Originally posted by UFS:
Forget about his stats... How can anyone take a guy so high when he doesn't average 100 games per season? John...Why don't you list all the 2nd baseman that were drafted after him who have out performed him so far this season?
I think you will find one...Uggla
Weeks has scored more runs than every 2nd baseman that was drafted after him except Uggla
No other 2nd baseman drafted after him has a higher combined homer/steal total
Did I miss something...I don't think he is done for the year.....Is Cano having a better season than him? I don't see you bitching about him being drafted so high.
Rickie Weeks
-
CC's Desperados
- Posts: 2558
- Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:00 pm
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by TheFoot:
When you look at some of the better young 2B in baseball Aaron Hill, Ian Kinsler, Kelly Johnson, even Howie Kendrick ( even though he cant stay healthy) are all the same age as Rickie Weeks , And over the last 3 or 4 years have all shown some kind of marked improvement. More then a Rickie Weeks.
If I had to compare Weeks to anyone it would be Josh Barfield. Both players are the same age. The both have a world of talent , but neither one can play consistent enough to improve the stat line. Hey Mr. Strikeout guy....Has Weeks made any improvements in cutting down his strikeouts this year? Maybe you haven't even looked....Kinsler was drafted before him....Hill's hurt, Kendrick has been hurt, and Johnson is hardly blowing away the field away.
When you look at some of the better young 2B in baseball Aaron Hill, Ian Kinsler, Kelly Johnson, even Howie Kendrick ( even though he cant stay healthy) are all the same age as Rickie Weeks , And over the last 3 or 4 years have all shown some kind of marked improvement. More then a Rickie Weeks.
If I had to compare Weeks to anyone it would be Josh Barfield. Both players are the same age. The both have a world of talent , but neither one can play consistent enough to improve the stat line. Hey Mr. Strikeout guy....Has Weeks made any improvements in cutting down his strikeouts this year? Maybe you haven't even looked....Kinsler was drafted before him....Hill's hurt, Kendrick has been hurt, and Johnson is hardly blowing away the field away.
-
NorCalAtlFan
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Rickie Weeks
I'm biased, but I would say Kelly Johnson was/is having a better season than Weeks.
My feeling is that Weeks is a calculated gamble if you accept that his BA will blow. If you're making it up elsewhere, great. And if by some miracle, he "gets it" one of these years and posts a .285+ BA, then you're talking a money player. He went too high for my tastes and I'm not a huge fan anyways, but I see the fascination with him.
My feeling is that Weeks is a calculated gamble if you accept that his BA will blow. If you're making it up elsewhere, great. And if by some miracle, he "gets it" one of these years and posts a .285+ BA, then you're talking a money player. He went too high for my tastes and I'm not a huge fan anyways, but I see the fascination with him.
-
CC's Desperados
- Posts: 2558
- Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:00 pm
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by bjoak:
Kev, You know I crunch numbers as much as anyone so for me to say that I sort of agree with the big foot hopefully means a little. Anyway, let me just ask a question: If Weeks plays for the next ten years and is healthy in each of the ten years (
) and hits below .240 but with an outstanding contact rate in each of them, do you expect him to hit for a decent average in the eleventh year? I ask because I would think that you would. There is a point at which you have to admit that a guy has certain propitious skills, but that they don't always translate into a good hitter, good pitcher or whatever. I think we are well past that point with Weeks. Mr. Contact rate guy....Can you tell me what Weeks contact rate is this year and if it is better than his past history?
[ June 13, 2008, 02:19 AM: Message edited by: CC's Desperados ]
Kev, You know I crunch numbers as much as anyone so for me to say that I sort of agree with the big foot hopefully means a little. Anyway, let me just ask a question: If Weeks plays for the next ten years and is healthy in each of the ten years (
) and hits below .240 but with an outstanding contact rate in each of them, do you expect him to hit for a decent average in the eleventh year? I ask because I would think that you would. There is a point at which you have to admit that a guy has certain propitious skills, but that they don't always translate into a good hitter, good pitcher or whatever. I think we are well past that point with Weeks. Mr. Contact rate guy....Can you tell me what Weeks contact rate is this year and if it is better than his past history?[ June 13, 2008, 02:19 AM: Message edited by: CC's Desperados ]
-
CC's Desperados
- Posts: 2558
- Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 6:00 pm
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by NorCalAtlFan:
I'm biased, but I would say Kelly Johnson was/is having a better season than Weeks.
My feeling is that Weeks is a calculated gamble if you accept that his BA will blow. If you're making it up elsewhere, great. And if by some miracle, he "gets it" one of these years and posts a .285+ BA, then you're talking a money player. He went too high for my tastes and I'm not a huge fan anyways, but I see the fascination with him. Who do you think will have a better career Johnson or Weeks?
I'm biased, but I would say Kelly Johnson was/is having a better season than Weeks.
My feeling is that Weeks is a calculated gamble if you accept that his BA will blow. If you're making it up elsewhere, great. And if by some miracle, he "gets it" one of these years and posts a .285+ BA, then you're talking a money player. He went too high for my tastes and I'm not a huge fan anyways, but I see the fascination with him. Who do you think will have a better career Johnson or Weeks?
-
NorCalAtlFan
- Posts: 1258
- Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Rickie Weeks
I don't think that was/is the point. But, let's see. They're the same age basically. Ricki has a bit more time, but Kelly has played 1 whole season for the most part. They're 2 different players, Kelly will probably hit for more power and Ricki will definitely steal more bases. If you tell me that Ricki will indeed enjoy a long, healthy career. I'd say him. But right now, knowing what we know, I'd say Kelly.
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by CC's Desperados:
quote:Originally posted by UFS:
Forget about his stats... How can anyone take a guy so high when he doesn't average 100 games per season? John...Why don't you list all the 2nd baseman that were drafted after him who have out performed him so far this season?
I think you will find one...Uggla
Weeks has scored more runs than every 2nd baseman that was drafted after him except Uggla
No other 2nd baseman drafted after him has a higher combined homer/steal total
Did I miss something...I don't think he is done for the year.....Is Cano having a better season than him? I don't see you bitching about him being drafted so high. [/QUOTE]Cano is still playing
Draft Weeks in the 9th round, where he belongs.
Weeks has killed more BA too!
If you click on the Weeks link in our league, there's a picture of a sick dog there
runs and hides
[ June 13, 2008, 04:12 AM: Message edited by: UFS ]
quote:Originally posted by UFS:
Forget about his stats... How can anyone take a guy so high when he doesn't average 100 games per season? John...Why don't you list all the 2nd baseman that were drafted after him who have out performed him so far this season?
I think you will find one...Uggla
Weeks has scored more runs than every 2nd baseman that was drafted after him except Uggla
No other 2nd baseman drafted after him has a higher combined homer/steal total
Did I miss something...I don't think he is done for the year.....Is Cano having a better season than him? I don't see you bitching about him being drafted so high. [/QUOTE]Cano is still playing
Draft Weeks in the 9th round, where he belongs.
Weeks has killed more BA too!
If you click on the Weeks link in our league, there's a picture of a sick dog there
runs and hides [ June 13, 2008, 04:12 AM: Message edited by: UFS ]
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by bjoak:
If Weeks plays for the next ten years and is healthy in each of the ten years ( ) and hits below .240 but with an outstanding contact rate in each of them, do you expect him to hit for a decent average in the eleventh year? I ask because I would think that you would. There is a point at which you have to admit that a guy has certain propitious skills, but that they don't always translate into a good hitter ... I think we are well past that point with Weeks. No I would not expect him to hit for average at that point. But we are not dealing with a failed career of a 30+ yr old player, we are dealing with the arrested development of a very young player which has led to short-sighted negative sentiment.
He's 25, younger than many players make it to the bigs. He has plenty of time to improve, and as noted, has shown certain improvement. No one has sustained as low a BABIP over a career, I doubt even over two seasons, as he has had this year. I don't care how dense he is, someone with his power and speed will not have a persistent BABIP rate of around 20%.
If you are "well past that point" with Weeks you're throwing in the towel more than just a little early. I would want to see two full seasons of ABs before I call him a 240 hitter. So far, he's had 3 partial years due to a busted wrist which is not indicative of an injury-prone player. He is a rare power/speed combination, upside player, at a weak position. Worthy of a high draft choice.
