|
Hwang
Mar 21, 2017 16:22:40 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 21, 2017 16:22:40 GMT -5
I know the same size I've seen is small, but I don't see how Hwang doesn't make this roster.
Compare HIS production to that of Williamson.
Yeah, I know Hwang isn't an outfielder, but I'd certainly rather have Hwang at 3B and Nunez in LF vs LHP, than I would Mac.
boly
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 21, 2017 21:15:37 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 21, 2017 21:15:37 GMT -5
Hwang is something of a dilemma.
Is he baseball ready to make the jump from the Korean League to MLB?
Is he socially ready for the US?
Does it make sense to put him on the roster but not start him? And if they do start him, what do they do with Nunez, for whom they gave up a decent pitching prospect and whose trade value is diminished by his eligibility for free agency this winter?
Can Nunez play the outfield? If he plays left field, what about Parker? Can Nunez get enough work as a super sub?
With Gillaspie and Hwang as the extra infielders in addition to the original four we are counting on, is the infield too limited? (For instance,there would be no proven backup for second base.) Can the Giants afford to carry seven infielders, giving them more versatility?
I believe if the Giants keep up Hwang, Nunez needs to learn to play the outfield (which he should be doing already, although to the best of my knowledge, that isn't the case). And it may mean they carry only a dozen pitchers. (Wouldn't that be horrible!)
Either way, I don't think Williamson will make it. I think the Giants want him playing every day.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Hwang
Mar 22, 2017 12:42:11 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Mar 22, 2017 12:42:11 GMT -5
I'd MUCH rather see Hwang on the roster than Gillaspie, all due respect to Connor's postseason accomplishments
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 22, 2017 13:32:15 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 22, 2017 13:32:15 GMT -5
I hadn't thought about Conor's not making the roster, Randy. Good outside the box thinking.
The niche Conor fills is that assuming the Giants don't keep Jimmy Rollins is as their sole lefty pinch hitter. He is a proven, experienced hitter who can hit right-handed pitching decently. His weakness is that he plays only the corner infield positions.
In theory, the Giants don't need a middle infielder reserve, since Eduardo Nunez can play there (although I believe his experience is limited at second base). They have other possibilities there, but none who hit left-handed.
I suspect Conor is in simply because of his ability to be a left-handed bench off the bat and a possible occasional third base rest replacement against right-handed pitching. I hope the Giants explore all options, including those that wouldn't include Conor, but I think he fills an important enough niche to make the team.
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 22, 2017 13:37:34 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 22, 2017 13:37:34 GMT -5
Gillaspie is batting .400 this spring and has only struck out twice in 25 at-bats. We should probably just release him.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Hwang
Mar 22, 2017 13:55:13 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Mar 22, 2017 13:55:13 GMT -5
You're right, Boagie...we should ignore Conor's .256 average in 1300 career ABs and believe that he has suddenly become Ted Williams.
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 22, 2017 15:40:27 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 22, 2017 15:40:27 GMT -5
Come on, Randy. Since Conor is the Giants' only left-handed pinch hitter, let's look at how he hits righties. Not great, but .266 with a .739 OPS is decent for a bench player.
Your comment says in itself that you know you aren't going to win this "argument." You're trying to build a straw man's argument by saying that Conor hasn't suddenly become Ted Williams. Boagie never said he has, and he doesn't have to be anywhere near as good a hitter as the one some say is the best ever in order to be a decent bench player.
Again, I apologize for what I said last week. But you're showing no understanding here of what is going on and are taking cheap measures to defend yourself.
What Boagie said was true. What you said (that Conor isn't Ted Williams) is true. The difference is that what Boagie said is relevant.
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 22, 2017 15:48:25 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 22, 2017 15:48:25 GMT -5
the upside for keeping Gillaspie is simple: He's a veteran, LH bat off the bench.
For that reason alone, I'd keep him
boly
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 22, 2017 16:11:54 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 22, 2017 16:11:54 GMT -5
Nice summary, Boly. Conor is far from a great player, but he's not bad for a bench player. If he could just hit southpaws and play the middle infield, he'd be an excellent one. Of course, if he could do all that, he'd probably be starting somewhere as a middle infielder.
