Can God Create A Prospect He Can't Get Out? Brett Lawrie vs. Mike Trout
by John Sickels on Sep 13, 2011 4:01 PM EDT
Email
Print
If He wanted to, could God create a prospect that He (God), can't get out?
If you could have Brett Lawrie or Mike Trout for the rest of his career, who would you pick and why?
77 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Trout
He has the position advantage and all his tools grade out to evenly or better than Lawrie’s outside of power.
Positional advantage?
How exactly does trout have the positional advantage over lawrie? Lawrie is playing 3b with exceptional defense whereas Trout is playing the OF. Even if Lawrie fails at 3b which still is up for debate, he moves to the OF. The same position as Trout. I can accept that Trout is a superior OF over Lawrie but I wouldn’t go as far to say that OF is a positional advantage over 3b. In fact, I think given the current state of 3b in the majors where 3b has significantly fallen off over the past few years that Lawrie is the one with the positional advantage.
by PhillyPhanatic on Sep 13, 2011 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Center field
If Lawrie ends up in the outfield, he’s going to be playing a corner. Trout plays center field (and plays it exceptionally well, according to a lot of reports). Third base has fallen off considerably, but center field has traditionally been a more difficult position to find elite offense at.
understood
I understand that if lawrie moves to the OF that trout would have the “advantage” over him being a CF with elite fielding tools. But that is only speculation. You’re assuming that Lawrie moves to the OF and basing this argument on that. Whereas, as it is currently right now, with no one saying otherwise Lawrie is a 3b. So in dealing with what has actually happened rather than what may or may not happen then Lawrie has the positional advantage, in my opinion. Additionally if Lawrie does in fact move to the OF a few years down the line he will still have a few years at 3b which I think just makes him that much more valuable.
by PhillyPhanatic on Sep 13, 2011 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Traditionally speaking
Center field has been a less demanding position offensively than third base has been. While there’s a dearth of talent at third right now, typically a center fielder is a move valuable player, offense being equal.
But they do have the same positional adjustment
+2.5
by EtSuKe on Sep 13, 2011 5:52 PM EDT via iPhone app up reply actions
According to FanGraphs
Their positional adjustments have always struck me as being very rough. They’re okay as a vague outline I guess, but I wouldn’t put too much stock in them.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
Positional Adjustments
There has been a ton of research into this. The positional adjustments are very solid.
Fight for licensed online poker in 30 seconds. Take part in the daily action plan!
https://www.facebook.com/theppa
twitter @PPADailyAction
They're solid but they're also estimates
I don’t think anyone actually believes that 2B, 3B, and CF are exactly the same value, but they are roughly equivalent looking over a long period of time. Then again, you can make an argument that CF is easier to fill because you have a larger sample of players to draw from (all players instead of just guys who throw right handed). I believe its also been shown that it changes a significant amount over time. For example, 3B was much tougher back when bunting was much more prevalent but became easier in the 90s and early 00s as bunting declined.
can anyone find the average slash line for CF compared to 3B this season? Just seems like there have been better offensive CF than 3B.
by Sniderlover on Sep 14, 2011 12:58 AM EDT up reply actions
positionally in 2011 per Baseball Reference
CF: .262 .327 .411 (OPS .738 )
3B: .252 .316 .387 (OPS .703)
wow, CF better at everything. You would think the slug% would be higher at 3B since you need power from that position but it just shows you how much stronger CF is getting while 3B is getting weaker.
Its as much injuries as 3B getting weaker
Outside of Aramis Ramirez, every full-time 3B that has put up a wRC+ over 120 (and there are 10 others in that category with 300+ PA) has missed at least 25 games.
Yes
But weren’t we talking about a golden age of third basemen five years ago? I’m going to go with the historical mean in determining positional value, not a two or three season blip. If you want to go on year to year statistics, shortstop would have almost been an offensive position a decade ago.
30 games in the majors aside
Lawrie was moved off 2b because he was awful defensively, and he had like 16 errors in half a season in the minors.
He is new to the position, so he obviously could improve, but a good defensive CF like Trout is far more valuable than a good defensive 3b (and that’s assuming Lawrie is one).
Trout has more defensive utility, far more speed, and will likely have higher BA and OBP. The question is just how much power will Lawrie really have. at under 6’, I’m suspicious.
Interestingly (to me anyway), I have to make this exact decision in my strat league. I have the first pick in the AL and it’s Trout, Lawrie, Pineda, or Ackley’s careers to choose from.