He's delivered positive value this year in spite of bad luck, and if he's back in 2-3 weeks his numbers will improve as the year goes.
If Weeks plays for the next ten years and is healthy in each of the ten years (
) and hits below .240 but with an outstanding contact rate in each of them, do you expect him to hit for a decent average in the eleventh year? I ask because I would think that you would. There is a point at which you have to admit that a guy has certain propitious skills, but that they don't always translate into a good hitter ... I think we are well past that point with Weeks. No I would not expect him to hit for average at that point. But we are not dealing with a failed career of a 30+ yr old player, we are dealing with the arrested development of a very young player which has led to short-sighted negative sentiment. He's 25, younger than many players make it to the bigs. He has plenty of time to improve, and as noted, has shown certain improvement. No one has sustained as low a BABIP over a career, I doubt even over two seasons, as he has had this year. I don't care how dense he is, someone with his power and speed will not have a persistent BABIP rate of around 20%.
If you are "well past that point" with Weeks you're throwing in the towel more than just a little early. I would want to see two full seasons of ABs before I call him a 240 hitter. So far, he's had 3 partial years due to a busted wrist which is not indicative of an injury-prone player. He is a rare power/speed combination, upside player, at a weak position. Worthy of a high draft choice.
He's delivered positive value this year in spite of bad luck, and if he's back in 2-3 weeks his numbers will improve as the year goes.
Rickie Weeks
UFS, bjoak & foot:
Who is likely to be the better fantasy player based on the follwing ratios per plate appearance?
Player A:
23% strikeouts
11% walks or HPB
1 in 19 PA, hits HR or Steals Base
Player B:
18% strikeouts
15% walks or HPB
1 in 16 PA hits HR or Steals Base
Who is likely to be the better fantasy player based on the follwing ratios per plate appearance?
Player A:
23% strikeouts
11% walks or HPB
1 in 19 PA, hits HR or Steals Base
Player B:
18% strikeouts
15% walks or HPB
1 in 16 PA hits HR or Steals Base
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by bjoak:
If Weeks plays for the next ten years and is healthy in each of the ten years ( ) and hits below .240 but with an outstanding contact rate in each of them, do you expect him to hit for a decent average in the eleventh year? I ask because I would think that you would. There is a point at which you have to admit that a guy has certain propitious skills, but that they don't always translate into a good hitter ... I think we are well past that point with Weeks. No I would not expect him to hit for average at that point. But we are not dealing with a failed career of a 30+ yr old player, we are dealing with the arrested development of a very young player which has led to short-sighted negative sentiment.
He's 25, younger than many players make it to the bigs. He has plenty of time to improve, and as noted, has shown certain improvement. No one has sustained as low a BABIP over a career, I doubt even over two seasons, as he has had this year. I don't care how dense he is, someone with his power and speed will not have a persistent BABIP rate of around 20%.
If you are "well past that point" with Weeks you're throwing in the towel more than just a little early. I would want to see two full seasons of ABs before I call him a 240 hitter. So far, he's had 3 partial years due to a busted wrist which is not indicative of an injury-prone player. He is a rare power/speed combination, upside player, at a weak position. Worthy of a high draft choice.
He's delivered positive value this year in spite of bad luck, and if he's back in 2-3 weeks his numbers will improve as the year goes. [/QUOTE]Good answer.
quote:Originally posted by bjoak:
If Weeks plays for the next ten years and is healthy in each of the ten years (
) and hits below .240 but with an outstanding contact rate in each of them, do you expect him to hit for a decent average in the eleventh year? I ask because I would think that you would. There is a point at which you have to admit that a guy has certain propitious skills, but that they don't always translate into a good hitter ... I think we are well past that point with Weeks. No I would not expect him to hit for average at that point. But we are not dealing with a failed career of a 30+ yr old player, we are dealing with the arrested development of a very young player which has led to short-sighted negative sentiment. He's 25, younger than many players make it to the bigs. He has plenty of time to improve, and as noted, has shown certain improvement. No one has sustained as low a BABIP over a career, I doubt even over two seasons, as he has had this year. I don't care how dense he is, someone with his power and speed will not have a persistent BABIP rate of around 20%.
