|
|
Post by rvn11 on Sept 10, 2024 14:21:23 GMT -5
I think this offseason it's time to trade some prospect depth for impact players at the MLB level. I know going back to the Theo era they talked about waves and waves of prospects, and it appears that Jed likes that mantra as well. That's a great idea, but at some point you need some studs rather than a bunch of role players. Unfortunately Hawkins time in Cleveland seems to portray yet another slow and steady type mentality where they didn't make aggressive moves, so I doubt he and Jed break it open at any point. Move some prospects for a stud pitcher or hitter, somebody to carry one side of the game. There are too many prospects to make it at the big league level, time to get some value out of them, or trade a veteran that's not cutting it. No more rentals, get someone that can be had long term to rely upon for this team. Pick a lane and go, like Milwaukee did with Yelich.
Hard to say who or what that type of player is. Vlad Jr. could potentially be had but he wouldn't come cheap, and then you're paying twice in a trade and a contract extension. I'm not certain of a contract year guy like Santander and he's not all that young either. Doubt they go after Alonso but his bat would help.
Crazy idea, but I'd like to see them pry Jake Burger away from Miami. Something of an under the radar type bat that could take off. That franchise is going nowhere, give them a return on their trade from the White Sox and bring in a bat that can help make this offense go. Split him at 3b, 1b and DH and with an impact FA signing and this lineup looks much different.
|
|
|
|
Post by thisbuds4u on Sept 10, 2024 14:33:49 GMT -5
The one area the Cubs can improve is the bench. They are pretty well set defensively with their starting 8 but they need more offensive production than what they are getting from their reserves. With the DH, the bench really isn't used that much. If anything, with the DH, you probably want more defensive-minded or defensive versatility on your bench. You've basically got 3 roster spots for your bench (9 everyday batters + 13 pitchers + 1 backup catcher = 23 players). You need at least one backup outfielder and one backup infielder. That leaves you with 1 spot. Ideally, your backup outfielder can play CF - because if you can play CF, then you can play the corners as well. Ideally your backup infielder can play SS, because if you can play SS you can probably play all of the other infield spots. If anything, you want that last roster spot to also be an infielder, since it's a whole lot easier for an infielder to go out and play the outfield if they have to, than for an outfielder to come in and play the infield. Looking at the roster for 2025, you set your 9 everyday players (whoever that might be), your 13 pitchers, and your backup catcher (again, whoever that is). Roster spot #24 probably goes to Tauchman or someone like Tauchman. Roster spot #25 I would give to Vazquez - can play anywhere and is well regarded defensively. He showed a little bit of hitting in the minors, but has never been given the chance to prove it at the major league level. Roster spot #26 is up in the air. If he's still on the roster, I might lean towards Mastrobouni simply because of his positional versatility. But Vazquez also fills that role, so it's not absolutely necessary. Having an exclusive offensive player on your bench... I think is mostly wasted, like Wisdom. He's only going to get a handful of at-bats in a week and you're just not going to get any offensive rhythm doing that. That's one reason why I think Wisdom's numbers are down a bit. Wisdom was never going to light the world on fire. But with regular playing time, a batting average just a bit above .200 and an OBP around .300, and probably a modest increase of his SLG, meaning an OPS of around .730, I don't think is out of the question. But because he's gotten irregular at-bats his numbers have dipped. That's fine if you can recognize that production out of your 26th roster spot, but at his salary I don't think he's worth it (and they had a similar, albeit less slug, already being paid before the 2024 season started - Bote). With injuries, rest days and a manager who plays the righty/lefty matchups, the Cubs need better offensive production from their bench. A collection of bench players who can't hit over .200 doesn't cut it. |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Sept 10, 2024 15:34:01 GMT -5
I think this offseason it's time to trade some prospect depth for impact players at the MLB level. I know going back to the Theo era they talked about waves and waves of prospects, and it appears that Jed likes that mantra as well. That's a great idea, but at some point you need some studs rather than a bunch of role players. Unfortunately Hawkins time in Cleveland seems to portray yet another slow and steady type mentality where they didn't make aggressive moves, so I doubt he and Jed break it open at any point. Move some prospects for a stud pitcher or hitter, somebody to carry one side of the game. There are too many prospects to make it at the big league level, time to get some value out of them, or trade a veteran that's not cutting it. No more rentals, get someone that can be had long term to rely upon for this team. Pick a lane and go, like Milwaukee did with Yelich. Hard