|
R.D. Mangles posted:The hope of Cubs fans is all wrapped up in four hyped prospects: Jorge Soler, Javier Baez, Kris Bryant, and Albert Almora. They will join with Anthony Rizzo and (in theory) Starlin Castro as their core (although Starlin Castro has shown no evidence of being anything but a guy who hits for an empty average and can't field his position). There's not a lot of pitching right now, but the feeling is that Theo and Jed will bring the Cubs' financial resources to bear when the prospects are closer to help complete the team. And then they'll be traded to or sign with a team that will win the world series.
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2014 15:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 07:13 |
|
|
MassaShowtime posted:John Gibbons is an excellent in game manager as well. He's great at deploying the bullpen properly and really loves to use matchups that generally hold up to scrutiny.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
One hit in the draft can provide tens of millions of dollars of surplus value for next to nothing. I go to my team, where Chris Sale was a #13 pick in 2010 and has since provided somewhere north of 15 WAR for a couple mil total over 4 years (two spent in the bullpen). He's been extended through age 30 on an insanely team-friendly contract. You can't get that kind of value through free agency. e. Jesus that contract is so insanely team-friendly barring injury. AAV around like $10M through age 30. Wow.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
Politicalrancor posted:People don't hate the Yankees enough, anymore. Honestly, I am far too friendly with far too many Red Sox fans. You think you've escaped Yankee haterdom, but time will bring it back again. Hating baseball teams is a flat circle. You can't break the cycle.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 14:05
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Go to every ballpark and get all 30 helmets. I just can't kill that many ballplayers...I've tried! 15 is my limit!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:"Miggy" is just one of those stupid nicknames that guys get because for some reason everyone in a sports clubhouse has to have a two-syllable nickname that ends in y. Beats M-Cab. zakharov posted:Presumably you collect it to gaze upon it and wonder how we could condone an an amazingly racist symbol to represent a sports team.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
It was nice that you tried, Michael.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
Devo posted:I'm heading to Oak Island, NC in July. The closest bigger town is probably Wilmington and I don't think it's too ridiculously far from Myrtle Beach. I was thinking about maybe making a quick drive to a minor league game when I'm on vacation. Any affiliated clubs nearby there? Went to Charleston last time I visited the Carolinas but that's a little farther than I want to drive this time I think. I work at the nuke plant near there (Southport) frequently, and last summer I was thinking the same thing but couldn't find anything. Wilmington Sharks exist, but they're collegiate summer league, so not sure that the meager quality you look for would be there.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2014 14:24
|
|
|
Devo posted:Yeah after I posted that last night I dicked around on milb.com for a while to see what I could find. There's actually a whole ton of teams 3-4 hours north and west but not much near the NC/SC border. The Pelicans have a home series against Lynchburg the first weekend I'm on vacation so hopefully there's some cool dudes playing on one or both teams then. I'd say just enjoy the beach and restaurants and don't go too crazy worrying about baseball maybe :P (my favorite restaurants are Turtle Island in Oak Island, and Ports of Call and Fishy-Fishy in Southport)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2014 15:57
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:That is both a bent brim and a fashion nightmare, so I'm not the poster itt who would be supporting it. It's an amazing contradiction. The neckbeards most prone to wearing fedoras couldn't possibly overcome their social anxiety disorders enough to go to a baseball game.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
Schlitzkrieg Bop posted:I'm a casual baseball fan who knows very little about the levels of play below the majors. Is there a preference for players to go to the farm systems straight out of high school or to go to college to play ball? Does one or the other tend to provide a higher caliber of player? It seems like guys can come into the majors from the minors at a much younger age if they don't go to college, so do most of the best high school prospects tend to go that route? Generational talents - yes. Bryce Harper and Stephen Strasburg are recent examples. Some players use college as leverage. "Draft me before Round X and promise me Y dollars or I'll back out and just go to college instead." Others prefer having a college degree safety net in case baseball isn't The Answer, while also polishing their skills and providing better guidance for scouts as to their ability. And others, god bless em, just like hanging around college scenes as athletes, partying and having fun and the like before doing the MiLB slog for a few years. In terms of caliber of talent: Not really. There are some trends, like high school players are highly variable, with huge booms and huge busts, while college players tend to have higher floors but lower ceilings. But trends are trends. Good scouting can identify great players from either pool. An example of a high-ceiling college player may be Chris Sale. Pander fucked around with this message at 14:59 on May 2, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 2, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
leokitty posted:I'm confused, are you using Strasburg as an example of a guy who skipped college? College is where he blossomed.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2014 15:43
|
|
|
Teams keep their own prospects. It would be really, really crazy to just swap entire minor league personnel given the intense effort put into assembling them. That's not to say that some talent-weak organizations wouldn't love to do that...
