Ortiz vs. Monasterio

[jay87shot]

I think the prevailing opinion is that the SS job is Ortiz's barring a big trade. I do agree Ortiz should be the leader for the job however I want to remind everyone that Mone should get a chance to steal the job in camp. Here are some things to think on.

1) His bat was way better at .270/.319/.437 109ops+ compared to Joey's .230/.276/.317 66ops+. Had Mone gotten 500 abs his pace would have been 36 2B, 16 HR, 8 sb with a 3+ WAR season (Ortiz 0.3). 

2) While Joey plays gold glove level defense Mone was at least average and I dont recall a game he started actually costing us a game. Also if he can win the job Joey could always come into games in like the 7th as a defensive sub. Also most defensive metrics werent high on Ortiz's 1st half defense (even though the eye test said different).

3)Mone is hitting well in winter ball. This doesn't really mean a ton, however points to him being able to maintain success.

4)Age, Mone is only a year older and at 27 Ortiz isn't really a prospect who we can expect to rebound to the player we hoped would be a .300 hitter with stellar defense. However, if he could hit .250 Ortiz should still be a 3-4 WAR player.

[sveumrules]

45 minutes ago, jay87shot said:

His bat was way better at .270/.319/.437 109ops+ compared to Joey's .230/.276/.317 66ops+. Had Mone gotten 500 abs his pace would have been 36 2B, 16 HR, 8 sb with a 3+ WAR season (Ortiz 0.3). 

No doubt Mona hit better in 2025, but for his career with the Brewers he has an 89 wRC+ (.298 xwOBA) over 592 PA compared to an 86 wRC+ (.289 xwOBA) for Ortiz over 1,017 PA. 

Even when Andruw was hot down the stretch last year with a 148 wRC+ from August 1st onward (3rd best on the team behind Turang at 172 and Bauers at 166) he still only managed 81 PA (14 starts at SS) over those last two months while Joey got 147 PA (40 starts at SS) with an 84 wRC+ over the same timeframe.

Come playoff time Ortiz had 23 miserable PA of 105/227/105 (6 wRC+) and they still didn't throw a start Mona's way to see if he could spark something from the nine spot.

I guess if Andruw comes out guns blazing and puts up a monster spring while Joey looks lost at the plate again it could maybe be enough to win him the starting spot, but I also think the Brewers internal eval of Joey's defense is probably pretty in line with his +10 FRV from StatCast that was 5th among SS last year which buys him a lot of leeway in their run prevention scheme.

[treego14]

Gimme' mo' Mona!

[Jim French Stepstool]

I can't think of any times where Monasterios' defense definitely cost us a game. But there were times when Ortiz' defense, in large part, helped make the difference in wins. And his bat doesn't have to rebound THAT much for him to be the clear choice. Hell, it was clear last year even with his struggles w/the bat & Monasterios' hot stretch.

IMO the scenario where Mona beats out Ortiz in the spring is highly unlikely.

[jay87shot]

1 hour ago, sveumrules said:

I guess if Andruw comes out guns blazing and puts up a monster spring while Joey looks lost at the plate again it could maybe be enough to win him the starting spot, but I also think the Brewers internal eval of Joey's defense is probably pretty in line with his +10 FRV from StatCast that was 5th among SS last year which buys him a lot of leeway in their run prevention scheme.

I agree with the defense eval. I guess the question is about how much offense is the 10 to 15 runs saved on defense worth. If Ortiz hits like last year the extra bat is worth more playing time for Mone. As I said before, the job is Joey's but I do think if his bat struggles in spring (and Mone is good) at the very least there should be like a 60/40 time split. I just think it is closer than most of us have been assuming all offseason.

[Turning2]

I don’t recall there being projections or expectations of .300 from Ortiz 

[Lathund]

Monasterio had such a small sample size this season that there can be a lot of randomness in there. I prefer wRC+ to wOBA, but just to put it on the same scale Monasterio had a .328 wOBA vs .281 xwOBA, Ortiz had a .263 wOBA vs .273 xwOBA. Or in other words, based on the batted ball profile and walk/strikeout rates being the same going forward, you'd expect Monasterio to put up significantly lower offense numbers than he did, while you'd expect Ortiz to improve his somewhat. Still an edge to Monasterio in 2025, but will that hold true going forward? And is it enough to outweigh the defensive difference?

