Cubs v. Cards Leadoff men

[indifferent]

Although not a big fan of comparing position players of different teams, I think how the leadoff men will fare between the two is an interesting discussion.

 

I predict Pierre>Eckstein this year in the role. Of course, this depends on the no. 2 hitter for both teams which is seemingly still up in the air for both. Eckstein posted his best numbers last year with Walker and Edmonds batting behind him (go figure, and with Pujols at no. 3). Any other Cards hitters batting no. 2 which included Taguchi, Grudz, and JRod and his numbers suffered. Cards are not going to have that luxury on the other hand this year, losing both Walker and Sanders, requiring a need for more power lower in the lineup. JimEd will move to the five spot which will bode well for his numbers. This will necessitate Spivey or Bigbie/JRod/So in the two spot.

 

Unless Perez is batting 2nd which by all accounts seems unlikely, even if Walker is gone, Pierre will pick up his performance to closer to his career numbers.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I agree that Pierre should out perform Eckstein. I'm a big proponent of looking at three-year averages.

 

Pierre from 2003-2005 posted a line of 303/354/378. He averaged 56 SB's over the past three years at a 73% success rate. If he comes close to those numbers, the Cubs will have a successful lead-off hitter.

 

Eckstein's three year line is 276/344/354. He's averaged 14 SB's per year at a 70% success rate. The stolen base really isn't part of his game like it is for Pierre, and I didn't think I could find anyone with less power than Pierre, but I did.

 

Pierre is definitely the better, but I think the other spots in the line-up still give the Cardinals a better offense. But if all we're doing is comparing lead-off options, the Cubs have the edge.

[Chief_Cardinal]

Man its going to be hard not being a Juan Pierre fan this year! :lol: J/K I like Eck but I would take Pierre anyday over Eck...mainly due to the speed factor

[dalgreen]

Eckstein still scares me as a leadoff hitter. Yes, he'll continue to get on base, but just as important he will continue to make pitchers work. I hope Pierre can do the same. I already see him seeing at least 8-10 pitches each at-bat versus Zambrano and Prior.

[goonys evil twin]

I think it's a pretty safe bet that Pierre will have a better line than Eckstein. But with the possibility of Jones or Perez accounting for a significant amount of the 2 hole at bats behind him, I'm thinking Juan could take a dip in the runs scored category. Assuming STL goes with Taguchi/Spivey (both similar to Jones) and Lee regresses enough so that Pujols again outperforms, Eckstein could score more runs than Pierre even if Juan outperforms on his own. If Dusty somehow decides to split the RLR up as much as possible, and goes Pierre, Perez, Lee, Jones, Ramirez, then I would be pretty certain Eckstein will score more (and STL will win more).

[K-Town]

Eckstein had 28 Win Shares last year, comared to 14 for Pierre.

 

Eckstein's VORP was 40.1, compared to Pierre's 20.6.

 

 

 

That's not to say that Pierre won't rebound, and be just as good as Pierre, but there's a pretty healthy gap to close between the two, and it seems like a real stretch to say "it's a pretty safe bet that Pierre will have a better line than Eckstein" in 2006.

[TrueBlueCubFan]

Eckstein had 28 Win Shares last year, comared to 14 for Pierre.

 

Eckstein's VORP was 40.1, compared to Pierre's 20.6.

 

 

 

That's not to say that Pierre won't rebound, and be just as good as Pierre, but there's a pretty healthy gap to close between the two, and it seems like a real stretch to say "it's a pretty safe bet that Pierre will have a better line than Eckstein" in 2006.

 

Your comparing Pierre's worst year to Eckstein's best

[Wild_Cubs04]

Eckstein had 28 Win Shares last year, comared to 14 for Pierre.

 

Eckstein's VORP was 40.1, compared to Pierre's 20.6.

 

 

 

That's not to say that Pierre won't rebound, and be just as good as Pierre, but there's a pretty healthy gap to close between the two, and it seems like a real stretch to say "it's a pretty safe bet that Pierre will have a better line than Eckstein" in 2006.

 

Didn't Eckstein perform above and beyond his "norms" last year?

