1B/DH roster choices

[Transmogrified Tiger]

This seems like a topic that's going to get more and more attention, so here's a thread for it.  Let's start with a quiz (no cheating!)

 

Player A's recent season wRC+ (oldest first): 93, 132, 105, 104

Player B's recent season wRC+ (oldest first): 92, 128, 103, 104

 

One of these is Hosmer and one of these is Mancini, do you know which? More importantly, with as similar as they are does it matter?

Spoiler

Player A: Mancini

Player B: Hosmer

 

Now, this comparison is misleading for a couple reasons.  One is age, Hosmer is 2 years older.  The other is 2020, that partial year represents Hosmer's one very good offensive season and Mancini didn't play at all that year since he was battling colon cancer.  The interest and investment each received(Hosmer cut by Boston and then signed for league minimum, Mancini 2/14 w/ an opt-out) makes it clear that they aren't the same.  But when I looked at it I was surprised how similar they were as hitters, especially when you consider Hosmer should be a clear upgrade defensively if you were to choose between them.

 

This is a drawn out way of saying that I think Mancini has a bigger part to play in Hosmer's fate than I might have realized.  Mancini's background isn't so sparkling that we can assume that he's gonna put up an above average batting line in his sleep into his 30s, and while his output languishes(current wRC+: 26), it might prove harder to move on from Hosmer if he's at least providing separation between them even if the overall number isn't great.  And Mancini's 2nd guaranteed year and background as a hitter means they believe enough in him to not pull the plug even after a horrific month, so paradoxically Mervis's MLB debut might be dependent not only on Hosmer not hitting, but on Mancini getting his act together offensively.

[mul21]

I think roster construction (i.e. Hosmer/Mervis both being LHH) is a as big a factor as any for me.  Hosmer doesn't provide a level of defense that appears to be game changing a la Rizzo from the eye test thus far and even if it's a modest increase in offensive output, I have to think that just getting away from all the damn ground balls he hits will have a net positive effect.  Long story short, Hosmer is a minimal sunk cost, Mervis is probably better already and hits less rally killing GBs, so bring him up and let's see what we have.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Mancini and Hosmer have been really similar players in a lot of ways but given that Mervis is a LHB, Mancini should stay and Hosmer should go.

[Bertz]

I'm not super worried about Mancini yet.  His swing rates and in zone contact rate are pretty flat with prior years.  He's hitting a lot more groundballs, but I don't think that means a ton over the course of 3 weeks.  He's been ass, but I think it's just a deep slump rather than anything systemic.

Hosmer has the similarly elevated groundball rate, but his chase rates and in zone contact rates have gone south as well.  That feels more likely to be real.  But even if his woes are also just a slump (very possible!), the existence of Mervis means he still ought to get the boot.

The other things working against Hosmer are that Mancini offers some nominal positional versatility, and that Madrigal's rebound means we do have a contact oriented bat on the roster. 

Hosmer made total sense in January, but for reasons both in and out of his control just doesn't anymore.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

2 minutes ago, Bertz said:

I'm not super worried about Mancini yet.  His swing rates and in zone contact rate are pretty flat with prior years.  He's hitting a lot more groundballs, but I don't think that means a ton over the course of 3 weeks.  He's been ass, but I think it's just a deep slump rather than anything systemic.

Hosmer has the similarly elevated groundball rate, but his chase rates and in zone contact rates have gone south as well.  That feels more likely to be real.  But even if his woes are also just a slump (very possible!), the existence of Mervis means he still ought to get the boot.

The other things working against Hosmer are that Mancini offers some nominal positional versatility, and that Madrigal's rebound means we do have a contact oriented bat on the roster. 

Hosmer made total sense in January, but for reasons both in and out of his control just doesn't anymore.

I think this is the most likely outcome, but I think what I meant to convey above is essentially that there's a non-trivial chance Mancini is cooked, and if/while Mancini looks cooked I think they're going to be more hesitant to pull the plug on Hosmer as long as he isn't just as bad.  Granted, we're about another week from that 'just as bad' moment at current trend lines, but still a relationship I think is probably under-thought in the Mervis v. Hosmer situation.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Mervis is 25 and I assume we are past any service time deadlines (is that still a thing). No reason to stall 

[Rex Buckingham]

Mooney had an article in The Athletic this morning that talked about how at Mervis' age Hosmer was in the majors and had however many homeruns and whatever and how he was a big part of the Royals run... WHO CARES! HE SUCKS NOW! 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Mooney doesn't think Mervis for Hosmer is very imminent: https://theathletic.com/4435497/2023/04/21/cubs-matt-mervis-how-soon/

 

Quote

In a Bears town, Matt Mervis is sort of like the backup quarterback right now, a buzzy topic for Cubs fans on social media and a button that Jed Hoyer’s front office can press whenever the offense struggles. But as an undrafted free agent out of Duke, Mervis doesn’t have the QB1 pedigree of a Justin Fields or the can’t-miss label attached to a top prospect such as Pete Crow-Armstrong. The Cubs also don’t want to overreact to small samples and disrupt their newfound sense of clubhouse harmony.

