T.R. Sullivan mailbag
by Adam J. Morris on May 11, 2009 4:09 PM CDT
Email
PrintT.R. Sullivan has a new mailbag column up...
There are quite a few questions, including some stuff on who the Rangers might look at in the 2009 draft and whether the team would look to bring Andruw Jones back next year, but this is the thing that jumped out at me:
I have nothing personal against Chris Davis, but his bat is noticeably slow on TV; his strikeouts are astronomical and he looks bad on sliders and sharp curves inside. I've seen no change and I've seen him overmatched. How long can we expect strikeouts in critical roles when we need to move the runners over or drive them in?
-- Craig M., Texarkana, TexasHis strikeout totals are staggering, but his other numbers aren't so bad. In his last 24 games, he is hitting .268 with a .326 on-base percentage and a .598 slugging percentage. The Rangers want him to use all fields rather than trying to pull everything. That might reduce the strikeouts. There are other first basemen struggling -- Mark Teixeira, Lance Berkman -- but none with Davis' staggering strikeout totals.
I saw those numbers and thought, that can't be right...but in fact, since starting the season 1 for 22, Davis has gone .268/.326/.598 over his last 24 games. And even if you say, well, those numbers are artificially inflated by the one big game yesterday, Davis still has an 863 OPS for the 23 games prior to yesterday's.
Basically, Davis had an awful first week of the season, and since then, has exceeded realistic expectations.
Although he still needs to get his K-rate down.
111 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Craig Monroe's back in town, eh?
Might have to make a visit back home…
"if my kid said 'uhh' that much, i would say, Hey! ... stop saying 'uhh' that much..." - dennis miller
Draft
Andy Seiler is doing superb draft analysis, and mocks at minorleagueball.com
Very recommended.
"[Font} doesn't turn 19 until the end of May and his heater can already hit 99 on the gun. That's baseball porn." - Jason Parks
yep
and if they took Raley with 14th pick I’d kill somebody…
Go Rangers...don't suck...
by Kinslerhomer on May 11, 2009 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions
Raley
Didn’t make the November BA top 100 prospect list, and was only 80th on their college prospect list.
Has he done that much to shoot up the lists that much this spring?
by Adam J. Morris on May 11, 2009 5:37 PM CDT up reply actions
Okay
They have him at #28 in their April 15 update.
Still…#14 seems high for a “pitchability” college lefty.
by Adam J. Morris on May 11, 2009 5:39 PM CDT up reply actions
I haven't kept up with CB closely this year,
but I did catch his start Saturday at UT, after a 11 inning game in College Station Friday night. He pitched a complete game 3(?) hitter and didn’t give up a run to UT. And his stuff looked good to me
That's very high.
And no one in the draft rumor circle mentions him anywhere higher than the last couple of picks in the first round. Even then, most think of him as a supplemental first round/second round prospect. I guess I’d be ok with him as our supplemental first rounder, but there are better guys out there. On the plus side, we could pull a Brian Bogusevic and try him as an outfielder if he fails.
Davis will be ok
As long as the pitching and defense are rolling along and others in the line up are hitting I can live with the K’s as long as he is still hitting like the lsat 24 days and plays good defense.
These umps are a bunch of bow-legged uncle fuckers.-D.A.Tron
http://tinyurl.com/ranger-rage
yeah
i don’t get the davis panic stuff at all. yes the strike outs need to come down, but i’m not seeing a slow bat. i do see an upper cut swing that may be susceptible to high fastballs.
Man, I love winning! You know? It's like better than losing!
Brooks Raley
If we pick Brooks Raley in the #14 slot, I will be seriously depressed. But don’t worry, there’s no way we pick him there.
Davis' Ks
While I agree that he need to cut down on the Ks, there are a number of guys right on Davis’ heels for the league lead. Mark Reynolds, Jordan Schafer, and Carlos Pena are all right there. I am not too worried he is going to break any records.
If by "right there"
you mean nearly 20% less, then, yes Reynolds, Schafer, and Pena are “right there.”