[K-Town]

Eckstein had 28 Win Shares last year, comared to 14 for Pierre.

 

Eckstein's VORP was 40.1, compared to Pierre's 20.6.

 

 

 

That's not to say that Pierre won't rebound, and be just as good as Pierre, but there's a pretty healthy gap to close between the two, and it seems like a real stretch to say "it's a pretty safe bet that Pierre will have a better line than Eckstein" in 2006.

 

Your comparing Pierre's worst year to Eckstein's best

 

Actually, Pierre had a pretty typical year.

 

2005 OPS+ = 84

Career OPS+ = 87

 

2005 steals = 57

Career average = 52

 

 

Eckstein definitely had his best year ever, but I'm guessing there are probably reasons for it. The Cards' mentality of not being afraid to take a walk seemed to rub off a little. Furthermore, Eckstein will still have a very good offense around him, so that should help him keep his numbers in good shape.

 

Like I said, I expect the gap between the two to close, and Pierre MIGHT even end up having the better year, but there's not much reason to assume that he'll be much better, or even as good as Eckstein.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

 

Actually, Pierre had a pretty typical year.

 

2005 OPS+ = 84

Career OPS+ = 87

 

2005 steals = 57

Career average = 52

 

 

Eckstein definitely had his best year ever, but I'm guessing there are probably reasons for it. The Cards' mentality of not being afraid to take a walk seemed to rub off a little. Furthermore, Eckstein will still have a very good offense around him, so that should help him keep his numbers in good shape.

 

Like I said, I expect the gap between the two to close, and Pierre MIGHT even end up having the better year, but there's not much reason to assume that he'll be much better, or even as good as Eckstein.

 

I think there's lots of reasons to assume he'll be as good and likely better. Three-year averages are often a better indicator than looking at just one season. When looking at the three-year averages of Eckstein and Pierre, you'll notice that Pierre has a higher average 303 to 276, a higher OBP 354 to 344, and a higher SLG 378 to 354. In addition, Pierre adds a threat on the bases that Eckstien doesn't. Assuming both players perform closer to their three year average which is just, if not more likely than to focus on one season, then there isn't one area in which Eckstein outperforms Pierre.

[K-Town]

 

Actually, Pierre had a pretty typical year.

 

2005 OPS+ = 84

Career OPS+ = 87

 

2005 steals = 57

Career average = 52

 

 

Eckstein definitely had his best year ever, but I'm guessing there are probably reasons for it. The Cards' mentality of not being afraid to take a walk seemed to rub off a little. Furthermore, Eckstein will still have a very good offense around him, so that should help him keep his numbers in good shape.

 

Like I said, I expect the gap between the two to close, and Pierre MIGHT even end up having the better year, but there's not much reason to assume that he'll be much better, or even as good as Eckstein.

 

I think there's lots of reasons to assume he'll be as good and likely better. Three-year averages are often a better indicator than looking at just one season. When looking at the three-year averages of Eckstein and Pierre, you'll notice that Pierre has a higher average 303 to 276, a higher OBP 354 to 344, and a higher SLG 378 to 354. In addition, Pierre adds a threat on the bases that Eckstien doesn't. Assuming both players perform closer to their three year average which is just, if not more likely than to focus on one season, then there isn't one area in which Eckstein outperforms Pierre.

 

Considering that Pierre pretty much performed right around his career averages last year, I wouldn't expect much improvement.

 

Eckestein? Hard to say. Some might say that the change of scenery and a better approach has helped him. Others might say he got "lucky". :wink:

 

Could go either way, in my opinion.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

 

Actually, Pierre had a pretty typical year.

 

2005 OPS+ = 84

Career OPS+ = 87

 

2005 steals = 57

Career average = 52

 

 

Eckstein definitely had his best year ever, but I'm guessing there are probably reasons for it. The Cards' mentality of not being afraid to take a walk seemed to rub off a little. Furthermore, Eckstein will still have a very good offense around him, so that should help him keep his numbers in good shape.

