Toggle sidebar

OT: MLB Discussion Thread: Part XXV

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
  • We're expecting server maintenance on March 3rd starting at midnight, there may be downtime during the work.
Status
Not open for further replies.
One Winged Angel said:
So let me get this straight. It’s ok to crown a prospect, albeit a good one on the same level that Mike Trout was as a prospect, even though there is zero evidence to show that he was on that level and that’s not a comparison, but it’s not ok to point out that Andujar had more doubles as a rookie than Mike Trout and that is a comparison.

Incredible, absolutely incredible.
Click to expand...

Really is amazing.
 
darko said:
If Vlad is with Blue Jays come opening day I'd be willing to bet he has a better rookie year than Andujar.

The only downside to Vlad is that be can be a butcher in the field. Imo he profiles better as a LF.
Click to expand...

With what protection? Who is protecting him in that lineup? They’re ANEMIC offensively. All of their big guns are gone. They haven’t made one splash to improve the offense. Chances are, they’re going to be behind in a lot of games, which means more pressure on an already anemic offense to produce runs.

If he was coming into a better situation in a loaded lineup or even an adequate one, then maybe the odds are better than I’m giving credit for, but they’re not as currently constructed.
 
To use a hockey analogy, trying to make a case for Andujar v Vlad based on being already established would be like settling with Gabe Landeskog or Jonathan Huberdeau when you could draft Auston Matthews or Jack Eichel
 
Krams said:
Why are we cherry picking doubles to make a point?
Click to expand...

Wasn’t cherry picking anything. I’ve made my point, if people want to ignore it because of whatever narrative, fine by me. I’m done explaining myself repeatedly because people hate Andujar because of his defense.
 
One Winged Angel said:
With what protection? Who is protecting him in that lineup? They’re ANEMIC offensively. All of their big guns are gone. They haven’t made one splash to improve the offense. Chances are, they’re going to be behind in a lot of games, which means more pressure on an already anemic offense to produce runs.

If he was coming into a better situation in a loaded lineup or even an adequate one, then maybe the odds are better than I’m giving credit for, but they’re not as currently constructed.
Click to expand...

All that means is that his counting stats won't be as inflated.
 
darko said:
All that means is that his counting stats won't be as inflated.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn’t just mean that. It means pitchers can pitch around him easier. Walk him more. Give him less to hit. Unless he is exactly what his father was (a devastating bad ball hitter) pitchers can throw garbage at him and watch him try to adjust.

Did nobody watch the second half of Aaron Judge’s rookie year? Pitchers make adjustments. If you don’t have protection in the lineup, you’re going to get crap to work with. If you have protection and they’re struggling as well, then your entire lineup becomes vulnerable piece by piece.

He’s also coming into a division with tough pitching and that tough pitching happens to be on the Red Sox and Yankees.

If I end up being wrong, I really don’t care, to be quite honest. However, I’m not gonna give him the batting title or say he’s going to hit .300 with 30 homers and 100 RBI’s as a rookie on a team that has lost its best bats over the years and hasn’t done a thing to replace them. It’s gonna be tough.

You also act like Andujar has peaked and can’t get any better at the plate or in the field. The double standards are beyond ridiculous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rangerfan4life90
I am reasonably sure it's already been shown that lineup projection either doesn't matter or has an extremely minimal effect outside of maybe the 8 hitter in the NL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nyr2k2 and romba
SA16 said:
I am reasonably sure it's already been shown that lineup projection either doesn't matter or has an extremely minimal effect outside of maybe the 8 hitter in the NL.
Click to expand...
Sounds similar to zone starts in hockey. In theory it makes a huuuuuuuge difference and drives coaching decisions, reality is it only has a minimal effect.
 
SA16 said:
I am reasonably sure it's already been shown that lineup projection either doesn't matter or has an extremely minimal effect outside of maybe the 8 hitter in the NL.
Click to expand...

Must be why Trout has lead the league in walks in 2 of the last 3 seasons, including leading the majors in 2016.
 