Not only that, but percentage-wise they still strike out significantly less of the time.
Also, they all walk quite a bit more than Davis does:
Davis 49 K, 8 BB in 114 PA = 43.0% K rate
Pena 42 K, in 138 PA = 30.4% K rate
Schafer 42 K, 22 BB in 124 PA = 33.9% K rate
Reynolds 40 K, 13 BB in 128 PA = 31.3% K rate
The problem I have with Davis is I don’t know if he’ll get on-base enough to a net positive (though his defense has been improved this year – SSS), and if you have a K rate > 40%, you’re almost definitely going to be a net negative offensively.
R
Not arguing OBP or K rate
was merely addressing the fact that so many people were beginning the talk that Davis was going to smash the strikeout record and look stupid doing it, as if he is the only person who is going to strike out a lot.
by texasbuckeye on May 11, 2009 7:08 PM CDT up reply actions
No
For one thing, if he keeps on King at 40%, he’ll be sent down sometime during the year. But I don’t think he’s THAT overmatched.
I was responding to texasbuckeye’s comment that Davis’s K’s aren’t that different from Pena’s Schafer’s or Reynolds’s.
He is the worst in the league, by a LARGE margin. NOT small.
Are YOU saying he’s not? (See where straw men become useless and argumentative?)
R
And Im the one looking to pick a fight, lol.
I didn’t try to make an argument, I made a simple point. You said if he has a K rate over 40 he will be negative offensively, I implied I don’t think thats going to happen.
Dear god, the straw men are out!
the preceding post was a great success.
Why not?
I agree that it’s plausible that he’ll reduce his strikeouts, but I’m not nearly as confident as you that he’ll be able to do it without dramatically changing his approach or his swing, which may have unintended consequences to his power numbers.
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on May 12, 2009 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions
well lets see
K’d in 27.5% of 1045 minor league at bats.
K’d in 29.8% of 298 mlb at bats last year.
K’d in 47.1% of 104 mlb at bats this year.
The first two are very high, but in the same realm as some comparable sluggers.
The third is unheard of. It also happens to be in the shortest sample size in a period that he has clearly been generally struggling and has personally said his timing/mechanics were off.
So why should I believe the third?
I suppose there is some sliver of a chance that his 48 Ks in the bank already + an elevated K rate the rest of the way and an injury or something could have him ending up the season at 40%, but I’d like to hear your logical reasoning to think it will happen.
And in the end even while K’ing 48% of the time through a month, he is still on pace for 97 runs and 86 rbis. If he reverts to near his 2008 rates the rest of the way his numbers for the year will be fine, even with a low average/obp. Add in the + defense, and he will have been valuable to the rangers.
the preceding post was a great success.
Unheard of....
for MAJOR LEAGUE CALIBER HITTERS.
That is not a guarantee with Davis.
You’re right though in that the sample size is an issue (that and I don’t believe he’s this bad are the main reasons why I don’t think he’ll keep up a pace of > 40% K rate).
R
Ok, but there have been thousands of non-major league caliber players who got a year in the mlb...
And I’m unaware of anyone posting such a number over a season qualifying number of at bats.
I’d be interested if such a list even exists for AAA.
the preceding post was a great success.
Can you please tell me what straw man I've stated?
I never SAID that he was going to have a K rate over 40. Or that I expected him to have a K rate over 40.
I said IF he had a K rate over 40, then he’s going to be negative offensively. This is in direct rebuttal to a comment that Davis’s K’s is approximately equal to other people in the league when THAT IS NOT THE CASE.
Are you arguing that it is? What’s the point of pointing out that Davis’s K rate is not LIKELY to be above 40%? You might as well point out that the other people I was comparing him to are not LIKELY to have K rates above 30%.
You might not be actively looking to pick a fight, but I interpreted it that way mainly because your point does not address the point I was making.
Sure it has some tangential relevance, but it doesn’t address any real point that I’m trying to make. And seems to be picking nits just to pick nits.
Actually, the first response here was ok, IMO, if a little querulous. It really was the second response which left me the combined impression of picking fights.
