I'm started this thread because we've had a lot of discussions about the value of Mike Jacobs. As far as I can ascertain, most people on this board seem to think that Mike Jacobs was entirely without value to our team last year. Most cite lack of OBP and bad defense. I'm not a guru when it comes to defensive metrics and I don't dispute that Jacobs was poor defensively. However, I do believe that his offensive game, while having indisputable weaknesses, was still much more useful than a player like Bonifacio. Specifically, Jacobs provided power and run producing ability. Bonifacio, on the other hand, provides a minutely better better average, but a non-existant slugging percentage and roughly the same .OBP. To demonstrate my point, let's look at the numbers:

 

Mike Jacobs

Year Team G AB R H HR RBI BB SO SB CS OBP SLG AVG

2008 FLA 141 477 67 118 32 93 36 119 1 0 .299 .514 .247

2009 KC 35 122 15 32 8 22 12 37 0 0 .338 .516 .262

 

Emilio Bonifacio

2008 ARI-WAS 49 169 29 41 0 14 14 46 7 4 .296 .337 .243

2009 FLA 36 157 24 41 1 9 10 35 7 3 .304 .325 .261

Total 96 349 55 87 1 25 28 84 14 8 .302 .327 .249

 

There really isn't anything about Bonifacio's offensive game that makes him more useful than Jacobs. I have a hard time believing that any player with a .500 slugging percentage couldn't be trade for more than a reliever, especially considering the ease with which we cut effective ones last year. I wasn't ever a huge fan of Jacobs, as like everyone else I prefer complete offensive players. He wasn't, but neither is Bonifacio.

 

I think the Fo's attempts at "improving" our team this offseason were strongly misguided. Many seemed to believe that, in the case of Jacobs, addition by subtraction would help us out. Now left with the results of subtraction, I have a hard time believing this is true, especially considering that Bonifacio's 3B defense hasn't really been extremely impressive either.

I don't think any out of a few did or will argue Emilio > Jacobs. The arguement was Gaby > Jacobs. And based off all the FO comments in the offseason, they removed Jacobs for Gaby, not for emilio. But Gaby had a horrible ST and lost to Emilio. He lit up AAA but is now injured until June. We'll probably see him in July.

 

edit:

 

Also, depending on the Metric, Jacobs cost us somwhere between 14-23 runs. Assuming Gaby was league average (so worth exactly 0 runs), he'd only have to OPS somewhere in the .662-.722 range to equal Jacobs production last year, depending on just how many runs Jacobs cost (i'd personally say more around the 15 mark, so around a .722 OPS).

Can't say I disagree with this.

I'm started this thread because we've had a lot of discussions about the value of Mike Jacobs. As far as I can ascertain, most people on this board seem to think that Mike Jacobs was entirely without value to our team last year. Most cite lack of OBP and bad defense. I'm not a guru when it comes to defensive metrics and I don't dispute that Jacobs was poor defensively. However, I do believe that his offensive game, while having indisputable weaknesses, was still much more useful than a player like Bonifacio. Specifically, Jacobs provided power and run producing ability. Bonifacio, on the other hand, provides a minutely better better average, but a non-existant slugging percentage and roughly the same .OBP. To demonstrate my point, let's look at the numbers:

 

Mike Jacobs

Year Team G AB R H HR RBI BB SO SB CS OBP SLG AVG

2008 FLA 141 477 67 118 32 93 36 119 1 0 .299 .514 .247

2009 KC 35 122 15 32 8 22 12 37 0 0 .338 .516 .262

 

Emilio Bonifacio

2008 ARI-WAS 49 169 29 41 0 14 14 46 7 4 .296 .337 .243

2009 FLA 36 157 24 41 1 9 10 35 7 3 .304 .325 .261

Total 96 349 55 87 1 25 28 84 14 8 .302 .327 .249

 

There really isn't anything about Bonifacio's offensive game that makes him more useful than Jacobs. I have a hard time believing that any player with a .500 slugging percentage couldn't be trade for more than a reliever, especially considering the ease with which we cut effective ones last year. I wasn't ever a huge fan of Jacobs, as like everyone else I prefer complete offensive players. He wasn't, but neither is Bonifacio.

