Monday, April 20, 2009
Yeah, That Could Totally Be It. That, Or He Isn't On Steriods Anymore...
From Jayson Stark's article "Reality or Illusion?":
--Ugly. David Ortiz (.170 AVG., 1 extra-base hit, 14 K, 8 hits) -- REALITY: Every scout we've talked to who has seen Ortiz is downright alarmed by his vanishing bat speed. "He's starting to go quick," one scout said. "His body is breaking down on him. He isn't even catching up to average fastballs, and he's not even driving the ball the other way. If he can't hit the fastball, they're going to eat him alive. I don't think he's going to be a .170 hitter. But he's not a guy who can carry a club -- not anymore."
Boy oh boy Jimmy, this is a gosh-darned muckety muck. I mean, gee willikers, I just don't understand! It's not like he was a 20-HR guy before he went to Boston and then blew u...wait, he was? He did, in fact, go from having a career-high of 20 home runs, then the very next year hit 31? Then 41 after that one? Then 47 after that one? Then 54 after that one? Then all the way down to 35 again*?
*Side note: I was suprised to see his OPS+ actually increased the year he started to come back to earth with his HR totals. Interesting. Whatever. He's clearly a steriod guy.
Some other notes form Stark's column:
The Bad: Roy Oswalt (0-2, 4.26, only 10 K in 19 IP) -- REALITY: After two messy starts, Oswalt threw six shutout innings against the Reds on Friday. But the baseball community no longer talks about him with anywhere near the reverence it used to. "He's definitely now more heart that stuff," one NL executive said. "I love him, but I think the arrow is pointing down. He used to have an overpowering fastball. Now it's not there. His curve is still a good pitch. But it's not a power strikeout pitch. He still has good enough stuff, but he lacks that put-away stuff he used to have."
Huh. Weird. Oh well, at least all those preseason mags were stupid and the Astros are surprising peop....wait, what's that? The Astros are 4-8? Good enough for dead last? Really?!? Because Mayfield was telling me they were going to be awesome. Can't believe he would be wrong when trying to speak about his favorite team's chances this year without an ounce of objectivity.
OK, to be fair....
The Bad: Derrek Lee (.217 AVG., 283 OBP, .348 slugging percentage) -- REALITY: We had a couple of "illusion" votes on Lee, but they didn't carry anywhere near the conviction of the people who think this man is fading. "This is a tough one, but Derrek Lee might really be slowing down," one front-office man said. "He's only 33 years old, but his power completely dropped off in the second half last year, as did his other numbers." Another variation of the same theme: "He really hasn't been the same guy since getting hurt [a broken wrist in 2006]."
It didn't look good the first week or two, but Lee may be coming on here. His last 7 days splits have seen his SLG go from .381 to .556, and subsequently has seen his OPS go from .687 to .871.
I know most people want to write off D-Lee, and I'm pretty close myself. But I'm not ready to yet. He may just be warming up.
Ryan Oswalt, though? Yeah, he's totally through.
Enjoy the rest of your Monday, nerds!
--Ugly. David Ortiz (.170 AVG., 1 extra-base hit, 14 K, 8 hits) -- REALITY: Every scout we've talked to who has seen Ortiz is downright alarmed by his vanishing bat speed. "He's starting to go quick," one scout said. "His body is breaking down on him. He isn't even catching up to average fastballs, and he's not even driving the ball the other way. If he can't hit the fastball, they're going to eat him alive. I don't think he's going to be a .170 hitter. But he's not a guy who can carry a club -- not anymore."
Boy oh boy Jimmy, this is a gosh-darned muckety muck. I mean, gee willikers, I just don't understand! It's not like he was a 20-HR guy before he went to Boston and then blew u...wait, he was? He did, in fact, go from having a career-high of 20 home runs, then the very next year hit 31? Then 41 after that one? Then 47 after that one? Then 54 after that one? Then all the way down to 35 again*?
*Side note: I was suprised to see his OPS+ actually increased the year he started to come back to earth with his HR totals. Interesting. Whatever. He's clearly a steriod guy.
Some other notes form Stark's column:
The Bad: Roy Oswalt (0-2, 4.26, only 10 K in 19 IP) -- REALITY: After two messy starts, Oswalt threw six shutout innings against the Reds on Friday. But the baseball community no longer talks about him with anywhere near the reverence it used to. "He's definitely now more heart that stuff," one NL executive said. "I love him, but I think the arrow is pointing down. He used to have an overpowering fastball. Now it's not there. His curve is still a good pitch. But it's not a power strikeout pitch. He still has good enough stuff, but he lacks that put-away stuff he used to have."
Huh. Weird. Oh well, at least all those preseason mags were stupid and the Astros are surprising peop....wait, what's that? The Astros are 4-8? Good enough for dead last? Really?!? Because Mayfield was telling me they were going to be awesome. Can't believe he would be wrong when trying to speak about his favorite team's chances this year without an ounce of objectivity.
OK, to be fair....
The Bad: Derrek Lee (.217 AVG., 283 OBP, .348 slugging percentage) -- REALITY: We had a couple of "illusion" votes on Lee, but they didn't carry anywhere near the conviction of the people who think this man is fading. "This is a tough one, but Derrek Lee might really be slowing down," one front-office man said. "He's only 33 years old, but his power completely dropped off in the second half last year, as did his other numbers." Another variation of the same theme: "He really hasn't been the same guy since getting hurt [a broken wrist in 2006]."
