Prospect Retrospective: Nate McLouth
by John Sickels on Nov 7, 2008 9:00 AM EST
Email
Print
Nate McLouth won a Gold Glove today. Most fans know litlte about him, so I thought he would be a good candidate for a prospect retro.
McLouth was drafted in the 25th round in 2000, out of high school in Whitehall, Michigan. Originally a second baseman, he was considered to be a good athlete with a measure of baseball polish, but was undersized at 5-10 and had a firm committment to the University of Michigan. He signed late but he did sign, then made his pro debut in 2001 as an outfielder.
It was a successful debut: .285/.371/.464 with 21 steals in 96 games for Hickory in the Sally League, skipping short-season and rookie ball entirely. Although he didn't receive much attention, his performance for Hickory was excellent: +23 OPS, with strong plate discipline and broad skills. I gave him a Grade C+ in the 2002 book, noting that he was "the definition of a sleeper."
Moved up to Lynchburg in the Carolina League in 2002, he slumped, hitting just .244/.324/.392 though with 20 steals in 114 games. He retained good command of the strike zone, but his production dropped off in most categories and he looked overmatched much of the time. Granted, he was just 20 years old. I did not put him in the 2003 book for space reasons, but had him rated as a Grade C prospect, though still very young.
Returned to Lynchburg in 2003, he rebounded with a .300/.386/.411 mark, with 40 steals in 44 attempts and a +14 percent OPS. Again, his strike zone judgment was very strong. I wrote that McLouth was one of several "outfield prospects in the walk/steal category" that the Pirates had, and that he could "end up as the best of the lot." Grade C+.
Some scouts were still skeptical about how he would fare against advanced pitching, but he answered those questions in 2004, with a .322/.384/.462 mark with 31 steals for Double-A Altoona. He was now getting attention for strong outfield defense as well. I gave him a Grade B- in the 2005 book, liking the broad skill base but projecting him as a really good fourth outfielder but possibly not a regular if the power did not maintain.
McLouth's power dropped off in 2005 at Triple-A, though he remained solid with a .297/.364/.401 mark and 34 steals. He hit .257/.305/.450 in a 41-games trial with the Pirates, giving him a strong shot at an outfield job in 2006. I lowered his grade in the '06 book to C+, but again pointed to him as a very good foutth outfielder.
He filled that role in 2006 for Pittsburgh, struggling wiht a .233/.293/.385 mark but showing good speed and defense. However, he was more effective in 2007 at .258/.351/.459 with 22 steals, and in 2008 he became a full-time regular, with a .276/.356/.497 mark, 46 doubles, 26 homers, 65 walks, 23 steals, and the aforementioned Gold Glove.
McLouth has always had good physical tools, strong baseball skills, and a terrific work ethic. What he lacked was size and home run pop. The power spike over the last two seasons has pushed him beyond the fourth outfield role and wasn't really predicted by his minor league track record, though in the minors he did show respectable pop at times. He turned 27 a few days ago and is now entering his peak seasons. It will be interesting to see if he gets better than he already is.
19 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
yankee trade
want do you want for mclouth? or can he even be had?
yankees fans won’t stop talking about how hes a perfect fit for them and that cashman needs to make him a priority this winter but honestly, if you’re pittsburgh why do you deal him?
especially since you’re not gonna get phil hughes (if you even still want him), cano isn’t the player everyone made him out to be (especially without all those rbis thanks to his lineup) and austin jackson’s highest ceiling IS nate mclouth. unless you’re gonna get a package of joba+, i don’t see it…
Perfect fit?
McLouth’s lefty split is pretty bad. Something like .710 OPS last season and .720 career. Don’t the Yanks need more right handed bats? McLouth was also rated as the worst regular defensive CF by all the major defensive metrics. I don’t think he really fits the Yankees needs, but he’s a good player to have.
I have zero interest in acquiring Mclouth
Despite his gold glove, hes a well below average defender, ranking at 30th and 35th in CF the past 2 seasons according to Baseball Info Solutions plus/minus system.
Offensivley hes a good hitter, and i was touting him big time prior to the 2008 season. But his 2nd half numbers give me pause, .270/.355/.426… 7 hr 29rbis.
Well below what he did in the first half … i still think hes a solid offensive player for a CF, but the problem is his defense is really much more to par in LF or RF, but his offense doesnt hold up in the corners.
