Last year Joe Mather, this year Brent Lillibridge?

In Commentary And Analysis, News And Rumors by dmick8928 Comments

brent-lillibridgeLast season Joe Mather was signed to a minor league contract and then made the team. Joe Mather was not any good. Not before he signed with the Cubs and especially not with the Cubs. Despite this, he still had nearly 250 plate appearances.

Joe Mather was the worst player in baseball last year. Baseball Reference only thought he was the 5th worst player in baseball.

In four seasons in the big leagues, Joe Mather has been a replacement level player or better only once according to both Fangraphs and Baseball Reference. That was in 2008.

While Brent Lillibridge won't make anyone mistake him for a good player, he's no Joe Mather. Then again, according to Baseball Reference, Brent Lillibridge has been below replacement in 2008, 2009, 2010 and at each stop (3 of them) in 2012.

However, in 2011 he was actually valuable. He wasn't just not bad. He was kind of good in 216 plate appearances with the White Sox. He hit .258/.340/.505 (.365 wOBA, 125 wRC+, 1.3 fWAR, 1.7 rWAR, 1.4 WARP).

He played 59 games in the outfield. Most of those (43) were in RF. He played 11 in CF and 9 in LF. He also played 22 games at 1st and 6 at 2nd base. Last season he played the most in the oufield and then at 1st and 3rd base. He can play anywhere.

Like Joe Mather.

Brent Lillibridge probably has better odds than not of making the team in what we'll now call the Joe Mather roster spot.

Give Cubs manager Dale Sveum an assist in convincing Brent Lillibridge to sign with the team.

"I like to get a feel for the manager, especially in a situation like this," said Lillibridge, a non-roster invitee. "I wanted to just talk baseball. [Sveum] really sold me on so many different parts of it and was real honest with me. That's what you want from the manager and the whole organization."

Now, his wife is already scouting for a place to rent in Chicago. They know the area. He played 3 1/2 seasons with the White Sox, then was traded twice last year — once to the Red Sox and again to the Indians.

He could be the utility player the Cubs need. Although Anthony Rizzo will be the main first baseman, he will need a day off now and then. Who will back him up? Sveum said catchers Welington Castillo and Dioner Navarro will get some playing time at first in Spring Training just in case, but Lillibridge could be the guy. It helps that he has played outfield and shortstop as well.

"I'm not going to lie to you, it gives you a huge edge in the National League," Sveum said of Lillibridge's versatility. "He's got some sock in his bat for a guy who looks like he's 150 pounds soaking wet."

In 2011, Lillibridge hit 13 home runs in 97 games, and made 22 starts at first for the White Sox when Paul Konerko was hurt and Adam Dunn was struggling.

"I still have my [first-base] glove up there just in case," he said. "Unless I stand on the base, I'm quite small over there at first base. I just want a bat in my hands. If I get a chance to swing, I'm excited. I want to help as much as possible."

There's not much reason to think that Lillibridge can hit as well as he did in 2011. His miinor league numbers don't indicate it and his numbers at the MLB level are far worse than he did then. He's not likely to be as bad as Joe Mather, but he's not likely to be on many fantasy teams unless you're playing in the new one GBTS wants to set up.

Share this Post

Comments

  1. Ryno

    Berselius wrote:

    @ Ryno:

    I’m amazed that the NCAA allows the DAC to exist, considering they blackball players for merely walking on the opposite side of the street as an agent.

    I can’t confirm, but it seems like the NFL oversees the DAC. Still, I’m sure the NCAA has at least some control over it.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  2. gbts22

    Ryno wrote:

    Well I think it’s the player’s problem a little…

    They’re not being drafted involuntarily. If a 19 year old thinks he’s good enough to play in the NFL, good for him. He’s probably wrong, but that’s his choice to make. I just don’t get why in professional sports we coddle people from making potentially terrible business decisions. Again, I thought this was America.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  3. Mucker

    How much benefit would there be for the NFL to have an instructional league? Kind of like a minor league where there is no contact, but they teach these players the systems and how to do their jobs. They can have simulated games or something and it could help these players that need a little extra seasoning. I think that could be beneficial to the league and might cut down on all the “draft busts” we see.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  4. Xoomwaffle

    @ Ryno:

    My biggest problem with people saying that it isn’t fair because he is ready to play ignores that this happens to people in every profession. There are plenty of kids on college who would be much better employees for companies, but they cannot be considered for a job without a degree. If you started reading about the law when you were 8, and by 14 you knew more than most practicing attorneys, you would still be required to get an undergraduate degree and a law degree before you could become a practicing lawyer.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  5. Ryno

    Mucker wrote:

    The problem with letting guys get drafted “too early” in the NFL is there is no chance for them to develop unless you play them. And if he isn’t ready, then you’re sacrificing wins for his development most likely.

    That’s exactly what the DAC would tell them. If a guy is talented but raw, they’ll tell him he has the ability to be drafted as high as the second round (for example). These guys know why and that waiting a year benefit them.

    Mucker wrote:

    That being said, is Clowney ready?

