|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Apr 19, 2019 14:37:35 GMT -5
Yeah, but speed doesn't typically fall off that much. See, e.g., the guys mentioned in this thread above - Mays, Rickey Henderson, Ichiro... Rickey stole 66 bases at age 39. Mays stole 23 at age 40. Ichiro stole 20 at age 39, 40 at age 37. Kenny Lofton maintained his speed-based game basically until the end of his career. Etc. In short, Betts would have a long way to fall to be as slow as Martinez, and there's no reason to think he'd fall that much any time soon, if ever. Jacoby fell off a cliff, even before the injuries. So did Carl Crawford, who was a huge speed and contact guy. They fell off at the age of 30.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 19, 2019 14:39:30 GMT -5
Yeah, but speed doesn't typically fall off that much. See, e.g., the guys mentioned in this thread above - Mays, Rickey Henderson, Ichiro... Rickey stole 66 bases at age 39. Mays stole 23 at age 40. Ichiro stole 20 at age 39, 40 at age 37. Kenny Lofton maintained his speed-based game basically until the end of his career. Etc. In short, Betts would have a long way to fall to be as slow as Martinez, and there's no reason to think he'd fall that much any time soon, if ever. Jacoby fell off a cliff, even before the injuries. So did Carl Crawford, who was a huge speed and contact guy. They fell off at the age of 30. Those two had games built almost completely on speed and were much faster than Betts.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaydouble on Apr 19, 2019 14:52:04 GMT -5
Mookie put up a 185 wRC+ last year. You can run backwards around the bases and still be valuable if you're hitting like that. The issue is he's only had one truly elite season with the bat (which was clearly at least somewhat inflated by BABIP luck). If he goes back to being a 120-135 wRC+ guy, then I think it's fair to worry about his aging curve.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Apr 19, 2019 14:54:17 GMT -5
Jacoby fell off a cliff, even before the injuries. So did Carl Crawford, who was a huge speed and contact guy. They fell off at the age of 30. Those two had games built almost completely on speed and were much faster than Betts. Jacoby is a special case because he was always injured. You're forgetting how awesome Carl Crawford's game was. He had 6 seasons where he hit over .300 at the age of 28. The dude could flat out hit.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 19, 2019 15:24:26 GMT -5
Those two had games built almost completely on speed and were much faster than Betts. Jacoby is a special case because he was always injured. You're forgetting how awesome Carl Crawford's game was. He had 6 seasons where he hit over .300 at the age of 28. The dude could flat out hit. He had a career wRC+ of 104. He had one season that was above 120.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Apr 19, 2019 15:28:15 GMT -5
Jacoby is a special case because he was always injured. You're forgetting how awesome Carl Crawford's game was. He had 6 seasons where he hit over .300 at the age of 28. The dude could flat out hit. He had a career wRC+ of 104. He had one season that was above 120. Not comparable to a Betts, no because he didn't slug much. However, Mookie is aided by playing at home in Fenway. Stick Carl Crawford at Yankee Stadium for the first 8 years of his career, and we might be talking much differently about his slugging. The point is, if you're looking for worst case scenarios for speedy outfielders with defense attached. Look no further than Crawford.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Apr 19, 2019 15:41:33 GMT -5
Honestly, the worst-case scenario for any professional baseballer is they get injured or get the yips or something and are just never the same again, no matter their age. It can happen to any of 'em. The question is how relatively safe it would be to bet on Betts to be better than bad for the better part of a big bucks contract. I think he projects to age reasonably well.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 19, 2019 15:52:44 GMT -5
He had a career wRC+ of 104. He had one season that was above 120. Not comparable to a Betts, no because he didn't slug much. However, Mookie is aided by playing at home in Fenway. Stick Carl Crawford at Yankee Stadium for the first 8 years of his career, and we might be talking much differently about his slugging. The point is, if you're looking for worst case scenarios for speedy outfielders with defense attached. Look no further than Crawford. wRC+ is adjusted for park. Betts is so much more of a hitter I can't think of a worse comp. I'd pick Willie Mays as a better choice.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Apr 19, 2019 16:33:38 GMT -5
Not comparable to a Betts, no because he didn't slug much. However, Mookie is aided by playing at home in Fenway. Stick Carl Crawford at Yankee Stadium for the first 8 years of his career, and we might be talking much differently about his slugging. The point is, if you're looking for worst case scenarios for speedy outfielders with defense attached. Look no further than Crawford. wRC+ is adjusted for park. Betts is so much more of a hitter I can't think of a worse comp. I'd pick Willie Mays as a better choice. I wasn't comparing the two players, drawing worst case scenarios isn't a comp. Willie Mays can be thought of as a reach too. Comparing Mookie to one of the 10 best players in MLB history for whatever you're trying to with Betts here. He has a chance, but there's a much better chance he goes Andrew McCutchen here. Also, there's nothing that can adjust the damage that Crawford could have done playing half his games at Yankee Stadium. He would have been easily a better power hitter like Granderson was when he was a Yankeee (again, not comparing Granderson to Crawford).