Trout's done it in the show
nuff said
For in depth fantasy analysis be sure to visit the Hawk Fantasy Sports site @ www.HawkBall.com
lol i read one trout comment
and i get a one track mind…. lawrie’s done it, i’ll take the guy who’s got glowing scouting reports and the stats in the majors that says he’s just got it….
this isnt chris davis 08, lawrie’s bat has been near MLB ready from day 1, and now that reports about his golve are shifting to positive
For in depth fantasy analysis be sure to visit the Hawk Fantasy Sports site @ www.HawkBall.com
lotsa thoughts
Brett Lawrie is just an unbelievably fascinating player. I don’t think there was ever too much doubt that he was going to hit, and hit a ton at that, although I’ll admit that even I didn’t think he was going to be anywhere this good this soon. What really makes him interesting to me, though, is that Lawrie is particularly representative of an obvious gap in understanding about player makeup. The stuff that has come out of the digital mouths of various “experts” about Lawrie’s personality over the years has been exceptionally harsh; while I am no expert, for the sake of objectivity I will gladly admit that I myself expressed concerns about his decision a while back to forsake an AFL assignment.
Still, as we see more of Lawrie, it’s increasingly obvious that the traits that armchair analysts thought unsavory are in fact the traits that make him a special player, and perhaps one day, a great player. I get the impression that he’s a guy who would rather not do something at all than do it half-assed, and I think that observation might go a long way towards explaining his defensive progression since being drafted. That being said, the notion that his personality might not mix well was silly before and looks just plain ridiculous now.
Yet I’m conflicted here, because if you could chart something like the ideal developmental path for the ideal position player prospect, Mike Trout and his 2010-2011 seasons have to come pretty dang close, don’t they? The only issue I have left on him, really, is that he plays the game with such aggressiveness that it can occasionally leave him prone at the plate. Considering he’s 20 and is holding his own in the majors, it’s a minor flaw all things considered.
With all due respect to Jason Heyward’s remarkable 2010, I think I’d need to go back to Pujols (and before him, perhaps Alex Rodriguez) to find a single ascendancy and subsequent major league debut that so clearly established the likelihood of an extraordinary future as what Trout and Lawrie have done this year. While I hate to make a choice, I think I’m going to go with Lawrie, despite my oft-affirmed appreciation for all things Trout. Call it a gut feeling.
by mrkupe on Sep 13, 2011 5:09 PM EDT reply actions 5 recs
basically the same thing i was trying to say
albeit i was running off to class so i couldnt articulate my thoughts as eloquently.
Both are star level talents, but i think as a community, we treat these kids like major leaguers in so much that we arent quick enough to update our view on them. seeing as this largely secondhand information we all spout out all over the place it’s not surprising that we are slow to update our images of a player.
In this regard i think that lawrie’s weaknesses are overblown, ive seen none of the immaturity and isolationism that pundits were all talking about. To be honest, couldnt a guy like him/harper/et al be isolated because the rest of the guys they are playing with are jealous? most of the guys in the minors will barely sniff the majors, yet they have to watch these kids blow through the system…
none of this is to knock trout, who is himself an exceptional talent, but there are some guys who are great and some guys who just WOW you, admittedly i havent seen much of either of these guys besides some ESPN highlights…. but going back to what i said earlier…. lawrie has just got IT
For in depth fantasy analysis be sure to visit the Hawk Fantasy Sports site @ www.HawkBall.com
i actually dont read BA at all
For in depth fantasy analysis be sure to visit the Hawk Fantasy Sports site @ www.HawkBall.com
Great analysis mrkupe
I might quibble over the use of “prone” in the third paragraph but that was a fun read.
"I didn't really say everything I said."-Yogi ism
don't be so damned humble
an editor would have caught the dangling modifier but if you’re not already writing professionally I think you should consider it :)
"I didn't really say everything I said."-Yogi ism
I had exactly this debate
. . . during this past off-season. i said that too a group of people here who said his makeup was poor, that I could find as many reports that his makeup was excellent.
He has also never been in trouble, or suspended, or anything like that. He is only descrtibed as too intense. Many great ballplayers have taken that route too sucess.
i ranked Lawrie #14 before the season, higher than anybody that I know of, and its becoming obvious that I probably ranked him too low. I suspect your gut feeling could be correct Kupe, though I think its probably splitting All-Star hairs there.
" I too love everthing that flows: rivers, sewers, lava, blood, bile, words, sentences . ." - Henry Miller
I had exactly this debate
. . . during this past off-season. i said that too a group of people here who said his makeup was poor, that I could find as many reports that his makeup was excellent.
