Jump to content
Jays Centre
  • Create Account

Olerud363

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,035

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Toronto Blue Jays Videos

2025 Toronto Blue Jays Top Prospects Ranking

Toronto Blue Jays Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Toronto Blue Jays Draft Pick Tracker

News

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Olerud363

  1. Olerud363
    Yes, but a bad hitter will hit better in a better hitters park. I'm not saying he is a good hitter. Just that he's not a .184 hitter. 1. His statcasts xBA last year is .204 2. His statcasts xBA career is .230 I honestly don't know how sophisticated xBA is. Is the .230 xBA what he'd be expected to hit in a neutral park? Or what he would be expected to hit in Sandiego given neutral luck? Parks can be bad for hitters because of dimensions, altitude, humidity, winds, visibility, foul territory, turf properties, and probably other stuff. Some of this might also effect the statscast numbers (visibility at least). Aren't all the parks on the west coast, except the one in Anaheim, pitchers parks? San Diego, Seattle, Oakland, San Francisco and LA. None of them have huge dimensions. I believe those 5 are near the coast, but Anaheim isn't. Any reason they are pitchers park?
  2. Olerud363
    Haven't been on the board much lately but just logged on... see Grisham being discussed. First thing I do is check his fangraphs page... Yeah. 2.2 WAR a year the last 3 years, including pandemic shortened 60 game year, and last year when he hit .185. If he wants numbers he should put Grisham's numbers in context with league averages, and park factors. Grissham hit .184 in perhaps the worst hitters park in baseball, in the worst hitters year in most of our lifetimes, and is only 25 and had power and some walks. So overall hitting .184 he still was an above average player. The batting average was probably a bit fluky too, and he could easily hit .240 in a better park and better hitters year (which presumably 2023 will be with the rule changes).
  3. Olerud363
    I'll fully admit I don't have the time to look into this deeply, and I don't watch all the playoff games or a lot of out of market games.... but where are these pinch runners, stolen bases, pinch hitters happening? Almost every playoff game this year was decided by extra base hits. Not all of them in the 9th inning. I mean the Jays got eliminated because Mariners comeback that started with a big homerun in the 6th. Final game of the year, Houston won because of a big homerun in the 6th. It's all about extra base hits. No inning is easier than any other. If Swanson was purposely being kept away from heart of the order, I can see his numbers might be deceiving, if he's facing a random assortment of batters doesn't matter what inning it is. His numbers may not be for real (because of variability) but nothing to do with pitching in the 6th inning.
  4. Olerud363
    Sort of, but O'Neil has a .320 career on base percentage compared to Grichuk's .293. That's a big difference. If you want to use the fancy Stat O'Neil is 115 wRC+, Grichuk 100 career. Actually O'Neil is a much better hitter when you look at it.
  5. Olerud363
    Well there really isn't any reason the 6th inning is easier then the 9th inning. The pattern can be explained by just reliever randomness. However good numbers in low leverage could still be a warning sign, not because the 6th inning is easier but maybe management knows the guy doesn't have the greatest stuff, management knows the numbers are fluky and doesn't move them up to high leverage.
  6. Olerud363
    That's as bad as Flexen, unless you believe Kelenic is fixable, which he might be. I think his k-rate and stuff is like not great but not .170 hitter bad. Marco Gonzeles is worse than Flexen in terms of underlying metrics... isn't he?
  7. Olerud363
    Gabriel not Orelvis. Gabriel stat-scouts better than Orelvis, if you think k rate and line drive rate are important.
  8. Olerud363
    I'm completely confused about the Martinez being left off the 40. Who was the last prospect with these kind of stats the Jays left unprotected? There was no way they could have done a 2-1 trade to make room? Capra and Lukes ahead of Martinez? Like they needed to protect both of those? Like what scenario would both Lukes and Capra be needed ? Like combined they weren't needed last year... Or is there still time to add Martinez to the 40 man if they make another move? Or does Martinez actually scout bad despite excellent stats for a 19 year old in high a? Or is Martinez's real name Jose DeSanta and he's actually 26 and stole some dudes birth certificate? Make it make sense.
  9. Olerud363
    This is why the people complaining about Vlad's ground ball rate and swing flaws aren't nuts. Heywards fly ball and hard hit rates peaked when he was 22. His walk rate peaked at 20. Vlad is better as a hitter, but if he followed Heyward's trajectory he'd just sort of be an OK hitter with one big season at 22. Still hoping Vlad follows more of a Gary Shefield path, slow start, big season, a couple of average seasons, then repeats the big season 10 times.
