Jump to content

Per Connolly: O's and LaRoche have interest in each other...

Nick The Stick

By Nick The Stick
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Sports Guy Hangout Grand Counsel

Sports Guy

Posted
Posted
You dismiss his age so easily. It's not an insignificant issue at all. In fact, I'd argue it's the most significant issue, especially for a player who battled injuries last year.

Here's a solid statistical analysis that backs up my views:

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/how-do-baseball-players-age-part-1/

Take particular note of the following table:

Table III: Average change in offensive performance from one age to the next (1980-2008)                           Average   Age                     Change   Cumulative Couplet      Players      in LW    Difference  20/21          27        18.4      -27.1  21/22         140         9.4      -17.7  22/23         329         4.6      -13.1  23/24         636         6.0       -7.1  24/25         993         3.0       -4.1  25/26        1224         2.4       -1.7  26/27        1272         1.5       -0.2  27/28        1236         0.2        0.0  28/29        1160        -2.0       -2.0  29/30        1064        -0.4       -2.4  30/31         956        -2.0       -4.4  31/32         819        -1.8       -6.2  32/33         716        -1.7       -7.9  33/34         581        -3.1      -11.0  34/35         461        -3.7      -14.7  35/36         358        -3.0      -17.7  36/37         266        -3.4      -21.1  37/38         183        -4.0      -25.1  38/39         116        -5.9      -31.0  39/40          70        -5.9      -36.9

Any analysis of peripherals is useless without a similar analysis of the expected decline of the player due to aging.

I am not dismissing his age..As I have said for a while, it would be naive for anyone to think DLee couldn't fall off a cliff quickly...But there are ZERO signs of him declining.

So, when you have a guy that is in good shape and has no signs of decline, I tend to think he is an ok gamble for 1-2 years.

Still rather have him than Huff..err I mean LaRoche.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frobby Hangout Grand Counsel

Frobby

Posted
Posted
You dismiss his age so easily. It's not an insignificant issue at all. In fact, I'd argue it's the most significant issue, especially for a player who battled injuries last year.

Here's a solid statistical analysis that backs up my views:

Obviously Lee may decline due to aging. Still, it seems very fair to say that a lot of his 2010 decline was due to injury, and that if he's healthy he should rebound somewhat. The data you provide shows average data, but there are huge variations from player to player. What we know with some degree of certainty is that Lee at his best has been significantly better than Laroche. So, there's more upside, and more downside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mizerooskie Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

Mizerooskie

Posted
Posted
Obviously Lee may decline due to aging. Still, it seems very fair to say that a lot of his 2010 decline was due to injury, and that if he's healthy he should rebound somewhat. The data you provide shows average data, but there are huge variations from player to player. What we know with some degree of certainty is that Lee at his best has been significantly better than Laroche. So, there's more upside, and more downside.

And there are huge variations from player to player, season to season, in terms of how peripheral stats translate to actual production. The age analysis is just as valid as the peripheral analysis.

I just think there's a much better shot at LaRoche contributing to a competitive Orioles team than Lee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
waroriole Hangout Grand Counsel

waroriole

Posted
Posted
Disagree. Delgado walked more, and hit much more consistently with power. Helton's OPS was driven by his elite ability to get on base, which was significantly better than Lee's. Frankly, Lee's offensive production over his career isn't even in the same ballpark as Giambi, though I'd throw out Giambi's season based on his steroid use.

I'd say Lee is better than Millar and Hatteberg. But, Millar's .800+ OPS season really happened in his age 34 season; he turned 35 in late September of that year. Hatteberg, I really have no explanation for.

But the fact remains, it's really uncommon for 35+ first baseman to produce offensively in the post-steroid era.

I just don't see anything that indicates Lee will bounce back from a .774 OPS at the age of 35. If he were 5 years younger, sure, I could buy the argument about peripherals. But at his age, he's due for a precipitous statistical fall.

