Pickles

I went with .750-.800. If I had to pick a target it would be .750, so well done to Frobby on picking an excellent "line" in the poll. He's been above .750 two of the last three years, so I think it's reasonable to expect it again this year (going forward.) He's been dragged down in the past by absolutely long stretches of poor performance, but he shouldn't have that long of a leash this year and if he's scuffling for weeks on end, he's going to lost at-bats in ways he hasn't the last few years. Now, that said, I think a lot of people are going to be upset at how much he plays. He will not be used solely as a short side platoon. He's going to play against righties, and I would expect him to start 4-5 games a week. He will take some at-bats from Cowser and Mullins, and others. How he and others perform will dictate just how many, but just as with Hays, Cowser will not play every single day and OPS 400 for weeks on end.

I think we should all agree that the Ferrari is McKenna's nickname going forward.

Didn't you hear? The really, really smart people are certain that the guy worth 0.6 WAR for his career is better than the guy who has outpaced him by 15x because.... well, feelings or something.

That would certainly improve it.

I hate when people cite save percentage and/or blown save percentage when evaluating relief pitchers because it is a stat that is so wildly dependent on context it tells you very little on its own. I think looking at overall team numbers is a better use of it but still flawed. And last night's game was a great example. Kimbrel was credited with a hold last night, despite allowing 2 runs in 2/3 of an inning, and it was actually Akin who was credited with the blown save, despite giving up 0 runs personally. I was just looking at the box score and this absurdity jumped out at me.

I would expect to see Hays in CF against lefties at this point.

Well, take that up with the GG voters, because they certainly thought so.

You can cut up people's numbers to make them look better or worse than they actually are, but that's not really good analysis. He basically had a horrific July last year. His Aug/Sept OPS was basically 775, which was actually higher than his OPS on the season. Nobody can deny he had a terrible start to this season as well, but you're talking less than 50 ABs and the likelihood that he was probably playing hurt.

I'm not sold on that right now. I think Cowser has superior traits- he's faster at least. But Hays' arm is a real weapon, and while he has a strong arm, Cowser is not nearly as quick or accurate delivering the ball as Hays. Same with range. Yes, Cowser is faster but Hays takes more direct routes. Cowser is certainly a lot better than he was last year, and if he continues to improve he should eventually surpass Hays, but I'm not sure he's there yet.

I think Hays will see more CF time than Cowser.

Sure. Anything's possible. However, it's extremely unlikely that Hays has reverted from essentially an average regular to a 5th OF in his age 28 season. And discussing that possibility is a world away from the laughable claim that McKenna is better than Hays.

I don't really disagree with any of this. I am probably more confident than you are though that give Hays 100-200 at-bats and he's going to perform pretty close to how he has the last 3 years or so, which is far beyond anything McKenna could dream of. But I don't have a problem with McKenna as a 5th outfielder, playing very sparingly, as I would like HK to get more consistent playing time in AAA.

I know you hate it when people put words in other people's mouths. I know that's a pet peeve of yours. Glad you're not a giant hypocrite or anything, desperately flailing, ever more and more desperate, to defend a terrible take.

Cherry picking stats to make your argument is not as convincing as you think it is. Again, no person with the most elementary understanding of baseball, would give at-bats to McKenna over Hays. I'm starting to realize the problem.

Uh, yes he is. And any argument to the contrary is a stupid one not based in reality.