I think Monasterio is a very good backup to have for all the infield spots, and I wouldn't mind if Murphy rotated his players a bit more to keep them fresh, which would give him more playing time to evaluate. But I think it would take a *lot* for Monasterio to win the job in camp. I still think that if they felt they had to move on from Ortiz and find a new SS starter internally it would be Brice Turang, since they have more guys who can play a passable 2B, including Monasterio. I also think Cooper Pratt is a lot closer than raw statline scouting would suggest. 

[sveumrules]

10 hours ago, jay87shot said:

I agree with the defense eval. I guess the question is about how much offense is the 10 to 15 runs saved on defense worth.

This is pretty much the exact kind of question the WAR framework is attempting to answer, so I'll take my best stab at it...

When Ortiz hit for a 67 wRC+ over 506 PA last year it shook out to -20.0 batting runs, which combined with his +2.5 base running and +13.9 defense on FanGraphs came out in the wash at 1.4 WAR.

When Ortiz hit for a 105 wRC+ over 511 PA in 2024 it shook out to +2.8 batting runs, combining that with his 2025 base running and defense numbers would be something like 3.7 WAR.

Take the midpoint of those extremes (his career 86 wRC+ with the Brewers), again combine it with his 2025 base running and defense and it gets you around 2.5 WAR or so.

I'd think it's a pretty safe bet that if Joey gets another 500 some PA as the Brewers primary SS his 2026 season will come out somewhere in that range of numbers. 

What might a full season at SS look like for Monasterio? That's a lot tougher hypothetical. Let's start around the edges...

In his 592 PA with the Brewers, Monasterio has -0.7 BSR over 592 PA. To keep things round let's call that three runs lost compared to 2025 Joey at +2.5 BSR.

Defense is a lot trickier. Easiest way is probably just to assume Monasterio would be an even 0.0 DEF with the positive positional adjustment from playing SS canceling out his likely negative fielding grades at the six over a full season. That is another fourteen runs lost compared to 2025 Joey.

So Andruw is starting off something like 17 runs behind Ortiz before we get to the bat. With the 38 point difference in Ortiz's disparate 2024/25 wRC+ numbers shaking out to a difference of 22.8 batting runs, that means quick and dirty math the Brewers would have to believe Mona is something like 28 points of wRC+ better than Joey on a true talent level just to even up (much less exceed) that 17 run gap on defense and the bases.

Lowering our assumption from a 17 run difference in defense and base running on the high end to say a lower, rounder endpoint of a 10 run difference in their BSR/DEF would mean Mona would have to be more like 17 points of wRC+ better at the plate to even out that kind of gap.

[liveforoctober]

Sveum I have never sent Wikipedia money to help keep it afloat... But if you ever decide you might not be able to post here anymore due to time/money reasons I will start the collection up on your behalf.

Your additions to this board are incredible.

[sveumrules]

Thanks @liveforoctober, that's really kind and much appreciated.

Nobody else I'd rather talk Brewers and baseball in general with than everybody here at BF.

[Thurston Fluff]

58 minutes ago, sveumrules said:

This is pretty much the exact kind of question the WAR framework is attempting to answer, so I'll take my best stab at it...

When Ortiz hit for a 67 wRC+ over 506 PA last year it shook out to -20.0 batting runs, which combined with his +2.5 base running and +13.9 defense on FanGraphs came out in the wash at 1.4 WAR.

When Ortiz hit for a 105 wRC+ over 511 PA in 2024 it shook out to +2.8 batting runs, combining that with his 2025 base running and defense numbers would be something like 3.7 WAR.

Take the midpoint of those extremes (his career 86 wRC+ with the Brewers), again combine it with his 2025 base running and defense and it gets you around 2.5 WAR or so.

I'd think it's a pretty safe bet that if Joey gets another 500 some PA as the Brewers primary SS his 2026 season will come out somewhere in that range of numbers. 

What might a full season at SS look like for Monasterio? That's a lot tougher hypothetical. Let's start around the edges...

