How does Swisher on the White Sox change his value?

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Thu Jan 03, 2008 2:44 pm

From first glance, I see a spike in batting average (+15 points) and possibly better homer/rbi/run production.

.251 career batting average - He maybe hits .270 in Chicago.

If you're projecting Swisher to have a big year then .270-35-110-100 seems possible at the ripe age of 27.

I think .265-28-95-90 runs is most likely. He can be a tough guy to project because he can be so incredibly streaky within a given year. Last year he started out with 2 very good months followed by 3 horrible ones, and then finished with a decent one.

Although he looks like one of those guys we all expect to have a pretty good year but year in and year out tends to disappoint.

Tough read.

[ January 04, 2008, 08:24 AM: Message edited by: Crazy Like a Fox ]

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 4:58 am

So you think the White Sox .246 lowest in the majors BA in 2007 was inflated 20 points by their ballpark? One of the big boy projection systems got its ass handed to it for projecting all the home runs for White Sox pitchers last year too. That park is overrated for hitters.

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:56 am

Originally posted by bjoak:

So you think the White Sox .246 lowest in the majors BA in 2007 was inflated 20 points by their ballpark? One of the big boy projection systems got its ass handed to it for projecting all the home runs for White Sox pitchers last year too. That park is overrated for hitters. No, it's more of Swisher's clear distinction between his batting average in home/road splits and his potentially better production with a better surrounding lineup that gives me reason to predict better overall numbers. I guess I should have said he'll hit better with Chicago instead of in Chicago.

So are you saying you think Swisher's batting average and run production will either be comparable to Oakland or even worse in Chicago? I want to see if you're trying to be smart, or you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

[ January 04, 2008, 01:00 PM: Message edited by: Crazy Like a Fox ]

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:27 am

Originally posted by Crazy Like a Fox:

No, it's more of Swisher's clear distinction between his batting average in home/road splits and his potentially better production with a better surrounding lineup that gives me reason to predict better overall numbers. I am not sure I agree with the home/road split analysis of BA. I know he hit for higher average on the road, and I know luck counts, but he was LUCKY to hit .270 on the road. At home, he struck out about 20% of the time. On the road, he struck out 28% of the time. A 72% contact rate is very poor.

The better line-up, depending on who hits after him, could help him see better pitches, but no ballpark or line-up will really help you if you cannot put wood on the ball. I like Swisher, but until he is able to make better contact (a little late maybe at 27), he is going in my high power potential, bad BA class.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 9:29 am

No, I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing, but I need not respond since Edwards Kings stated my case better than I ever could have. While I might look at home/road splits for someone in SD or COL or HOU (which plays so much differently for righties/lefties), I wouldn't worry too much about Swisher--or his change--with regards to BA.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 9:39 am

Also, the White Sox scored less runs than Oakland and had the aforementioned BA. I know his surrounding hitters will look a little better but I wouldn't get too excited about that Chicago luck rubbing off.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 9:53 am

This is most likely a stupid comment...but aside from ballpark dimensions having an impact on your foul balls and home runs...(and maybe even advancing on passed balls)...and aside from an extremely uneven-lopsided percentage of dominant to poor pitchers faced ratio.

Couldn't spending 1/2 of your season hitting BP, playing and practising in a ballpark help your eyes and hand-eye coordination get accustomed to the natural or false lights, or grass/dirt cutoffs, or background outfield wall, seating colors, and signs of your home field...giving you more of a comfort zone?

Yup...looking back over this comment...pretty stupid.

~Lance

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 10:28 am

Couldn't spending 1/2 of your season hitting BP, playing and practising in a ballpark help your eyes and hand-eye coordination get accustomed to the natural or false lights, or grass/dirt cutoffs, or background outfield wall, seating colors, and signs of your home field...giving you more of a comfort zone?

Yes -- this is not stupid. It is not readily quantifiable, but it is real. As is sleeping in your own bed, eating at your own house, being able to be with your family in person and not long distance, not jumping on a plane every 3 days etc.

This is the primary reason I think park effects in general are somewhat bogus -- at least to the extent some use them. Those that remember my goofy little series of vignettes last year this time will be giddy to know I have some more planned for the coming weeks, including a rant on park effects.

As much of a number cruncher that I am, I prefer the caveman approach -- Philly good, Petco bad.

Basically, the park effect factor is supposed to flesh out all bias, but I humbly feel it does not flesh out the "home field advantage" bias adequately. Most of which is what Lance is talking about.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:05 am

Sweet...I enjoyed your "vignettes" last year, Zola! Looking forward to more sparks of conversation ammo, and different insights.

~Lance

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:09 am

Originally posted by ToddZ:

quote: Couldn't spending 1/2 of your season hitting BP, playing and practising in a ballpark help your eyes and hand-eye coordination get accustomed to the natural or false lights, or grass/dirt cutoffs, or background outfield wall, seating colors, and signs of your home field...giving you more of a comfort zone?

Yes -- this is not stupid. It is not readily quantifiable, but it is real. As is sleeping in your own bed, eating at your own house, being able to be with your family in person and not long distance, not jumping on a plane every 3 days etc.

This is the primary reason I think park effects in general are somewhat bogus -- at least to the extent some use them. Those that remember my goofy little series of vignettes last year this time will be giddy to know I have some more planned for the coming weeks, including a rant on park effects.

As much of a number cruncher that I am, I prefer the caveman approach -- Philly good, Petco bad.

Basically, the park effect factor is supposed to flesh out all bias, but I humbly feel it does not flesh out the "home field advantage" bias adequately. Most of which is what Lance is talking about. [/QUOTE]Home field advantage - that's a good point.

I don't have any stats to back it up but I would imagine most hitters hit better at home (which negates my first comment) due to the comfort factor.

I do think the Oakland park and the god aweful surrounding hitters have had a negative effect on his batting average/production, I could be wrong. That White Sox lineup I don't think are as bad as they played last year. Just about every player had an off year.

Not strictly looking at numbers, I'd like to think he might settle down his approach at the plate knowing he doesn't have the be "the guy" that gets the job done. I think most players play better when there is less pressure. Although there are new pressures, playing for a new team and all.

Someone made a good point about the unlikelihood Swisher will all of sudden put more wood on the ball at age 27. I think that is a reasonable argument. I am not incredibly high on Swisher and never have been.

I guess in the end, we have to decide whether Swisher will play better next year regardless of where he's playing, and my vote leads towards yes. I still think he has 40 homer potential with that swing of his but he'll always be a low average hitter. Probably a guy you wouldn't want to grab unless he's sitting there much later than he should.

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:14 am

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

This is most likely a stupid comment...but aside from ballpark dimensions having an impact on your foul balls and home runs...(and maybe even advancing on passed balls)...and aside from an extremely uneven-lopsided percentage of dominant to poor pitchers faced ratio.

Couldn't spending 1/2 of your season hitting BP, playing and practising in a ballpark help your eyes and hand-eye coordination get accustomed to the natural or false lights, or grass/dirt cutoffs, or background outfield wall, seating colors, and signs of your home field...giving you more of a comfort zone?

Yup...looking back over this comment...pretty stupid.

~Lance A very good point, and one that is probably most crucial in this topic so far. Nothing stupid at all.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:42 am

I agree that there are so many intangibles, you are better off sticking to the big stuff. I don't care if Swish has Babe Ruth hitting after him, better pitches only get you so far. It's not like his approach was all walks and no strikeouts; his approach is to sit on the pitcher's offerings and that's not gong to change. In fact, it probably gives him more real baseball value than higher average hitters so there is no reason it should change.

I do think the move gives him a few more homers, but if you were, say, running with Shandler's projection of 27, you move it up a few clicks to 30. He's too hard to accurately project anyway so it will be difficult for anyone to come back here and say they were right. I think it will be somewhere between 25 and 35, with a chance of 20 or 40.

Another intangible: perhaps he hit better in 2006 because he was all amped up for the pennant chase. In 2007 he lost his edge as there was nothing to play for, but now that he's with the White Sox...oh, wait...

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 1:24 pm

Originally posted by bjoak:

I agree that there are so many intangibles, you are better off sticking to the big stuff. I don't care if Swish has Babe Ruth hitting after him, better pitches only get you so far. It's not like his approach was all walks and no strikeouts; his approach is to sit on the pitcher's offerings and that's not gong to change. In fact, it probably gives him more real baseball value than higher average hitters so there is no reason it should change.

I do think the move gives him a few more homers, but if you were, say, running with Shandler's projection of 27, you move it up a few clicks to 30. He's too hard to accurately project anyway so it will be difficult for anyone to come back here and say they were right. I think it will be somewhere between 25 and 35, with a chance of 20 or 40.

Another intangible: perhaps he hit better in 2006 because he was all amped up for the pennant chase. In 2007 he lost his edge as there was nothing to play for, but now that he's with the White Sox...oh, wait... I think you are right when you say it's too hard to predict. So many intangibles. That's why I posted the question, to see what others thought. I for one would not jump to get him, although anyone with a glimpse of 40 homer potential gets some attention from me.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 1:33 pm

.255 with 27 homers is the "Marcelian" projection for him.

Prior to the deal, I bumped him up to 29 HR and a BA a couple points higher. I'm not sure if I will change anything post-trade. At most, it'll be 31 HR.

Power in general is a little tricky to project this season, as HR were significantly down, but runs scored were about the same. So any system that uses a 3-year average as base and weights it towards recent seasons (read -Marcel) will have HR totals a little higher than last season, but not splitting the difference between recent years.

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 2:26 pm

Originally posted by ToddZ:

.255 with 27 homers is the "Marcelian" projection for him.

Prior to the deal, I bumped him up to 29 HR and a BA a couple points higher. I'm not sure if I will change anything post-trade. At most, it'll be 31 HR.

Power in general is a little tricky to project this season, as HR were significantly down, but runs scored were about the same. So any system that uses a 3-year average as base and weights it towards recent seasons (read -Marcel) will have HR totals a little higher than last season, but not splitting the difference between recent years. Well, as we all know, projections should never be solely based on numbers. Being in a lineup with Konerko, Thome, Dye may not be nearly as important as the influence they have on him in batting practice, in the dugout and so on.

I'm sure some will disagree, but my predictions are based on many intangibles and past numbers are only a portion of it.

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 2:41 pm

Also, with a high on-base percentage, Swisher has a real shot at hitting #2 in that lineup. With Thome hitting behind him, he'll see a ton of fastballs and could score 120 runs. Not to mention better years from Konerko and Dye to knock him in.

Remember, he's never had anybody protecting him before. And, this ballpark is better for hitting homeruns than he's used to.

With all that being said, this could easily be a career year for him.

I'm upping my prediction. - .275-36-90-118 runs

That's based on my prediction that he hits 2nd in that lineup.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 5:21 pm

Originally posted by Crazy Like a Fox:

Also, with a high on-base percentage, Swisher has a real shot at hitting #2 in that lineup. With Thome hitting behind him, he'll see a ton of fastballs and could score 120 runs. Not to mention better years from Konerko and Dye to knock him in.

Remember, he's never had anybody protecting him before. And, this ballpark is better for hitting homeruns than he's used to.

With all that being said, this could easily be a career year for him.

I'm upping my prediction. - .275-36-90-118 runs

That's based on my prediction that he hits 2nd in that lineup. Crazy Like a Fox

Member

Member # 705

posted November 30, 2006 03:32 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, you put up an excellent argument in defense of Gomes over Swisher as far as potential. I couldn't have said it better myself.

On a side note. With the way Swisher played in the 2nd half last year, there's no guarantee that guy won't fall off the face of the earth either, although, being on the A's he has a much better chance to stick around. Talk about holes in his swing.....sheesh!

MY GOODNESS A LOT HAS CHANGED ABOUT NICK SWISHER BETWEEN NOV 30 2006 AND TODAY- where did the holes in the swing go? Will he do as well as Gomes in 07?

You change your mind more than Mitt Romney- -)

[ January 04, 2008, 11:31 PM: Message edited by: Chest Rockwell ]

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:52 pm

Originally posted by Crazy Like a Fox:

Also, with a high on-base percentage, Swisher has a real shot at hitting #2 in that lineup. With Thome hitting behind him, he'll see a ton of fastballs and could score 120 runs. Not to mention better years from Konerko and Dye to knock him in.

Remember, he's never had anybody protecting him before. And, this ballpark is better for hitting homeruns than he's used to.

With all that being said, this could easily be a career year for him.

I'm upping my prediction. - .275-36-90-118 runs

That's based on my prediction that he hits 2nd in that lineup. This year's Julio Lugo?

Grady Sizemore saw more pitches than any other player in baseball last year and had a pretty good year, he'll probably be at the end of the 1st round in most drafts.

And you're predicting that Swisher will match his Runs numbers......brilliant.

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:04 pm

It's funny Chest, I am so important in your life that you drum up past posts.

As far as Swisher having plenty of holes in his swing, he clearly does.

I've already said in this thread that "he tends to disappoint", "probably a guy you wouldn't want to grab unless he's sitting there much later than he should".

What's funny Chest is that you love Swisher and probably agree with everything I've said so far on this topic, yet all you can do is try to find the negative. I've told you this before. You have to be POSITIVE CHEST 2008.

And I think everyone changes their stance a little bit from year to year. Oh wait, you project the same stats every year for every player?

[ January 05, 2008, 01:08 AM: Message edited by: Crazy Like a Fox ]

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:15 pm

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

quote:Originally posted by Crazy Like a Fox:

Also, with a high on-base percentage, Swisher has a real shot at hitting #2 in that lineup. With Thome hitting behind him, he'll see a ton of fastballs and could score 120 runs. Not to mention better years from Konerko and Dye to knock him in.

Remember, he's never had anybody protecting him before. And, this ballpark is better for hitting homeruns than he's used to.

With all that being said, this could easily be a career year for him.

I'm upping my prediction. - .275-36-90-118 runs

That's based on my prediction that he hits 2nd in that lineup. This year's Julio Lugo?

Grady Sizemore saw more pitches than any other player in baseball last year and had a pretty good year, he'll probably be at the end of the 1st round in most drafts.

And you're predicting that Swisher will match his Runs numbers......brilliant. [/QUOTE]You can't be stuck in your way of thinking. If you strictly go by last year's numbers you will surely fail. I put a lot of things into play in my analysis. I'm not a Swisher fan at all, but I think if you don't think outside the box then you're in some trouble, and you'll never separate yourself from the crowd, or your competitors.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 7:32 pm

...and if 26 is "hitting their prime years"...than 27 can't be much different.

I actually like that you even consider new teammates...and their positive or negative influence on the player (in the locker room or BP or whatever).

There are many many levels to consider...and hitting coach/ teammate type stuff often goes unnoticed.

OAK offense looks very mediocre for 2008...looking over the A's and the White sox depth charts...I see much more chance for scoring opportunities in CHI. (IMO)

~Lance

[ January 05, 2008, 01:34 AM: Message edited by: sportsbettingman ]

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 8:36 pm

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

...and if 26 is "hitting their prime years"...than 27 can't be much different.

I actually like that you even consider new teammates...and their positive or negative influence on the player (in the locker room or BP or whatever).

There are many many levels to consider...and hitting coach/ teammate type stuff often goes unnoticed.

OAK offense looks very mediocre for 2008...looking over the A's and the White sox depth charts...I see much more chance for scoring opportunities in CHI. (IMO)

~Lance Thanks Lance. I consider just about everything. Sometimes it can get me into trouble but it usually helps give me the edge I need. I'm not afraid to stray from conventional thinking either. I think in order to separate yourself from the pack you have to think differently from the pack IMHO.

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:18 am

Originally posted by Crazy Like a Fox:

quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

quote:Originally posted by Crazy Like a Fox:

Also, with a high on-base percentage, Swisher has a real shot at hitting #2 in that lineup. With Thome hitting behind him, he'll see a ton of fastballs and could score 120 runs. Not to mention better years from Konerko and Dye to knock him in.

Remember, he's never had anybody protecting him before. And, this ballpark is better for hitting homeruns than he's used to.

With all that being said, this could easily be a career year for him.

I'm upping my prediction. - .275-36-90-118 runs

That's based on my prediction that he hits 2nd in that lineup. This year's Julio Lugo?

Grady Sizemore saw more pitches than any other player in baseball last year and had a pretty good year, he'll probably be at the end of the 1st round in most drafts.

And you're predicting that Swisher will match his Runs numbers......brilliant. [/QUOTE]You can't be stuck in your way of thinking. If you strictly go by last year's numbers you will surely fail. I put a lot of things into play in my analysis. I'm not a Swisher fan at all, but I think if you don't think outside the box then you're in some trouble, and you'll never separate yourself from the crowd, or your competitors. [/QUOTE]Gee, Let me write that down.

OK, I think I've got it.

[ January 05, 2008, 09:11 AM: Message edited by: DOUGHBOYS ]

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 4:56 am

Originally posted by Crazy Like a Fox:

It's funny Chest, I am so important in your life that you drum up past posts.

As far as Swisher having plenty of holes in his swing, he clearly does.

I've already said in this thread that "he tends to disappoint", "probably a guy you wouldn't want to grab unless he's sitting there much later than he should".

What's funny Chest is that you love Swisher and probably agree with everything I've said so far on this topic, yet all you can do is try to find the negative. I've told you this before. You have to be POSITIVE CHEST 2008.

And I think everyone changes their stance a little bit from year to year. Oh wait, you project the same stats every year for every player? I have never really shared a stat projection with you so you are guessing there. As far as Swisher I simply do not know what I think yet. i know you are way too optimistic on him.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 6:36 am

I'm upping my prediction. - .275-36-90-118 runs I've already said in this thread that "he tends to disappoint", "probably a guy you wouldn't want to grab unless he's sitting there much later than he should".Have your cake or eat it. Yes, Swisher is hard to project, but your projection shouldn't be his ceiling. If this is what you think then you should be relatively certain he will hit 31-41 homers and that he is as likely to hit .295 as he is to hit .255. If that is the case you are a fool not to take him 4th round or higher.