352E23222B2728460 wrote: We can compare every .214 hitter who comes along to Cal Ripken and play him instead one of our only sources of power on the team. At least the .214 hitter works for the LM.
I'm surprised no one has dusted off The Roberto Clemente Apology for this guy yet. Has The CRJ Apology replaced it or something?
Adam Frazier
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
Adam Frazier
4A676A7B7C6D7A3A39080 wrote: .246 isn't far from average.
And, if it and his HRs are 'below average,' then what is .214?
It's not as if we're replacing Polanco with any Willie Mays.
It is meaningless to compare a BA after 83 ABs to a BA after 2,547 ABs.
At this point we have no idea if Alford will be better than Polanco. The only things we know for sure are that Polanco has already compiled an unimpressive body of work after 7 seasons as an everyday player and that Alford's career is in its infancy with barely anything to go on other than 83 scattered ABs over 4 seasons with a career high of 28 ABs in any one season. Polanco had as many as 593 ABs in one season alone.
But you act as if we don't need to see anything more from Alford because of his "career" BA of .214. Heck, if you want to use absurdly small sample sizes for comparison, Alford's career BA for the Pirates is .250. That's better than Polanco's .246. Dump Polanco! And while we're at it, let's release Jared Oliva. He's a career .188 hitter.
Cal Ripken Jr began his career with 11 hits in his first 83 ABs. (Holy cow!, that's fewer than Alford's 14 for 83!) But in a bizarre move, the Orioles did not conclude that he would be a career .133 hitter. Go figure. Somehow, amazingly, incredibly, they came up with the crazy idea that perhaps he had not demonstrated his full ability as a hitter after compiling a career of 83 ABs. Those people could never work in Weenie World where Ripken and Alford would both be on the Hall of Shame wall as 2 of the biggest flops in MLB history and John Paciorek would be crowned as the greatest hitter in MLB history with a perfect 1.000 mark in his career 3 ABs.
Alford probably won't be in the Hall of Fame. He's probably no Ripken. But maybe, just maybe, 83 career ABs is not enough to draw a conclusion on his ability. (I dunno, just tossin' that out there.)
Stop making sense, Bobster. It's too confusing to some.
And, if it and his HRs are 'below average,' then what is .214?
It's not as if we're replacing Polanco with any Willie Mays.
It is meaningless to compare a BA after 83 ABs to a BA after 2,547 ABs.
At this point we have no idea if Alford will be better than Polanco. The only things we know for sure are that Polanco has already compiled an unimpressive body of work after 7 seasons as an everyday player and that Alford's career is in its infancy with barely anything to go on other than 83 scattered ABs over 4 seasons with a career high of 28 ABs in any one season. Polanco had as many as 593 ABs in one season alone.
But you act as if we don't need to see anything more from Alford because of his "career" BA of .214. Heck, if you want to use absurdly small sample sizes for comparison, Alford's career BA for the Pirates is .250. That's better than Polanco's .246. Dump Polanco! And while we're at it, let's release Jared Oliva. He's a career .188 hitter.
Cal Ripken Jr began his career with 11 hits in his first 83 ABs. (Holy cow!, that's fewer than Alford's 14 for 83!) But in a bizarre move, the Orioles did not conclude that he would be a career .133 hitter. Go figure. Somehow, amazingly, incredibly, they came up with the crazy idea that perhaps he had not demonstrated his full ability as a hitter after compiling a career of 83 ABs. Those people could never work in Weenie World where Ripken and Alford would both be on the Hall of Shame wall as 2 of the biggest flops in MLB history and John Paciorek would be crowned as the greatest hitter in MLB history with a perfect 1.000 mark in his career 3 ABs.
Alford probably won't be in the Hall of Fame. He's probably no Ripken. But maybe, just maybe, 83 career ABs is not enough to draw a conclusion on his ability. (I dunno, just tossin' that out there.)
Stop making sense, Bobster. It's too confusing to some.
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
Adam Frazier
4C575A5B525E513F0 wrote: We can compare every .214 hitter who comes along to Cal Ripken and play him instead one of our only sources of power on the team. At least the .214 hitter works for the LM.
Source of power? Really? Have you not been paying attention to this guy the past few years?
Source of power? Really? Have you not been paying attention to this guy the past few years?
-
ArnoldRothstein
Adam Frazier
Alford has 749 plate appearances in Triple A, .250/.326/.374. 319 plate appearances in Triple A in 2019, .259/.343/.411. 26 years old, 2,500 plate appearances as a pro.
-
skinnyhorse
- Posts: 926
- Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:19 am
Adam Frazier
3365736768726269647341666C60686D2F62010 wrote: I would rather have Polanco in the outfield over Osuna, Alford, or Frazier.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
_______
What I see in Alford is a career .214 hitter with no power. What I see in Polanco is a career .246 hitter with some power.
But you're ignoring his poor outfield play, his horrid base running, and his inability to stay healthy for an appreciable length of time. Those all matter, too. For me, they offset a BA that's below average and the ocassional HR.
Polanco has the physical attributes to be a home run threat that few people have. The problem is he hasn't turned that into production. He could that remains to be seen but he's already wasted several years of under performing. I wouldn't give him away, if someone offered me something worth while I'd consider it. Just be smart no stupid.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
_______
What I see in Alford is a career .214 hitter with no power. What I see in Polanco is a career .246 hitter with some power.
