Article: The Cubs and Pete Crow-Armstrong Might Be Facing a (Good) Dilemma

[Brandon Glick]

3 hours ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

The Cubs do not exist to give everyone a chance. There's a place for guys who you aren't sure if they can play in the majors or not but they might have some value someday if they could. It's called AAA.

But how do you know if a guy can play in the majors if he doesn't get a chance in the majors? We already know he's better than the competition at Triple A. That question has been answered. 

The jump from Triple A to the Majors is, by FAR, the biggest developmental curve any player will ever face. It takes so many guys multiple chances to figure it out, and most never do. I'm not saying the Cubs have to give Mervis a terribly long leash, but he already proved what he can at Triple A. Eventually, he has to come back up to the big leagues and see if he can sustain his success there. 

[Brandon Glick]

I was debating writing an article on Horton, but seeing where the comments have gone I think I should write one on Brailyn Marquez if I want to steer the discussion in that direction 😅

[Hairyducked Idiot]

5 minutes ago, Brandon Glick said:

But how do you know if a guy can play in the majors if he doesn't get a chance in the majors? We already know he's better than the competition at Triple A. That question has been answered. 

The jump from Triple A to the Majors is, by FAR, the biggest developmental curve any player will ever face. It takes so many guys multiple chances to figure it out, and most never do. I'm not saying the Cubs have to give Mervis a terribly long leash, but he already proved what he can at Triple A. Eventually, he has to come back up to the big leagues and see if he can sustain his success there. 

You find out one of two ways:

1) they are such an exceptional prospect that there is little doubt and the upside is strong, like PCA.  An overage hit-only guy being kinda good (but not amazing) in a hitter-friendly park in a hitter-friendly league isn't that type of guy.

2) circumstances conspire such that a spot opens up and they are next in line.  (The fact that this actually did happen with 1b this season and the cubs still chose not to commit to mervis speaks volumes).  

If that never happens for Mervis, oh well. That's life. Shoulda been a more interesting prospect.

You keep saying we *have* to find out what we have in him, but we really don't.  We do not exist for Matt Mervis' benefit.  He could spend the rest of his career in AAA and nothing particularly valuable would be lost.

It might take 1000 PAs to be statistically sure of what you're seeing in the majors from him.  And for what upside? If he can make the adjustments, congrats, you've got a 2-war 1b already entering his decline years.

 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Remember when TT made a spreadsheet where you could plug in different starting options for the Cubs one offseason and it would give you team projected win total. But if you tried to make LaHair the starting 1b it just told you "no"?

[Brandon Glick]

20 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

You find out one of two ways:

1) they are such an exceptional prospect that there is little doubt and the upside is strong, like PCA.  An overage hit-only guy being kinda good (but not amazing) in a hitter-friendly park in a hitter-friendly league isn't that type of guy.

2) circumstances conspire such that a spot opens up and they are next in line.  (The fact that this actually did happen with 1b this season and the cubs still chose not to commit to mervis speaks volumes).  

If that never happens for Mervis, oh well. That's life. Shoulda been a more interesting prospect.

You keep saying we *have* to find out what we have in him, but we really don't.  We do not exist for Matt Mervis' benefit.  He could spend the rest of his career in AAA and nothing particularly valuable would be lost.

It might take 1000 PAs to be statistically sure of what you're seeing in the majors from him.  And for what upside? If he can make the adjustments, congrats, you've got a 2-war 1b already entering his decline years.

 

I don't know. I get what you're saying about Mervis not being an elite prospect and not forming our team plan around him. That's fine and well (and true). 

But, I mean, what else is the guy supposed to do? He's doing everything at the top-end (like 90th percentile outcome) of his profile in the minors. I'm not advocating the Cubs give him the next two years to figure things out. They HAVE to go into next year with more than what they did this year at first. Obviously. But how in the world is the guy supposed to prove whether he belongs in the majors if he never gets a chance in the majors? He had 99 PA. That's it. And as has been pointed out by others, there are innumerable guys who struggled deeply at first only to improve with more exposure to the bigs (I mean, that's literally the whole point of being a prospect. Adjusting to a new level and then adjusting to that level's adjustments against you.). 

He won't be Rizzo or Judge or Trout or likely any of the other guys who stumbled badly at first only to become stars later. But every winning team has "good" players who fall short of being elite. Mervis can absolutely become a good player. He just needs a chance. Not an infinite amount of leash. But a chance. And if isn't with the Cubs, it'll be elsewhere. 

Edited August 9, 2023 by Brandon Glick

[Hairyducked Idiot]

He's not *that* good in AAA.  He's nowhere near what LaHair was.  He's basically having the exact same season as Yonathan Perlaza and I don't hear a lot of clamoring to give him chances.