Machinehead said:
I would drive Andujar to Toronto myself for Vlad, but it's disingenuous to say he's not a good hitter.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is saying Andujar isn't a good hitter but he's not on the same planet as Trout (no one is). Is there anyone on the Rangers you wouldn't trade for Jack Hughes?
One Winged Angel said:
Must be why Trout has lead the league in walks in 2 of the last 3 seasons, including leading the majors in 2016.
Click to expand...
Bonds got intentionally walked with the bases loaded. How'd that impact his stats?
 
SA16 said:
I am reasonably sure it's already been shown that lineup projection either doesn't matter or has an extremely minimal effect outside of maybe the 8 hitter in the NL.
Click to expand...

Also, he lead the AL in IBB the last 2 seasons and lead the majors this year.

I think you can throw that theory right out the window.
 
darko said:
Gleyber was top-5 going into last season but Vlad is a whole different beast. Vlad ripped through high minors at age 19 and if not for Jays delaying his arbitration clock he would've made his MLB debut.
Click to expand...
Torres also lost 3 months (?) of AAA after TJS. Hard to say how that impacted how people viewed him.
 
sbjnyc said:
Bonds got intentionally walked with the bases loaded. How'd that impact his stats?
Click to expand...

Lost out of a ton of homers and RBI’s.

He had a .370 BA in 2002, but that was the first year during his steroid spree that he lead the majors in IBB, getting 249 free passes to 1st in a 3 year span, including 120 in 2004. Notice how although his BA was down in 2001, his homeruns, RBI’s, total bases and everything were lower from 2002-2004 because of the fact that they were limiting his damage by giving him the IBB. BA is also higher because walks intentional or not don’t factor into BA. In order to maintain total bases, runs, etc, the protection in the lineup has to move him over or bat him in.

With protection in the lineup, the opposition can make that decision, but they can also certainly pay for it if they’re not smart with how they approach the cleanup behind. Also, getting runners on base before hand is going to affect that.
 
romba said:
Sounds similar to zone starts in hockey. In theory it makes a huuuuuuuge difference and drives coaching decisions, reality is it only has a minimal effect.
Click to expand...

That'a a decent comp. Or even faceoff wins as another analogue. Late game faceoffs/zone starts and special teams ones definitely matter. But over the longhaul and in most game situations, yeah they don't matter very much.

It's like managing a baseball game late. You know who's coming up next and that influences decision making in a tight game. Putting guys on and what not. But over the course of a normal game and non-high-leverage situations, who's hitting behind you doesn't matter. Pitcher is trying to get you out, pretty simple.
 
Filthy Dangles said:
The best player in baseball drawing the most walks is somehow evidence that 'protection' exists. Am I reading that right...?
Click to expand...

If anything, that’s what you want to see. Imagine if Trout had protection in the lineup. You’d see a lot of those walks disappear and the average and power numbers go up even more because there wouldn’t be anywhere to put him on base. If Steroid Bonds had better protection in his lineup, you’d be looking at an even higher number of runs and total bases.

So this myth that protection doesn’t help is a joke.
 
One Winged Angel said:
If anything, that’s what you want to see. Imagine if Trout had protection in the lineup. You’d see a lot of those walks disappear and the average and power numbers go up even more because there wouldn’t be anywhere to put him on base. If Steroid Bonds had better protection in his lineup, you’d be looking at an even higher number of runs and total bases.

So this myth that protection doesn’t help is a joke.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter who hits after Trout. You'd rather face that player, whoever it is, even if it was prime Pujols. Same was true for Bonds. You are talking about historic greats.
 
sbjnyc said:
It doesn't matter who hits after Trout. You'd rather face that player, whoever it is, even if it was prime Pujols. Same was true for Bonds. You are talking about historic greats.
Click to expand...

Eh, I think I disagree with that one. Prime Pujols on the Cardinals was on another level at the plate than even Trout.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom