Joey Rickard

[weams]

My meme of the off season was that Joey's hand injury was unrepaired and he would have issues. I appear to have been wrong once again. 

He has gotten off to a scorching Grapefruit league start and suddenly the new defensive metrics love him. 

Is he more than I ever thought he was?

fansided photo

 

 

[weams]

Roch has some thoughts.

[Babypowder]

He had a great spring last year, too. Then went on to suck. 

It's spring training. It's 23 ABs. Manny Machado is hitting .167 in 18 ABs this spring. Perhaps we should all write him out of our wills now? 

There's death, taxes, and people overreacting to spring training.

[esmd]

I liked him a lot last year.  He started off great, slumped, made adjustments, and was producing again when he got hurt.  The kid can play, IMO.  I just hope they can find a way to keep him, Mancini, and Santander on the team.

[esmd]

Just now, Babypowder said:

He had a great spring last year, too. Then went on to suck. 

It's spring training. It's 23 ABs. Manny Machado is hitting .167 in 18 ABs this spring. Perhaps we should all write him out of our wills now? 

There's death, taxes, and people overreacting to spring training.

That's overly simplistic.

[weams]

1 minute ago, Babypowder said:

He had a great spring last year, too. Then went on to suck. 

It's spring training. It's 23 ABs. Manny Machado is hitting .167 in 18 ABs this spring. Perhaps we should all write him out of our wills now? 

There's death, taxes, and people overreacting to spring training.

Manny is the WBC MVP.

[esmd]

1 minute ago, RZNJ said:

At the very least, he's solidified his spot in LF or RF as the right side of a platoon and the absence of AB's for Kim against LHP this spring suggest its LF.

Joey may be more than that.  Time will tell.

Agreed.

[Babypowder]

9 minutes ago, esmd said:

That's overly simplistic.

Significantly below replacement level in a half season qualifies as "sucked" to me. I'd like him fine as the short side of a platoon, but I still don't think much of him long term. I think there's another groundswell of affection for his spring numbers that will thrust him into the lineup every day again. I think that will be a mistake, again.

[Babypowder]

11 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

I wouldn't call an .862 against LHP's "suck".  Even his overall OPS of .699 deserves better.

As wildcard has said, why do we ignore the possibility that a 25 year old player, with very little AAA experience, coming off his rookie season, might actually improve.

I agree, his spring should be taken with a grain of salt.  Two things have my attention.  The statcast mention about his defense and 10 walks vs. 3 strikeouts.

I'm not ignoring the possibility he can improve. He will turn 26 in May. His minor league resume is not that impressive, and the fact that he doesn't have much AAA experience at his age is a cautionary flag, not a feather in his cap. I am just not willing to see spring training as evidence he has improved. Especially not ~30 plate appearances. Even bad players have stretches longer than this when they look great in the regular season, against better competition. Spring training performance means absolutely nothing to me.

As I just said, I am totally fine with Rickard platooning right off the bat. I don't want to see his spring put Kim on the bench and Rickard in the lineup every day. That happened last season too, and it was absolutely the wrong call.

[weams]

22 minutes ago, Babypowder said:

Significantly below replacement level in a half season qualifies as "sucked" to me. I'd like him fine as the short side of a platoon, but I still don't think much of him long term. I think there's another groundswell of affection for his spring numbers that will thrust him into the lineup every day again. I think that will be a mistake, again.

Maybe the numbers are wrong. Maybe defensive metrics are all messed up. Maybe we don't have the equations right yet. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, weams said:

Maybe the numbers are wrong. Maybe defensive metrics are all messed up. Maybe we don't have the equations right yet. 

Maybe the sample size is laughably small.

[weams]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Maybe the sample size is laughably small.

Probably. 

[weams]

Maybe no one actually knows what replacement is until the defensive side is corrected. And the strike zone is automated. 

[Frobby]

19 minutes ago, Babypowder said:

Significantly below replacement level in a half season qualifies as "sucked" to me. I'd like him fine as the short side of a platoon, but I still don't think much of him long term. I think there's another groundswell of affection for his spring numbers that will thrust him into the lineup every day again. I think that will be a mistake, again.

When Statcast publishes its 2016 "catch probability" statistics, I'll be interested to see if Rickard's poor ratings by other defensive metrics are confirmed or contradicted.   That's where his "significantly below replacement value" tag comes from.    I'm not going to say he was a stud offensively, but he did OK for a rookie.    It's reasonable to think he could improve in his second season.   

I'm definitely in the "spring training has limited importance" camp, but this is the second time this kid has been fighting for a roster spot and has come through with flying colors (so far).     You have to give him credit for that.   

[wildcard]

The first half of the spring is the easiest. The 2nd half gets harder and the regular season is harder still.   Joey is doing all he can so far.  Just have to wait and see what happens next.  That said I think its better to be hitting .400 half way through spring training then to be trying to make the team hitting .200.