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
Laderhan posted:Is the whole "pitchers with an inverted w in their motion are more susceptible injuries" thing true or just bullshit? It's so hard to say, given how every pitcher differs in health and pitching motion. I tend to believe the theory that "pitching a ton when you're young makes you more likely to gently caress your arm up than any specific mechanics with your pitching".
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
Given Felix Hernandez' win despite a 13-12 record, and the fact that 11-14 Chris Sale finished higher than 18-6 Bartolo Colon last year, I'd say he'll have a decent shot if there's no reasonably close. Any sort of sensible alternative and he's toast. Like if Kershaw goes 17-6 with a 2.50 it doesn't matter if Samardzija has a 1.50 ERA if he has a 4-7 record or whatever with a billion NDs.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:The SI article linked above is an astonishingly good read and you should all read it immediately or else you are bad people. Agree with this man. I read it a good while back, and usually my memory sucks but when I saw the name "Gift" I recalled almost all of the story it's that good.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
Popete posted:If a catcher drops a foul tip is it then considered a foul ball? Like if the catcher saw a runner going could he intentionally miss or drop a foul tip to prevent the runner from stealing? I don't think that's physically possible.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 19:36
|
|
|
Popete posted:How so? Runner goes catcher sees the steal attempt catches the foul tip but lets it drop out of his glove. Is that then a foul ball and the runner has to return to 1st? Try it sometime. Have someone throw a ball at you, hard, and make a conscious attempt to let the ball drop out of the glove at the last second instead of catching it. None of that is probably going to happen at baseball speed either (80-95 MPH) under the stated conditions (foul tip while crouching), but the gist should be similar: your body will have an instinct to catch the drat ball as a baseline. Only adjusting that baseline on the conditional of noticing a runner going with the additional coincidence of a foul tip? I sincerely doubt in the fraction of a second that spans the difference between a foul tip being hit and a ball hitting your glove that you can consciously decide to drop the foul tip. It's just too little time to react to. At that point, your body is likely committed to throwing the runner out based on the expectation of a swing-and-miss or no-swing. The relatively low-likelihood event of a foul tip is a wild card that will either spawn its own dropped ball or be just a slight variation on a swing-and-a-miss. A catcher's been trained to throw to second in this event the vast majority of the time, and would not have a set plan to drop the ball on the off chance of a foul tip that an umpire may not even know was a foul tip.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
VJeff posted:So Miggy is up to 34 doubles. Some people are saying he might reach 60 this year. From what I've read, this seems like it'd be a pretty big deal. How much of an accomplishment would that be relatively to the other stuff he's done? Does he have any kind of shot at breaking 67? Could be any number of factors. Could be power dropping with age or some slight injury. Could be change in luck (lower HR/FB). Could be that the air around Comerica has changed density/humidity or some other park factor that's decreasing home run rates slightly. The one thing it's probably not is him deciding "instead of homers I'm going to hit doubles", because doubles are never better than homers in every single case ever forever. It's probably just luck.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
Sac flies and sac hits are different. Sac hits are where you bunt to advance baserunners to 2nd and/or 3rd. I don't think you can get an RBI off a sac bunt, it's either a squeeze (which is scored similar to a grounder if you get thrown out at 1st or fielders choice if the runner gets thrown out) or a sac fly if there's a tag up involved. Sac hits are entirely sacrificial and are most commonly seen in late + close games with a runner on 2nd and nobody out or a runner on 1st and a guy who hits for average well coming up.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
Good question. I dunno if there are ways of sacrificing besides bunting. Nothing comes to mind.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
