Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why not Green?

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by NYMets523 View Post
    You do know that Errors are the worst statistic to judge defense, correct?
    The worst statistic. No, I honestly didn't know that. I would have pegged them as maybe third or fourth worst. Single worst, wow. I guess you learn something new every day.

    We've strayed way off subject here. The point was in relation to the Mets fans over-hyping young talent. Let's say for argument's sake that Green was far and away the worst fielder of the four players mentioned. I don't believe he was, but let's say hypothetically it's true. Was his fielding so much worse as to compensate for the gap between him and replacements on the offensive side? It could be argued that they didn't lose a great deal offensively. That might be fair, but that's not what's being argued. We are arguing that superstars Milledge, Gomez, and Chavez each were deprived of their shot at superstardom due to a bum like Green being ahead of them on the depth chart. That wasn't fair to Green. It wasn't fair to Milledge, Gomez, or Chavez. Now it's not fair to be putting that same pressure on Daniel Murphy. Maybe Murphy will blossom into a superstar, but people are expecting way too much of him. When people compare him to Don Mattingly, they are just setting themselves up for a letdown.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by m8644 View Post
      What rational met fan hyped up Endy chavez to be a superstar???? Certainly no one I know.....I hope no one actually did, they'd need to get professional help. He was what he was...a tremendous defensive replacement.

      And in 2007 for us...green was what he was....a declining older player who was completely average offensively. Not bad, not good...just average. (and one who could not hit lefties unfortunately)


      for the record... I like Shawn, always have, from when he was with the blue jays. But I dont put him higher up on my mets list because of what he was before he came here. He was an average player as a met..who was older and declining....so the organization decided to go younger.....which is something i am pretty sure most teams would have done in the same position.

      Why are you condeming the mets for this?
      I'm not condemning the Mets for this. I'm condemning one fringe element of Mets fans who insisted that Green was dead weight that needed to be jettisoned so that the younger superior talent would be given a chance to bloom. Green's best years were clearly behind him. However, I still believe that he had a few more good years left in him.

      Many Mets fans couldn't wait for him to be gone. I'm not saying that batting .291 with 30 doubles means he was an All-Star or a Hall of Famer. However, this one fringe element seemed to believe that a .291 hitter was not only expendable but must be gotten rid of. His last month ever playing baseball in the Majors had him batting .407 with a .576 slugging percentage. Does that mean he deserved another huge contract? No. Does that mean he should be revered as the savior of the Mets franchise? No. Does that mean his best days were ahead? In all probability, not. However, it does mean that he wasn't exactly Willie Mays in the '73 World Series either. All I read while Green was there was how he needed to step aside. Well, he did. I just never saw the expected huge surge in talent or the resulting improvement of the team as a whole ever come to fruition.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by The Commissioner View Post
        The worst statistic. No, I honestly didn't know that. I would have pegged them as maybe third or fourth worst. Single worst, wow. I guess you learn something new every day.
        The problem with errors is they are subjective; the scorekeeper determines whether or not it is an error and decides who it goes to. The best thing to look at with defense is range. For example, Carlos Gomez had incredible range in CF last year. Two stats that show range, RFg and RF9

        RFg - Range Factor by games played (A + PO) / G
        lgRFg - Major League Average Range Factor at that position that year by games.
        RF9 - Range Factor per nine innings 9 * (A + PO)/ Inn
        lgRF9 - Major League Average Range Factor at that position that year per nine innings.

        Gomez's RFg was 2.95 (lgRFg was 2.35) and his RF9 was 3.15 (lgRF9 was 2.71). He made 8 errors last year. If you only looked at errors, you'd erroneously determine he is, at best, an average defender.

        Look at the opposite of that case. To say Ryan Braun is a poor defensively is an understatement. In 2007, he was the first 3B to have a Fielding Percentage below .900 (to be fair, it was .895 but still, he was bad). Last year he played LF and never made an error. Would you say he was the best LF in the league because of that? No. His RFg 1.91 (lgRFg was 1.47) and his RF9 was 1.95 (lgRF9 was 1.90). This shows his range was very average. He did not get to as many balls in play as Gomez did. This would translate into more balls he allowed to fall in for hits. So, while Gomez made 8 errors, he fielded a greater number of balls because of his range and more than made up for the errors he did make.