In his 592 PA with the Brewers, Monasterio has -0.7 BSR over 592 PA. To keep things round let's call that three runs lost compared to 2025 Joey at +2.5 BSR.

Defense is a lot trickier. Easiest way is probably just to assume Monasterio would be an even 0.0 DEF with the positive positional adjustment from playing SS canceling out his likely negative fielding grades at the six over a full season. That is another fourteen runs lost compared to 2025 Joey.

So Andruw is starting off something like 17 runs behind Ortiz before we get to the bat. With the 38 point difference in Ortiz's disparate 2024/25 wRC+ numbers shaking out to a difference of 22.8 batting runs, that means quick and dirty math the Brewers would have to believe Mona is something like 28 points of wRC+ better than Joey on a true talent level just to even up (much less exceed) that 17 run gap on defense and the bases.

Lowering our assumption from a 17 run difference in defense and base running on the high end to say a lower, rounder endpoint of a 10 run difference in their BSR/DEF would mean Mona would have to be more like 17 points of wRC+ better at the plate to even out that kind of gap.

I think the bigger problem with WAR and defense is determining the value of defense vs offense. Making it even harder is the value of defense varies depending on the pitcher. Ground ball pitchers need better infield defense. Flyball/strikeout pitchers less so. The stadium effect is also in play. Teams with large outfields need better/faster defense in the outfield. Overall defensive WAR is still a work in progress but one that I believe will eventually get to the point where most people agree on an objective number. I think it will take longer to take park effects and pitcher type into account but it's still doable. I question whether a single all WAR taking both defense and offense into account for all teams in all fields is possible.

[sveumrules]

24 minutes ago, Thurston Fluff said:

I think the bigger problem with WAR and defense is determining the value of defense vs offense. Making it even harder is the value of defense varies depending on the pitcher. Ground ball pitchers need better infield defense. Flyball/strikeout pitchers less so. The stadium effect is also in play. Teams with large outfields need better/faster defense in the outfield. Overall defensive WAR is still a work in progress but one that I believe will eventually get to the point where most people agree on an objective number. I think it will take longer to take park effects and pitcher type into account but it's still doable. I question whether a single all WAR taking both defense and offense into account for all teams in all fields is possible.

Yeah, there are definitely a lot of elements of WAR that create varying degrees of gray areas.

Obviously quantifying defense is the trickiest with DRS and FRV spitting out results that are on two different scales of impact, and often times disagree pretty majorly on individual players.

Position Adjustments could probably use an updating to be less harsh towards 1B/DH now that there are twice as many DH slots as when the adjustments were originally conceived and the supply of juiced aging sluggers to fill them is lower too (this has trickled down to LF some also).

Park Effects that go into things like wRC+ and OPS+ apply equally across the board where different stadiums will impact different hitters in different ways depending on their batted ball profiles (or just what the weather might be like on that particular day).

Trying to divvy up credit between the pitcher and the defense behind them is a whole other task which is near impossible to untangle depending on a number of variables like you mention.

Of course there is no way to know for sure, but I'd imagine each organization has their own internal models that attempt to address these issues (& others we can't conceive). Presumably a team like the Brewers that has exceeded general expectations most every season for the last decade has a proprietary system that is much more accurately calibrated than the public facing versions.

[Thurston Fluff]

2 hours ago, sveumrules said:

Of course there is no way to know for sure, but I'd imagine each organization has their own internal models that attempt to address these issues (& others we can't conceive). Presumably a team like the Brewers that has exceeded general expectations most every season for the last decade has a proprietary system that is much more accurately calibrated than the public facing versions.

I have no doubt individual teams have their own version of value that takes their park effects and other variables into account. The problem is more from a fan/media perspective. Defense is so much harder to determine objective league wide metrics. Brewers wise I don't think it's a coincidence they've moved to ground ball pitchers when they have such good infield defense. Nor is it a coincidence they collected a lot of good defensive infielders around the same time ground ball pitchers went out of fashion. The cost effectiveness is not just finding undervalued assets but finding a combination of undervalued assets that complement each other.