    Fuck. Yes. He would easily be the first overall pick this year and he’d start this fall. Obviously, he’s a few years from reaching his potential, but he’s worth his contract now. In fact, he arguably was last year too.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  6. Ryno

    gbts22 wrote:

    I didn’t even know there was a DAC. I think that’s a really good thing and makes the two year waiting period even more inexcusable.

    Agreed. I think the best solution is to invest more into the DAC, give more comprehensive evaluations and make anyone aged 18 or older eligible for the NFL Draft.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  7. gbts22

    @ Xoomwaffle:
    That’s probably because we want to be more convinced that people are competent doctors, engineers, or attorneys than we are concerned they become competent interior linemen.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  8. Ryno

    Mucker wrote:

    How much benefit would there be for the NFL to have an instructional league? Kind of like a minor league where there is no contact, but they teach these players the systems and how to do their jobs. They can have simulated games or something and it could help these players that need a little extra seasoning.

    I would think the NCAA would pitch a fit if the NFL offered an alternative to college football. It would have to be like an off-season camp thing. And I would think the NFL would have no part of it unless it were televised.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  9. Mucker

    @ Ryno:
    I think the biggest reason why HS players don’t get drafted is because they are not ready physically. The majority anyways. But if there is a kid that has it all, then he should be allowed to be drafted. There shouldn’t be a rule because the team is taking all the risk and if they want to take that risk, let them. I think though that since football is a violent sport, people don’t want to see 18 year old kids getting their fucking heads bashed in.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  10. Mucker

    Ryno wrote:

    I would think the NCAA would pitch a fit if the NFL offered an alternative to college football. It would have to be like an off-season camp thing. And I would think the NFL would have no part of it unless it were televised.

    I don’t mean an alternative, but an extension. Almost like a practice squad type thing but they play against other teams as well.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  11. Ryno

    Xoomwaffle wrote:

    My biggest problem with people saying that it isn’t fair because he is ready to play ignores that this happens to people in every profession. There are plenty of kids on college who would be much better employees for companies, but they cannot be considered for a job without a degree. If you started reading about the law when you were 8, and by 14 you knew more than most practicing attorneys, you would still be required to get an undergraduate degree and a law degree before you could become a practicing lawyer.

    I hear you, but that analogy is only really applicable if the aspiring lawyers risked damaging their “draftable asset” by going to law school. (cue alcohol/drug/party jokes)

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  12. gbts22

    @ Mucker:
    Agreed, ready for the NFL straight out of high school or just one year of college would be rare, and I doubt many teams would be eager to regularly assume that kind of risk with an early round pick. The one-year basketball rule, though, is inexcusable.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  13. Ryno

    Mucker wrote:

    I think the biggest reason why HS players don’t get drafted is because they are not ready physically. The majority anyways. But if there is a kid that has it all, then he should be allowed to be drafted. There shouldn’t be a rule because the team is taking all the risk and if they want to take that risk, let them. I think though that since football is a violent sport, people don’t want to see 18 year old kids getting their fucking heads bashed in.

    I agree that kids should be allowed to enter the draft whenever. I just think that they should have to submit for a more comprehensive DAC evaluation first since they’d give up college eligibility if they entered.

    ANd if you’re right about the last sentence, I’d think they’d probably want to increase the minimum age for military service.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  14. Xoomwaffle

    @ Ryno:

    It also doesn’t make financial sense for the NFL. They have free minor leagues right now. And they get to watch these kids cut their teeth on real competition before investing in them.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  15. Mucker

    gbts22 wrote:

    @ Mucker:
    Agreed, ready for the NFL straight out of high school or just one year of college would be rare, and I doubt many teams would be eager to regularly assume that kind of risk with an early round pick. The one-year basketball rule, though, is inexcusable.

    Yeah but the NBA needed to do something. For every Lebron there was 20 Jonathan Benders, Darius Miles, Kwame Browns, etc. I think the NBA’s product was hurting.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  16. Ryno

    Mucker wrote:

    I don’t mean an alternative, but an extension. Almost like a practice squad type thing but they play against other teams as well.

    I think it’s a good idea in theory, but I just don’t think the logistics could be worked out where the NCAA, colleges, the NFL, NFL teams and the kids would all benefit.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  17. Mucker

    @ Ryno:
    Well regarding the military service, if war was televised and showed the atrocities and casualties that accompany it, they probably would. I don’t agree with it, but I can only imagine that would become an issue when the first 18 year old gets carted off the field and the media delcares it was because he wasn’t ready.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  18. Edwin

    I’d actually like the NFL to set up a minor league system like there is in baseball. And then I’d like the NFL to be able to draft players out of HS, if they so choose.

    I think currently there is too much money in college football, and it ends up exploiting players and schools. Forcing players to go to college for any length of time is crazy. Create developmental leagues, and let the NFL, NBA, MLB be in charge of developing players, and let colleges focus more on education.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  19. josh

    I see Lillibridge as harmless – one of those players managers like who isn’t really taking a spot of someone better. The only way he can really do damage is if Sveum plays him too much. Unfortunately, given how he used Mather, this is a possibility.

    Eh well, Lillibridge will have no real effect on the outcome of the season, and if he has a solid year like 2011, then they can offload him. I don’t care. He’s nothing to get excited about on a team that is 85% nothing to get excited about.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

Leave a Comment