to say who or what that type of player is. Vlad Jr. could potentially be had but he wouldn't come cheap, and then you're paying twice in a trade and a contract extension. I'm not certain of a contract year guy like Santander and he's not all that young either. Doubt they go after Alonso but his bat would help. Crazy idea, but I'd like to see them pry Jake Burger away from Miami. Something of an under the radar type bat that could take off. That franchise is going nowhere, give them a return on their trade from the White Sox and bring in a bat that can help make this offense go. Split him at 3b, 1b and DH and with an impact FA signing and this lineup looks much different. I'd rather have Burger than Parades , but even though the Cubs need slug , Burger isn't really an answer to that , he's pretty much another of what they already have, Happ .458 Burger .451 Seiya .471 Belly ,427 Busch .434 And I'm fairly certain that Shaw is part of the 2025 roster either at 2b if Nico is traded or 3b if he isn't and then Cam Smith should be here in another year so this would be doing nothing more than clogging up a spot with a patchwork veteran again. |
|
|
|
Post by Returnofstevefitz on Sept 10, 2024 15:42:52 GMT -5
Just keep in mind, those of you who want to see Shaw, Cassie, Triantos all come up (assuming you make roster space by moving veterans and Belly opting out), these are rookies who will have growing pains during the season for 1 and maybe 2 seasons. We're moving the goal posts again? So 2027? This team is so MID it's so disappointing. Jed's tenure has been a failure. But they'll push the late season wins and just missing the postseason again. Rookies can have growing pains and still contribute as long as the others are doing their job. Stop with your goal posts shit already. The whole gist of it all is when they would try to contend and not be flipping players and that time line has clearly passed, there are never any guarantees to make the playoffs and some plans/rosters etc take longer to gel or get the right mix. Look at the Mets and the ridiculous money they spent and how shitty they were last season , they FULL OUT tried to win , just didn't have the right mix/chemistry etc and they made some changes and dumped some the the expensive talent and went with more youth and are now a playoff contender getting hot at the right time .....for now atleast. The Cubs have issues but they could also get real good , real fast as they've shown some flashes of doing and for the most part aside from Cleveland they've played the better teams pretty tough. it's not the late season wins that have me looking forward to the future, it's that guys like PCA and Amaya now look legit and could be what we were hoping for , the pen is now filled with a lot of younger power arms , not old retreads etc. A lot fo work to be done , but I still think the future is bright and I think that STUD you seek might be Cam Smith , I may be jumping the gun on what he's done but he seems like he could be a face of the franchise type guy. You're not making the postseason with Shaw, Caissie and Triantos playing every day. Stop with this shit already. I don't care about other teams, look at the Dodgers, look at the Yankees, shut up about it already with the fucking cherry picking. |
|
|
|
Post by Returnofstevefitz on Sept 10, 2024 15:47:24 GMT -5
Just keep in mind, those of you who want to see Shaw, Cassie, Triantos all come up (assuming you make roster space by moving veterans and Belly opting out), these are rookies who will have growing pains during the season for 1 and maybe 2 seasons. We're moving the goal posts again? So 2027? This team is so MID it's so disappointing. Jed's tenure has been a failure. But they'll push the late season wins and just missing the postseason again. Which is the reason I wanted to see Caissie after the all star break. Most rookies will struggle but that doesn't mean teams don't bring up rookies while they are contending. You can deal with the struggles as long as you aren't counting on them to play a major role. There's a huge difference between pinch hitting a few times a week and splitting starts. If they don't rot on the bench, hopefully by September, the struggles are mostly behind them. No, I don't think they are moving the goal posts, I just don't always agree with how they are getting there. I still think this year (and next) the Cubs were expected to compete. Exactly!!! But Batman wants to just throw 3 rookies in the fire. It's the same shit w1ith him every year. There's no way anyone can look at this roster, without adding super star talent, and honestly think this team is going anywhere. It's not minor changes that need to be made. What's the goal every year, fight just enough to maybe get the 3rd wild card spot? Gets tiring finishing 10 games behind the Brewers every season. |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Sept 10, 2024 15:51:41 GMT -5
