Nomadsfest Sox Fans

A forum for the old AOL board Sox fans and others.


    Tim Anderson Extended

    Share
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by rmapasad on Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:38 pm

    I would consider Anderson to be a mild disappointment if he matched Ramirez first 8 years >>
    So would the Sox although they would certainly get their money's worth if that's what Anderson did.  
    Quite honestly, there are no assurances Anderson can even match Alexei.
    Alexei's ISO with Sox was 149, about the same as Anderson's first year.  But TA was low 100's for most part in the minors so who knows.
    Alexei had a 8% BB rate and 19% K rate, where Anderson was 3-4% BB and 21-27% K rate in minors and majors.    TA has some work to do.

    Before we talk about TA and Andre Dawson, let's first see if he can better Alexei Ramirez.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2006
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:17 pm

    As I said before, the comp to Dawson looks offbase. 


    ********************


    I said the 1980 version of Dawson would be Anderson's peak.  It clearly wasn't Dawson's peak.


    850 is very doable for Anderson


    BTW, just love how the nearly identical OPS at age 23 is considered luck.  But all your comparison are sure fire corrleations


    SPARE ME
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2006
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:23 pm

    Quite honestly, there are no assurances Anderson can even match Alexei.


    **********************************


    LMAO!!!!!!!!


    THE only things certain in life are death and taxes.


    I'd throw in you being a deliberate contrarian as well


    TA has some work to do, well duh.  No, I thought he could be like Mickey Mantle, show up hangover and still bang out homers


    850OPS at his peak.  But you just can't keep correcting me can you.  4-6 years b4 the peak is in.  But your sick ass has to piss on the parade now
    avatar
    Hawk Harrelson
    Silent Hot Dog Vendor

    Posts : 1049
    Join date : 2014-06-13

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Hawk Harrelson on Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:24 pm

    Not my money!!!  Why should I care?
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by rmapasad on Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:41 pm

    Deplorable Mark wrote:Quite honestly, there are no assurances Anderson can even match Alexei.


    **********************************


    LMAO!!!!!!!!


    THE only things certain in life are death and taxes.


    I'd throw in you being a deliberate contrarian as well


    TA has some work to do, well duh.  No, I thought he could be like Mickey Mantle, show up hangover and still bang out homers


    850OPS at his peak.  But you just can't keep correcting me can you.  4-6 years b4 the peak is in.  But your sick ass has to piss on the parade now

    Sorry, but I refuse to lead the cheers for Sox players with serious flaws just because they have some temporary success based on a bunch of seeing eye singles. Said the same about Viciedo and Garcia who both hit .300+ in first initial Sox seasons.  As well as about Gillaspie who was a two month .350 hitting wonder back in 2014. 
    Anderson had a shitload of seeing eye singles in 2016.  Even after factoring out IF hits which he gets due to his speed skills, Anderson snuck more grounders through the IF than did AL batting leader Jose Altuve.  That was luck.  
    I'm not the only one who noticed that. Two major projection systems have him hitting .260 with a sub .700 OPS this year.
    Fortunately the Sox have the luxury of giving Anderson plenty of time for growing pains. Plus his defense, speed, and ability to get  leg hits and stretch singles into extra bases will keep him from becoming the busts those other guys have been. 
    While I fully expect him to improve his power and baseball smarts how much is sheer speculation.   Saying he'll 1980 Dawson is based on skills he HAS TO GAIN not things that he has right now.   As opposed to Dawson,Frank Thomas, etc. who showed up in their first years in majors with the skills and polish needed to succeed and keep succeeding.
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by rmapasad on Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:48 pm

    Hawk Harrelson wrote:Not my money!!!  Why should I care?


    Sox didn't take that big a monetary gamble considering inflation, etc, etc.  But they are banking on TA to be an integral part of their plans to be a contender in 2020 and beyond.   So Sox can ill afford for him to go the Avi Garcia/Beckham route.  Doubt that will happen but IMO whatever value he has beyond what Alexei gave the Sox will be very helpful.
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by rmapasad on Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:57 pm

    BTW, just love how the nearly identical OPS at age 23 is considered luck.  But all your comparison are sure fire corrleations  >>
    Because 20 pts of Anderson's Bat Avg was due to good luck, and that equates to 40 pts of OPS.  If TA is the next Ty Cobb and can keep getting 38% of his batted balls in the playing field to go for hits, I'll be the first to eat crow about it.  And gladly.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2006
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:57 pm

    .Coming from the guy that claimed Eric Karros started out the same as Avisail Garcia.....

