Joey Rickard

[mdbdotcom]

When Brooks played, the question was, "Who's slower, Brooks or Boog?" I'm pretty sure Brooks was.

[InsideCoroner]

I was surprised that Brooksie hit more triples in his career than Cal (68 to 44) so I had to look up who hit more in Memorial, since Brooks played in some fairly cavernous stadiums during away games. So checking how they both fared purely in Memorial Stadium: In their first 10 or so full seasons, Brooks hit 20 triples. Cal hit 11. So I'm going to say Cal was slower. 

[scOtt]

3 hours ago, mdbdotcom said:

When Brooks played, the question was, "Who's slower, Brooks or Boog?" I'm pretty sure Brooks was.

I think Boog was a little fast early on. He started out in the OF.

[Larry18]

55 minutes ago, InsideCoroner said:

I was surprised that Brooksie hit more triples in his career than Cal (68 to 44) so I had to look up who hit more in Memorial, since Brooks played in some fairly cavernous stadiums during away games. So checking how they both fared purely in Memorial Stadium: In their first 10 or so full seasons, Brooks hit 20 triples. Cal hit 11. So I'm going to say Cal was slower. 

Brooks hit more triples than Rickey Henderson but I believe Henderson was faster.

[Frobby]

22 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I wonder what percentage have to get thrown out for station to station to be more efficient?

Depends on the base/out situation.   With two outs and a runner on 2nd, you'd have to be thrown out about 65% of the time for it to make sense to go station to station.   

[terps19]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

Depends on the base/out situation.   With two outs and a runner on 2nd, you'd have to be thrown out about 65% of the time for it to make sense to go station to station.   

Assuming an OBP of .350 I am guessing?  Which I guess is highly independent from player to player.  If you had Joseph coming to the plate last year I would think you are sending any runner you possibly can... 

[CP0861]

Rickard's minor league numbers are respectable.....I don't care about his age as long as he's not 33 in AAA....here and now, he's still young and he's performed at every level.  Nobody knew who he was last year and small sample size or not, he had a great spring, made the squad and carried it over into the season....beat the odds and earned the roster spot....cooled down for a couple of weeks (look it up, it's not often you'll see a guy get hits in 7 outta 10 games and drop 21 pts in BA) and then it seems like quite a few people turned on the guy and started with all the "I told you he sucked" talk. 

Now he looks good again...having a good spring even with the added pressure of having options, Mancini knocking on the door, several OF signings, and 2 rule 5 guys....it would be easy to lay down, roll over and accept the AAA role.....but he's not - he's earning it again. 

I'm not saying he's a stud....but he's got ML talent....what did Manny bat in his first season?  Schoop? Say what you want, but the dude doesn't suck when he comes outta nowhere, with very little time in AAA, under a spotlight and against all odds as a rule 5 guy, and puts up a .268 BA....obviously, that's not gonna win a batting title, but that's solid. How many guys on the roster with 250+ ab's batted higher? 2 or 3? 

I'm glad the O's have him and hope he makes the OD roster. 

 

 

 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, CP0861 said:

Rickard's minor league numbers are respectable.....I don't care about his age as long as he's not 33 in AAA....here and now, he's still young and he's performed at every level.  Nobody knew who he was last year and small sample size or not, he had a great spring, made the squad and carried it over into the season....beat the odds and earned the roster spot....cooled down for a couple of weeks (look it up, it's not often you'll see a guy get hits in 7 outta 10 games and drop 21 pts in BA) and then it seems like quite a few people turned on the guy and started with all the "I told you he sucked" talk. 

Now he looks good again...having a good spring even with the added pressure of having options, Mancini knocking on the door, several OF signings, and 2 rule 5 guys....it would be easy to lay down, roll over and accept the AAA role.....but he's not - he's earning it again. 

I'm not saying he's a stud....but he's got ML talent....what did Manny bat in his first season?  Schoop? Say what you want, but the dude doesn't suck when he comes outta nowhere, with very little time in AAA, under a spotlight and against all odds as a rule 5 guy, and puts up a .268 BA....obviously, that's not gonna win a batting title, but that's solid. How many guys on the roster with 250+ ab's batted higher? 2 or 3? 

I'm glad the O's have him and hope he makes the OD roster. 

 

 

 

But age makes a huge difference.  You can't compare what Rickard did at 25 to what Manny did at 19 and Schoop did at 21.  Manny and Schoop have not even had their age 25 seasons.