Rookies can have growing pains and still contribute as long as the others are doing their job. Stop with your goal posts shit already. The whole gist of it all is when they would try to contend and not be flipping players and that time line has clearly passed, there are never any guarantees to make the playoffs and some plans/rosters etc take longer to gel or get the right mix. Look at the Mets and the ridiculous money they spent and how shitty they were last season , they FULL OUT tried to win , just didn't have the right mix/chemistry etc and they made some changes and dumped some the the expensive talent and went with more youth and are now a playoff contender getting hot at the right time .....for now atleast. The Cubs have issues but they could also get real good , real fast as they've shown some flashes of doing and for the most part aside from Cleveland they've played the better teams pretty tough. it's not the late season wins that have me looking forward to the future, it's that guys like PCA and Amaya now look legit and could be what we were hoping for , the pen is now filled with a lot of younger power arms , not old retreads etc. A lot fo work to be done , but I still think the future is bright and I think that STUD you seek might be Cam Smith , I may be jumping the gun on what he's done but he seems like he could be a face of the franchise type guy. You're not making the postseason with Shaw, Caissie and Triantos playing every day. Stop with this shit already. I don't care about other teams, look at the Dodgers, look at the Yankees, shut up about it already with the fucking cherry picking. Yeah , look at the Dodgers and the Yankees , loaded with huge name stars , tell me again which one of those teams has won more championships than the Cubs the last 20 years . I'll wait for you not to answer. But hey, they make the playoffs , funny how it's great when they do , but when the Cubs do the same and not win it all , it's a different story. |
|
|
|
Post by Returnofstevefitz on Sept 10, 2024 15:54:04 GMT -5
Again with the Championships bullshit. I'm not going down that rabbit hole again. You're a Cubs apologist that makes excuses for everything they do.
I refuse to fall for the banana in the tail pipe trick because they won a few games in August vs some of the worst teams in baseball.
"But hey, they make the playoffs , funny how it's great when they do , but when the Cubs do the same and not win it all , it's a different story."
But they're not making the postseason hahahahahaha
|
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Sept 10, 2024 15:56:17 GMT -5
Which is the reason I wanted to see Caissie after the all star break. Most rookies will struggle but that doesn't mean teams don't bring up rookies while they are contending. You can deal with the struggles as long as you aren't counting on them to play a major role. There's a huge difference between pinch hitting a few times a week and splitting starts. If they don't rot on the bench, hopefully by September, the struggles are mostly behind them. No, I don't think they are moving the goal posts, I just don't always agree with how they are getting there. I still think this year (and next) the Cubs were expected to compete. Exactly!!! But Batman wants to just throw 3 rookies in the fire. It's the same shit w1ith him every year. There's no way anyone can look at this roster, without adding super star talent, and honestly think this team is going anywhere. It's not minor changes that need to be made. What's the goal every year, fight just enough to maybe get the 3rd wild card spot? Gets tiring finishing 10 games behind the Brewers every season. You should write books , you are very creative , either that or you just like to make shit up and or simply can not comprehend what others type , I didn't say to start three rookies in 2025. I was talking about maybe one or more playing a big part in 2025 to make the team better, but hey they are not an all star making 250+ million so they aren't worth shit. |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Sept 10, 2024 15:58:33 GMT -5
Again with the Championships bullshit. I'm not going down that rabbit hole again. You're a Cubs apologist that makes excuses for everything they do. I refuse to fall for the banana in the tail pipe trick because they won a few games in August vs some of the worst teams in baseball. "But hey, they make the playoffs , funny how it's great when they do , but when the Cubs do the same and not win it all , it's a different story." But they're not making the postseason hahahahahaha YOU have the championship or it's a failure mentality , not me. So that's why I pull it out to remind you. I can easily go back and find posts about you saying how they've failed since 2016 , but everybody else on here already knows, maybe you forgot the things you said. |
|
|
|
Post by kfidd on Sept 10, 2024 16:05:14 GMT -5
OBP tells you a player reached base, nothing more. Batting average indicates how successful a player is when he puts the ball in play. Happ has walked 71 times and struck out 156 times. Turner has walked 26 times and struck out 84 times. OBP, SLG and OPS are almost identical this season not their career numbers. If anything Happ's numbers are inflated because of BBs. With RISP, Happ-.246, Turner-.289, and Arraez-.376 this year. With the game on the line, I would rather have Arraez up over Happ because he is more likely to successfully put the ball in play. While Happ gets himself in scoring position more often than Arraez, Arraez does a far better job of driving in that run by a huge margin. If you look at BBs and Ks combined, who is less likely to put the ball in play? And again, Happ leads by a wide margin over Turner and Arraez. You are