Mark My Words...
by Nico on Mar 9, 2007 3:21 PM PST
in News
Email
PrintMark Kotsay is an easy player to argue both ways. He can accurately be described as patiently able to work a 12-pitch at bat, and he can accurately be described as having a real hankering for eagerly jumping on the first pitch…and often bouncing it to the second baseman. He can accurately be described as having lost something in centerfield and he can accurately be described as having started at such a high level that the “poor man’s version” of Kotsay is still quite a good centerfielder indeed.
But I believe that whether your reaction to Kotsay's surgery has been “oh no!” or “good riddance!” we will all be singing a far more similar tune come the first week of April. That's because in one essential area, the contrast between Mark Kotsay and Milton Bradley is stark. That area is "fundamentals".
Bradley has far more talent than Kotsay has, but Kotsay's fundamentals are virtually unmatched in the American League and certainly not by Bradley. Almost never does Kotsay overthrow the cutoff man, something I imagine we’ll see from Bradley by the end of the season's first week. Rarely does Kotsay get too close to the wall chasing a fly ball he can't catch, something we'll remember every time we watch a ball sail over an A's outfielder only to roll back towards the infield. Kotsay is usually in perfect position to throw before the ball has even reached his glove, something we'll notice each time Bradley catches a ball flatfooted before uncorking a throwing towards (hopefully the right) base. The jump on the ball, the angle, the thinking-ahead alertness, the wise decision (and perhaps most of all the restraint) are not only Kotsay's strengths but they are also Bradley's weaknesses.
In any sport at any level, success starts with defense and defense starts with fundamentals. In baseball, nowhere do fundamentals, or the lack thereof, show up more than up the middle. On the middle infield and in centerfield, if your fundamentals are poor you just can't hide. Milton Bradley is a brilliantly talented player with below-average fundamentals and he is filling in for someone who sets the standard in fundamental play.
And that's why come April, even Kotsay's most ardent critics are going to find themselves filled with a certain amount of longing and appreciation.
79 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great post...
I totally agree with this.
However, it doesn't make me less mad that March, not November, was the chosen month for the surgery.
That's what I thought--very good writing
I'm sorry, I guess I'm out of it, but I wasn't aware that Kotsay generated a lot of criticism. I've always been very admiring of him, the guy is a great player.
I don't like the surgery date either, but he's human.
I'll miss that great defense, man. Such a smart player.
Agreed
Yes, I agree, I have not heard many Kotsay detractors. Nice guy, always goes hard, good consistent stick, always hurt...oops, ok, so maybe a bit fragile, but hey, did I mention he is a nice guy?
a certain amount of longing
and appreciation? that's what i tell all my soon to be ex g/f's...
I would think that in your case,
Everyone knows that we will miss him.
But he has to be in a game to miss him. He misses too many games. That's why people aren't as sad as you and Blez seem to think that we should be about him missing time. You can't cry over the inevitable.
BTW...we really needed another Kotsay thread. <eyeroll>
I really doubt
that Milton Bradley is going to make so many defensive mistakes in the first week of the season that I'll be counting the days until Kotsay's return.
Is Bradley as good as Kotsay out on the field? No, but he's a more than suitable replacement. I think Milton Bradley deserves more credit than the KDF group wants to give him.
Agreed.
Milton makes a lapse every now and then, but he's faster than Kotsay, and has an absolute cannon of an arm. It's a dropoff, but it's not a huge dropoff.
I'm down.
I'm not glad to see Kotsay gone - I'm just pissed that he'll be gone for so long at THIS point of the season as a result of utterly failing to do anything about his back until it was too late.
Opting for surgery at the end of last season would have seen him healthy right now, instead of six months time.
Hindsight is 20/20? Maybe, but how many seasons do we need to use the words "as long as Kotsay stays healthy" before it's no longer hindsight?
Your sig line needs updating.
Kotsay is 31...Kotsay's back is dead.
That's not quite right
It should read: "Kotsay is 31... Kotsay's back is day to day".
Now that I think of it...
It should read: "Kotsay is 31...Kotsay's back is 12 to 16 weeks."
In Kotsay's defense.
I can't recall surgery as ever being presented as an option. A diagnosis that recommended surgery never existed until this spring.
...that we know of.
So his disc wasn't herniated a month ago?
Now, suddenly, it's herniated?
Weird.
Sacramento Bee...