 

I think the Fo's attempts at "improving" our team this offseason were strongly misguided. Many seemed to believe that, in the case of Jacobs, addition by subtraction would help us out. Now left with the results of subtraction, I have a hard time believing this is true, especially considering that Bonifacio's 3B defense hasn't really been extremely impressive either.

 

Good post.

 

The sum of Baker, Cantu, Uggla, Hanley, Hermida and Ross are doing relatively close to what they did last year. This year they're about .020 OPS points below last year.

 

The huge drop-off is with Boni and Maybin replacing two productive hitters that could be counted on to put up OPSes in the .825 range.

I don't think any out of a few did or will argue Emilio > Jacobs. The arguement was Gaby > Jacobs. And based off all the FO comments in the offseason, they removed Jacobs for Gaby, not for emilio. But Gaby had a horrible ST and lost to Emilio. He lit up AAA but is now injured until June. We'll probably see him in July.

 

edit:

 

Also, depending on the Metric, Jacobs cost us somwhere between 14-23 runs. Assuming Gaby was league average (so worth exactly 0 runs), he'd only have to OPS somewhere in the .662-.722 range to equal Jacobs production last year, depending on just how many runs Jacobs cost (i'd personally say more around the 15 mark, so around a .722 OPS).

 

Problem with that is it's not Gaby. When Boni was given 3B I took down by projected wins by 2 to 4 or something like that. It was stupid to not give Gaby a shot. He earned it with the year he had in the minors last year.

I don't think anyone would argue that Jake was better than Boni has been, even with defense taken into account.

I remember when Jacobs first came up with the mets, had like 10 homeruns in 90 at bats..

 

i think it was a good trade for Nunez though. I didnt realize he threw so hard(no homo)

I remember when Jacobs first came up with the mets, had like 10 homeruns in 90 at bats..

 

i think it was a good trade for Nunez though. I didnt realize he threw so hard(no homo)

 

How is there anything even near homo in that sentence?

I remember when Jacobs first came up with the mets, had like 10 homeruns in 90 at bats..

 

i think it was a good trade for Nunez though. I didnt realize he threw so hard(no homo)

 

How is there anything even near homo in that sentence?

Yeah, a Mets fan.

I remember when Jacobs first came up with the mets, had like 10 homeruns in 90 at bats..

 

i think it was a good trade for Nunez though. I didnt realize he threw so hard(no homo)

 

How is there anything even near homo in that sentence?

Yeah, a Mets fan.

 

lolololololol.

I don't disagree with Gaby being sent to the minors for the start of the year. His ST just didn't merit keeping a job. The real problem is that, while moving Cantu to first is a good move defensively, we've now blocked Gaby or Logan. Whats worse is the outright release of McPherson. I know he didn't light the world on fire in ST and that the FO released him because he wasn't willing to accept a backup job. But going from having the option of some kind of combination of Jacobs, Cantu, Dallas, and Gaby at the corners, to starting Emilio at a power position was ridiculous. It's shows the lack of foresight and poor decision making that has plagued the front office for a couple years now.

 

Beinfest has done a pretty good job of assembling 75% of our team. Its those final few ingredients that he has struggled with mightily. And when he has mismanaged situations where we've had a surplus of talent, it has nothing to do with payroll constraints.

You people are going to get the Bonifacio Kool-Aid parade after you here before long(the ones that think a 5 game sample size is more relevant than a 20 game sample size or career MiLB sample size for that matter) and it wont be pretty...better be careful.

You people are going to get the Bonifacio Kool-Aid parade after you here before long(the ones that think a 5 game sample size is more relevant than a 20 game sample size or career MiLB sample size for that matter) and it wont be pretty...better be careful.

 

 

no one ever said this, it is nothing more than a straw man that you (and others, but mostly you) have perpetuated. but even that is much less dumb than the following:

 

not hating EB = ritualistic mass suicide

Actually, you have all done it. Bonifacio followed up an >month long span where he barely broke a .400 OPS and that was ignored by all of you. He gets a few hits in Milwaukee and yall came out of the woodwork faster than anything I have ever seen with a smug "told you so" arrogance. Where were you over the previous 120 ABs?