correct that OBP purely tells you that a player has reached base which is why I used OPS. Some players will slug more as part of their OPS, others simply get on base. But at the end of the day Happ has far more successfully ended up in scoring position (numbers provided previously) as well as driven in runners than Arraez has despite the difference in batting average. Happ - 150 pa with RISP, 62 RBI, 41.3% of those plate appearances (and that includes the walks) resulted in 1 RBI Arraez - 109 pa with RISP, 36 RBI, just 33.0% Batting average without slug doesn’t equate to much. You have to have the ability to drive the ball and get yourself into scoring position. Batting average alone will never indicate slug. But slug itself is not the only stat that matters either, you need to have some ability to get on base or else you end up Patrick Wisdom. Batting average and on base both do that. But only OPS combines getting on base with slugging. Bonus: you know what else high contact with low slugging provides (which is the exact outcome of Arraez and his high batting average but low OPS)? Lots of twin killings. 2024 GIDP Happ: 6 Arraez: 18 Huge difference between a guy with a high batting average but low OPS like Arraez vs Judge but we aren’t talking about that. We are talking about batting average being indicative of anything meaningful by itself. And it isn’t. By preferring Arraez in those RISP opportunities all you’ve done is missed out on 8-9% more RBIs not to mention a player who has gotten himself into scoring position (and scored more runs in fewer plate appearances) more frequently. |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Sept 10, 2024 16:08:00 GMT -5
Again with the Championships bullshit. I'm not going down that rabbit hole again. You're a Cubs apologist that makes excuses for everything they do. I refuse to fall for the banana in the tail pipe trick because they won a few games in August vs some of the worst teams in baseball. "But hey, they make the playoffs , funny how it's great when they do , but when the Cubs do the same and not win it all , it's a different story." But they're not making the postseason hahahahahaha Just like Jed needs to pick a lane, so do you. Is making the playoffs a success , or do you have to win it all to be a success? If you feel that making the playoffs is , then I would stop with the Championship stuff , but you keep moving your "goal posts" about what a contender is and what a successful season is. Your whole mentality seems to fluctuate , seems like you get a strange enjoyment out of finding a way to be disappointed with an ending to a Cubs season . |
|
|
|
Post by cfin on Sept 10, 2024 16:33:55 GMT -5
You are correct that OBP purely tells you that a player has reached base which is why I used OPS. Some players will slug more as part of their OPS, others simply get on base. But at the end of the day Happ has far more successfully ended up in scoring position (numbers provided previously) as well as driven in runners than Arraez has despite the difference in batting average. Happ - 150 pa with RISP, 62 RBI, 41.3% of those plate appearances (and that includes the walks) resulted in 1 RBI Arraez - 109 pa with RISP, 36 RBI, just 33.0% Batting average without slug doesn’t equate to much. You have to have the ability to drive the ball and get yourself into scoring position. Batting average alone will never indicate slug. But slug itself is not the only stat that matters either, you need to have some ability to get on base or else you end up Patrick Wisdom. Batting average and on base both do that. But only OPS combines getting on base with slugging. Bonus: you know what else high contact with low slugging provides (which is the exact outcome of Arraez and his high batting average but low OPS)? Lots of twin killings. 2024 GIDP Happ: 6 Arraez: 18 Huge difference between a guy with a high batting average but low OPS like Arraez vs Judge but we aren’t talking about that. We are talking about batting average being indicative of anything meaningful by itself. And it isn’t. By preferring Arraez in those RISP opportunities all you’ve done is missed out on 8-9% more RBIs not to mention a player who has gotten himself into scoring position (and scored more runs in fewer plate appearances) more frequently. Another way to look at this is to consider Almora, Madrigal, Baez, and Hoerner. None of them walk a ton, so their OBP is largely based on their batting average. Almora and Madrigal couldn't slug. And they couldn't walk. This was especially true with Almora, he grounded into a ton of double plays. In today's game, if you're not walking then you are swinging at a lot of pitches out of the zone. Almora (and to a lesser extent Madrigal) would do this but didn't have a lot to show for it. Just because you CAN make contact with that pitch 6 inches off the plate, doesn't mean it's a good idea to make contact. If all you are going to is roll over on it, then you're not being productive. Baez (at least his time with the Cubs.. most of it) he wouldn't take a walk either. He would make contact with those pitches 6 inches off the plate... but he could drive those pitches a lot of times. He struck out a lot and that made it frustrating when he struck out on those pitches off the plate, but he could also hit some balls very far on pitches that