Link, which might require subscription, but here are the salient parts:
"I'm being given the opportunity to have a procedure the doctor feels good about, to get me to a healthy state as opposed to battling to stay on the field like I did the last two seasons," Kotsay said in a telephone interview Wednesday night from Southern California. *"I've always had the problem.* It was a matter of determining whether the herniation was causing my symptoms."
...and:
"It's always been there and that's been an option," he said of the surgery. "I haven't pursued it because I really thought I could function by doing rehabilitation and taking the steps to get through the season..."
Understandable, but too bad it took two dicey seasons for him to make up his mind. In March.
That changes my opinion somewhat.
That's the first time I've definitively heard that surgery has always been an option. Thanks for finding that!
Probably one more.
He'll be gone by then.
overall... considering both defense and offense
Bradley will be a marked upgrade over 2006 Kotsay in centerfield. Hell, Byrnes would be an upgrade.
The only thing we'll miss about Kotsay is depth. If Bradley and/or Stewart go down to injury, we're screwed, but we probably would have been, anyway, with or without Kotsay.
Uh oh
I sense an impending barrage of defensive metrics.
Out of curiosity (and I have no idea whether Kotsay is better or worse than average at this, so I'm not trying to make any point), how do defensive metrics account for positioning?
They don't.
I think someone brought that up in one of the earlier Kotsay threads, right about the time my eyes were glazing over and I was just going tharn from the whole thing...
You're being too premature . . .
Nico, usually your posts are well thought out and well supported by actual observations and evidence. That's why I am really disappointed with your post. It is couched in terms of fact, i.e. the fact that Bradley will make this error or that, when in fact, you have not even given Bradley the benefit of observing him play center for a prolonged period of time. So how can you couch what are essentially baseless predictions as fact?
Is Kotsay the standard in fundamentals? Yes? Does that mean Bradley won't be an upgrade or an equal to Kotsay b/c he has had a mental lapse? No.
I would think Torii (?) Hunter has more mental lapses than Kotsay - you know what I mean - but at this stage in their careers, I think Hunter is by far the better defensive CF even though he is overhyped by all the SportsCenter highlights.
Similarly, I believe Bradley's natural talent, better speed and better arm will be more than enough to make him equal to or better than Kotsay. At least to such an extent that I won't be begging for Kotsay's return as you claim we all will.
Mind you, I'm not a Kotsay hater or a member of the KDF, and I truly wish he was healthy b/c that's just better for the A's depth wise, but no one can dispute his steady decline in the past few years - fundamentals aside. We will be just fine without him . . . so long as Milton and the other OFs stay healthy.
I don't think that's fair...
...I love Milton Bradley, but he's no Kotsay in the field. Healthy Kotsay is one of the top tier CFs in the game. Milton's great (and WAY better on offense), but few can touch Kotsay's defense.
"Healthy Kotsay"
does not exist, and has not existed for at least two years.
Kotsay's fundamentals are second to none, but there really isn't much point in comparing Bradley to some Platonic ideal of Mark Kotsay. Compared to the Mark Kotsay that we actually got during the last two years, and that we would have had this year even if his stretching/yoga program had been a success, there's a good chance that Bradley will be a defensive upgrade.
andeux has it right.
Kotsay isn't the player he once was and he may never return to his former glory as a fielder. Kotsay missed some balls last year. I don't think that Bradley is a huge step down from that.
Probably, except what Bradley is missing...
...is the quality that makes Kotsay such a good fielder; he anticipates each play; just has an innate sense of the ball that very few fielders do.
Yes Kotsay used to play like that
You said you were disappointed in Nico
for jumping to a conclusion. He's watched Bradley and Kotsay for years, not just in Oakland.
i remember
several occasions last year where bradley set up behind the fly ball, stepped into it as he caught it and unleashed perfect on target throws, just like kotsay does. he may not do it as perfectly as kotsay everytime, but to say he catches balls flat footed and makes poor throws is incorrect imo. i think bradley is a fine defensive player. but i am more interested in the fact that he really looks like if he can stay healthy he's gonna hit 300 with a 400 obp and a 450 slg. now that is gonna be fun to watch.
To letsgooakland and oaktown mario,
1. I never said you'd be longing for Kotsay now; I said when the season starts. I've seen Bradley enough to know that he is a great athlete who often acts before he thinks--and that impulsivity shows up in his decision-making, not just in his temper.
2. The point about Kotsay missing too many games...This is how Bradley is an upgrade?
But to clarify, I never said Bradley would constantly overthrow the cutoff man and would catch everything flatfooted. And I'm sure Bradley will make some tremendous plays, plays Kotsay may never have made. I just said I think you will find enough examples of "unforced errors" (of judgment, fundamentals, etc.) to notice the contrast between Kotsay and Bradley.
so, in other words...
