd much rather use Santana as a Zobrist style utility player moving between spots in the infield and outfield. Maybe they can develop him to fill that role.

[nicksaviking]

I like to go back and check some of my old takes from past threads, I get way too proud of myself sometimes when I see that I was spot on.

 

Regarding the Liriano trade, I was dead wrong.

 

nicksaviking, on 29 Jul 2012 - 5:30 PM, said:

    Is no one concerned that both of these non-prospects are now forced to take a 40-man roster spot? If any more moves are made and the Twins need to clear more roster space, now they have to lose another player just to keep thses two bums? There are a lot of expendable players on the 40-man, but if I had to decide who was the most expendable based on how they have faired in the minros and what thier ceiling is, Escobar would be the first guy I'd get rid of. This trade made no sense on so many levels. Escobar is already in his second option year, next year is his last. So in 2014, the Twins will be putting him on waivers already when they need to replace him for someone who can hit. Even if there were no better packages, and even if the Pohlad's told Ryan that in no way shape or form can Liriano be offered a qualifying offer (doubtful) Ryan's biggest mistake is clogging the already messed up 40-man instead of asking for younger developmental players.

 

Escobar is a quality player and seems to do best with full-time duty.  Had he been starting from the get-go, not only might we not have been asking for a SS upgrade all year, we might have been happy that this team had an above average one.  This guy can hit when he gets regular at bats and those 35 doubles last year do not look like a fluke. 

[Mike Sixel]

Bad roster management, no doubt about it. I would love to understand what they were thinking.

[James]

 

I like to go back and check some of my old takes from past threads, I get way too proud of myself sometimes when I see that I was spot on.

 

Regarding the Liriano trade, I was dead wrong.

 

nicksaviking, on 29 Jul 2012 - 5:30 PM, said:

    Is no one concerned that both of these non-prospects are now forced to take a 40-man roster spot? If any more moves are made and the Twins need to clear more roster space, now they have to lose another player just to keep thses two bums? There are a lot of expendable players on the 40-man, but if I had to decide who was the most expendable based on how they have faired in the minros and what thier ceiling is, Escobar would be the first guy I'd get rid of. This trade made no sense on so many levels. Escobar is already in his second option year, next year is his last. So in 2014, the Twins will be putting him on waivers already when they need to replace him for someone who can hit. Even if there were no better packages, and even if the Pohlad's told Ryan that in no way shape or form can Liriano be offered a qualifying offer (doubtful) Ryan's biggest mistake is clogging the already messed up 40-man instead of asking for younger developmental players.

 

Escobar is a quality player and seems to do best with full-time duty.  Had he been starting from the get-go, not only might we not have been asking for a SS upgrade all year, we might have been happy that this team had an above average one.  This guy can hit when he gets regular at bats and those 35 doubles last year do not look like a fluke. 

I don't know what I said about the Liriano trade when it happened.  I don't think I want to look.  It may have been something similar.  But the fact is, even if Escobar is mainly a utility guy for the rest of his stay with the Twins, I'd say we got the better end of that deal.  

 

I think it should be pretty obvious to most people that Escobar should be the starting SS for the rest of the season.  He should have been starting at SS for a while before, like other have said.  I just look forward to seeing him there the rest of the year. 

[DocBauer]

Count me as a fan of Escobar, and a believer that he should be, at least for now, the Twins starting SS, and should have been at least a month ago. If not two.

 

But I am not a revisionist. I was one of those calling for Santana to get first shot when the season first began. He has more range, more speed, more athleticism and potential. He was coming off a huge season. And while I expected obvious regression, I actually thought he'd walk a little more to help offset a loss in BA. I also thought he might steal a few more bases as well.

 

Therefore....Santana was first up in my book. And I stand by my original thoughts. Again, not a revisionist. And I believe Santana earned and deserved some rope initially. But when it became obvious...well, sure seemed obvious to me and most of us...that he was not just going to play himself out of a funk, I thought he should be in AAA, stay in AAA, and give the job full time to Escobar.

 

When given a legitimate shot, he has shown that the player he was last season just might be real. That the player he looked like in ST was also real. I don't mind Nunez as a utility for now. I'm not giving up on Santana either finding himself, or becoming an athletic and sometimes dangerous INF/OF utility type. (Just never good enough or consistent enough to start) And I have high hopes for Polanco, assuming he is not traded.

 

My objection is it took this long to look to Escobar and stick with Escobar.

[Thrylos]

 

.286 .364 .469 .833 in 55 PAs.

 

It's enough to make me want to tear my hair out. Half this board called for Escobar to start FOR MONTHS before he finally got "the job", albeit sharing duties with Nunez.

 

Speaking of Nunez, here's his slash line: .259 .286 .296 .582 in 28 PAs. Meh, whatever. Bad but only 28 PAs.

 

Escobar isn't an .833 player over the long term but this kind of output is exactly why he should have been starting in May.

 

I want to like Paul Molitor but I find crap like this baffling and completely unacceptable. How many wins did the Twins leave on the table by running Santana out there two months past his expiration date?

 

Are you sure that it was not Ryan who made part of the call?  He could had demoted him faster... Part of the context here is that the team was doing great even with Santana at SS (and Suzuki at C, and what's his face at CF) for a month...

