Who is Ed Lucas and what is he doing in the lineup?
March 7, 2011 at 4:51 pm by Kevin Orris under Atlanta Braves
For some, Spring Training is a chance to regain velocity and timing. For others, it’s a chance to prove they are worthy of a roster spot. Ed Lucas, 28, is a member of the latter.
Signed on November 29, 2010, Lucas was brought in with four other career minor leaguers that are still looking for their opportunity to make it to the big leagues. It was the kind of move that has little risk and potentially high rewards.
Before coming to Atlanta, Lucas spent seven years in the Kansas City Royals organization as a super utility man. For more information, I contacted Royals Prospects Guru Greg Schaum of PinetarPress.com for detailed insight.
“Ed Lucas, if he chooses, will have a future in baseball. It might not be as a player though. He has the type of mind that we could see running a ball club some day. He was an Ivy League graduate of Dartmouth University in 2004 with a Sociology degree. A popular player with his teammates and a solid minor league baseball player he has worked his way up the organizational ladder since the Royals took him in the 8th round of the 2004 draft.
He can play every position on the field except catcher and he has always been able to hit.”
Pay close attention to that last sentence. Below is a chart of games played at different positions since he went pro in 2004.
| Position |
Games Played (2004 – 2010) |
|
First Base |
26 |
|
Second Base |
26 |
|
Third Base |
361 |
|
Shortstop |
115 |
|
Outfield |
82 |
|
Total |
610 |
He’s coming off a career best year in Triple-A last season where he played 99 games for Omaha hitting .307/.398/.480 with 13 HR and 7 stolen bases. In short, he’s demonstrated ability across the board, but has never stood out in one specific asset of the game.
As I am writing this, Lucas just tripled in the top of the 9th with two outs to tie the game at three, which the Braves would ultimately lose 4-3 in the 10th inning.
It’s obvious that Frank Wren and Fredi Gonzalez have targeted him as a potential candidate to obtain a bench spot at some point this season, whether it’s on Opening Day or sometime down the road. In 24 at-bats this spring, he’s hitting .438/.500/.563 with 4 RBI.
From what I’ve seen, he’s Brooks Conrad with hitting ability. He’s not going to hit for the same power, but he may move a little quicker on the bases and has the knack to play all over the diamond.
If Opening Day were tomorrow, I would fully endorse Lucas for a bench role. There’s only one catch. He’s not on the 40 man roster.
Loading ...
I think there’s another backup infielder on the 40 man who would probably make it through waivers..
So you’d endorse Lucas on the 25-man over Conrad right now, or would they both have a spot?
Yes, Wagner will clear a spot when he retires. And yes, I endorse Lucas over Conrad. There’s no reason to have both of them.
Isn’t Billy Wagner going to retire eventually and be dropped from the 40-man roster?
What about Lucas v. Diory Hernandez?
Conrad has played pretty poorly this spring. I like Lucas.
From what I’ve seen, he’s Brooks Conrad with hitting ability.
I take it you mean that he’s Conrad with defensive ability? Brooks can hit.
It sounds like EL might be one of those guys who just needs an opportunity, a la Matt Diaz….
5/Jason
Hinske and Ross are locks. I’m pretty sure that you can say the same about Mather. That leaves two spots between Brooks Conrad, Diory Hernandez, Ed Lucas, Jordan Schafer, and Matt Young. Right now, I take Lucas and Young, but if either one falters early, I don’t hesitate to swap them out.
It’s a good thing that the Braves have a lot of options for those 4th and 5th bench spots, because you know there will be injuries.
7/Anon21
Nope. I meant what I said. When I say hitting ability, I mean he’s a better hitter in scouting terms. Conrad offers more power. That’s the only advantage that he has. I haven’t seen much of Lucas on defense, but at least he’s multi-dimensional. He’s been playing all over the diamond for the Braves this spring.
Nice perspective here… thanks for the info. I’d have to agree with you in that I’d take a bat that has proven it over the last few years, not diory who despite a decent spring has shown no ability to hit. I like that Lucas can play anywhere at any time, but the only positions where you would insert him would be second or short b/c you have other options at other places (Matt Young, Hinske, etc.). Lucas also would be your 4th or 5th bat off of the bench after probably Hinske, Mather, Ross, Young/Lucas… so does that last spot need to provide better defensive skill, i.e. – Diory Hernandez is better defensively according to scouts, or should he be a better all around hitter.
I do agree with you in that Brooks will not make the team. He has heart and power but not much else to offer.