If you are "well past that point" with Weeks you're throwing in the towel more than just a little early. I would want to see two full seasons of ABs before I call him a 240 hitter. So far, he's had 3 partial years due to a busted wrist which is not indicative of an injury-prone player. He is a rare power/speed combination, upside player, at a weak position. Worthy of a high draft choice.
He's delivered positive value this year in spite of bad luck, and if he's back in 2-3 weeks his numbers will improve as the year goes. [/QUOTE]Good answer.
Chance favors the prepared mind.
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by CC's Desperados:
quote:Originally posted by bjoak:
Kev, You know I crunch numbers as much as anyone so for me to say that I sort of agree with the big foot hopefully means a little. Anyway, let me just ask a question: If Weeks plays for the next ten years and is healthy in each of the ten years ( ) and hits below .240 but with an outstanding contact rate in each of them, do you expect him to hit for a decent average in the eleventh year? I ask because I would think that you would. There is a point at which you have to admit that a guy has certain propitious skills, but that they don't always translate into a good hitter, good pitcher or whatever. I think we are well past that point with Weeks. Mr. Contact rate guy....Can you tell me what Weeks contact rate is this year and if it is better than his past history? [/QUOTE]You have me confused with someone else. Kevin was talking about contact rate earlier in the thread was why I brought it up.
quote:Originally posted by bjoak:
Kev, You know I crunch numbers as much as anyone so for me to say that I sort of agree with the big foot hopefully means a little. Anyway, let me just ask a question: If Weeks plays for the next ten years and is healthy in each of the ten years (
) and hits below .240 but with an outstanding contact rate in each of them, do you expect him to hit for a decent average in the eleventh year? I ask because I would think that you would. There is a point at which you have to admit that a guy has certain propitious skills, but that they don't always translate into a good hitter, good pitcher or whatever. I think we are well past that point with Weeks. Mr. Contact rate guy....Can you tell me what Weeks contact rate is this year and if it is better than his past history? [/QUOTE]You have me confused with someone else. Kevin was talking about contact rate earlier in the thread was why I brought it up.Chance favors the prepared mind.
-
BaseBrawler
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Rickie Weeks
If I had to bet I would say Johnson is going to have a better carrer.
Im not a hugh numbers cruncher. I try to view players based on there over all numbers. Career averages. Career averages because that is what a player averages out most of the time. I dont like to over project players. Ans sometiumes you hit and sometimes you miss just like with number crunching projectionss. We all do what makes this fun for us , and we all have our favorites. And if Weeks is you favorite then he is , and thats ok . Me personal I see a player that is going to hit 230 to 240 every year. He will score some runs because of the team he is on and he will steal some bases.
I would rather trust my team to a guy who is going to put up steady numbers. Rickie Weeks will never put up staedy number unless something in his game changes.
Johnson has more of a chance to be like Chase Utley then Rickie Weeks does. not as good as Chase , but just more like him.
[ June 13, 2008, 09:48 AM: Message edited by: TheFoot ]
Im not a hugh numbers cruncher. I try to view players based on there over all numbers. Career averages. Career averages because that is what a player averages out most of the time. I dont like to over project players. Ans sometiumes you hit and sometimes you miss just like with number crunching projectionss. We all do what makes this fun for us , and we all have our favorites. And if Weeks is you favorite then he is , and thats ok . Me personal I see a player that is going to hit 230 to 240 every year. He will score some runs because of the team he is on and he will steal some bases.
I would rather trust my team to a guy who is going to put up steady numbers. Rickie Weeks will never put up staedy number unless something in his game changes.
Johnson has more of a chance to be like Chase Utley then Rickie Weeks does. not as good as Chase , but just more like him.
[ June 13, 2008, 09:48 AM: Message edited by: TheFoot ]
The Foot Moves swiftly and silently ....THEN KICKS YOUR BUTT!
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
UFS, bjoak & foot:
Who is likely to be the better fantasy player based on the follwing ratios per plate appearance?
Player A:
23% strikeouts
11% walks or HPB
1 in 19 PA, hits HR or Steals Base
Player B:
18% strikeouts
15% walks or HPB
1 in 16 PA hits HR or Steals Base I will go with C: Not enough information. But since it is obviously a trap, I'll add that one thing I'd like to know is that Player B isn't hitting .210!
