Flash Era Coming to an End?

[Can_of_corn]

What are his and Schoop's numbers at this point? Must be pretty close.

Schoop's defensive metrics at second are better.

[Flash- bd]

What are his and Schoop's numbers at this point? Must be pretty close.

Schoop has a .608 OPS, Ryan had a .573 OPS in just over half the PAs, so yeah, they'll be pretty close after a 2-3 with a HR. Schoop, of course, has had the benefit of playing nearly every day.

I'm just not sure why people are so oblivious to Ryan's tools. He's got power and a decent on base skill, with that alone I think it's a pretty safe assumption he'd hit for at least the .683 OPS he posted last season in the season he received the most PAs (though still only half a season's worth). If he got into the .700, .710 range with his defense, which is at least average--as a conservative assumption--and perhaps better than average, you're looking at a somewhat valuable player, good enough to be a starting 2B. And it's not a far-fetched scenario in the least.

[Can_of_corn]

Check. I missed that one.

Speaking of missing one, I was also against extending Johnson and was tickled to see him get traded in a salary dump.

[Flash- bd]

Good lord, I was wrong, with that 2-3 Ryan went from a .573 OPS to a .623 OPS (Schoop-- .608). Shows how much your OPS can vacillate when you've only got some 100 PAs. Hopefully that will change and he will get a chance to play every day.

[Oldorioles]

Schoop has a .608 OPS, Ryan had a .573 OPS in just over half the PAs, so yeah, they'll be pretty close after a 2-3 with a HR. Schoop, of course, has had the benefit of playing nearly every day.

I'm just not sure why people are so oblivious to Ryan's tools. He's got power and a decent on base skill, with that alone I think it's a pretty safe assumption he'd hit for at least the .683 OPS he posted last season in the season he received the most PAs (though still only half a season's worth). If he got into the .700, .710 range with his defense, which is at least average--as a conservative assumption--and perhaps better than average, you're looking at a somewhat valuable player, good enough to be a starting 2B. And it's not a far-fetched scenario in the least.

I think Flaherty is a utility infielder, the numbers don't lie.

1) Flaherty does not have "decent on base skills". His OBP this season is .296, which is a CAREER HIGH. His career OBP is .283, that's awful.

2) It's not a safe assumption that he would hit with a 683 OPS like he did last season, which was also a career high. A more reasonable assumption would be that he would hit for his career average OPS, which is 651.

3) I agree that if he got to the 700 or 710 OPS range that he would be more valuable, but there is nothing to indicate that's realistic. We can wish for anything we want but that doesn't make it likely. Heck, if he got to the 800 OPS range he'd be an all-star. He's never had a 700 OPS in his MLB career.

The metrics says he's a slightly above fielder who can play multiple positions...that has value. Although he hasn't shown it much this season, I believe he has a little pop as well. He is worth something coming off the bench. I feel like we should be happy with that. This notion that if he plays more, his hitting will skyrocket above his career highs makes no sense to me.

[Oldorioles]

What are his and Schoop's numbers at this point? Must be pretty close.

They are similar:

Schoop Flaherty

AVG .223 .221

OBP .263 .296

OPS .608 .623

dWAR 0.8 -0.2

oWAR -0.3 0.1

WAR 0.3 -0.2 (from baseball reference)

AGE 22.2 27.3

I think the numbers are quite similar. You can make a case for either guy. For the future, I see Schoop's potential as the deciding factor. At Schoop's age Flaherty was playing for the single-A Peoria Chiefs. I think he's got more upside. However, you could make an educated argument that it might be good to send him down for more seasoning this year. I think he's been rushed a little.

[Flash- bd]

I think Flaherty is a utility infielder, the numbers don't lie.

1) Flaherty does not have "decent on base skills". His OBP this season is .296, which is a CAREER HIGH. His career OBP is .283, that's awful.

2) It's not a safe assumption that he would hit with a 683 OPS like he did last season, which was also a career high. A more reasonable assumption would be that he would hit for his career average OPS, which is 651.

3) I agree that if he got to the 700 or 710 OPS range that he would be more valuable, but there is nothing to indicate that's realistic. We can wish for anything we want but that doesn't make it likely. Heck, if he got to the 800 OPS range he'd be an all-star. He's never had a 700 OPS in his MLB career.

The metrics says he's a slightly above fielder who can play multiple positions...that has value. Although he hasn't shown it much this season, I believe he has a little pop as well. He is worth something coming off the bench. I feel like we should be happy with that. This notion that if he plays more, his hitting will skyrocket above his career highs makes no sense to me.