He has also never been in trouble, or suspended, or anything like that. He is only descrtibed as too intense. Many great ballplayers have taken that route too sucess.
i ranked Lawrie #14 before the season, higher than anybody that I know of, and its becoming obvious that I probably ranked him too low. I suspect your gut feeling could be correct Kupe, though I think its probably splitting All-Star hairs there.
" I too love everthing that flows: rivers, sewers, lava, blood, bile, words, sentences . ." - Henry Miller
Fantasy vs Reality?
In fantasy ball, it is really, really close… but overall, Trout’s SB prowess will give him an edge, since while he won’t have the home run or extra base power that Lawrie will, he won’t be too far behind. In real life baseball, adding in his defensive prowess gives him a clear edge.
Lawrie
What he’s shown in the last month and a half solidifies what his tools and scouting reports have said; whereas Trout still has to show he can hit at an all-star level in the Majors. It’s terribly close, and I haven’t seen Trout play much, but I’m confident Lawrie’s glove will be an asset, and he will provide some value on the basepaths, even if not as much as Trout. It’s a bit ridiculous to knock Trout’s athleticism, but his body type does look like he’s likely to slow down a little more than Lawrie as they age.
Lawrie
I would take Lawrie over Trout. Admittingly, I may be in the minority on this one.
Both will be top 3 to 5 players in their respective positions over the next 3 years.
Thanks John
now I can’t get a particular episode of Arrested Development out of my head.
Has to be Trout for me. He’s been special at every level while exhibiting the complete package throughout. Just feel he can be trusted more because his ceiling appears higher.
Good observation
Nicely done & I think both of these kids could be ‘Living Classics’. Something tells me that Brett Lawrie isn’t a ‘never nude’ though.
Simpsons or AD?
I saw many but not all Arrested Developments, so that reference is lost on me. I do know there was a Simpsons, when Homer is smoking medicinal marijuana, where he posited the following question to Ned Flanders: “Could Jesus microwave a burrito so hot that even He couldn’t eat it?” That is what came to my mind when i saw John’s post title.
Lawrie
What he’s shown in the last month and a half solidifies what his tools and scouting reports have said; whereas Trout still has to show he can hit at an all-star level in the Majors. It’s terribly close, and I haven’t seen Trout play much, but I’m confident Lawrie’s glove will be an asset, and he will provide some value on the basepaths, even if not as much as Trout. It’s a bit ridiculous to knock Trout’s athleticism, but his body type does look like he’s likely to slow down a little more than Lawrie as they age.
I'm so glad
I own both of these guys in a 30 team dynasty league.
I can’t really say who I would pick because I haven’t seen Trout yet and I’ve seen Lawrie play all the games so it would be biased.
Both have tremendous potential so all I will say it, both will be great players. Trout has positional advantage and he’s got more speed. I think Lawrie will be a better hitter with more power though.
possibly the single greatest post title of all time
by msgg139 on Sep 13, 2011 7:35 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Trawrie
An amalgamation of the two would form the ultimate power.
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Trout
When in doubt, take the guy that’s 18 months younger.
Fight for licensed online poker in 30 seconds. Take part in the daily action plan!
https://www.facebook.com/theppa
twitter @PPADailyAction
AA
When in doubt, take the player that Alex Anthopoulos traded for.
sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew
by alexwithclass on Sep 13, 2011 9:45 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Or
Take the guy he couldn’t get in a trade because he’s too good!
Fight for licensed online poker in 30 seconds. Take part in the daily action plan!
https://www.facebook.com/theppa
twitter @PPADailyAction
Don't doubt Alex "The Enforcer" Anthopoulos
This guy is so good he traded the Angels Vernon Wells’ corpse for decent players and only $5M. If he wanted to he could probably convince the Angels’ front office to spend a night with each of their wives in exchange for a pat on the back.
Big Sexy
Follow KBR and Dewey on Twitter! @KBRandDewey
by King Billy Royal on Sep 14, 2011 9:38 AM EDT up reply actions
AA: Hey Tony!
Reagins: Oh hi, Alex!
AA: That Mike Trout fellow looks very nice.
Reagins: I know, he’s gonna be a good one for us one day.
AA: That’s great. Say, what would you want for him?
Reagins: Brett Lawrie, Yunel Escobar, Henderson Alvarez, and Anthony Gose.
AA: waves his hand These are not the players you are looking for.
Reagins: These are not the players I am looking for.
AA: waves his hand You, instead, want David Cooper, Dewayne Wise and Mark Teahen for Mike Trout.
