rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 19, 2018 8:24:05 GMT -5
Why is Brandon Belt a good player? It's simple.
When a batter comes to the plate, his job is to avoid making an out. When a fielder has a chance to make a play, his job is to get the out.
Brandon does both those jobs well. When someone does his jobs well, he's good at his job. Good.
Offense = no out.
Defense = out.
Brandon is a good offensive player, and he's a good defensive player. He's good at both. Good.
Let's look at Boly to see why he's good at his job. His job is to help his students learn. His job is to make his players better. Boly is good at both. Boly is a good teacher. Good.
Good = Students learn
Good = Players improve
Boly is good at helping his students learn. He's good at helping his players improve. He's good at both. Good.
Get outs and avoid making them, and you're a good baseball player. Brandon Belt does both of those things well. Brandon Belt is a good player.
It's simple.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Feb 19, 2018 10:41:43 GMT -5
I will agree that Belt is a good player, Rog, when...
He stops going through slumps that seem as long as eleventeen years. (Brandon's slumps are outrageously long. UN acceptably long. Longer than ANYONE's I've ever seen in 60+ years of watching the game)
He corrects that "criquette" style bat swing
He stops trying to PULL everything.
He begins doing what he did when he first came up; driving the ball consistently to left field.
Heck, I'll even go one step further.
If he stops doing THREE (3) of those things for a complete season, THEN I'll acknowledge him as a good player.
Until then, he's nothing more than an above average, UNDER achiever; a walking brain-fart waiting to happen; a big oaf blessed with talent he never comes close to meeting.
boly
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Feb 19, 2018 13:47:03 GMT -5
There are other indications of a good player. There are things a good player avoids doing, such as...
1. A good player avoids making mental mistakes, such as forgetting to cover his assigned base.
2. A good 1st basemen avoids wandering too far away from his base for a ground ball that can easily be fielded by his gold glove second baseman.
3. A good/tough player NEVER begs to leave a game with a lower body "injury" and then walks off the field with no obvious limp...and then starts the next day's game. That's called getting a boo boo and most players Pony League level or above play through that.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 20, 2018 5:29:07 GMT -5
Brandon Belt is a good offensive player. He's more than a good defensive player. He's a good player.
No one is saying he's perfect. No one is saying he doesn't have flaws. No one is saying he should be an All-Star every year (perhaps shouldn't be an All-Star at all) or that he belongs in the Hall of Fame.
Brandon Belt is a good offensive player. He's more than a good defensive player. That he does certain things that irk us can't take away from that.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 21, 2018 4:31:04 GMT -5
You guys are defining a good player not by how he performs, but essentially by how well he fits your own personal profile of how a player becomes a good player. Performance is the measure of a good player, while performance in the specific areas you guys define is the measure not of a good player, but of a player who performs in the MANNER you guys want.
I used the top third of qualifiers in each of the past three seasons (Belt didn't quite qualify in 2017, but he came fairly close) as my definition of good. I would, of course, have used a much higher level if looking for a great player. So what we're looking for is, how close did Brandon come to meeting the criteria for "good" in the areas of OBP, SLG, OPS and fielding.
Let's start with fielding. Brandon is clearly good at fielding, ranking in the top third of first basemen in the Fielding Bible voting each of the past three seasons. In 2017 he was ranked second, which gets close to the "great" area.
With regard to hitting, here is where Brandon ranked in comparison to the threshold for the top third in OBP, SLG and OPS in each of the past three seasons.
2015 -- OBP, plus 9 points. SLG, plus 24 points. OPS, plus 42 points.
2016 -- OBP, plus 39 points. SLG, minus 8 points. OPS, plus 43 points.
2017 -- OBP, plus 1 point. SLG, minus 18 points. OPS, minus 13 points.
Given that Brandon plays in a pitchers' park, he is clearly in the top third of hitters.
One wouldn't have to be in the top third of hitters and the top third of fielders in order to be good. He could be somewhat below the top third on one side of the ball if he were significantly above on the other side. But Brandon is clearly in the top third on either side of the ball.
Brandon meets the qualifications for a good player fairly easily. He may not do so in the precise manner each of you prescribe, but he gets the results of a good player, and isn't it results we're after?
If we are looking for a good player, Brandon makes the cut. If we're looking for a player who fits the personal profiles you guys expect, he doesn't.
My sense is that when people rank players, they do so based on performance, not on the special and personal criteria you guys come up with regarding HOW a player is to perform his accomplishments.
And that is clearly as it should be.
Using the manner you guys use, I could show that Klay Thompson is a better player than Steph Curry. Although Steph is a great shooter in his own right, Klay has the purer shot. And Klay is the better defensive player. Thus, Klay must be the better player of the two.
We know, of course, that isn't true. Both players may wind up in the Hall of Fame, but only Steph is ranked among the all-time greatest.
If we use results as our criteria, Brandon is good. At the end of the season, they don't ask of wins, how? They ask, how many?
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 21, 2018 4:38:20 GMT -5
One reason the Giants have a chance to be a good, likely not great team is that they have many players with a decent chance to be good this season: Bumgarner, Cueto, Samardzija (?), Melancon, Watkins, Posey, Belt, Panik, Crawford, Longoria and McCutchen. That would be nearly half the team as good players, and a high percentage of the starting players and pitchers, as well as the relievers.
In all likelihood not all the above players will wind up with a good season. But others such as Pence might. And some of the good players might not be just good, but very good or even excellent.
The Giants have question marks. Is the rotation deep enough? The outfield? The bullpen? Do the trainers have enough Geritol on hand?
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Feb 21, 2018 11:41:31 GMT -5
I'm in favor of trading Belt for however little his trade value is and giving his job to Shaw...that way we wont have to worry about the luxury tax or whatever the correct terminology is. Shaw's ceiling, IMO, is better than merely "good."
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Feb 21, 2018 14:25:24 GMT -5
I would like to see Belt gone, too, Randy... but I don't think NOW is the best time to move him.
1-He needs to show he's healthy and can actually play a full year.
2-He needs to show more consistency at the plate.
3-He needs to show there are NO ill effects from his concussions.
All of those will increase his trade value.
As to Shaw, IMHO, based upon the video I've seen, he's flat out not ready.
He has a huge loop at the top of his swing that makes him VERY vulnerable to well placed gas; which ML pitchers can do.
I would like to see Shaw after he gets 200+ abs in AAA.
The next off season I'd consider a Belt move, but not before.
boly
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 21, 2018 21:16:52 GMT -5
I think you've got the right idea, Boly.
On the positive side, I heard that Derek Law was lavish in his praise for Shaw's hitting. And you and I likely agree that if Shaw can shorten his swing, it could be a thing of beauty.
Your analysis of Shaw's being able to be beaten by well-placed fastballs seems good too. While he kept his average and power up well at Sacramemto, he struck out nearly once every three at bats, indicating his average is likely to fall substantially without an improvement in his swing. He had 106 strikeouts compared to 20 walks, which shows a lack of plate control.
Then there's the thing about his glove. His best position is designated hitter. I can't see left field as being prominent in his future, and he's not a very good first baseman either.
I think it would be a great success for Shaw this season if he could be ready should Belt become injured.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Feb 22, 2018 10:37:22 GMT -5
Every time I watch video of Shaw hitting he has what I call a 'loop' at the top of his swing. He's a big guy to begin with, but that 'loop' is just one more moving part that will need to be kept in sync as he swings. Most players have some type of start up action that gets their swing in motion. But a loop at the top makes the swing longer, and slower. And the slower/longer the swing is, the harder it will be to catch up to good gas. Now swings can be shortened, and since Shaw is NOT in the Show yet, chances are fairly high that he'd be willing to make a change. Regardless of size, most hitting coaches would agree that "shorter and quicker" to the ball is more desirable. We'll see. Defensive skills, by and large, are easier to improve than hitting problems. Especially at 1B when the problem usually begins with poor footwork. Poor footwork leads to a balance, or rather, an 'off' balance problem. Repetition can fix that to some degree. Hard or soft hands...THAT is an entirely different problem. Having coached as long as I did, 'soft' hands is often a talent that a player either has or hasn't. But that, too, can improve; at least a little bit, with repetition and good coaching. He may never, ever be JT Snow with the glove, but he doesn't have to be like Dr. Strangeglove himself, Dick Stuart. boly
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Feb 22, 2018 11:22:07 GMT -5
While I think Shaw COULD be a first baseman, I don't think that's the Giants plan for him, at least not last season. Last season he played ALL his games in the outfield. We'll see if that changes this season. If his bat is as good as he's demonstrated thus far, they'll have to find somewhere for him to play.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Feb 22, 2018 12:48:49 GMT -5
True statement, boagie.
But here's the glitch in that scenario; he's not fast enough, nor quick enough to play in our outfield.
His best position, according to what scouts who watch him say, is 1B.
I'd be willing to bet the Giants are taking a 'wait and see' attitude towards Belt.
IF...IF he finally can stay healthy and IF he finally can put together the season for which they and all of us have been waiting, they'll keep Brandon.
If not, they'll move him.
boly
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Feb 22, 2018 13:47:56 GMT -5
No offense Boly but I heard the same criticisms of Adam Duvall...he of the 200 RBI the last 2 seasons.
As for Shaw being ticketed for the OF, that might be because they have a big oaf taking up space and money at 1B.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Feb 22, 2018 14:36:53 GMT -5
Boly- IF...IF he finally can stay healthy and IF he finally can put together the season for which they and all of us have been waiting, they'll keep Brandon.
If not, they'll move him.
Boagie- He's never going to be the ballplayer you and Randy want, Boly. Not at AT&T. At his best he was a good hitter (decent for a first baseman) and a very good defender. That wasn't good enough for you two. That is Belt's ceiling, despite what Rog's projection was for Belt. Hes a streaky hitter, always has been, always will be.
By the way, if Belt has another sub par season, whether the Giants will want to move him or not, it will be very hard to do so.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Feb 22, 2018 14:39:32 GMT -5
No offense taken, Randy.
But please note that I said "our" outfield.
LF in Cincinnati is considerably smaller, which means less ground to cover and a slow, lumbering LF is easier to hide.
Then again, 200 RBIS in 2 seasons is a well deserved "hide" that likely could be worked around.
Pat Burrell, for instance. Captain stationary in LF, so no question, it 'can' be done.
We had Ishi out there, too, in the playoffs and worlds series.
I guess what I'm implying is that I don't really believe that the Giants are planning on him being a LF in the Show.
It's my opinion that last year at AAA, his playing LF was really more of an experiment; to see how he'd do.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 22, 2018 17:53:08 GMT -5
LF in Cincinnati is considerably smaller, which means less ground to cover and a slow, lumbering LF is easier to hide.
Rog -- Adam Duvall hasn't been as good as his homers and RBI's make it appear. As you say, Boly, he's playing in a hitters' park. And even then, he hits and walks so little that his OBP is about .300.
The thing that has surprised me is that he has played a nice left field. Whether he would be as good a fielder at AT&T I don't know, but his speed isn't too bad for left field. He's just one tick below Christian Arroyo and two below Joe Panik.
For top-end speed, he ranked #38 out of 58 left fielders in 2017. Among all players, he ranked #259 out of 451. The median speed for major leaguers is 27.2 mph (Joe Panik), and Adam is close at 27.0. Major league players range from Byron Buxton at 30.2 mph to Albert Pujols at 23.0.
We spoke about whether Buster Posey's being slow made him unsuited for hitting #3, but he's just one tick behind #3 hitter Anthony Rizzo. He's faster than Joey Votto, Jose Bautista, Mike Moustakas, Miguel Cabrera, Yonder Alonso and Justin Smoak, each of who batted a lot at #3 or #2 in the order last season.
Considering Buster to bat third for the Giants simply isn't anywhere near as stupid an idea as has been indicated here. I don't think I personally would bat him third this season, but to be honest, NOT considering him simply because he's slow would be a mistake.
It was implied that anyone who would bat Buster third didn't know much about baseball, but that is far from the truth, as many teams through the years have illustrated.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 22, 2018 18:21:36 GMT -5
I guess what I'm implying is that I don't really believe that the Giants are planning on him being a LF in the Show. It's my opinion that last year at AAA, his playing LF was really more of an experiment; to see how he'd do. Rog -- I think you're right on the money here, Boly. The scouts have questions as to whether Shaw is athletic enough to play a decent first base, let alone the outfield. Here are some reports: As expected, Shaw struggled defensively at first base. On the opening play of the game, he muffed a hard-hit grounder to his backhand side that would have been a routine play in the majors. He did not receive much more action during the game; however, John has already noted that Shaw’s "defense needs a lot of work to be acceptable." I believe that Shaw is athletic enough to learn to be serviceable at first, but this is clearly the area of his game that needs the most developing. A positive report: At the same time, Shaw has already shown enough to convince his manager he has a future in left field. "He's very natural in left field," Richmond manager Kyle Haines said. "He's bouncing back and forth just to give him some versatility, but he's an average first baseman right now and he's probably a better than average left fielder. I mean he's a big guy built like an NFL tight end and he moves around out there really well. As he plays out there more, scouts are going to see that more, how well he moves out there." Shaw's experience playing right field in college has helped ease the transition quite a bit. Chris Shaw leads the list and is a true prospect with a chance to be a Top 20 first baseman. However, the Giants have committed to Brandon Belt and unless they move him, Shaw will have to move to the outfield where he will be a potential liability. Relative to position, Shaw is a future 40 fielder at LF and 45 fielder at 1B. Shaw seems plenty comfortable moving in one direction and playing balls off the ground, but changing direction and adjusting to balls in the air gives him more trouble. Entering as a first baseman, the Giants have worked to expand his defensive arsenal. Shaw played exclusively at first in 2016, but he’s been split evenly between the corner and left field so far, this season. Realistically, he will never be a defense-first option in the outfield. He lacks the natural defensive instinct and ability to run in the field. The impression I get is that Shaw's outfield defense isn't hopeless, but the prognosis isn't positie. How does it look to the rest of your guys? One positive is that Shaw is said to be down to 226 pounds from 240. Read more at www.baseballamerica.com/minors/chris-shaw-adjusting-to-life-in-left-san-francisco-giants/#pyhOhMiHHPZoYkam.99Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4309/brandon-belt-good-player?page=1#ixzz57seJh7Cy
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 22, 2018 19:23:50 GMT -5
By the way, if Belt has another sub par season, Rog -- Interesting thought. It does feel like Brandon had a down season, primarily I guess because his batting average was well down. But he tied his career home run record, doing so in 110 fewer at bats. He finally started hitting those home runs we wanted! What intrigues me is that we felt Brandon had a down season in a year in which his OPS was .823 and he was rated the #2 fielder at first base. His OPS+, which takes park factor into effect, was 117. That's far from spectacular, but it is the career number for future Hall of Famer Adrian Beltra and former first baseman Steve Garvey. Here's the irony: If the Giants were struggling at first base both offensively and defensively, they would look to Belt performing even better in a hitters' park and think with their emphasis on speed (Brandon is above average for a first baseman and has stolen as many as 12 bases in a season) and defense, and would likely make him a trade target. Sadly, he's playing in the wrong park. Remember, his power on the road has been good in his career. It's at AT&T where he's struggled with power -- although most of his other numbers aside from home runs are up. It's likely that should the Giants replace him with Chris Shaw, we would finally fully appreciate his defense. Probably Shaw's power would play better at AT&T than Brandon's, but it should be worth noting that Brandon's career OPS in the majors is .819, only 35 points short of Shaw's .854 in the minors. Here is a stat that may be telling. Shaw has hit a homer every 20 at bats in the minors. ON THE ROAD, Brandon has hit a homer every 22 at bats. In the minors, Belt hit a homer every 20 at bats. Yes, despite the numbers above, I like Shaw's power better than Brandon's. Not a night and day difference, but better. But Shaw doesn't seem likely to hit for as high an average, and he doesn't get on base nearly as often. Belt's major league batting average of .268 is only 12 points lower than Shaw's minor league mark. For a more direct comparison, Belt's minor league average was 70 points higher than Shaw's. Brandon's major league on base percentage is 14 points higher than Shaw in the minors, and Brandon's minor league OBP was 117 points higher than Chris's. Shaw's swing looks a LOT better to me than Brandon's. And I have read reports that he is quick to the ball, despite any loop in his swing. But as Boly knows, there is more to hitting than a player's swing. The thing that concerns me most about Shaw is that at Sacramento last season, he struck out 106 times while walking only 20 times. THAT'S worrisome. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4309/brandon-belt-good-player?page=1#ixzz57ss2vOe3
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Feb 23, 2018 10:41:55 GMT -5
I, for one, do appreciate his defense, Rog.
But, like Randy, his mental boners drive me crazy!
As Randy pointed out, he all tooooooo often vacates his position to try for balls that belong to the 2Bman, and more importantly, LEAVE first base VACANT.
On the plus side, he has, good, soft hands, and is very adept at digging thrown balls out of the dirt.
THAT alone is invaluable.