When I refer to on base skills I refer to OBP-AVG delta. Also you should probably look past his ML numbers* a bit, considering, I repeat, he has as many career ABs as Markakis had in his rookie season. People need to think of Flaherty as an old rookie who has had a very odd, unconventional career-path to this point, and has not yet been given a chance to really show what he can do over a full season, nor even a half one. That is why I would argue it is, indeed, a safe assumption that he would have a .683 OPS in a larger sample size as he had last season. He has tend to come on in the second half of seasons when for whatever reason he began to get consistent ABs, so I also think that like with Melvin Mora (ignoring the possible PED factor which complicates things a bit) he would greatly benefit from consistent ABs.

The bolded statement above is a pretty worthless one considering his grand total of 553 ML PAs. Considering that he had 167 PAs in his rookie season--a season in which for the first half the #1 argument was why is this guy occupying a roster space when he literally never plays?--and 115 PAs this season, and that his season with by far the most PAs (271, which is still a half a season's worth or less), was, as I said, a rather productive one.

*His MiL OBP is .345, and he has roughly a .67 OBP-AVG delta.

[Scrat1]

I think the numbers are quite similar. You can make a case for either guy. For the future, I see Schoop's potential as the deciding factor. At Schoop's age Flaherty was playing for the single-A Peoria Chiefs. I think he's got more upside. However, you could make an educated argument that it might be good to send him down for more seasoning this year. I think he's been rushed a little.

I think you have to go with Flaherty and it's not even close.

1. Service time

2. More experience and consistent playing time for Schoop

3. Extended look at Flaherty to see what his future with the club is

Between those three, I just don't see how you can make a serious argument for Schoop over Flaherty.

[weams]

No analysis for me(not that it isn't relevant).I decide with my eyes. Schoop is better. He's the future. I don't hate Flaherty as a utility infielder(he will get plenty of action when Manny is suspended). Schoop is the better option long term.

But you would not be opposed to sending Manny and Schoop down if it meant winning more game right?

[weams]

Good lord, I was wrong, with that 2-3 Ryan went from a .573 OPS to a .623 OPS (Schoop-- .608). Shows how much your OPS can vacillate when you've only got some 100 PAs. Hopefully that will change and he will get a chance to play every day.

They are similar:

Schoop Flaherty

AVG .223 .221

OBP .263 .296

OPS .608 .623

dWAR 0.8 -0.2

oWAR -0.3 0.1

WAR 0.3 -0.2 (from baseball reference)

AGE 22.2 27.3

I think the numbers are quite similar. You can make a case for either guy. For the future, I see Schoop's potential as the deciding factor. At Schoop's age Flaherty was playing for the single-A Peoria Chiefs. I think he's got more upside. However, you could make an educated argument that it might be good to send him down for more seasoning this year. I think he's been rushed a little.

I think you have to go with Flaherty and it's not even close.

1. Service time

2. More experience and consistent playing time for Schoop

3. Extended look at Flaherty to see what his future with the club is

Between those three, I just don't see how you can make a serious argument for Schoop over Flaherty.

Schoop had one of those Grady Sizemore springs. He'll be back. And he'll be really good.

[CA-ORIOLE]

They are similar:

Schoop Flaherty

AVG .223 .221

OBP .263 .296

OPS .608 .623

dWAR 0.8 -0.2

oWAR -0.3 0.1

WAR 0.3 -0.2 (from baseball reference)

AGE 22.2 27.3

I think the numbers are quite similar. You can make a case for either guy. For the future, I see Schoop's potential as the deciding factor. At Schoop's age Flaherty was playing for the single-A Peoria Chiefs. I think he's got more upside. However, you could make an educated argument that it might be good to send him down for more seasoning this year. I think he's been rushed a little.

WAR/dWAR is a pretty poor argument imo. For one it's a counting stat and Schoop has more time this year. For the another it's positionally adjusted and much of Flaherty's time is based on third base ( a tougher count) this year while both players best position is second. The defensive stats this year are sss. Defensively it may be close. Schoop certainly looks fine at second base. DRS likes him so far. UZR not so much. Personally I think Flaherty is the slightly better defender at second base overall. That's no dig at Schoop's skills.

I see Schoop's potential as the deciding factor.

No one would argue this. Schoop has the better pedigree and upside. I think the point is what is in the best interest for all in the short term (and maybe the longer term). In the short term, I think Flaherty and a RH platoon complement (maybe Weeks) might be more beneficial to us while allowing Schoop to get some more development time.

Having said that, every time this comes up Schoop seems to have a big game.

[Can_of_corn]

WAR/dWAR is a pretty poor argument imo. For one it's a counting stat and Schoop has more time this year. For the another it's positionally adjusted and much of Flaherty's time is based on third base ( a tougher count) this year while both players best position is second. The defensive stats this year are sss. Defensively it may be close. Schoop certainly looks fine at second base. DRS likes him so far. UZR not so much. Personally I think Flaherty is the slightly better defender at second base overall. That's no dig at Schoop's skills.