I'll give you Delgado. Helton's numbers are inflated due to Coors, but who knows how much, also he doesn't have Lee's power. Giambi just isn't the kind of guy who would age well, and it has shown. Millar and Hatteberg aren't even close to the same level. Decline due to age is a concern, but as SG has said, he hasn't shown any signs yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
El Gordo Hangout Grand Counsel

El Gordo

Posted
Posted
And there are huge variations from player to player, season to season, in terms of how peripheral stats translate to actual production. The age analysis is just as valid as the peripheral analysis.

I just think there's a much better shot at LaRoche contributing to a competitive Orioles team than Lee.

A poor year for Lee is an average year for LaRoche. So if Lee does decline you are getting what you expect from LaRoche, why not take a chance that Lee has a couple of good years left?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Capn Vivi Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

Capn Vivi

Posted
Posted

To go along with what El Gordo was saying, let's just look at last season, Derrek Lee's worst in a decade compared to LaRoche's, which was only a slight downtick from his career avg.

Derrek Lee: .260/.347/.428/.774 19 HR, 35 2B, 80 RBI (.340 wOBA, 110 wRC+, 2.0 WAR) 103 OPS+ [95 for CHC, 130 for ATL]

Adam LaRoche: .261/.320/.468/.788 25 HR, 37 2B, 100 RBI (.339 wOBA, 107 wRC+, 2.1 WAR) 106 OPS+

If we signed LaRoche, that's about the line I would expect him to put up. Conservatively, I'd like to see his BA rise maybe if he cut down on the SO (which approached Reynolds levels last year) which would raise his OBP to a somewhat respectable level for a 1Bman in the AL East.

On the other hand, Derrek Lee is exactly the kind of gamble this team should make. One in which you're reasonably certain in the production you'll get as a "floor," but the potential and ceiling is much higher. I won't say that Lee could hit 35 out next year, but he's certainly capable of reproducing his career slash line of: 282/.367/.498/.865. While I wouldn't put any money on it, that's an upside likely to match or exceed Konerko or Martinez' production in 2011 and for a fraction of the cost and commitment.

There's no way I want LaRoche manning 1B for us for the next 3-4 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
quidam AAA

quidam

Posted
Posted
I am not dismissing his age..As I have said for a while, it would be naive for anyone to think DLee couldn't fall off a cliff quickly...But there are ZERO signs of him declining.

So, when you have a guy that is in good shape and has no signs of decline, I tend to think he is an ok gamble for 1-2 years.

Still rather have him than Huff..err I mean LaRoche.

There doesn't need to be any signs of decline. I assume it will take at least a two year contract to sign Lee.

Look at the ten comparable players to Lee according to baseballreference. Two of them, Konerko and Carlos Lee, are the same age as Lee. Four of them didn't play both seasons at 35 and 36 and retired. The remaining four averaged a .772 ops in those two seasons. Those that played at the age of 34 averaged an .832 ops. None of these players showed significant signs of declining.

Depending on what the salary is Lee is huge risk to experience even more decline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mweb Hangout Grand Counsel

mweb

Posted
Posted

I'm really not enthused by LaRoche. If he can be signed for a reasonable 1-2 year deal, I won't really complain much, but I would rather go other directions.

Lee obviously or Thome or Magglio for DH and Scott at 1B.

Or Scott and Reimold for 1B and DH with a cheaper guy like Hawpe or even Nick Johnson to fill those spots. Fox can occasionally play 1B/DH as well if he's back.

If Napoli is really available, he'd be another option I'd like to explore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sangar All-Star

sangar

Posted
Posted
I'm really not enthused by LaRoche. If he can be signed for a reasonable 1-2 year deal, I won't really complain much, but I would rather go other directions.

Lee obviously or Thome or Magglio for DH and Scott at 1B.

Or Scott and Reimold for 1B and DH with a cheaper guy like Hawpe or even Nick Johnson to fill those spots. Fox can occasionally play 1B/DH as well if he's back.

If Napoli is really available, he'd be another option I'd like to explore.

I feel the same way about LaRoche, pretty much exactly.

Now that Crawford has signed elsewhere I doubt the Angels will trade Napoli as they no longer need to free up the money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...