Developing situation with Mountcastle?

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

I really have no explanation but it is really striking. Hopefully just a SSS thing. The crazy thing is he is absolutely on fire batting RH to more than make up for his struggles on the LH side. Can't recall seeing anything like it. 

I have an explanation.

It's baseball.

It isn't the first time a switch hitter has switched back and forth on what side they were performing better.

[Spy Fox]

26 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

You know what, I actually mess that up.  I always say at bats and that’s really not right..it should be PA but anyway, my threshold is more of a games started type of thing.

for me, the Os only have 1 everyday player and that’s Gunnar.  Everyday being defined as 155+ games. Adley, being a C, should rest (as in a full game off) more often imo.

After that, it just varies.

I think yon could say a guy playing 135 games is an everyday guy.  I’m not trying to nitpick on semantics.  I look at it more as, take away PA from someone.  
 

I have said I think this will be one of, if not the best, year of Mounty’s career. I don’t want him sitting too much but I don’t see anything wrong with saying he’s a 550ish PA guy vs 650ish.

Now, if he’s on fire and hitting all pitching, that plan can obviously be altered but the current plan for me would be to target 550ish PA..so, 135-140 games. 

It’s not a huge difference but you do that with him, with Santander and with Hays and all flan sudden, you find a bunch of at bats for a young hitter with bigger upside.  
 

That’s really what all of this is about.  I have never once said I want Cowser and Kjerstad playing everyday. They aren’t Gunnar.  They aren’t Holliday or Mayo either, 2 other guys I expect to be true everyday guys.

But they can play 135-140 games, just like Mounty and be really good imo.  

Right now, there are vet bats here stopping that. For me, I’m looking for ways to get the bats in the young guys hands as much as possible and I don’t feel sacrificing at bats from a good but not great player is some tragic way of doing that.

I pretty much agree with all your assessments here of how to handle those players. I do think a lot of folks would call a 140-game guy an "everyday player."

I also wonder if most 120-140 start guys don't do it by playing a consistent 4-5 games a week all year. They do it by playing almost every game most of the time, then having a few short breaks where they are more fully out of the lineup due to nagging injuries, illnesses, slumps. I think the way things usually play out, at any one moment most guys can be bucketed as full-timers, platoon, or bench. 

[Aristotelian]

10 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I have an explanation.

It's baseball.

It isn't the first time a switch hitter has switched back and forth on what side they were performing better.

That's not an explanation.

[Orioles Jim]

I remember when Patriots messageboards had similar thread titles about Aaron Hernandez 

Edited May 8 by Orioles Jim

[Orioles Jim]

42 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

You know what, I actually mess that up.  I always say at bats and that’s really not right..it should be PA but anyway, my threshold is more of a games started type of thing.

for me, the Os only have 1 everyday player and that’s Gunnar.  Everyday being defined as 155+ games. Adley, being a C, should rest (as in a full game off) more often imo.

After that, it just varies.

I think yon could say a guy playing 135 games is an everyday guy.  I’m not trying to nitpick on semantics.  I look at it more as, take away PA from someone.  
 

I have said I think this will be one of, if not the best, year of Mounty’s career. I don’t want him sitting too much but I don’t see anything wrong with saying he’s a 550ish PA guy vs 650ish.

Now, if he’s on fire and hitting all pitching, that plan can obviously be altered but the current plan for me would be to target 550ish PA..so, 135-140 games. 

It’s not a huge difference but you do that with him, with Santander and with Hays and all flan sudden, you find a bunch of at bats for a young hitter with bigger upside.  
 

That’s really what all of this is about.  I have never once said I want Cowser and Kjerstad playing everyday. They aren’t Gunnar.  They aren’t Holliday or Mayo either, 2 other guys I expect to be true everyday guys.

But they can play 135-140 games, just like Mounty and be really good imo.  

Right now, there are vet bats here stopping that. For me, I’m looking for ways to get the bats in the young guys hands as much as possible and I don’t feel sacrificing at bats from a good but not great player is some tragic way of doing that.

Just curious, where does Westburg fit in as far as everyday/what kind of games starter would be optimal for him, IYO?