 

And calling me a perpetrator of straw man arguments is laughable.

 

That said, this is irrelevant. Jacobs is no longer a Fish, no one in the system was going to replicate his power at 1B anyway. Emilio is the 3B for now, cant really do anything about it. It is what it is.

Mike Jacobs 1b

1 year/$3.25M (2009)

Actually, you have all done it. Bonifacio followed up an >month long span where he barely broke a .400 OPS and that was ignored by all of you. He gets a few hits in Milwaukee and yall came out of the woodwork faster than anything I have ever seen with a smug "told you so" arrogance. Where were you over the previous 120 ABs?

 

And calling me a perpetrator of straw man arguments is laughable.

 

That said, this is irrelevant. Jacobs is no longer a Fish, no one in the system was going to replicate his power at 1B anyway. Emilio is the 3B for now, cant really do anything about it. It is what it is.

 

 

Well if you can't see how you are, at the very least, jumping to conclusions, then you are dumber than I thought you were.

 

:lol yea I was hiding from MB.com/forums because EB wasn't playing well. In every thread that I have ever discussed EB I have acknowledged his poor stretch, while pointing to an even larger sample (the whole season). Acknowledge is the opposite of ignore. The definition of a straw man argument is to weaken the position of your opponent by arguing against something that he did not intend to defend. I never tried to ignore anything. Yet you constantly say I did. So I'm not sure what you mean by 'laughable'. Comedy is generally a matter of taste, anyhow.

 

The truth is, the haters try to ignore the ABs that he has done well by only focusing on one 120 AB stretch (which is substantial, but not comprehensive). Just because one sample is larger than the other does not make the smaller one irrelevant.

 

Also, drinking kool-aid is associated with conformity, and on this forum, the vocal majority has aggresively spoken out against EB on numerous occasions. So who is the follower? The one who goes along with the crowd saying 'yah, boner sux' or the one who tries to point out some positives and notes that he actually is not the worst offensive Marlin this season, all while weathering the scorn of pompous *******s.

Whats worse is the outright release of McPherson. I know he didn't light the world on fire in ST and that the FO released him because he wasn't willing to accept a backup job.

 

 

Actually his back acted up again and that's likely why he was released. He still hasn't played an inning of baseball this year because of his back.

Whats worse is the outright release of McPherson. I know he didn't light the world on fire in ST and that the FO released him because he wasn't willing to accept a backup job.

 

 

Actually his back acted up again and that's likely why he was released. He still hasn't played an inning of baseball this year because of his back.

 

I knew he had struggles with his back and that played a part in him having trouble in ST. But I remember some kind of article or report concerning him not wanting to be a part time player leading to his release. Either way its unfortunate to hear him sidetracked again by the back. Marlin or not I was really rooting for him.

I don't think any out of a few did or will argue Emilio > Jacobs. The arguement was Gaby > Jacobs. And based off all the FO comments in the offseason, they removed Jacobs for Gaby, not for emilio. But Gaby had a horrible ST and lost to Emilio. He lit up AAA but is now injured until June. We'll probably see him in July.

 

edit:

 

Also, depending on the Metric, Jacobs cost us somwhere between 14-23 runs. Assuming Gaby was league average (so worth exactly 0 runs), he'd only have to OPS somewhere in the .662-.722 range to equal Jacobs production last year, depending on just how many runs Jacobs cost (i'd personally say more around the 15 mark, so around a .722 OPS).

 

 

Not true. If Gaby failed at 1B during ST it was well known that Cantu would play there and the 3B job was open. Emilio beat out Dallas for that job. And currently Dallas was last seen on milk cartons.

I don't think any out of a few did or will argue Emilio > Jacobs. The arguement was Gaby > Jacobs. And based off all the FO comments in the offseason, they removed Jacobs for Gaby, not for emilio. But Gaby had a horrible ST and lost to Emilio. He lit up AAA but is now injured until June. We'll probably see him in July.

