Jump to content

A debate that should be interesting???


Flosman

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It's difficult to compare who will be better because we haven't seen how this season will end for Jones. I think both have the potential to hit 30/100, Nick's already reached the 100 RBI plateau, perhaps not year in and year out but the potential is still there. I'm not sure what I see as a potential comparison for Jones, because he's still trying to become more patient, improved yes, but he's still working on it, and I certainly don't think he'll ever reach Nick Markakis levels of getting on base. He'll win Gold Gloves though, I've not doubt about that.

Markakis I see as a Paul Molitor, Tony Gwynn type. By that I mean he gets on base a lot, scores a lot of runs, gets a ton of hits, high batting average, hits .300 every year, contends for a batting title year in and year out.

Gwynn:

20 Seasons 2440 10232 9288 1383 3141 543 85 135 1138 319 125 790 434 .338 .388 .459 .847 132

Molitor:

21 Seasons 2683 12160 10835 1782 3319 605 114 234 1307 504 131 1094 1244 .306 .369 .448 .817 122

Based on his production levels so far I can see Nick hitting for more power than Molitor, but not quite at the hitting acumen level of Gwynn. Either way, if he stays healthy (always a big if), and if his batting eye and plate discipline stays at the level it is or develops further then I've no doubt he'll get to 3,000 hits.

In all honesty who is better isn't that important. I'm just hapy to see both of them reaching their potentials and spending time in an O's uniform for a long time. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either way, if he stays healthy (always a big if), and if his batting eye and plate discipline stays at the level it is or develops further then I've no doubt he'll get to 3,000 hits.

Really? Nick doesn't get a ton of hits because he takes so many walks. This also hurts his BA, since he's taking hits away. I know it could change, but I don't think Nick has gotten to 200 hits yet. It's not because he isn't talented, it's because he's so damn patient.

Ichiro would be an interesting comp because he's sort of the opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, Jones has a better chance to win a GG and you think he may hit more homers and that makes him a better player?

That is some silly reasoning there but of course you only pay attention to the things that you like, while ignoring the things that proves who is a better player.

Oh well, glad we have both of them.

My goodness. He jsut picked the player he thought would be better. Why the big deal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? Nick doesn't get a ton of hits because he takes so many walks. This also hurts his BA, since he's taking hits away. I know it could change, but I don't think Nick has gotten to 200 hits yet. It's not because he isn't talented, it's because he's so damn patient.

Ichiro would be an interesting comp because he's sort of the opposite.

I'm not sure how walks hurt Nick's batting average. Swinging at balls take away hits. But it likely takes away far more outs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? Nick doesn't get a ton of hits because he takes so many walks. This also hurts his BA, since he's taking hits away.
Taking walks doesn't hurt BA. For every "hit" he replaces with a walk he probably replaces far more outs (and far more outs than his batting average would suggest). And he also takes away one at bat.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just find it hilarious when OldFan comes with an obviously uninformed opinion, and is proven wrong on it within minutes. Sometimes it's the simple things in life... ;)

I don't see the problem. There was a question who he thought wuld be the better player. He picked Jones. No biggie. For I too believe Jones is the better player. Oldfan just used the distance a HR went. He was mistaken. That is all. Jeez when someone makes a mistake some sure do like to rub it in. Hm wonder which one you are?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's difficult to compare who will be better because we haven't seen how this season will end for Jones. I think both have the potential to hit 30/100, Nick's already reached the 100 RBI plateau, perhaps not year in and year out but the potential is still there. I'm not sure what I see as a potential comparison for Jones, because he's still trying to become more patient, improved yes, but he's still working on it, and I certainly don't think he'll ever reach Nick Markakis levels of getting on base. He'll win Gold Gloves though, I've not doubt about that.

Markakis I see as a Paul Molitor, Tony Gwynn type. By that I mean he gets on base a lot, scores a lot of runs, gets a ton of hits, high batting average, hits .300 every year, contends for a batting title year in and year out.

Gwynn:

20 Seasons 2440 10232 9288 1383 3141 543 85 135 1138 319 125 790 434 .338 .388 .459 .847 132

Molitor:

21 Seasons 2683 12160 10835 1782 3319 605 114 234 1307 504 131 1094 1244 .306 .369 .448 .817 122

Based on his production levels so far I can see Nick hitting for more power than Molitor, but not quite at the hitting acumen level of Gwynn. Either way, if he stays healthy (always a big if), and if his batting eye and plate discipline stays at the level it is or develops further then I've no doubt he'll get to 3,000 hits.

