Jump to content

Ghiroli: Kim 2017


weams

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, big_sparxx said:

You miss the point. If Buck, who gets paid to make those decisions, felt like Kim should have had more playing time, I'm sure he would have given it to him. If BUCK, felt that he couldn't play Kim against lefties then it matters very little if he's been the best player in Korea or anywhere else.

A AAA option might have helped, it might not have, but for the moment he is a damn awfully expensive platoon player.

Again, don't get me wrong, I like the guy. I just think new players in the league need time to adjust, and if a stint at AAA helps in that effort, so be it. He's still making millions.

You miss my point, BUCK evidently didn't want Kim on his team  BUCK went with Richard to start the season, the same Rickard that, at the end of the day, performed substantially worse than Kim once the games counted.

It is almost as if BUCK misjudged both of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply
8 minutes ago, big_sparxx said:

You miss the point. If Buck, who gets paid to make those decisions, felt like Kim should have had more playing time, I'm sure he would have given it to him. If BUCK, felt that he couldn't play Kim against lefties then it matters very little if he's been the best player in Korea or anywhere else.

A AAA option might have helped, it might not have, but for the moment he is a damn awfully expensive platoon player.

Again, don't get me wrong, I like the guy. I just think new players in the league need time to adjust, and if a stint at AAA helps in that effort, so be it. He's still making millions.

Also, you know what might have helped him to adjust?

NOT GETTING BENCHED IN SPRING TRAINING.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, big_sparxx said:

amazing really... I'm not going back in the OH archives to find it, but I think there were more than a few critical of the fact that he didn't have an option last year, and that he looked horrible in ST.

 

#justsayin

Some were.  Others were rather upset at how Buck and Dan were handling the situation.  Guess which group I was in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

He had an option.  They tried to use it.  He might never have escaped Norfolk's bench.

woulda coulda shoulda... we'll never know. He turned out to be a pleasant surprise for sure. All I'm saying is that he costs a whole lot of $ for riding the pine against lefties. Great if you can afford that type of platoon player... which we can't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, big_sparxx said:

woulda coulda shoulda... we'll never know. He turned out to be a pleasant surprise for sure. All I'm saying is that he costs a whole lot of $ for riding the pine against lefties. Great if you can afford that type of platoon player... which we can't.

Does he make more than Smith this year?   I haven't read anything from you about how much he is costing as a platoon player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Does he make more than Smith this year?   I haven't read anything from you about how much he is costing as a platoon player.

Or what about if Bourn doesn't make the 40 man? Can you justify keeping Kim over Bourn? Why? Doesn't Bourn offer us more defensively?

We could ask millions of "what if's" and the point of the matter is the thread is about Kim.

Kinda off topic to bring up Smith, but I see it as a body that can do a job. I'm more impressed with the fact that we were able to unload Gallardo, which I think is the more important factor. If wecould get a bag of balls for Jimenez, I'd make that deal too.

We have Kim for one more season. Lets enjoy him and his 300 AB's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, big_sparxx said:

amazing really... I'm not going back in the OH archives to find it, but I think there were more than a few critical of the fact that he didn't have an option last year, and that he looked horrible in ST.

 

#justsayin

Kim had the option to go to Norfolk last year and chose not to exercise it, as was his right.  It was written into his contract by DAN.  If you want to criticise IMO you would be better served by starting there, because when Kim finally got his real-world opportunity he made the best of it and silenced a lot of the doubters.

My recollection is that at least half of the posters here were upset that Kim refused his assignment to Norfolk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, big_sparxx said:

Or what about if Bourn doesn't make the 40 man? Can you justify keeping Kim over Bourn? Why? Doesn't Bourn offer us more defensively?

We could ask millions of "what if's" and the point of the matter is the thread is about Kim.

Kinda off topic to bring up Smith, but I see it as a body that can do a job. I'm more impressed with the fact that we were able to unload Gallardo, which I think is the more important factor. If wecould get a bag of balls for Jimenez, I'd make that deal too.

We have Kim for one more season. Lets enjoy him and his 300 AB's.

How so?  Smith is a platoon outfielder. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Some were.  Others were rather upset at how Buck and Dan were handling the situation.  Guess which group I was in.