were no where near the strike zone. Hoerner has the best attributes of all of these. He doesn't walk (although my gut feeling is he walks better than any of the others mentioned). He doesn't slug a lot, but he slugs just enough. Those pitches 6 inches off the plate that he swings at and makes contact, he can usually get just enough of them to dump them into the outfield. He does roll over on some, but he's much better than Almora and Madrigal considering he doesn't walk a lot. So players that don't accept their walks usually fall into one of these 3 types of categories. There are very few Hoerners out there that can find that happy medium with contact and enough slug to get hits, without swinging for the fences all the time and striking out. For a player to be successful in today's game, they largely have to be willing to accept their walks. And that's why OBP tends to be a more telling stat than AVG. Now... just because you can accept your walk and get on-base, that doesn't mean you're being productive. That's largely where I have issues with Happ - although, truth be told he's put together a nice couple of months, but he was no where to be found in May, June, and July. Happ would take his walks. And certainly better to walk than make an out. But his walks didn't really lead to the team being very productive. There's a school of thought that striking out a bit instead of taking your walks will help you slug. Reason being that pitchers will think they can get you to strikeout and leave pitches closer to the zone. I have to wonder what kind of numbers Bonds and Pujols would have put up (steroids not withstanding) had they offered at a few of those pitches just off the zone and tricked pitchers to think they could strike them out. That's probably a bit of extreme thinking but there is a school of thought there. |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Sept 10, 2024 17:25:02 GMT -5
You are correct that OBP purely tells you that a player has reached base which is why I used OPS. Some players will slug more as part of their OPS, others simply get on base. But at the end of the day Happ has far more successfully ended up in scoring position (numbers provided previously) as well as driven in runners than Arraez has despite the difference in batting average. Happ - 150 pa with RISP, 62 RBI, 41.3% of those plate appearances (and that includes the walks) resulted in 1 RBI Arraez - 109 pa with RISP, 36 RBI, just 33.0% Batting average without slug doesn’t equate to much. You have to have the ability to drive the ball and get yourself into scoring position. Batting average alone will never indicate slug. But slug itself is not the only stat that matters either, you need to have some ability to get on base or else you end up Patrick Wisdom. Batting average and on base both do that. But only OPS combines getting on base with slugging. Bonus: you know what else high contact with low slugging provides (which is the exact outcome of Arraez and his high batting average but low OPS)? Lots of twin killings. 2024 GIDP Happ: 6 Arraez: 18 Huge difference between a guy with a high batting average but low OPS like Arraez vs Judge but we aren’t talking about that. We are talking about batting average being indicative of anything meaningful by itself. And it isn’t. By preferring Arraez in those RISP opportunities all you’ve done is missed out on 8-9% more RBIs not to mention a player who has gotten himself into scoring position (and scored more runs in fewer plate appearances) more frequently. Another way to look at this is to consider Almora, Madrigal, Baez, and Hoerner. None of them walk a ton, so their OBP is largely based on their batting average. Almora and Madrigal couldn't slug. And they couldn't walk. This was especially true with Almora, he grounded into a ton of double plays. In today's game, if you're not walking then you are swinging at a lot of pitches out of the zone. Almora (and to a lesser extent Madrigal) would do this but didn't have a lot to show for it. Just because you CAN make contact with that pitch 6 inches off the plate, doesn't mean it's a good idea to make contact. If all you are going to is roll over on it, then you're not being productive. Baez (at least his time with the Cubs.. most of it) he wouldn't take a walk either. He would make contact with those pitches 6 inches off the plate... but he could drive those pitches a lot of times. He struck out a lot and that made it frustrating when he struck out on those pitches off the plate, but he could also hit some balls very far on pitches that were no where near the strike zone. Hoerner has the best attributes of all of these. He doesn't walk (although my gut feeling is he walks better than any of the others mentioned). He doesn't slug a lot, but he slugs just enough. Those pitches 6 inches off the plate that he swings at and makes contact, he can usually get just enough of them to dump them into the outfield. He does roll over on some, but he's much better than Almora and Madrigal considering he doesn't walk a lot. So players that don't accept their walks usually fall into one of these 3 types of categories. There are very few Hoerners out there that can find that happy medium with contact and enough slug to get hits, without swinging for the fences all the time and striking out. For a player to be