UFS, bjoak & foot:
Who is likely to be the better fantasy player based on the follwing ratios per plate appearance?
Player A:
23% strikeouts
11% walks or HPB
1 in 19 PA, hits HR or Steals Base
Player B:
18% strikeouts
15% walks or HPB
1 in 16 PA hits HR or Steals Base I will go with C: Not enough information. But since it is obviously a trap, I'll add that one thing I'd like to know is that Player B isn't hitting .210!
Chance favors the prepared mind.
-
BaseBrawler
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by TheFoot:
[qb] When you look at some of the better young 2B in baseball Aaron Hill, Ian Kinsler, Kelly Johnson, even Howie Kendrick ( even though he cant stay healthy) are all the same age as Rickie Weeks , And over the last 3 or 4 years have all shown some kind of marked improvement. More then a Rickie Weeks.
If I had to compare Weeks to anyone it would be Josh Barfield. Both players are the same age. The both have a world of talent , but neither one can play consistent enough to improve the stat line. Weeks had as many homers in a partial '07, not at full strength, than Barfield had in two full seasons. He has nearly double the SBs in his 1100 ABs than does Barfield in 900. Barfield had an OBP around 290 over his last two seasons, Weeks was 370. I think the comparison begins and ends with: they are both second basemen that you don't care for.
BTW, both Aaron Hill and Kendrick had a lower OBP and a lower SLG pct, and about one-fifth of the SBs, in comparison to Weeks over the last two seasons. And these are the guys you think are the top young players while Weeks is a hapless 220 hitter ???
I think you should spend a little more time with the stats, and a little less watching little leaguers. The defense rests, and case closed. [/QUOTE]Rickie Weeks is a 240 Hitter. He has been for every year expect 1 year. When I look at some of the other players his age He is not in there class. Im not looking at slugging Pct, Onbase Pct, Contact rate. What ever numbers you want to throw by me . Im looking at the stats that count.
Kelly Johnson is a 270 hitter 27 points higher the weeks with 200 more career at bats
Aaron Hill is a career 284 hitter 41 points with 800 more career at bats
Howie Kendrick is a 307 hitter with 200 less at bats
Ian kinsler is a 282 lifetime batter 200 more career atbats.
And they are all the same age with Kendrick being a year young, so please dont bring up the age arguement again.
All of these players are going to bring different aspects to there team. Power or speed come from that player, but if your in a good line up you going to have good run production.
If you look at the stats, and not projections or Pcts. You will see that these players are much better right now in their careers then Rickie Weeks, and they do more to help their team. The case is not close your defense is using funny numbers to disguise the truth , you lack good evidence. At best youy have a pourous defense.
I will close my case against Rickie Weeks by saying he is the most over rated second basemen in the game today. ! I will rest unless funny numbers are thrown at me again! LOL
[ June 13, 2008, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: TheFoot ]
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by TheFoot:
[qb] When you look at some of the better young 2B in baseball Aaron Hill, Ian Kinsler, Kelly Johnson, even Howie Kendrick ( even though he cant stay healthy) are all the same age as Rickie Weeks , And over the last 3 or 4 years have all shown some kind of marked improvement. More then a Rickie Weeks.
If I had to compare Weeks to anyone it would be Josh Barfield. Both players are the same age. The both have a world of talent , but neither one can play consistent enough to improve the stat line. Weeks had as many homers in a partial '07, not at full strength, than Barfield had in two full seasons. He has nearly double the SBs in his 1100 ABs than does Barfield in 900. Barfield had an OBP around 290 over his last two seasons, Weeks was 370. I think the comparison begins and ends with: they are both second basemen that you don't care for.
BTW, both Aaron Hill and Kendrick had a lower OBP and a lower SLG pct, and about one-fifth of the SBs, in comparison to Weeks over the last two seasons. And these are the guys you think are the top young players while Weeks is a hapless 220 hitter ???
I think you should spend a little more time with the stats, and a little less watching little leaguers.