 

edit:

 

Also, depending on the Metric, Jacobs cost us somwhere between 14-23 runs. Assuming Gaby was league average (so worth exactly 0 runs), he'd only have to OPS somewhere in the .662-.722 range to equal Jacobs production last year, depending on just how many runs Jacobs cost (i'd personally say more around the 15 mark, so around a .722 OPS).

 

 

Not true. If Gaby failed at 1B during ST it was well known that Cantu would play there and the 3B job was open. Emilio beat out Dallas for that job. And currently Dallas was last seen on milk cartons.

 

So it's not true, but you're agreeing with me?

You'll understand when you're older.

I can only disagree to a small extent

 

I liked jacobs and hope he does well in KC. His bat could change a game when he connected and bring in multiple runs.

 

However, I don't think it's fair to say that emilio brings nothing that jake didn't bring.

 

Emilio has game changing speed. He can score on plays that other guys can't (let alone a fairly pedestrian runner like jacobs)

 

Even in last nights game you could see how he affected Haren when he was on first. In the minors he was also very dangerous on the base paths.

 

He just needs to get there more often ....... that's the problem with the guy. His best attribute is considerably held back by his worst.

Saying Emilio is Jacob's replacement is like saying Taylor is Olsen's replacement. In effect they replaced the other, but that wasn't the intent.

 

I do not agree that we've blocked Gaby and Logan. Cantu is capable of returning to third base.

I don't think any out of a few did or will argue Emilio > Jacobs. The arguement was Gaby > Jacobs. And based off all the FO comments in the offseason, they removed Jacobs for Gaby, not for emilio. But Gaby had a horrible ST and lost to Emilio. He lit up AAA but is now injured until June. We'll probably see him in July.

 

edit:

 

Also, depending on the Metric, Jacobs cost us somwhere between 14-23 runs. Assuming Gaby was league average (so worth exactly 0 runs), he'd only have to OPS somewhere in the .662-.722 range to equal Jacobs production last year, depending on just how many runs Jacobs cost (i'd personally say more around the 15 mark, so around a .722 OPS).

 

 

Not true. If Gaby failed at 1B during ST it was well known that Cantu would play there and the 3B job was open. Emilio beat out Dallas for that job. And currently Dallas was last seen on milk cartons.

 

Not sure what you're arguing here...

I don't think any out of a few did or will argue Emilio > Jacobs. The arguement was Gaby > Jacobs. And based off all the FO comments in the offseason, they removed Jacobs for Gaby, not for emilio. But Gaby had a horrible ST and lost to Emilio. He lit up AAA but is now injured until June. We'll probably see him in July.

 

edit:

 

Also, depending on the Metric, Jacobs cost us somwhere between 14-23 runs. Assuming Gaby was league average (so worth exactly 0 runs), he'd only have to OPS somewhere in the .662-.722 range to equal Jacobs production last year, depending on just how many runs Jacobs cost (i'd personally say more around the 15 mark, so around a .722 OPS).

 

 

Not true. If Gaby failed at 1B during ST it was well known that Cantu would play there and the 3B job was open. Emilio beat out Dallas for that job. And currently Dallas was last seen on milk cartons.

 

So it's not true, but you're agreeing with me?

 

No. I'm disputing the statement Boni beat out Gaby for a position on the team. He didn't. He beat out Dallas.

 

Dallas looked just fine the last game he played in for us. I was there. Maybe he hurt that back later, but he sure looked healthy that game, and every game I saw him in this Spring. He just played like crap mostly all ST. A ST that he knew he had to excel in to make the team. Stumbling and bumbling defensively, and not producing at the plate. Just like last ST pre-injury. Just like his call up last September with no injury. Never did buy into him being a board fav just because what he did a few years ago vs lefties. He wasn't a fit on this team. Plain and simple.

 

I was never a Jake fan because of his poor defense. And because Boni is learning a new position, I'm willing to give him until the ASB to really settle in over there. Just like last year with Cantu, who was much improved after that date with his glove. It's just a learning curve we have to live with. But trying to compare him with Jake? Why not compare Maybin with Jake. Or Coghlin with Jake. Or....