  10. Olerud363
    Good point. Didn't know that. He was a .250 hitting noodle in the minors with a good k/bb. Small Cavaet is that his k/bb was good and almost all of that was done as a 20 and 21 year old. His 22 year old season was wiped out by Covid, then called up after 30 games as a 23 year old. Same can be said of Kirk though, and Kirk raked in 2019 as a 20 year old.
  11. Olerud363
    People pointed Olerud had not much power and no 30 homer seasons. However he did have two .350 seasons 8 WAR seasons should count for something... shouldn't they. Eyeballing it Olerud has more lifetime fWAR and better peak seasons then Belle, Mattingly, McGriff, Murphy. better peak than Palmeiro. Nothing too much better to talk about. I will concede it's not just Cito's fault. Though I think Olerud's career would look a lot of better with the missing 600 PAs. Olerud, like Mattingly and Dale Murphy also fizzled out a bit early. No good seasons after 33. Palmeiro and McGriff both had several good seasons after 33.
  12. Olerud363
    Yeah He only caught 80 games last year so it would be nice to see that bumped up a bit to get the other guys more rest.
  13. Olerud363
    It wouldn't be hard to put in body type in projections. The projection just takes every player in the history of baseball, and uses their stats to model how players develop. You can just as easily put height and weight in it, as you could age or hr rate. Not sure if the publicly available projections use height and weight or not.... I am sure each teams proprietary ones do. So will be hard to rip them off, by sending them Kirk, cuz if fat guys are a bad bet, all the teams know. as fans it's fun to look at past players and try to figure out what the truly fat guys do. How many truly fat guys can people remember who were good at 23?? Fielder? Sandoval? Who else. Seems the consensus is fat guys do OK until late 20s, so it doesn't matter for Kirk for a few years.
  14. Olerud363
    Carroll has a surprisingly low projection. Possibly because most of his best work was done in a double a hitters park. According to projections Kirk > Carroll... Moreno > Carroll
  15. Olerud363
    The projection system is just assuming everyone under 27 improves a bit on their lifetime averages, everyone 27-30 stays the same, and after 30 they decline a bit. Vladimir Guerrero JR is projected to hit .290 .359 .535 with 4.8 WAR. I made that up but guarantee you it is like within 1% of his real projection. It's that simple. So these projection systems just assume young guys improve. However the geniuses on this board have the real scoop, as they factor in obesity levels, eye sight improvements and the scouting reports they made from the 500 level.
  16. Olerud363
    5/40 seems reasonable but not sure I'd expect him to be great offensively long term. His career averages are .227 .307 .423. Just because he has good exit velocities doesn't mean the change in performance is a sure bet going forward. I am sure Jorge Soler had great exit velocities in 2019. Not that Soler was terrible going forward, just that he, like almost everyone else that has a big year, returned to his career averages. Sometimes guys like Jose Bautista or EE have a really good 5 year run after a mediocre one, but since the beginning of time the better bet is everybody will return to their career averages no matter age or story. Edit: Check the projections when they are available, they have all the info in their as to how much players like Jansen will regress, doubt anyone on this board can reliably tell who is the exception that won't regress. I think that's why Terminator is making fun of the eye glasses. Half the board thinks Jansen is a .260 .340 .550 hitter now that he has the right glasses now.
  17. Olerud363
    The 80s into the 90s was weird as s*** and guys routinely lost years of their career for little reason. Even Delgado had a super slow progression and wasn't allowed to work through slumps when he did arrive. Look at Delgados 1992 and 93. Spent the entire year raking at a single level, when he would have done 2 levels a year with a modern progression schedule. Wade Boggs did not have his first full season until age 25. Crazy. Spent years in the minors. Then Griffey jr was handed a full time job at 19. Ruben Sierra at 20 I think. It was just weirdly inconsistent. Matt Stairs. I think I remember Bill James going ballistic about him, like he should be playing. This was in the early 90s.
  18. Olerud363
