17: Phillies (Nola) @ Tigers (Verlander)

julio 2017-03-07 22:18:30 UTC #17

Final was 11-6. Pedro Beato took a beato-ing in the ninth.

Scoring Summary:
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	R	H	E
Phillies	0	1	0	2	2	4	2	0	0	11	13	0
Tigers	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	4	6	14	1

Pitching Summary:
Phillies	IP	H	R	ER	BB	K	Pitches	Strikes
Nola	2.0	5	2	2	1	2	0	0
Murray	1.0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0
Gomez, J.	1.0	1	0	0	1	1	0	0
Lively	2.0	1	0	0	0	3	0	0
Ramos, C.	2.0	1	0	0	0	1	0	0
Beato	0.2	5	4	4	0	1	0	0
Mariot	0.1	1	0	0	0	1	0	0
Totals	9.0	14	6	6	2	10	0	0

Tigers	IP	H	R	ER	BB	K	Pitches	Strikes
Verlander	3.0	4	1	1	2	2	0	0
Wilson, J.	0.1	1	2	2	2	1	0	0
Bell, C.	1.0	3	2	2	1	0	0	0
Hardy, B.	1.0	3	4	4	1	1	0	0
Stumpf	1.1	2	2	2	2	0	0	0
Ryan, K.	1.1	0	0	0	1	2	0	0
Leon	1.0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Totals	9.0	13	11	11	9	6	0	0

Austinfan 2017-03-07 22:41:10 UTC #18

Stassi picking up where he left off in winter ball.
It's looking like it's gonna be awfully hard to keep him off the 25.
In fact, from what I've seen of Kendrick, he'd better hope Stassi doesn't master fielding LF.

tom81 2017-03-08 01:03:34 UTC #19

Based upon this springs sss Joseph better hope he does master LF this spring.

VoteForKalas 2017-03-08 01:22:48 UTC #20

As we say every year, spring training stats are not only of a very small sample size, but being posted against pitchers who are working on aspects of their game/arsenal and/or may be pitchers destined eventually for the minors.

Is it positive and fun to see prospects playing well? Absolutely, but I caution making any other firm conclusions. We've seen many years players who have shined in ST and done pretty much nada ever again at the ML level.

If the Phillies truly make roster decisions based on ST stats, I would again doubt their intelligence and seriousness.

zambonir 2017-03-08 02:01:31 UTC #21

I genuinely don't know, ESPN broadcasts a lot of televised sports now where the announcers are in Bristol or Florida studios. I assume they still pick up ambient noise somehow but then there'd be no reason for it to vanish during quiet times either.

Austinfan 2017-03-08 15:36:58 UTC #22

Stassi has steadily improved the last couple years, big year in Reading, but last season in International league, he was 9th in the league in OPS (.806) RC+ 149 in 2015, 136 in 2016. Then he went down to Venezuela and posted great numbers 111 AB, 31BB, 23K, .988 OPS.

So whatever adjustment he made two years ago has persisted, and this spring so far is the continuation of a trend.
He has solid power, has really improved his batting eye, is a plus fielding 1B, question is whether he can handle LF.

andyb 2017-03-08 15:55:58 UTC #23

Stassi has never had a good season for a 1B at an age appropriate level. He is 27 and plays a position where offense the first requirement. He might be a good fit for the last spot on the bench for the short term, but there are really no expectations that he is much more than a 750-775 OPS player with limited defensive value (i.e. not good in the outfield).

That might be a reserve for a year or two, but it is not that valuable a player.

Austinfan 2017-03-08 17:52:36 UTC #24

As usual, you conclude a player is an automation, his talent frozen at the time he's drafted.
Numerous players with great initial talent flatline (see D Brown), others are late bloomers who make adjustments and blossom.

Josh Donaldson spent 2 1/2 years in AAA ball, then hit .241 with a .686 OPS for the As in half a season at age 26. Obviously no future.
Phillies gave up on Brandon Moss, how'd that work out for them?

Now are the odds stacked against Stassi? Sure.
One reason he has to master LF is he nees to show versitility to win a bench spot.

But I have a simple rule, if a player suddenly jumps in performance, it's probably a fluke, if they sustain that jump and there's a good explanation for that improvement (he reworked his swing and his approach to hitting two years ago and has continued to make adjustments), then the odds that it's for real increase over time.

Nor is he a BABIP artifact, his 2014 season he put up a .244 BABIP, after that season his BB% took a significant jump to 13%, his ISO jumped to .170 and stayed there for two seasons, and his BABIP returned to "normal." So his performance the last two years seems to reflect a change in his approach to hitting, he's become much more selective and makes harder contact.

andyb 2017-03-08 18:47:05 UTC #25

Not at all. The conclusion is to discount minor league stats when a player is much older than his competition. And it is nt as if Stassi's AAA stats last year were that great for a first base prospect anyway. It matters if they are 26 or 27 as opposed to 23 or 24 even if you say it doesn't.

Your Josh Donaldson and Brandon Moss examples do not hold true either. They were top picks (1st round supplemental for Donaldson or had the tools and early progress where they were universally acknowledged as a prospect (Moss was a top 100 prospect after his age 20 season).

Of course there are anomalies and players can improve. They usually have tools though. Stassi has below average power for a first baseman and that is an issue for him.

All of this is completely independent of thinking Stassi could earn a bench role - which I think he could under certain situations. But the main point is that there really is not much in his recent record to suggest he is better than a fringe bench player. Nothing. Beating up on younger players (VZ included) does not count as improvement.