        There are more advanced fielding metrics to look at. However, my knowledge of them is rather limited. RFg and RF9 are available on B-R and I don't feel like looking up other fielding stats at this time (1:10am). Fangraphs.com and Hardballtimes.com has some so check there if you're curious.
        Last edited by NYMets523; 03-27-2009, 11:11 PM.
        "I'm happy for [Edwin Encarnacion] because this guy bleeds internally, big-time" -Dusty Baker

        "If on-base percentage is so important, then why don't they put it on the scoreboard?" -Jeff Francoeur

        "At the end of the day, the sun comes up and I still have a job" -Joba Chamberlain

        Comment


        • #49
          I have four words describing the posting in this thread within the past couple days: this ship has sailed.

          To argue the merits of resigning Shawn Green was probably legit all the way into early '08. Right now, it's crying over spilt milk. It would be like arguing that Moises Alou should have been resigned or perhaps that we should have made a push to sign Cliff Floyd. And before someone starts up that Floyd and Alou were both injury prone and Green was not, let me just say that while yes, Alou and Floyd were injury prone and Green was not, note that I'm using the past tense. Look at any number of position players that just break down when they get up there in age that were once solid as a rock: Wade Boggs and Fred McGriff come to mind.

          "New York didn't need his .313 post season batting average with the club anyway!"

          Let me just say that post-season batting averages are nearly worthless. If we go by this logic, then Rogers Hornsby stunk because he hit .245 with a .288 OBP in the post-season. Simply put, we're looking at a sample size that is too small. Likewise when you point out one month of Green's career when he hit over .400. Once again, the sample size is too small.

          "a .291 hitter"

          With a line of .195/.264/.288 against left-handed pitching.
          "They put me in the Hall of Fame? They must really be scraping the bottom of the barrel!"
          -Eppa Rixey, upon learning of his induction to the Baseball Hall of Fame.

          Motafy (MO-ta-fy) vt. -fied, -fying 1. For a pitcher to melt down in a big game situation; to become like Guillermo Mota. 2. The transformation of a good pitcher into one of Guillermo Mota's caliber.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Dalkowski110 View Post
            I have four words describing the posting in this thread within the past couple days: this ship has sailed.

            I agree. As I clearly stated in my first response to this thread over the past couple of days this has now become a moot point. However, you can't just jump into this argument now, say "this ship has sailed", and then add more fuel to the fire. You don't get to wait until the last moment, jump into a debate, and then say, "now all debate is closed". Either swim or get off the Lido deck

            Originally posted by Dalkowski110 View Post
            To argue the merits of resigning Shawn Green was probably legit all the way into early '08. Right now, it's crying over spilt milk. It would be like arguing that Moises Alou should have been resigned or perhaps that we should have made a push to sign Cliff Floyd. And before someone starts up that Floyd and Alou were both injury prone and Green was not, let me just say that while yes, Alou and Floyd were injury prone and Green was not, note that I'm using the past tense. Look at any number of position players that just break down when they get up there in age that were once solid as a rock: Wade Boggs and Fred McGriff come to mind.
            So based on what transpired with Wade Boggs and Fred McGriff when they were each half a decade older than Green we should assume that he too was going physically break down some time soon? I agree, he probably wouldn't have lasted to 40. Yet both players you cited were both very productive well into their late 30s. Green was 34 at the time of his retirement.


            Originally posted by Dalkowski110 View Post
            "New York didn't need his .313 post season batting average with the club anyway!"

            Let me just say that post-season batting averages are nearly worthless. If we go by this logic, then Rogers Hornsby stunk because he hit .245 with a .288 OBP in the post-season.
            Worthless? Really? First of all, Rogers Hornsby is a poor example to bring to this because no one is arguing trying to say that Hornsby cost his teams the World Series. Here, people are implying that Shawn Green cost the Mets the pennant. The batting average is meant to illustrate that he was one of the team's more productive hitters during that span. Then again...if post-season batting average is worthless, though, that would explain why no one seems to place any blame on David Wright, Paul Lo Duca, or Endy Chavez for their NLCS performances and yet Green receives an inordinately larger share of some fan's denunciation.