 

Like I said, I expect the gap between the two to close, and Pierre MIGHT even end up having the better year, but there's not much reason to assume that he'll be much better, or even as good as Eckstein.

 

I think there's lots of reasons to assume he'll be as good and likely better. Three-year averages are often a better indicator than looking at just one season. When looking at the three-year averages of Eckstein and Pierre, you'll notice that Pierre has a higher average 303 to 276, a higher OBP 354 to 344, and a higher SLG 378 to 354. In addition, Pierre adds a threat on the bases that Eckstien doesn't. Assuming both players perform closer to their three year average which is just, if not more likely than to focus on one season, then there isn't one area in which Eckstein outperforms Pierre.

 

Considering that Pierre pretty much performed right around his career averages last year, I wouldn't expect much improvement.

 

Eckestein? Hard to say. Some might say that the change of scenery and a better approach has helped him. Others might say he got "lucky". :wink:

 

Could go either way, in my opinion.

 

Pierre performed lower than his career average in all three significant metrics. His BA was 19 points below his career, hs OBP was 29 points below career average, and his SLP was 21 points below career average.

 

On the other end of the spectrum, Eckstein's BA was 18 points above average, OBP 24 points above average, and SLP 63 points. You can attribute it to change of scenery or that he had a career year and that he'll revert back to the mean.

 

I've found that while players do imrove and and often can enter a whole new plane of performance, that three-year averages if adjusted for trends, age, etc are often the truest indicators. The three-year averages of both playes indicate that Pierre will be better.

[K-Town]

Pierre performed lower than his career average in all three significant metrics. His BA was 19 points below his career, hs OBP was 29 points below career average, and his SLP was 21 points below career average.

 

On the other end of the spectrum, Eckstein's BA was 18 points above average, OBP 24 points above average, and SLP 63 points. You can attribute it to change of scenery or that he had a career year and that he'll revert back to the mean.

 

I've found that while players do imrove and and often can enter a whole new plane of performance, that three-year averages if adjusted for trends, age, etc are often the truest indicators. The three-year averages of both playes indicate that Pierre will be better.

 

Pierre's career numbers are skewed because he played in Colorado.

 

That's why I used OPS+ numbers, which reflect park factors. Pierre performed pretty much as last year as he's performed (on average) for his career.

 

"Three year averages" are good, but they're not everything. Like I said, I wouldn't be surprised if Pierre is as good as Eckstein, but to imply that it's a "no brainer" that he'll probably be better is blind reasoning, in my opinion.

[CubinNY]

Pierre performed lower than his career average in all three significant metrics. His BA was 19 points below his career, hs OBP was 29 points below career average, and his SLP was 21 points below career average.

 

On the other end of the spectrum, Eckstein's BA was 18 points above average, OBP 24 points above average, and SLP 63 points. You can attribute it to change of scenery or that he had a career year and that he'll revert back to the mean.

 

I've found that while players do imrove and and often can enter a whole new plane of performance, that three-year averages if adjusted for trends, age, etc are often the truest indicators. The three-year averages of both playes indicate that Pierre will be better.

 

Pierre's career numbers are skewed because he played in Colorado.

 

That's why I used OPS+ numbers, which reflect park factors. Pierre performed pretty much as last year as he's performed (on average) for his career.

 

"Three year averages" are good, but they're not everything. Like I said, I wouldn't be surprised if Pierre is as good as Eckstein, but to imply that it's a "no brainer" that he'll probably be better is blind reasoning, in my opinion.

 

Pierre's numbers are hardley affected by playing in Coors field. That is a good one. He is a slap hitter. He rarely hits triples even in Pro Player and Coors.

 

I wish Slappy wasn't on the Cubs but I'd take him over ADHD boy any day as a leadoff hitter.

[K-Town]

Pierre performed lower than his career average in all three significant metrics. His BA was 19 points below his career, hs OBP was 29 points below career average, and his SLP was 21 points below career average.

 

On the other end of the spectrum, Eckstein's BA was 18 points above average, OBP 24 points above average, and SLP 63 points. You can attribute it to change of scenery or that he had a career year and that he'll revert back to the mean.