successful in today's game, they largely have to be willing to accept their walks. And that's why OBP tends to be a more telling stat than AVG. Now... just because you can accept your walk and get on-base, that doesn't mean you're being productive. That's largely where I have issues with Happ - although, truth be told he's put together a nice couple of months, but he was no where to be found in May, June, and July. Happ would take his walks. And certainly better to walk than make an out. But his walks didn't really lead to the team being very productive. There's a school of thought that striking out a bit instead of taking your walks will help you slug. Reason being that pitchers will think they can get you to strikeout and leave pitches closer to the zone. I have to wonder what kind of numbers Bonds and Pujols would have put up (steroids not withstanding) had they offered at a few of those pitches just off the zone and tricked pitchers to think they could strike them out. That's probably a bit of extreme thinking but there is a school of thought there. a prime example to me would be Joey Votto with the walks making him a lot less productive. I know there were some years that Reds fans got on him for seeming to fall in love with taking walks when he could have been bashing more homers and could have driven in a lot more runs. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2024 18:57:19 GMT -5
A prime example to me would be Joey Votto with the walks making him a lot less productive. I know there were some years that Reds fans got on him for seeming to fall in love with taking walks when he could have been bashing more homers and could have driven in a lot more runs. Just for Fun .907 24 Games .874 (84 RBI - 59 BB) .981 (84 RBI - 70 BB) 1.024 (113 RBI - 91 BB) .947 (103 RBI - 110 BB) 1.041 111 Games .926 (73 RBI - 135 BB) .799 62 Games 1.000 (80 RBI - 143 BB) .985 (97 RBI - 108 BB 1.032 (100 RBI - 134 BB) .837 (67 RBI - 108 BB) .768 (47 RBI - 76 BB) .800 54 Games
.938 (99 RBI - 78 BB)
.689 91 Games .747 65 Games.920 Career |
|
|
|
Post by thisbuds4u on Sept 11, 2024 3:27:58 GMT -5
You are correct that OBP purely tells you that a player has reached base which is why I used OPS. Some players will slug more as part of their OPS, others simply get on base. But at the end of the day Happ has far more successfully ended up in scoring position (numbers provided previously) as well as driven in runners than Arraez has despite the difference in batting average. Happ - 150 pa with RISP, 62 RBI, 41.3% of those plate appearances (and that includes the walks) resulted in 1 RBI Arraez - 109 pa with RISP, 36 RBI, just 33.0% Batting average without slug doesn’t equate to much. You have to have the ability to drive the ball and get yourself into scoring position. Batting average alone will never indicate slug. But slug itself is not the only stat that matters either, you need to have some ability to get on base or else you end up Patrick Wisdom. Batting average and on base both do that. But only OPS combines getting on base with slugging. Bonus: you know what else high contact with low slugging provides (which is the exact outcome of Arraez and his high batting average but low OPS)? Lots of twin killings. 2024 GIDP Happ: 6 Arraez: 18 Huge difference between a guy with a high batting average but low OPS like Arraez vs Judge but we aren’t talking about that. We are talking about batting average being indicative of anything meaningful by itself. And it isn’t. By preferring Arraez in those RISP opportunities all you’ve done is missed out on 8-9% more RBIs not to mention a player who has gotten himself into scoring position (and scored more runs in fewer plate appearances) more frequently. Another way to look at this is to consider Almora, Madrigal, Baez, and Hoerner. None of them walk a ton, so their OBP is largely based on their batting average. Almora and Madrigal couldn't slug. And they couldn't walk. This was especially true with Almora, he grounded into a ton of double plays. In today's game, if you're not walking then you are swinging at a lot of pitches out of the zone. Almora (and to a lesser extent Madrigal) would do this but didn't have a lot to show for it. Just because you CAN make contact with that pitch 6 inches off the plate, doesn't mean it's a good idea to make contact. If all you are going to is roll over on it, then you're not being productive. Baez (at least his time with the Cubs.. most of it) he wouldn't take a walk either. He would make contact with those pitches 6 inches off the plate... but he could drive those pitches a lot of times. He struck out a lot and that made it frustrating when he struck out on those pitches off the plate, but he could also hit some balls very far on pitches that were no where near the strike zone. Hoerner has the best attributes of all of these. He doesn't walk (although my gut feeling is he walks better than any of the others mentioned). He doesn't slug a lot, but he slugs just enough. Those pitches 6 inches off the plate that he swings at and makes contact, he can usually get just enough of them to dump them into the outfield. He does roll over on some, but he's much better than Almora and Madrigal considering he doesn't walk a lot. So players that don't accept their walks usually fall into one of these 3 types of categories. There