    And people complain I'm in love with my own ego

    Here you are claiming to now what is s a lucky hit  and what isn't

    Like this board is suppose to believe a guy that thinks Terry Pendleton and BJ Surhoff were no different than Avisail Garçia at this stage, despite massive obvious difference.  But when your BS is exposed by showing how similiar Dawson and Anderson were at the same age, then we have to dig deeper.  And invent who was lucky and unlucky.  

    Avisail Garcia just might be the next Jose Guillen according to your fucked up logic,  but Anderson some day posting an 850 OPS is rah rah fanboy nonsense

    Once again you prove yourself full of beans
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2006
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:06 pm

    Hilarious how Rogers lectures about sheer speculation in one post than invents bullshit stats like quad A crap have my a 1 in 6 chance of of turning into Jose Guillen

    ALso, Dawson did not hit 300 until 1980, his fifth year.  Another thing the sabr genius conveniently left out.  But then I'm sure that was all bad luck in the 70's

    Maybe I should start claiming Anderson sucks out loud.  Then we can watch Roger invent stats proving Anderson is the next Honus Wagner
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2006
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Wed Mar 29, 2017 9:26 am

    Just wondering


    Anybody else think its ridiculous that Avisail Garcia has a 1 in 5 chance of having an OPS of 912, but for Tim Anderson to reach an 850 OPS would require a Herculean effort that rarely every happens in baseball?


    Yet isn't that what Roger is claiming?


    And just how absurd is his statement that in order for Tim Anderson to hit like Andre Dawson, he has to first hit like Ty Cobb?  Cobb routinely had OPS over 1.000.  The KARK is advocating for just 850.  and people claim I put words in other people's posts.  Jeez


    BTW, prior to 1980, Dawson's career OPS was below 800.  So once again Roger misstated the facts with his claims that Dawson hit this well from the start.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2006
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Wed Mar 29, 2017 9:44 am

    Tim Anderson's minor league batting averages


    2013 = 277
    2014 = 303
    2015 = 312
    2016 = 306


    Clearly Tim Anderson has shown the ability to hit for a respectable average.


    This notion that he was simply lucky in 2016 is clearly a load of crap
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2006
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Wed Mar 29, 2017 9:56 am

    roger writes:


    As I said before, the comp to Dawson looks offbase.


    ****************


    the truth shows


    Age 23 batting line Dawson 253/299/442 Anderson 283/306/432,

    BTW, the KARK stated Dawson 1980 would be Anderson's peak.  I probably should have used 1982, but 23 HR seemed a little too much.

    Anyway, 1980 was Dawson's 5th best year.  So maybe Roger should brush up on his reading comprehension.  Saying Anderson will peak at Dawson's 5th best year is not the same has saying he is the next Andre Dawson.


    PS, I wonder what Garcia's hits per ball in play and K/BB ratio and grounder to flyball ratio and velocity of batted balls has to morph into so that he can become Jose Guillen.  Or will it just be one of those random one in five things that come out of nowhere.
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by rmapasad on Wed Mar 29, 2017 11:16 am

    Just wondering
    Anybody else think its ridiculous that Avisail Garcia has a 1 in 5 chance of having an OPS of 912, but for Tim Anderson to reach an 850 OPS would require a Herculean effort that rarely every happens in baseball?
    Yet isn't that what Roger is claiming? >>
    No, it's what you're claiming.   I said there was a 1-5 chance Garcia could improve marginally and even worse odds that he could improve to the point of a 800+ OPS.  912 OPS ???? Where did you even get that ??

