Jump to content

Chance Sisco 2020


Frobby

Recommended Posts

The broadcast had Rayford in '85 as the last catcher leading off for us.  Watching him catch Milone it struck me maybe he works as personal catcher for someone who controls running game well even in time of Adley, if you call 128/32 his max PT limit anyway.

For as long as this lasts he's Pipped Hays from leadoff in my mind.

I still have a light on for 6 PA in 24 games Franklin Barreto, and hope for Sisco, Santander, Nunez, Ruiz, Mountcastle, Hays, Severino, Alberto, Barreto next Tuesday.  Yusniel 9/1 - I'm good showcasing both catchers these next two weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can’t quite figure out Sisco.    He’s got excellent strike zone judgment, but he swings and misses at pitches in the strike zone at a very high rate.    The most comparable player I can think of is Mark Reynolds, but the Sheriff had a much more violent swing and was more of a HR hitter.   Could it be as simple as lack of bat speed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I can’t quite figure out Sisco.    He’s got excellent strike zone judgment, but he swings and misses at pitches in the strike zone at a very high rate.    The most comparable player I can think of is Mark Reynolds, but the Sheriff had a much more violent swing and was more of a HR hitter.   Could it be as simple as lack of bat speed?

Maybe he is also blind?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OrioleDog said:

The broadcast had Rayford in '85 as the last catcher leading off for us.

That's more evidence that Earl had been taken over by an alien presence during his return stint.  Rayford actually led off five times that year.  He walked 10 times in 379 PA.  Coming into the season he had a career .279 OBP.  He stole four bases in his career, probably because the opponents didn't hold him on because they didn't think him stealing was possible*.

*Somehow the Sugar Bear had 24 steals as a 17-year-old in the Pioneer League in '75.  Seriously, he must have gained 50 pounds in those 10 years.  He's listed at 190, but that has to be undercounting by 30-40 pounds.

192.jpg

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

I can’t quite figure out Sisco.    He’s got excellent strike zone judgment, but he swings and misses at pitches in the strike zone at a very high rate.    The most comparable player I can think of is Mark Reynolds, but the Sheriff had a much more violent swing and was more of a HR hitter.   Could it be as simple as lack of bat speed?

The narrative that forms in my brain, and may even have some tenuous connection to reality, goes like this:

- In the minors he was often a high average, high OBP guy with little power
- In today's three true outcome, launch angle, damn-the-strikeouts world the coaches have encouraged him to hit more balls hard, in the air
- Instead of making contact, going the other way, working the count, he's thinking he needs to put the ball 26 rows up in the RF stands
- At the MLB level this leads to a K rate of over 30%, compared to 19% in the minors
- Perhaps he'd be better off as the hitter he is, rather than the hitter the coaches want everyone to be

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My earlier today enthusiasm was tempered a little bit seeing the K% alongside the crazy triple slash.

Jesse Winker in Cincinnati has something similar going on.  I feel like this is the one where the book on a guy is good eye, too passive, but the guy has changed gears to trying to hit the snot out of the ball.

It looks like a few balls were in play today, but this morning the Three True Outcomes percentage was 70-ish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

The narrative that forms in my brain, and may even have some tenuous connection to reality, goes like this:

- In the minors he was often a high average, high OBP guy with little power
- In today's three true outcome, launch angle, damn-the-strikeouts world the coaches have encouraged him to hit more balls hard, in the air
- Instead of making contact, going the other way, working the count, he's thinking he needs to put the ball 26 rows up in the RF stands
- At the MLB level this leads to a K rate of over 30%, compared to 19% in the minors
- Perhaps he'd be better off as the hitter he is, rather than the hitter the coaches want everyone to be

There's a lot to this theory, simply because this seems to be his approach when the scenario in the game dictates the need to gain base runners over all else.  To me, these feel like the times he's most comfortable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

o

 

 

Sisco's 3-run shot has actually made the score resemble a competitive game ........ 8-5, Red Sox.