Yeah, and you've never let it go.    So Buck misjudged Kim based on his poor spring training and they attempted to convince him to start the year in the minors, and when Kim refused Buck didn't play him much at the start of the season, but gradually played Kim more as he proved he could hit major league pitching.     It's not the worst thing that ever happened.     Don't forget that both Rickard and Reimold started the year extremely hot.    If that's the worst thing Buck has done as the O's manager, it's pretty damned minor.    I really don't want to spend 2017 arguing about it.    The issue now is what opportunities Buck will give Kim this year.    What happened last March has little or nothing to do with that.    Buck's had a lot of positive things to say about Kim over the winter and I believe Kim will get the opportunity to play more.    But I don't expect everything to be set in stone by April 3, any more than it was last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, big_sparxx said:

woulda coulda shoulda... we'll never know. He turned out to be a pleasant surprise for sure. All I'm saying is that he costs a whole lot of $ for riding the pine against lefties. Great if you can afford that type of platoon player... which we can't.

There are very , very few lefties. He's on the good foot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Yeah, and you've never let it go.    So Buck misjudged Kim based on his poor spring training and they attempted to convince him to start the year in the minors, and when Kim refused Buck didn't play him much at the start of the season, but gradually played Kim more as he proved he could hit major league pitching.     It's not the worst thing that ever happened.     Don't forget that both Rickard and Reimold started the year extremely hot.    If that's the worst thing Buck has done as the O's manager, it's pretty damned minor.    I really don't want to spend 2017 arguing about it.    The issue now is what opportunities Buck will give Kim this year.    What happened last March has little or nothing to do with that.    Buck's had a lot of positive things to say about Kim over the winter and I believe Kim will get the opportunity to play more.    But I don't expect everything to be set in stone by April 3, any more than it was last year.

I promise I will not spend 2017 fixated on it. I am glad Kim found a way to fit in. The Orioles made great effort to make him feel welcome. He has a new translator. Maybe messages will be delivered better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




  • Posts

    • The same thing was happening was MacDonald was the DC and when Wink was the DC, that makes me put most of the blame on Harbaugh 
    • dWAR is just the run value for defense added with the defensive adjustment.  Corner OF spots have a -7.5 run adjustment, while CF has a +2.5 adjustment over 150 games.    Since Cowser played both CF and the corners they pro-rate his time at each to calculate his defensive adjustment. 
    • Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.
    • Wait a second here, the reason he's -0.1 in bb-ref dwar is because they're using drs to track his defensive run value.  He's worth 6.6 runs in defense according to fangraphs, which includes adjustments for position, which would give him a fangraphs defensive war of +0.7.
    • A little funny to have provided descriptions of the hits (“weak” single; “500 foot” HR). FIP doesn’t care about any of that either, so it’s kind of an odd thing to add in an effort to make ERA look bad.  Come in, strike out the first hitter, then give up three 108 MPH rocket doubles off the wall. FIP thinks you were absolutely outstanding, and it’s a shame your pathetic defense and/or sheer bad luck let you down. Next time you’ll (probably) get the outcomes you deserve. They’re both flawed. So is xFIP. So is SIERA. So is RA/9. So is WPA. So is xERA. None of them are perfect measures of how a pitcher’s actual performance was, because there’s way too much context and too many variables for any one metric to really encompass.  But when I’m thinking about awards, for me at least, it ends up having to be about the actual outcomes. I don’t really care what a hitter’s xWOBA is when I’m thinking about MVP, and the same is true for pitchers. Did you get the outs? Did the runs score? That’s the “value” that translates to the scoreboard and, ultimately, to the standings. So I think the B-R side of it is more sensible for awards.  I definitely take into account the types of factors that you (and other pitching fWAR advocates) reference as flaws. So if a guy plays in front of a particular bad defense or had a particularly high percentage of inherited runners score, I’d absolutely adjust my take to incorporate that info. And I also 100% go to Fangraphs first when I’m trying to figure out which pitchers we should acquire (i.e., for forward looking purposes).  But I just can’t bring myself say that my Cy Young is just whichever guy had the best ratio of Ks to BBs to HRs over a threshold number of innings. As @Frobby said, it just distills out too much of what actually happened.
    • We were all a lot younger in 2005.  No one wanted to believe Canseco cause he’s a smarmy guy. Like I said, he was the only one telling the truth. It wasn’t a leap of faith to see McGwire up there and Sosa up there and think “yeah, those guys were juicing” but then suddenly look at Raffy and think he was completely innocent.  It’s a sad story. The guy should be in Hall of Fame yet 500 homers and 3,000 hits are gone like a fart in the wind cause his legacy is wagging his finger and thinking he couldn’t get caught.  Don’t fly too close to the sun.  
    • I think if we get the fun sprinkler loving Gunnar that was in the dugout yesterday, I don’t think we have to worry about him pressing. He seemed loose and feeling good with the other guys he was with, like Kremer.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...