[Jim French Stepstool]

5 hours ago, Lathund said:

Monasterio had such a small sample size this season that there can be a lot of randomness in there. I prefer wRC+ to wOBA, but just to put it on the same scale Monasterio had a .328 wOBA vs .281 xwOBA, Ortiz had a .263 wOBA vs .273 xwOBA. Or in other words, based on the batted ball profile and walk/strikeout rates being the same going forward, you'd expect Monasterio to put up significantly lower offense numbers than he did, while you'd expect Ortiz to improve his somewhat. Still an edge to Monasterio in 2025, but will that hold true going forward? And is it enough to outweigh the defensive difference?

I think Monasterio is a very good backup to have for all the infield spots, and I wouldn't mind if Murphy rotated his players a bit more to keep them fresh, which would give him more playing time to evaluate. But I think it would take a *lot* for Monasterio to win the job in camp. I still think that if they felt they had to move on from Ortiz and find a new SS starter internally it would be Brice Turang, since they have more guys who can play a passable 2B, including Monasterio. I also think Cooper Pratt is a lot closer than raw statline scouting would suggest. 

I think the 'moving on' from Ortiz---if that happens---would involve Monasterio getting more time there in '26 if need be (although not the majority of reps) & then the final hammer falling after the season, be it Made, Pratt, whoever. Maybe this is overreaction on my part but the brief shoulder issues Turang had after playing SS a few days last spring, I can't get that out of my head. I'd much rather leave well enough alone--leave the GG 2B at 2B.

I think you may be correct re Pratts' being closer than some think. But does he get passed by Made in the interim? Nice problem to have.

[Ewitkows1]

I also wonder if the Brewers want Brice at 2nd to resign him. The cost for SS vs 2nd is very significant. 

[Lathund]

15 hours ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

I think the 'moving on' from Ortiz---if that happens---would involve Monasterio getting more time there in '26 if need be (although not the majority of reps) & then the final hammer falling after the season, be it Made, Pratt, whoever. Maybe this is overreaction on my part but the brief shoulder issues Turang had after playing SS a few days last spring, I can't get that out of my head. I'd much rather leave well enough alone--leave the GG 2B at 2B.

I think you may be correct re Pratts' being closer than some think. But does he get passed by Made in the interim? Nice problem to have.

I do think it's an overreaction to the shoulder issue, but you're also far from alone in having it. It's a very widespread "truth" among the fanbase that Turang is unable to play SS because of it. Which I don't agree with. Which isn't me saying that he'll be absolutely amazing there, since I don't know either, just that brief soreness/fatigue there during spring training isn't proof of anything. Maybe he started working on a different set of throwing mechanics too hard, too early. Maybe the issues had nothing to do with the position switch, and would've happened either way; it's a common thing in spring training after all. The fact that they pivoted away from it also isn't proof; it's just practical. If your plan A and plan B are very close, then even a small, temporary, setback in plan A means it makes sense to go with plan B and have it ready for the season. Doesn't mean plan A never would've worked. 

Turang did play SS for years without any issues, so I don't have any doubts about his ability to physically handle it. Now I don't *want* to move him over either; I'm perfectly fine leaving him at 2B to give first Ortiz more time, and then Pratt/Made.  But I don't think the fact that he's a really good 2B should make him unmovable. If they need a new SS and he's the best SS, he should play there. Regardless of how good he is at 2B. The other candidates for the position will also be better 2B than they are SS, it goes with the nature of the positions.

I also don't necessarily think Pratt gets passed by, even if Made continues his meteoric rise. Pratt will begin the year in AAA, Made likely in AA, so he is still a level ahead. Pratt is also clearly the better SS at this time, so if it's an everyday SS they need, he's ahead. Made might become one in time, but right now most evaluators would agree he isn't. If he comes up first it's because his bat demands it, and I think he'd mostly play at other positions. I also think other considerations factor in more for Made, namely service time and everything related to it. The rules for service time for ROTY, the prospect promotion initiative, whether a Chourio-like extension is in play etc. They're probably more willing to "risk" starting Pratt's clock than Mades, if the decision had to be made at an inconveniently timed moment.  

[Jim French Stepstool]

@Lathund, the service time factor re Made is a great point.

[Jim Goulart]