Jump to content

Offense Observations After Boston Series


Old#5fan

Recommended Posts

Unless you can show what spot in the lineup those stats may easily support my point, which is Markakis cannot handle the three spot this season.

FWIW, Kakes still has a .810 OPS this season in the #3 spot. So if by "can't handle it" you mean, "isn't putting up a 1.010 OPS like he is in the #2 spot," then sure. Whatever.

You're also talking about a sample size of 207 ABs. It's not the world's smallest sample size (like your agrument against Paplebon... I could probably find 3 or 4 other pitchers that Nick is 0 for at least 6 against), but it's small. Last year he had a higher OPS (.843 vs .829) batting in the #3 spot over the #2 spot.

What's my point? Given time, Nick's going to raise his .810 OPS in the #3 spot. There's absolutely no reason why Nick's batting better in the #2 hole aside from him getting more juicy fastballs when Roberts is on than he would in the #3 hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 167
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I do care in what situation because when the "bad" swing occurred, it was at the worst possible time in the game. That is when the truly great players step up not recede.

Again, any great player is going to fail 7 out of 10 times in that situation. Probably 8 or 9 times against a good closer like Paplebon.

So, what's your point? That Nick isn't a great player? Man, you must really not be a very happy person then. Just look at what he's doing this year and enjoy it, for a change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why OldFan is allowed to continually troll on this board by posting illogical and ridiculous "observations" and then summarily dismissing any valid arguments against said illogical "observations" is beyond me.

Completely agree. I went through this with OldFan last week already; he's got this strange bias. May I point out that Markakis has a 1.101 OPS for July so far? He's slugging .638, OBP .438, and hitting .383. And, of course, he leads the O's in OPS for the season. Yeah, he's not getting the job done; let's drop him to 5th!!! :) We don't want his .401 OBP (best on the O's, 5th in the AL, 3rd in the AL East) batting in front of our cleanup hitter!!! (There is an argument for batting Markakis 2nd, due to his high OBP and to separate the lefties, but most baseball people would agree he's a natural #3 hitter, with a nice mix of OBP and power. But 5th?!!! That's silly.)

-Larrytt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sky is red.

Did you see it with your own eyes? Were you wearing these at the time? They are similar to the "I hate Markakis" glasses that Oldfan wears.

<img src="http://store.retrorebels.com/images/s/sweetheartredred.jpg">

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, Kakes still has a .810 OPS this season in the #3 spot. So if by "can't handle it" you mean, "isn't putting up a 1.010 OPS like he is in the #2 spot," then sure. Whatever.

You're also talking about a sample size of 207 ABs. It's not the world's smallest sample size (like your agrument against Paplebon... I could probably find 3 or 4 other pitchers that Nick is 0 for at least 6 against), but it's small. Last year he had a higher OPS (.843 vs .829) batting in the #3 spot over the #2 spot.

What's my point? Given time, Nick's going to raise his .810 OPS in the #3 spot. There's absolutely no reason why Nick's batting better in the #2 hole aside from him getting more juicy fastballs when Roberts is on than he would in the #3 hole.

This isn't fantasy baseball. You can throw out your silly OPS or HOT or BBW or DUM or whatever made-up stats you want, but baseball is played on the field, not by a computer. And my eyes tell me Nick Markakis sucks in the clutch, can't hit any good pitcher after the 3rd inning and pees himself everytime he sees his name in the 3 spot in the lineup. If you've watched baseball like me for 40+ years, you could see that he just can't handle it. If it were up to me, I'd trade for a true BASEBALL PLAYER, like David Eckstein or Darin Erstad (did you know he used to play football?? He's TOUGH AND NEVER GETS NERVOUS IN THE CLUTCH!!!) Those guys don't crap themselves in tough situations like Markakis. I mean, I SAW HIM YESTERDAY after he struck out. I KNOW he had no confidence and just simply won't ever get a big hit. If it were up to me, he'd bat like 8th and would sacrifice bunt each time up, even with 2 outs and nobody on. And he would wear Huggies.

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely agree. I went through this with OldFan last week already; he's got this strange bias. May I point out that Markakis has a 1.101 OPS for July so far? He's slugging .638, OBP .438, and hitting .383. And, of course, he leads the O's in OPS for the season. Yeah, he's not getting the job done; let's drop him to 5th!!! :) We don't want his .401 OBP (best on the O's, 5th in the AL, 3rd in the AL East) batting in front of our cleanup hitter!!! (There is an argument for batting Markakis 2nd, due to his high OBP and to separate the lefties, but most baseball people would agree he's a natural #3 hitter, with a nice mix of OBP and power. But 5th?!!! That's silly.)

-Larrytt

I would take Kevin Youkelis any day over Markakis as a hitter and he bats fith, so your stance that my belief is silly is simply unfounded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Red skies at night, sailor's delight. Red skies at morn, sailors take warn.

Now that I have read them with my own eyes, they do look like fabulous rhymes. So, to continue proving my point, I have changed the criteria. I will not tell you the criteria just yet, but I can assure that you - when judged by my new rubrics - my rhymes are far and away superior.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I have read them with my own eyes, they do look like fabulous rhymes. So, to continue proving my point, I have changed the criteria. I will not tell you the criteria just yet, but I can assure that you - when judged by my new rubrics - my rhymes are far and away superior.

I assure you your rhymes fall under the category of epic fail. Or phail. But not MacPhail. He r00lz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...