    As to Anderson's ability to reach 850, I NEVER said that was out of reach just that he doesn't have the qualities now that would enable him to do it, and he'd have to acquire more power and discipline. The very fact that I said it was POSSIBLE for a clown like Garcia to get more power would surely say that I think it is also possible that Anderson could get more power.
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by rmapasad on Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:55 pm

    Deplorable Mark wrote:Tim Anderson's minor league batting averages
    2013 = 277
    2014 = 303
    2015 = 312
    2016 = 306

    Clearly Tim Anderson has shown the ability to hit for a respectable average.
    This notion that he was simply lucky in 2016 is clearly a load of crap


    Anderson had high BA's in the minors too because his speed enables him to get leg IF hits that other guys can't.  But factoring out leg hits, as anyone who is familiar with sabermetrics will do, his rate of regular GB's going through the IF was extraordinarily high in majors last year. 

    Part of the deluded way you argue is to act as though I am the only person in the world who could possibly come up with such lunatic conclusions.  Yet all the major projection sources (ESPN, Steamer, Zips, PECOTA) have Anderson's BA for 2017 between .260-.270.  They understand that guys with extraordinarily high BABIP are likely to have some reversion.  As well as the fact that when a guy strikes out close to 30% of the time is going to have trouble hitting for a high average in the MAJORS.   But Anderson's speed and leg hits are also his floor.  No one is saying he'll hit .240.

    If all the .260-.270 projections are wrong, that will be because Anderson has IMPROVED - either gained more skills and started to overcome some weaknesses.  But the projections are based on TA having similar skills and weaknesses as last year. Defenses and pitchers will adjust and unless Anderson grows in his maturity and baseball sense, those adjustments will take a toll.
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by rmapasad on Wed Mar 29, 2017 1:38 pm

    Deplorable Mark wrote:roger writes:

    the truth shows


    Age 23 batting line Dawson 253/299/442 Anderson 283/306/432,


    LMAO  It ignores the glaring difference in Slug- BA (189) for Dawson and Anderson (149). As well as the OBP-BA (46 Dawson - 23 Anderson).  That's 63 pts. of real difference in POWER and DISCIPLINE.  But because Anderson got far more seeing eye singles than Dawson at age 23, that shows Anderson can achieve the same 850 OPS Dawson did at age 27 ? 

    Here are several players at age 23
    Player A -   327/378/415  = 793 OPS
    Player B -   293/312/463  = 775 OPS

    Player B happens to be Carlos Lee and Player A is Juan Pierre. 
    For some strange reason though, Pierre's career OPS (704) came up a little short of El Caballo's (822).
    How could that be - they had "similar OPS's" at age 23 ?  Very Happy Very Happy
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2006
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:41 pm

    rmapasad wrote:
    Deplorable Mark wrote:roger writes:

    the truth shows


    Age 23 batting line Dawson 253/299/442 Anderson 283/306/432,


    LMAO  It ignores the glaring difference in Slug- BA (189) for Dawson and Anderson (149). As well as the OBP-BA (46 Dawson - 23 Anderson).  That's 63 pts. of real difference in POWER and DISCIPLINE.  But because Anderson got far more seeing eye singles than Dawson at age 23, that shows Anderson can achieve the same 850 OPS Dawson did at age 27 ? 

    Here are several players at age 23
    Player A -   327/378/415  = 793 OPS
    Player B -   293/312/463  = 775 OPS

    Player B happens to be Carlos Lee and Player A is Juan Pierre. 
    For some strange reason though, Pierre's career OPS (704) came up a little short of El Caballo's (822).
    How could that be - they had "similar OPS's" at age 23 ?  Very Happy Very Happy


    ONCE AGAIN YOU PROVE YOU CANNOT READ


    Anderson is 7 points better in OBP and 10 points worse in SLG


    Just look at those wide difference between in OBP and SLG in your, yet again, piss poor sample.  Plus Pierre  Isolated Power was a extremely weak 88, compared to Anderson's 149


    But what really proves how full of shit you are is you claim Avisail Garcia has a 1 in 5 chance to become Jose Guillen.  Well, Guillen's peak OPS was 928.  Meaning Garcia to go from 692 to 928 is practically twice as much as Anderson going from 738 to 850.  So how the hell is Garcia 1 in 5 and Anderson is unlikely, improbable and a rarely ever seen improvement.