Austinfan 2017-03-09 03:26:41 UTC #26

I don't jump to conclusions. I like to watch and see what happens, instead of presuming I have some special ability to predict what are random variables.
The predictive value of baseball statistics, especially minor league statistics, are pretty limited.
Outliers reveal themselves, if we knew who would be the outlier, it would kill the fun.

schillingfan 2017-03-09 16:46:54 UTC #27

Since Stassi is 27, he is at his peak performance age, so I would expect him to perform well. Keep him for a couple of years and then expect him to start to decline.

zambonir 2017-03-09 18:41:30 UTC #28

If he makes the team, Knapp would likely double as the team’s backup first baseman and backup catcher. That could hinder the chances of Brock Stassi, who is vying to make the team as an extra first baseman and outfielder.

This seems like an incomplete speculative analysis on Breen's part. If Knapp "beats out" Stassi as back-up 1B and is backup catcher, there is still a spot to fill, so does it go to another catcher, an OF (Perkins, Nava?) or a utility guy?

andyb 2017-03-09 18:57:20 UTC #29

Agree there. Knapp would be an "option" at backup 1B. Without a 3rd catcher someone else would get more relief starts though designating Knapp might also mean they want to give Joseph a shot at playing every day (i.e. 150+ games) until he shows he cannot do that.

Kendrick or Coghlan or Nava would all be fine in spot starts.

zambonir 2017-03-09 20:16:18 UTC #30

Well, that is the other part of the equation. Completely apart from Knapp's status, they simply don't need a bench player who is primarily a 1B. Joseph should play as much as possible and in addition to Kendrick and Coghlan, Blanco can play the position (as could Franco for that matter).

Stassi is on fire now but if the Phillies really do go for three catchers another reason may simply be that none of the other bench candidates are that exciting, and there's very little playing time for them, at 1B or in the OF (where Altherr and Coghlan will see most of the action). If it's not a catcher, it still wouldn't surprise me if it's a SS/utility type.

andyb 2017-03-09 21:07:23 UTC #31

I guess one could say that anyone in the 25th spot might be biding time till Crawford or someone else (Williams, Quinn) is ready. We obviously could trade Kendrick and/or Saunders to clear the spot, but I could also see them wanting Quinn on the team pretty quickly if he gets off to a good start. His pinch running alone could be worth the roster spot though of course he would not get the needed at bats unless they demoted someone like Kendrick.

We all want Quinn to be a starter, but giving him a Jarrod Dyson-like role for a couple of years is not the worst thing. If anybody gets on base starting in the 6th inning they could get Quinn in the game on a double switch and then your outfield defense is better the rest of the game also. Dyson has been stealing 30 bases a year on less than 300 AB. And in that 50% playing time he is consistently a 2-3 WAR player because the Royals almost always use him in situations where speed and defense is valuable.

andyb 2017-03-09 21:15:14 UTC #32

In other catchers playing 1B news Alfaro played 1B for Colombia yesterday against Tampa and had a HR plus at least one other hit. I am sure Colombia just wanted their backup catcher to get a game in and Alfaro is one of their 9 best hitters clearly.

zambonir 2017-03-09 21:15:17 UTC #33

Interesting. I just don't know that performance is the thing that is going to get Quinn his call-up. It's not even ABs or development he needs per se, it's proving that he can play every day without another trip to the DL. So I think they'll want to leave him in Allentown until July 31, at which point they'll have roster spots and he'll have stayed healthy (unless he hasn't done that, in which case it's all moot, and maybe the role you envision is actually his ceiling).

And yes, they could also go with Gomez or Florimon (or even a third catcher) if the plan is for Crawford to take that spot sooner rather than later (i.e. May rather than August). Then Blanco, Galvis and Hernandez all stick around until trade deadline or off-season.

tom81 2017-03-09 23:53:23 UTC #34

I really don't understand this reasoning at all. If he is "destined" to get hurt every year why not play him at the level where he can learn the most and help the team the most? If he can handle ML pitching I'd want all of his playing time to be at the ML level playing there as much as he can. If that means his body can't take an everyday role so be it, let him play when he can. If they think he is not yet ready for ML pitching then he belongs in AAA. Playing below level just to prove he can or cannot stay healthy makes no sense to me.

zambonir 2017-03-10 00:39:06 UTC #35

Well, he's not really "below level" because Quinn has never played in AAA. He may be talented enough to skip it, but he isn't conclusively developed enough to be a starting major league outfielder. So it is that, as well as the desire to put his body to the test.

What helps the team the most is figuring out what the 2018 OF is going to look like - who can start, who isn't worth keeping, who has trade value if you end up with enough depth. Letting Quinn show he can get 300 ABs in a half-season of AAA instead of 300 ABs in a full season of major league ball is valuable information. If they thought he or Altherr were healthy enough and ready to be the team's starting RF, and that either of those guys would make the 2017 team better, they woudln't have signed Saunders. Saunders and Kendrick are meant to make the 2017 team better (which is debatable) but they are also here to buy that additional development time for Altherr and the three AAA OFs.

tom81 2017-03-10 03:33:35 UTC #36

Not necessarily true. Saunders provides something unique to this team, a left handed power bat. This is something management decided the team needs. The guy who is not unique is Kendrick, a light hitting, not outstanding fielding LF. What value the signing of Kendrick did give the team was the ability to shop Hernandez. With Hernandez staying and us signing Coghlan who can play 2b/3b in addition to LF Kendrick has no unique value. There is no reason to start Kendrick in LF if either Quinn or Altherr are healthy and are able to hit ML pitching other than sunk cost.

If Quinn can hit ML pitching having him play in AAA is below level even if he has never played in AAA before. If he can hit ML pitching then his level is ML, he surely can field at the ML level and he is a plus to plus plus base runner at the ML level.