Check out my baseball analysis blog FANalytics
whither Gold glove?
I know this is only one metric,
but John, can you comment on the Gold glove with a little insight.
Fielding Bible has McLouth at 40 in +/, the worst for any major league centerfielder.
glove
No idea. Baseball Prospectus’ defensive metrics don’t like him either. I have not seen him in person enough to judge by eye. Obviously the voters saw SOMETHING they liked.
glove
I would note that his reputation in the minors was that he was an excellent defensive outfielder. I don’t know why the numbers are so different from the scouting reports.
Generally speaking
Outfielders who get bad jumps on balls or take bad routes but are athletic tend to make a fair share of acrobatic catches (diving catches) that look impressive and register with peoples memories, but in reality are the results of bad defense, which means that they likely dont get to a lot of balls that they should.
Check out my baseball analysis blog FANalytics
logic?
not sure I see the logic there. leaping/acrobatics are a function of getting close enough to do so. If one gets a good or bad jump is irrelevant – the guy who gets a good jump will simply dive for balls that would be entirely out of reach of a guy who got the bad jump, and settle under fly balls that the guy with the lesser jump has to dive for. No reason to think, mathematically, that one will occur more than the other.
I think it's perfectly logical
A bad, but athletic OF like Byrnes or McLouth won’t catch the tough ones the good CFs catch with difficulty, and they manage to catch the easier ones that good CFs catch with ease. Overall, they might be making just as many spectacular plays (or even a few more, if they’re the type of “gritty” player who dives more than necessary because getting dirty is cool), but they’re not making nearly as many plays as they should.
by thejd44 on Nov 9, 2008 8:50 PM EST up reply actions
The Gold Glove for him is hilarious
Good question whether that or Michael Young’s Lifetime Non-Achievement Award is a more comical demonstration of the incompetence of the voters.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
Well, Young even has the REPUTATION of sucking defensively
If I remember correctly, McLouth had some crazy diving catches this season that probably stuck in the minds of voters. Sure, they were probably Eric Byrnes-type plays and not truly great plays, but diving gets noticed.
For what it’s worth, UZR also hates McLouth’s defense.
by thejd44 on Nov 7, 2008 2:32 PM EST up reply actions
McLouth is a great guy
I had a chance to work a youth camp with him a couple years ago, and he’s one of those guys that you love to root for.
That said, I see where the metric hating comes from. He’s fast, but his judgement isn’t very good, and it hurts his range a lot. I’m a huge Pirate fan, and watching him play centerfield this summer was mildly painful.
He plays a very shallow centerfield, and gets burned on balls over his head a lot. There were a few times where fly balls would drop five feet in front of the warning track, and he was still nowhere near it.
Not too mention, he’s got an arm like Coco Crisp. That throw at the All-Star game came out of nowhere. He 4 hopped a ball to the plate from about the same spot in a game a couple days later.
Still though, there’s nobody who’s happier than me for Nate the Great.
Aaron Cunningham
This retro seems to remind of A’s OF prospect Aaron Cunningham. Undersized, 4th OF potential, playing above expectations…
We A's fans would sure take that kind of production, even if it's in a corner OF slot...
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
PT
What do you think Cunningham is going to do in the majors once he settles in? Is he a starter or a 4th OF? Will the A’s give him a shot? (why do they insist on playing Emil Brown and will they do so again next year?)
Sorry for so many questions, but you’re an A’s fan and respected member of the community(and you’re never short on opinions haha).
thanks man,
Charlie
Go Pirates!!!
by cool hand Charlie on Nov 9, 2008 4:15 PM EST up reply actions
I'm not PT, but I really like Cunningham
And actually, I think he has talent that’s far above a “4th outfielder.” He might not be there next year, but I think by 2010, most expect him to be an everyday player for the A’s. There’s been nothing to suggest he won’t get a shot.
Emil Brown won’t be back.
by thejd44 on Nov 9, 2008 8:52 PM EST up reply actions
mcLouth did not
over perform… his performance this year is completely supported by underlying skills and it was easy to see the breakout coming if you were looking in the right places…. I was touting him as a cheaper grady sizemore before the season started, and that seems pretty accurate right now.
Check out my baseball analysis blog FANalytics
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