are very few Hoerners out there that can find that happy medium with contact and enough slug to get hits, without swinging for the fences all the time and striking out. For a player to be successful in today's game, they largely have to be willing to accept their walks. And that's why OBP tends to be a more telling stat than AVG. Now... just because you can accept your walk and get on-base, that doesn't mean you're being productive. That's largely where I have issues with Happ - although, truth be told he's put together a nice couple of months, but he was no where to be found in May, June, and July. Happ would take his walks. And certainly better to walk than make an out. But his walks didn't really lead to the team being very productive. There's a school of thought that striking out a bit instead of taking your walks will help you slug. Reason being that pitchers will think they can get you to strikeout and leave pitches closer to the zone. I have to wonder what kind of numbers Bonds and Pujols would have put up (steroids not withstanding) had they offered at a few of those pitches just off the zone and tricked pitchers to think they could strike them out. That's probably a bit of extreme thinking but there is a school of thought there. Happ doesn't make enough contact. Between the walks [72] and strikeouts [158] that's 230 ABs where he hasn't put the ball in play. That's in 585 total plate appearances which is close to 40% of his ABs. |
|
|
|
Post by Returnofstevefitz on Sept 11, 2024 8:36:39 GMT -5
Again with the Championships bullshit. I'm not going down that rabbit hole again. You're a Cubs apologist that makes excuses for everything they do. I refuse to fall for the banana in the tail pipe trick because they won a few games in August vs some of the worst teams in baseball. "But hey, they make the playoffs , funny how it's great when they do , but when the Cubs do the same and not win it all , it's a different story." But they're not making the postseason hahahahahaha YOU have the championship or it's a failure mentality , not me. So that's why I pull it out to remind you. I can easily go back and find posts about you saying how they've failed since 2016 , but everybody else on here already knows, maybe you forgot the things you said. No you won't. Stop lying. All my complaints have come post COVID and you know it. I called the trading of all the core guys a rebuild, nope, you push hard on that. I said 2025 will be the first time they make the post season, you pushed VERY hard on that. You claimed by 2022 they'd be a great team again HA! After 2023 I said they had a chance to get the postseason a year sooner, this season, if they added big time players. They didn't. I said it was a 77 win team pre-Belly. They landed Belly and I said 84 win team with a peak of 87. With 17 games left I'm probably right on point with 84-87 wins. You were plus 90 and I think at one point you said 95+ or even 100  My stance has always been clear. One thing you can't argue..... unless a miracle happens, 4 straight season no postseason. But you will go on and on about how great August was. Jerry Reinsdorf loves fanes like you, so does Tommy. Just be in the race in September, whether they get in or not. |
|
|
|
Post by Returnofstevefitz on Sept 11, 2024 8:41:12 GMT -5
Another way to look at this is to consider Almora, Madrigal, Baez, and Hoerner. None of them walk a ton, so their OBP is largely based on their batting average. Almora and Madrigal couldn't slug. And they couldn't walk. This was especially true with Almora, he grounded into a ton of double plays. In today's game, if you're not walking then you are swinging at a lot of pitches out of the zone. Almora (and to a lesser extent Madrigal) would do this but didn't have a lot to show for it. Just because you CAN make contact with that pitch 6 inches off the plate, doesn't mean it's a good idea to make contact. If all you are going to is roll over on it, then you're not being productive. Baez (at least his time with the Cubs.. most of it) he wouldn't take a walk either. He would make contact with those pitches 6 inches off the plate... but he could drive those pitches a lot of times. He struck out a lot and that made it frustrating when he struck out on those pitches off the plate, but he could also hit some balls very far on pitches that were no where near the strike zone. Hoerner has the best attributes of all of these. He doesn't walk (although my gut feeling is he walks better than any of the others mentioned). He doesn't slug a lot, but he slugs just enough. Those pitches 6 inches off the plate that he swings at and makes contact, he can usually get just enough of them to dump them into the outfield. He does roll over on some, but he's much better than Almora and Madrigal considering he doesn't walk a lot. So players that don't accept their walks usually fall into one of these 3 types of categories. There are very few Hoerners out there that can find that happy medium with contact and enough slug to get hits, without swinging for the fences all the time and striking out. For a player to be successful in today's game, they largely have to be willing to accept their walks. And that's why OBP tends to be a more telling stat than AVG. Now... just because you can accept your walk and get on-base, that doesn't mean you're being