    Never. He ruined the great mid 90s Jays team of young left handed super stars. We complain about the 2022 Toronto Blue Jays having no left handed hitters. The 1996 Blue Jays had 3, Shawn Green, Carlos Delgado and John Olerud. Cito platooned two of them with the ghost of Ruben Sierra and Jacob Brumfield, and Delgado sometimes sat for Juan Samuel. It was insane. All three proved to be able to handle 700 PAs regularly and hit much better in 700 PAs then they did in 500. But they were young people say... Cito needed to teach hitting lessons... no. Bo and Vladdy are handling things at the same age. Olerud's 1998, Green's 2001... very painful. Delgado hitting 470 homeruns when he left 50 in Syracuse... painful. Especially seeing modern baseball where good prospects do 2 levels a year, are brought up young, and allowed to work through slumps, obesity and ground ball problems.
  19. Olerud363
    Matt Stairs peaked at 3 WAR. Second best season was 1.8. Olerud had two 8 WAR seasons. The Olerud thing is a fun conversation because he has more WAR then a few hall of famers, and better peak seasons than many hall of famers. It's also fun because his bad season, where he got benched for Jacob Brumfield is better per game then Matt Stair's best season
  20. Olerud363
    That's a huge change. More like your Aunt wants to be on the town board but loses the vote by a huge margin. She has been a good member of the community but always had bosses who didn't like her and never got visibility. But in retrospect she had a lot of talent, and maybe if you did it over, some very slight differences would have made her more visible over the years and she would have made the town board in a different world.
  21. Olerud363
    Don Mattingly did way better than Olerud in hall of fame voting. Like on the ballot for 15 years. 15% of vote some years despite having 17 less career WAR and an inferior top 5 seasons. Some very modest assumptions. 1) Olerud gets more playing time 2) hit's 2 % better because of better hitting tips, more relaxed, more confidence. You give him more playing time, and just assume he hits a bit better and his career looks way, way better, more like 12 years of a Don Mattingly that takes walks. Olerud career reconstructed, without platooning, worry about Brumfield, and better hitting tips (2% boost) 1990 .270 21 77 1991 .265 23 80 1992 .290 22 90 1993 .370 26 121 1994 .303 14 70 1995 .300 10 75 1996 .290 28 100 1997 .300 24 110 1998 .367 24 105 1999 .300 20 99 2000 .290 15 110 2001 .302 21 95 2002 .300 21 100
  22. Olerud363
    He hit .325 .425 .501 in 3 years full time as a Met facing lefties and righties, not sure of his splits with the Mets, but was probably hitting both lefties and righties better those years. There is a guy called Tom Robson who passed away a year ago, but wrote a hitting book, and Olerud wrote the forward. Olerud politely explains that his numbers were down in Toronto 94-96 because they tried to change his approach. So 600 extra at bats Potentially better numbers because not pressing to hold off Jacob Brumfield and old PT Potentially better numbers if he didn't have the 'pull dat ball' coach's messing with his swing. Potentially he spends his whole career with Toronto So even with all that say it's 62 WAR or something... it's not just the WAR, but the narrative and the counting stats. The other way to look at is this. What if you re-ordered his season so his best 5 were consecutive and instead of getting platooned he got an injury? He'd have more of a Don Mattingly narrative, but better numbers.
  23. Olerud363
    No. Robin Ventura came up. Same age. Left handed. Olerud was a better hitter every year. Ventura got 677 plate appearances more from 90-96. More importantly, many, such as yourself have started to claim that 'pressing' is a thing. Do you not think that one might press when Old Pat Tabler or Jacob Brumfield is taking your playing time? I suspect Olerud would have played a bit better not platooning, his 90-96 years, would have looked more like his 97-2003... around 677 extra at bats, and he'd be more relaxed, better rate stats, better counting stats. Ventura vs Olerud plate appearances 90-97 (Ventura did not have to sit for Brumfield or old Pat Tabler) 565 421 705 541 694 537 669 679 474 453 577 581 674 469 4358 3681 defference=677
  24. Olerud363
    On the topic of first base defense just a reminder that John Olerud was a hall of fame talent.... His defense was gold glove caliber and he did win gold gloves once he stopped sitting for Jacob Brumfield and old Pat Tabler, scored above 0 a few times as a first basemen. The fangraphs numbers are truly outstanding for a first basemen https://www.fangraphs.com/players/john-olerud/1093/stats?position=1B In addition to being a gold glover he was a .300++ hitter and winning (and contending) for batting titles when he wasn't getting only 350 at bats a year because Cito had to sit him for Jacob Brumfield and old Pat Tabler. If Cito wasn't the manager of the Blue Jays Olerud would have been the teams all time franchise player, a George Brett kind.
  25. Olerud363
    Totally. His past performance is small sample size so has high range of outcomes.
×
×
  • Create New...