Lot’s of reasons are given when a player like Charlie Zinc slips away with dfa. He is “too old” of a prospect is the usual. Other statements: we block our prospects; make room for younger prospects; they are held onto for too long. The reality is, Charlie Zinc just hit his stride, entered his prime. He may have developed his knuckler late (as do most knuckle ball pitchers), he may have won the minor league equivalent of the ‘Cy Young”, he may have won 14G in 2008 helping the PawSox to the postseason (a rarity), but somehow he is “too old”, and is conveniently labeled with the deadly yet baseless AAAA. To all of this I have to say, BS. What a waste of talent.
It’s not that these prospects are held on to for too long, but that they develop later. Such is the human condition. Zinc wasn’t ready in 2007 at age 27. He is ready now, and with his ‘cy young’ his confidence was probably at its highest. But baseball has a universal bias against older rookies, a bias with little statistical basis and, I think, lots of traditional ‘that’s the way we’ve always done it’ rationale. What a waste of talent.
This is why Scott Boras annually cleans the clocks of owners and GM’s and the Players’ Union, because he is creative, aggressively creative, thinking outside the box, weaving the grand visions which are so lacking otherwise. In a market starved for pitching, and paying obscene premiums for it, couldn’t anyone on the Red Sox figure a way to package MLB ready Charlie Zinc for even a couple of good looking prospects???? I bet most of the readers here could have done.
IMO, no matter what age they hit their prime if, when they hit that prime, their talents are at a MLB level, then they should get to MLB. This is not the same as those who have nursed OK talent through the minors. I refer to solid prospects who mature more slowly than others, and finally get it right after years of learning to get it right. But with MLB’s “the clock is ticking” mentality, at a certain age they have little value, no matter their promise. This waste of talent is normally disguised by the facile term “AAAA”. We are prone to categorization, and black & white is easy.
I think this is the case with Charlie Zink. It may also be the case with Jeff Bailey, Chris Carter and Jon VanEvery who not only had extraordinary years in Pawtucket at ages 26 – 29, but also backed them by doing well enough at Fenway to get another look. Any bets they will be dfa’d rather than brought up or traded? Dumb! Any reason why they couldn’t be traded for something of value? Yes, there is. By MLB lights, they are too old.
Yet, we will pay 33 year old Julio Lugo $9M or Alex Cora $4M to back 24 year old Jed Lowrie (who emerged at the right time) because they are ‘established veterans’. I would MUCH rather have Joe Thurston for the short life of his prime (3 years?) to back IF & OF & steal a dozen bases, and hit at least as well as Julio or Alex. Ahh, you say, but he is just AAAA. Can you prove that? Can you prove that after all Joe’s struggles and hard work, this once top prospect hasn’t finally matured to somewhere near his once anticipated high side? The only way we will find out is by giving him a shot. But he too is gone. Hopefully, this bias won’t deprive him of that. What a waste of talent. Was Craig Breslow AAAA, with his 1.91ERA last year? He escaped just in time. I apologize for the negative tone of this post. I have spent much of my life fighting bias in all its ugly forms. This bias wastes needed talent, years of work, and many dreams.
Great job Charlie. Hang in there. Someone with vision will sign you, and maybe George Kottaras or Dusty Brown to catch you. They also seem about ready for the show. Good luck.