[wildcard]

3 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Hot off the presses, @wildcard takes a few dozen plate appearances, draws massive and completely unwarranted conclusions from them, and slaps a clickbait headline on the whole thing.

I can see your reading comprehension is challenged.   Read the OP again.  I made no conclusion.   In fact went out of my way to say I made no conclusion.

[DrungoHazewood]

9 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I can see your reading comprehension is challenged.   Read the OP again.  I made no conclusion.   In fact went out of my way to say I made no conclusion.

Sure, you were perhaps absent-mindedly musing about whether a small sample of information should be used to draw wide-ranging conclusions. We'll have to keep track of this before doing anything rash, like suggesting this is a Developing Situation.

Similar to how if Dan Hammer's 0.00 ERA for the BaySox were to continue for months or years, then perhaps we've found our closer for the next decade. Or how I'm sure Mike Elias is closely monitoring Ryan McKenna's slugging, and if he keeps it over 1.000, like it is right now, maybe he's the next Barry Bonds. We'll have to keep an eye on all of this before forming any kind of conclusions at all.

[wildcard]

3 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Sure, you were perhaps absent-mindedly musing about whether a small sample of information should be used to draw wide-ranging conclusions. We'll have to keep track of this before doing anything rash, like suggesting this is a Developing Situation.

Similar to how if Dan Hammer's 0.00 ERA for the BaySox were to continue for months or years, then perhaps we've found our closer for the next decade. Or how I'm sure Mike Elias is closely monitoring Ryan McKenna's slugging, and if he keeps it over 1.000, like it is right now, maybe he's the next Barry Bonds. We'll have to keep an eye on all of this before forming any kind of conclusions at all.

Mountcastle has had trouble hitting righties for his  last 600 PAs.   You left that out.   The question is will that continue going forward this season.

[Just Regular]

42 minutes ago, Spy Fox said:

I also wonder if most 120-140 start guys don't do it by playing a consistent 4-5 games a week all year. They do it by playing almost every game most of the time, then having a few short breaks where they are more fully out of the lineup due to nagging injuries, illnesses, slumps. I think the way things usually play out, at any one moment most guys can be bucketed as full-timers, platoon, or bench. 

Ron Shandler's people at Baseball Forecaster had something new in their 2024 annual trying to serve fantasy players in weekly leagues - it segmented playing time into Active Weeks out of 26, and then measured per week volume in plate appearances and/or games played.    

Having watched the Rays try to MacGyver their way past the Yankees most of the past decade with spare parts, I've gotten to like 300 PA per season.   

2023 that's 293 guys, 2022 it is 277 guys, 2021 it is 262 - it is steady around 9 guys per Club, and most everyone else is replacement players except when Gunnar Henderson is getting 125 at-bats.

[Moose Milligan]

49 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

That's not an explanation.

Sure it is.  Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not an explanation.  

[Moose Milligan]

7 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Mountcastle has had trouble hitting righties for his  last 600 PAs.   You left that out.   The question is will that continue going forward this season.

Would the last 600 PAs stretch back to last year to his issues with vertigo?

[DrungoHazewood]

16 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Mountcastle has had trouble hitting righties for his  last 600 PAs.   You left that out.   The question is will that continue going forward this season.

Given enough time almost everyone ends up with a platoon split that's roughly average. I would bet that Mountcastle is no different, and when all is said and done his career splits will be something like his career marks right now: around .850 against lefties, .750 against righties. Year to year that will be influenced by random variation.

[wildcard]

6 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Would the last 600 PAs stretch back to last year to his issues with vertigo?

Sure.   That is one of the reasons that its a developing situation and there is a question mark after the title.

[Moose Milligan]

3 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Sure.   That is one of the reasons that its a developing situation and there is a question mark after the title.

I love how you're using "developing situation" here.  

[wildcard]

6 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Given enough time almost everyone ends up with a platoon split that's roughly average. I would bet that Mountcastle is no different, and when all is said and done his career splits will be something like his career marks right now: around .850 against lefties, .750 against righties. Year to year that will be influenced by random variation.

You are speculating and I am just questioning what happens  next.