It's not a matter of being a 'hater'. It's a matter of attempting to improve the team. The Astros' offense as currently constructed is too one-dimensional and too inconsistent. If you want to add talented players like Carl Crawford, Alfonso Soriano, etc., you have to be willing to give up proven major league players. 3B is a position of strength for the Astros, and a package of Jason Lane and Chris Burke is not going to attract anyone worth adding. Ensberg is a productive major league player, no doubt, who is scuffling (again) at the plate, but there is a good chance, I believe, that you could significantly improve the Astros' offense by trading him.
Ensberg is a decent major league 3rd baseman. That being said, he is not a 3 or 4 hitter. I'd bat him 6 or 5 at most. The problem is that we have a lineup filled with dead weight (Everett, Ausmus, sometimes Lane), so your 5/6 guy becomes that much more important.
Yes and no. If there isn't anyone on, please take the pitches. If there is a man on 3rd with 0 or 1 out, swing the bat at good pitches. Last season, he started out much like he is going now. Had a decent OBP, but was taking pitches down the middle that could be driven. When he started getting hot, it was because he became much more agressive with his swing. He walked less but was driving in runs at a very good pace. The 3rd and 4th spot is reserved for hitters that will be smart and agressive at the same time. It's more of the leadoff and bottom of the order hitters to take pitches to wear down the opposing pitcher.
i don't think i need to explain how ridiculous it is to believe that the d-rays or nats will trade their #1 stars (young stars at that) for a 30 yr old 3rd baseman. i never said mo was the best 3rd baseman in the league, but he is top-tier for sure. yes, carl crawford and fonsi are better than ensberg, but that's one of the most unrealistic scenarios one could imagine (even if you have throw-ins in that trade). we are NOT going to improve by trading ensberg. we need to add better hitters and solidify the bullpen, but you don't trade some of your best talent - that's not how you improve. (i already made the case that it's unreasonable to believe we can get soriano or crawford, so please don't start talking about how awesome it would be to get one of them for mo.)
Allow me to interject some facts: Batting 3rd (Avg/OBP/SLG/OPS) .267/.417/.457/.874 Batting 4th .282/.397/.581/.978 Batting 5th .242/.352/.435/.787 Batting 6th .267/.346/.506/.852
so based on his prolific three-year career, how many games are you willing to jeopardize until this proven commodity snaps out of it? bigger, perhaps more telling question: has a reliable run producer ever endured a prolonged stretch as awful as this? it's a month and a half and counting. i went and looked his splits up - on may 1, his average was .315; it dipped to a season-low of .276 on may 17, then back up to .284 on may 21. since that time, it's dropped 30 points and he's knocked in 12 runners. so what's your breaking point? how long do you stick with him knowing full well this line-up already has virtually three automatic outs?
Of course Morgan has sucked hugely for about 6 weeks now, but let's have a little perspective. I looked at the Runs Created per 27 outs among 3bmen with at least 350 ABs from 2003-2005. Morgan's 2005 ranked 7th in a list that was topped by A-Rod's 2005. Morgan's 2003 was 11th on this list. Also, Morgan and Scott Rolen were the only repeat players in the top 11, though Aramis Ramirez and A-Rod each had two seasons in the top 15.
my point is that it's misleading as to value. if the guy gets on base but isn't driving in runs, then he's not doing his job in that part of the order.
I love Mo, but right now I'd like to see him batting 5th or 6th and not 3rd. For the most part he has been batted lower as of late. Here is who I would put out there as my regular lineup. 2B Craig Biggio 1B Mike Lamb RF Lance Berkman LF Preston Wilson CF Chris Burke 3B Morgan Ensberg C Brad Ausmus SS Adam Everett P Pitcher
never said it wasn't important. i said it tends to be vastly overrated in judging performance. and here's a good example of that. no one in their right mind would argue that ensberg has been "doing his job" in the lineup. his obp numbers can look great...but in the 4 hole, you might wanna take a look at slugging and rbi numbers.
I didn't state anywhere that Ensberg straight up for Crawford would be the deal, but Ensberg + Nieve + Luke Scott, or something similar, could be a justifiable trade, I would think. I would suggest that the Astros would be better after that trade, and if the Rays plugged Ensberg in at 3rd base, Delmon Young into their OF with Baldelli and Gomes and moved Nieve into their rotation, they could be better as well.
hmmm...people i talk with. people who buy in hook, line and sinker to Moneyball. i think it was way overlooked for a long time...now it's looked at like a magic potion. that's certainly my perception of it.
If you don't understand the importance of OBP, then you don't understand the first thing about baseball.
who are you having this argument with??? i didn't say it wasn't important. i never once said that. i'm saying it's not the "end all, be all."
What are your other options? Lamb's not a good 3B, so that isn't going to work on an everyday basis. I certainly have no problem moving him down in the order - but if this team is going to try to make a move to improve something, third base is one the last things we have the luxury to worry about.
ok, you go tell that to a nats or devil rays fan and see how seriously they take you. if it were that easy to get crawford or fonsi, every team would have been all over that by now. enough of this...keep mo and stop trying to justify your argument.