    So let's see you lie your why out of this one.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2006
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:51 pm

    rmapasad wrote:
    Deplorable Mark wrote:Tim Anderson's minor league batting averages
    2013 = 277
    2014 = 303
    2015 = 312
    2016 = 306

    Clearly Tim Anderson has shown the ability to hit for a respectable average.
    This notion that he was simply lucky in 2016 is clearly a load of crap


    Anderson had high BA's in the minors too because his speed enables him to get leg IF hits that other guys can't.  But factoring out leg hits, as anyone who is familiar with sabermetrics will do, his rate of regular GB's going through the IF was extraordinarily high in majors last year. 

    Part of the deluded way you argue is to act as though I am the only person in the world who could possibly come up with such lunatic conclusions.  Yet all the major projection sources (ESPN, Steamer, Zips, PECOTA) have Anderson's BA for 2017 between .260-.270.  They understand that guys with extraordinarily high BABIP are likely to have some reversion.  As well as the fact that when a guy strikes out close to 30% of the time is going to have trouble hitting for a high average in the MAJORS.   But Anderson's speed and leg hits are also his floor.  No one is saying he'll hit .240.

    If all the .260-.270 projections are wrong, that will be because Anderson has IMPROVED - either gained more skills and started to overcome some weaknesses.  But the projections are based on TA having similar skills and weaknesses as last year. Defenses and pitchers will adjust and unless Anderson grows in his maturity and baseball sense, those adjustments will take a toll.


    AGAIN YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT.

    LETS IGNORE LEG HITS

    WHY

    MAYBE WE SHOULD MINDLESS MULTIPLY IT BY 1.8.  A CONCEPT YOU FAILED MISERABLE AT EXPLAINING.  THEN OUTRIGHT LIED ABOUT MULTICOLINEARITY AND HOW JOURNALISM SCHOOL DROP OUTS COULD ADJUST FOR IT.

    AND NOW LETS ACT LIKE PROJECTIONS ARE FACTS.   THEY ARE MEANINGLESS, GLORIFIED WEIGHTED AVERAGES.  

    ANYBODY THAT KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT MATH CAN FIGURE THAT OUT.  JUST LIKE ANYBODY THAT KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT MATH KNOWS THE ONLY WAY TO CORRECT FOR MULTICOLINEARITY IS TO THROW OUT THE INTERDEPENDENT VARIABLES

    AND JUST TO REALLY SHOW HOW STUPID YOU ARE, YOU CLAIM IF ANDERSON BETS HIS PROJECTIONS HE IMPROVES.  WELL DUH

    YOU ARE THE MASTER OF THE FREAKING OBVIOUS

    PS, YOU ARE THE ONLY LUNATIC RETARD THAT COMES UP WITH SUCH FUCKED UP CONCLUSIONS AS AVISAIL GARCIA HAS A 1 IN 5 CHANCE OF BECOMING JOSE GUILLEN.  SHOW ME A REAL SABERMETIAN THAT CLAIM UP WITH THE SAME CONCLUSION.  WHILE YOUR AT IT, SHOW ME ONE THAT SHOWS ANDERSON WILL NEVER 850 OPS.
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by rmapasad on Wed Mar 29, 2017 3:12 pm

    Deplorable Mark wrote:And just how absurd is his statement that in order for Tim Anderson to hit like Andre Dawson, he has to first hit like Ty Cobb?  Cobb routinely had OPS over 1.000.  The KARK is advocating for just 850.  and people claim I put words in other people's posts.  Jeez
    BTW, prior to 1980, Dawson's career OPS was below 800.  So once again Roger misstated the facts with his claims that Dawson hit this well from the start.

    Here is a comp to Tim Anderson that is dead-on and very appropriate.  Look no further than across town to another middle infielder, Javier Baez.   Not only are their age 23 OPS's almost identical (738 v. 737) but their COMPONENTS are nearly so as well
                       ISO     BB %   K %      BA 
    Anderson     149     3.0      27.0     .283
    Baez            150     3.3      24.0    .273

    Both have good defense but Anderson has better speed, although Baez had more power (couple 20 HR seasons) in the minors.   Baez's projections (737) for 2017 are better than Anderson's (687) but those are just projections.  Although Cub fans might be a tad insulted with this comp, Baez's raw skills yet lack of plate discipline match very well with Anderson's. 
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by rmapasad on Wed Mar 29, 2017 3:47 pm

    Deplorable Mark wrote:
    rmapasad wrote:
    Deplorable Mark wrote:Tim Anderson's minor league batting averages
    2013 = 277
    2014 = 303
    2015 = 312
    2016 = 306

    Clearly Tim Anderson has shown the ability to hit for a respectable average.
    This notion that he was simply lucky in 2016 is clearly a load of crap


    Anderson had high BA's in the minors too because his speed enables him to get leg IF hits that other guys can't.  But factoring out leg hits, as anyone who is familiar with sabermetrics will do, his rate of regular GB's going through the IF was extraordinarily high in majors last year. 

