For those of you who missed Part 1...I shall attempt to
differentiate some Outfielders in the #25-40 range by comparing them to the
Star Trek movies. The basic premise, one sentence about each Trek movie (not
the JJ Abrams one because I still haven't seen it) followed by what player I
equate that film to.
Star Trek 4: The crew goes back in time to save Earth.
Player equivalent: Carl Crawford
Note: Before I started writing this column on Outfielders, I
thought about doing the Star Trek idea with pitchers, in which case this
movie's summary would've been “Save the whales” and the player would've been
Bartolo Colon. I know, easy joke.
Crawford's case is pretty well known already. If you've been
trapped under Bartolo Colon for the last couple seasons, all you need to know
is he's been hurt. A lot. This may be the year for him to make a grand return
though, which is why his name is still relevant to a silly writer like me.
There's really only two reasons to draft him in my mind: A) you still believe
and you're banking on him for 25+ steals or B) you are desperate and pick him
purely for his upside, hoping he will bail you out. I did this in a mock
recently, I waited on Outfielders and wound up with him as my third OF. My
first? Carlos Beltran. The rest of my team looked fine, but holy Hannah Montana
did my Outfield look like crap. If Beltran and Crawford pan out, then I'd at
least be competitive, and at that point, I think it's worth a shot.
If Crawford is going to be successful this season, he'll
need to go back in time and tap into his Tampa Bay days. If so, you'll probably
hear a lot of preachy owners who pull out the “This is why you draft guys
who've been successful already” message. Will it be as annoying as the
environmental message of Star Trek 4? Maybe. Maybe not.
Star Trek 5: The search for the omnipotent being ends up
turning up a false god.
Player equivalent: Wil Myers
This is where people will think I hate Wil Myers. I don't.
Truly, I like the guy. I want to make sure you newer players don't invest too
much in him. I'm really concerned if he gets off to a hot start in Spring
Training. Guys have a hot Spring, their draft status goes up, owners want to
count on them to stay hot all season. It's not going to happen. Perhaps he can
be a decent #5 OF later in the year, but please don't expect him to save your
team. Right now, he is a lottery ticket. He's a good lottery ticket, but he's
not a lock to bail you out of a bad draft. A guy like Crawford will cost you
more, but he's been there. He's already had the success and we know what we
need to look for with him. I'm already starting to preach...I warned you about
that, didn't I?
Star Trek 6: Strange and unique circumstances bring a new
union.
Player equivalent: Torii Hunter
Yeah, this was the closest comparison I could come up with,
but the Angels signing Josh Hamilton after claiming they were in a salary
crunch seemed like a good enough comparison to me. I presumed they told Hunter
that with the presumption that this money they set aside for Hamilton was
already spent, so technically they weren't lying, just withholding part of the
truth. But I digress...
I wasn't big on Hunter until I was reminded that he hit
second in the Angels' lineup and put up very good numbers between Trout and Pujols
(okay, “heard” is more accurate than “reminded”, either I didn't pay enough
attention to the Angels last season or my memory is swiss cheese...which is
entirely possible.) Austin Jackson ain't Mike Trout, but if Hunter can be good
enough...just good enough offensively, hitting behind Cabrera and Fielder...he
could be a quietly great pick for you in the draft. He is coming off his worst
year in terms of taking walks, and that's a little bothersome, but as a #5 OF,
maybe as a #4. I'd be pretty happy with him. His defense will keep him in the
lineup regardless and he'll get a handful of RBI's.
If you're still not buying him, consider this...you can
draft him as a #5 OF, get some production early in the season to cover your
butt until you find someone better. By that point, if he's so decent, you can
throw him into a deal later on claiming “he's not bad, I just don't have room
for him,” or “money is tight,” if you really want to have fun with it. Hunter
and Tigers...not quite Klingons and humans, but that's the best you'll get out
of me on that analysis.
Star Trek 7: New and old come together and are ultimately
pretty lame, but I like it anyway.
Player equivalent: Emilio Bonifacio
If you're familiar with “Star Trek: Generations”, you know
it's not a very good movie. Even I admit that, and I'll watch it anytime it's
on cable. I think it's Donald Sutherland that keeps drawing me in...then again,
I have no interest in seeing “Tank Girl.” Whatever. Anyway, if you look at any
of the quote major unquote fantasy sites, they won't have Bonifacio any higher
than a 6th outfielder. Now here's what I don't get about these
rankings: the Blue Jays' lineup will likely start off with Reyes, Cabrera,
Bautista, Encarnacion with Lind, Rasmus, Lawrie, and Arencibia filling out the
lineup with Bonifacio. I don't care where in the lineup he is, he will score
runs. If he's 9th, awesome, he just has to get on base. If he's 6 or
7, he'll have guys who can do a decent job of knocking him in coming up behind
him. If he's moved up to 2, so much the better.
Here's the best part though...he'll qualify at 2B in no
time! In such a lousy crop of Second Basemen, I absolutely love that Bonifacio
will have eligibility there. Look at the projected numbers all you want, I see
great things for him this year. If I have no need for him at 2B, even I might
not bother drafting him, but he'll get great numbers. He's not a popular pick
right now and his stock may not rise much, but I'm still going to be tuned in
when his name pops up as a “Best Available.”
Written by David Bobke
Written by David Bobke
No comments:
Post a Comment