 

I've found that while players do imrove and and often can enter a whole new plane of performance, that three-year averages if adjusted for trends, age, etc are often the truest indicators. The three-year averages of both playes indicate that Pierre will be better.

 

Pierre's career numbers are skewed because he played in Colorado.

 

That's why I used OPS+ numbers, which reflect park factors. Pierre performed pretty much as last year as he's performed (on average) for his career.

 

"Three year averages" are good, but they're not everything. Like I said, I wouldn't be surprised if Pierre is as good as Eckstein, but to imply that it's a "no brainer" that he'll probably be better is blind reasoning, in my opinion.

 

Pierre's numbers are hardley affected by playing in Coors field. That is a good one. He is a slap hitter. He rarely hits triples even in Pro Player and Coors.

 

I wish Slappy wasn't on the Cubs but I'd take him over ADHD boy any day as a leadoff hitter.

 

Even "slap hitters" are benefitted by playing at Coors. The main reason is that breaking pitches don't break, therefore giving hitters a better look at them.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

Pierre performed lower than his career average in all three significant metrics. His BA was 19 points below his career, hs OBP was 29 points below career average, and his SLP was 21 points below career average.

 

On the other end of the spectrum, Eckstein's BA was 18 points above average, OBP 24 points above average, and SLP 63 points. You can attribute it to change of scenery or that he had a career year and that he'll revert back to the mean.

 

I've found that while players do imrove and and often can enter a whole new plane of performance, that three-year averages if adjusted for trends, age, etc are often the truest indicators. The three-year averages of both playes indicate that Pierre will be better.

 

Pierre's career numbers are skewed because he played in Colorado.

 

That's why I used OPS+ numbers, which reflect park factors. Pierre performed pretty much as last year as he's performed (on average) for his career.

 

"Three year averages" are good, but they're not everything. Like I said, I wouldn't be surprised if Pierre is as good as Eckstein, but to imply that it's a "no brainer" that he'll probably be better is blind reasoning, in my opinion.

 

But his last three seasons he played in Pro Player, hardly a hitter's park. And his numbers from last season were considerably lower than the two seasons previously.

 

Last year showed that it is possible for Eckstein to be the better player, but when considering the totality of the evidence and not the most recent samples, I think the case is likely that Pierre will be better.

 

As an aside to prove my point: Who do you suspect will be better in 2006: Pujols or Lee? If we judge strictly on 2005 numbers, they will be about as equal a player as you can get. If we judge along three-year averages, there's no question Pujols will be better. I would agree with that. While I don't expect Lee to regress down to his numbers prior to last year, I in no way expect him to reach 2005 numbers either. I'd expect him to produce somewhere in line with his three-year average.

 

Also, in your assessment of Rolen's ability, how much do you factor in 2005 numbers? Would you say Rolen would perform closer to his career or closer to 2005?

[K-Town]

But his last three seasons he played in Pro Player, hardly a hitter's park. And his numbers from last season were considerably lower than the two seasons previously.

 

Last year showed that it is possible for Eckstein to be the better player, but when considering the totality of the evidence and not the most recent samples, I think the case is likely that Pierre will be better.

 

As an aside to prove my point: Who do you suspect will be better in 2006: Pujols or Lee? If we judge strictly on 2005 numbers, they will be about as equal a player as you can get. If we judge along three-year averages, there's no question Pujols will be better. I would agree with that. While I don't expect Lee to regress down to his numbers prior to last year, I in no way expect him to reach 2005 numbers either. I'd expect him to produce somewhere in line with his three-year average.

 

Also, in your assessment of Rolen's ability, how much do you factor in 2005 numbers? Would you say Rolen would perform closer to his career or closer to 2005?

 

I totally understand where you're coming from. I don't believe that last year is the only thing that should be considered.

 

Career OPS+

Eckstein: 89

Pierre: 87

 

 

Last year's OPS+

Eckstein: 98

Pierre: 84

 

 

Long-term and short-term, Eckstein has been better, from that standpoint. Of course, that doesn't include Pierre's stolen base factor, which is relevant. I guess it depends on what you want out of your lead-off hitter. Personally (as a Cardinal fan) I don't necessarily want my lead-off hitter stealing a base, because then Pujols may not see any pitches.