Promoting Mervis from Triple-A Iowa is simply not under consideration while the Cubs are riding the momentum from their strong start to the season (11-7). Giving some level of assurance to Eric Hosmer and Trey Mancini before signing those free agents — and then turning on them in April — is not a good way of doing business. Mervis is not on the 40-man roster, another factor as the Cubs try to manage their talent across a 162-game schedule.

 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

3 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

Mooney doesn't think Mervis for Hosmer is very imminent: https://theathletic.com/4435497/2023/04/21/cubs-matt-mervis-how-soon/

 

 

He's essentially saying the Cubs don't think Mervis is all that important as a prospect.

[jersey cubs fan]

I’d rather my team be ruthless with decisions involving crappy veterans than appease them with the hopes that other aging veterans might one day sign with the team because they can expect to be given a long leash. 

[CubinNY]

31 minutes ago, jersey cubs fan said:

I’d rather my team be ruthless with decisions involving crappy veterans than appease them with the hopes that other aging veterans might one day sign with the team because they can expect to be given a long leash. 

Agree. Hosmer is one of those guys that hangs around forever in baseball because he's White and is seen as some kind of a stabling presence or role model. 

[jumbo]

49 minutes ago, Rex Buckingham said:

Mooney had an article in The Athletic this morning that talked about how at Mervis' age Hosmer was in the majors and had however many homeruns and whatever and how he was a big part of the Royals run... WHO CARES! HE SUCKS NOW! 

This comment is perfect when your avatar is next to it - I can see that guy saying this

[Tryptamine]

Yes, I'm sure all the FAs are going to say, well the Cubs are offering me the most money but they were mean to a guy who has been terrible at baseball for 5 years straight so I guess I'll go elsewhere. 

[fromthestretch]

44 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

Giving some level of assurance to Eric Hosmer and Trey Mancini before signing those free agents — and then turning on them in April — is not a good way of doing business.

Fine. Then cut him May 1 when it isn't April anymore. (Sorry that it attributes that quote to you, TT, when you were quoting an article.)

What assurances did Hosmer get? Like 95% of his salary is being paid by another team. He is what he is at this point and hasn't put up palatable numbers for a first baseman since 2017 (excluding the pandemic-shortened 2020 season). He's started 14 of the 18 games, so it's not like they haven't given him an opportunity. I understand why they signed him. I understand wanting to give Mervis a few weeks at AAA to start the season, since last year was the first year he showed prowess with the bat as a professional. I think it's clear he has nothing left to prove at AAA.

[mul21]

1 minute ago, grassbass said:

Fine. Then cut him May 1 when it isn't April anymore. (Sorry that it attributes that quote to you, TT, when you were quoting an article.)

What assurances did Hosmer get? Like 95% of his salary is being paid by another team. He is what he is at this point and hasn't put up palatable numbers for a first baseman since 2017 (excluding the pandemic-shortened 2020 season). He's started 14 of the 18 games, so it's not like they haven't given him an opportunity. I understand why they signed him. I understand wanting to give Mervis a few weeks at AAA to start the season, since last year was the first year he showed prowess with the bat as a professional. I think it's clear he has nothing left to prove at AAA.

I think that last bit there is my biggest problem with this whole situation.  Dude is 25, has destroyed the baseball for the last 7 months in the minors and at some point you have to find out if he's an asset, has things to work on that get exposed when he comes up, or if he's not the solution long term.  We know Hosmer and Mancini aren't.

[fromthestretch]

Just now, mul21 said:

I think that last bit there is my biggest problem with this whole situation.  Dude is 25, has destroyed the baseball for the last 7 months in the minors and at some point you have to find out if he's an asset, has things to work on that get exposed when he comes up, or if he's not the solution long term.  We know Hosmer and Mancini aren't.

It's also not like the Cubs get any less left-handed offensively if they replace Hosmer with Mervis either. Sure, it's possible Mervis could tank, but with his obvious power and the plate discipline he's shown, the chances of him being worse than Hosmer are probably slim. It's an obvious one-for-one replacement, especially considering they play the same position.