The defense rests, and case closed. [/QUOTE]Rickie Weeks is a 240 Hitter. He has been for every year expect 1 year. When I look at some of the other players his age He is not in there class. Im not looking at slugging Pct, Onbase Pct, Contact rate. What ever numbers you want to throw by me . Im looking at the stats that count.Kelly Johnson is a 270 hitter 27 points higher the weeks with 200 more career at bats
Aaron Hill is a career 284 hitter 41 points with 800 more career at bats
Howie Kendrick is a 307 hitter with 200 less at bats
Ian kinsler is a 282 lifetime batter 200 more career atbats.
And they are all the same age with Kendrick being a year young, so please dont bring up the age arguement again.
All of these players are going to bring different aspects to there team. Power or speed come from that player, but if your in a good line up you going to have good run production.
If you look at the stats, and not projections or Pcts. You will see that these players are much better right now in their careers then Rickie Weeks, and they do more to help their team. The case is not close your defense is using funny numbers to disguise the truth , you lack good evidence. At best youy have a pourous defense.
I will close my case against Rickie Weeks by saying he is the most over rated second basemen in the game today. ! I will rest unless funny numbers are thrown at me again! LOL
[ June 13, 2008, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: TheFoot ]
The Foot Moves swiftly and silently ....THEN KICKS YOUR BUTT!
Rickie Weeks
Uhhhhh, Foot, I'll drop it now that I know who/what I'm dealing with.
BA matters. HR and SB ratios do not. OBP is meaningless. Contact rate suggests nothing. BABIP, well that's too funny to even repeat. Anything that hasn't been proven yet in career stats isn't worth considering. Good luck riding your 270-hitting, low-run scoring, low-HR hitting, no SB-getting, no upside players to the championship.
BA matters. HR and SB ratios do not. OBP is meaningless. Contact rate suggests nothing. BABIP, well that's too funny to even repeat. Anything that hasn't been proven yet in career stats isn't worth considering. Good luck riding your 270-hitting, low-run scoring, low-HR hitting, no SB-getting, no upside players to the championship.
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Uhhhhh, Foot, I'll drop it now that I know who/what I'm dealing with.
BA matters. HR and SB ratios do not. OBP is meaningless. Contact rate suggests nothing. BABIP, well that's too funny to even repeat. Anything that hasn't been proven yet in career stats isn't worth considering. Good luck riding your 270-hitting, low-run scoring, low-HR hitting, no SB-getting, no upside players to the championship. And good luck riding a guy that has averaged 103 games per season for three years
I'll take M.Young in RD 5 (more runs, RBI, avg) and make up the SB later, knowing that BA is very hard to make up later in the draft. I guess making it up isn't as hard when a guy is only projected for 400 ab per year
Uhhhhh, Foot, I'll drop it now that I know who/what I'm dealing with.
BA matters. HR and SB ratios do not. OBP is meaningless. Contact rate suggests nothing. BABIP, well that's too funny to even repeat. Anything that hasn't been proven yet in career stats isn't worth considering. Good luck riding your 270-hitting, low-run scoring, low-HR hitting, no SB-getting, no upside players to the championship. And good luck riding a guy that has averaged 103 games per season for three years
I'll take M.Young in RD 5 (more runs, RBI, avg) and make up the SB later, knowing that BA is very hard to make up later in the draft. I guess making it up isn't as hard when a guy is only projected for 400 ab per year
-
headhunters
- Posts: 1976
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:00 pm
Rickie Weeks
foot, bjoak and kj. move to 30 year old ryan ludwig. thanks
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by UFS:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Uhhhhh, Foot, I'll drop it now that I know who/what I'm dealing with.
BA matters. HR and SB ratios do not. OBP is meaningless. Contact rate suggests nothing. BABIP, well that's too funny to even repeat. Anything that hasn't been proven yet in career stats isn't worth considering. Good luck riding your 270-hitting, low-run scoring, low-HR hitting, no SB-getting, no upside players to the championship. And good luck riding a guy that has averaged 103 games per season for three years
I'll take M.Young in RD 5 (more runs, RBI, avg) and make up the SB later, knowing that BA is very hard to make up later in the draft. I guess making it up isn't as hard when a guy is only projected for 400 ab per year [/QUOTE]Can't get BA late?
Conor Jackson .298 = 10th rd
McLouth .304 = 14th rd
Willingham .341 = 15th rd
Milton Bradley .333 = 18th round
Ramon Vazquez, .328 = waiver wire
Maybe you can't get BA late, I can.
