Jeff Natale

[jacksonianmarch]

Dan Uggla is a major candidate for disappointment of the yr this yr.

[HeadOfSoxNation]

Originally Posted by jacksonianmarch

Dan Uggla is a major candidate for disappointment of the yr this yr.

You can say that about a lot of the Marlins...anyone expecting the same kind of performance out of Uggla, HanRam, Anibal Sanchez, and the like are, I have a feeling, in for a big disappointment. Sure, some of them will still be solid, but to have years like last year? I doubt it.

[jacksonianmarch]

Uggla is at the head of that list simply because he never did it before. He was let go by the dbacks because he was terrible and all of a sudden put together on hell of a season out of nowhere.

[One Red Seat]

Terrible? .880 OPS at AA, admittedly as a 25 y/o, the year before he was left unprotected. I think it had a lot more to do with the fact that the D-Back system is loaded and they had bigger/brighter future stars to protect on the 40-man.

You should make thebaseballcube.com a link in your favorites menu so you can refrain from putting your foot in your mouth so often.

[RobZombie]

Originally Posted by One Red Seat

Terrible? .880 OPS at AA, admittedly as a 25 y/o, the year before he was left unprotected. I think it had a lot more to do with the fact that the D-Back system is loaded and they had bigger/brighter future stars to protect on the 40-man.

You should make thebaseballcube.com a link in your favorites menu so you can refrain from putting your foot in your mouth so often.

It really had more to do with that they didn't think he could play. Again for very good reason statistics aren't the only thing used to evaluate players who haven't played a day in the majors. I don't think they'd made the Glaus trade for Hudson when the time to protect him came.

I for one am highly skeptical of Dan Uggla. His EYE ratio was just horrible. I don't see how he can sustain a high enough BA to be as good as it was.

Trust me if you think a guy can help you in the majors in short order, you can always find a spot for him without having to let go of your future stars. There are always guys on the roster who are fungible.

They let him go because despite his gaudy OPS #s in AA the previous year, they didn't feel he was a prospect.

As far as Natale goes, I'd have to say that despite his gaudy OPS numbers I'm not terribly impressed either. We are talking about a guy who will likely not able to adequately field an infield position and will end up as an OF/1B type. That's fine if he continues to hit at a .950 OPS clip, but I don't think he will once he faces better pitching.

[Dana Kiecker]

Im pretty sure " fungible" is not a word.. other than that good post.

[One Red Seat]

Originally Posted by RobZombie

It really had more to do with that they didn't think he could play. Again for very good reason statistics aren't the only thing used to evaluate players who haven't played a day in the majors. I don't think they'd made the Glaus trade for Hudson when the time to protect him came.

I for one am highly skeptical of Dan Uggla. His EYE ratio was just horrible. I don't see how he can sustain a high enough BA to be as good as it was.

Trust me if you think a guy can help you in the majors in short order, you can always find a spot for him without having to let go of your future stars. There are always guys on the roster who are fungible.

They let him go because despite his gaudy OPS #s in AA the previous year, they didn't feel he was a prospect.

As far as Natale goes, I'd have to say that despite his gaudy OPS numbers I'm not terribly impressed either. We are talking about a guy who will likely not able to adequately field an infield position and will end up as an OF/1B type. That's fine if he continues to hit at a .950 OPS clip, but I don't think he will once he faces better pitching.

I never said he was a world-beater or even a prospect, just that he wasn't terrible.

[RobZombie]

Originally Posted by One Red Seat

I never said he was a world-beater or even a prospect, just that he wasn't terrible.

Uggla or Natale?

If you are talking about Natale...when evaluating prospects...either you can eventually make a difference to the major league team or you can't. If you can't its really irrelevant if you are terrible or not.

[One Red Seat]

Uggla, as that was who Jacko was calling terrible.

As far as your comment, didn't that evaluation completely miss the boat, at least thus far, with Uggla? So, I would contend it is relevant if you are terrible or not. If he was indeed terrible, then he never would have been given a shot.