 

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Are you sure that it was not Ryan who made part of the call?  He could had demoted him faster... Part of the context here is that the team was doing great even with Santana at SS (and Suzuki at C, and what's his face at CF) for a month...

I think it was six of one, half dozen of the other.

 

Santana shouldn't have been on the roster. That's on Ryan.

 

Santana shouldn't have been on the field. That's on Molitor.

[Brock Beauchamp]

For the record, in no way am I criticizing the front office for starting the season with Santana. I would have done the same in their place.

 

On the other hand, by mid-May at the very latest, it was apparent Santana needed a reboot. Any playing time Santana received after May 15-ish was a mistake, and a big one.

[Cap'n Piranha]

 

Exactly. Hell, I might roll into 2016 with Escobar at short if better options don't present themselves this offseason. He's not the guy you *want* starting at short but given the potential in Santana, Polanco, and later Gordon, he might be acceptable as a stop-gap player.

 

People tend to forget Escobar is only 26 years old with ~1050 MLB PAs. In those latest 760 PAs, he has an OPS+ of 96.

 

On the other hand, I'd do everything in my power to avoid letting Suzuki vest his option and stick with the team in 2017. That should be priority #1 this offseason and something needs to be done to avoid that situation.

 

I'll do you one better and say I want Esco starting 150 games a year until Vielma or Gordon takes it from him.  Giving what Gordon's been doing in the second half this year, that could happen in 2018.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Those looking back on the Liriano trade, don't beat yourselves up too much. Escobar wasn't that great a prospect at the time, there was really no way for us fans to know he'd become a passable starting SS.

 

Credit to the Twins for seeing that potential and helping him flip that switch at the plate, although ironically as this thread suggests, it was the Twins who have doubted him in that role more recently.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Credit to the Twins for seeing that potential and helping him flip that switch at the plate, although ironically as this thread suggests, it was the Twins who have doubted him in that role more recently.

Yeah, it's kinda humorous they believed in him enough to get him in trade but lacked the faith to play him every day after his good 2014.

[gil4]

On this thread; http://twinsdaily.com/topic/19771-can-we-put-down-the-pitchforks/

 

Gernzy, on 19 Aug 2015 - 08:06 AM, said:

I would like to see everyone who hates Terry Ryan and the front office try to take on the job. Any of you seriously think you could do a better job?

 

Not to pick on Gernzy, because this was just the latest example of this type of question being asked, and it's certainly a valid question, but examples like the Escobar/Santana situation seem awfully common in this organization, common enough to give me pause before answering "probably not." 

 

I'm not a Ryan basher, I don't want him fired (unless I get the job), and I (for the most part) like the direction the organization is headed.  But I do get frustrated by some of the decisions he has made that seem obviously wrong at the time to those of us with much less information available, when in hindsight, it turns out we were right.

 

Maybe if we were in the chair we would have a tough time seeing the forest for the trees, too.  Maybe we would see the tools Santana has and try to make it work.  Or maybe we would spend all day on TD and get the real scoop and make all the right moves.   (Dave still wouldn't like them.)

 

[nicksaviking]

 

Those looking back on the Liriano trade, don't beat yourselves up too much. Escobar wasn't that great a prospect at the time, there was really no way for us fans to know he'd become a passable starting SS.

Credit to the Twins for seeing that potential and helping him flip that switch at the plate, although ironically as this thread suggests, it was the Twins who have doubted him in that role more recently.

 

No kidding, this is a guy who has a career .675 minor league OPS.  By all accounts he looked like a poor man's Pedro Florimon.

[bird]

 

For the record, in no way am I criticizing the front office for starting the season with Santana. I would have done the same in their place.

 

On the other hand, by mid-May at the very latest, it was apparent Santana needed a reboot. Any playing time Santana received after May 15-ish was a mistake, and a big one.

 

 

Substitute Punto for Santana and Gardy for Paulie. And then be thankful we're not contending with all that rubbish about Paulie's little favorites and compromising photos. Yet. Better that people blame it all on Ryan.

[nicksaviking]

 

Substitute Punto for Santana and Gardy for Paulie. And then be thankful we're not contending with all that rubbish about Paulie's little favorites and compromising photos. Yet. Better that people blame it all on Ryan.

 

I think the relief comes from the idea the Molitor liked Santana because of his potential while it seemed that Gardy preferred the intangibles more associated with hustle and other blue collar adjectives.

 

I'm guessing barring injury Escobar gets the job through the year.  But I wonder if we are going to go through this every year with Polanco getting the gig to start the year in 2016 and Gordon or Vielma getting a shot in following years.  Escobar has a real chance at being a legendary Pariah

[d-mac]

 

Exactly. Hell, I might roll into 2016 with Escobar at short if better options don't present themselves this offseason. He's not the guy you *want* starting at short but given the potential in Santana, Polanco, and later Gordon, he might be acceptable as a stop-gap player.

 

People tend to forget Escobar is only 26 years old with ~1050 MLB PAs. In those latest 760 PAs, he has an OPS+ of 96.

 

On the other hand, I'd do everything in my power to avoid letting Suzuki vest his option and stick with the team in 2017. That should be priority #1 this offseason and something needs to be done to avoid that situation.

 

YES to all points here!