Poll: Do you like the Adam Frazier signing?

[owknows]

Just now, Pickles said:

For support not illumination.  

Yes... I understood.

[DrinkinWithFermi]

Just now, RZNJ said:

What kind of first half would he have had if his BABIP was his career average.   It still would have been good.   You ding him when his BABIP is above his career average but don't give him any ground when it's below.   Interesting.   Last year he had a horrid month when he put about 80 balls in play and had a .154 BABIP.   Unlucky?

He's slow and he makes extremely weak contact. That does not seem like a recipe for a big bounceback, but maybe he'll prove me wrong.

I hope he does.

 

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

He's slow and he makes extremely weak contact. That does not seem like a recipe for a big bounceback, but maybe he'll prove me wrong.

I hope he does.

 

He's had weak EV numbers his entire career.   I grant you and have said many times in these threads that his speed going from consistently above the 50th percentile for years 2018-2021 and dipping to 37th last year is a concern.   

 

[Number5]

17 minutes ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

The metrics are not particularly encouraging, but maybe we'll get lucky and he'll have another outlier like his 2021 first half. 

The point is it isn't reasonable to claim the unusually high BABIP for the first 4 months of 2021 is an outlier, without acknowledging that the unusually low BABIP in 2022 is also an outlier.

[DrinkinWithFermi]

2 minutes ago, Number5 said:

The point is it isn't reasonable to claim the unusually high BABIP for the first 4 months of 2021 is an outlier, without acknowledging that the unusually low BABIP in 2022 is also an outlier.

It depends on whether you think the low BABIP in 2022 was an outlier or a representation of a new norm. 

Ibelieve it is the latter, although I have previously said that I do expect some improvement over 2022, albeit not an enormous amount.

[Number5]

Just now, DrinkinWithFermi said:

It depends on whether you think the low BABIP in 2022 was an outlier or a representation of a new norm. 

Ibelieve it is the latter, although I have previously said that I do expect some improvement over 2022, albeit not an enormous amount.

There is zero reason to believe that.  His EV is unchanged, and .268 is an extremely low BABIP for anyone.  Really, DWF, it looks like you are just driving an agenda when you manipulate stats the way you're doing here.

[DrinkinWithFermi]

1 minute ago, Number5 said:

There is zero reason to believe that.  His EV is unchanged, and .268 is an extremely low BABIP for anyone.  Really, DWF, it looks like you are just driving an agenda when you manipulate stats the way you're doing here.

I'm not manipulating anything, I am simply expressing my opinion. Bottom of the barrel EVs and well below average speed is not a recipe for success, but I wou,d love to be proven wrong. I just don't expect to be.

[Number5]

3 minutes ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

I'm not manipulating anything, I am simply expressing my opinion. Bottom of the barrel EVs and well below average speed is not a recipe for success, but I wou,d love to be proven wrong. I just don't expect to be.

Just telling you how it looks.  It is very clear that you aren't painting a complete picture in your posts when you cherry-pick stats the way you have.  You're certainly entitled to your opinion.

Personally, I remain unexcited one way or the other about signing Frazier.  I question the need for the signing, given the infielders we already had in house, but I recognize that the guy's been a solid pro.  His stats and the $8 million aren't what I'm concerned about.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

His big run in PIT in 2021 was the result of a BABIP spike that exceeded his career average by 50+ points. That is not debatable, the only thing that is debatable is what can be expected from him going forward. Based on his 2022 metrics and bottom line numbers, my guess is not much but a bit more than Odor. 

Is anyone arguing that they expect Frazier to replicate what he did in the first four months (not “first half”) of 2021?  It is hypocritical to cite his high BABIP from part of 2021 and ignore his low BABIP in 2022.   

If we can just be real for a minute:  Frazier’s xwOBA was 23 points higher than his actual wOBA last year.   That strongly suggests he was the victim of bad luck.  At the same time, his xwOBA also was the lowest of his career by a significant margin.  That strongly suggests that some of his decline was real.   There is plenty of room for Frazier to bounce back somewhat from 2022 without bouncing back all the way to his career average levels.  Frankly, that’s my baseline expectation of what’s most likely to happen. 
 