So I guess the answer to the “what is he doing in the lineup” question is “being incredibly useful”.
And I agree Kevin. I’d go with Lucas and Young, too. I’m still a Brooks Conrad fan, but he’s having a bad spring and he’s shown that his defense leaves much to be desired. Since Bobby isnt here to play favorites, I hope Fredi will go with the hot hands, which right now are Young and Lucas.
That being said, there’s still plenty of time left in spring training for this to change.
Scratch that… Wilkin Ramirez would be the hotter hand than Matt Young, I just think Matt Young would be a better long-term bench option since he can play all OF spots and 2B in a pinch and historically has an OBP around .400 and steals a ton of bases.
Sounds like he could be a potential candidate for filling Matt Diaz’s shoes. The relatively unknown fan favorite.
My impression of the spot Lucas is gunning for is that defense will be weighed heavily. If Mather and Young/Schafer make the team as expected, we will already have backups in place for every position except 2B/SS. This makes Lucas’ versatility a bit less valuable.
Thus Lucas, Diory, Conrad and Hicks would be in a battle for the final bench spot, which would probably be the last in the pecking order to grab a bat. DOB has said Lucas isn’t in the class of Hernandez defensively (meaning he’s not in the class of Hicks either). I haven’t seen him – so that’s the best I have to go off of.
If his versatility is indeed rendered less valuable and he doesn’t match up with the other two defensively up the middle, I don’t know if the offense he provides makes up for it. I think he’s in the same boat as Conrad.
Only in baseball would a sociology degree, possibly the stupidest field of study around, from Dartmouth, the runt of the Ivy League, warrant you “genius” status. It’s similar to LaRussa’s law degree from FSU giving him this mystical aura of intellectualism.
But that aside, it is highly intriguing that Lucas is raking so well. I was wondering when the CAC crew would take notice after he wasn’t mentioned in your spring training rundown during the last podcast.
If Lucas really isn’t as good as Hernandez defensively, that is a bad sign.
This from O’Brien:
He’s at least serviceable defensively at every infield position and has experience at all three outfield spots, though left field is probably the only outfield position where the Braves would want to use him.
Depending on how the roster shakes out, Lucas could be competing for a backup job with Diory Hernandez, who is a superior defensive player at second base and shortstop, but doesn’t play other positions. Hernandez is 5-for-15 with two doubles and a triple.
Luke M,
It always irks me to hear of any area of serious human endeavor being called “stupid,” as such. In what wise “stupid,” I ask? Is the degree “stupid” because it won’t fast-track its recipient into a career? Do you think sociology is “stupid” because you’ve met sociologists you don’t like or agree with? Do you think it’s “stupid” because you took a sociology class in undergrad and thought yourself too good for it (and you may well have been? How can a way of looking at the world that is refined through research and reflection be “stupid?” This question holds whether or not we agree with any of the research methods, classifications, deductions, or ‘results’ associated with sociology simplicitur. Stupid people just don’t approach the world in that way. It’s a cardinal intellectual crime to attribute the perceived errors of your opponents as signs of mental weakness. If your complaint with sociology is about sociologists being wrong or wrongheaded, which I hope it is, then please take into consideration that being wrong might not be the same as being stupid. Otherwise, for example, Aristotle, the father of scientific reasoning, was a complete fool.
If, on the other hand, sociology as a field of study is in your mind stupid because impractical in the job market, then there’s nothing to say other than that most kids that take degrees in the liberal arts do so because a text, a lecture, a conversation, or a professor lit a flame in their mind at some point, and they decided to let it burn. What, I ask, is stupid about that?
And, to pull the tone down, who put the word “genius” to Ed Lucas other than you?
I apologize for playing Miss Manners, sirs, but the attempt to undermine the intellect of one of the relatively few college-educated ballplayers on the grounds that he went to a good, but not good enough, school and studied something he liked rather than something useful got me a little fired up.
Hmm, if the Braves share DOB’s opinion of his defense, seems like he’s a guy that could be a short drive away in Gwinnett if the Braves have an injury.
Out of curiosity, does anyone know who emergency catcher would be? I thought that was Diaz the past few years. Can Mather do that?
GT Alum,
Yes you are correct that it was Diaz. I’m not sure who the emergency catcher would be now. Mather hasn’t registered any games at catcher at the MLB level or minors. He has however registered a pitching appearance: last year in that crazy 20 inning game.