But you're ignoring his poor outfield play, his horrid base running, and his inability to stay healthy for an appreciable length of time. Those all matter, too. For me, they offset a BA that's below average and the ocassional HR.
Polanco has the physical attributes to be a home run threat that few people have. The problem is he hasn't turned that into production. He could that remains to be seen but he's already wasted several years of under performing. I wouldn't give him away, if someone offered me something worth while I'd consider it. Just be smart no stupid.
-
BellevueBuc
- Posts: 343
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 1:41 pm
Adam Frazier
062A22252E093E28384B0 wrote: So --- You want to keep Polanco?
Keeping Polanco is not a bad idea. No one will trade for him, they have no prospects to play RF and Polanco's issue was clearly due to lack of playing time. His K rate was extremely abnormal for him, playing winter ball is a big deal. He was destroying the ball at times, he gets on track he is a player to keep, not get rid of for some random minor leaguer.
Keeping Polanco is not a bad idea. No one will trade for him, they have no prospects to play RF and Polanco's issue was clearly due to lack of playing time. His K rate was extremely abnormal for him, playing winter ball is a big deal. He was destroying the ball at times, he gets on track he is a player to keep, not get rid of for some random minor leaguer.
-
BellevueBuc
- Posts: 343
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 1:41 pm
Adam Frazier
59424F4E474B442A0 wrote: I would rather have Polanco in the outfield over Osuna, Alford, or Frazier.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
Osuna is not going to be with the team and Alford is going to be in CF, so it really does not matter if they are better talents than Polanco.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
Osuna is not going to be with the team and Alford is going to be in CF, so it really does not matter if they are better talents than Polanco.
-
ArnoldRothstein
Adam Frazier
Polanco hit 23 homers in 2018 before he did his swan dive. He only had 341 plate appearances combined in 2019-20.
I've said this before: if Polanco was floating around for free, a lot of people would advocate taking a flier on him. Well, for the Pirates he is pretty nearly free unless, someone will take his salary. The big question is: is he actually blocking anyone? As always, there's only four outfielders on the 40-man roster, so I don't think he's being pushed aside.
I've said this before: if Polanco was floating around for free, a lot of people would advocate taking a flier on him. Well, for the Pirates he is pretty nearly free unless, someone will take his salary. The big question is: is he actually blocking anyone? As always, there's only four outfielders on the 40-man roster, so I don't think he's being pushed aside.
-
BellevueBuc
- Posts: 343
- Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 1:41 pm
Adam Frazier
497A6667646C5A677C607B7C6D6166080 wrote: Polanco hit 23 homers in 2018 before he did his swan dive. He only had 341 plate appearances combined in 2019-20.
I've said this before: if Polanco was floating around for free, a lot of people would advocate taking a flier on him. Well, for the Pirates he is pretty nearly free unless, someone will take his salary. The big question is: is he actually blocking anyone? As always, there's only four outfielders on the 40-man roster, so I don't think he's being pushed aside.
He is blocking Cole Tucker from playing more in the OF. Which is to say, no he is not blocking anyone.
I've said this before: if Polanco was floating around for free, a lot of people would advocate taking a flier on him. Well, for the Pirates he is pretty nearly free unless, someone will take his salary. The big question is: is he actually blocking anyone? As always, there's only four outfielders on the 40-man roster, so I don't think he's being pushed aside.
He is blocking Cole Tucker from playing more in the OF. Which is to say, no he is not blocking anyone.
-
2drfischer@gmail.c
Adam Frazier
4D555750504756514C4D5B3E0 wrote: I would rather have Polanco in the outfield over Osuna, Alford, or Frazier.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
_______
What I see in Alford is a career .214 hitter with no power. What I see in Polanco is a career .246 hitter with some power.
But you're ignoring his poor outfield play, his horrid base running, and his inability to stay healthy for an appreciable length of time. Those all matter, too. For me, they offset a BA that's below average and the ocassional HR.
Polanco has the physical attributes to be a home run threat that few people have. The problem is he hasn't turned that into production. He could that remains to be seen but he's already wasted several years of under performing. I wouldn't give him away, if someone offered me something worth while I'd consider it. Just be smart no stupid.
Sound advice for any GM. But I'm a fan and I've seen enough of him. The sooner he's gone the sooner the team gets better, in my opinion.
So you're not interested in having the best talent on the field? I thought you were a Pirates fan.
______
I don't consider Osuna and Alford to be better talents than Polanco.
_______
What I see in Alford is a career .214 hitter with no power. What I see in Polanco is a career .246 hitter with some power.
But you're ignoring his poor outfield play, his horrid base running, and his inability to stay healthy for an appreciable length of time. Those all matter, too. For me, they offset a BA that's below average and the ocassional HR.
Polanco has the physical attributes to be a home run threat that few people have. The problem is he hasn't turned that into production. He could that remains to be seen but he's already wasted several years of under performing. I wouldn't give him away, if someone offered me something worth while I'd consider it. Just be smart no stupid.
Sound advice for any GM. But I'm a fan and I've seen enough of him. The sooner he's gone the sooner the team gets better, in my opinion.