            Originally posted by Dalkowski110 View Post
            "Simply put, we're looking at a sample size that is too small. Likewise when you point out one month of Green's career when he hit over .400. Once again, the sample size is too small.
            Too small for what? I would agree that were I pulling a random month out of the middle of the season and saying "Aha, therefore Green is still one of the game's true greats" it would be too small of a sample to prove that thesis. It would be skewing the data to make a ridiculous argument. However, I was puling the last month of his active career to show that he was still capable of playing at a Major League level above that of his potential replacements. There is a huge difference there. Was the last month of his career, some sort of fluke that he was incapable of repeating again? Perhaps. The point is we'll never know and it would be ridiculous to assume that it was just a pure anomaly.

            Hey, I'll be the first to agree that Green probably wasn't worth the money that they would have had to shell out to re-sign him. He definitely wasn't worth the $9.5 million it would have cost the team to renew his option. Although how much less he would have been willing to come back and play for, we'll never know. The truth is, though, that all these people who's careers he was supposedly standing in the way of in 2007 haven't quite lived up to being the next anybody, and probably won't any time soon.

            When Daniel Murphy turns 27, if he's only batting .291 instead of being Don Mattingly is it going to be time for him to pack his bags and go too based on Baseball America's report of the next Darryl Strawberry who's tearing it up at Binghamton?

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by The Commissioner View Post
              I agree. As I clearly stated in my first response to this thread over the past couple of days this has now become a moot point. However, you can't just jump into this argument now, say "this ship has sailed", and then add more fuel to the fire. You don't get to wait until the last moment, jump into a debate, and then say, "now all debate is closed". Either swim or get off the Lido deck



              So based on what transpired with Wade Boggs and Fred McGriff when they were each half a decade older than Green we should assume that he too was going physically break down some time soon? I agree, he probably wouldn't have lasted to 40. Yet both players you cited were both very productive well into their late 30s. Green was 34 at the time of his retirement.






              Worthless? Really? First of all, Rogers Hornsby is a poor example to bring to this because no one is arguing trying to say that Hornsby cost his teams the World Series. Here, people are implying that Shawn Green cost the Mets the pennant. The batting average is meant to illustrate that he was one of the team's more productive hitters during that span. Then again...if post-season batting average is worthless, though, that would explain why no one seems to place any blame on David Wright, Paul Lo Duca, or Endy Chavez for their NLCS performances and yet Green receives an inordinately larger share of some fan's denunciation.



              Too small for what? I would agree that were I pulling a random month out of the middle of the season and saying "Aha, therefore Green is still one of the game's true greats" it would be too small of a sample to prove that thesis. It would be skewing the data to make a ridiculous argument. However, I was puling the last month of his active career to show that he was still capable of playing at a Major League level above that of his potential replacements. There is a huge difference there. Was the last month of his career, some sort of fluke that he was incapable of repeating again? Perhaps. The point is we'll never know and it would be ridiculous to assume that it was just a pure anomaly.

              Hey, I'll be the first to agree that Green probably wasn't worth the money that they would have had to shell out to re-sign him. He definitely wasn't worth the $9.5 million it would have cost the team to renew his option. Although how much less he would have been willing to come back and play for, we'll never know. The truth is, though, that all these people who's careers he was supposedly standing in the way of in 2007 haven't quite lived up to being the next anybody, and probably won't any time soon.

              When Daniel Murphy turns 27, if he's only batting .291 instead of being Don Mattingly is it going to be time for him to pack his bags and go too based on Baseball America's report of the next Darryl Strawberry who's tearing it up at Binghamton?

              if it's a .291 average with no power and no on base skills...then yes it would probably be time to replace him.

              But if its a .291 with him showing some power and patience...then he'd be a pretty productive player
              "all the mets road wins against the dodgers this year have occured at Dodger Stadium"---Ralph Kiner

              "Blind people came to the park just to listen to him pitch"---Reggie Jackson, talking about Tom Seaver

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by m8644 View Post
                if it's a .291 average with no power and no on base skills...then yes it would probably be time to replace him.

                But if its a .291 with him showing some power and patience...then he'd be a pretty productive player
                41 extra base hits won't cut it, though. The Mets will have to ship off Murphy in order to make room for the next AA, going on Cooperstown, homegrown hero. Everyone who thinks that's going to work out differently, I'd love to start a high roller fantasy baseball league with you all. That way Green won't be the only one enjoying his early retirement.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by The Commissioner View Post
                  41 extra base hits won't cut it, though. The Mets will have to ship off Murphy in order to make room for the next AA, going on Cooperstown, homegrown hero. Everyone who thinks that's going to work out differently, I'd love to start a high roller fantasy baseball league with you all. That way Green won't be the only one enjoying his early retirement.

                  I dont get your point here............The VAST majority of teams make moves of replacing either an average, older, or just flat out unproductive player for a top prospect......this has literally happened thousands of times in the history of sports

                  Why are you making it out that just the mets do something like this?....if teams never brought up prospects, then how would ANY player make it?

                  How do you think Shawn Green became a good player......the jays made room for him in the lineup.

                  Yes, alot of prospects end up not making it....but alot do as well. It's the nature of the game.

                  Im sorry, I just really dont get what you're trying to do here
                  "all the mets road wins against the dodgers this year have occured at Dodger Stadium"---Ralph Kiner

                  "Blind people came to the park just to listen to him pitch"---Reggie Jackson, talking about Tom Seaver

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by m8644 View Post
                    I dont get your point here............The VAST majority of teams make moves of replacing either an average, older, or just flat out unproductive player for a top prospect......this has literally happened thousands of times in the history of sports

                    Why are you making it out that just the mets do something like this?....if teams never brought up prospects, then how would ANY player make it?

                    How do you think Shawn Green became a good player......the jays made room for him in the lineup.

                    Yes, alot of prospects end up not making it....but alot do as well. It's the nature of the game.

                    Im sorry, I just really dont get what you're trying to do here
                    I'm not "trying to do" anything.

                    Of course teams bring up prospects. The question is whether they replace a productive ballplayer with less productive ones. Yes, sometimes it turns out for the best. A young player will struggle at first, but it will prove to be valuable experience which eventually molds him into a better player, thus helping the team, in the long run. I don't believe that I, nor any one else here is denying that. However, some fans (in this particular case it just so happens to be Mets fans) tend to be so myopic in focusing on age and hype, that they lose sight of the bigger picture. I understand the Mets as a team making the ultimate decision to part ways with Green. However, what still gets me is that some fans right from the start went on and on...and on...and on about how he was such a hindrance to the team and how Lastings Milledge was the second coming of Willie Mays and Carlos Gomez was going to morph into Joe DiMaggio.

                    You are starting with the premise here that Shawn Green was "unproductive". The facts don't back that up. He wasn't as productive as we all hoped he would have been for that contract. He wasn't as productive as a 28 year old Green once was. However, he was an asset to the ball-club. He was more productive than anyone else the Mets found to try to fill his position. It's like being stuck in a flood and someone gives you a perfectly good lifeboat. You resentfully reject it and say "No, thanks. I'm waiting for Superman to come and save me." You can read and believe in all the comic strips (or in this case bloated blogs, threads, scouting reports and Baseball America articles) you want, it doesn't make you any less likely to drown.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by The Commissioner View Post
                      I'm not "trying to do" anything.

                      Of course teams bring up prospects. The question is whether they replace a productive ballplayer with less productive ones. Yes, sometimes it turns out for the best. A young player will struggle at first, but it will prove to be valuable experience which eventually molds him into a better player, thus helping the team, in the long run. I don't believe that I, nor any one else here is denying that. However, some fans (in this particular case it just so happens to be Mets fans) tend to be so myopic in focusing on age and hype, that they lose sight of the bigger picture. I understand the Mets as a team making the ultimate decision to part ways with Green. However, what still gets me is that some fans right from the start went on and on...and on...and on about how he was such a hindrance to the team and how Lastings Milledge was the second coming of Willie Mays and Carlos Gomez was going to morph into Joe DiMaggio.

                      You are starting with the premise here that Shawn Green was "unproductive". The facts don't back that up. He wasn't as productive as we all hoped he would have been for that contract. He wasn't as productive as a 28 year old Green once was. However, he was an asset to the ball-club. He was more productive than anyone else the Mets found to try to fill his position. It's like being stuck in a flood and someone gives you a perfectly good lifeboat. You resentfully reject it and say "No, thanks. I'm waiting for Superman to come and save me." You can read and believe in all the comic strips (or in this case bloated blogs, threads, scouting reports and Baseball America articles) you want, it doesn't make you any less likely to drown.

                      in 2007, green was an average player...i never said he was unproductive. I said in a previous post he was average....there is nothing wrong with someone at that point in their career in 2007 being "average". Yes he batted ..291, but he was cleary declining and was not in the plans beyond 2008 as he was an old player who couldnt hit lefties anymore on a team that wanted to get younger (and pretty much every other team would have made the same choice of not bringing him back in 2008....especially when you had the choice of either giving your top prospect the job or trading him for a ryan church, who was on his way to a breakout season before some bad luck)


                      You're literally condemning the mets for making the decision to move on from a 35 year old declining outfielder and giving the job to someone younger......when it's a decision that pretty much any gm makes 19 times out of 20. (you say that you understand the move, but cleary you don't by some of the other comments you made in this thread)


                      As for the mets fans who thought of milledge and gomez as future stars. Thats the nature of sports.....fans get excited about young players and dream about them getting better. That's just the way it is. (for the record I was and still am high on milledge...but to me gomez was expendable in the right deal, which obviously came)


                      I hope i'm not coming off as a jerk here :ooo:......I'm just not getting what you're trying to say here. Are the mets wrong? Are the fans wrong? Should we have brought Shawn back in 08? Should we never trust prospects?
                      Last edited by m8644; 03-29-2009, 02:11 AM. Reason: add
                      "all the mets road wins against the dodgers this year have occured at Dodger Stadium"---Ralph Kiner

                      "Blind people came to the park just to listen to him pitch"---Reggie Jackson, talking about Tom Seaver

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        "and then add more fuel to the fire."

                        Wrong. I was pointing out WHY said ship had sailed.

                        "So based on what transpired with Wade Boggs and Fred McGriff when they were each half a decade older than Green we should assume that he too was going physically break down some time soon? I agree, he probably wouldn't have lasted to 40. Yet both players you cited were both very productive well into their late 30s. Green was 34 at the time of his retirement."

                        Did I say that Boggs or McGriff was unproductive? No. You're putting words into my mouth. But I did say they started to break down near the end of their careers. Actually, an excellent example who went from merely injury-prone around age 34 to "lock to be injured" is Moises Alou.

                        "Worthless? Really? First of all, Rogers Hornsby is a poor example to bring to this because no one is arguing trying to say that Hornsby cost his teams the World Series. Here, people are implying that Shawn Green cost the Mets the pennant."

                        First off, I never said worthless. You're twisting what I say. Second, yes, he did contribute to costing them the pennant. Via his regular season batting average. Against left-handers. Which was .195. He didn't cost them the pennant, but let me say this: he sure helped in costing it when facing southpaw pitching.

                        "However, I was puling the last month of his active career to show that he was still capable of playing at a Major League level above that of his potential replacements. There is a huge difference there."

                        There is a huge difference? I don't see it. As for measuring your performance in your last month of play...Vince Sherlock could've clobbered MLB pitching by this logic; he batted .462 in his last Major League month and was at least a relatively solid hitter in the 1930's Pacific Coast League. And if you point out a flukishly high BABIP for Sherlock (which was of course present), then you better do one for Green, too: .407 (vs. a career .305). His hitting was largely the creation of luck.

                        "When Daniel Murphy turns 27, if he's only batting .291 instead of being Don Mattingly is it going to be time for him to pack his bags and go too based on Baseball America's report of the next Darryl Strawberry who's tearing it up at Binghamton?"

                        Huh? I never even spoke about Murphy. Although he can hit left-handers better than Green, even based off BABIP. Let me reiterate that since you never responded to it: .195/.264/.288.
                        Last edited by Dalkowski110; 03-29-2009, 08:47 AM.
                        "They put me in the Hall of Fame? They must really be scraping the bottom of the barrel!"
                        -Eppa Rixey, upon learning of his induction to the Baseball Hall of Fame.

                        Motafy (MO-ta-fy) vt. -fied, -fying 1. For a pitcher to melt down in a big game situation; to become like Guillermo Mota. 2. The transformation of a good pitcher into one of Guillermo Mota's caliber.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by m8644 View Post
                          in 2007, green was an average player...i never said he was unproductive. I said in a previous post he was average....there is nothing wrong with someone at that point in their career in 2007 being "average". Yes he batted ..291, but he was cleary declining and was not in the plans beyond 2008 as he was an old player who couldnt hit lefties anymore on a team that wanted to get younger (and pretty much every other team would have made the same choice of not bringing him back in 2008?
                          I disagree. He was still an above average player. (note I'm by no means trying to say "great" or "spectacular") Had he not gotten injured in the middle of the season and taken a long time to recover (he obviously tried to come back too soon before he was fully healed) his stats may have been a lot more impressive. Even if you assume he would have gone 0 for 12 to get to 502 PA, he had the second highest batting average of any regular player on the team in 2007. When he was given the green light on the base-paths he was 11 for 12, showing that he still had his legs. His major flaws were that he still struck out a lot and still grounded into a lot of double plays, but on that team he was by no means even close to be the worst in either category.

                          Originally posted by m8644 View Post
                          You're literally condemning the mets for making the decision to move on from a 35 year old declining outfielder and giving the job to someone younger......when it's a decision that pretty much any gm makes 19 times out of 20. (you say that you understand the move, but cleary you don't by some of the other comments you made in this thread)
                          I'm not condemning the Mets. I just think it was a bad move. I said that I understand them not renewing the option on his contract for $9.5 million or whatever the exact figure would have been. That would have been a poor choice. However, after not renewing the option, he himself, had said that he was willing to play for a major pay cut. They probably could have re-signed him at a much lower rate. As of ST 2008, he still had a lot of good baseball left in him.


                          Originally posted by m8644 View Post
                          As for the mets fans who thought of milledge and gomez as future stars. Thats the nature of sports.....fans get excited about young players and dream about them getting better.
                          We all do. However, I always think a bird in hand is worth two in the bush leagues.

                          Not that I'm in any way trying to compare what Green meant to baseball with the greatness of this guy, but it reminds me of Wayne Gretzky's last season. In Gretzky's last year, he could barely score a goal to save his life (now given a lot of that had to do with experimental crease rules in hockey at the time which have since been revoked). Everyone it seemed, especially
                          many Rangers fans, kept on saying how pathetic it was watching him and couldn't wait for him to hang up his skates. The thing was, that he was still far and away the best passer on the team. Only one Ranger in the next half a decade posted as many assists as Gretzky did that year. By most measures he was still a very productive hockey player, he just wasn't The Great One anymore.

                          That seems to be similar to the sort of pressure that Mets fans put on Shawn Green. There is no way Green was ever going to hit 40 home runs again in a season. Fans were comparing Green to his old self rather than rather than to what someone else could do in that position. He's never been after the same after his torn labrum. However, it wasn't inconceivable that he could have been a 20/20 guy one last time or a solid .280 hitter with 20 homers and 30 doubles.


                          Originally posted by m8644 View Post
                          I hope i'm not coming off as a jerk here :ooo:......
                          Not at all. A healthy debate is always welcome here at Baseball Fever.

                          Originally posted by m8644 View Post
                          Are the mets wrong? Are the fans wrong? Should we have brought Shawn back in 08? Should we never trust prospects?
                          Those are two different questions. Yes, I believe the Mets were wrong for not attempting to re-sign him. I also believe the fans were wrong for wanting to see the last members of the army pass by before Atlanta inevitably descended into rioting. Of course, you should trust prospects, just not all the time, not always over proven veterans who can still perform out on the field, and mostly not to the extent that the press and the blogosphere hype them up.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Dalkowski110 View Post
                            Did I say that Boggs or McGriff was unproductive? No. You're putting words into my mouth. But I did say they started to break down near the end of their careers. Actually, an excellent example who went from merely injury-prone around age 34 to "lock to be injured" is Moises Alou.
                            There is no indication based on Mosies Alou that Green would be a lock to be injured. Even in his prime, Alou was missing 30 games a season. Green once played through 160 games with the Dodgers while having an untreated torn labrum. In fact, 2007, marked the first time that Green was ever on the disabled list in his fifteen years of ML service.

                            Originally posted by Dalkowski110 View Post
                            First off, I never said worthless. You're twisting what I say. Second, yes, he did contribute to costing them the pennant. Via his regular season batting average. Against left-handers. Which was .195. He didn't cost them the pennant, but let me say this: he sure helped in costing it when facing southpaw pitching.
                            I believe your exact quote was "Let me just say that post-season batting averages are nearly worthless. If we go by this logic, then Rogers Hornsby stunk because he hit .245 with a .288 OBP in the post-season." I apologize if I am misconstruing your meaning here. I am not intentionally attempting to twist what you say.


                            Originally posted by Dalkowski110 View Post
                            "However, I was puling the last month of his active career to show that he was still capable of playing at a Major League level above that of his potential replacements. There is a huge difference there."

                            There is a huge difference? I don't see it. As for measuring your performance in your last month of play...Vince Sherlock could've clobbered MLB pitching by this logic; he batted .462 in his last Major League month and was at least a relatively solid hitter in the 1930's Pacific Coast League. And if you point out a flukishly high BABIP for Sherlock (which was of course present), then you better do one for Green, too: .407 (vs. a career .305). His hitting was largely the creation of luck.
                            Vince Sherlock is surely a ridiculous example. Had Sherlock not had 2 1/2 less plate appearances than Green and had Sherlock torn it up in the minors, then I would agree with you. In that case he should have been given a chance to perform at the ML level. However, Sherlock had only 27 plate appearances in 9 games, hardly a large enough sample and was extremely unspectacular, although consistently good, in the minors.

                            Green, unlike Sherlock, however was a proven ML veteran. At the time of his injury in late May, he not only led the Mets in batting, but he was in the top ten for the league. Then, he struggled and he struggled bad. From the time he attempted to come back in mid-June until mid-August his season took a nose dive. He struggled batting only .231 for that period. He may have come back too soon from his injury (having never been on the DL in his life perhaps he wasn't the best judge of when he was ready to come back?) or he may have just been going through an extended slump? (along with Gil Hodges, Green has to be one of the great streak hitters in MLB history)

                            Green's hitting was luck or Sherlock's? If it was Green you were referring to, he did get awfully lucky then.

                            As I stated, Green came back from his injury and slumped hard. Then, after hitting rock bottom in mid-August with a .269 batting average, he completely tore it up for the last month and a half of the season. From August 16th on, he had a .390 batting average, a .480 on base percentage, and a .524 slugging percentage.

                            Originally posted by Dalkowski110 View Post
                            "When Daniel Murphy turns 27, if he's only batting .291 instead of being Don Mattingly is it going to be time for him to pack his bags and go too based on Baseball America's report of the next Darryl Strawberry who's tearing it up at Binghamton?"

                            Huh? I never even spoke about Murphy.
                            I'm sorry, I never meant to imply that you were speaking of Murphy. I'm trying to respond to several people in the Anti-Green Movement at once. The unfair pressure on Murphy was why I jumped back into this thread to begin with.


                            Originally posted by Dalkowski110 View Post
                            Let me reiterate that since you never responded to it: .195/.264/.288.
                            Talk about your small sample size, though. You are basing that on Green's 2007 season versus lefties. While his .291 batting average overall was 8 points higher than his career average and could, therefore, I guess, be labelled as "luck" or an anomaly, his numbers against left handers that season truly were anomalous compared to his career averages against lefties: -58 points batting, -59 points on base average, -143 points slugging. Yes, his 2007 numbers were horrible against lefthanders, but you make it sound as if it were an equal split. He faced close to three times as many right handers and he did lefties that year. For his career he has also faced nearly three times as many right handed pitchers. I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but that would have meant Green would have been facing starting righties for about 120 games in 2008. It still sounds like the Mets may have given up on him too soon.

                            Comment

                            Ad Widget

                            Collapse
                            Working...
                            X