Bradley in centerfield won't harm the team, at all. And, his offense will be dramatically better than Kotsay's. And, we'll miss Kotsay why?
looks to me like Travis Buck...
should be our 5th outfielder, not Goleski. Were that to be the case, I don't think depth would be an issue. Actually, I believe it would incease the offensive production of the outfielder corp.
Goleski better turn it around real soon or he ain't making the 25-man roster.
by FoolshGame22 on Mar 10, 2007 6:15 PM PST up reply actions
Has goleski recovered from his injury?
.. he hasn't done squat in ST so far ..
by Randy Bell on Mar 10, 2007 6:25 PM PST up reply actions
I imagine Goleski is just pressing too hard...
because with both Kotsay and Kielty DLed through the beginning of the regular season, Goleski was, I think, the presumptive favorite to make the roster. He can't be this bad a hitter (I hope).
by FoolshGame22 on Mar 10, 2007 6:30 PM PST up reply actions
Besides that he's pressing a bit,
I disagree
with the entire gist of this post. You make it seem like Bradley is some goon with a glove. He's a very fine defensive player and I don't anticipate a huge spike in missed cutoff men or balls rolling back towards the infield because of Bradley replacing Kotsay.
I'm not saying that Kotsay's D won't be missed because it will, but the reason it will be missed is not because Bradley will be in center, but because Swisher will be in right and not at 1B.
That might have been true in 2004
An injured Kotsay was a defensive liability last year. He was negative 8 in Fielding Runs Above Average. Bradley was negative 2 in right field.
Hopefully we will see a return to the old Kotsay once he gets his back straightened out.
by Jimmie Foxx on Mar 9, 2007 4:46 PM PST reply actions
Surgery timing
From what I've heard he worked hard on rehabbing his back all offseason but it obviously didn't work. You guys are jumping all over him after he spent this much time and effort tyring to be on the field. Hopefully the surgery makes him comfortable and productive later this season.
Me like Kotsay, Me like Bradley
Now pass the green m&m's....................and let's all just enjoy what we have. God I love A's baseball!!!!
YES we are soooo fortunate ..
mrod says -- God I love A's baseball!!!!
Me Too, Amen Brother -- We are so fortunate to have a wise GM and an organization with a history of winning here in Oakland {or maybe later in Fremont}. The A's don't even have the Giants' budget but they amaze the League year after year with their performance. Much like the Twins, we have a class organization that knows how to maximize limited resources and utilize talent like few others in baseball. Here's to a season whose success will defy the odds -- last year we won the West despite a crippled Kotsay, Chavez, Crosby, - multiple injuries to the pitching staff, - etc. Let's not give up, Go A's !! Let's Go Oakland !!
by Randy Bell on Mar 9, 2007 7:05 PM PST up reply actions
Nice perspective added
by the Pro Milton contingent. But, you seem to have forgotten that Kotsay played in more games than Bradley last year. I'm rootin for Bradley to play a full season - he's a helluva player - but I don't think he's only played in as many as 120 once.
Kotsay has a lot of kills on the basepaths, has come up with some amazing dekes at crucial times, and doesn't make mental mistakes. Run prevention is the name of the A's game, and they need to keep the pressure off that young pitching staff by not making errors.
But let's get to what really matters - the "Kotsay's Korner" sign is obsolete. Bradley's Gamers?
Goleski's Galoots
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Mar 9, 2007 8:45 PM PST up reply actions
I Just Hope Milton Can Hang On ..
.. and Swish can play right-field well, and DJ can play a good 1B well enough .. that we can get by the first half without finding ourselves 10 or 15 games under .500 before Kotsay is rehabbed and healthy again. If that happens, i.e. if we dig ourselves a big hole in the first-half that not even a strong second-half surge can overcome, it won't matter what Kots does or does not do this year. Very good posts from Nico and Blez on the Kots issue, at least they are good at stimulating discussion. Discussion is good, free speech is good, we don't have to agree, -- it is very good to have lively debate and exchange of ideas .. thanks Nico. :) P.S. I have got to quit falling asleep for naps while these new lively threads are posted, I never catch up {g} ..
by Randy Bell on Mar 9, 2007 6:57 PM PST reply actions
scapels and backs
any criticism about the timing of kotsay's surgery is misplaced. we would have all made the same desicion is his shoes. you would have waited until all other options were exhausted. i work in the spinal graft industry, and believe me, you don't want any body cutting your back open unless they absolutely have to. People are upset about the timing?? why? because it impacts your fantasy team?
although, eric bynes would look pretty good on the team right about now. think of the column nico could write about fundamentals then!