productive. That's largely where I have issues with Happ - although, truth be told he's put together a nice couple of months, but he was no where to be found in May, June, and July. Happ would take his walks. And certainly better to walk than make an out. But his walks didn't really lead to the team being very productive. There's a school of thought that striking out a bit instead of taking your walks will help you slug. Reason being that pitchers will think they can get you to strikeout and leave pitches closer to the zone. I have to wonder what kind of numbers Bonds and Pujols would have put up (steroids not withstanding) had they offered at a few of those pitches just off the zone and tricked pitchers to think they could strike them out. That's probably a bit of extreme thinking but there is a school of thought there. a prime example to me would be Joey Votto with the walks making him a lot less productive. I know there were some years that Reds fans got on him for seeming to fall in love with taking walks when he could have been bashing more homers and could have driven in a lot more runs. What??? LOL |
|
|
|
Post by cfin on Sept 11, 2024 10:04:50 GMT -5
a prime example to me would be Joey Votto with the walks making him a lot less productive. I know there were some years that Reds fans got on him for seeming to fall in love with taking walks when he could have been bashing more homers and could have driven in a lot more runs. You're probably right here. Although I don't follow the Reds enough or know the details of Votto's at-bats. But the gut feeling here is that there were some years where Votto preferred walking over slugging. I don't know the specific details of all of those plate appearances, but the notion that Votto would take pitches just off the plate means that opposing pitchers were more inclined to never give him a strike (or at least a strike where he could do damage) and would just prefer to walk him. Again, I'm not saying that accepting your walks is a bad thing. But sometimes walking isn't the most productive use of your plate appearance. But I also think it's unproductive if you can never entice an opposing pitcher into thinking they can strike you out, and thus never getting a pitch to hit or be productive with. |
|
|
|
Post by cfin on Sept 11, 2024 10:19:51 GMT -5
Happ doesn't make enough contact. Between the walks [72] and strikeouts [158] that's 230 ABs where he hasn't put the ball in play. That's in 585 total plate appearances which is close to 40% of his ABs. Would you rather that Happ make contact on half of those 72 walks? What if that contact resulted in weak contact? What if there was someone on first base and that weak contact resulted in a double play? What if that weak contacted resulted in him grounding out? And thus not getting on base. Whether we like it or not, strikeouts are part of the game now. I don't want a 1-9 batting order with high strikeouts. But generally speaking, if you are going to slug, then you are going to strikeout. Strikeouts don't bother me as much as it does other people. At the very least, an opposing pitcher has to throw the batter three pitches to strike them out. If I could see the future and know that one batter is going to ground out to 2B on one pitch and another batter is going to strikeout on three pitches, I'll take the strikeout. You've made the pitcher work. Ideally... three pitches isn't a lot, so a three pitch strikeout isn't all that valuable. But if a batter can force the pitcher to throw 6 or 7 pitches and then strikes out, then there's a small victory to be had in making the pitcher work. Consequently, it takes four pitches for a pitcher to walk a batter. That's even better. You've made the pitcher work AND you didn't make an out. High walks and high strikeouts have the consequence of making the opposing pitchers work. That's something in today's game. When I'm watching Cubs game, under the best circumstances I'm looking for the Cubs offense to force the opposing pitcher to throw at least 15 pitches in an inning. More than that is even better. 12 pitches is really the absolute minimal. Any inning where the Cubs are done with less than 12 pitches being thrown in that inning is typically a failure. That's not to say that Cub hitters couldn't hit 2 homeruns and finish the inning having only 10 pitches thrown to them - they scored 2 runs so there's some good there. But there's also some good that comes from a zero run inning where the opposing pitcher throws 20 to 30 pitches. Conversely, I like it when Cubs pitchers can get through an inning with less than 15 pitches thrown. Imanaga threw what? A 4 pitching first inning last night? That's a win. |
|
|
|
Post by batman66 on Sept 11, 2024 11:02:35 GMT -5
a prime example to me would be Joey Votto with the walks making him a lot less productive. I know there were some years that Reds fans got on him for seeming to fall in love with taking walks when he could have been bashing more homers and could have driven in a lot more runs. What??? LOL Not hard to figure out that if a excellent hitter like Votto swung the bat more he'd have more homers and rbi's than he did. This was something Reds fans used to complain about , that he fell too in love with taking walks and look at his better rbi years , more rbi's than the years he had a shit ton of walks. |
|