Well said Lukas B. The love and thirst for knowledge, and the persistent search for it is a lost art in today’s world. In the baseball world, it’s almost unheard of — a reason for why it is a sport that takes so long to implement change. The sabermetric community is attempting to change that nature of thinking within baseball. It is slowly (go figure) happening, and perhaps 50 years from now, baseball will be a sport where intellectuality is not forgotten.
GT Alum, this is going to sound like a joke, but I believe Brooks Conrad also has catching experience. Not that I expect he’ll make the roster. It likely won’t matter who is the emergency catcher, as I don’t believe Diaz even almost had to catch for us. It’s a shame though, because if we had an actual former catcher as our emergency guy (Eli Marrero and Robert Fick come to mind), we could use Ross in some pinch hitting situations.
Also, well said Lukas B. I’d add my input, but you already said anything I would have.
Andy,
Yeah, that’s what brought it to mind was people talking about Ross as a PH. Despite his offensive ability, I know we didn’t use him much as a PH or DH previously because we wanted to keep him in reserve in case something happened to Brian.
Lukas B., well said. I took offense to the earlier comment as well. And I say that as a historian who, occasionally, pokes fun at the sociologists.
Anyway, re: Dave O’Brien’s comment about Diory and Lucas. Where has it been decided that Diory Hernandez is a good defensive middle infielder? I don’t know that he’s bad, per se, but from all I’ve read the verdict on his defense is, at best, mixed. Is this simply a circumstance of a beat writer who assumes, without evidence, that a poor-hitting backup infielder must be good with the glove? Likewise, is there real evidence that Lucas is bad or even sub-par? He hasn’t logged a lot of time at SS in his career, but total zone fielding stats suggest, at the least, that he has been above average at 2B, 3B, and in the corner outfield spots.
Lukas B,
Excellent points. There is tremendous value in the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake (says the guy with a Philosophy degree).
I think the criticism of sociology, anthropology, and all the social sciences has been overblown. They are certainly not as exact as the “hard” sciences, and when the pretend or claim to be, they do undermine their own premises. When studied and understood correctly, however, they certainly have a rightful place in academia. To expand on that, when built on faulty premises, the claims of sociologists do not hold up to close scrutiny. But good sociology, like good chemistry or good philosophy or good mathematics, points us towards the truth.
I still do not see how Lucas can be similar to brooks conrad if you are talking him up to be a good ball player. Conrad is a guaranteed error every game he plays and has no business being in MLB. His ceiling is AAA IMO. Also, if Lucas is not as good defensively as Diory Hernandez then he definitely doesn’t deserve to make the 25 man roster because Diory is average at best defensively.
Even if you majored in gym at Dartmouth you would be an intellectual powerhouse in the baseball world.
Wow, I see my earlier comment has generated quite a bit of anger. While “stupid” was probably too harsh of a term, I was a sociology minor, so I say with full confidence it’s a rather pointless field. It was interesting, yes, but mainly trivial.
@ 16 and 28
Why are you singling out baseball? I would imagine baseball players are among the more intelligent in the world of sports.
@ 29, do you have any evidence of this? I submit the opposite: that baseball players are the least academically inclined among the three major league sports (hockey excepted, because I don’t know anything about hockey players). Two supports for my contention–first, it is not required that players be accepted into college to reach the highest level of play. I know we’ve all heard horror stories of athletes who have no business on a college campus attending major universities. However, I work in a high school, and I can tell you that many of my student-athletes have been passed over for Div I schools because of their academics. A baseball player can go to the minors if he can’t go to college.
Secondly, the game itself does not require the speed of cognition that football and basketball do. At the NFL level, football players must memorize deep playbooks, recognize and adapt to changing situations instantly, and communicate well with teammates. NBA players must have the same skills, although not to such a high degree–fewer players in the game, fewer set plays, etc. Baseball, not so much. Baseball is a much more individual sport, and I believe doesn’t require as much intellect.
Of course, this entire argument assumes that there is one thing we can point to and call it ‘intelligence’. As many sociologists would agree, that’s an open question.
I think the Bench should be
1. Eric Hinske LF/1B #20
2. David Rodd C #8
3. Joe Mather UTL #4
4. Brooks Conrad 2B/3B #7
5. Diory Hernandez Middle Infield #24
How can you say that Ed Lucas has more value than Brooks? Without Brooks last year we probably wouldn’t have won at least 5 of those game were he hit walk-offs. I know he was a disaster defensively in the NLDS, but with his hitting ability and heart I think he deserves a second chance. He has PROVEN that he belongs in the majors.
@30
I agree with what you are saying with regards to football. But I don’t see how basketball could be more cognitively demanding than baseball is.
