People here seem to forget

[DrungoHazewood]

A-Rod and Jermaine Dye come to mind.

Dye sort of fits the mold.

But Alex Rodriguez' worst year is better than Huff's best. He's never had consecutive years with an OPS+ under 135. I'm failing to see where he had a three-year run of mediocrity.

[Number5]

Right...And they were 3 consec healthy years as well I believe.

And, Huff isn't a HOFer like some of the guys being mentioned either.

Yes, some are in the HOF. Some aren't. I was looking for slugging corner guys that had down years. I wasn't concerned with their HOF status. Why would it matter?

Whether in the HOF or not, NONE had a "one career year" come back. I have found nothing to support the claim that these "one career year" come backs occur often times -- HOF or not. Have you? In fact, I was unable to find even one. I'm sure it must have happened, but I just haven't come across one yet.

Likewise, there is every indication that a come back that lasts for an extended period of years is not only not "very rare," but it seems to be quite common.

Interesting that HOFers McCovey, Stargell, and Killebrew all had "lows" that were every bit as low as Huff's. Their down years, it seems, were an even more drastic drop off in form from their highs, yet they all enjoyed extended come backs.

Future HOFer (IMO) Chipper Jones had a "low" of .848, but, for him, that was every bit the drop off that Huff had. Everything is relative. Being a HOFer does not exclude a player from having down years and recovering, does it?

[DrungoHazewood]

Yes, some are in the HOF. Some aren't. I was looking for slugging corner guys that had down years. I wasn't concerned with their HOF status. Why would it matter?

Whether in the HOF or not, NONE had a "one career year" come back. I have found nothing to support the claim that these "one career year" come backs occur often times -- HOF or not. Have you? In fact, I was unable to find even one. I'm sure it must have happened, but I just haven't come across one yet.

Likewise, there is every indication that a come back that lasts for an extended period of years is not only not "very rare," but it seems to be quite common.

Interesting that HOFers McCovey, Stargell, and Killebrew all had "lows" that were every bit as low as Huff's. Their down years, it seems, were an even more drastic drop off in form from their highs, yet they all enjoyed extended come backs. Killebrew, McCovey, and Stargell's lows were nothing at all like Huffs. Completely different levels of lows.

Future HOFer (IMO) Chipper Jones had a "low" of .848, but, for him, that was every bit the drop off that Huff had. Everything is relative. Being a HOFer does not exclude a player from having down years and recovering, does it?

No, but players whose best years are farther from average typically have more volatility in their performances than average players. George Brett hit .390 in 1980, then .314 and .301 the next two. He was still a heck of a player, just not living on another world. That's not exactly what we're talking about here.

McCovey had a few down years, like 1964, or '72 when he was hurt. But it's not like he had any extended stretches where he was just an average player. And anyway he had 11 years with an OPS+ over 150.

From 1959 to 1972 Killebrew never had a season with an OPS+ of under 130. He was great every year from the time he became a regular at 23 until he was 37.

Stargell never had an OPS+ under 125 from the age of 24 through 40!

I'm not sure how you're comparing these guys to Huff. Huff had a three-year period where he was a below-average DH. That's nothing like a 15-year-run of greatness where the player sometimes went from "super great" to just "really great" for a few years.

[Sports Guy]

Yeah, I agree, hoping Huff will put up an OPS around .850 is not at all hoping for a miracle.

About 50 points higher than he did the last 3 years?

I think expecting an 825 OPS is the MOST we should EXPECT.

[Mackus]

About 50 points higher than he did the last 3 years?

I think expecting an 825 OPS is the MOST we should EXPECT.

I agree with MWeb here. Expecting an .850 OPS is not unreasonable at all. Maybe a tad higher than I'd guess if I had to, but not unreasonable by any definition of the word.

[TyCobb]

Dye sort of fits the mold.

But Alex Rodriguez' worst year is better than Huff's best. He's never had consecutive years with an OPS+ under 135. I'm failing to see where he had a three-year run of mediocrity.

Again, I was just looking at multiple peaks.

Arod Had an OPS+ of 160 his first full season. Went to 120, 136, and 134 the next 3 seasons. At the age of 24 had a 162 season (peak) and followed up with 160. They went to 158, 147, and 131. At the age of 29 he jump back up to 173 (peak). Went down to 134 and then last season followed up with another peak of 177.

[TyCobb]

About 50 points higher than he did the last 3 years?

I think expecting an 825 OPS is the MOST we should EXPECT.

What are you basing this on?

I could see anywhere from a .775 - .922 OPS.

[Mackus]

What are you basing this on?

I could see anywhere from a .775 - .922 OPS.

But the term "expect" implies the most likely outcome. Even if you have an expectation, you certainly always take into account the slimmer possibilities of someone doing considerably better or worse than that.

Your "expectation" is better described as basically your "prediction of what is the most likely outcome".

[Number5]

No, but players whose best years are farther from average typically have more volatility in their performances than average players. George Brett hit .390 in 1980, then .314 and .301 the next two. He was still a heck of a player, just not living on another world. That's not exactly what we're talking about here.

McCovey had a few down years, like 1964, or '72 when he was hurt. But it's not like he had any extended stretches where he was just an average player. And anyway he had 11 years with an OPS+ over 150.