R
OK
Looking back, I see why you were pointing out about the K rate > 40%.
In my mind, the 40% line was a throw-away line, so it wasn’t the main point. But I can see how someone might interpret that as the main point.
Consider the 40% line just filler, not worthy of response.
R
alrighty then
let me break this down.
A) You used his 43% K rate for the year as the basis of an argument, and stated if he K’s 40% of the time he will be bad.
B) I simply imply I do not think he will K at either of those rates.
Even if it was only relevant to your minor 40% throwaway line, there is nothing argumentative with making a one line, calm post in response to said line. This is a baseball message board and I wished to express the thought.
However, then claiming that it has no relevance? Your entire post was using his +40% K rate to differentiate him from other sluggers. If you don’t believe he will K at that Rate, then it is EXTREMELY relevant to your main post which relies on said high percentage he currently has; and to call it of some tangential relevance is absurd.
the preceding post was a great success.
I like how you never replied to this post R
Requested sample size use is in this line of discussion.
Do something for me: Read the first few posts that started this argument. Read your initial replies. Can you honestly tell me you don’t think you overreacted?
D
the preceding post was a great success.
I did not respond
because I didn’t think it was relevant.
But since you specifically asked, let’s break it down:
A) You used his 43% K rate for the year as the basis of an argument, and stated if he K’s 40% of the time he will be bad.
What argument? Please clarify how I’m using the 40% rate as the basis of an argument.
B) I simply imply I do not think he will K at either of those rates.
Fair enough. It’s possible, I read too much into it, but I WAS RESPONDING TO THE PREVIOUS POST. Your implication has no bearing in TALKING ABOUT WHAT HAS HAPPENED. The previous poster is talking about how Chris Davis’s PAST PERFORMANCE (NOT FUTURE PERFORMANCE) is relative to other players’ PAST PERFORMANCES.
So, my question is if a person is thinking that you’re talking about CURRENT PERFORMANCES, what does predicting FUTURE PERFORMANCE have to do with it?
Even if it was only relevant to your minor 40% throwaway line, there is nothing argumentative with making a one line, calm post in response to said line. This is a baseball message board and I wished to express the thought.
Except it’s a complete non sequitur when I’m focused on PAST PERFORMANCE. I’ll admit that I might have misinterpreted what you were talking about, but I’m NOT making an argument BASED ON the 40% line. This is the thrust of the basic miscommunication, I think.
However, then claiming that it has no relevance? Your entire post was using his +40% K rate to differentiate him from other sluggers. If you don’t believe he will K at that Rate, then it is EXTREMELY relevant to your main post which relies on said high percentage he currently has; and to call it of some tangential relevance is absurd.
Again, read this in the context of PAST PERFORMANCE. Then, yes, the FUTURE PREDICTION of 40% line question has NO relevance. Are you saying predicting future performance is relevant to past performance?
Requested sample size use is in this line of discussion.
I’m sorry I don’t understand what you’re talking about.
Do something for me: Read the first few posts that started this argument. Read your initial replies. Can you honestly tell me you don’t think you overreacted?
I think there was misunderstanding and miscommunication on both sides. I probably chose the word straw man poorly due to misunderstanding what you were talking about. Call it non sequitur instead. Still, it probably was a poor choice of terms which heightened your sense of antagonism.
For that, I apologize.
OTOH, do something for me. Can you read YOUR first few posts and say that YOUR posts do not have little nuances which could inflame other people or could be interpreted as deliberate digs at the other person?
I think, in the end, there was a significant miscommunication and a spiraling of language which led to name-calling and unproductive posts.
I do think that a lot of your argumentative style hits a lot of my pet peeves.
But I’m not sure if it’s worth going into, since whenever I bring it up, you seem to take it as a personal attack on you.
Anyways, I hope you are not severely disappointed that I replied to your post.
R
Well, what if you look at it from a different perspective
He’s a 22 year old whose production is virtually identical to Mike Jacobs, except he’s a significantly better defensive player. Why would you assume he’ll be sent down, strikeouts or no strikeouts? Especially considering there’s a substantial chance he’ll improve, and nobody who can really replace him (assuming you don’t rush up Justin Smoak)
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on May 12, 2009 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions
True
I don’t think for the majority of reasons that you state that he’ll get sent down.
