Jump to content

mavscougars

Polanco a Tiger again?? I'd love to see it

Recommended Posts

I don't really get why a ground out is better than a strikeout. Polanco grounded into 15 DP last year, 6 more than Raburn and Santiago combined.

I don't understand why a ground out to the 1B-2B side of the infield with a runner is at 3B and less than two out would be all that important compared to a strike out...

no, wait, I do.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really get why a ground out is better than a strikeout. Polanco grounded into 15 DP last year, 6 more than Raburn and Santiago combined.
Correct.

Polanco is one of those guys that everyone seemed to "like"... but once people started infatuating him (just read the thread title), it make the likers not like him so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For what it is worth;

If you doubled the amount of AB's with Raburn and Santiago and kept Polanco at the same at bats (42 walks, 44 strike outs in 469 AB's) you'd get this;

Raburn 42 walks, 228 K's in 774 AB's

Santiago 34 walks, 76 K's in 516 AB's

If you double Polanco's weight you get 2008 Renteria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't understand why a ground out to the 1B-2B side of the infield with a runner is at 3B and less than two out would be all that important compared to a strike out...

no, wait, I do.....

this would imply Polanco actually does this consistently, which I assume you think he does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, Raburn had one less RBI in almost 100 less AB, and Santiago had 20 less in 200+ less AB. Those AB totals combined are about what a 2B would get you over a full year, and it's more than Polanco gave you last year. They also hit 14 more HR than Polanco combined.

Polanco is in no way a good player, or even better than anything the Tigers currently have, and there's no way to back that up that he is better with numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He doesn't. Not enough to make it matter. What does this happen, like 3 or 4 times a season maybe? And what's the average, 2 or 3 times? We're talking a run or two over whoever else might be playing there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this would imply Polanco actually does this consistently, which I assume you think he does.

I was also going to say how a ground ball to the 1B side can move a runner from 2B to 3B, or to have confidence to start the runner on a full count or how it's easier to call a hit an run on a hitter who (for 2011) strikes out less than 10% of the time vs. almost 30% for Raburn. But you know what I'm saying.

PS: I'm not fighting for Polanco here to say he's really a great player now (he's not), I'm fighting to say he's not total garbage like it's been inferred here (and no, not that Vonlenska personally said that Polanco is garbage either... lol...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, the only reason that Polanco's 2011 numbers weren't horrific was because of his unreal April. Look at his season

April (114 PA): .398/.447/.524/.972

After (409 PA): .243/.304/.287/.591

Guess which Polanco is more likely to show up in 2012.

And Raburn's a complete stud muffin with bright future assured to us because his splits were what for the second half of the season?!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter if he's total garbage or not.

He isn't much of an upgrade (arguably even a downgrade) from what we already have.

Isn't worth paying much more than replacement level.

Case closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And Raburn's a complete stud muffin with bright future assured to us because his splits were what for the second half of the season?!?

I don't think that was what mmwatkin was trying to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Productive outs are being kept track of by ESPN, but only by team, not by player. We ranked 12. ESPN.com - MLB - Productive Outs

Which shows you just how overrated productive outs are. We still scored a crapload of runs. I'll take a team full of guys that can get on base and/or slug the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It doesn't matter if he's total garbage or not.

He isn't much of an upgrade (arguably even a downgrade) from what we already have.

Isn't worth paying much more than replacement level.

Case closed.

If his name wasn't Placido Polanco, and people were just looking at the numbers, I doubt anyone would want to bring him here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think that was what mmwatkin was trying to say.

Agreed, but it's just unfair to say a guy would have sucked more but for part of a year, but to have other's say Raburn had a good year despite a slow start like I've often heard said.

Sorry mmwatkin's- I didn't mean to put words in your mouth, just to point out a common "benefit of a doubt" that is given to Raburn when the topic of Raburn comes up. (Raburn vs. Polanco specifically)

again, sorry to mmwatkins....

Edited by STLTiger69

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If his name wasn't Placido Polanco, and people were just looking at the numbers, I doubt anyone would want to bring him here.

Someone's going to play 2B for the Tigers in 2012, and frankly, I don't think any of the options that are being discussed are likely to be better than Polanco is likely to be. He's aging, injury-prone, and a complimentary player at best, but every one of the players that are available to play 2B or even 3B have issues, and none are markedly better than Polanco IMHO. Maybe we'll get a plus player for the IF, but I seriously doubt it.

To be clear, I'm not pushing for the guy, it's a moot point anyway because we're not going to trade for Polanco under any circumstances, but the options are all pretty marginal/damaged goods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It doesn't matter if he's total garbage or not.

He isn't much of an upgrade (arguably even a downgrade) from what we already have.

Isn't worth paying much more than replacement level.

Case closed.

I will not disagree with you on this...

again, Polanco just isn't garbage, he could help other teams is what I'll go with....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And Raburn's a complete stud muffin with bright future assured to us because his splits were what for the second half of the season?!?

Sorry, I will take 4 months of productivity from Raburn compared to 1 month from Polanco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also bear in mind that SLG is a stat based on total bases. A player who gets more total bases than another player is going to have a higher SLG and then you add SLG to OBP to get OPS.

And in general the more total bases you get, the more runs you tend to score, provided a similar OBP. That is how it works and why SLG is important.

I'm not making excuses for Polanco, he does have less power but SLG and OPS tend to favor players who get more total bases overall than singles hitters who don't get a lot of extra base hits and who walk a lot.

3 home runs in 20 at bats = 12 total bases for a .150 BA

10 hits in 20 at bats = 10 total bases for a .500 BA

You know where I'm going....

Well, if a guy went 10 for 20 with no walks or XBH, his line would be 0.500 / 0.500 / 0.500, or an OPS of 1.000.

If the other went 3 for 20 with no walks but the 3 hits were home runs, then that guy's batting line would be 0.120 / 0.120 / 0.600 for an OPS of 0.720.

So the first guy is quite a bit more valuable because of a much higher OBP. I don't know what that has to do with Polanco or some hypothetical analogue, because nobody hits like this for a season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed, but it's just unfair to say a guy would have sucked more but for part of a year, but to have other's say Raburn had a good year despite a slow start like I've often heard said.

...

Just because people point out that Raburn had a better year than Delmon Young does not mean they think he had a good year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Polanco will be 36 last year, was not any good despite playing in a very good hitters park, and has not played 2nd base since he left Detroit. I'm not sure what about him is supposed to be interesting really, other than that he played for the Tigers and was also not very good his last season with them.

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.


Motown Sports Blog



×
×
  • Create New...