He's NOT JT Snow, but then again, who is?
boly
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Feb 23, 2018 11:22:38 GMT -5
Everyone makes boneheaded plays, I'm sure even JT did once or twice. I haven't seen that many boneheaded plays by Belt, not any more than I could count on one hand.
What separates Belt and Snow is the fact that Belt doesn't make many smart plays to go along with the boneheaded ones. Belt doesn't have the same field vision as someone like Snow. Snow knew when to throw home or when not to. Snow knew to tag the base first or not to. Snow knew when someone was going to take a big turn around second or third.
Belt, from the neck down is better than Snow was, in my opinion. He's better at scooping balls, he has better range and a better arm. What JT had was that instinct and field vision that can't be taught.
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Feb 23, 2018 12:29:25 GMT -5
I, for one, do appreciate his defense, Rog. But, like Randy, his mental boners drive me crazy! As Randy pointed out, he all tooooooo often vacates his position to try for balls that belong to the 2Bman, and more importantly, LEAVE first base VACANT. On the plus side, he has, good, soft hands, and is very adept at digging thrown balls out of the dirt. THAT alone is invaluable. He's NOT JT Snow, but then again, who is? boly dk..I should hope that you taught your pitchers to cover first on any ball hit to the right side...also, Belt got caught once going to cover second on a ball popped inter short center when both second baseman and shortstop went for the ball...someone caught the ball and there was no one covering first...and this board was on Belt because he was making the right play...covering second...the pitcher should have covered first;....and Belt was blamed the whole year for the mistake(?)... his biggest mistake is he hustles too much, maybe....
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Feb 23, 2018 12:39:26 GMT -5
I did, Don, but, if you watch a lot of games... one all too often sees ML pitchers...have a brain fart and be slow getting over there.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Feb 23, 2018 12:41:00 GMT -5
boagie:
I agree, and I don't agree.
1-I don't think Belt is better at digging balls out.
Snow was one of the better ones I've ever seen.
2-Belt has a MUCH better arm, that's for sure!
3-From the neck down? Split.
Brandon has a much better build, but JT was a MUCH better hitter.
Brandon has yet to prove the same consistency.
boly
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Feb 23, 2018 12:41:33 GMT -5
I have seen no evidence of smart plays by Belt...could you provide examples, Boagie? He has soft hands and he has natural talent at the plate which, in my opinion, he never has come close to using at their full potential. This is what drives me and Boly to drink. He has considerable skills but his "want to" is severely lacking, as is his baseball IQ. To paraphrase a line from Bull Durham...I'd give my left nut to have half his talent, and I can guarandamntee you my mind wouldn't wander during games and I wouldn't walk off the field because I got a little booboo sliding into 2nd base.
FYI Boly...the JT you're comparing to Belt was AFTER some of his range diminished...in Anaheim, JT's range and arm was the equal or better than Belt's. And JT didn't willy nilly wander off first base to get balls that he knew would be an easier play for Kent to make. I have to disagree with you about the ball scooping. JT, IMHO, was far superior in that area even in his Giant days.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Feb 23, 2018 12:43:44 GMT -5
If you ask women, JT was better from the neck down...and from the neck up too for that matter. I wish I was his wing man...the leftovers would be tremendous!
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Feb 23, 2018 13:28:49 GMT -5
Now THAT was a great post, Randy!
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 23, 2018 14:46:51 GMT -5
I did, Don, but, if you watch a lot of games... one all too often sees ML pitchers...have a brain fart and be slow getting over there.
Rog -- Not that the first baseman shouldn't assume that the pitcher is going to cover and prepared to go to the bag himself (I got caught on that myself when I made perhaps my best diving stop but assumed the pitcher would cover), but the primary fault on that is the pitcher. They work on that play all spring training, for crying out loud.
Wherever I played, my instinct was to move in the direction of the ball. There are many plays on which a player's responsibility is such that he can't go very far toward the ball. But I simply took a step or two in the direction of the ball (unless I was the pivot man, just doesn't happen when you're left-handed). As a pitcher, that directed me toward first base on any ball hit to the right side. To me, it seems intuitive, and should be even easier for a right-handed pitcher who is falling toward first base anyway.
But I have to say that when Tim Lincecum made his All-Star start in 2009, he messed up covering first base not once, not twice, but three times. He got better at it later in his career.
But getting back to the particular play, almost all first basemen with good range -- and especially left-handed first basemen -- range too far to their right on occasion. The thing to do, of course, is see where the second baseman is playing prior to the pitch and then judge whether he can get to the ball. But the decision has to be made in an instant, and the first baseman isn't always going to make it correctly. It's even worse when he assumes the second baseman can get to the ball and then it goes through the hold for an unfortunate base hit.
I think Randy was talking about a play where Brandon simply didn't cover first base on a ball hit elsewhere, and indeed there is almost never an excuse for that. When you're playing first base, go to the bag and assume the ball IS going to go there. The only exception I can think of is the clear double (or play Don mentioned where both the second baseman and the shortstop vacate the bag), where the first baseman's job is to drag behind the batter in case he rounds the bag too far and can caught by a throw behind him. The mistake wasn't Brandon's on that play, although the pitcher too could have covered unless he was going to have to back up a base.
I don't remember the specific play Randy described, but if I understood his description, it was a clear mental error by Brandon. But I can assure you that Brandon gets far more extra outs than he gives up with what it some of the best first base defense in the game.
If we're talking about Brandon offensively only, he's likely better than we give him credit for, since playing at AT&T clearly hurts a left-handed power hitter. On the road, Brandon has hit about 25 homers per 550 at bats, and I think we would take 25 homers from him. Naturally we'd like even more, but 25 wouldn't be bad. If he didn't play at AT&T and could stay healthy, he likely would usually reach or approach that mark. If he played in a hitters' park, 30 might be reasonably attainable.
Of course we hate the bone headed play. But doesn't it make sense to evaluate his defense by how many net outs he gets after we subtract his mistakes from his good plays?
Likewise, at the plate, don't the results matter, not whether they come with a cricket swing or not?
Boagie mentioned that I was too high in my expectations for Brandon. I did reign them in a bit after his first season, and that is about the level he has achieved. I didn't know much about his defense, so he's been better on that side of the ball than I expected.
The one thing I did get right is when I told Boly that I thought Brandon would fare better at the plate than Jesus Montero, who was ranked the #3 overall prospect as a catcher for the Yankees. But I was right about that because Montero went on to hit just .253 over his career than because Brandon hit as well as I expected.
The bottom line here is still that Brandon is a good player offensively and that he's a very good player defensively. How a player can not be a good player with both those components is beyond me.
Last season wasn't Brandon's best year, but he still was close to the average first baseman at the plate. The average first baseman had an OPS of .836, and Brandon's was .823. In 2016 the average was .794, and Brandon's was .868. In other words, over the past two seasons combined, Brandon has hit clearly better than the average first baseman.
The feeling that Brandon isn't a good player seems to be based simply on personal bias as to HOW a player should play, not with his actual results.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 23, 2018 14:48:41 GMT -5
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Feb 23, 2018 14:57:43 GMT -5
Belt has a MUCH better arm, that's for sure! Rog -- Again, my memory is faint, but I thought JT had a really good arm as well. He was quite slow, but I thought his arm was strong. Despite having a father who was a great wide receiver with the Rams, he played quarterback his senior year of high school. I thought I heard on a Giants telecast that Robb Nen was one of his wide receivers, although I'm not positive about that. Brandon of course was a good pitcher in college, and might even have been drafted as a pitcher. But I think both players had extremely strong arms for a first baseman. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4309/brandon-belt-good-player?page=1#ixzz57xkI1PqW
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Feb 23, 2018 15:17:10 GMT -5
Rog -- Not that the first baseman shouldn't assume that the pitcher is going to cover and prepared to go to the bag himself (I got caught on that myself when I made perhaps my best diving stop but assumed the pitcher would cover), but the primary fault on that is the pitcher. They work on that play all spring training, for crying out loud.
Dood - the bottom line is this...the GOOD first baseman will be able to let the 2nd baseman get as many balls as he can because the easier throw is to a first baseman standing on the bag rather than a pitcher sprinting over...a moving target. It's a completely separate argument from a pitcher remembering or forgetting to cover the bag. The pitcher should be starting that way on all balls hit to the right side anyway. It's only when the first baseman fields the ball or when he foolishly takes himself out of the play when the 2nd baseman can make the play (like Belt too often does) that the pitcher's responsibility to cover the bag comes into play. Too often I've seen Kruk and Kuip praise Belt for making a difficult play (or worse, a failed attempt at a difficult play for him) on a ground ball that Panik could have turned into a routine 4-3 putout.
|
|