Michael Young .299 = 5th round. Yep, you really got one over on me with that pick, John.
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Uhhhhh, Foot, I'll drop it now that I know who/what I'm dealing with.
BA matters. HR and SB ratios do not. OBP is meaningless. Contact rate suggests nothing. BABIP, well that's too funny to even repeat. Anything that hasn't been proven yet in career stats isn't worth considering. Good luck riding your 270-hitting, low-run scoring, low-HR hitting, no SB-getting, no upside players to the championship. And good luck riding a guy that has averaged 103 games per season for three years
I'll take M.Young in RD 5 (more runs, RBI, avg) and make up the SB later, knowing that BA is very hard to make up later in the draft. I guess making it up isn't as hard when a guy is only projected for 400 ab per year
[/QUOTE]Can't get BA late? Conor Jackson .298 = 10th rd
McLouth .304 = 14th rd
Willingham .341 = 15th rd
Milton Bradley .333 = 18th round
Ramon Vazquez, .328 = waiver wire
Maybe you can't get BA late, I can.
Michael Young .299 = 5th round. Yep, you really got one over on me with that pick, John.
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by UFS:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Uhhhhh, Foot, I'll drop it now that I know who/what I'm dealing with.
BA matters. HR and SB ratios do not. OBP is meaningless. Contact rate suggests nothing. BABIP, well that's too funny to even repeat. Anything that hasn't been proven yet in career stats isn't worth considering. Good luck riding your 270-hitting, low-run scoring, low-HR hitting, no SB-getting, no upside players to the championship. And good luck riding a guy that has averaged 103 games per season for three years
I'll take M.Young in RD 5 (more runs, RBI, avg) and make up the SB later, knowing that BA is very hard to make up later in the draft. I guess making it up isn't as hard when a guy is only projected for 400 ab per year [/QUOTE]Can't get BA late?
Conor Jackson .298 = 10th rd
McLouth .304 = 14th rd
Willingham .341 = 15th rd
Milton Bradley .333 = 18th round
Ramon Vazquez, .328 = waiver wire
Maybe you can't get BA late, I can.
Michael Young .299 = 5th round. Yep, you really got one over on me with that pick, John. [/QUOTE]Good one.... Now pull the averages for Josh W and Nate out of your projections for me. You got lucky and you know it on those guys.
I'll take .299 with 650 AB over whatever Josh W has in the Ab's before he got injured.
So how many AB's did you project Weeks for?
quote:Originally posted by UFS:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Uhhhhh, Foot, I'll drop it now that I know who/what I'm dealing with.
BA matters. HR and SB ratios do not. OBP is meaningless. Contact rate suggests nothing. BABIP, well that's too funny to even repeat. Anything that hasn't been proven yet in career stats isn't worth considering. Good luck riding your 270-hitting, low-run scoring, low-HR hitting, no SB-getting, no upside players to the championship. And good luck riding a guy that has averaged 103 games per season for three years
I'll take M.Young in RD 5 (more runs, RBI, avg) and make up the SB later, knowing that BA is very hard to make up later in the draft. I guess making it up isn't as hard when a guy is only projected for 400 ab per year
[/QUOTE]Can't get BA late? Conor Jackson .298 = 10th rd
McLouth .304 = 14th rd
Willingham .341 = 15th rd
Milton Bradley .333 = 18th round
Ramon Vazquez, .328 = waiver wire
Maybe you can't get BA late, I can.
Michael Young .299 = 5th round. Yep, you really got one over on me with that pick, John.
[/QUOTE]Good one.... Now pull the averages for Josh W and Nate out of your projections for me. You got lucky and you know it on those guys.I'll take .299 with 650 AB over whatever Josh W has in the Ab's before he got injured.
So how many AB's did you project Weeks for?
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Michael Young .299 = 5th round. Yep, you really got one over on me with that pick, John. Yes, you are correct. TYVM.
Weeks
.210 7-20 43 runs 10 sb
Young
.299 6-32 51 runs 4sb
killed on avg, rbi and durability factor. My guy PLAYS with a broken finger.
beats in runs. HR a wash.
Only 6 sb behind. Whoooohooooooooo You win one cat!!!
