Pickles
-
Posts
5797 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Pickles
-
-
6 minutes ago, .500_OR_BETTER said:
I know - you can't change it but if i could it would be 100_WINS_OR_BETTER
That's the spirit.
-
7 minutes ago, .500_OR_BETTER said:
He made is MLB debut last week against the Marlins, so 10K's might not be the norm.
He's young and throws hard. I would say he's very similar to Grayson with a 97+ mph fastball as well as a 90+ mph changeup with movement.
Your handle is outdated. It's not 2010 anymore.
-
2 minutes ago, forphase1 said:
But accurate...
No it's not.
It's a "statistic" the obsures the truth.
He started 100 games at 2b, and less as the season wore on, and none in the playoffs.
He was not an everyday 2b for the Orioles.
-
2
-
-
5 minutes ago, forphase1 said:
While still playing Frazier in 141 games. As you stated, his defense cratered, yet he STILL got into 141 games. Sure sounds like defense is their #1 priority, no?
That 141 is extremely misleading.
-
1 minute ago, forphase1 said:
He played in 141 games, or like 87% of the games played. That's about as close to everyday as you can get. For our infielders, only Henderson had more games played than Frazier.
His defense was poor, though there may be defense stats that said otherwise. As noted in an article about Frazier possibly returning to the club this year -
Frazier’s defense, which according to FanGraphs was, well, dreadful. His -15 Outs Above Average at second base was easily the worst of any O’s fielder at any position. His -4 Defensive Runs Saved was second-worst only to Aaron Hicks in center field (-5). And Baseball Savant puts Frazier in the first percentile for range — meaning 99% of fielders have more range than him. It’s not pretty.
We can argue which defense numbers to use, but numbers THIS bad certainly calls into question just how much they REALLY valued defense IMO.
He started 100 games at 2b, and less as the year went on. He was not an every 2b in the second of the season by any stretch.
FG has his defense as terrible; BRef has his defense as above average. I know many prefer FG, and I'm not going down that road, but his defense was not universally panned by the statistics.
Now, I will say I believe they thought/hoped he'd be better defensively when they signed him. And that he had regressed out there.
He also didn't start a game in the playoffs, so by the time the team was fully formed, he was not the starting 2b.
-
7 minutes ago, forphase1 said:
Oh, like Adam Frazier.....
The defensive stats on Frazier varied. I felt his range was below average, but he made all the plays he got to, and turned a nice double play.
I'm not sure it's fair to say he was below average, nor is it fair to say they ran him out there everyday, particularly in the 2nd half.
-
10 minutes ago, Frobby said:
Last year they were 5th out of 30 teams in UZR, 6th in Rtot, 8th in Rdrs. So while they do occasionally cut against the grain of optimizing the defense at times, I’d say the evidence is pretty strong that they value it highly.
It's also extremely disingenuous to suggest that giving a sub-par defender an occasional start in RF at Camden Yards is the same thing as running a sub-par defender out there every night at 2b or 3b.
-
19 minutes ago, Say O! said:
The two plays last night which have generated some discussion are here — link to reels
I thought his diving attempt in the first was great effort, his jump was solid, he tracked outstanding, just didn’t make the diving catch.
The other play of note was the double to RCF, again I thought he tracked well to cut if off, conditions were wet, ball didn’t bounce as high, skipped under his glove although Mateo quickly regrouped preventing any runners further advancing.
net/net, while he didn’t make these (potentially outstanding) plays, to me he looked capable in CF whereas I did not get that impression last year when his tracking was circuitous and missteps were prevalent in limited action.
Yeah, I wouldn't criticize him too much for any of those plays. The first play, he made a great effort. The ball in the gap he didn't clean fieldly, but he cut it off, and recovered quickly and didn't give up any extra bases.
The last play was the one I had mentioned. It's routine but it still required to fulfill the role the CF is expected to.
There's nothing from last night that would prevent me from continuing to let him play out there.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Mooreisbetter27 said:
Sometimes you have to give the other team credit. They fouled off a lot of pretty good pitches and spit on some pretty good pitches.
I was impressed with them overall.
They sure don't look like a losing team to me.
-
2 hours ago, interloper said:
I wanted to punt Mateo into the sun last night. He is an awful outfielder and I hope Hyde notes what he saw last night. Give me McKenna all day over Mateo in CF.
Was there a particular play?
I only saw one he caught, and he charged in and took charge and caught it. It was pretty routing, but he did a good job taking charge, which is the CF's responsibility.
-
I said Stowers, because I feel he's the most worthy.
But what will really be the determining factor is who gets hurt and what does the big club need.
And that's truly unpredictable.
-
1 hour ago, interloper said:
Only 3 Ks is a bit weird, but he looked fine considering the delay and weather. And the Royals are once again a pesky pain in the ass team to face. Really, really glad we got the series win before hitting the road.
The Royals look to be much improved this year.
-
2 minutes ago, RZNJ said:
It’s a place even for people like you, who know absolutely nothing about baseball.
So clever. And yet, so demonstrably dense that the minutest of details need to be explained to you in detail before you can follow along.
-
1 minute ago, RZNJ said:
So, your NEW hypothesis is that Cowser decided even if it was a curve ball, belt high, center cut, that he’d rather take strike three than try to drive in the tying run for his teammates. You asked me if I’ve ever stood in a batters box and I answered. No need to ask you.
Yeah, that's what I'm saying ma'am.
-
Just now, RZNJ said:
Haha. I have been in a batters box many, many times over many, many years.
Semantics? You actually said he decided not to swing before the pitch was thrown. You are finally walking back those words. It’s not semantics. It’s what you actually said.
Because it's things that don't need to be said.
Nobody is arguing that the guy just decides before he steps in the box to swing or not. And if you take that literally, that's on you.
I thought this was a place for people who knew a little about baseball. I didn't know everything needed to be explained as if I was dealing with those unfamiliar with the game.
I'm glad we could focus the conversation on my language, where it matters. Not Cowswer looking like dog shit on low breaking balls.
-
5 minutes ago, Spy Fox said:
A player at Cowser's level isn't going to decide before a 2-2 pitch to not swing. I don't even think he's going decide before a 2-2 pitch to not swing at any curveball.
But he could certainly have in his mind to avoid chasing the curveball low, because he knows that's one of the likely ways Smith would try to get him out. And that factor could freeze him on a well-placed low curveball in the zone, which is what he got.
What we're talking about is guessing. On pitch 1 he guessed if he got this type of pitch he was going to swing. And on strike three he guessed if I get this pitch I'm not going to swing.
He does not literally decide in advance of the pitch if he is going to swing or not though. And everybody who isn't emotionally trying to pick semantic arguments, understands that.
-
3 minutes ago, RZNJ said:
“He made up his mind to swing before the 0-0 pitch, and he made up his mind to not swing before the 2 strike pitch.“
Were you not clear here? You say that Cowser made up his mind not to swing BEFORE the pitch.
In regards to breaking balls.
Have you ever been in a batter's box?
I'm not sure why you FREAK OUT about the semantics of these things.
-
1 minute ago, RZNJ said:
Not one person you mentioned believed he decided not to swing before the pitch was thrown. Emmett said that the previous breaking pitches were all out of the zone and he probably thought that one would be too. Entirely different than what your saying.
Again this is the hyperbolic stuff.
I'm not sure why I have to explain everything to you in miniscule detail for you to understand it.
Nobody actually thinks somebody decides in advance of the pitch whether to swing or not.
What the grown folks are talking about is the guy makes a decision on the first pitch to swing as soon as he recognizes the breaking ball out of the hand, and the guy makes the decision on the last pitch to NOT swing when he recognizes the breaking ball out of the hand. And he was DEAD wrong wrong in both decisions.
Your semantic histrionics are boring. All reasonable people know what we're talking about. -
1 minute ago, RZNJ said:
Because I think it’s crazy to suggest a ML hitter with the bases loaded and a 2-2 count would actually decide not to swing at a pitch before it was thrown. I find your hypothesis very interesting. I just can’t believe you suggested it and haven’t disavowed it yet.
Why? I wasn't the only one.
I think he was not going to swing at a breaking ball there. Emmet felt the same way. SportsGuy did too in his own way. Thinking he was guessing is a similar statement.
I don't know why you keep expecting me to disavow the very sensible things I keep saying in this thread.
-
8 minutes ago, RZNJ said:
You don’t have to prove anything. Your original OPINION was that Cowser decided not to swing before the pitch. Is that still your opinion?
Why is my hypothesis about his decision making more interesting to you than his actual decision making?
Edit: To be clear, I think he predetermined to take a breaking ball if he saw one because he was tired of whiffing at them.
-
1 minute ago, RZNJ said:
You keep trying to confuse the point. We are discussing one thing here right now. Do you believe, with the bases loaded and a 2-2 count, that Cowser decided not to swing before the pitch was thrown? You seem to be confirming that you actually believe that. Correct?
Why do I have to predict his intentions to criticize them?
He watched strike three go down the fing middle of the plate after swinging at ball one six feet outside and in the dirt.
Why do I have to be able to prove EXACTLY what he was thinking to criticize those decisions?
-
1 hour ago, emmett16 said:
I think he committed to not swinging *at a curve. He saw it well previous two. I think he saw the curve out of the hand and committed to not swinging. He threw 4 curves in the AB, strike 3 was the only one in the zone and it was right on the edge.
This is probably a better summation of the decision than mine.
-
5 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
Female language?
Yes, the shrill detached emotional appeals.
Me: He made a bad decision there.
Them: Are you saying he was scared??!?!?! Mentally weak!?!?! That's crazy!!!!!!
This is not rational discourse.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, RZNJ said:
No ones arguing against the fact that swung at a terrible pitch for strike one or swing through a fastball for strike two or get caught looking at a breaking pitch for strike three.
You are the only one who thinks he decided not to swing before the last pitch was thrown. I’m giving you another chance to take back that ridiculous take but you haven’t done it yet.
You can keep using hyperbolic words and emotional appeals, but I'm going to keep you to the point:
He's made some very questionable swing decisions in his at bats the last two nights.
It's not ridiculous to say that. It's not crazy to say that.
This is the OH, I thought. Where a 2 RBI double if it's down on a bad swing and a bad count should be recognized as such. And an AB in the 9th where you get outclassed should be called as such.
I didn't know we had to get emotionally invested like cheerleaders.
2024 Ongoing Lineup Thread
in Orioles Talk
Posted
Was there ever a resolution for Trade Angelos?