LeftistMuslimObama posted:So are the people calling Jean Segura a black hole for "only" hitting .236 just crazy then? Considering his defense, it seems like his hitting is perfectly acceptable, especially when the brewers have a gaping hole at 1B. Not crazy at all. Maybe they're looking at him through a more relativistic lens than absolute, since last year he was an amazing offensive shortstop and this year he is not. He doesn't strike out too much, never walks, doesn't hit for power, and steals merely at an okay rate when he does get on. He justifies a roster slot, but "acceptable" isn't really a good target to hope for. A sub-.600 OPS is simply bad hitting. You need to be a fantastic defender to make up for that kind of lack of production, and he's merely pretty solid defensively. e. he's a big better than "pretty solid" defensively, but still a phenomenally bad hitter this year. Pander fucked around with this message at 16:03 on Aug 11, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
tadashi posted:Is it totally wrong to say that Segura could be the ss version of Carlos Gomez? He seems like he's an excellent athlete who's still learning how to play baseball but could hit a good amount dingers and get on base at an acceptable rate (for the position) if he can get it together? They have very similar slashlines when you compare Gomez's age 21 partial season with the Mets and Segura's ongoing age 24 season. So maybe they could be. I'd say odds are against it, unless you want to bet on Segura discovering a power stroke out of nowhere in the next few years. Not impossible, but I think he'll lack the hit tool and elite base-stealing skill of Gomez. Think "fast Gordon Beckham" not "weak Carlos Gomez".
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 17:49
|
|
|
rickiep00h posted:Is there any benefit to doing nothing besides dumping salary and/or hamstringing the claimant's budget? Is the claimant even required to negotiate in good faith? Could they offer peanuts (or even nothing) and say "Take it or leave it"? The Blue Jays have a more accurate example of this kind of salary dump more recently. Alex Rios in 2009 was a straight salary dump via a waiver claim to the White Sox (a move that history probably shrugs its shoulders over, as Rios was somewhat productive, if incredibly unevenly season-by-season). They also traded Vernon Wells before the season began for Juan Rivera and Mike Napoli, but they valued losing Wells' gargantuan contract more than either player they received.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 15:05
|
|
|
Yeah. He out-thought himself there. Probably wasn't aware of how much Arencibia was about to suck and/or undervalued how good Napoli is at the whole hitting thing. Still that's why I said "they" valued the contract dump more than the players received. Clearing out the garbage Ricciardi contracts was still pretty impressive. Hard to say how much one move affects the future, but they're 6.5 behind the Orioles now, and if Toronto finishes within 10 games at the end of the year, it'd be the first time they've done that in 21 years.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 15:40
|
|
|
Calling hitters as a general group "terrible" suggests to me that rather than hitters being bad, pitchers have been re-developing an edge ever since the end of the steroid era. Hitting and pitching has generally been cyclical, and for the moment increased scouting information available has seemed to benefit pitchers more due to better shifting and understanding of hitter weaknesses. Also fewer steroids and greenies might also help, although that's debatable. I don't know which guys with 0.2 WAR that get 8-figure deals you're thinking of. Don't WAR and other similar stats normalize league-wide on a year-by-year basis? Meaning, if all hitters are more "terrible" this year than last, then the top player should still have the same league-leading OPS+, and should still provide the same value over a replacement player. Your last question kind of conflicts with your original statement. If good players are undervalued by WAR (and therefore more expensive than thought), then wouldn't a guy with a 0.2 WAR getting $$$ mean the problem has self-corrected?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
The last I heard, 1 WAR = ~$6M Cabrera sound perfectly priced. Everth is entering his arb years and in 2013 he provided 3+ WAR (which would be worth $15M). So he's actually been providing a fantastic value for his money. A one year fluctuation where he falls to what he SHOULD cost is hardly a terrible deal for the Padres unless it signals the start of a downward trend where he ends up costing his club a lot. His age, performance, and his price tag suggest he's either a young developing player or should be a bench player. It's not his fault if the club instead treats him like a starter and he produces less than he should. Chase Headley has finally entered free agency after Arb-3 bumped him up to about $10M. Ignoring the fact he's produced over 21 WAR so far (a $100M+ value) for far under-market value, his past year wasn't bad. When you start with the expectations of superstardom at the rock-bottom pricing he had been at for the past half decade, his 2014 does seem bad. But in a more objective sense he's a plus defender and league-average bat (with a history of doing well above league-average). $10M for an above-average 3B in today's market seems very reasonable. If he went to my preferred club (Chicago White Sox) for an AAV of $10MM I'd be doing somersaults. I couldn't tell you about Hundley, he seems like backup catcher who had a bit of potential before. $5MM/yr seems a bit high, sure. Maybin seems like an overpay, but they might project him developing into a better hitter more than I do. He's a good defensive CF as it stands. PetCo makes offensive evaluation tricky, and he doesn't have enough PA to really get an idea. Stults just pitched awful this year. The two years before he was a reasonable value. He was a good Petco pitcher, but got murdered on the road. Most of the contracts you're pointing out seem to involve arbitration pricing. It's just how the pricing structure works. It doesn't always work out that player value = money paid to player value. In fact, it RARELY does. Often times you get the young phenom who waaaaay overproduce his trifling rookie/early arb contracts. And you'll frequently get the older veteran who will never meet his steep price. This is part of the way a pricing system built on risk/reward works. Pay more for a more known quantity that may provide less reward, or pay less on unknown players who bust at a higher rate.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
Everblight posted:Again, I'm not talking about specific players, just that the concept of a replacement player as compared to who is actually bumming around in AAA seems to have a disconnect, and empirically bad players (Nick Punto, Ryan Howard, James Loney) get big deals and hang on much longer than they probably should compared to chancing on a few AAA guys, even if you have to eat their entire contract. The conceptual replacement player is just that: a concept. Some clubs would LOVE to have one in case a star goes down, while other are loaded with the quintessential AAAA types but lack real MLB stars or AA types that can project to stardom. Your attitude toward roster turnover seems more akin to NFL practices than MLB. MLB player development is usually a much longer process than NFL. In the NFL, most high-skill position players peak in their early to mid 20s. In the MLB, players typically peak in the late 20s, and undergo gradual increases in competition levels to ingrain proper habits. This increased development time renders a strategy of mucking through bargain bin players to keep the good and discard the chaff pretty much impossible, because it takes years and great efforts to properly identify and train the 'good'. The players you call "empirically" bad either were once very good or still serve a specific useful function. Ryan Howard was overpaid, injured, and his skill set declined at the exact same time. He's somewhat of an anomaly in how bad his situation panned out. He is not a 'typical' MLB bad contract. Loney has more often than not been an MLB-starter level hitter. Punto has a lot of positional flexibility with plus defensive skills and decent speed on the basepaths. Plus he's still pretty cheap. Pander fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Sep 29, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
To expound on Nick Punto a little bit I think positional flexibility needs to be brought up. Let's assume a 'standard' Nick Punto year as 0.4 oWAR over 250 PA, 0.6 dWAR, and he plays 2B, SS, and 3B, with maybe a game or two in the OF to cover an injury. Now you might argue that he's hardly worth more than a replacement player based on the numbers. But in reality, he provides a great deal of utility value, which WAR tends to underrate. Star players and starters don't play in every game, and only requiring one spot on the 25-man roster to fill in for 3+ different positions allows for the GM to provide the manager with an additional specific roleplayers, like maybe a dedicated off-the-bench left-handed hitter, or a 5th OF specifically for late-game defensive substitutions or pinch-running. Or, if the manager is Ozzie Guillen, an extra reliever. So even though he's borderline replacement level in terms of counting-stat production, the fact Punto relieves the need for separate competent backup 3B/2B/SS players on the bench has a value that doesn't show up in WAR.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
Everblight posted:I guess then the question is, how valuable is that? Because Nick Punto cannot possibly be worth $3m a year to What are you basing your monetary assessments upon? To me, $3M is a shitton of money and I'd be loving ecstatic to have it, since it's probably as much or more (I don't feel like determining for sure how far I'm off) than I'll make in my lifetime. To a baseball team, $3M for a veteran utility player providing between about 0.3-1 WAR is fine.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2014 22:25
|
|
it up.