Michael Young .299 = 5th round. Yep, you really got one over on me with that pick, John.
Yes, you are correct. TYVM.Weeks
.210 7-20 43 runs 10 sb
Young
.299 6-32 51 runs 4sb
killed on avg, rbi and durability factor. My guy PLAYS with a broken finger.
beats in runs. HR a wash.
Only 6 sb behind. Whoooohooooooooo You win one cat!!!
Rickie Weeks
I like High BA and speed early. I believe that low BA power is normally available late or via fa. My projections for Rickie coming into the season were .260 21/25 105 & 59 and while I was not targeting him I ended up with him in 2 Sats (both in the fifth round). I did have him projected playing 140 games. It is hard for me to project BA's below .250 for (non-catcher)ML ball players (Cameron & Andrew Jones were both .250 projections) or .325 or above (Cabrera & Pujols). What do I know I had Doumit down for .337 OBP with 12 HR's?
Main C3-pick#12 Crawford/Upton/Mags/Guillen/Chipper/Zimmerman/Del Young
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by Sheep:
IMy projections for Rickie coming into the season were .260 21/25 105 & 59 and while I was not targeting him I ended up with him in 2 Sats (both in the fifth round). I did have him projected playing 140 games. I had close to the same, he still could get there.
IMy projections for Rickie coming into the season were .260 21/25 105 & 59 and while I was not targeting him I ended up with him in 2 Sats (both in the fifth round). I did have him projected playing 140 games. I had close to the same, he still could get there.
Rickie Weeks
Originally posted by UFS:
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Michael Young .299 = 5th round. Yep, you really got one over on me with that pick, John. Yes, you are correct. TYVM.
Weeks
.210 7-20 43 runs 10 sb
Young
.299 6-32 51 runs 4sb
killed on avg, rbi and durability factor. My guy PLAYS with a broken finger.
beats in runs. HR a wash.
Only 6 sb behind. Whoooohooooooooo You win one cat!!! [/QUOTE]Wouldn't it be funny if Weeks ended up playing more games than Young?
Btw, if I had to have a guy like Michael Young I would've waited 20 rounds and grabbed DeRosa.
quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Michael Young .299 = 5th round. Yep, you really got one over on me with that pick, John.
Yes, you are correct. TYVM.Weeks
.210 7-20 43 runs 10 sb
Young
.299 6-32 51 runs 4sb
killed on avg, rbi and durability factor. My guy PLAYS with a broken finger.
beats in runs. HR a wash.
Only 6 sb behind. Whoooohooooooooo You win one cat!!!
[/QUOTE]Wouldn't it be funny if Weeks ended up playing more games than Young? Btw, if I had to have a guy like Michael Young I would've waited 20 rounds and grabbed DeRosa.
Rickie Weeks
Young
.299 6-32 51 runs 4sb
DeRosa
.313 8-35 40 runs 3 sb
Whoooohooooooooo You'd be winning one cat plus one extra steal - for a pick 20 rds earlier!!!
... and Young is pretty much doing the best he could possibly be doing; taking a guy like him in Rd 5 isn't playing to win, it's playing not be lose.
.299 6-32 51 runs 4sb
DeRosa
.313 8-35 40 runs 3 sb
Whoooohooooooooo You'd be winning one cat plus one extra steal - for a pick 20 rds earlier!!!
... and Young is pretty much doing the best he could possibly be doing; taking a guy like him in Rd 5 isn't playing to win, it's playing not be lose.
Rickie Weeks
Another little tidbit for you Week-haters.
His wrist was bothering him much of last season. Sometime in July he said that he finally felt back to full strength.
Duing the final 2 months he hit .273 with 11 HRs and 15 SBs (while M Young has avg'd just 22 combined hr+sb over the last two seasons, and is on the same pace this year, in 660 ABs!).
[ June 13, 2008, 04:36 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]
His wrist was bothering him much of last season. Sometime in July he said that he finally felt back to full strength.
Duing the final 2 months he hit .273 with 11 HRs and 15 SBs (while M Young has avg'd just 22 combined hr+sb over the last two seasons, and is on the same pace this year, in 660 ABs!).
[ June 13, 2008, 04:36 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]