Reagins: I, instead, want David Cooper, Dewayne Wise and Mark Teahen for Mike Trout.
AA: Deal! Nice talking to you again, Tony!
Reagins: Thanks… wait, what just happened?
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
by Frag on Sep 14, 2011 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
how about...
when in doubt, choose the one whose already successful in the majors? i’ll take that over the 18 months.
http://www.simdynasty.com/index.jsp?refer=mychiefs58
by huckleberry on Sep 14, 2011 10:16 AM EDT up reply actions
re
So you’d obviously rather have Peter Bourjos than Mike Trout, right?
Fight for licensed online poker in 30 seconds. Take part in the daily action plan!
https://www.facebook.com/theppa
twitter @PPADailyAction
by that logic, you'd rather have dwayne wise than mike trout too
so that logic is probably not the best logic in the world
Trout
But its close, and really a taste issue. Short term, I think they will show similar average, with Trout having an edge in Defense and Speed and Lawrie having an edge in power. As mentioned above, there is also the difference in age, although both are still very young. What it really comes down to is how you project Trout’s power versus Lawrie’s defense into the future. If you believe Trout can turn into at 20 home run, 50 stolen base, .800-.850 OPS with great defense (a peak somewhere between Kenny Lofton and Rickey Henderson), then he has to be the pick. If you think Lawrie can turn into a gold glove caliber player at 3B, and post a .850-.900 OPS (a peak somewhere between Scott Rolen and Mike Schmidt), then you pick him. However, third basemen do not tend to age as well or tend to move to LF or 1B at a relatively young age. CF tend to age much better due to better athleticism. I think that Trout has a better chance to have long-term and sustained success, but Lawrie could be a monster. In the end, I will still go with Trout.
The more interesting question to me, and more apples to apples, is Lawrie vs. Harper.
So...
You mean that at his peak, he’s Ellsbury-light?
I miss the days when after Ellsbury came up everyone said that he’d be a Gathright/Podsednik clone with a 15 HR peak at best.
I wouldn't say Ellsbury-light yet
Ellsbury is having a breakout year, especially power-wise, but let’s see if he can sustain it first. His career average (boosted by this year) is .300/.355/.447/.801, averaging 15 HR (this is only year above that mark) and 57 SB – that would be the low end of what I put forth. Plus, I think Trout will have more obp skills than Ellsbury. But if Ellsbury’s power can be sustained, as much as I hate to admit it as a Yankees fan, he will be a beast.
by cookiedabookie on Sep 15, 2011 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions
I find this debate unnecessary.
We all know that Alex Anthopoulos will soon trade Mark Teahen to the Angels for Mike Trout and cash, making both Blue Jays for the next decade.
by TwoEyesForAnEye on Sep 14, 2011 1:59 AM EDT reply actions
Don't buy Lawrie as an average defensive third basemen yet
Let alone a plus one. I fully buy into Trout’s potential to be a gold glove center fielder. So gotta give the defensive value aspect to Trout here, as well as baserunning. The question for me is whether Trout’s bat will be as good as Lawrie’s. I think he has a good chance.
http://www.crawfishboxes.com
Cliche, I know
but if you had watched every one of Lawrie’s highlight plays, you’d know he’s going to be at least a good defender at third (until he gets old of course).
A lot of people thought that
Without having seen him play, just hearing hearsay from others. Lawrie has the range and arm to play 3B. He probably will never be to Rolen level, but he could be an above average fielder.
they'll give him every opportunity to prove he's not a 3B
He’s not a butcher out there – he’s still somewhat raw, but no Ryan Braun at the hot corner. I think he’ll eventually end up in LF/RF later on in his career, but it’s not necessary now.
Don’t have too much access to defensive data (at work), and SSS too, but his range factor and dWAR (B-Ref) are both above average thus far
LF
I don’t see how it matters if Lawrie ends up in LF because thats likely where Trout is going to be as well
by GoldenSpikes24 on Sep 16, 2011 7:38 AM EDT up reply actions
Because Trout is good enough defensively to hold down CF
That means he is almost assuredly going to be better in LF and it gives him the added flexibility of moving over to CF depending on what’s going on with Bourjos.
to me Lawrie all the way.
This kid has 9 hr and 23rbis in 36 games. his average is .308 and he has 6 stolen bases. This kid never gives up hustles 100% of the time and has already hit walkoffs drove in game tieing runs and been clutcher then some all stars. this kid is going to be special.
Trout has played 33 games. 5 Hr and 15 Rbis a 220 average and 2 stolen bases. I know its a small sample but Lawrie is the realy deal. And i know in those 3 games trout isnt hitting 4 homers aint cracking in 8 ribis. and aint stealing 4 bases.
Lawrie wins it playing a hard 3b he also only has 3 errors witch isnt that bad.
You mention small sample size
yet you seem to be putting in way too much stock in it. Don’t mean to point you out, but you’re definitely not the only one jumping on the Lawrie wagon because of what he’s done in his VERY short ML career. I wouldn’t be surprised if Brett has some significant ups and downs next season…
yea im just a huge jays fan so my vote is bias.
But to me just watching this kid every day, he really is something. I think by therethey end of there careers lawries will be alot better. if i was a betting man.
Wow, good poll
I’m a bit surprised by the pretty overwhelming Lawrie support in the comments. Lawrie’s had a spectacular debut, but its tough to learn as much from it as people seem to be wanting to believe. Its still under 150 PAs and there are some pretty unsustainable aspects to it. It does seem to me there’s a good chance his plate discipline gets exposed and he’ll have some adjustments to make, and it also can’t be ignored that Trout’s been pretty excellent in his second trip up as well.
In terms of non-major league stuff, Trout’s really shown great control of the strike zone in a way that Lawrie hasn’t in his minor league career. I think they ultimately have similar volatility potential, and while Lawrie’s power is much more developed, Trout’s plate discipline is as well, and it will be easier for the latter to develop more power naturally moving forward than it will be for Lawrie to develop control of the zone. Trout is also the better pure athlete and seems a safer bet to carry positive defensive value, though that can be overstated in some regards, I still take Trout.
For what its worth, its interesting that ZiPs already favors Trout as a hitter, projecting him for a .332 wOBA and Lawrie at .319 for the RoS. Not sure it means a whole lot, but worth mentioning that an objective statistical modeling system seems to prefer what Trout has done in terms of future performance even though Lawrie’s been so spectacular.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Sep 14, 2011 2:37 PM EDT reply actions
ZiPS projections aren't accurate measures for players with less than 3 years of major league experience
by dudedudedude on Sep 14, 2011 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Okay, I always forget which ones use minor league numbers
Not really that important, just something I thought was an interesting quirk, and more worth mentioning in the context of the sample size issue than any kind of precise prediction. ZiPs clearly takes minor league numbers into account but I tend not to trust the projection systems in terms of players with limited major league exp, and especially ZiPs RoS which is extra watered down. I still think progress seems more natural from this point for Trout while it might be a tougher road for Lawrie, even if Lawrie is a bit better right now. I would rather see plate discipline, athleticism, and a touch of pop from a younger player than an advanced hit tool with average plate discipline and athleticism from a slightly older one.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Sep 14, 2011 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions
You are severely underselling Lawrie
He is only a year older, has a ton of pop, ridiculous range for 3rd base, and a great approach at the plate. Athleticism wise, he is on par with Trout. It doesn’t look pretty, but he is sneaky quick. Let’s also not forget Trout’s increase in K rate with the jump to double A.
by dudedudedude on Sep 14, 2011 10:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Meh, that's what a lot of Lawrie's "supporters" have said
but its not what the scouting reports I’ve read have said of what I’ve seen, and as a Mets fan I have no bias one way or another. I understand Lawrie’s a very solid athlete, but he’s just not on Trout’s level (and I don’t think its particularly close). Trout’s K-rate may have spiked a bit in Double-A, but his walk rate stayed above average and even in the majors he swings and misses less than Lawrie, and SwStrk% is one of the few stats that becomes relatively stable in less than 150 PAs. It seems more natural to me that Trout takes his current skillbase and develops above average power than it does that Lawrie takes his and develops above average plate discipline and premium defense. Its easy to fall in love with 150 great PA’s, but they really don’t mean all that much in the grand scheme. If I were to guess who had the better career, I go Trout, though they’re both obviously excellent choices.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Sep 14, 2011 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes because Lawrie has never shown any amount of skill before these 150 PA's
by dudedudedude on Sep 14, 2011 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Straw man
The whole point is I’m not putting much value in their statistical major league careers so far. Doesn’t really invalidate any of my other arguments. I’m not saying I don’t like Lawrie, just saying that in five years its much easier for me to see Trout as the more complete player who transitioned smoothly into major league stardom, while with Lawrie there may be some aspects of his game that are slightly flawed and aspects of his game pitchers may be able to exploit more as they learn him as a hitter. I still expect them both to be fantastic players though.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Sep 15, 2011 1:10 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Minor League Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