Elephantman, I totally agree
If I had been in Kotsay's predicament, I probably would put off surgery until now while exploring every alternative, and then when I ran out of alternatives to explore I probably would have retired at age 31. So as my baseball passion regresses into reason over time, I don't blame Kotsay for the timing of the surgery; I just wish the A's could catch a health break as well as Kots used to catch a fly ball.
glass half full
looking at it this way, it could be the break goleski or maybe dan johnson can take advantage of. somebody will get significant playing that otherwise would not. now maybe goleski can break camp with the club and begin to blossom. otherwise we would have to give him back.
Nico, - On what do you base
your assertion that the ""poor man’s version" of Kotsay is still quite a good centerfielder indeed"?
Every defensive metric suggests that the 2006 version - I will submit that as the "poor mans" version - of Kotsay was in fact NOT a good centerfielder at all. And in fact that version of Kotsay was a significantly below average center fielder.
I don't disagree that Kotsay has very good fundamentals - but if he ain't gettin to the ball, it hardly matters.
Somehow, you seem to be saying that a sub-par Kotsay is still good. I don't see any evidence anywhere that would support that assertion, and in fact all the evidence would tend to point to a "poor mans" version of Kotsay being a "poor mans" version of a centerfielder - albiet one that is quite expensive
Cheers
by onlysaying on Mar 9, 2007 7:26 PM PST reply actions
Don't fall in love with defensive metrics,
* how many doubles are turned to singles by smart decisions or shrewd angles
* how the pitching staff impacts the percentage of balls an OFer should get to (are the pitchers serving up a buffet of line drives or a high percentage of lazy fly balls?)
* throws to the wrong base that allow runners to advance, assists not earned because the runner didn't dare test the arm, singles turned to doubles by weak arms
* balls your teammate caught because your range allowed him to play closer to the left-field line knowing you had the alley covered
What do I base my assertions on? I watched Kotsay with my eyes for over 100 games last year, I watched hundreds of games of opposing CFers, and I have watched baseball for decades with a scout's eye. The guy was above average in CF.
It's almost an aesthetic appreciation
The ole scout's eye view takes some shots, but you're right, Klassic Kotsay plays with a level of grace that few CF'ers do.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Mar 9, 2007 8:58 PM PST up reply actions
Agreed, FSU
I don't think you can use a "scout's eye view" for everything, but I just don't know how you could watch Kotsay last year and conclude he was only league average in CF. He certainly wasn't as good as he had been in 2004, but he was still damn good--and CF, like SS, is a position where the "little things" add up quickly to be significant.
defensive metrics are...
a bowl of crap (unless they support your position). I recall defensive metrics being thrown at me quite regularly when they favored Kotsay over Byrnes. I know, that's probably a distant memory now.
I've always said they were a bowl of crap
no need to apologize...
the stats are on my side to prove otherwise. ;-)
by FoolshGame22 on Mar 9, 2007 10:01 PM PST up reply actions
This is why they have stats
I watched nearly every A's game last year - MLB TV - live overseas (no blackouts) work from home.
I saw several balls hit over Kotsay's head that went for doubles - 2 in one game IIRC. Flat out didn't happen in 2004.
I have been watching the A's for over 30 years - Born and Raised in the Bay Area - but I won't claim to have a "scouts eye" - and based on Moneyball I wouldn't even if I thought I did.
So we can debate who has seen more baseball games - and how we look at things but
Yes - when Kotsay gets to a ball he plays it very well, but in 2005 and especially 2006 - he just flat out didn't get to as many balls - and it cost the A's runs.
I also find it ironic - and interesting that when stats don't support one's position, they are a "bowel of crap" - Moneyball largely said that scouts eyes and not stats were bowels of crap
Cheers
by onlysaying on Mar 9, 2007 11:47 PM PST up reply actions
I agree with you on defensive metrics...
to a point.
I hesitate to match one player's metrics to another because the numbers leave out so much information. However, using defensive metrics to compare one player's performance over the course of several seasons IS a valid option because the "intangibles" should remain constant. Kotsay has slipped since 2004, you can tell with a scout's eye, the metrics just tell you how far he's fallen.
I'll agree with that, groves--
I just think that most stats are generally basically accurate for what they are aiming to gauge, but that defensive metrics have a long, long way to go before they are more than the "little knowledge" that is "a dangerous thing".