 

 

(vs. RED SOX, 8/21)

 

 

NUMBER 4

 

CHANCE THOMALEO SISCO

CHANCE THOMALEO SISC

CHANCE THOMALEO SISCO

CHANCE THOMALEO SISCO

CHANCE THOMALEO SISCO

CHANCE THOMALEO SISCO

CHANCE THOMALEO SISCO

 

o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/19/2020 at 2:34 PM, Frobby said:

I can’t quite figure out Sisco.    He’s got excellent strike zone judgment, but he swings and misses at pitches in the strike zone at a very high rate.    The most comparable player I can think of is Mark Reynolds, but the Sheriff had a much more violent swing and was more of a HR hitter.   Could it be as simple as lack of bat speed?

He definitely seems to have trouble making contact with good breaking balls. Not sure if it a bad speed or pitch recognition issue.

His contact to damage ratio seems quite high compared to the high batting average low power guy we saw come up in the minors. Last year too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

You know what I haven't seen in the game threads?

Folks complaining about how teams are running wild when Sisco is behind the plate.

Also, lefty-lefty dong.

So far in '20 we're seeing the fewest steals per game in a MLB season since 1971.  Soon it'll be like the 40s and 50s, you could run a one-armed catcher out there and the difference wouldn't be noticeable.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

 

So far in '20, we're seeing the fewest steals-per-game in a MLB season since 1971. Soon it'll be like the 40's and 50's, you could run a one-armed catcher out there, and the difference wouldn't be noticeable.

 

o

 

 

o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Posts

    • It's a foregone conclusion that they will blow a 4 game lead in the span of 6 games? 
    • 100%! I say abolish divisions, play a fully balanced schedule and take the top 4 or 6 or 8 or whatever teams in each league to the playoffs. 
    • The question was asked, a few months ago, whether winning the division was necessary. A lively debate resulted, some saying the division didn’t matter(“just make the playoffs and anything can happen”) and some taking the opposite view. I wanted the Division and I’m disgusted the play has been so bad. And I haaaate the Yankees( sports hate. I’m sure they are all great guys in person.) It will not magically improve, and I despair of winning more than two more games…not even 90 wins. And in a Homer–prone park, how many homers will the Os give up? The thought is not comforting. And there’s little reason to think things will improve against the Tigers or Royals. But at least: 1) next year they will hopefully have Bautista and the position players healthy. 2) The farm has very few MLB-ready players so there won’t be so much bouncing back and forth. Hopefully the guys can settle in and just play. 3) the Os will be looking for a fourth consecutive winning season, which hasn’t happened since the 70s So there’s that…
    • I was about to post a similar thread, but despite my memory issues, I recalled this thread.  I still find myself enjoying sports less and less.  The issue is not my teams, but myself.  It's a sad reality that I'm bothered when my team doesn't win, or does win, but wins in a way that is not how I wanted them to!  LOL!  It's ridiculous.  Frankly, I'm somewhat ashamed. The O's are very likely going to the playoffs.  But instead of being happy about that, I'm more concerned with how awful we've been and how little I expect from them as the post-season draws near.  A real fan loves his team and sticks with them, through thick and thin.  It's absolutely okay to be critical, even frustrated, at times, but when those are the default and dominant expressions, it makes me feel... less than.  It's like this with all my favorite teams (O's/Ravens/Terps).  It's therapeutic, in a way, to reveal such truths.  But the quest to find a way to enjoy sports again, to enjoy what my teams are doing, is a process that is taking longer than I'd hoped.  
    • I wouldn’t say I’m fired up.  I’d like to do enough to (1) win the season series (which only takes one win), (2) clinch a playoff spot (which probably only takes one win, depending what other teams do, and (3) improves our chances of getting the no. 4 seed (which might take a couple of wins, depending how other teams do).   
    • It feels like a foregone conclusion that the O’s sneak in with the third wild card spot and then lose the wild card series. So it just doesn’t really matter all that much what happens from here on out.    Then again, get hot at the right time and this could still be a World Series contender. I have to see some fire in this team before I entertain that thought though.
    • I am not really fired up per se.  I am just hoping that something happens that is different than what we have seen for months.  A late comeback to win the game.  A big inning of 4 runs or more.  Some big hits from Adley or Holliday.   1 win means we win the season series against everyone in the East for the second year in a row.  That would be great.  And even if we lose, I am hoping that watching the Yankees celebrate in front of them and the fans celebrate around them fires them up.   
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...