[Triple Crown]

50 minutes ago, CP0861 said:

Rickard's minor league numbers are respectable.....I don't care about his age as long as he's not 33 in AAA....here and now, he's still young and he's performed at every level.  Nobody knew who he was last year and small sample size or not, he had a great spring, made the squad and carried it over into the season....beat the odds and earned the roster spot....cooled down for a couple of weeks (look it up, it's not often you'll see a guy get hits in 7 outta 10 games and drop 21 pts in BA) and then it seems like quite a few people turned on the guy and started with all the "I told you he sucked" talk. 

Now he looks good again...having a good spring even with the added pressure of having options, Mancini knocking on the door, several OF signings, and 2 rule 5 guys....it would be easy to lay down, roll over and accept the AAA role.....but he's not - he's earning it again. 

I'm not saying he's a stud....but he's got ML talent....what did Manny bat in his first season?  Schoop? Say what you want, but the dude doesn't suck when he comes outta nowhere, with very little time in AAA, under a spotlight and against all odds as a rule 5 guy, and puts up a .268 BA....obviously, that's not gonna win a batting title, but that's solid. How many guys on the roster with 250+ ab's batted higher? 2 or 3? 

I'm glad the O's have him and hope he makes the OD roster. 

 

 

 

Great post

[TommyPickles]

I think Rickard will continue to show improvement this year, and establish himself as a valuable player.

This is especially true given then makeup of our lineup. 

And it always seems like Buck likes what he sees from the kid.

Imagine how affordable he'd be as a full-time COF in a year or two... Might even help us afford a Manny extension.

 

 

[Babypowder]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

But age makes a huge difference.  You can't compare what Rickard did at 25 to what Manny did at 19 and Schoop did at 21.  Manny and Schoop have not even had their age 25 seasons.

He looked (or more likely, didn't look) at the mountain of evidence that shows how important age is and decided it didn't matter in Rickard's case. He also came with batting average to support his play last season.... a very strong post indeed. I have no rebuttal.

[ArtVanDelay]

32 minutes ago, Triple Crown said:

Great post

It really wasn't though.  Age doesn't matter? Alrighty then. .268 batting average?  It's 2017, why would anyone ever cite batting average when we have actual useful stats?  Rickard had an 86 wRC+.  That's bad. 

[Il BuonO]

3 hours ago, ArtVanDelay said:

It really wasn't though.  Age doesn't matter? Alrighty then. .268 batting average?  It's 2017, why would anyone ever cite batting average when we have actual useful stats?  Rickard had an 86 wRC+.  That's bad. 

Nostalgia?

[CP0861]

16 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

But age makes a huge difference.  You can't compare what Rickard did at 25 to what Manny did at 19 and Schoop did at 21.  Manny and Schoop have not even had their age 25 seasons.

I didn't say it didn't. Of course age is one of many factors.  I was specifically referring to Rickard when I said "I don't care about his age". 

He went to college, so he's a little older than what many would consider ideal for breaking into the majors, but I don't hold it against him that he debuted at 24.

I wasn't comparing Rickard to Schoop at 21....Schoop at 21 actually batted higher than Rickard last year...I threw Schoop's 15 at bats in 2013 out the window.  I was just pointing out Rickard at 24/25 to Schoop at 22.  So yeah, I understand Schoop was 2 years younger.....but Schoop also had slightly more exposure in the minors.  So granted, it's not perfect in age, but they had comparable professional experience when playing their first season....

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CP0861]

16 hours ago, ArtVanDelay said:

It really wasn't though.  Age doesn't matter? Alrighty then. .268 batting average?  It's 2017, why would anyone ever cite batting average when we have actual useful stats?  Rickard had an 86 wRC+.  That's bad. 

I never made the general statement or argument "age doesn't matter" as you are trying to imply.  You're either twisting my words, or you're completely misinterpreting them.  I was specifically referring to Rickard when I said "I don't care about his age".  He's 25.  Is that too old to improve?  Is he washed up?  No room for progression?  

Rickard 86 wRC+ last year....ok...is that really bad, or is it simply between average and below average?  Wouldn't bad (poor) be 75 or below? You referenced the stat......don't make up your own scale for the rating. 

Rickard fell into the same part of the scale as Schoop last year, right?  Therefore, Schoop was bad too, right?