It didn't look good the first week or two, but Lee may be coming on here. His last 7 days splits have seen his SLG go from .381 to .556, and subsequently has seen his OPS go from .687 to .871.
I know most people want to write off D-Lee, and I'm pretty close myself. But I'm not ready to yet. He may just be warming up.
Ryan Oswalt, though? Yeah, he's totally through.
Enjoy the rest of your Monday, nerds!
Labels: Boston Red Sox, Chicago Cubs, David Ortiz, Derrek Lee, Houston Astros, Roy Boy Oswalt
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Stating the REALLY Obvious: Mike & Mike In The Morning Is Really Annoying
Again, I feel like I'm just pissing in the wind here, but...Mike Greenberg is really, really annoying.
This morning he breathlessly threw out the hyperbole:
"Alex Rodriguez is having the best start to a season in the history of baseball."
Jesus Christ. How can you be just months from completely throwing this guy under the bus to hero-worshipping him? Especially when it is ultimately leading to the Yankees having an 8-10 record and 4 games back from first (sitting in fourth place, half a game in front of Tampa Bay)?
Not only that, but can we really say this is the best start to a season ever? I mean, I'm sure ol' Greeny poured over hours of web time on Baseball Prospectus and everything, but I'm guessing that there have been similar starts. Hell, here are some in very recent history. I'll have a little guessing game...I left out the games played and home runs here because it would be obvious:
Any guesses? Would you say, looking at these stats (in order to see them better, click on the picture and you can actually read the numbers), that one line is the "best start in the history of baseball?" Of course you wouldn't. You wouldn't because, dear Heavy Souler, you are one of sound judgement and rational opinion-making.
So, have you decided who applies to what line? Like I said, these stat lines are from recent history. And when I say recent history, I mean the years 2005, 2006, and 2007. The players are Derrek Lee (2005), Albert Pujols (2006), and A-Rod (2007).
How could you possibly suggest that the greatest start in the history of Major League Baseball--keep in mind, that spans over 131 years--could be incredibly similar to the best starts of the past two years? If it were the best start in the history of baseball, A-Rod's numbers would be about 20% better in virtually every category over the best starts of the past two years. In fact, I would argue that--unless A-Rod stays as hot or gets hotter over the next six games remaining in April--Albert Pujols had the all-around better month. And Derrek Lee's 2005 start could certainly be favorably compared, especially in the "pure hitter" sense.
Again, to people like Mike Greenberg and the majority of those at ESPN, all that matters is the East Coast, and in baseball, that just means Boston and New York. As long as a player hits a bunch of home runs in the month of April and they have a "B" or a "NY" on their hat, it translates into "the greatest start in baseball history."
It is utterly ridiculous, and beyond me that these guys NEVER get called out on stuff like this by ANYONE that joins them on the air. In the era of instant gratification and the need to have up-to-the-minute news five minutes ago, these type of people get a free pass. Well, not anymore, fuckers! Heavy Soul is on your ass!
This morning he breathlessly threw out the hyperbole:
"Alex Rodriguez is having the best start to a season in the history of baseball."
Jesus Christ. How can you be just months from completely throwing this guy under the bus to hero-worshipping him? Especially when it is ultimately leading to the Yankees having an 8-10 record and 4 games back from first (sitting in fourth place, half a game in front of Tampa Bay)?
Not only that, but can we really say this is the best start to a season ever? I mean, I'm sure ol' Greeny poured over hours of web time on Baseball Prospectus and everything, but I'm guessing that there have been similar starts. Hell, here are some in very recent history. I'll have a little guessing game...I left out the games played and home runs here because it would be obvious:
Any guesses? Would you say, looking at these stats (in order to see them better, click on the picture and you can actually read the numbers), that one line is the "best start in the history of baseball?" Of course you wouldn't. You wouldn't because, dear Heavy Souler, you are one of sound judgement and rational opinion-making.
So, have you decided who applies to what line? Like I said, these stat lines are from recent history. And when I say recent history, I mean the years 2005, 2006, and 2007. The players are Derrek Lee (2005), Albert Pujols (2006), and A-Rod (2007).
How could you possibly suggest that the greatest start in the history of Major League Baseball--keep in mind, that spans over 131 years--could be incredibly similar to the best starts of the past two years? If it were the best start in the history of baseball, A-Rod's numbers would be about 20% better in virtually every category over the best starts of the past two years. In fact, I would argue that--unless A-Rod stays as hot or gets hotter over the next six games remaining in April--Albert Pujols had the all-around better month. And Derrek Lee's 2005 start could certainly be favorably compared, especially in the "pure hitter" sense.
Again, to people like Mike Greenberg and the majority of those at ESPN, all that matters is the East Coast, and in baseball, that just means Boston and New York. As long as a player hits a bunch of home runs in the month of April and they have a "B" or a "NY" on their hat, it translates into "the greatest start in baseball history."
It is utterly ridiculous, and beyond me that these guys NEVER get called out on stuff like this by ANYONE that joins them on the air. In the era of instant gratification and the need to have up-to-the-minute news five minutes ago, these type of people get a free pass. Well, not anymore, fuckers! Heavy Soul is on your ass!
Labels: Albert Pujols, Alex Rodriguez, Annoying, baseball, Chicago Cubs, Derrek Lee, Douche Bags, ESPN, Mike and Mike in the Morning, New York Yankees, St. Louis Cardinals, Statistics, Sucking
Term Papers