But if a player starts striking out at an unheard of rate, you’ve got to consider whether he’s overmatched, and whether it might be better for his development to send him down.
Especially if you’re in the hunt for a playoff spot.
I’m not advocating he get sent down, but I’m open to the possibility if it will improve him in the long term.
I’ve always been wary of players who have marginal to poor plate discipline. It’s just a bias I have.
R
Though I will back you that I don't believe at all this recent "hot streak"
If you look closely, you’ll notice that it’s almost entirely BABIP-related. Though his power is enough to make him a decent offensive player, unless he reduces his strikeouts dramatically, he won’t be an impact 1B
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on May 12, 2009 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions
Every hot streak ever is going to show up as a high BABIP. You can’t hit 410 over a 10 game stretch with a .300 babip. Not possible.
the preceding post was a great success.
Never say impossible
Don Mattingly, July 8-July 20 1987.
BA .422
BABIP 281
4/10/09 - Josh Hamilton's last walk.
"You know a pitching prospect isn't any good if John Daniels doesn't trade him away but keeps him insteaad." - http://crops.mlblogs.com/
"You probably can throw Neftali Feliz on that group of overblown Rangers pitching prospect failures." - http://crops.mlblogs.com/
10 homeruns in a 8 game stretch, nice.
you are correct, I shouldn’t have said impossible. that was wrong. almost impossible.
but still, it generally amuses me when people bring up someones high babip during a hot streak. i saw kinsler’s sky high babip used when he was hitting .470. ya think?
the preceding post was a great success.
I just like baseball trivia
and I happened to be at one of those games.
Who’da thunk that 4 of his HRs in that streak were against Ranger Pitching :)
4/10/09 - Josh Hamilton's last walk.
"You know a pitching prospect isn't any good if John Daniels doesn't trade him away but keeps him insteaad." - http://crops.mlblogs.com/
"You probably can throw Neftali Feliz on that group of overblown Rangers pitching prospect failures." - http://crops.mlblogs.com/
checked it out for the last week
ok, the K totals create a ridiculously small sample. in his last 6 games he has only 10 at bats that count towards babip, eliminating all the strikeouts and homeruns.
oh my, hes 6 for 10 in those 10! the hot streak is the 3 homeruns not the extra 2 singles he doesn’t “deserve”.
the preceding post was a great success.
Hmmmm
Maybe it’s just my interpretation, but my view of your comments here (not directed toward me) is that they are argumentative.
Perhaps it just the words you’re choosing or maybe you’re a Chris Davis defender?
I dunno, they just strike me as trying to argue.
R
Your disregard for sample size even continues into analyzing posters.
Yes, i strongly believe in chris davis and thus generally defend him when I see points brought up that I disagree with. Choosing a Davis thread to analyze me by will result in some of my more pointed posts.
I would suggest that there is nothing wrong with that as long as sound logic is used, and if you have caught me using faulty baseball logic I invite you to disagree.
Anyway, you don’t like my tone, fine. But you are the one making personal attacks.
And this still isn’t argumentative. He made a post referring to BABIP during a hot streak, I made a point about BABIP and hot streaks. Theres a difference between an argument point and being argumentative. Your harassing me is argumentative.
the preceding post was a great success.
Disregard for sample size?
Besides citing examples of your posts in this thread, what disregard for sample size have I exhibited?
And did I generalize to you in general? I did state “my view of your comments HERE.” Now maybe you think I’m generalizing across all of your posts.
I am not. I’m saying that IN THIS THREAD. And I did say earlier that it wasn’t so much the first comment that seemed argumentative as the second one in when I read it directly after the first comment.
Anyways, I’m usually the one who HIGHLIGHTS the small sample size caveats. So, to find myself being accused of disregarding sample size is hilarious.
Also, is it possible for you to stop making straw men? That’s faulty LOGIC, in general.