    Part of the deluded way you argue is to act as though I am the only person in the world who could possibly come up with such lunatic conclusions.  Yet all the major projection sources (ESPN, Steamer, Zips, PECOTA) have Anderson's BA for 2017 between .260-.270.  They understand that guys with extraordinarily high BABIP are likely to have some reversion.  As well as the fact that when a guy strikes out close to 30% of the time is going to have trouble hitting for a high average in the MAJORS.   But Anderson's speed and leg hits are also his floor.  No one is saying he'll hit .240.

    If all the .260-.270 projections are wrong, that will be because Anderson has IMPROVED - either gained more skills and started to overcome some weaknesses.  But the projections are based on TA having similar skills and weaknesses as last year. Defenses and pitchers will adjust and unless Anderson grows in his maturity and baseball sense, those adjustments will take a toll.


    AGAIN YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT.

    LETS IGNORE LEG HITS

    WHY

    MAYBE WE SHOULD MINDLESS MULTIPLY IT BY 1.8.  A CONCEPT YOU FAILED MISERABLE AT EXPLAINING.  THEN OUTRIGHT LIED ABOUT MULTICOLINEARITY AND HOW JOURNALISM SCHOOL DROP OUTS COULD ADJUST FOR IT.

    AND NOW LETS ACT LIKE PROJECTIONS ARE FACTS.   THEY ARE MEANINGLESS, GLORIFIED WEIGHTED AVERAGES.  

    ANYBODY THAT KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT MATH CAN FIGURE THAT OUT.  JUST LIKE ANYBODY THAT KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT MATH KNOWS THE ONLY WAY TO CORRECT FOR MULTICOLINEARITY IS TO THROW OUT THE INTERDEPENDENT VARIABLES

    AND JUST TO REALLY SHOW HOW STUPID YOU ARE, YOU CLAIM IF ANDERSON BETS HIS PROJECTIONS HE IMPROVES.  WELL DUH

    YOU ARE THE MASTER OF THE FREAKING OBVIOUS

    PS, YOU ARE THE ONLY LUNATIC RETARD THAT COMES UP WITH SUCH FUCKED UP CONCLUSIONS AS AVISAIL GARCIA HAS A 1 IN 5 CHANCE OF BECOMING JOSE GUILLEN.  SHOW ME A REAL SABERMETIAN THAT CLAIM UP WITH THE SAME CONCLUSION.  WHILE YOUR AT IT, SHOW ME ONE THAT SHOWS ANDERSON WILL NEVER 850 OPS.

    I refuse to go back and answer your typical distortions about a discussion that took place several years ago.  Multicolinearity ?  Really. 

    As to Garcia's chances of becoming Guillen,  two things:
    a) Not sure what exact odds I gave, but they were low. You think 15-20% are good odds ?  If a Dr. gives somebody a 15-20% chance of surviving  I doubt the guy will be putting any downpayments on an expensive European vacation he might take a year from now..
    b) This Jose Fucking Guillen were talking about not Willie Mays.  Guillen who managed to put up an average of about 2 WAR per year at his peak, in short a mediocrity. 




    predicted Garcia WILL become Guillen for sure.
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by rmapasad on Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:10 pm

    ONCE AGAIN YOU PROVE YOU CANNOT READ
    Anderson is 7 points better in OBP and 10 points worse in SLG
    Just look at those wide difference between in OBP and SLG in your, yet again, piss poor sample.  Plus Pierre  Isolated Power was a extremely weak 88, compared to Anderson's 149>>>

    LMAO....Bill James would be snickering if he read the "Slug % was only 10 pt difference" line.  Of course 30 pts of BA due to more singles will add 30 pts more to Slug, duh...This is why James "isolated" extra base hitting by subtracting BA from SLug to make ISO the "pure" measure of power. You wonder why I lecture you on the obvious.  You bloviate about crazy shit like "multicolinearity" yet butcher the simple concepts by trying to pawn off nonsense like a "10 pt. difference Slug %"  when ISO is over 40 pt difference. 

