GatewayRedbirds.com

skmsw wrote:

There's no room for biased enthusiasm on this board?

There is. However, in my opinion, Asmodai has been, at times, treated disrespectfully because he doesn't share the biased enthusiasm. In my opinion that's not the same thing, and given my way there's no room for that.

When Boston won the World Series last seaon did Sox fans ascribe it good luck or superior personnel?

On this thread I've discussed neither luck nor Boston, so I'm not sure where you're headed with this. But to take the question at face value, lots of different fans ascribed lots of different meanings to it. There was a sizeable percentage of fans who misread the results (and a sizeable percentage who mistreated other fans). Is that what you aspire for this forum?

No, I asked the converse question of Asmo without a reply so I was making a joke.

cpebbles wrote:

Asmodai wrote:Bryan Anderson had an isolated power of just 90 while playing half of his games in perhaps the best offensive park in the league, in the best offensive league at the level.

The overall factors for them are 1.04 or so, iirc.

Wichita and Midland were a little better offensively, but none are better for power hitters due to the high HR factor.

So the neutral overall park factors are irrelevant, what really matters is the HR park factor for a player whose offensive game is not dependant on the HR by anyone's estimation?

So are these posts trolling, or are you really this confused about what you're saying?

the overall PFs for the TL (http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/fil ... ltipliers/)
1.03 Springfield
1.03 Frisco
1.02 Midland
1.00 Wichita
1.00 Arkansas
1.00 Tulsa
0.95 Corpus Christi
0.91 San Antonio

Arkansas had been a HUGE hitters park until last season, as they opened a new one in 2007.

My stuff comes up as this for 2007:
(Again I use the stuff from above for Rasmus)

we can be realistic about Rasmus's chances (and not really just Rasmus's chances in particular, but all prospects), but we can be excited by his potential prime years at the same time (.290/.400/.550)...

he could be Corey Patterson (although not likely considering the HUUUUUUUGGGGEEEEE differences in BB/k ratio--which I still firmly believe is a good indicator of future success--meaning that a player with a bad BB/k ratio--Patterson, Pie--is more unlikely to be successful than a player with a good BB/k ratio...)


one thing is for certain, if Rasmus does't at least become a .260/.360/.480 player in the next 2-3 years then the Cards could continue to struggle...


luckily for us baseball starts soon and Rasmus can continue to hit fantastically at a new level (as I doubt there is any chance outside of injury that he doesn't tear up AAA--and not just in a way that's highly inflated by BABIP like Pie did last year)

Blind homerism is an interesting thing.

tenniseleven wrote:he could be Corey Patterson (although not likely considering the HUUUUUUUGGGGEEEEE differences in BB/k ratio--which I still firmly believe is a good indicator of future success--meaning that a player with a bad BB/k ratio--Patterson, Pie--is more unlikely to be successful than a player with a good BB/k ratio...)

Statistically speaking... guys in Double A with relatively high K rates (Rasmus falls under this distinction) fall into two categories: those who walk and those who don't walk. (SURPRISING!).

Of the successful hitters in Double A with relatively high K rates which do you think are actually more successful in AAA the next season? The hitters with the low walk rates. I only looked at above average hitters. The high K, high walk guys had a .290 EqA in AA. The high K, low walk guys had a .280 EqA in AA. The high K, high walk guys had a .260 EqA in AAA and the high K, low walk guys in AAA had a .270 EqA.

Obviously it's only immediate term factors, not long term which are more important and the high walk guys probably have a bit more of an adjustment period to earn their value in walks, so to speak. Either way K:BB isn't the secret recipe for predicting success most people think it is. It helps, but it's certainly not as important as some (most) make it out to be. It's just some food for thought.

.290/.400/.550 for Rasmus? That's absurd.

.290/.400/.550 for Rasmus? That's absurd.

Prospectus translates last season into a peak of .273/.380/.538. McQuown's system projects .301/.397/.572. This is twice now that you have offered nothing but an out-of-hand dismissal of these projections.

It's very nice that you trust your gut feeling so much more than the systems of people who publish their projections and then analyze the results. But I don't.

.273/.380/.538 compared to .290/.400/.550. That's a significant difference. Maybe a career year, but outside of that NO system predict ANY hitter to hit .290/.400/.550 over their three to five year peak performance. Any system that does is probably inaccurate as hell.

Let me reiterate that guys like Anderson and Rasmus are the types of guys these systems get wrong anyways.

You are completely misunderstanding EVERYTHING ive said. Im not saying he cant hit .290/.400/.550 i just mean to say, predict or expect anything at the level from ANY prospect is too much. The expected level of production is MUCH lower.

dont lecture me on sabermetric concepts please. you and i both know i these things.

I see Jacoby Ellsbury being a .350/.430/.630 player. It's absurd that he doesn't get as much attention as Bruce or Rasmus...

Besides PECOTA for Rasmus spits out:

2008 (age 21) .243/.327/.453/.266
2009 (age 22) .247/.329/.453/.271
2010 (age 23) .248/.329/.465/.273
2011 (age 24) .256/.343/.485/.284
2012 (age 25) .259/.347/.497/.288
2013 (age 26) .252/.345/.487/.286
2014 (age 27) .263/.347/.491/.287

GatewaySnayke wrote:I see Jacoby Ellsbury being a .350/.430/.630 player. It's absurd that he doesn't get as much attention as Bruce or Rasmus...

what the hell is your point