I can even point out what the straw men are if you’re curious, but it doesn’t seem like you’re interested in constructive criticism.
Also, please point out where I’m the one making personal attacks. Aside from:
someone seems to be looking to pick a fight with me for some reason.
I don’t see it.
R
rookie of the year
while i don’t disagree about those pitchers being outstanding, but the other hitters?
travis snider = outfield
his numbers? .250/.305/.42/.726
he’s 21 and had 73 ab’s last year.
brett gardner = centerfield
.227/.288/.273/.560 with 6 sb’s
he’s 24 (will be 25 when the award is handed out) and had 127 ab’s last year
chris getz= 2b
.291/.360/.380/.739
he’s 24 (will be 25 when the award is handed out) and had 127 ab’s last year
elvis andrus= ss
.273/.312/.409/.721
he’s 20 (will be 21 when the ward is handed out)
i think he’s clearly putting up better numbers than the older outfielder brett gardner, arguably has better numbers than older outfielder travis snider and isn’t that far behind chris getz who is 4 years older.
i know age doesn’t matter, but you’d figure if 2 players were very close in terms of production, position and age may swing it a little one way.
Omar Vizquel: your starting shortstop for the 2009 AL all-star team.
FWIW: VORP
Andrus does, in fact, lead all AL position players in VORP by a full run right now. I only use VORP because it’s quick and sortable and nothing better is. I’d say he’s pretty solidly the front runner among position players right now, but the Rookie of the Year class so far belongs to pitching.
right
but as far as voters go…it’s all about avg, runs, home runs, rbi, sb, obp, slg
and sb only count if it’s something like 35 sb.
Omar Vizquel: your starting shortstop for the 2009 AL all-star team.
Yeah, they're pretty stupid.
I usually just talk about who deserves to win awards and don’t try and guess how the voters will lean.
?
Do you mean among rookies? It’s hard for me to see that Andrus would be a full run better than all players…..
R
i will look it up real quick
done…
andrus leads AL rookies with a vorp of 4.1
getz is 2nd with 3.1
gardner is -2.1
snider is -0.1
as far as all AL shortstops…
bartlett 16.0
scutaro 13.3
jeter (!) 8.5
vizquel 4.8
andrus 4.1
take out omar and andrus is 4th in the AL for shortstops
Omar Vizquel: your starting shortstop for the 2009 AL all-star team.
Marco Scutaro
Striking example of a player learning plate discipline later in his career. Either that or what he is doing is a complete fluke.
His bb/k ratio this season (1.53) is about double what he has posted the previous four full seasons he has been in the ML (0.75 to 0.88). It will be interesting to see if he can maintain the healthy walk rate.
Doctor please. Some more of these.
And he can play plussy plus defense at both MIF positions and at 3b.
Yah, I love me some Scutaro, even knowing that there’s no way he keeps up this hot start going forward.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
You want the mustache on or off? ... ... ... Too bad.
by thedirkatron on May 11, 2009 8:18 PM CDT up reply actions
?
I seem to be having a lot of questions recently….
Scutaro has almost always had good plate discipline (if he didn’t, then, Beane wouldn’t have been so hot to trade for him back in 2004).
His small sample size is probably just fluky, but he’s always walked quite a bit in his career.
R
You're right
his OBP has always been a good .70 or so points above his avg., his current hot streak is just that.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
It's interesting
that people are saying that his bat looks slow, but he just switched to a heavier bat. He said it helped him last year too. Here is the story. Apparently he doesn’t think his bat is too slow.
The way davis creams the ball....
If he can cut his strikeouts down it will surely make his numbers rise.
I think he is on the verge of a nice streak…I also think Murphy is breaking out as well.
