scadder21 wrote: Disagree again. When someone has the talent(1st round pick) and has showed that he can thrive under the pressure of a pennant race and the playoffs it's entirely possible that he learned something/picked something up in the Bigs that nullified his lack of success in the Minors. I can't find his stats online but I'm willing to bet that Ozzie Smith's Minor League stats weren't great.

scadder21 wrote: Disagree again. When someone has the talent(1st round pick) and has showed that he can thrive under the pressure of a pennant race and the playoffs it's entirely possible that he learned something/picked something up in the Bigs that nullified his lack of success in the Minors. I can't find his stats online but I'm willing to bet that Ozzie Smith's Minor League stats weren't great.

Smith spent his first year of professional baseball, 1977, with the Class A Walla Walla Padres of the Northwest League.

Smith began 1978 as a non-roster invitee to the San Diego Padres' spring training camp in Yuma, Arizona. Smith credited Padres manager Alvin Dark for giving him confidence by telling reporters the shortstop job was Smith's until he proved he can't handle it. Even though Dark was fired in the middle of training camp, Smith made his Major League Baseball (MLB) debut on April 7, 1978.


^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozzie_Smith}

scadder21 wrote: I looked but couldn't find it.

Couldn't find what? Ozzie's stats? Go to baseball reference, search Ozzie Smith, go his stat page and click on the section at the top that says Minors, just above his name in-between Fielding and News Archive.  

That doesn't mean that he's just a guy talent wise.

What do you mean by this? It's your point that since he was drafted in the first round he's more talented than someone drafted in the second round. 

He was pushed too fast through the minors and before he was allowed to have any success at any level.He was also young for the level he was at almost every year.

At 19 he was at Johnson City most of the year. Age appropriate. At 20 he spent most of the year at Quad Cities. Age appropriate. At 21 he spent most of the year at AA. Age appropriate. 22 AA, 23 AAA, 24 AAA. Pretty age appropriate. I don't see how him being too young for a level has anything to do with his AAA production. We're talking about 23 and 24 year old player at AAA posting a .223/.286/.324 slash line through 243 games. That's very bad. 

He's a good defensive shortstop

Good is a bit of stretch. I'd say average or slightly above average. If I was scouting him I'd give him a 55 from what I've seen in the bigs. 

with a strong arm

Another stretch. I'd say an average SS arm, maybe slightly above average.

and good base-running skills

He does run well and run intelligently from what I've seen.

He's adequate as a replacement or platoon with Furcal.

I think you need to look up the word adequate. The guy has 3 has average tools, he's a bench player. He has no business starting at any position. I don't see why you're so willing to write off his long track record of terrible minor league performance because he had a nice stretch in September. Players get hot, it happens. Just because he hit .343/.392/.586 over 25 games doesn't make him an adequate replacement. He doesn't play good  enough defense to be a defense only SS. He's not an adequate starter. 

We don't need to be trading possible future regulars in order to have a better bat yet significantly worse defense at SS. SS isn't an important offensive position.

I agree defense is incredibly more important at SS than offense. I've never said it isn't. I also agree that the Cardinals shouldn't trade for a SS. In fact I've said this entire postseason I don't want to see a single Cardinal or Cardinal prospect traded. All I've said is that Kozma isn't an adequate replacement or starter at SS. He's fine on the bench, but any stretch of him starting at the Major League level will surely expose him for what he is. A terrible offensive player. I cannot think of a single player that has been as bad as Kozma in AAA that suddenly put it together in the bigs for any reasonable amount of time. 

stlcards5129 wrote:

scadder21 wrote: Disagree again. When someone has the talent(1st round pick) and has showed that he can thrive under the pressure of a pennant race and the playoffs it's entirely possible that he learned something/picked something up in the Bigs that nullified his lack of success in the Minors. I can't find his stats online but I'm willing to bet that Ozzie Smith's Minor League stats weren't great.

Come on, he was a reach in the first round and you know it. I don't understand the relevance of him being a first round pick, what first round picks never bust or guys taken in the 3rd round don't have talent? He also did terrible in the playoffs (outside of 1 nice at bat), bringing up the playoffs doesn't help your argument.

Are you seriously comparing Kozma to Ozzie? Ozzie could have hit .190 and still been incredibly valuable. Such a joke of an argument/point. Also, I don't understand why you just don't look it up. Ozzie barely played in the minors, 68 games. Not 671 like Kozma. Also Ozzie was never known for his bat, outside some good hitting seasons in his prime (roughly '85-'92 excluding '90) he was mediocre with the bat. 

Essentially what you're doing is taking an incredibly small sample size of decent production and saying it is more likely to continue than the incredibly large sample size of poor production. I'd being willing to bet my life savings that Pete Kozma's career in the bigs is more similar to his career in the minors than his little 82 PA hot streak.

PadsFS wrote:

stlcards5129 wrote:

scadder21 wrote: Disagree again. When someone has the talent(1st round pick) and has showed that he can thrive under the pressure of a pennant race and the playoffs it's entirely possible that he learned something/picked something up in the Bigs that nullified his lack of success in the Minors. I can't find his stats online but I'm willing to bet that Ozzie Smith's Minor League stats weren't great.