[sneakypower]

37 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

I wish it were so simple! You’ve got the Dodgers and Rangers in the top 4, and resurgent Angels at 3, Houston and the Braves have left the top 10 for the first time since the pandemic but are still lg avg or better as a whole, the Orioles, Rays same thing…We’re not even a few years out from the entire LCS and WS squads being made up of the league’s top flyball offenses…And all this in the context of the Cubs and Mervis not even being lg avg in this regard, Cubs for years. It’s probably no coincidence the Cubs’ 2nd half offense features a new league avg flyball rate with resurgences from Swanson and Happ 

It’s not the only thing that matters but neither is Matt Mervis’ latest minor league slash or K rate. We’re all pretty confident he’s a good MiLB hitter and a Prospect, but that’s not exactly what the Cubs’ current situation calls for 

chasing past trends in an ever-evolving sport, not really the wisest course of action usually

[sneakypower]

2 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

He's not *that* good in AAA.  He's nowhere near what LaHair was.  He's basically having the exact same season as Yonathan Perlaza and I don't hear a lot of clamoring to give him chances.

...i am

Edited August 9, 2023 by sneakypower

[Tim]

1 minute ago, TomtheBombadil said:

I would say the past trend to ignore here is thinking Matt Mervis has more in common with Mike Trout than Luken Baker because Trout didn’t come in hot 

This is just ridiculous. Show one quote where anybody says that.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

5 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

He's not *that* good in AAA.  He's nowhere near what LaHair was.  He's basically having the exact same season as Yonathan Perlaza and I don't hear a lot of clamoring to give him chances.

Sneaky has beaten me to this but you definitely will!  It's also instructive to look at more than just this year to understand why people might have more optimism in Mervis' future than Perlaza's.

More broadly, here are half of the Top 10 first basemen in baseball this year

Yandy Diaz

Christian Walker

Nathaniel Lowe

LaMonte Wade

Josh Naylor

 

While no two paths are exactly the same, it's worth pointing out 1) their ages when they had real MLB success 2) how dominant they were(or weren't, relative to Mervis) in AAA 3) their lack of immediate MLB success 4) their lack of draft/prospect pedigree (Naylor is the closest and he graduated a fringe Top 100 guy) and 5) that none of them ended up succeeding with their original organization.  There's an assumption here that because Mervis is at the bottom of the defensive spectrum, he has to be good beyond imagination at AAA with the bat in order to have an MLB future, because he wasn't good in his first try and he's old for the level and lacks scouting oomph.  Prospects fail as a rule so we shouldn't expect an outcome like the gentlemen above, but they're pretty proof positive that Mervis' circumstances don't condemn his chances.

[sneakypower]

sigh, it's true, i even have an embroidered throw pillow that says "Matt Mervis will be exactly as good as Mike Trout"

[Brandon Glick]

1 minute ago, sneakypower said:

sigh, it's true, i even have an embroidered throw pillow that says "Matt Mervis will be exactly as good as Mike Trout"

New merch idea for the Obvious Shirt store???

[Brandon Glick]

18 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

He's not *that* good in AAA.  He's nowhere near what LaHair was.  He's basically having the exact same season as Yonathan Perlaza and I don't hear a lot of clamoring to give him chances.

 

3 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

Sneaky has beaten me to this but you definitely will!  It's also instructive to look at more than just this year to understand why people might have more optimism in Mervis' future than Perlaza's.

More broadly, here are half of the Top 10 first basemen in baseball this year

Yandy Diaz

Christian Walker

Nathaniel Lowe

LaMonte Wade

Josh Naylor

 

While no two paths are exactly the same, it's worth pointing out 1) their ages when they had real MLB success 2) how dominant they were(or weren't, relative to Mervis) in AAA 3) their lack of immediate MLB success 4) their lack of draft/prospect pedigree (Naylor is the closest and he graduated a fringe Top 100 guy) and 5) that none of them ended up succeeding with their original organization.  There's an assumption here that because Mervis is at the bottom of the defensive spectrum, he has to be good beyond imagination at AAA with the bat in order to have an MLB future, because he wasn't good in his first try and he's old for the level and lacks scouting oomph.  Prospects fail as a rule so we shouldn't expect an outcome like the gentlemen above, but they're pretty proof positive that Mervis' circumstances don't condemn his chances.

Tiger's response is basically perfect (at least in terms of my own opinions on the matter), but to add very quickly: 

Just because LaHair flamed out doesn't mean Mervis will. It's kinda like going into a new relationship expecting to get cheated on because your ex cheated on you. Like yea, you're gonna protect your heart from the chances it happens again, but the past with someone else doesn't determine the future with someone new (this makes me sound like I love Matt Mervis... don't get me wrong, I'm sure he's swell, but I'd at least like him to take me out to dinner first). 

[sneakypower]

4 minutes ago, Brandon Glick said:

New merch idea for the Obvious Shirt store???

if i may make another suggestion, one that reads "Yonathan Perlaza has 57 doubles in his last 146 games played"

[Hairyducked Idiot]

They definitely don't, although just looking at successes is survivorship bias.

Mervis could be like those guys.  So could Perlaza. So could Jared Young.

You just can't run an MLB team and give every guy who could be that 500 PAs to find out for sure 

[CubinNY]

1 minute ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

They definitely don't, although just looking at successes is survivorship bias.

Mervis could be like those guys.  So could Perlaza. So could Jared Young.