With Hamilton coming back our offense has a chance of carrying us for a few weeks.
by death of the cool on May 11, 2009 5:15 PM CDT reply actions
yeah
gotta figure that:
murphy will hit somewhere between how he’s been hitting this past week and how he was hitting before
davis will cut back on strikeouts and make contact
other than his little slump, kins is about where he should be i guess
salty has gotten better (hopefully he can get even better)
hamilton has got to be better when he gets back
if andrus has hitting numbers where they are right now at the end of the year, i’ll be happy.
cruz has outstanding power, but strikes out a lot and doesn’t get on base. that can probably change a little.
byrd is pretty much where he’s been the past several seasons
young has been overperforming a little
blalock? outstanding ops, but that’s is like 80% home runs, can he sustain that pace for 47 homers??? lol
jones is overperforming, i think
while most of the hitters are either underperforming and will surely get betters, you gotta believe that francisco will blow a save or 2 and will allow a run eventually. millwood will come back to earth. holland hasn’t really had his wake up moment in the big leagues yet, how will he come back from that. odday ain’t as good as he has been.
OR…the hitters will get better and the pitchers will stay right where they are. that would be awesome.
Omar Vizquel: your starting shortstop for the 2009 AL all-star team.
?!?!?!
Is this supposed to be sarcasm?
davis will cut back on strikeouts and make contact
cruz has outstanding power, but strikes out a lot and doesn’t get on base. that can probably change a little.
Davis – 47.1% K rate (different from ESPN I calculated), .289 OBP
Cruz – 25.6% K rate, .328 OBP
R
no
cruz strikes out a lot and doesn’t get on base enough. that will change some.
saying the same about davis is stating the obvious. i think he will get better too though.
Omar Vizquel: your starting shortstop for the 2009 AL all-star team.
Is your post supposed to be?
It wasn’t a direct comparison, he was just going down the list making comments relative to their performance thus far.
Davis SHOULD cut back on his K% (hes not breaking the K record by 70) and make BETTER contact at least.
Cruz does strike a lot and a .328 obp isnt particularly good.
And why do you put “R” after every post when you know your name is attached anyway?
the preceding post was a great success.
that's his thing
he’s always done that.
"if my kid said 'uhh' that much, i would say, Hey! ... stop saying 'uhh' that much..." - dennis miller
Hmmmm
someone seems to be looking to pick a fight with me for some reason.
Had a bad day?
Davis COULD cut back on his K%, or he could keep K’ing at a similar rate and get sent to the minors.
No, Cruz’s OBP isn’t particularly good and he does K a lot.
I just found the dichotomy between the two comments significantly different. So much so that I was wondering if he was being sarcastic (which he informs me he was not).
I put an R mainly because of habit. I’ve been doing it for as long as I’ve been posting on message boards on the internet (some of the people from the old ESPN boards probably remember me doing something similar). It’s sort of like a sig before there were sigs, but since there are sigs here, it’s become more of a habit.
Someone else called me douche about it, but he was never able to articulate any reason why.
R
So you ask if post "!?!?!?!, is this supposed to be sarcasm" in response to a reasonable post
And Im looking to pick a fight?
Read my post again. Having a bad day? What are you talking about? Because I asked why you post an initial after your name? Newsflash: noone else does, its a little weird. I didn’t call you any names over it.
I said Davis should cut back on his K’s, and he should. His K % now would surely be a mlb record and is far greater than his % last year or in the minors. There is a slim to none chance he actually K’s 48% or whatever from here on. He could keep it up in the same sense that Evan Longoria could actually get 200 something RBIs. He could, but he won’t.
the preceding post was a great success.
Well
in my view, it didn’t make sense. So, if you want to look at it from my perspective, it wasn’t quite “reasonable.” He clarified in his response, so I understand where he was coming from.
In my view, when YOU make an assumption of what the guy is trying to say and then argue against it, it seems to me that you’re trying to just be argumentative. It might not be what you intend, but that’s how I see it. Others may not get that impression.
For example the BABIP thing. I’m not sure what hot streak the guy is talking about, nor do I think his argument is sound, but by picking your own interpretation of what HIS hot streak is and then arguing against an argument he didn’t necessarily make, it sounds like you’re arguing just to argue.
And IMO, a non-argumentative version of what you said, basically could have been:
I think he was just going down the list making comments relative to their performance thus far.