Come on, he was a reach in the first round and you know it. I don't understand the relevance of him being a first round pick, what first round picks never bust or guys taken in the 3rd round don't have talent? He also did terrible in the playoffs (outside of 1 nice at bat), bringing up the playoffs doesn't help your argument.

Are you seriously comparing Kozma to Ozzie? Ozzie could have hit .190 and still been incredibly valuable. Such a joke of an argument/point. Also, I don't understand why you just don't look it up. Ozzie barely played in the minors, 68 games. Not 671 like Kozma. Also Ozzie was never known for his bat, outside some good hitting seasons in his prime (roughly '85-'92 excluding '90) he was mediocre with the bat. 

Essentially what you're doing is taking an incredibly small sample size of decent production and saying it is more likely to continue than the incredibly large sample size of poor production. I'd being willing to bet my life savings that Pete Kozma's career in the bigs is more similar to his career in the minors than his little 82 PA hot streak.

Smith was very good at getting on-base despite poor BA/power.

His OBP was 80-90 points higher than his BA during his time in STL.

He was also worth an average of 2.5 WAR for the Padres in his first four years despite his awful batting skills.

scadder21 wrote: The point is obvious.

So is mine. He sucked in the Minors he'll probably suck in the Majors.


Kozma is a pretty good defensive shortstop

I don't know why you want to continue to call him good. That's just not true. He's average, maybe slightly better than average. 

and does enough other good things right to make it unnecessary to trade possible future players for a SS that hits an can't field.

Again. I've never advocated trading anyone. 

And that Minor League performance doesn't equal MLB success.  

That's true, but the vast majority of the time Minor League success precedes Major League Success. And I've never once seen any player play so terribly in the Minors and rebound in the Majors to the level you seem to expect. 

Matt Holliday wasn't very good in the minors for the most part.

So instead of comparing Kozma to a hall of famer you want to compare him to a guy who had a .780 OPS in the minors? Kozma is not Holliday. I don't think you realize how terribly bad his Minor League track record is and now you're reaching in your argument so much that you want to compare a guy who has .652 Minor League OPS to a guy who has a .780 OPS. There's no relevance in comparing these 2 at all. The kind of situation you're basing you're "SS is fine" position on just doesn't happen.

scadder21 wrote: I don't see why you say his likely batting line is .230.

Because 82 plate appearances isn't enough for me to think he's anything more than he's shown he is over the larger sample.

He's proven he has some talent to hit MLB pitching. Also some players are late bloomers. I.e. Matt Holliday.

Again. Matt Holliday wan't even close to as bad as Kozma in the minors. It's a terrible comparison. Some players are late bloomers but find me one example of a player who has a .650 career OPS who suddenly rebounded to have a solid career in the bigs. I'm going to go out a limb and say you won't be able to. 

I thought this whole discussion was how we should trade Lynn, Kelly and Adams for Caberara

The point I quoted you on was when you said "Right now SS is fine. People seem to be discounting Kozma showed he could actually play some last year". I disagree with this completely that's what I'm talking about. As I've said before I've repeatedly said I'm not an advocate of the Cardinals making any trades this offseason.

at which point I said the increased offense and worse defense wouldn't make up for the players we would be losing.

Again. I've never even mentioned Cabrera or any trade. My issue is with your view of Kozma. 

scadder21 wrote: 5129- I do realize how horrible he was in the minors. I've been following the minors for about 4 or 5 years. I hated the Kozma pick, he hasn't produced in the minors but I also recognize he has talk and that he was rushed to each level before having success and was almost always too young for the level.

How do you explain the very age appropriate 23 and 24 year old seasons at AAA where he had a combined .610 OPS.

I also realized that when a young guy can handle a pennant race and the pressure of the playoffs it isn't something that should be dismissed so easily especially if he has real talent.

I don't know how you can even bring up the playoffs and think it's a point in your favor. He looked over matched every time striking out in 27% of his Plate Appearances and had a .686 OPS he also made some really dumb plays in the field. 

This isn't a Bo Hart situation where he didn't have much talent and just got by on guts.

I never compared him to Bo Hart. In fact Bo Hart actually had a pretty solid Minor League performance prior to his call up. A lot better than Kozma, not really a good comparison. I can see how that enters your head though, because he too had a nice stretch of less than 100 plate appearances before he came back to earth. 

Essentially, Kozma could be like a Ryan Theriot before he close 2 steps on defense.

I sincerely doubt Kozma ever approaches even Ryan Theriot's level.

And that isn't enough to warrant getting rid of Kelly, Lynn and Adams for.

AGAIN! I've never said anything about trading Kelly, Lynn or Adams. Please stop bringing this up. My issue is with your believe Kozma could develop into a player who could hit .300/.390/.360 (that's Theriot's best season) in a season. And you're basing this believe off 82 plate appearances. That would be like me saying that Matt Adams is a worse hitter than Kozma because he hit .244/.286/.384 over 91 Plate Appearances. 

scadder21 wrote: Essentially, Kozma could be like a Ryan Theriot