Jump to content

Jackson Holliday 2024


btdart20

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, banks703 said:

I've been extremely consistent with my opinion of the kid since he was drafted and we've had our debates and back and forth about it. With respect to what we have disagreed upon, I've been pretty spot-on about what I've posted about him as a player whereas your arguments always just go back to that he was drafted as a SS so he must be a SS or you resort to ad hominem. 

You have been right that his arm isn’t currently strong enough to play SS. Thats true to an extent.

What else have you argued that is differing?

Edited by Sports Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

You have been right that his arm isn’t currently strong enough to play SS. Thats true to an extent.

What else have you argued that is differing?

 

200w.gif?cid=6c09b952a3d1qlnza344bh6e8z6

 

 

Edited by banks703
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Malike said:

Holliday was +3 OAA in his time on the big league club at 2B. Jordan Westburg is -6 OAA at 2B, but yes, that post you responded to was right. Westburg is going to be the far superior 2B defensively lol. Unreal.

I don’t trust that +3 OAA AT ALL.  Rtot and Rdrs had him at 0, UZR had him at -0.2.   I think his fielding in AAA has been worse than in the majors, as he’s made 10 errors there but didn’t make any in his short major league tenure.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, banks703 said:

 

200w.gif?cid=6c09b952a3d1qlnza344bh6e8z6

 

 

No no..im asking. Where you and I have differed is that you don’t think he will ever be a good defender at SS…ever.

I disagree with that.

Your whole argument is based around his arm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I don’t trust that +3 OAA AT ALL.  Rtot and Rdrs had him at 0, UZR had him at -0.2.   I think his fielding in AAA has been worse than in the majors, as he’s made 10 errors there but didn’t make any in his short major league tenure.   

How has his range been in AAA? How he has been at turning double plays? Is he getting to balls others aren’t?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sports Guy said:

No no..im asking. Where you and I have differed is that you don’t think he will ever be a good defender at SS…ever.

I disagree with that.

Your whole argument is based around his arm.

It isn't. I've made lots of comments about other parts of his defense. They're in my post history. You can find them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

How has his range been in AAA? How he has been at turning double plays? Is he getting to balls others aren’t?  

Beats the hell out of me.  That why I said “I think” his defense has been worse in AAA than the majors.  I definitely don’t KNOW it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, banks703 said:

It isn't. I've made lots of comments about other parts of his defense. They're in my post history. You can find them. 

Ok fine..whatever. The point is that you are making this grand proclamation of “how right you have been” and the reality is that you are completely discounting basic scouting things, which makes so much of your point irrelevant to me.

Even Tony, who shares your doubts, has said “unless he gets stronger physically” (or something along those lines), he doesn’t see him at SS.

Thats my issue with your stance. You are providing zero room for improvement and quite frankly, that makes your point foolish.

I’ll give you credit for raising doubt about him when others weren’t necessarily doing that…but the total discounting of him getting better will always make your opinion completely worthless to me.

Now I know you don’t care about that but you can at least understand that I really don’t care what you have to say on the matter. 

Edited by Sports Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Beats the hell out of me.  That why I said “I think” his defense has been worse in AAA than the majors.  I definitely don’t KNOW it.  

But yet you discount numbers and bring up the errors even though you don’t really know the origin of how the errors came about or if/how the elbow has hurt things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What number am I discounting?  To be clear, my doubts about his major league OAA have nothing to do with his MiL performance.  They have to do with the fact that every other advanced metric disagrees, and what I witnessed watching him play.  I refer to his MiL errors there only as evidence that he has done worse in the minors than the majors defensively.  If advanced stats existed at the MiL level I’d use them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Yeah, I liked the idea of Mayo at 3B and Holliday maybe in CF but I was just coming around to the realization that Westburg at 3B and Holliday at 2B was the best future alignment which would make one of Basallo, Mayo, or Kjerstad more tradeable.    I have more confidence in Holliday as a 2B than Mayo as a 3B moving forward and Westburg looks better at 3B.

Especially with Cowser doing so well defensively this year and looking capable of being the starting CF for at least the next few years, the Holliday to CF option is looking less likely. And after drafting Honeycutt and Overn to add to Bradfield and the other CF options in the system, I think Holliday is going to stay at 2B.

Mayo could still be a part time 3B for Gunnar/Westburg/Holliday rest/DH days, and that would still be valuable. But I think his future with the Orioles is primarily as a 1B. And that’s fine! They need a long term 1B too and his bat incredible. Even if he’s purely a 1B/DH, I think he’s more valuable than Crochet, but I do think that puts him on the table and not on the “untouchable” list for Skubal. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

What number am I discounting?  To be clear, my doubts about his major league OAA have nothing to do with his MiL performance.  They have to do with the fact that every other advanced metric disagrees, and what I witnessed watching him play.  I refer to his MiL errors there only as evidence that he has done worse in the minors than the majors defensively.  If advanced stats existed at the MiL level I’d use them. 

Errors don’t mean he has done worse.  It’s also an obvious much larger sample size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Ok fine..whatever. The point is that you are making this grand proclamation of “how right you have been” and the reality is that you are completely discounting basic scouting things, which makes so much of your point irrelevant to me.

Even Tony, who shares your doubts, has said “unless he gets stronger physically” (or something along those lines), he doesn’t see him at SS.