    But what really proves how full of shit you are is you claim Avisail Garcia has a 1 in 5 chance to become Jose Guillen.  Well, Guillen's peak OPS was 928.  Meaning Garcia to go from 692 to 928 is practically twice as much as Anderson going from 738 to 850.  So how the hell is Garcia 1 in 5 and Anderson is unlikely, improbable and a rarely ever seen improvement.>>

    Yeah, I said Anderson's improvement was unlikely, improbable and rarely ever seen. Must have been this statement  "While I fully expect him to improve his power and baseball smarts [size=13]how much is sheer speculation. "   Maybe it was this one then  "As to Anderson's ability to reach 850, I NEVER said that was out of reach  The very fact that I said it was POSSIBLE for a clown like Garcia to get more power would surely say that I think it is also possible that Anderson could get more power."[/size]
    Yeah, I said it would be next to impossible for Anderson.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2006
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Thu Mar 30, 2017 12:22 pm

    rmapasad wrote:
    Deplorable Mark wrote:
    rmapasad wrote:
    Deplorable Mark wrote:Tim Anderson's minor league batting averages
    2013 = 277
    2014 = 303
    2015 = 312
    2016 = 306

    Clearly Tim Anderson has shown the ability to hit for a respectable average.
    This notion that he was simply lucky in 2016 is clearly a load of crap


    Anderson had high BA's in the minors too because his speed enables him to get leg IF hits that other guys can't.  But factoring out leg hits, as anyone who is familiar with sabermetrics will do, his rate of regular GB's going through the IF was extraordinarily high in majors last year. 

    Part of the deluded way you argue is to act as though I am the only person in the world who could possibly come up with such lunatic conclusions.  Yet all the major projection sources (ESPN, Steamer, Zips, PECOTA) have Anderson's BA for 2017 between .260-.270.  They understand that guys with extraordinarily high BABIP are likely to have some reversion.  As well as the fact that when a guy strikes out close to 30% of the time is going to have trouble hitting for a high average in the MAJORS.   But Anderson's speed and leg hits are also his floor.  No one is saying he'll hit .240.

    If all the .260-.270 projections are wrong, that will be because Anderson has IMPROVED - either gained more skills and started to overcome some weaknesses.  But the projections are based on TA having similar skills and weaknesses as last year. Defenses and pitchers will adjust and unless Anderson grows in his maturity and baseball sense, those adjustments will take a toll.


    AGAIN YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT.

    LETS IGNORE LEG HITS

    WHY

    MAYBE WE SHOULD MINDLESS MULTIPLY IT BY 1.8.  A CONCEPT YOU FAILED MISERABLE AT EXPLAINING.  THEN OUTRIGHT LIED ABOUT MULTICOLINEARITY AND HOW JOURNALISM SCHOOL DROP OUTS COULD ADJUST FOR IT.

    AND NOW LETS ACT LIKE PROJECTIONS ARE FACTS.   THEY ARE MEANINGLESS, GLORIFIED WEIGHTED AVERAGES.  

    ANYBODY THAT KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT MATH CAN FIGURE THAT OUT.  JUST LIKE ANYBODY THAT KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT MATH KNOWS THE ONLY WAY TO CORRECT FOR MULTICOLINEARITY IS TO THROW OUT THE INTERDEPENDENT VARIABLES

    AND JUST TO REALLY SHOW HOW STUPID YOU ARE, YOU CLAIM IF ANDERSON BETS HIS PROJECTIONS HE IMPROVES.  WELL DUH

    YOU ARE THE MASTER OF THE FREAKING OBVIOUS

    PS, YOU ARE THE ONLY LUNATIC RETARD THAT COMES UP WITH SUCH FUCKED UP CONCLUSIONS AS AVISAIL GARCIA HAS A 1 IN 5 CHANCE OF BECOMING JOSE GUILLEN.  SHOW ME A REAL SABERMETIAN THAT CLAIM UP WITH THE SAME CONCLUSION.  WHILE YOUR AT IT, SHOW ME ONE THAT SHOWS ANDERSON WILL NEVER 850 OPS.