In all honesty who is better isn't that important. I'm just hapy to see both of them reaching their potentials and spending time in an O's uniform for a long time. :D

Honestly, I don't see either as a very good comp for Nick. Molitor hit 20 HRs exactly once and never had 100 BBs in a year. He didn't even top 70 until he was 31. Their profiles are radically different.

Gwynn never walked 100 times (and had over 80 BBs only once) and never hit 20 HRs. Gwynn's production was driven by lofty BAs.

Gwynn was - essentially - Ichiro before Ichiro (but arguably better [as a hitter]). Not Markakis-like at all.

If you want comps, I'd think somewhere between Al Kaline and Stan Musial is what we should be hoping for.

With a likelihood that he ends up, instead, as good or better than Paul O'Neill (circa 1993-1998).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how walks hurt Nick's batting average. Swinging at balls take away hits. But it likely takes away far more outs.
Taking walks doesn't hurt BA. For every "hit" he replaces with a walk he probably replaces far more outs (and far more outs than his batting average would suggest). And he also takes away one at bat.

I'll admit to being a little green on this subject, but I would counter by saying that not all walks comprise plate appearances where the batter didn't see 1 or more good strikes to hit. Therefore, unless you're assuming that he'd be trying to hit balls, I'm not sure how you two can make this statement.

That being said, I could be 100% wrong. However, I do vaguely remember seeing some article about Ichiro on this subject. Maybe it was just about # of hits, not about BA. I don't know. :noidea:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is just a personal enjoyment thing of mine where I appreciate a monster shot for the esthetics of it. Kind of like a slam dunk in basketball. Not all homers are the same. Some are truly awesome and you never forget them. For example I still recall Boog Powell hitting three homers in Fenway including a Monster Shot over the Green Monster, which is rare for a LH hitter. I also saw Jack Cust do the same thing (hit a Monster over the Green Monster) when he was with the O's. The shot Jones hit last night is one I won't forget either.

who can forget the Luke Scott walkoff vs. Detroit last year? Now that was a homer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • The problem with a Cowser/Kjerstad/Stowers/Bradfield outfield roster is there are no right handers to handle LHP. I don't think and completely left handed outfield is the destination for an organization the values versatility.
    • Looks maybe concussion related. 
    • How can you not be romantic about baseball? This seems slightly poetic. I enjoyed reading, and correlated your experience in the stands back to what I watch in Game 1 on MASN.  It was also pretty cool to hear Jim Palmer give you a shout out in Game 2 of the series on Live TV.
    • I am not worried.  It just doesn’t remotely meet the eye test.  He has been great in the field . I can think of at least 3 outstanding plays he has made and not any that I thought he should have gotten but didn’t. Meanwhile Holliday is 3 OAA and I can’t think of an outstanding play and can think of a number I thought he should have made. 
    • Nicely stated Roy. Every since I was 9 years old and saw the O's vs. the Tokyo Giants in Tokyo in 1971, I've been infected with the Orange/Black virus. There is no cure and I don't want one. You and I sat at the lunch table with Jim Palmer at the 1970 World Series Champs reunion, and its still one of my enduring baseball memories. You said I looked like Carlton Fisk! I was at all 3 games in this Angels series, right behind the O's dugout. I got to see all our boys, and just simply love to watch this team play. And in true baseball fashion, the one game on paper we should have dominated (GRod vs. 8+ ERA Channing), we end up down 7-0 and lose. But watching Gunnar's homers, his electric triple, and he made a fantastic play today on a ball that went under Westburg's glove, Adley do Adley things, Cowser, holy crap. Kimbrel v. Trout with bases loaded, bottom of 9th, 2 outs, down by 2? That was fun. Next game Trout bats leadoff and torches a GRod fastball for a homer to the opposite field.  An observation.... If you didn't know anything about the team, and you only watched game 1 batting practice, you'd think Cowser and O'Hearn were the studs of the team. Mountcastle was taking BP with the reserves and he put on a show as well.  Home after 3 straight days watching this O's team, so jealous of the Balt fans in Balt that get to see the team with regularity. It's a special bunch.
    • emmett16 is right. Uppercut swings produce a lot of groundouts because the bat is not on the same plane as the ball for very long. The best swing stays on the same plane as the ball for a longer time. This will produce contact that creates backspin on the ball which makes it carry. That Ted Williams book is one of the best hitting books ever written.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...