Thats my issue with your stance. You are providing zero room for improvement and quite frankly, that makes you a complete fool.

I’ll give you credit for raising doubt about him when others weren’t necessarily doing that…but the total discounting of him getting better will always make your opinion completely worthless to me.

Now I know you don’t care about that but you can at least understand that I really don’t care what you have to say on the matter. 

I've not once ever suggested that he wouldn't get better. You're legitimately making that up in your head or purposely ignoring the posts that I've made when I have stated that he, in fact, would get better.

I've always stated that he would not kill you defensively (specifically at SS) but that he would never be the best option there at the ML level. That is how I have described his prospects as a defensive SS from the day that they drafted him. And I continue to stand by the idea that he may end up in the OF. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, banks703 said:

I've not once ever suggested that he wouldn't get better. You're legitimately making that up in your head or purposely ignoring the posts that I've made when I have stated that he, in fact, would get better.

I've always stated that he would not kill you defensively (specifically at SS) but that he would never be the best option there at the ML level. That is how I have described his prospects as a defensive SS from the day that they drafted him. And I continue to stand by the idea that he may end up in the OF. 

First of all, I edited my post. I originally said you are a complete fool in that post. That’s not what I meant to say and I re-worded it.  So, I apologize for that comment.

Now, back to the post..you have 100% said he will never be good defensively at SS.  In one post you will say he could get better and then in another post you will say, he never will. 100% you have said that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • I had been considering making the trip but it unfortunately didn't work out this season with a lot of other travel obligations I ended up having. I went to Fenway for the first time to see the O's back in 2019 and absolutely loved it.  Hope everyone making the trip has a blast!
    • Nice to see he's putting the increase in ticket prices to good use! 
    • I learned just now that the Library of Congress has a new David M. Rubenstein Treasures Gallery, so named in recognition of a $10 mm gift by Rubenstein.  Looks pretty cool, too.   https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/09/03/library-of-congress-exhibit/
    • He’s really having a rough year.  Three trips to the IL plus an illness that zapped him badly at the beginning of the year.  I’d say there’s a good chance he’s getting non-tendered this offseason.  But hopefully he can recover from this latest setback and contribute to the Phillies during the postseason.
    • It’s kind of amazing, but Bowman has thrown 207.2 innings in his career, while Perez has thrown 207.1.   Perez has allowed fewer hits (183/188), fewer runs (101/105), fewer homers (15/18) and has struck out more batters (191/167).   The only place where Bowman has the advantage is walks (108/75).  Perez is five years younger.   I prefer Perez every day and twice on Sunday.  
    • I don't want to hijack this thread but for those that are interested: Underestimating the Fog (Bill James)-or the original title-The Problem of Distinguishing Between Transient and Persistent Phenomena When Dealing with Variables from a Statistically Unstable Platform.  https://sabr.org/research/article/underestimating-the-fog/ Excerpt: " Dick Cramer, in the clutch-hitting study, did the same thing, and catcher-ERA studies, which look for consistency in catcher’s impact on ERAs, do the same thing; they compare one comparison offshoot with a second comparison offshoot. It is a comparison of two comparison offshoots. When you do that, the result embodies not just all of the randomness in two original statistics, but all of the randomness in four original statistics. Unless you have extremely stable “original elements” — original statistics stabilized by hundreds of thousands of trials — then the result is, for all practical purposes, just random numbers. We ran astray because we have been assuming that random data is proof of nothingness, when in reality random data proves nothing. In essence, starting with Dick Cramer’s article, Cramer argued, “I did an analysis which should have identified clutch hitters, if clutch hitting exists. I got random data; therefore, clutch hitters don’t exist.” Cramer was using random data as proof of nothingness — and I did the same, many times, and many other people also have done the same. But I’m saying now that’s not right; random data proves nothing — and it cannot be used as proof of nothingness. Why? Because whenever you do a study, if your study completely fails, you will get random data. Therefore, when you get random data, all you may conclude is that your study has failed. Cramer’s study may have failed to identify clutch hitters because clutch hitters don’t exist — as he concluded — or it may have failed to identify clutch hitters because the method doesn’t work — as I now believe. We don’t know. All we can say is that the study has failed. Dealing now with the nine conclusions listed near the start of the article, which were: -Clutch hitters don’t exist. -Pitchers have no ability to win, which is distinct from an ability to prevent runs. -Winning or losing close games is luck. -Catchers have little or no impact on a pitcher’s ERA. -A pitcher has little or no control over his hits/innings ratio, other than by striking batters out and allowing home runs. -Base running has no persistent impact on a team’s runs scored, other than by base stealing. -Batters have no individual tendency to hit well or hit poorly against left-handed pitching. -Batters don’t get hot and cold. -One hitter does not “protect” another in a hitting lineup. On [1), it is my opinion that this should be regarded as an open question. While Dick Cramer is a friend of mine, and I have tremendous respect for his work, I am convinced that, even if clutch-hitting skill did exist and was extremely important, this analysis would still reach the conclusion that it did, simply because it is not possible to detect consistency in clutch hitting by the use of this method." He goes on to question the other conclusions.  It's a very interesting read. Here is Birnbaum's response:  https://sabr.org/journal/article/response-to-mapping-the-fog/  
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...