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Apr 19, 2019 16:39:50 GMT -5
For those who were trying to argue that Paxton isn't that great, report now. Reporting for duty. Right now I feel like I could get out a few of these Red Sox hitters. His away numbers last year weren't all that great and he's an injury waiting to happen.
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Apr 19, 2019 19:14:47 GMT -5
Nope.... Blame Cherington for a terrible contract to Pedroia. You CAN blame DD for counting on Pedroia coming back this year.....similar to him counting on Sandoval coming back in a prior year. Pedroia threw his teammates under the bus during the Machado incident and will never be accepted by his teammates. They are a much better team without him. Are they? Have they won a game without him? I mean, I think he's cooked, I just don't believe in the intangible affect. I also think it's feasible for him to be better than Lin and Nunez. No one was complaining about the Pedroia contract at the time. Most people called it a bargain and a hometown discount.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 19, 2019 19:16:19 GMT -5
Nope.... Blame Cherington for a terrible contract to Pedroia. You CAN blame DD for counting on Pedroia coming back this year.....similar to him counting on Sandoval coming back in a prior year. Pedroia threw his teammates under the bus during the Machado incident and will never be accepted by his teammates. They are a much better team without him. Now there’s some revisionist history...
|
|
|
Post by flabosox on Apr 20, 2019 20:06:58 GMT -5
Its just the hard cold truth about how signings and trades of GM's get judged in hindsight. I don't recall any complaints about signing "the Panda and bringing him to Fenway" at the time. There was quite a bit of excitement actually. Turned out to be one of the worst signings ever...... no?
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Apr 20, 2019 20:32:57 GMT -5
Its just the hard cold truth about how signings and trades of GM's get judged in hindsight. I don't recall any complaints about signing "the Panda and bringing him to Fenway" at the time. There was quite a bit of excitement actually. Turned out to be one of the worst signings ever...... no? Where you not a member here at the time? A lot of people were questioning the Panda move at the time. He was a giant and had rapidly declining power before he got here.
|
|
|
Post by flabosox on Apr 20, 2019 21:00:22 GMT -5
Its just the hard cold truth about how signings and trades of GM's get judged in hindsight. I don't recall any complaints about signing "the Panda and bringing him to Fenway" at the time. There was quite a bit of excitement actually. Turned out to be one of the worst signings ever...... no? Where you not a member here at the time? A lot of people were questioning the Panda move at the time. He was a giant and had rapidly declining power before he got here. No I was not a member then. I assume you were. Were you one of the people questioning the deal? Good. then you guessed right on one (Panda) and guessed wrong on another (Pedrioa).
|
|
|
Post by redsoxfan2 on Apr 20, 2019 21:37:21 GMT -5
Where you not a member here at the time? A lot of people were questioning the Panda move at the time. He was a giant and had rapidly declining power before he got here. No I was not a member then. I assume you were. Were you one of the people questioning the deal? Good. then you guessed right on one (Panda) and guessed wrong on another (Pedrioa). Yeah, pretty much.
|
|