Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Albert Pujols 2012 season

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • brett
    replied
    There have been 47 10+ WAR years by position players which would certainly be in the "not happening every year" range.

    Do you like Ripken '91 or Morgan '75? They are both +10. Ripken had a 162 OPS+ as a shortstop, which is about double an average SS, and about 80 points higher. That would be like 196, or 230 for a first baseman on a "marginal" or "proportional" basis, but of course you have to decide if you agree with WAR that he was as effective a fielder as Ozzie Smith's prime in '91.

    For Morgan, it was probably the only year he deserved the gold glove, and he put up a 169 at second with league leading base stealing totals.

    I would definitely call a 9 war season a monster season in today's game though. Including Trout, only 5 of the last 16 leaders have been at 9.0 or higher, 2 by Pujols, 2 by Trout and 1 by Ichiro, but that one is a little anomalous because he is getting 3.0 war from defensive runs saved which is twice as many as any other season. Also batting leadoff gives you more war just because you get to bat more often.

    Leave a comment:


  • White Knight
    replied
    Originally posted by brett View Post
    I think a league leading OPS+ total would be a monster season, or at least an above average for a league leader OPS+.

    Going back to right after Bonds' last big year, the average of 16 league leaders is 175. If we take the major league leader we get 180. I'd say over 180 surely qualifies for me, as it would be a level we would be less than 50/50 likely to see in a given year. That would be 180 while playing 150+ games.

    I think that 185 today would be on par with roughly 200 in the mid 30s.
    Well, I wouldn't say he had a monster season if he leads the League in OPS+ with 170. A monster season is something rarer than something that happens almost every year. To me now, it's in the 190 range. 180 would not qualify as monster for me. But then again, is OPS+ everything? Did Trout have a monster year with 170? Did his SB's, runs, and age make up for it?

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    I think a league leading OPS+ total would be a monster season, or at least an above average for a league leader OPS+.

    Going back to right after Bonds' last big year, the average of 16 league leaders is 175. If we take the major league leader we get 180. I'd say over 180 surely qualifies for me, as it would be a level we would be less than 50/50 likely to see in a given year. That would be 180 while playing 150+ games.

    I think that 185 today would be on par with roughly 200 in the mid 30s.

    Leave a comment:


  • White Knight
    replied
    Originally posted by Honus Wagner Rules View Post
    I think Pujols has 1 or 2 "monster" seasons left in him.
    Define monster. We need to come up with a standard. I used to say any season of 200 or more OPS+, but that's too rare so I now call those historic seasons. However, I would not call a season with under 190 OPS+ "monster" at all. You think he can do 190 again?

    Leave a comment:


  • Tyrus4189Cobb
    replied
    Originally posted by Honus Wagner Rules View Post
    Any theories about Pujols' declining walk rate? I remember reading recently (at fangraphs I think) that he is swinging at pitches outside the strike zone much more than a few years ago. Could this be one cause for his declining walk rate?
    I think pitchers are also less afraid of him. He still a hitter not to be trifled with, but he no longer presents that same looming fear of devastation as before. If his numbers are better next season, pitchers will be more afraid and try to hit the corners more, leading to walks.

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    Originally posted by dominik View Post
    yes. but he is also hacking more. the last 2 years his outside the zone swing percentage increased dramatically. his career average was about 22% and in 2011 it was 31 and even 36 in 2012
    http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx...77&position=1B

    that is quite unusual. it does happen that players walk less because the pitchers don't fear them anymore and rather lay one in but that a player starts to lose his eye and chases pitches doesn't happen very often. usually the eye is the last thing that goes and many older players even compensate for losing contact ability by being more selective (thus walking more).
    duplicate post

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    Originally posted by dominik View Post
    yes. but he is also hacking more. the last 2 years his outside the zone swing percentage increased dramatically. his career average was about 22% and in 2011 it was 31 and even 36 in 2012
    http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx...77&position=1B

    that is quite unusual. it does happen that players walk less because the pitchers don't fear them anymore and rather lay one in but that a player starts to lose his eye and chases pitches doesn't happen very often. usually the eye is the last thing that goes and many older players even compensate for losing contact ability by being more selective (thus walking more).
    I noticed that Mike Schmidt cut down his K rates as he aged and declined.
    Through '83: 142 Ks per 162
    '84-'87: 99 per 162
    '88-'89: 64 per 162

    In his case, he just lost his ability to drive the ball.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by dominik View Post
    yes. but he is also hacking more. the last 2 years his outside the zone swing percentage increased dramatically. his career average was about 22% and in 2011 it was 31 and even 36 in 2012
    http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx...77&position=1B

    that is quite unusual. it does happen that players walk less because the pitchers don't fear them anymore and rather lay one in but that a player starts to lose his eye and chases pitches doesn't happen very often. usually the eye is the last thing that goes and many older players even compensate for losing contact ability by being more selective (thus walking more).
    By the way, I think it is a change of approach, not vision.

    I predict: .310/.370/.550 est. 35 HRs, 45 2Bs.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by dominik View Post
    yes. but he is also hacking more. the last 2 years his outside the zone swing percentage increased dramatically. his career average was about 22% and in 2011 it was 31 and even 36 in 2012
    http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx...77&position=1B

    that is quite unusual. it does happen that players walk less because the pitchers don't fear them anymore and rather lay one in but that a player starts to lose his eye and chases pitches doesn't happen very often. usually the eye is the last thing that goes and many older players even compensate for losing contact ability by being more selective (thus walking more).
    Hence "this and...".

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    Originally posted by RDB_SoxFan View Post
    I just dont see Albert driving in 140 runs. He hasnt done it yet in his career and has only been close twice.
    It wil take Trout scoring 140.

    Leave a comment:


  • PlanetZoltan
    replied
    Originally posted by brett View Post
    I predict next year: .312 50 doubles, 40 home runs, 140 RBI, 170 OPS+ but only 65-70 walks.
    I just dont see Albert driving in 140 runs. He hasnt done it yet in his career and has only been close twice.

    Leave a comment:


  • dominik
    replied
    Originally posted by Matthew C. View Post
    This and he is getting 20-30 fewer IBB than he did in his best OB% seasons.
    yes. but he is also hacking more. the last 2 years his outside the zone swing percentage increased dramatically. his career average was about 22% and in 2011 it was 31 and even 36 in 2012
    http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx...77&position=1B

    that is quite unusual. it does happen that players walk less because the pitchers don't fear them anymore and rather lay one in but that a player starts to lose his eye and chases pitches doesn't happen very often. usually the eye is the last thing that goes and many older players even compensate for losing contact ability by being more selective (thus walking more).

    Leave a comment:


  • Bothrops Atrox
    replied
    Originally posted by Honus Wagner Rules View Post
    Any theories about Pujols' declining walk rate? I remember reading recently (at fangraphs I think) that he is swinging at pitches outside the strike zone much more than a few years ago. Could this be one cause for his declining walk rate?
    This and he is getting 20-30 fewer IBB than he did in his best OB% seasons.

    Leave a comment:


  • Honus Wagner Rules
    replied
    Originally posted by brett View Post
    I predict next year: .312 50 doubles, 40 home runs, 140 RBI, 170 OPS+ but only 65-70 walks.
    Any theories about Pujols' declining walk rate? I remember reading recently (at fangraphs I think) that he is swinging at pitches outside the strike zone much more than a few years ago. Could this be one cause for his declining walk rate?

    Leave a comment:


  • brett
    replied
    I predict next year: .312 50 doubles, 40 home runs, 140 RBI, 170 OPS+ but only 65-70 walks.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X