@29.. listen to the interviews of average basketball players and then listen to the interview of the average baseball player and tell me which one sounds more intelligent.
@33, there *are* offensive systems and set plays in basketball. I’m a Blazers fan; last summer, our team traded away a player who could not learn the offensive sets. He was always going to the wrong spot. Likable guy, had talent and a good work ethic–the only thing against him was that he could not learn what was expected of him.
If we think of intelligence as (at least partly) the ability to memorize/remember information–especially when it is in our field of interest–then this guy didn’t have it. There isn’t as much in baseball of this requirement.
If we think of intelligence (again, at least in part) as the ability to quickly recognize patterns, adjust in a rapidly-paced environment, and assimilate new information, then basketball has it all over baseball. Speed of cognition is one aspect of intelligence. This is not perfect; I know several high school students who seem very dim-witted because their rates of cognition are much slower than average. But while it takes them longer to get there, they DO eventually find the correct answer. I think people like this face less of a handicap playing baseball than they would playing basketball. I believe this is MORE true the higher you go in level.
I am willing to be convinced otherwise.
@ Doug (I’m assuming you were directing at me, as the numbering seems to gotten off-track a little):
Don’t fall into the trap of assuming that someone’s speech patterns reflect their actual intelligence. That’s a very dangerous path.
Furthermore, our perception of larger trends may be skewed by what we see presented in the media. What I mean is, player interviews broadcast on TV and radio may not be indicative of the average intelligence of the NBA as a whole, or of MLB as a whole. For whatever reason, we may get more soundbites of ‘dumb’ sounding NBA players and ‘smart’ sounding MLB players.
How can you say that Ed Lucas has more value than Brooks? Without Brooks last year we probably wouldn’t have won at least 5 of those game were he hit walk-offs. I know he was a disaster defensively in the NLDS, but with his hitting ability and heart I think he deserves a second chance. He has PROVEN that he belongs in the majors.
OK, chipperpleaseretire (should delete the comment just for the handle), you go about constructing the roster based on what happened last year. For those of us concerned with the Braves winning baseball games in 2011, we’ll continue to consider true talent level rather than past results.
@ Karyn
I don’t care to convince you of anything. I find this much more offensive than the guy who called sociology “stupid”.
I’m sure the “Media” conspires to portray basketball players as [stupider] than baseball players. I don’t appreciate you pointlessly inserting race into this.
@ 16 and 28
Why are you singling out baseball? I would imagine baseball players are among the more intelligent in the world of sports.
@CAC #37
I love your blog, read it every day from here in Australia, but why is it that when a poster has a different opinion to yours you always rubbish them rather than rather than addressing why you believe the opposite. Yes most of the reasons have been addressed in the blog or comments, but in this instance chipperpleaseretire (shocking name) points out some attributes that they believe Conrad has which will benefit over others.
Well, he pointed out only one attribute: heart (aka he’s a white guy who doesn’t use batting gloves and runs hard to first base–like most baseball players do). It’s just the typical “true Yankee” argument holy writers use because, though it’s an extremely weak principle, it’s difficult to dismantle, and one that I despise. That’s it, that’s the only attribute he pointed out. The rest of his argument revolved around last year’s results, and anyone with half a brain knows that performance doesn’t always equal results and true-talent level doesn’t always dictate performance. My reaction was such because I want to discourage that type of weak, thoughtless discussion from taking place in this space. If you want to say, “I really like Brooks Conrad and I’d hate to see him off the roster because of my personal affinity towards his style of play”, that’s fine, but please don’t use that type of logic (and that’s basically all there was to chipperpleaseretire’s comment) to tell people who are making an effort to think critically and discuss the subject intelligently that they’re wrong.
Haha my comment was a joke. I definitely don’t think all baseball players are dumbasses, but I have a hard time believing that a bunch of guys who spend most of their formative years in dugouts in the far reaches of America are exactly the nation’s brightest. If you ever overhear Conrad and Hinske debating Sartre and Being and Nothingness let me know. Matt Young looks like he crawled out of a swamp somewhere in Texas, but he could be a brilliant guy for all I know.
It was a joke. Get over it.
[...] Capitol Avenue Club has an interesting post today about Ed Lucas, the 28 year-old super-utility player that stands a fair chance to make the club coming out of spring training. Lucas, a member of the Royals farm system before joining the Braves this year, has played at least 26 games at every position except pitcher and catcher over the last six seasons. That includes 115 at shorstop, the most important position one must handle if they dream of occupying the 25th spot on a Major League roster. [...]