That said, anyone taken a look at the major league depth at second, short and third? Better than at first base, catcher or in the outfield. A lot of the good talent at those positions is young too, especially at short.
I would have to say that only Carlos Correa, Corey Seager, Francisco Lindor and Trea Turner are better than the Giants' own Brandon Crawford, and Turner has less than a full season's track record, so I could see ranking Brandon as high as fourth, which is where Bleacher Report ranked him.
I think too that Joe Panik will perform as better than the #18 second baseman this season, although there is tremendous depth at the position and even being ranked #18 isn't bad.
The position with the least depth? Probably catcher. If we look at pitchers, bullpen depth has probably never been as good as it is now. And while the injury to Will Smith hurts, the Giants have a little of it themselves. Not so much from the left side though, now that Smith is out.
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 24, 2017 2:06:48 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 24, 2017 2:06:48 GMT -5
Rog- I would have to say that only Carlos Correa, Corey Seager, Francisco Lindor and Trea Turner are better than the Giants' own Brandon Crawford
Boagie- Turner played 6 inning at shortstop in 2016. Need I really alaborate more on how ridiculous that comment is?
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 24, 2017 9:33:23 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 24, 2017 9:33:23 GMT -5
1-We haven't seen enough of Seager to make a determination
2-Turner: See boagie's comment above
3-Lindor: Yes, he's faster, yes, likely more offensive upside, but until I see him: 1-Grow as Crawford has 2-Consistently make the routine plays like Crawford does (because right now, he doesn't make them anywhere near as often), then I might see him as better.
Until then, I'll take Crawford.
boly
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Hwang
Mar 24, 2017 12:24:49 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Mar 24, 2017 12:24:49 GMT -5
Craw outplayed every SS in the WBC tournament
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 24, 2017 12:34:31 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 24, 2017 12:34:31 GMT -5
Rog- I would have to say that only Carlos Correa, Corey Seager, Francisco Lindor and Trea Turner are better than the Giants' own Brandon Crawford Boagie- Turner played 6 inning at shortstop in 2016. Need I really alaborate more on how ridiculous that comment is? Rog -- No, you don't -- because it really isn't. Looking forward, Trea is likely going to be better than Brandon this season. While Trea played almost exclusively at second base and in center field with the Nationals because that was where he was needed, prior to joining the Nationals, he had played all but 13 of his professional games at his natural position of shortstop. Aren't you penalizing him for sacrificing himself for the good of the team? Trea is a far better athlete than Brandon, so while I don't expect him to be as good defensively (and possibly not NEARLY as good), despite having to move to TWO new positions, he hit .342 last season, with a .940 OPS. He was a plus defender at both his new positions. He stole 33 bases in just 73 games (while being caught only 6 times). Trea is 23. Brandon wasn't in the major leagues until he was 24, and he was rushed at that. How many teams do you think WOULDN'T trade Crawford for Turner if they had the opportunity? By the way, Boagie, I did say in my post, "Turner has less than a full season's track record, so I could see ranking Brandon as high as fourth, which is where Bleacher Report ranked him." I think I covered the situation pretty well. Will Turner fall back a little toward reality this season? Almost certainly. But he can fall a fair amount and still be a better player than Brandon -- unless he truly stinks it up in the field, and no one is expecting that. Here's a tiny bit of perspective: Trea is known much more for his base running than his power hitting, yet in his 73 games he homered one more time than Brandon homered in over twice as many games. As for stealing bases, Trea's 33 in half a season are 50% more than Brandon has stolen in six seasons. I think Brandon is a GREAT shortstop fielding-wise. I mean ALL-TIME great. Probably top 10 or 20. And he's developed into a better hitter the past two seasons than I thought he would ever become. But I would trade him for Trea Turner in a flash, and the Giants might well become the NL West favorites immediately. Could Trea hit a bump in the road this season? Certainly. But I would have to say that his FLOOR seems close to where Brandon is right now. And his ceiling is nearly unlimited. Fantasy baseball isn't real baseball, and it doesn't consider defense at all, but Trea will usually be a top 20 pick, while Brandon won't always go in the top 200. It seems unlikely that Brandon's fielding edge will be enough to make up that difference. If Turner isn't better than Brandon this season, I would be very surprised if he isn't the next season. Turner is darn good. Prior to last season and at the age of 22, he was Baseball America's #9 prospect. If he were still a rookie now, he might be ranked #1. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3777/hwang#ixzz4cGS62BJ7Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3777/hwang#ixzz4cGOwTLbH
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Hwang
Mar 24, 2017 12:43:52 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Mar 24, 2017 12:43:52 GMT -5
I'll take a guy who is a PROVEN stud over a guy who MIGHT be good later every day of the week and twice on Sunday
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 24, 2017 15:31:34 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 24, 2017 15:31:34 GMT -5
I'll take a guy who is a PROVEN stud over a guy who MIGHT be good later every day of the week and twice on Sunday Rog -- If the Giants had taken that position, they would have either won or lost the 2010 World Championship with Bengie Molina as their catcher. As the #9 prospect a year ago, Turner was getting into Posey/Bumgarner/Lincecum prospect territory. Anyone here who WOULDN'T trade Crawford for Turner? I would guess that Turner is one of the 10 most tradeable players in the game. We were talking only caliber of play here, but let's look at the broader picture. The Giants could have traded Crawford over the winter for Turner -- and had enough money left over to sign Ian Desmond or one of the other free agent outfielders or first basemen. If the Giants had been able to trade Crawford for Turner, they would almost certainly be favored to win the NL West -- and would likely be set at shortstop for a dozen more seasons. Plus they would have Turner controlled at bargain prices for the next six seasons. Any GM who refused to trade Crawford for Turner would likely be putting his job at risk. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3777/hwang#ixzz4cHDlH5zH
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 24, 2017 16:29:49 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 24, 2017 16:29:49 GMT -5
Bengie Molina wasn't a back to back gold glove winner, his brother however was, would you have considered Posey better than Yadier? I recall the conversation back then was Posey was darn good but not quite at the level of Yadier.
As much as I like Buster, and liked him in 2010, I wouldn't have traded Yadier for Buster.
Yadier and Posey is a much more credible analogy than Bengie and Posey.
Just like Don with Posey, you have a very similar stance on Crawford. You delegitimize him because you hate the fact that you were 100% wrong about him.
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 24, 2017 20:44:35 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 24, 2017 20:44:35 GMT -5
I think the problem Don has with Posey is as much mental as anything else.
By that I mean, Don and I come from a different era; an era in which catchers started at the position at a young age and thus, when they got to the show, many of the 'expected' mechanics they need were second nature.
Posey LOOKS awkward behind the plate.
he does.
There's no other way to say it.
It ISN'T his natural position, and thus, his methods don't LOOK normal.
Then again, neither does Hunter Pence.
Just because it doesn't "look" normal, doesn't mean he can't be good, or even very good.
My problem with Posey is the ridiculous hype he gets.
Awkward or not, he IS a good defensive catcher. He just doesn't go about it as smoothly as other, more polished catchers.
But the hype he gets for his offense drives me crazy.
For a catcher, he's pretty good.
But the hype casts a net over him that paints him more than he is.
IF he were a 1B, we'd be saying his average to above average.
Still, other than Yadier, whom I'd prefer, he can catch me anytime.
boly
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Hwang
Mar 25, 2017 1:45:48 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Mar 25, 2017 1:45:48 GMT -5
I love Benjie but did I miss his Gold Gloves and Silver Slugger awards? He was FAR from an elite level catcher, not even in his own family.
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 25, 2017 2:01:53 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 25, 2017 2:01:53 GMT -5
1-We haven't seen enough of Seager to make a determination 2-Turner: See boagie's comment above 3-Lindor: Yes, he's faster, yes, likely more offensive upside, but until I see him: 1-Grow as Crawford has 2-Consistently make the routine plays like Crawford does (because right now, he doesn't make them anywhere near as often), then I might see him as better. Until then, I'll take Crawford. Rog -- I understand what you're saying, but I wouldn't apply for any general manager jobs. Seager was not only the Rookie of the Year, he finished #3 in the MVP voting. When do we think will be the next time Brandon accomplishes that feat. Turner has done far less than Seager, but he's been fabulous in his brief time -- even though he had to play out of position -- at two different positions, nonetheless, without much training at either position. If Turner isn't better than Crawford this year, he soon will be. Lindor is very close to Crawford as a fielder, and he's the offensive player Brandon always dreamed of being. What we've got here is three guys with a shot at the Hall of Fame. I'll put the over/under at two. Maybe one and a half. Brandon should go down as a great-fielding shortstop, one of the best ever, but even his mom doesn't think he'll make the Hall of Fame. You guys take Crawford, but you won't get a single offer to trade him for any of the others. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3777/hwang#ixzz4cJnSCXTb
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 25, 2017 2:03:45 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 25, 2017 2:03:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 25, 2017 2:16:21 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 25, 2017 2:16:21 GMT -5
I love Benjie but did I miss his Gold Gloves and Silver Slugger awards? He was FAR from an elite level catcher, not even in his own family. Rog -- You're right. Bengie wasn't elite. Of course, then again, neither is Brandon (except defensively). I would say Brandon has been better. But Bengie was good enough to bat clean up a couple of seasons. Maybe we should use Willie McCovey and Orlando Cepeda as our example. Or Cepeda and Bill White. Or Willie Mays and Bobby Thomson. Or Jim Ray Hart and Jimmy Davenport. Or Dick Dietz and Tom Haller. Or Jack Clark and Bobby Murcer. Or -- well, I think you get the idea. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3777/hwang?page=1#ixzz4cJpdifSw
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Hwang
Mar 25, 2017 2:18:59 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Mar 25, 2017 2:18:59 GMT -5
Only idiots like Collins doesn't KNOW that Crawford is elite. Did you miss the silver slugger award he won?
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 25, 2017 2:40:04 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 25, 2017 2:40:04 GMT -5
Awkward or not, he IS a good defensive catcher. He just doesn't go about it as smoothly as other, more polished catchers. But the hype he gets for his offense drives me crazy. For a catcher, he's pretty good. Rog -- Who cares what Buster looks like defensively if he's good at it? As far as his offense, you're not giving him enough credit. For a catcher, he's more than pretty good. He's elite. Among all the catchers of our lifetime, his .307 batting average is behind only Mike Piazza. His .848 OPS is behind only Piazza and Roy Campanella. His 136 OPS+ are behind only Mike Piazza. Gary Carter was a pretty good hitter, wasn't he? His OPS was 75 points below Buster's. That's 40% bigger than the difference between Willie Mays and Moises Alou. Buster's OPS is only one point below Orlando Cepeda, not that Orlando could hit. Gary's OPS+ of 115 compared to Buster's 136 shows that on a park-adjusted basis, Gary has less than half as much better than the league average hitter as Buster has been. Only 101 players in history who have over 3000 plate appearances have an OPS+ higher than Buster. For a catcher, his hitting is pretty good? Yeah. And Van Gogh was a pretty good painter too. Vincent didn't look too good. But he got the job done. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3777/hwang?page=1#ixzz4cJswo03X
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 25, 2017 2:56:27 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 25, 2017 2:56:27 GMT -5
By the way, I once thought Buster's hitting was overrated too, but the closer I look, the more I see it isn't.
Let's not forget that AT&T Park holds down guys' offense. We really should take that into consideration.
If we want to look at Buster's hardware, his won the ROY, an MVP, three Silver Sluggers and a Gold Glove. He's a four-time All-Star. That's as many Silver Sluggers and Gold Gloves as Carlton Fisk won in Carlton's Hall of Fame career, and Carlton never won the MVP.
There is a Hall of Fame indicator with the acronym JAWS, and after the equivalent of five full seasons, Buster already ranks #26 among all the catchers to ever play the game. He ranks right behind Roy Campanella, who was a GREAT catcher (kind of like Sandy Koufax in that he career was ended prematurely). Roy played 10 years to gain his JAWS rating.
Buster's Wins Above Replacement for his seven top seasons are also the 26th-best ever. Even though he has played only seven seasons, with only four of those being full seasons. When he puts together seven full seasons, Buster has a shot at ranking behind only Johnny Bench and Gary Carter in this rating of a player's seven peak years.
It appears that if other over-appreciate Buster, we may be guilty of UNDER-appreciating him. Considering that he took up catching late, it appears he's done pretty well.
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 25, 2017 3:00:01 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 25, 2017 3:00:01 GMT -5
One last point about Buster: While even for a catcher he's not a GREAT base runner, he is well above average for the position -- even though he was slow to begin with and was further slowed by his horrific ankle injury.
So, for a catcher -- great hitter, excellent defender, and an above-average base runner. Not sure what else we should expect.
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 25, 2017 9:35:12 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 25, 2017 9:35:12 GMT -5
Rog- One last point about Buster: While even for a catcher he's not a GREAT base runner, he is well above average for the position -- even though he was slow to begin with and was further slowed by his horrific ankle injury.
Boagie- Maybe my memory is off, but I recall Buster having pretty good wheels before the injury.
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 25, 2017 10:11:21 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 25, 2017 10:11:21 GMT -5
Awkward or not, he IS a good defensive catcher. He just doesn't go about it as smoothly as other, more polished catchers.
But the hype he gets for his offense drives me crazy.
For a catcher, he's pretty good.
Rog -- Who cares what Buster looks like defensively if he's good at it?
****boly says***
Rog, please keep my post in context. I was RESPONDING to what Don wrote, merely trying to explain my opinion on why Don doesn't see him as a good catcher.
As a Sociologist, here's what I've learned: whether we want to or not, people often have a subconscious bias towards people and things.
We are not consciously aware of why we are 'turned off' by certain people and or their actions, we just are.
Thus at a level at which Don is not aware, he doesn't "see" Posey as a good catcher BECAUSE he looks awkward.
It's not easy to over come those built in resistances. Some would argue impossible.
There are other reasons, of course.
One of the explanations/theories I've read, for instance, on "why" we sometimes dislike a person we just met has to do with pheromones.
Pheromones are odors our olfactory systems recognizes at an unconscious level, of which we are not aware.
boly
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 25, 2017 10:13:18 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 25, 2017 10:13:18 GMT -5
Finishing my post, Rog. Thus YOU might not care what a player 'looks' like as he plays his position, but others unconsciously do.
Again, I reference Hunter Pence.
I'm willing to BET a ton of scouts urged their teams to take a pass on him BECAUSE he didn't do things "correctly."
Correctly meaning their preconceived ideas of 'how' a hitter should look, and how a person should throw.
boly
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 25, 2017 10:20:02 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 25, 2017 10:20:02 GMT -5
Sorry, Rog, but I do NOT see Posey as an elite hitter for a catcher.
I see a 'good' hitter, but far, far from elite.
Maybe that's my built in bias, shaped, unfortunately because I resent the ridiculous hype he gets.
As I said, there are many who believe that it may be impossible to change those thoughts.
As usual, we see him through different eyes.
Your eyes are shaped by numbers, comparing him to others.
I don't care how the numbers compare to other eras.
What I SEE is a hitter undeserving of the hype he gets.
What I SEE is a 4 hole hitter who doesn't drive in 100 runs, or even 90+ runs nearly enough to be considered elite.
What I SEE is a hitter who fails in the clutch far too often for my taste.
You're going to disagree, and that's okay.
You're going to reference numbers which, to me, are moot.
That's okay.
boly
|
|
|
Hwang
Mar 25, 2017 12:11:13 GMT -5
Post by donk33 on Mar 25, 2017 12:11:13 GMT -5
The most important things I rate a catcher is how he relates with his pitchers and how he runs the defensive part of the game.....all I see with Posey is a guy who shows very little in "thinking" along with his pitchers. I don't see a guy setting up hitters for the type of game an individual pitcher likes to pitch...to me, he simply puts down numbers and waits for a pitcher to pick one out...equally important, he seems almost disinterested in how a game is proceeding...he doesn't go to the mound to talk when a pitcher is getting cuffed around in order to give him a blow and talk over how to handle the game....Posey just doesn't seem to care....the B league catcher I had in the Army could teach Posey how to call a game...and yet back the pitcher when he wants to deviate...
|
|