Jump to content

Recommended Posts

WOAH. I like this deal for the Angels. $36M AAV isn't too other-worldly to have the best player in baseball in your uniform their entire career. Hopefully they can put a team around him so we can see him in some playoff games!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Luke-OH said:

The PR/intangible value of having the possibly the best player ever as a career-long member of your team is probably pretty darn high. Smart move by the Angels, I'm sure they are insuring it to some degree against injury. 

Yep, it looks good for them.  Now, hopefully, they can build around him.  Trout needs to be in the playoffs and he needs a title.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Yep, it looks good for them.  Now, hopefully, they can build around him.  Trout needs to be in the playoffs and he needs a title.  

Seriously. Get this guy a ring already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Moose Milligan said:

Yep, it looks good for them.  Now, hopefully, they can build around him.  Trout needs to be in the playoffs and he needs a title.  

If Ohtani gets healthy, that helps a lot and they have a group of uber-athletic prospects, Jo Adell being the most likely potential star of the group.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Luke-OH said:

If Ohtani gets healthy, that helps a lot and they have a group of uber-athletic prospects, Jo Adell being the most likely potential star of the group.

Didn't they have the 30th ranked system a year or two ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Didn't they have the 30th rank system a year or two ago?

Yeah, it was terrible, it's improved quickly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats







  • Posts

    • I'm multitasking.
    • I'm here too, logged in as DJ Stewart's number one fan on the board. I like the guys who don't look like athletes.
    • Here's bad news: I'm watching. 
    • Looks like it's just me and you here, @eddie83
    • So I had a grand theory all ready to explain modern baseball, based on the impact of the information revolution on defense.  According to the theory, better data has allowed teams to better measure individual defense and the contribution of defense to run prevention, which has led to increased emphasis on defensive ability in personnel decisions.  Better data has also led to shifts and other improvements in defensive positioning.  All of these factors have led in theory to improved defensive efficiency--an increase in the percentage of balls in play that are converted into outs.  In turn, this has led to a change in optimal offensive strategies.  If it's harder to get hits on balls in play, then it is less likely that you will be able to score runs by stringing a bunch of singles together, or by using small ball tactics like base stealing, the hit and run and the sacrifice.  Teams thus optimally put more emphasis on power in personnel decisions, because a home run is the one way to score runs that can't be stopped by good defense. Great theory, huh?  Then I looked at the data.  Here are the numbers for aggregate defensive efficiency for MLB since 2001: 2001:  0.691     2002:  0.695   2003:  0.694   2004:  0.691   2005:  0.693   2006:  0.687   2007:  0.686   2008:  0.689 2009:  0.690   2010:  0.691   2011:  0.694    2012:  0.691   2013:  0.692   2014:  0.690    2015:  0.689    2016: 0.688 2017:  0.688    2018:  0.691 So twenty years into the defensive revolution, we have...the same defensive efficiency that we had in 2001.  Teams on the whole are doing no better today at converting balls in play into outs than they were in 2001, despite all of the shifts and all of the zone ratings and other defensive measures that are now available.   So much for my theory.  Some earlier posts suggest another theory--improved pitch design and velocity have made it harder to hit for contact, which increases strikeouts and reduces batting average.  In turn this leads to a greater emphasis on power at the expense of contact, increasing home runs, further increasing strikeouts and further reducing batting average.  That theory may be correct, but it's less obvious to me that the correct strategic response to improved pitch design and velocity is to sacrifice contact for power. It could go the other way--in response to better pitching, it is even more important to hit for contact, to put the ball in play, to sustain an offense.  It would take a model simulation to determine whether the optimal response to power pitching is to emphasize power hitting.   Or it could just be a juiced ball!  
    • Two out walk no damage. I say Orioles win 8-2 tonight.  
    • Holy hell Soler is having himself a season.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...