SiriusXM: Steve Phillips & Todd Hollandsworth

On MLBRADIO

"The value of a 26 home run guy has grown exponentially. A Unique player in MLB today."

You are constantly beating this drum, and while I think it is indisputable that a 26 homer guy is significantly rarer today than 10 years ago, it will always be true that homers are just one element of offense and that their value relative to other good offensive events only changes a little bit from year to year. Here's a chart showing the relative value of different offensive events used in the calculation of wOBA: http://www.fangraphs.com/guts.aspx?type=cn. It shows that in 2004, a home run was worth about 2.22 times what a single was worth (1.983/.890). In 2014, a home run was worth 2.39 times what a single was worth (2.135/.892). So, the relative value of a home run compared to a single has increased by about 8% in the last decade. That's significant, but not earth-shattering. You'd still rather have a guy who hits 165 singles and 10 home runs than a guy who hits 125 singles and 26 home runs (all other stats being equal).

You are constantly beating this drum, and while I think it is indisputable that a 26 homer guy is significantly rarer today than 10 years ago, it will always be true that homers are just one element of offense and that their value relative to other good offensive events only changes a little bit from year to year. Here's a chart showing the relative value of different offensive events used in the calculation of wOBA: http://www.fangraphs.com/guts.aspx?type=cn. It shows that in 2004, a home run was worth about 2.22 times what a single was worth (1.983/.890). In 2014, a home run was worth 2.39 times what a single was worth (2.135/.892). So, the relative value of a home run compared to a single has increased by about 8% in the last decade. That's significant, but not earth-shattering. You'd still rather have a guy who hits 165 singles and 10 home runs than a guy who hits 125 singles and 26 home runs (all other stats being equal).

A lot of folks grew to love baseball during the Steroid era. Their views of what power is are obviously different than yours and mine. I would love to have Nick back reasonably and you know that. I am not in favor of paying Nelson 80 million and you know that.

A lot of folks grew to love baseball during the Steroid era. Their views of what power is are obviously different than yours and mine. I would love to have Nick back reasonably and you know that. I am not in favor of paying Nelson 80 million and you know that.

Yes, I do know that. The tone of my post was a little harsher than I intended. Sorry about that. My general point is that while the value of a home run relative to other offensive events is higher today than ten years ago, there still are limits on the tradeoff between homers and getting on base more often in other ways. It's nice than Jonathan Schoop hit 16 homers as a rookie, but that .244 OBP is not going to cut it. You can chalk up 2014 to development, but in the longer term, he's got to bring that OBP up or he'll be out of a job, even if he adds a few more homers to his totals. I suspect he will be able to do it, but it bears watching.

Yes, I do know that. The tone of my post was a little harsher than I intended. Sorry about that. My general point is that while the value of a home run relative to other offensive events is higher today than ten years ago, there still are limits on the tradeoff between homers and getting on base more often in other ways. It's nice than Jonathan Schoop hit 16 homers as a rookie, but that .244 OBP is not going to cut it. You can chalk up 2014 to development, but in the longer term, he's got to bring that OBP up or he'll be out of a job, even if he adds a few more homers to his totals. I suspect he will be able to do it, but it bears watching.

And yet his 16 home runs makes him viable with his outstanding linebacking at second. He needs 20 points of OBP as progress to keep his job. And I bet he hits more homers. Long ones.

Yes, I do know that. The tone of my post was a little harsher than I intended. Sorry about that. My general point is that while the value of a home run relative to other offensive events is higher today than ten years ago, there still are limits on the tradeoff between homers and getting on base more often in other ways. It's nice than Jonathan Schoop hit 16 homers as a rookie, but that .244 OBP is not going to cut it. You can chalk up 2014 to development, but in the longer term, he's got to bring that OBP up or he'll be out of a job, even if he adds a few more homers to his totals. I suspect he will be able to do it, but it bears watching.

And more than 10 years ago, 15 to 20 is a much better context. Most of our young adult posters never saw it for real.

And yet his 16 home runs makes him viable with his outstanding linebacking at second. He needs 20 points of OBP as progress to keep his job. And I bet he hits more homers. Long ones.

Of 171 players with 450+ plate appearances, Schoop ranked 171st in OBP, a full 10 points lower than anyone else. Add 20 points and he'd be 169th of 171. That might be enough to keep his job if he added another 5 homers or so and continued to play as well defensively as he did last year. But honestly, I'd like to think he is capable of doing significantly better than that. And yes, I think he will hit more homers. He hit 10 in his final 59 games last year and really seemed to be punishing mistake pitches.

I think Schoop is a guy who really would benefit by making the pitchers throw him more strikes. He can hit them a long way.

Of 171 players with 450+ plate appearances, Schoop ranked 171st in OBP, a full 10 points lower than anyone else. Add 20 points and he'd be 169th of 171. That might be enough to keep his job if he added another 5 homers or so and continued to play as well defensively as he did last year. But honestly, I'd like to think he is capable of doing significantly better than that. And yes, I think he will hit more homers. He hit 10 in his final 59 games last year and really seemed to be punishing mistake pitches.

I think Schoop is a guy who really would benefit by making the pitchers throw him more strikes. He can hit them a long way.

Your namesake told him to remember that he own the first two strikes. Schoop did improve slightly after that.

Your namesake told him to remember that he own the first two strikes. Schoop did improve slightly after that.

Namesake? You mean this isn't Frank?

Namesake? You mean this isn't Frank?

To quote John Updike, writing about Ted Williams: "Gods do not answer letters."

To quote John Updike, writing about Ted Williams: "Gods do not answer letters."

I got Frank to smile for a photo one time.

To quote John Updike, writing about Ted Williams: "Gods do not answer letters."

My one college girlfriend knew Updike well.

My one college girlfriend was/knew Updike well.

My one college girlfriend was knew Updike well.

Updike seems like a natural for you, Weams. He is capable of writing extremely long sentences, long enough to wrap around your ofice and form a protective shield for you against the many trolls and tribulations of moderating OH, including the occasional invective and oft times not so well thought out but dubiously sarcastic syllogism.

Updike seems like a natural for you, Weams. He is capable of writing extremely long sentences, long enough to wrap around your ofice and form a protective shield for you against the many trolls and tribulations of moderating OH, including the occasional invective and oft times not so well thought out but dubiously sarcastic syllogism.

I never met the man. Only the stories.