Davis SHOULD cut back on his K% (hes not breaking the K record by 70) and make BETTER contact at least.
Cruz does strike a lot and a .328 obp isnt particularly good.
BTW, why do you put "R" after every post when your name is right below every post?
R
So you make my post ever so slightly less direct.
When I’m replying to your post that started:
?!?!?!
Is this supposed to be sarcasm?"
Humorous.
I find it amusing that such subtle changes deemed calling me out when there are legitimate trolls on this website. I have a 17.5 thousand post history of getting along with people on this site, I don’t care for you starting a PERSONAL argument with me over a simple baseball point and trying to deem it my character issue.
the preceding post was a great success.
Character issue? Calling you out?
Jeez. You don’t take ANY criticism well, do you?
Let’s just put it this way, you hit me on my pet peeve of MISREPRESENTING OTHER PEOPLE’S ARGUMENTS.
If you don’t want to do to change that, fine. Don’t change.
I’ve tried to phrase things carefully, showing that I’m not generalizing or “making character issues” or personalizing things, but you seem to want to take offense even though I’m trying to not offend.
I know that my use of language could be improved, but I didn’t realize I’m THAT bad. Maybe I should never just call ’em like I see them.
Oh wait, you seem to think that’s good. Have I just offended you again? Crap.
R
So to prove that I am easily offended
You go completely berserk on me.
Humorous.
the preceding post was a great success.
I'm not trying to prove you're easily offended
If you feel that I am, well, there’s nothing I can do to change your mind.
All I can say is that was not the intention.
R
My conclusion after reviewing this entire thread.
You got mad at me for questioning the posting of “R” after your posts.
Only logical explanation.
the preceding post was a great success.
Hmmmm
maybe the problem, is that there’s more than one possible explanation to various behaviors.
Though in your eyes, there seems to be only one.
R
I said "logical" explanation.
I’m sure you can come up with a few illogical ones.
the preceding post was a great success.
Sophmore slump!
Not worried about Davis one bit. Hamilton is who I’m interested in. If he can comeback to pre-homerun derby numbers this team will be tough to beat.
"So, is there any tread left on the tires? Or at this point would it be like throwing a hot dog down a hallway?"
i hate days off
that 20 day stretch spoiled me with ranger baseball.
If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to save the infant's life without even considering if there are men on base. ~Dave Barry
Why would he?
4/10/09 - Josh Hamilton's last walk.
"You know a pitching prospect isn't any good if John Daniels doesn't trade him away but keeps him insteaad." - http://crops.mlblogs.com/
"You probably can throw Neftali Feliz on that group of overblown Rangers pitching prospect failures." - http://crops.mlblogs.com/
Because winning a World Series and fielding competetive teams year after year is the yucky and gross.
Duh.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
You want the mustache on or off? ... ... ... Too bad.
by thedirkatron on May 11, 2009 8:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Just that type of personality
You wonder if the players don’t tune it out after a while. The core has been together for quite some time now. It will probably be a fun trading deadline in Chicago.
They're all of 3.5 out in a division without a dominant team.
Let’s hold off on the “Break ’em up!” talk for now.
And I’d think all managers run the risk of being tuned out after a while. I don’t know why Ozzie would be particularly susceptible to it. In fact you could probably make a pretty good argument the other way.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
You want the mustache on or off? ... ... ... Too bad.
by thedirkatron on May 11, 2009 9:10 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm not suggesting they should fire Ozzie
I’m more curious about the there relationship. It would be quite a reach to say they’re are championship contenders, 3.5 games out or not. They are neither building something special nor are on the verge of something special.
I think they're a little better than you seem to be saying.
And I also subscribe to theory that says you strive to make the playoffs whenever possible cause the short series make them a crapshoot, at least as compared to the regular season.
They’ve got a good back end of the bullpen (Thornton, Dotel and Jenks) two pretty good starters (Danks, Burly) and some nice offensive weapons when/if they get going (keeping Dye healthy would obviously be huge…).
Plus they have two nice looking prospects coming up in White Beckham and Poreda, though Poreda needs to watch it with all the walks so far.