[Three Run Homer]

I voted yes, because if used properly he can help the team.   By "properly used" I mean that he should be a platoon utility player, subbing all over the field against righty starters.   He should not block Westburg or Ortiz, who hit right handed.   He does block Vavra, but I think Frazier offers more defensive versatility than Vavra.   

If he winds up being the regular 2B and putting up numbers similar to 2022 while Westburg or Ortiz rot at AAA, then that's a bad outcome.  But in evaluating this signing in isolation, I think we need to apply the envelope principle and assume that the team will use him optimally going forward.  

[Tony-OH]

19 hours ago, Frobby said:

Is anyone arguing that they expect Frazier to replicate what he did in the first four months (not “first half”) of 2021?  It is hypocritical to cite his high BABIP from part of 2021 and ignore his low BABIP in 2022.   

If we can just be real for a minute:  Frazier’s xwOBA was 23 points higher than his actual wOBA last year.   That strongly suggests he was the victim of bad luck.  At the same time, his xwOBA also was the lowest of his career by a significant margin.  That strongly suggests that some of his decline was real.   There is plenty of room for Frazier to bounce back somewhat from 2022 without bouncing back all the way to his career average levels.  Frankly, that’s my baseline expectation of what’s most likely to happen. 
 

BTW, I do expect Frazier to bounce back "somewhat". I doubt he's worse than he was last year offensively, but I still don't thin he was worth the $8 million. Peerhaps with the bigger left field they feel his low EV oppo hits will have more room to fall, though Seattle is a pretty big park.

One of the keys to the Frazier signing is that Elias has now told the world and his prospects that he values defense highly, particularly on the dirt. 

I think this makes Westburg, Norby and Vavra trade bait for him unless he views Westburg eventually as a 1B. This may have been why we heard that Norby said he thinks he will be traded this offseason. 

 

[sportsfan8703]

Belt to Toronto for $9 million. Kluber got $10 million. The Frazier signing looks more and more terrible by the day. 

[Frobby]

29 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Belt to Toronto for $9 million. Kluber got $10 million. The Frazier signing looks more and more terrible by the day. 

Belt vs. Frazier, 2018-22:

2018: Belt 2.5 rWAR, Frazier 2.7 rWAR

2019: 0.5 vs. 2.5

2020:  2.0 vs. 0.8

2021: 2.7 vs. 4.1

2022: 0.3 vs. 0.9

5 year total: 8.0 vs. 11.0.   

Frazier is 31, Belt is 35.

Seems to me that Frazier for $8 mm has more value than Belt for $9.5 mm.  If anything, the Belt signing confirms we got Frazier for a good price.  

Kluber, meanwhile, has been worth 1.8 rWAR in the last 4 years combined, compared to Frazier’s 8.3.   

In short, neither of those signings make the Frazier signing look worse.  And to be clear, the Frazier signing did not stop us from signing Belt or Kluber, if we’d wanted to do so.   



 

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

Belt vs. Frazier, 2018-22:

2018: Belt 2.5 rWAR, Frazier 2.7 rWAR

2019: 0.5 vs. 2.5

2020:  2.0 vs. 0.8

2021: 2.7 vs. 4.1

2022: 0.3 vs. 0.9

5 year total: 8.0 vs. 11.0.   

Frazier is 31, Belt is 35.

Seems to me that Frazier for $8 mm has more value than Belt for $9.5 mm.  If anything, the Belt signing confirms we got Frazier for a good price.  

Kluber, meanwhile, has been worth 1.8 rWAR in the last 4 years combined, compared to Frazier’s 8.3.   

In short, neither of those signings make the Frazier signing look worse.  And to be clear, the Frazier signing did not stop us from signing Belt or Kluber, if we’d wanted to do so.   



 

Agreed. The Frazier signing is awful on its own.  It doesn’t need anything put up against it to show how bad it really is.

[Frobby]

14 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Agreed. The Frazier signing is awful on its own.  It doesn’t need anything put up against it to show how bad it really is.

For me it’s not so much awful as it is a head-scratcher, given our alternatives at 2B and in the OF.   But Belt and Kluber have nothing to do with that.