Nick's Knocks

[DrungoHazewood]

Nick is only 7 hits away from tying Brian Roberts on the Orioles' all time hit list, and 10 hits from tying Ken Singleton. Once he passes them, which could happen on this homestand, he'll be in 6th place all time, behind only Ripken, B. Robinson, Murray, Anderson and Powell.

Nick is currently sitting on 24.3 rWAR. He's in a tight group with four other Orioles: Raffy, Al Bumbry, and Chris Hoiles between 23-25 rWAR. That seems about right, even though the four of them are from all over the spectrum, slugging first baseman, speedy center fielder, offense-first catcher, and... ummm... what slot do you put Nick in? OBP-centric RFer?

Interesting that three of the four (Hoiles, Markakis, and Bumbry) had spike/fluke seasons. Hoiles with his almost 7-win, 1.000 OPS 1993, Markakis with a 7+ win 2008, and Bumbry with a 6-win 1980 where he hit .318. None of them had another year within two wins of those peaks.

[bobmc]

Nick is currently sitting on 24.3 rWAR. He's in a tight group with four other Orioles: Raffy, Al Bumbry, and Chris Hoiles between 23-25 rWAR. That seems about right, even though the four of them are from all over the spectrum, slugging first baseman, speedy center fielder, offense-first catcher, and... ummm... what slot do you put Nick in? OBP-centric RFer?

Interesting that three of the four (Hoiles, Markakis, and Bumbry) had spike/fluke seasons. Hoiles with his almost 7-win, 1.000 OPS 1993, Markakis with a 7+ win 2008, and Bumbry with a 6-win 1980 where he hit .318. None of them had another year within two wins of those peaks.

Not being a "stat-geek" and with mush for brains, I am surprised that Brady had such a career with the O's hit-wise. But wasn't his 50 HR year a spike year for him also?

[DrungoHazewood]

Not being a "stat-geek" and with mush for brains, I am surprised that Brady had such a career with the O's hit-wise. But wasn't his 50 HR year a spike year for him also?

Of course that was a flukey spike year, but that was only a win-and-a-half ahead of his excellent '92 and '99 seasons. Brady has one of the more unusual careers of all time. He was basically David Lough or Luis Matos or something through age 27, when most people start their declines. Then for six straight years, and seven of eight, he had individual seasons worth more than his entire career through age 27. At 34 he looked almost done, but responded with his 2nd-best season at 35. Five different seasons with at least semi-regular playing time and an OPS under .700, and another five over .800. He had one strike-shortened season where (by bb-ref) he was a +9 fielder, and two others where he was -14 and -22. At 33 he had 18 steals and 12 caught, but at 35 he had 36 and 7.

Exactly no one will get this reference, but he was the Jimmy Sheckard of the 1990s.

[Frobby]

Exactly no one will get this reference, but he was the Jimmy Sheckard of the 1990s.

First of all, please tell me that you didn't have Jimmy Sheckard's name at the tip of your tongue, and that you found him by doing some search on BB-ref. Second of all, though I've never heard of him, it looks like he was a bit more consistently good at the plate than Brady was. 121 OPS+ for his career, compared to 109, plus he played a bit longer than Brady.

[DrungoHazewood]

First of all, please tell me that you didn't have Jimmy Sheckard's name at the tip of your tongue, and that you found him by doing some search on BB-ref. Second of all, though I've never heard of him, it looks like he was a bit more consistently good at the plate than Brady was. 121 OPS+ for his career, compared to 109, plus he played a bit longer than Brady.

Oh, but of course I have Jimmy Sheckard on the tip of my tongue! First off, he was briefly an old Oriole (in '99 and '02), and led the NL in steals for the O's in 1899. He was also the subject of a brief article in Bill James' original Historical Baseball Abstract because of the bizarre nature of his career (I love that in '11 it appears that he just decided he was going to walk constantly, and he went out and set the NL record for walks that stood for decades after never having walked more than 83 times in a season up to that point). He's one of the very few players who has led the league in both homers and steals, and he also led the league twice in sac hits with totals that would make a modern fan shudder. And he was on the Cubs teams early in the century who still hold records for wins in 2, 3, 4 consecutive seasons.

If Sheckard had been able to group his best years a little differently he'd be in the Hall.

[Il BuonO]

Nick is a very smart hitter, and I swear that on both of his home runs he saw a pitch well up in the zone and thought that if he just served up a high fly ball, the wind currents in Texas would carry it out even if he didn't get all of it, and that's what happened. He actually tried to do it again in his next AB last night, but hit it a little too much towards CF.

Now let's see if Nick can get something going at home, where he's hit only .290/.317/.400 so far this season, compared to .317/.392/.434 on the road.

I just changed my avatar. It was a picture of Nick in the dugout, face on both hands that made it appear like he was asleep. I made the comment in the GT that he's such a good hitter he could do it in his sleep.

He is a little more thoughtful than that. The observation of him hitting to take advantage of his environment is fitting. Nick is a smart hitter and it's contrasted in the games you highlighted in Texas with the four hit game he had a just little while back. I'm pretty sure he served every ball into LF for single. At least three of the four.

Two of the three pitches seemed unhittable or very difficult strikes at a minimum, but Nick didn't try to do to much and wound up on base because of it. Just a great piece of hitting.

It's nice to see him still muscle up on a ball when the elements and the pitch allows. Staying within himself allows him to still be somewhat productive.

[DrungoHazewood]

Staying within himself allows him to still be somewhat productive.

I think Nick gets criticized more than he probably deserves because of the declining run environment over the course of his career. When he put up that .897 OPS in 2008 the league scored 4.78 runs/game. Today that's down to 4.32, or off by about 10%. He's "only" OPSing .783 right now, but put that in the context of 2007 or 2008 and that's the equivalent of something like .830.

In context, his 2014 season (so far) is better than his 2006, 2009, 2011 or 2013, and only a tiny bit behind '07 or '10. If he were to keep playing like this all year he'd end up with over 3 rWAR. That's not just "somewhat productive", that's better than an average MLB player.

Disclaimer: please don't misconstrue this post as suggesting that Nick is a superstar, or a Hall of Famer, or worthy of a 6/100 extension or that we need to be naming firstborn sons after him. Just saying that his numbers, taken out of context, may not tell the whole story.

[bobmc]

I think Nick gets criticized more than he probably deserves because of the declining run environment over the course of his career. When he put up that .897 OPS in 2008 the league scored 4.78 runs/game. Today that's down to 4.32, or off by about 10%. He's "only" OPSing .783 right now, but put that in the context of 2007 or 2008 and that's the equivalent of something like .830.

In context, his 2014 season (so far) is better than his 2006, 2009, 2011 or 2013, and only a tiny bit behind '07 or '10. If he were to keep playing like this all year he'd end up with over 3 rWAR. That's not just "somewhat productive", that's better than an average MLB player.

Disclaimer: please don't misconstrue this post as suggesting that Nick is a superstar, or a Hall of Famer, or worthy of a 6/100 extension or that we need to be naming firstborn sons after him. Just saying that his numbers, taken out of context, may not tell the whole story. Now if you want to name your son or daughter "3 rWAR", I can live with that.

Now that's what I'm talking about! I've been "afraid" to like him all year until I read that. 3 rWAR isn't a bad name....

[Frobby]

I think Nick gets criticized more than he probably deserves because of the declining run environment over the course of his career. When he put up that .897 OPS in 2008 the league scored 4.78 runs/game. Today that's down to 4.32, or off by about 10%. He's "only" OPSing .783 right now, but put that in the context of 2007 or 2008 and that's the equivalent of something like .830.

In context, his 2014 season (so far) is better than his 2006, 2009, 2011 or 2013, and only a tiny bit behind '07 or '10. If he were to keep playing like this all year he'd end up with over 3 rWAR. That's not just "somewhat productive", that's better than an average MLB player.

And on the FA market 3 WAR is worth about $16.5 mm according to fangraphs. By the way, fangraphs has Nick at 1.4 fWAR right now, which projects out to 3.9 fWAR over a full season, worth $21.5 mm. I don't think anyone will pay him anything close to that, but the way he is playing, his $17 mm option isn't all that absurd, especially when you consider that the buyout costs $2 mm anyway.

Funny how things can change in a few weeks this time of year. I'm pretty sure Nick was at about 0.0 WAR at the end of April. It will be interesting to see if he continues to hit as well as he has for the last 45 games or so. He's hit .324/.393/.457 over that stretch, dating back to April 16.

[Il BuonO]

I think Nick gets criticized more than he probably deserves because of the declining run environment over the course of his career. When he put up that .897 OPS in 2008 the league scored 4.78 runs/game. Today that's down to 4.32, or off by about 10%. He's "only" OPSing .783 right now, but put that in the context of 2007 or 2008 and that's the equivalent of something like .830.

In context, his 2014 season (so far) is better than his 2006, 2009, 2011 or 2013, and only a tiny bit behind '07 or '10. If he were to keep playing like this all year he'd end up with over 3 rWAR. That's not just "somewhat productive", that's better than an average MLB player.

Disclaimer: please don't misconstrue this post as suggesting that Nick is a superstar, or a Hall of Famer, or worthy of a 6/100 extension or that we need to be naming firstborn sons after him. Just saying that his numbers, taken out of context, may not tell the whole story.

Good to know, at work and on my phone doesn't always allow the neccessary data searches. I'm a supporter of Nick's.

[Flash- bd]

Enjoying this discussion guys! I love Nick positivism...er, positivity!

[Frobby]

Two hits for Nick last night to extend his hit streak to 11 games. His two long hitting streaks this year:

April 21 - May 11 (18 games): 26 for 73, .356/.427/.478.

May 26 - June 6 (11 games): 18 for 48, .375/.444/.583.

[Ohfan67]

Super happy that Nick is playing well. And he's basically just having an average Markakis year. Despite all the criticism, he has only had one year in his career with an OPS+ below 100. He's at 117 right now. That said, I am a little anxious about the O's extending Nick. He seems so much slower this year, but maybe that's just my impression. It's hard not to imagine Nick turning into aa very slow, mediocre fielding, punch-and-judy hitter in the near future. (I know some critics label him that now, but OPS+ of 117 is not punch-and-judy). Anyway, I hope he continues to have a great year and hits for more power, but no matter how he performs this year the idea of an extension still worries me.

[Frobby]

For me, the biggest issue with an extension is that Nick will be a 10-and-5 guy after one more season, able to veto any trade. That's why any extension can't be too long.

[calmunderfire]

I think part of the Nick Criticism comes from 2 things that he can't really control. The team overpaid him, not his fault, the Orioles organization made a contract mistake. And the fact that the local media pumped him up so much early in his career.