    I refuse to go back and answer your typical distortions about a discussion that took place several years ago.  Multicolinearity ?  Really. 

    As to Garcia's chances of becoming Guillen,  two things:
    a) Not sure what exact odds I gave, but they were low. You think 15-20% are good odds ?  If a Dr. gives somebody a 15-20% chance of surviving  I doubt the guy will be putting any downpayments on an expensive European vacation he might take a year from now..
    b) This Jose Fucking Guillen were talking about not Willie Mays.  Guillen who managed to put up an average of about 2 WAR per year at his peak, in short a mediocrity. 




    predicted Garcia WILL become Guillen for sure.


    DO YOU EVEN READ WHAT YOU POST?!?!?!?!?


    THE point isn't how good or how bad 15%-20% odds are.  The point is that the 15%-20% odds are a hell of a lot better than the odds you are giving Tim Anderson.


    BTW, Jose Guillen peak OPS is 928.  His peak period was ages 27-31.  WAR for that period 4.9; 3.1; 3.6, -0.9; 3.5.  that is a 2.9 average which is about 3, not about 2.  Throw out the injury year and its 3.8


    so again what you post is materially different from what actually happened.


    But back to my main point.  20% chance Garcia becomes good in your opinion.  But for Anderson to increase his OPS 112 points would require some freakishly rare improvement.


    Do you even see how contradictory your analysis is from one player to the next?


    Now do you understand why I claim you deliberately disagree with me?!?!?!?  Applying your analytical methods one would be forced to conclude Avisail Garcia not only has a higher upside than Tim Anderson, but has a far greater probably of reaching it.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2006
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Thu Mar 30, 2017 12:23 pm

    rmapasad wrote:ONCE AGAIN YOU PROVE YOU CANNOT READ
    Anderson is 7 points better in OBP and 10 points worse in SLG
    Just look at those wide difference between in OBP and SLG in your, yet again, piss poor sample.  Plus Pierre  Isolated Power was a extremely weak 88, compared to Anderson's 149>>>

    LMAO....Bill James would be snickering if he read the "Slug % was only 10 pt difference" line.  Of course 30 pts of BA due to more singles will add 30 pts more to Slug, duh...This is why James "isolated" extra base hitting by subtracting BA from SLug to make ISO the "pure" measure of power. You wonder why I lecture you on the obvious.  You bloviate about crazy shit like "multicolinearity" yet butcher the simple concepts by trying to pawn off nonsense like a "10 pt. difference Slug %"  when ISO is over 40 pt difference. 

    But what really proves how full of shit you are is you claim Avisail Garcia has a 1 in 5 chance to become Jose Guillen.  Well, Guillen's peak OPS was 928.  Meaning Garcia to go from 692 to 928 is practically twice as much as Anderson going from 738 to 850.  So how the hell is Garcia 1 in 5 and Anderson is unlikely, improbable and a rarely ever seen improvement.>>

    Yeah, I said Anderson's improvement was unlikely, improbable and rarely ever seen. Must have been this statement  "While I fully expect him to improve his power and baseball smarts [size=13]how much is sheer speculation. "   Maybe it was this one then  "As to Anderson's ability to reach 850, I NEVER said that was out of reach  The very fact that I said it was POSSIBLE for a clown like Garcia to get more power would surely say that I think it is also possible that Anderson could get more power."[/size]
    Yeah, I said it would be next to impossible for Anderson.




    YOUR TRULY ARE A DOUBLING TALKING ASSHOLE
    avatar
    rmapasad
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2546
    Join date : 2009-04-06
    Location : Northridge, CA

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by rmapasad on Thu Mar 30, 2017 1:37 pm

    THE point isn't how good or how bad 15%-20% odds are.  The point is that the 15%-20% odds are a hell of a lot better than the odds you are giving Tim Anderson.>>>

    This last statement is strictly an invention of yours. I've NEVER given odds on Anderson and have said "I fully expect improvement from him".  Yet I'm expecting less of Anderson than Garcia ?  Please.