They were dumb to let Vasquez and Swisher go for essentially nothing but contract relief, though.
I agree they seem to be operating in that dangerous state of limbo between going for it and rebuilding, but they’re not in bad shape or anything like that.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
You want the mustache on or off? ... ... ... Too bad.
by thedirkatron on May 11, 2009 9:54 PM CDT up reply actions
If he hasn't by now, I don't see why he would any time soon
Ozzie has been relatively sane so far this season and isn’t doing as poorly as he was in 2007 when he still kept his job. Those 2 deserve each other
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
Unlikely Sheets will sign before the draft.
Heh, yeah, I guess you could say that.
G G G E-flat_______ F F F D__________....
Oh, god damn it.
I’m bored as hell waiting for my food to settle so I can head to the gym and so I give in and reluctantly head over to read TR’s latest crapfest and this what I find in the very first answer.
He’s a left-hander who doesn’t throw hard but has excellent secondary pitches and a good feel for pitching. The Rangers have enough big arms in their system. It’s time for a college pitcher with some polish who can balance that out.
Shit like this reminds me why I no longer read TR.
That’s gotta be the supidest “logic” I’ve heard in quite some time.
“We have enough potential #1 starters in the system, we need to balance that out with some potential 3/4’s!!!”
FU, TR. You deserves to taste each and every last one of my many greasy butt-hole hairs.
TR no longer serves any purpose but to be dumb about baseball.
The 40 Trumps All!!!
You want the mustache on or off? ... ... ... Too bad.
Glad I'm not the only one who feels this way.
"That start was like somebody on a deathbed suddenly jumping up and doing the Lindy Hop, then speeding away on a pogo stick while playing the fiddle." - Telegraph
count yourself among many
If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to save the infant's life without even considering if there are men on base. ~Dave Barry
It's kind of sad
I remember before his MLB gig, that he seemed to actually care to ask smart questions and look for answers…..
Now, I just get the impression of someone just mailing it in.
R
one thing that I haven't seen written about Davis
He’s really young, like only nine months older than Smoak.
Doctor please. Some more of these.
And in those 9 months
He has already proven he can’t hit ML pitching, sucks at life, and should be replaced by Smoak.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
-The Outlaw
haha
The 40 Trumps All!!!
You want the mustache on or off? ... ... ... Too bad.
by thedirkatron on May 11, 2009 9:55 PM CDT up reply actions
What can you say
He is a doer, one of those folks who lives life at full swing
Anybody else check out the Fangraphs
in season ZiPs projection for every player. Good stuff, Im not sure how much, if any, stock to put into them, but they are fun to look at….
Here are some quick Ranger numbers:
CD: .252/.308/.502 with 36 HRs and 189 Ks… not terrible, but i would hope his BA and OBP would be better.
EA: .250/.303/.337 not horrendous, but after watching him so far this year, I think and hope elvis can reach an OPS over .700 this season.
"The House That Ruth Built, 85 years old, goes out as The House That Hamilton Knocked Down"
some more to look at:
Nellie: .279/.346/.525 with 33 HRs… Thats a pretty legit season, its pretty insane if we can hope for this continued production in the along with an improved CD, Smoak, Hamilton, and Kinsler add in whoever comes out as our C option
"The House That Ruth Built, 85 years old, goes out as The House That Hamilton Knocked Down"
ZiPS is good, but in recent history, it has been less successful than several other projection systems and even, I believe, a couple subjective humans.
So, take that as you will.
Hey philkid
Do you have a link or info at what projection systems did better?
So far, the Zip projection for hitters have been pretty good, but the pitching has been totally off.
OTOH, probably most of the projections missed on the pitchers that I drafted in my fantasy league (Beckett, Shields, Big Unit, Maine)…..
Thanks,
R
I don't have a link readily available.
But I know if you search zips at Vegas Watch, you’ll get a lot of info.
yea, im not sure how accurate it is, just
fun to look at.
"The House That Ruth Built, 85 years old, goes out as The House That Hamilton Knocked Down"
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Lone Star Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