You just can't run an MLB team and give every guy who could be that 500 PAs to find out for sure 

This has become a shtick at this point.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

11 minutes ago, Brandon Glick said:

 

Tiger's response is basically perfect (at least in terms of my own opinions on the matter), but to add very quickly: 

Just because LaHair flamed out doesn't mean Mervis will. It's kinda like going into a new relationship expecting to get cheated on because your ex cheated on you. Like yea, you're gonna protect your heart from the chances it happens again, but the past with someone else doesn't determine the future with someone new (this makes me sound like I love Matt Mervis... don't get me wrong, I'm sure he's swell, but I'd at least like him to take me out to dinner first). 

I think the analogy of prospects to falling in love is a lot more apt than you intended and precisely the issue at hand.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

You can't throw a tennis ball into a AAA locker room without it bouncing around and hitting at least three guys who statistically haven't fully disqualified themselves from being major leaguers if they got a chance and took a step forward, but they don't quite have the pedigree or dominance to demand a spot so they're just hoping for a lucky break to open up at the right time.  The iowa cubs have mervis, young and Perlaza, and that's just the thumpers. There's also glove guys and pitchers.  That's just what AAA is for, a holding tank for these guys because there's many many more of them than there are MLB roster spots.  This is literally what the concept of "replacement level" was designed to measure.

You could cut Mervis tomorrow and call up any other team offering minor considerations and have another one just like him on a plane to Iowa. 

I'll go to Google right now and ask for a random number 1-29.  24. Alphabetically that's Seattle.  Their AAA Tacoma team has Taylor Trammell (25 year old former 1st rounder with a .945 ops), Jake Scheiner (27, .915 ops), Zach DeLoach (24, .869, can play some CF).

There are more of these guys floating around than there are spots for them.  You don't plan around them because they're so ubiquitous.  You can have as many as you want any time you want them.

 

[sneakypower]

how many guys would the tennis ball hit who boasted age-appropriate seasons in the high minors with .600 SLG & sub-20% Ks

[Brandon Glick]

18 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

I think the analogy of prospects to falling in love is a lot more apt than you intended and precisely the issue at hand.

Oh trust me, it was intended. All the way. 

I've been doing the prospect thing for a while now. I've seen enough "can't miss" guys fail and enough "who the hell is he" guys succeed to know it's a crapshoot. 

And really, that's all it is. A crapshoot. You just gotta keep throwing darts at the board to see what sticks. And that's the point: you have to at least throw the dart. You can't prevent yourself from doing so just because the odds are it won't work. 

Yea, it'd be great if the Cubs could just have a guaranteed 4 WAR guy at every position on the diamond. But those guys are expensive and you can't just buy every surefire player on the market (at least not this side of George Steinbrenner). You need young guys to come up and produce. Mervis could be one of them. He just needs a chance. That's all I want for him (and every other guy who produces enough at the highest level of the minors to deserve it).  

[Tryptamine]

14 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

You can't throw a tennis ball into a AAA locker room without it bouncing around and hitting at least three guys who statistically haven't fully disqualified themselves from being major leaguers if they got a chance and took a step forward, but they don't quite have the pedigree or dominance to demand a spot so they're just hoping for a lucky break to open up at the right time.  The iowa cubs have mervis, young and Perlaza, and that's just the thumpers. There's also glove guys and pitchers.  That's just what AAA is for, a holding tank for these guys because there's many many more of them than there are MLB roster spots.  This is literally what the concept of "replacement level" was designed to measure.

You could cut Mervis tomorrow and call up any other team offering minor considerations and have another one just like him on a plane to Iowa. 

I'll go to Google right now and ask for a random number 1-29.  24. Alphabetically that's Seattle.  Their AAA Tacoma team has Taylor Trammell (25 year old former 1st rounder with a .945 ops), Jake Scheiner (27, .915 ops), Zach DeLoach (24, .869, can play some CF).

There are more of these guys floating around than there are spots for them.  You don't plan around them because they're so ubiquitous.  You can have as many as you want any time you want them.

 

Deloach= 113 wRC+ on a .394 babip and 27.8K%

Trammel= 125 wRC+ and has been given 351 major league PAs in which he has posted a .168/.270/.368 line with a 37.0k%

Scheiner= 115 wRC+ 

 

Mervis=  137 wRC+, 99 MLB PA with a .167/.242/.289 line on a .218 babip

Walks more than any of those guys, strikes out less than any of those guys, higher wRC+ than any of those guys

 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

5 minutes ago, sneakypower said:

how many guys would the tennis ball hit who boasted age-appropriate seasons in the high minors with .600 SLG & sub-20% Ks

Is this the Iowa locker room? Then zero 

[sneakypower]

1 minute ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

Is this the Iowa locker room? Then zero 

oh damn Mash has some quick cat-like reflexes i hadn't realized were there

[Hairyducked Idiot]

7 minutes ago, sneakypower said:

oh damn Mash has some quick cat-like reflexes i hadn't realized were there

Calling 24 "age appropriate" to be playing parts of a season at A+, AA and AAA is a stretch 

[sneakypower]

6 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

Calling 24 "age appropriate" to be playing parts of a season at A+, AA and AAA is a stretch 

roughly 2/3 his PA were facing older pitchers

anyway this is getting too tedious to soldier on