Tracking Ex Oriole Thread

[Ruzious]

14 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

For me, Manny appears to be a fit inside the club house, and not a cancer, and his face isn't on TMZ every other day.

Is he perfect? Perfect

Yes, his lack of hustle is maddening to the fan.

But, the skill level that he can play defense, be sideways and have power to throw to first, and not even having a leg on the ground is mind blowing.

Yeah, I think he's still arguably a top 5 talent in all of baseball.  With that talent comes enormous expectations - which I imagine many players would wilt under, so I can understand when "Manny's being Manny" and rubs people the wrong way.  Not having the "burden" of being one of the best in the world at anything (though I can whine pretty well at times), a lot of people don't give him the slack he probably should get.   

[Frobby]

8 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

Although I was indirectly teasing Atomic above about disparaging Manny's performance, I actually think there's a high probability that Manny will not have a HOF level career performance. If you look at career WAR by age, then Manny is still in amazing company. But a lot of his WAR has been associated with stellar defense and his defense seems to have slipped a good bit at age 26. He is a very good hitter, but he is very unlikely to hit his way into the HOF (he's currently tied for 372nd in career OPS+, for example). It was very reasonable to project Manny as a HOF'er several years ago based on WAR by age comparisons, but a significant part of Manny's worth by year is likely to pretty much evaporate in the next few years. Not ragging on Manny, but just thinking out loud about the relative value of his defense and its direction. Plus he is unlikely to get a lot of feel good votes from writers unless his "brand" changes a lot in the future. 

I’d never say that any 26-year old (except maybe Trout) is more likely  than not to make the Hall of Fame.   There are just too many things that can change or go wrong as a player ages, especially injuries.  

Having said that, I like Manny’s chances.    He’s got a real good shot at both 500 homers and 3,000 hits.    To me, the key issue is health.    

[DrungoHazewood]

57 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

Although I was indirectly teasing Atomic above about disparaging Manny's performance, I actually think there's a high probability that Manny will not have a HOF level career performance. If you look at career WAR by age, then Manny is still in amazing company. But a lot of his WAR has been associated with stellar defense and his defense seems to have slipped a good bit at age 26. He is a very good hitter, but he is very unlikely to hit his way into the HOF (he's currently tied for 372nd in career OPS+, for example). It was very reasonable to project Manny as a HOF'er several years ago based on WAR by age comparisons, but a significant part of Manny's worth by year is likely to pretty much evaporate in the next few years. Not ragging on Manny, but just thinking out loud about the relative value of his defense and its direction. Plus he is unlikely to get a lot of feel good votes from writers unless his "brand" changes a lot in the future. 

There are a lot of ways to slice this, but there are 27 non-active players who had 30+ rWAR through 26, and had at least a +25 in fielding runs.  Manny's obviously active, but he's at 36 rWAR and +76 fielding runs, so pretty high on the list.

By my count 23 of the 27 players on the list are in the Hall or will be (Bonds).  The counter-examples are Jimmy Sheckard, Charlie Keller, Andruw Jones, and Sherry Magee.  Keller's career never really recovered from WWII, Magee is better than any number of actual HOFers, Sheckard had a long, winding career that was comparable to Magee, and I think Jones eventually goes in.

Pretty much everyone with Manny's resume through 26 goes to the Hall or (very occasionally) just misses.

[DrungoHazewood]

43 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I’d never say that any 26-year old (except maybe Trout) is more likely  than not to make the Hall of Fame.   There are just too many things that can change or go wrong as a player ages, especially injuries.  

Having said that, I like Manny’s chances.    He’s got a real good shot at both 500 homers and 3,000 hits.    To me, the key issue is health.    

Manny probably has 12-15 years left unless he gets hurt.  Even at a very disappointing two wins a year he's going to be at about the same career value as someone like Andre Dawson.  He could totally crash and burn, only amass another 10 wins, and still be in the neighborhood of Jim Rice, Ralph Kiner, Mickey Cochrane, Lou Brock, etc.  He's already ahead of 10 or 12 current HOFers.

[atomic]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

I’d never say that any 26-year old (except maybe Trout) is more likely  than not to make the Hall of Fame.   There are just too many things that can change or go wrong as a player ages, especially injuries.  

Having said that, I like Manny’s chances.    He’s got a real good shot at both 500 homers and 3,000 hits.    To me, the key issue is health.    

He turns 27 iN a month. It is highly unlikely he gets 3000 hits or 500 home runs.

[Frobby]

15 minutes ago, atomic said:

He turns 27 iN a month. It is highly unlikely he gets 3000 hits or 500 home runs.

Define “highly unlikely.”    What would you say the odds are on each?

[DrungoHazewood]

15 minutes ago, atomic said:

He turns 27 iN a month. It is highly unlikely he gets 3000 hits or 500 home runs.

According to the Bill James favorite toy he has about a 30% chance at 3000 hits and about a 47% chance at 500 homers.  I used about three times his current totals to guess how many he'll have of each this year. 

I think the favorite toy as implemented by ESPN underrates Manny because it estimates he'll only play about another eight years.  It's a very simple tool. 

[Sessh]

11 minutes ago, atomic said:

He turns 27 iN a month. It is highly unlikely he gets 3000 hits or 500 home runs.

If he averages 180 hits and 30 HR a season over the next 10 years, he's got a real shot. So, 1746 hits (he has 54 this season) and 290 HRs (10 this season) would put him at 2850 hits and 475 HRs. He's got a legitimate chance and he'd be in his age 37 season, so maybe he'd have another 150 hits and 25 HR's in the tank. I wouldn't say it's highly unlikely barring major injury problems.

[Tx Oriole]

19 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Define “highly unlikely.”    What would you say the odds are on each?

I don’t think he gets 500 homeruns. 

[atomic]

1 hour ago, Sessh said:

If he averages 180 hits and 30 HR a season over the next 10 years, he's got a real shot. So, 1746 hits (he has 54 this season) and 290 HRs (10 this season) would put him at 2850 hits and 475 HRs. He's got a legitimate chance and he'd be in his age 37 season, so maybe he'd have another 150 hits and 25 HR's in the tank. I wouldn't say it's highly unlikely barring major injury problems.

Players aren’t lasting as long these days. Hard for older guys to react to 98 mph fastballs.  Most likey to start decline at 32.  

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Tx Oriole said:

I don’t think he gets 500 homeruns. 

The biggest obstacle is that he’s now playing in San Diego, which will probably cost him 50-100 homers over the next decade.   

[Tx Oriole]

17 minutes ago, Frobby said:

The biggest obstacle is that he’s now playing in San Diego, which will probably cost him 50-100 homers over the next decade.   

It sure could.

[Enjoy Terror]

Manny has like 300 more hits than Markakis did at the end of their age 25 seasons, and Markakis is often mentioned in an outside chance at 3000.

Silly to speculate at age 26 anyway, but as long as we’re all on the same page about the silliness, Manny is outpacing Nick for that distinction right now.

[DrungoHazewood]

11 hours ago, atomic said:

Players aren’t lasting as long these days. Hard for older guys to react to 98 mph fastballs.  Most likey to start decline at 32.  

Data, please.

[DrungoHazewood]

10 hours ago, Frobby said:

The biggest obstacle is that he’s now playing in San Diego, which will probably cost him 50-100 homers over the next decade.   

Let's say Manny would have 300 homers over the next decade in a neutral park.  150 at home, 150 on the road.  For him to lose 50 homers, that would be 100 at home, 150 on the road.  For him to lose 100 that would be 50 at home 150 on the road. 

The most extreme home run split I know of (in the live ball era) is Mel Ott.  He had 323 homers at home (Polo Grounds), and 188 on the road.  63% of homers at home.  If Manny had 63% of his homers on the road in this hypothethical situation he'd have 150 on the road and 88 at home.  That would mean he "lost" 62 homers to his home park.

According to multiple sites PETCO has a HR park factor of about 86. I think the calculation works out that Mel Ott's Polo Grounds factor was 63.  Meaning Manny should lose 14% of his neutral park home home runs to PETCO, or .14 x 150 = 21 homers.  

If he'd stayed in Baltimore he probably would have gained 10 or 15 compared to neutral.  So... OPACY Manny hits 315, neutral park Manny hits 300, and PETCO Manny hits about 279.

Somebody check my math...