It’s not looking good at second base for the Phils’. According to mlbtrade, one of the 4 internal options they have to replace Utley is… hold on.. wait for it…..PETE ORR. hahaha
@40: This reason is exactly why I like coming to this site. I like Brooks Conrad for everything that he did to help the Braves make it to the post-season on what many people called a “magical” run. There were plenty of nail-biting runs where the Braves had to rely on one person heavily for a time.
The Braves went from a lineup that included McLouth and Yunel Escobar at the top of the order, suffering setbacks and injuries that had them move Prado and Heyward to the top of the order and then finish with Omar Infante, Brooks Conrad, Rick Ankiel and Derrek Lee all making consistent starts.
Keep in mind that, no matter what happened last year, when the Braves broke camp, they didn’t think they’d ever have to make Conrad, who had to beat out Joe Thurston to make the team, start in any significant amount of games (let alone the playoffs). The fact that they had to do so shows that they had a few too many injuries that may or may not happen to every team at one point or another during the season.
Whether it be Ed Lucas, Diory Hernandez or Brooks Conrad (or someone else?) who makes the team in that utility/last bench spot, you’d still have to realize that they shouldn’t have to be counted on in any role close to what Conrad went through last year. We should all hope that we don’t have to worry about that, too.
There’s actually a nice piece on Brooks Conrad on the espn.com baseball page written by Jayson Stark. Of course, its basically the same story everyone else has written about him, but its still good.
JFH/43,
Well, and this illustrates why some people were saying to hold off on crowning the Phillies the division winners yet. The Phillies had significant injuries to some of their key players last year and they have an older roster that has shown some signs of potential decline. Everyone seems to assume that they’ll be the same offensive powerhouse they were in previous years, but add those effects to losing Werth, and there’s reason to believe the Phillies won’t be as potent offensively as they were in previous years.
If we are talking about the Brooks Conrad of last year, I would take him over Diory, Lucas, or anybody else… but after seeing him play in Spring Training, I don’t know if he’s damaged goods. His body language is awful, as he was leaving the stadium he literally ran to the bus… I think he’s still haunted from his nightmare of a post-season, a real shame. Conversely, why is Schaefer getting so many ABs this spring? He clearly is not ready, I’d have a hard time believing he’ll be the backup OFer, give Young and Clevlen more ABs, let Shaef mature a little more in the minors… there’s still some talent there.
I would never hope for a player on any team to not be able to play because of injuries (even ARod), especially someone who plays the game like Utley. But if he’s out for a significant time that’s a pretty huge shift in the balance of power in the East especially considering the brittleness the rest of their lineup.
I suffer this site it aalwlys has alot of calm it aalwlys updates about 200-300 flicks biweekly as well as we havent seen the improved site yet. So distant we have celebrated over 50 cinema as well as all of them appear to be operational.
TradeAndruw, no one said anything about a conspiracy. I don’t believe the majority of people involved in the news are overt bigots. But there are a lot of people involved in taping, editing, and choosing stories to air. Everyone is susceptible to confirmation bias–we see what we expect to see, that which confirms our view of the world, and tend to disregard the rest. We all do this, to greater or lesser degrees.
As to the question of race, why does it offend you so for me to bring it up? Why is race off-limits? Peter brought up race and media perceptions of players in this very thread; is it all right for him to do that, or will you call him out as well?
I’ve put forth a line of reasoning to support my claim that at the highest levels, in the aggregate, baseball players are not required to have as much academic-type intelligence as football or basketball players. What’s your reasoning for your point of view?
Not wanting to get totally dragged into this, but I do want to point out that the comment about being passed over by D1 schools because of academics doesn’t necessarily say anything about the relative intelligence of pro basketball and football players to pro baseball players.
For one, it’s not like you have to play in D1 to reach the NBA or the NFL. Players come out of smaller schools to those leagues, although the additional exposure of playing at a D1 school definitely helps.
Also, just because a high school athlete gets passed over by D1 schools doesn’t mean he never plays at that level. Many athletes go to junior colleges to get their grades in order, then go to D1 schools.
Finally, just because baseball has a minor league system outside the college system doesn’t mean that baseball players couldn’t get accepted to college. In fact, many of them turn down college scholarships to enter the minor leagues.
Honestly, as far as I know, there’s no data to support that baseball players are any more or less intelligent than other athletes. And I would say any professional-calibre athlete who is serious enough about education to get a degree in any field should not be the subject of ridicule, especially since most of them aren’t required to anymore.
This thread: