Jump to content

cruzer1

When is Boesch not a fluke?

Recommended Posts


yes..he already hits LHP a lot better than Luke Scott ever has or will.

The kid has one thing you can never judge until you watch a player over a period of time..aptitude, he makes in game adjustments, I love that about him.

+1 Correct!!This is one of those innate intangible qualities that is hard to measure but certainly should be leveraged into an evaluation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luke Scott does not hit lefties that poorly and does not have a particularly large split:

OPS vs RHP .863

OPS vs. LHP .796

I'm not saying I think that's what Boesch will do. I just wouldn't put Scott on a list of players who flamed out. If he didn't play against the Tigers, he'd find other teams to punish with his random surges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Luke Scott does not hit lefties that poorly and does not have a particularly large split:

OPS vs RHP .863

OPS vs. LHP .796

I'm not saying I think that's what Boesch will do. I just wouldn't put Scott on a list of players who flamed out. If he didn't play against the Tigers, he'd find other teams to punish with his random surges.

agreed Scott hasn't flamed out..his walk rate is suppressed versus lefites and they never really seem to play him much..although his performace against them, is typically better than a platoon player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just went back again and watched some Boesch highlights on the website. Stats and sabrs and all that junk out the window....the guy is just fun to watch.

hope he keeps it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to throw Boesch's stats out the window because his .342 BA, .593 slugging average and .426 wOBA are all beautiful things to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, which is why I said to ignore the text. The point was merely that their have been quite a few guys who emerged based on power and then fell off, which ties into the 'it takes longer for power numbers to stabilize and mean something' comments.

I'm certainly not saying Boesch is doomed to become Brian Daubach.

Bryan Smith was just exploring a new way to analyze players who exceed expectations. It's a work in progress as is a lot of research. The article wasn't garbage but I wouldn't make any strong conclusions from it either. It was a stepping stone analysis rather than a definitive one.

Sure that is all fine and good, but couldn't this type of analysis be applied to nearly any player in any circumstance? Sure there are a handful of left-handed player who were unknowns that had one good year and then fell off but I'm sure there is also quite a few players who were top 100 prospects and did well and then fell off, so what? He uses a sample size of 18 players, what if those players who did well and fell off did so strictly out of chance?

I just personally don't see how any type of conclusion as to whether or not Boesch's hot start will last could be drawn based on 18 players. Maybe its just me but I don't see how an article that essentially says...

"Well, I looked up players who kind-of, sort-of had a half-season that resembles Clovin and Boesch's and most of those players flamed out. I have no idea why they flamed out but for some reason they did and as such Boesch and Clovin might also flame out, but at the same time they might not.

P.S.

One of the players on my list of 18 happened to have a season in AA that was eerily similar to Boesch's and he fell off the map...I bet you that means Boesch might fall off the map too."

provides any insight into Boesch and Clovin "going forward."

Just to be clear, I don't necessarily disagree with him. I doubt that Boesch will be able to sustain Cabrera-esque numbers over his career, but I fail to see how the 18 players mentioned in the article have any consequence or foresight into Boesch's future, as such I don't find the article to be worthwhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure that is all fine and good, but couldn't this type of analysis be applied to nearly any player in any circumstance? Sure there are a handful of left-handed player who were unknowns that had one good year and then fell off but I'm sure there is also quite a few players who were top 100 prospects and did well and then fell off, so what? He uses a sample size of 18 players, what if those players who did well and fell off did so strictly out of chance?

I just personally don't see how any type of conclusion as to whether or not Boesch's hot start will last could be drawn based on 18 players. Maybe its just me but I don't see how an article that essentially says...

"Well, I looked up players who kind-of, sort-of had a half-season that resembles Clovin and Boesch's and most of those players flamed out. I have no idea why they flamed out but for some reason they did and as such Boesch and Clovin might also flame out, but at the same time they might not.

P.S.

One of the players on my list of 18 happened to have a season in AA that was eerily similar to Boesch's and he fell off the map...I bet you that means Boesch might fall off the map too."

provides any insight into Boesch and Clovin "going forward."

Just to be clear, I don't necessarily disagree with him. I doubt that Boesch will be able to sustain Cabrera-esque numbers over his career, but I fail to see how the 18 players mentioned in the article have any consequence or foresight into Boesch's future, as such I don't find the article to be worthwhile.

I think the author was actually hoping to find similar players that did do well despite low expectations. If he did, then it would have been interesting because it would have exposed a flaw in the projection system which could then be fixed. I find efforts such as that to be useful because they can lead to good discussion and further analysis. I'm a researcher by trade though, so I'm probably in the minority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As banal as this observation might be, I think the way Boesch hits after the All-Star layoff will be very critical. He has been in a day-in day-out groove for two and a half months, and a four-day rest can really mess with that.

If he picks up where he left off--or only regresses from phenomenal to really good--then that is really telling empirical evidence regarding his mental makeup and ability to focus.

I can't see him hitting like Ted Williams the rest of his career, and if that makes him a "fluke" then that's setting the bar pretty high. I think Craig Monroe with more power and and a better OBP would be quite enough to say he's not a fluke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the author was actually hoping to find similar players that did do well despite low expectations. If he did, then it would have been interesting because it would have exposed a flaw in the projection system which could then be fixed. I find efforts such as that to be useful because they can lead to good discussion and further analysis. I'm a researcher by trade though, so I'm probably in the minority.