    Talk about "deliberately disagreeing".  By twisting or extrapolating other peoples' words you create an opinion for them they never directly expressed or intended. Then you disagree with that opinion they never really had.

    So for the FIRST TIME, here are my odds on Tim Anderson:
    Being a bust = 15%

    Being adequate (Alexei Ramirez or slightly better) =  55 %
    Being good but not outstanding = 28 %

    Being a Hall of Famer = 2 %

    I know that the above odds are better than most in the sabermetric community would give Anderson.
    As to Avi Garcia, on the same criteria

    Being a bust   = 84%
    Being nearly adequate (1.7 -2 WAR) = 15 %
    Being good = 1  %

    Being a Hall of Famer = 0.0 %



    OK, if Jose Guillen was better than 2 WAR average at his peak, then I retract the comparison because whatever slim odds Garcia has are AT BEST to be a 2 WAR per year player.  And no, he has ZERO chance of matching Guillen's outer-body 929 season.  In fact, Guillen himself never came close to that again. 

    For the 12th and VERY LAST time, the only reasons to keep Garcia at this point are a) Sox aren't going anywhere in 2017  and b) Avi's current Sox competitors have similar odds.  Let the others who can still be sent to AAA prove themselves there since most haven't yet. Then let Garcia get his last gasp chance at proving he is a major leaguer, something I am still quite pessimistic about (84%).
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2006
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Fri Mar 31, 2017 6:20 pm

    This last statement is strictly an invention of yours. I've NEVER given odds on Anderson and have said "I fully expect improvement from him".  


    ***************************


    THEN WHAT WAS ALL THAT CRAP ABOUT MATCHING TY COBBS 38% BATTED BALL RATIO?!?!?!?!?!?


    *********************


    Talk about "deliberately disagreeing".  By twisting or extrapolating other peoples' words you create an opinion for them they never directly expressed or intended. 



    *****************************


    HOW THE FUCK IS ONE SUPPOSE TO TAKE YOUR TY COBB REFERENCE?!?!?  A SANE PERSON WOULD TAKE IT AS EXTREMELY RARE.  A HELL OF A LOT RARER THAN 15%


    AND HOW MUCH DOES GARCIA'S 15% DROP WHEN YOU START LOOKING AT HIS UNDERLYING RATIO INSTEAD OF COMPARING HIM TO ERIC KARROS AND ANYBODY ELSE THAT MANAGED TO DIP BELOW 700OPS DURING THEIR AGE 25 SEASON?!?!


    THE FACT YOU DID THIS TO ANDERSON AND NOT GARCIA IS WHY I GET THE IMPRESSION YOU GO OUT OF YOUR WAY TO DELIBERATELY DISAGREE WITH ME!
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Roof Shot

    Posts : 2006
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Fri Mar 31, 2017 6:33 pm

    rmapasad wrote:BTW, just love how the nearly identical OPS at age 23 is considered luck.  But all your comparison are sure fire corrleations  >>
    Because 20 pts of Anderson's Bat Avg was due to good luck, and that equates to 40 pts of OPS.  If TA is the next Ty Cobb and can keep getting 38% of his batted balls in the playing field to go for hits, I'll be the first to eat crow about it.  And gladly.


    HERE YOU GO ROGER

    NOW TELL US ALL THE PROPER WAY TO INTEREPT IF TA IS THE NEXT TY COBB

    SOUND TO ME LIKE YOU ARE CLAIMING NO WAY IN FREAKIN HELL ANDERSON EVER GETS TO 850 OPS.  SOUND LIKE YOU ARE CLAIMING HE PEAKS AT 810

    AS FOR JOSE GUILLEN AND HIS PEAK WHICH YOU SAID GARCIA HAS A 15-20% CHANCE OF MATCHING, 928, 849, 817, 674, 813.  THAT ABOUT AN 825 AVG

    SO INSTEAD OF PUTTING WORDS IN YOUR POST, I EXPOSED YOUR FAULTY LOGIC AND SLOPPY SAMPLING AND WEAK ANALYSIS BY TAKING THEM TO THEIR ILLOGICAL CONCLUSIONS

    Sponsored content

    Re: Tim Anderson Extended

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Nov 21, 2017 8:05 am