From 1959 to 1972 Killebrew never had a season with an OPS+ of under 130. He was great every year from the time he became a regular at 23 until he was 37.

Stargell never had an OPS+ under 125 from the age of 24 through 40!

I'm not sure how you're comparing these guys to Huff. Huff had a three-year period where he was a below-average DH. That's nothing like a 15-year-run of greatness where the player sometimes went from "super great" to just "really great" for a few years.

I'm not comparing Huff to anybody but himself. I am comparing each player to himself. Mackus' unsupported statement was that "often times" guys have down years, then have a "career year" only to never do well again. My question is where did he come up with that? I have not found one single case supporting what he claims happens "often times" and I have found many cases that say players do, in fact, have comebacks for an extended period of years. The players' HOF status is irrelevant.

Stargell's years at or close to 125+ were, in fact, very much so off years for him. His lifetime was 147+ and he had quite a few 160+ or even better. I have in no way compared Aubrey Huff to Willie Stargell, other than the commonality of having some off years and then rebounding.

It amazes me that you choose to nitpick minutia as to whether my examples are EXACTLY like Aubrey Huff, rather than look at Mackus' totally unsupported statement that these comebacks are "often times" for only "one career year" and that it is "very rare" for the comeback to last more than one year. Neither he, nor you, have substantiated that statement in any way. Every indication, from looking at the careers of HOFers and non-HOFers alike, is that, in fact, the reverse is true.

Again, I was totally and completely unconcerned with anyones Hall of Fame Status as I looked at this. I was simply looking up corner guys who had down periods in production. I was not comparing one with another, I was looking at each players' statistics individually.

[Mackus]

I'm not comparing Huff to anybody but himself. I am comparing each player to himself. Mackus' unsupported statement was that "often times" guys have down years, then have a "career year" only to never do well again. My question is where did he come up with that? I have not found one single case supporting what he claims happens "often times" and I have found many cases that say players do, in fact, have comebacks for an extended period of years. The players' HOF status is irrelevant.

A few players who I would qualify as having big "resurgent" years and then not approaching those numbers again.

Richard Hidalgo after a huge 2003.

Bobby Higginson after 2000.

Rondell White after 2001.

Trot Nixon after 2003.

Vernon Wells after 2006.

Thats just from looking at Huff's comparable hitters list on BBRef. Not all are great comparisons, but most of them were guys who usually had a few really good years, but then had settled into the 95-110 OPS+ range, then broke out for a 130-140 OPS+ season, then settled back into the previous range (or less).

[Frobby]

Huff easily could have a few good seasons left in him. I certainly wouldn't count on him equaling his 2008 output, however, even though that's possible. I'd expect something in between his 2007 and 2008 seasons.

Why do you EXPECT that?

You are basically saying you think he is going to have an OPS around 850 or so...Why?

No, that's not what I meant to be saying. I just meant I'd expect something better than 2007 and not as good as 2008.

[JTrea81]

A few players who I would qualify as having big "resurgent" years and then not approaching those numbers again.

Richard Hidalgo after a huge 2003.

Bobby Higginson after 2000.

Rondell White after 2001.

Trot Nixon after 2003.

Vernon Wells after 2006.

Thats just from looking at Huff's comparable hitters list on BBRef. Not all are great comparisons, but most of them were guys who usually had a few really good years, but then had settled into the 95-110 OPS+ range, then broke out for a 130-140 OPS+ season, then settled back into the previous range (or less).

I'd say injuries especially with White, Nixon and Wells had something to do with that. The year that they put up the big season was a year the stars aligned and they were finally healthy...

[Frobby]

About 50 points higher than he did the last 3 years?

I think expecting an 825 OPS is the MOST we should EXPECT.

I agree with MWeb here. Expecting an .850 OPS is not unreasonable at all. Maybe a tad higher than I'd guess if I had to, but not unreasonable by any definition of the word.

It's all guesswork. However, I think the team, in assessing its needs, should be conservative in estimating how its players are likely to do in the future. so if I were the Orioles, I wouldn't go into the season "expecting" Huff to have an OPS above .825, even if there is a reasonably good chance he will exceed it.

[mweb]

About 50 points higher than he did the last 3 years?

I think expecting an 825 OPS is the MOST we should EXPECT.

I disagree. He apparently changed his offseason workout strategy, which is possibly the reason why he got off to a better start than normal, and even in his down years(last 3), his post all star OPS is .839. I feel he was underachieving those years, and now has bounced back in a big way. I don't expect him to continue to be a .900 OPS guy, but he has been since August of last year. Plus, like others have mentioned, his BA/BIP doesn't scream fluke by any means.

I think .825 is a conservative prediction, and certainly possible, but as of now, I'm fine with predicting something around .850.

[SilentJames]

I look at career average.

His career average is .825

Now I don't think there is any reason, other than injury, that he shouldn't be able to reach that. He had surgery in the offseason, so no telling how long that hernia was really bothering him.

He will have solid protection in the lineup with Nick, Luke, and Matt batting around him.

A healthy Huff should easily hit the 820's in OPS. Now the question remains, can the Orioles succeed with their starting DH hitting in the 820's?