I can agree with all of this, if he was able to find a flaw in the projection system that would have made for a very interesting and useful article. Unfortunately, it looks as if he really didn't and at least in my opinion the article just didn't do anything for me.

If you enjoyed it, that's all fine and good...and I won't criticize you or anyone else for it; I just simply got nothing out of it and think it failed to provide any insight into Boesch or Cloving "going forward." :happy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the RCMB, it's become popular to call me out because I said that Boesch's upside was Luke Scott when he got called up, and that I still think Boesch will settle into a similar player as Luke Scott. First I get asked why I can't figure out that Boesch is going to be a big league player, and then I get ridiculed for not knowing that he was going to post a 1 OPS in his first 250 at bats, and then I get told that Boesch is going to hit in the neighborhood of .280/.330/.520 in the years ahead.

And then I just get really confused....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can agree with all of this, if he was able to find a flaw in the projection system that would have made for a very interesting and useful article. Unfortunately, it looks as if he really didn't and at least in my opinion the article just didn't do anything for me.

If you enjoyed it, that's all fine and good...and I won't criticize you or anyone else for it; I just simply got nothing out of it and think it failed to provide any insight into Boesch or Cloving "going forward." :happy:

I understand the issues people have with the article, but I think people expect too much out of fangraphs sometimes. If every article had to be some mindblowing insight that no one else could figure out, then there would be like 5 articles on that site.

It's just taking a premise that everyone agrees with anyway (that Boesch will not hit this way forever) and just lists some players that were similar in the past. An interesting historical comparison, nothing more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the author was actually hoping to find similar players that did do well despite low expectations. If he did, then it would have been interesting because it would have exposed a flaw in the projection system which could then be fixed. I find efforts such as that to be useful because they can lead to good discussion and further analysis. I'm a researcher by trade though, so I'm probably in the minority.
I understand the issues people have with the article, but I think people expect too much out of fangraphs sometimes. If every article had to be some mindblowing insight that no one else could figure out, then there would be like 5 articles on that site.

It's just taking a premise that everyone agrees with anyway (that Boesch will not hit this way forever) and just lists some players that were similar in the past. An interesting historical comparison, nothing more.

Bingo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a metric that measures line drives and hard grounders VS fly balls and weak grounders?

BB seems to always hit the ball hard on a line or on the ground. Even the home runs tend to be lasers and not arching fly balls. I think this would explain the high BABIP.

Also....wasn't there an article during spring training that mentioned that he has changed his approach and/or swing since the end of last year (or mid year last year)? This could explain why he appears to be a different hitter.

I expect that he will not keep this pace up, but I see no reason for him to regress immensely considering the way he has played for an extended amount of time. No one can be this lucky this long...can they?? :) Even the great Chris Shelton was done after a few weeks:shocked:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand the issues people have with the article, but I think people expect too much out of fangraphs sometimes. If every article had to be some mindblowing insight that no one else could figure out, then there would be like 5 articles on that site.

It's just taking a premise that everyone agrees with anyway (that Boesch will not hit this way forever) and just lists some players that were similar in the past. An interesting historical comparison, nothing more.

Maybe this does accurately sum up the problem I had with the article. It was entitled "Clovin and Boesch Going Forward" and as such I expected more than the author simply stating that a few rookies who had a season somewhat close to the players didn't pan out for some unknown reason and because of such Boesch would most likely follow their path. He only used one stat (ISO), IIRC he didn't say anything about any other stats nor did he show if those stats were the cause for their decline.

If the author would have showed that certain statistics like BB%, K%, BABIP, ISO, etc. lead to success or failure and that Boesch would have to maintain a certain baseline to have a successful career I thought it would have been fantastic and interesting. Instead it was just a shallow article that doesn't bring much to the table in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe this does accurately sum up the problem I had with the article. It was entitled "Clovin and Boesch Going Forward" and as such I expected more than the author simply stating that a few rookies who had a season somewhat close to the players didn't pan out for some unknown reason and because of such Boesch would most likely follow their path. He only used one stat (ISO), IIRC he didn't say anything about any other stats nor did he show if those stats were the cause for their decline.

If the author would have showed that certain statistics like BB%, K%, BABIP, ISO, etc. lead to success or failure and that Boesch would have to maintain a certain baseline to have a successful career I thought it would have been fantastic and interesting. Instead it was just a shallow article that doesn't bring much to the table in my opinion.

I agree it was a poorly-titled article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree it was a poorly-titled article.

Well at least we can agree on one thing. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So if he IS a fluke

is he a keeper??

pawsboeschsm.gif

my AAT is doing well

Sir, your powers of .gif-making are legendary even in Hell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ZL1RguQL4jQ

I was in there just the other day.

There were all these kids playing video games

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bl4dEAtxo0M&hl=en_US&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bl4dEAtxo0M&hl=en_US&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

devilTitus.gif

like Nils Lofgren said,

Edited by Titus Tiger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Paul Giamatti is in this Dio video...I'm going to have to look that up...sure looked like him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...