No one would argue this. Schoop has the better pedigree and upside. I think the point is what is in the best interest for all in the short term (and maybe the longer term). In the short term, I think Flaherty and a RH platoon complement (maybe Weeks) might be more beneficial to us while allowing Schoop to get some more development time.

Having said that, every time this comes up Schoop seems to have a big game.

One guy might.

So far this season Schoop has looked better to me at second and Flaherty has, of course, looked better at third.

[Scrat1]

No analysis for me(not that it isn't relevant).I decide with my eyes. Schoop is better. He's the future. I don't hate Flaherty as a utility infielder(he will get plenty of action when Manny is suspended). Schoop is the better option long term.

No one disagrees that Schoop is the better option long-term. In all likelihood that's the case. I certainly believe it is. That said, he's only marginally better than Flaherty at the moment, if at all. Considering this fact, if you are in favor of keeping Schoop up, you're arguing that the marginal improvement of Schoop over Flaherty is more valuable this year than having Schoop under control for an entire extra year. If he's truly "the future" as we all hope he is, the smart move is sending him down.

[Flash- bd]

One guy might.

So far this season Schoop has looked better to me at second and Flaherty has, of course, looked better at third.

Haha!

Nah, I like Schoop too. I just think Schoop was rushed--predictably--and still needs some refinement at the MiL level. And I obviously think Flaherty has more potential than most people do.

Whether Schoop or Flaherty is better long term isn't really the point, for me. Of course the conservative guess is that Schoop is. Regardless, I think we might have a starter-level 2B in Flaherty if we give him the chance. That's good for the organization whether Schoop ends up being better next year or the year after or not. And with Hardy's contract situation there's of course a spot potentially open in our infield long term, so let's get the value that we can out of the players we have, short term and long term. The best way to do that, for me, is to send down Schoop to work a bit on his approach at AAA, and have Flaherty get the majority of ABs at 2B with another capable 2B in Weeks--who has a bit of upside himself--factoring in.

[Oldorioles]

When I refer to on base skills I refer to OBP-AVG delta. Also you should probably look past his ML numbers* a bit, considering, I repeat, he has as many career ABs as Markakis had in his rookie season. People need to think of Flaherty as an old rookie who has had a very odd, unconventional career-path to this point, and has not yet been given a chance to really show what he can do over a full season, nor even a half one. That is why I would argue it is, indeed, a safe assumption that he would have a .683 OPS in a larger sample size as he had last season. He has tend to come on in the second half of seasons when for whatever reason he began to get consistent ABs, so I also think that like with Melvin Mora (ignoring the possible PED factor which complicates things a bit) he would greatly benefit from consistent ABs.

The bolded statement above is a pretty worthless one considering his grand total of 553 ML PAs. Considering that he had 167 PAs in his rookie season--a season in which for the first half the #1 argument was why is this guy occupying a roster space when he literally never plays?--and 115 PAs this season, and that his season with by far the most PAs (271, which is still a half a season's worth or less), was, as I said, a rather productive one.

*His MiL OBP is .345, and he has roughly a .67 OBP-AVG delta.

I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I will say that I hope you are right, and I will continue to root for Flaherty when he plays. Occasionally, you find a guy who performs well later on, like Mora. I think that possibility remains with Flaherty, I just think it's a very, very small possibility.

That being said, I still don't buy the argument. So how many at bats do we waste until we realize that he is what he is? 1,000? 1,500? It's true Flaherty has never had a whole year starting, but he's done nothing to justify that he should. He started 59 games at 2B last year, Roberts had 60. So, Flaherty basically played 2B as much as any player on the O's last year, albeit only 59. His numbers won't just improve all of a sudden because he gets more PAs. If that were the case, he'd have better numbers this year since he's seen more major league pitching than he had a year ago.

You're OBP-AVG delta is an interesting one, but I would argue that the same delta is not guaranteed or to be expected when jumping from the minors (and with Flaherty it's basically AA) all the way to MLB. Getting on base is harder, walks are more difficult to come by. ML numbers don't necessarily translate to MLB.

Using this logic, would you argue Caleb Joseph or David Lough would have much better numbers if we played them more? Caleb had a monster season last year at Bowie. He's only hitting .128, but that's only in 47 ABs. Should we play him 4 out of every five days so that he can try to replicate his 840 OPS at Bowie? Similarly, David Lough has never gotten the opportunity to play a "full season" in the big leagues. Last year, he played in 96 big league games - so a little over half a season. Should all his detractors give him more of an opportunity because his career ML OPS is over 800? He's has almost the exact number of PAs this year as Flaherty. Will you argue for Lough to have more playing time so he can achieve something closer to his career ML numbers or does this logic only apply to Flaherty?