656E666A6F6E753036417860696E6E2F626E010 wrote: One player, not two. And Kendricks was added at the deadline, not when injury occurred.
Again, do people take the loss of Kang and Marte into consideration?
They don't make us a contender. The fact is NH didn't do a darn thing to use that money to replace them is/was a major problem. You keep giving the FO a pass.
Hurdle-4 more years!
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Hurdle-4 more years!
So, no difference at all? You honestly think that or just disagreeing with me like usual?
Five game difference would have them with the Cardinals and Brewers. Do you think those two teams aren't in contention too?
Seven game difference has them in the Wild Card Game. Do you think the Rockies aren't in contention?
I don't know what the difference would be, but the team certainly would be better than they are now or have been all year. I don't get how someone could think differently as Marte and Kang are two of the best in the league at their positions and are clearly better than their replacements.
Five game difference would have them with the Cardinals and Brewers. Do you think those two teams aren't in contention too?
Seven game difference has them in the Wild Card Game. Do you think the Rockies aren't in contention?
I don't know what the difference would be, but the team certainly would be better than they are now or have been all year. I don't get how someone could think differently as Marte and Kang are two of the best in the league at their positions and are clearly better than their replacements.
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3642
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
Hurdle-4 more years!
5A51595550514A0F097E475F565151105D513E0 wrote: So, no difference at all? You honestly think that or just disagreeing with me like usual?
Five game difference would have them with the Cardinals and Brewers. Do you think those two teams aren't in contention too?
Seven game difference has them in the Wild Card Game. Do you think the Rockies aren't in contention?
I don't know what the difference would be, but the team certainly would be better than they are now or have been all year. I don't get how someone could think differently as Marte and Kang are two of the best in the league at their positions and are clearly better than their replacements.
That doesn't exonerate the team from not finding adequate replacements though
Five game difference would have them with the Cardinals and Brewers. Do you think those two teams aren't in contention too?
Seven game difference has them in the Wild Card Game. Do you think the Rockies aren't in contention?
I don't know what the difference would be, but the team certainly would be better than they are now or have been all year. I don't get how someone could think differently as Marte and Kang are two of the best in the league at their positions and are clearly better than their replacements.
That doesn't exonerate the team from not finding adequate replacements though
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Hurdle-4 more years!
61535F5F4B795A535E5B5453320 wrote: So, no difference at all? You honestly think that or just disagreeing with me like usual?
Five game difference would have them with the Cardinals and Brewers. Do you think those two teams aren't in contention too?
Seven game difference has them in the Wild Card Game. Do you think the Rockies aren't in contention?
I don't know what the difference would be, but the team certainly would be better than they are now or have been all year. I don't get how someone could think differently as Marte and Kang are two of the best in the league at their positions and are clearly better than their replacements.
That doesn't exonerate the team from not finding adequate replacements though
I never said it did. I was very vocal about Kang.
I am just asking if people take those losses into consideration and the difference in games they would have made. To me, having pretty much the same record as last year without those two is surprising.
Five game difference would have them with the Cardinals and Brewers. Do you think those two teams aren't in contention too?
Seven game difference has them in the Wild Card Game. Do you think the Rockies aren't in contention?
I don't know what the difference would be, but the team certainly would be better than they are now or have been all year. I don't get how someone could think differently as Marte and Kang are two of the best in the league at their positions and are clearly better than their replacements.
That doesn't exonerate the team from not finding adequate replacements though
I never said it did. I was very vocal about Kang.
I am just asking if people take those losses into consideration and the difference in games they would have made. To me, having pretty much the same record as last year without those two is surprising.
Hurdle-4 more years!
6C676F6366677C393F487169606767266B67080 wrote: I think they would be in first place considering what the back ups (fill ins) did in their absence. Maybe between 10-15 game difference.
Wowzers man, half a year of Marte and a full year of Kang swings 10-15 games over Freese and Frazier/Jaso/Osuna/assortment
We have some $hit bench players, apparently
Wowzers man, half a year of Marte and a full year of Kang swings 10-15 games over Freese and Frazier/Jaso/Osuna/assortment
We have some $hit bench players, apparently
Hurdle-4 more years!
6C676F6366677C393F487169606767266B67080 wrote: So, no difference at all? You honestly think that or just disagreeing with me like usual?
Five game difference would have them with the Cardinals and Brewers. Do you think those two teams aren't in contention too?
Seven game difference has them in the Wild Card Game. Do you think the Rockies aren't in contention?
I don't know what the difference would be, but the team certainly would be better than they are now or have been all year. I don't get how someone could think differently as Marte and Kang are two of the best in the league at their positions and are clearly better than their replacements.
That doesn't exonerate the team from not finding adequate replacements though
I never said it did. I was very vocal about Kang.
I am just asking if people take those losses into consideration and the difference in games they would have made. To me, having pretty much the same record as last year without those two is surprising.
that only works if you say the Pirates lost wins and other teams didn't. The Bucs are 9.5 in back of the Cubs who have the worst record of any division leader. If you give every team back their two longest injured players (or players out like Kang) the Pirates might get more a couple more games back than other teams but very unlikely enough to win the division.
Five game difference would have them with the Cardinals and Brewers. Do you think those two teams aren't in contention too?
Seven game difference has them in the Wild Card Game. Do you think the Rockies aren't in contention?
I don't know what the difference would be, but the team certainly would be better than they are now or have been all year. I don't get how someone could think differently as Marte and Kang are two of the best in the league at their positions and are clearly better than their replacements.
That doesn't exonerate the team from not finding adequate replacements though
I never said it did. I was very vocal about Kang.
I am just asking if people take those losses into consideration and the difference in games they would have made. To me, having pretty much the same record as last year without those two is surprising.
that only works if you say the Pirates lost wins and other teams didn't. The Bucs are 9.5 in back of the Cubs who have the worst record of any division leader. If you give every team back their two longest injured players (or players out like Kang) the Pirates might get more a couple more games back than other teams but very unlikely enough to win the division.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Hurdle-4 more years!
Yep, a very crappy bench.
Osuna and Jaso were awful in the field and gave up a lot of runs. Jaso batted .143 in April. Osuna batted .169 in May. Frazier got hurt. Frazier cooled down with more playing time in June and July with an OPS under .675.
Other players who played in the outfield were Ortiz and Bostick. Moving Harrison out there had Hanson, Gosselin, Ngoepe playing in the infield.
It was bad. None of these guys could hit and some couldn't field (Gosselin was bad too). There was a huge drop off from Kang and Marte.
Osuna and Jaso were awful in the field and gave up a lot of runs. Jaso batted .143 in April. Osuna batted .169 in May. Frazier got hurt. Frazier cooled down with more playing time in June and July with an OPS under .675.
Other players who played in the outfield were Ortiz and Bostick. Moving Harrison out there had Hanson, Gosselin, Ngoepe playing in the infield.
It was bad. None of these guys could hit and some couldn't field (Gosselin was bad too). There was a huge drop off from Kang and Marte.
-
Bobster21
Hurdle-4 more years!
I think 10-15 more wins is unrealistic. While Kang and Marte would have outperformed their replacements, I'm sure some of their productive games would have occurred in games in which the starting or relief pitching or the fielding or the base running or the strange managerial decisions were contributing to losses. But otherwise, since this thread is about Hurdle, we need to keep in mind that NH's failure to replace Kang and Marte only made Hurdle's job more difficult. I think Hurdle has been awful this year. But that's based on his game decisions, lineups, strategies, etc. not because of the W-L record. The decision by NH not to replace Kang and Marte and to keep only 2 OFers eliminated any chance of a respectable W-L record.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
Hurdle-4 more years!
This was discussed a little bit in a thread 1/3 way through. I posted this on June 2nd with some stats. I still stand by this post:
I don't know the best way to calculate, but I do know that Freese, Jaso, Gosselin, Gift, Hanson, Ortiz, Frazier, Bostick, and Osuna have 591 at bats with 126 hits batting .213.
I would assume that Kang and Marte would take a huge chunk of those at bats and not bat a combined .213. Marte would make a huge difference in the outfield too, right?
So, Yes, I do think it is a huge difference in talent losing those two. They are two of the best at their position in baseball.
« Last Edit: Jun 2nd, 2017 at 2:35pm by Dogknot3 »
I don't know the best way to calculate, but I do know that Freese, Jaso, Gosselin, Gift, Hanson, Ortiz, Frazier, Bostick, and Osuna have 591 at bats with 126 hits batting .213.
I would assume that Kang and Marte would take a huge chunk of those at bats and not bat a combined .213. Marte would make a huge difference in the outfield too, right?
So, Yes, I do think it is a huge difference in talent losing those two. They are two of the best at their position in baseball.
« Last Edit: Jun 2nd, 2017 at 2:35pm by Dogknot3 »
Hurdle-4 more years!
28232B272223387D7B0C352D242323622F234C0 wrote: This was discussed a little bit in a thread 1/3 way through. I posted this on June 2nd with some stats. I still stand by this post:
I don't know the best way to calculate, but I do know that Freese, Jaso, Gosselin, Gift, Hanson, Ortiz, Frazier, Bostick, and Osuna have 591 at bats with 126 hits batting .213.
I would assume that Kang and Marte would take a huge chunk of those at bats and not bat a combined .213. Marte would make a huge difference in the outfield too, right?
So, Yes, I do think it is a huge difference in talent losing those two. They are two of the best at their position in baseball.
« Last Edit: Jun 2nd, 2017 at 2:35pm by Dogknot3 »
Once again they were gone and you just stated the obvious with the stats you posted. THEY NEEDED TO BRING PLAYERS IN. Why do you keep giving NH a pass on this? For every example you have a counter argument. Matt Adams was traded early in the year. Do you think he could've helped the Pirates? Howie Kendrick was traded, do you think he could've helped the Pirates? The biggest problem was they did nothing to fix the OF knowing full well Marte was gone for 80 games. Their was no suitable replacement for him on the roster!
I don't know the best way to calculate, but I do know that Freese, Jaso, Gosselin, Gift, Hanson, Ortiz, Frazier, Bostick, and Osuna have 591 at bats with 126 hits batting .213.
I would assume that Kang and Marte would take a huge chunk of those at bats and not bat a combined .213. Marte would make a huge difference in the outfield too, right?
So, Yes, I do think it is a huge difference in talent losing those two. They are two of the best at their position in baseball.
« Last Edit: Jun 2nd, 2017 at 2:35pm by Dogknot3 »
Once again they were gone and you just stated the obvious with the stats you posted. THEY NEEDED TO BRING PLAYERS IN. Why do you keep giving NH a pass on this? For every example you have a counter argument. Matt Adams was traded early in the year. Do you think he could've helped the Pirates? Howie Kendrick was traded, do you think he could've helped the Pirates? The biggest problem was they did nothing to fix the OF knowing full well Marte was gone for 80 games. Their was no suitable replacement for him on the roster!