|
Groucho Marxist posted:Let's stop acting like $/WAR is worth a poo poo since it treats a nonlinear value like a linear one. I've probably been the worst offender and even I've tried to make sure to hedge my assessments with a reasonable degree of uncertainty. WAR confirms the conclusions I've stated (Chase Headley has been a great value, Everth Cabrera is worth what he's paid), which can be independently drawn in numerous other ways. Everblight posted:Twenty years of Marlin fandom, which boils down to "If he costs more than $440,000 a year, he's gone." I assume all teams are operating under the same "keep payroll under $30m a year for 25 players" restrictions, and sometimes forget that other teams are actually profitable/don't cook the books enough that an occasional whiff on a Cameron Maybin isn't going to bankrupt the team. Most teams are actually willing to pay guys more than a couple million. Cause they actually associate winning with greater fan participation. And that somehow leads to a better brand.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Command generally refers to the ability to throw multiple types of pitches well, and be able to make the release on all of them look the same. It also includes being able to vary the speed and amount of break in various pitches, minimizing random variability. A pitcher does not have good command of his curve ball if he tips it with arm motion every time, or cannot routinely give it the speed and break that he desires. This is pretty much it. Control is universal. It is putting the ball where you want it. It doesn't even have to be in the strike zone. Sometimes good control involves locating a pitch outside the strike zone. What matters is that the ball goes exactly where the catcher and pitcher agrees it should go. A pitch called for at the bottom outside corner of the zone that ends up splitting the middle of the plate at belt height is indicative of profoundly poor control, even if it may be a strike. What command refers to can differ on different pitches. For fastballs, it can be the apparent 'rising' motion caused by magnus forces. For sliders, it might be precisely the timing and magnitude of break, as well as how easy it is to pick up the spin off the release. Most all major league level pitchers have to have some ability to do both, or else they'd simply fail to get outs. Some have the raw talent to command pitches with the movement and velocity to be successful even with poor control (think Carlos Marmol for a few years there with a filthy slider). On the other end you get pitchers like Mark Buehrle who rely on impeccable control and command of four or five different pitches to keep hitters off-balance, even if he can't break 85 mph. What they have in common is command. You can survive without control, and you can survive without the ability to throw 95+ mph, but major league pitcher require command of their pitches or else they will throw the flat fastballs and rolling breaking pitches that go a very long way. e. huh, the link ^^^^^^ seems to conflict with what I said. I guess go with that. I'd learned differently. Then again I watch baseball games narrated by Hawk Harrelson, so... Pander fucked around with this message at 01:16 on Nov 22, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:To me, the classic "hanging curve ball" is a good illustration of command versus control. The guy has good control as he has thrown the ball at the correct spot, assuming the ball breaks properly. Due to his poor command of the pitch, however, it doesn't break as it should and stays up in the zone, making it easy to hit. I agree with you. It seems there's a denotative difference here regarding how to define the terms that are equivalent but different. One side looks at strike % of pitches thrown to determine control, and then looks at underlying performance within that band to determine command. The other looks at ability to throw a pitch at any pre-determined location as control, and judges the ability of the pitch to fool batters as command. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
That's why I think you're both wrong and Deteriorata is right. Control is putting a pitch in a predetermined location with regularity. It doesn't say anything about the pitch itself other than where it crosses the plate. Command is making a pitch "work" (slider slide, knuckleball avoid spinning, sinker sinks, curveball breaks, cutter cut). This is where each player often has their unique take on how to pitch. Submariners with a 4-seamer that makes it seem to rise are far different than a top-down thrower whose 4-seamer might have some cutting action. Power is making the pitch move faster than your peers. Fastballs near 100, hard breakers over 90, slow breakers over 80. RA Dickey is an odd example of power pitching, since his angry knuckler is a 'slow breaker' that can eclipse 80 mph. All are separate. Having only one of the three skills in the majors is a recipe for disaster. Having all three leads to dominance. Pander fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Nov 22, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 05:47