Any Sport?
In any sport at any level, success starts with defense and defense starts with fundamentals.
Synchronized swimming?
Noodling?
Buzkashi?
(To be fair, I really don't know whether or not success in buzkashi relies on defensive fundamentals...)
by GreenNGoldSooner on Mar 9, 2007 8:01 PM PST reply actions
You forgot the 100-yard dash
An arrogant post
Speak for yourself Nico, not all of us. Bradley not fundamental enough for you? Perhaps you preferred an NBA game without the non-traditional dunk shot?
OK, I'll speak for myself and not for all of you:
It's a breath mint. No, it's a candy mint.
Stop!, you're both right!
Actually, it was a lozenge, so HA!
Speaking of "an arrogant post," AlaskaA, would it be a CGV if I called you one? Would you take a-fence? Would others picket?
OK, scribble away.
Now I'm just getting board.
well, i could dish out some more
fencing vernaculars but as an urban cat you probably wouldn't get it.
Mark Kotsay fun
Is it possible that Mark Kotsay and Jim Breuer were separated at birth? I know that there are obvious differences, for sure, like Mark is a hard working ball player and Jim Breuer is a smartass comedian, Kotsay is, for the most part, straight laced, Jim Breuer is a goofball. But one can't help but looking at the both of them and wondering..."Are they related or both just smoke a lot of weed?"
Another major difference:
I've heard Mark Kotsay being funny.
I've always pegged Kotsay...
...as more a Christopher Walken guy.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Mar 10, 2007 12:34 AM PST up reply actions
Nico, Your Argument is Flawed
You make it sound like Mark Kotsay was a perfectly sound outfielder for the last three years ... he wasn't.
Even at his healthiest, Mark Kotsay wasn't a perfect outfielder. His fundamentals were sound, but he did misjudge balls. Plus, Kotsay was far from 100% physically the last two years.
I'll take Bradley's "flawed fundamentals" over Kotsay's 60% physical ability any day.
Damn it, Eck!
Kotsay has zero Gold Gloves
He has not been an all-star. His average year is .285 and 13 HR's..his OBP at .340 is low -especially for a top of the order hitter....he misses on average about 30 games a season.
He was damaged goods and high risk when the A's traded for him.
This site paints him as the second coming of Mickey Mantle--he is not.
He is a solidd--not great outfielder. A good CF hits .300--the great ones above that. If he had been great the A's could not have afforded to extend his contract in his prime.
A healthy Shannon Stewart is an upgrade--Stewart finished 3rd in the AL MVP in 2003--Kotsay has never been in the race,
Jay Payton was fine in CF last year and got to some balls Kotsay's total lack of speed never touched.
Kotsay was the slowest CF in either league--he has to have fundamentals and positioning to compensate for a lack of athletic abilities compared to the average good CF.
Mickey Mantle? I've heard Kotsay
compared to a jerk but never a boozer. Anyway, some of your points seem valid to me, but not others. Specifically, the fact that Kotsay has never won a gold glove? Was it Palmeiro who did win one at 1B in a season he DHed? And I think the notion that Kotsay was the slowest CFer in either league, or that most CFers hit .300+, is an exercise in exaggeration.
But it seems like the debate in this thread has degenerated (like a certain back) to where everyone disagreeing is actually agreeing. If we are analyzing how good a hurt-but-playing Kotsay is, we all agree that the decline has been steep to where he can't hit or field at the level we grew accustomed to when we first had Kotsay.
The disagreement is really about whether the decline is injury (or age) related, i.e., reversible or irreversible, and whether the latest version of Kotsay was "horrible" or "ok". I don't think anyone is confusing the 2006 model for the 2004 model, and I think we all, in hindsight if not in foresight, would rather have Cano or Wang at the moment. I don't know if Beane really had the chance to swap Kotsay for one of those, but if he did...shoulda...No argument there.
I Doubt even the Yankees ..
.. would have given up Cano or Wang for Kotsay .. definitely not Wang, given the premium that pitching has become in today's market .. and where would we play Cano if we had him? Trade Mark Ellis? These sorts of speculations are fun but they are just that -- almost infinite speculation on trade possibilities that never happen. Just read the Yahoo MLB Rumor blogs and you will see fans of every team in the MLB wishing they had made this or that trade, etc. I think Billy Beane knows what he is doing and if he didn't make any deal with the Yankees there was probably good reason ..
by Randy Bell on Mar 10, 2007 11:07 AM PST up reply actions
I agree, Randy Bell--
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