The murkier decision for me is who goes when Morel ultimately comes up. Rios hasn't done much but also hasn't really been given much of an opportunity early on. He's also a left-handed bat with power. Torrens, who I'm not as low on as some here, might be the obvious choice at that time. 

[Transmogrified Tiger]

3 minutes ago, grassbass said:

Fine. Then cut him May 1 when it isn't April anymore. (Sorry that it attributes that quote to you, TT, when you were quoting an article.)

What assurances did Hosmer get? Like 95% of his salary is being paid by another team. He is what he is at this point and hasn't put up palatable numbers for a first baseman since 2017 (excluding the pandemic-shortened 2020 season). He's started 14 of the 18 games, so it's not like they haven't given him an opportunity. I understand why they signed him. I understand wanting to give Mervis a few weeks at AAA to start the season, since last year was the first year he showed prowess with the bat as a professional. I think it's clear he has nothing left to prove at AAA.

I think Jed's actual quote in the article is probably a more fair point than what Mooney insinuates:

 

Quote

How much time is enough time to give a full evaluation of what you have?

“It’s not 17 games,” Hoyer said before Thursday night’s 6-2 loss to the Dodgers at Wrigley Field. “We’ve played three weeks of baseball, so you have to be patient and be thankful that some of our guys have gotten off to hot starts. That allows some other guys to struggle. When those guys struggle, the other guys will pick them up, but I don’t think there’s like a specific number.”

Regardless of what ditching Hosmer does from a relational perspective, from a 'how do I get the best production' perspective I think you can make the argument that you can't definitively say he's got nothing to offer based on 50 PA.  I probably wouldn't make that argument, because even if you guess wrong and Mervis is bad and you don't have Hosmer anymore, you still have Mancini/Rios/Torrens who could fake it at 1B and then any number of other players who can help with DH at bats. I also don't think the likely difference in cutting Hosmer on April 20th v. May 15th or Memorial Day is going to be all that decisive in the short or long term trajectory of the team, but maybe I'm just being too careful because AAAA mashers are a much deeper player pool than stud hitting 1B.

[CubinNY]

They can keep Rios but, they need to get rid of Torrens and Hosmer.

[Irrelevant Dude]

2 minutes ago, mul21 said:

I think that last bit there is my biggest problem with this whole situation.  Dude is 25, has destroyed the baseball for the last 7 months in the minors and at some point you have to find out if he's an asset, has things to work on that get exposed when he comes up, or if he's not the solution long term.

Either the Cubs think Mervis still has things to work on in AAA or they simply don't view him as the answer at 1B.  If they thought Mervis was going to come up and make an immediate positive impact, I don't think they would be holding him back on account of undeserved loyalty to Hosmer.  There is a third possibility that the Cubs view Mervis so highly that he was only being kept down for service time reasons, but they learned from the Kris Bryant situation that it is better to wait beyond the exact service time date to give themselves plausible deniability.  I really don't think that's the case for a guy who is already 25 and not a top tier prospect, but you never know.

[fromthestretch]

1 minute ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

even if you guess wrong and Mervis is bad and you don't have Hosmer anymore, you still have Mancini/Rios/Torrens who could fake it at 1B and then any number of other players who can help with DH at bats.

I agree with this. Hell, if you wanted to get Madrigal or Rios some innings at 3B, Wisdom could play 1B, too. 

[fromthestretch]

Looking at the schedule, May 1 might actually make some sense for a call up. The Cubs are in DC, so probably a bit less pressure considering 1) they're on the road and 2) the Nats suck something awful. That gives him another week or so to mash for Iowa, which isn't awful considering he's lost some games due to weather. 

[CubinNY]

Isn't Mooney bascially Jed's mouthpiece?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

25 minutes ago, grassbass said:

I agree with this. Hell, if you wanted to get Madrigal or Rios some innings at 3B, Wisdom could play 1B, too. 

And if that's the path you want to go then Morel becomes viable for regular playing time too.

[sneakypower]

1 hour ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

“It’s not 17 games,” Hoyer said before Thursday night’s 6-2 loss to the Dodgers at Wrigley Field. “We’ve played three weeks of baseball, so you have to be patient and be thankful that some of our guys have gotten off to hot starts. That allows some other guys to struggle. When those guys struggle, the other guys will pick them up, but I don’t think there’s like a specific number.”

gambler's fallacy!!!

[Bertz]

3 hours ago, CubinNY said:

Isn't Mooney bascially Jed's mouthpiece?

No that's Jesse Rogers