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:In my experience, what you're talking aboyt is generally referred to as "stuff" or "movement". "stuff" is a nebulous term that can mean either or both of command and power. It's a neat term, but not very precise. I liken command to the phrase "feel" for a pitch, although feel is also an imprecise term that can also denote some semblance of control in addition to command. To see the difference between control and command, think of Pedro Martinez' change-up. His control kept it low in the strike zone. His command made it dance. Without either component, it would not have been effective. With both it was devastating. I fail to see any difference, even in degree, of "control" and "command" as described in that earlier article. One lets you dictate where the ball goes, and the other lets you dictate where the ball goes. That's just a flawed understanding of the game in my book.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
Perhaps the way to view it is that control is getting a pitch to go where you want it to, while command is the ability to ensure it still gets there after you impart more velocity and movement upon it? A pitcher with poor command of his breaking stuff may still have decent control of his pitch if he doesn't snap it, but then he's likely to leave a slow roller over the heart of the plate. If he has poor control, he may get it to dance, but it ends up dancing out of the other batters box or hitting the batter. It seems hard to imagine a player having good command but poor control, since a feel for a pitch should mean the pitcher can locate it. Perhaps command without control means being able to throw a pitch well, but not accounting for its break in determining where you want it to cross the plate.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 07:56
|
|
|
We both read it. I just choose not to accept it because I think that last definition of command seems superfluous, as shown by this virtually identical edit: quote:If a pitcher intends to throw a low-and-away strike and he ends up throwing a pitch high and away, dead-middle or up and in, he’s showing poor control—even if the ball is in the strike zone. I completely agree with the following quote... quote:If anyone refers to a pitcher’s walk rate when talking about command, he’s inaccurately mixing his descriptions. Definition: A pitcher who hits the target the catcher sets has good control of that pitch. Pitcher 1) A pitcher with good control can still choose to throw balls to entice swings-and-misses. Pitcher 2) A pitcher who always misses the target the catcher sets by 3 feet, even if the ball ALWAYS passes through the strike zone through dumb luck, cannot be said to have good control. (Let's not discuss why the catcher is setting up so oddly) Pitcher 1 walks batters occasionally due to nibbling, yet has excellent control. Despite the fact Pitcher 2 never walks anyone, he has awful control. So while you can accept, as a generality, that good control pitchers tend to walk fewer batters, it is not the only aspect of pitching that should define a pitcher's control.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 08:09
|
|
|
leokitty posted:You can't choose not to accept that definition. It is what people are using when they grade or talk about command. I'm not a professional scout, I can do whatever I want. It's just not in step with people who are in the business. I can live with that, because the professional definition is redundant.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 09:41
|
|
|
Twin Cinema posted:I can't seem to find a suitable answer online, other than the standard "Mendoza Line", but I thought I'd ask here: 1) What production does his backup (Option B) provide? 2) How many runs does his defense provide over Option B? 3) How many runs does his offense cost compared to Option B? If you have 8 decent bats, you can settle for a butcher at SS, CF, or C if they are truly transcendent defensive talents. It really does depend on the specifics, but as a manager I could probably stomach the second coming of Ozzie hitting somewhere in the neighborhood of .180/.230/.250 before I felt like there really wasn't enough defensive value available to make him worth starting over someone who could manage, say, .240/.300/.320 with average or even below average defense. Prime Yadier or Simmons is that kind of defensive talent today. If a lineup ISN'T solid all the way through, you have even more impetus to get a good hitter and jettison the defensive player for some offense. In the end the lineup doesn't really matter as much (preventing runs is basically worth the same as earning runs).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 07:13 |
|
|
Ice To Meet You posted:All MLB shortstops combined for a .310 OBP this season. So .300 is barely even bad anymore. Like I said I'd probably put the floor at a .230 obp for a great defender at a premium position as a generalistic answer to the query. So many intangibles make it an uncertain exercise.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 05:50
|
|