 

There are lots of ways to look at it. Judging from the past, I'd say that it's a toss-up as to who will be the better lead-off hitter in 2006.

 

 

One thing's for sure....... for the money I'll take Eckstein, but that's an entirely different issue.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

When discussing the leadoff spot, OPS does nothing for me. I could care less if Slappy's SLG isn't the greatest if his OBP is 360 or better. Sure beats the snot out of what we've had.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Career numbers are a bit deceiving because Pierre spent 3 years in Colorado, but OPS punishes him for that despite not having the power to take advantage. His OPS+ as a Marlin(a.k.a the last 3 years): 98, 107, 84; average of 96. Eckstein's over that timeframe: 79, 77, 98; average of 84. Neither are very good offensive players who rely on good fortune with balls in play to post good OBP numbers.

[K-Town]

I just find it hard to believe that Eckstein's numbers last year were entirely a fluke. I have to believe that having Pujols and Edmonds looming behind him meant that he saw a few more good pitches.

 

Like I said, there are alot of different ways to look at it, and I don't think you can pick a clear-cut favorite, at this point.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I just find it hard to believe that Eckstein's numbers last year were entirely a fluke. I have to believe that having Pujols and Edmonds looming behind him meant that he saw a few more good pitches.

 

Like I said, there are alot of different ways to look at it, and I don't think you can pick a clear-cut favorite, at this point.

 

Players have "peak" or "fluke" seasons quite often. It's not as much a rarety as you would think. Do I think Eckstein will drop all the way to his career norms? Maybe not, but i'd think the safer bet is that he'll perform closer to his career norms than his 2005 numbers.

[The Voice of Reason]

I just find it hard to believe that Eckstein's numbers last year were entirely a fluke. I have to believe that having Pujols and Edmonds looming behind him meant that he saw a few more good pitches.

 

Like I said, there are alot of different ways to look at it, and I don't think you can pick a clear-cut favorite, at this point.

 

Players have "peak" or "fluke" seasons quite often. It's not as much a rarety as you would think. Do I think Eckstein will drop all the way to his career norms? Maybe not, but i'd think the safer bet is that he'll perform closer to his career norms than his 2005 numbers.

 

Vance - Do you have the same feeling about D. Lee?

[K-Town]

I just find it hard to believe that Eckstein's numbers last year were entirely a fluke. I have to believe that having Pujols and Edmonds looming behind him meant that he saw a few more good pitches.

 

Like I said, there are alot of different ways to look at it, and I don't think you can pick a clear-cut favorite, at this point.

 

Players have "peak" or "fluke" seasons quite often. It's not as much a rarety as you would think. Do I think Eckstein will drop all the way to his career norms? Maybe not, but i'd think the safer bet is that he'll perform closer to his career norms than his 2005 numbers.

 

Right, but when Womack caught fire hitting in front of guys like Pujols and Edmonds, and Eckstein caught fire hitting in front of guys like Pujols and Eckstein, and even Abraham Nunez caught fire hitting in front of guys like Pujols and Edmonds, you have to begin to wonder if there's a reason for it.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I just find it hard to believe that Eckstein's numbers last year were entirely a fluke. I have to believe that having Pujols and Edmonds looming behind him meant that he saw a few more good pitches.

 

Like I said, there are alot of different ways to look at it, and I don't think you can pick a clear-cut favorite, at this point.

 

Players have "peak" or "fluke" seasons quite often. It's not as much a rarety as you would think. Do I think Eckstein will drop all the way to his career norms? Maybe not, but i'd think the safer bet is that he'll perform closer to his career norms than his 2005 numbers.

 

Vance - Do you have the same feeling about D. Lee?

 

I figure there will be some regression, yes. I'd guess he will also perform closer to his three-year average than he will his 2005 numbers.

[ManEatingTarp]

I think it's all about adjustments. Lee altered his stance last year and it seemed that his second half went from scorching to just sizzling.

He's the real deal, but I would expect slightly less this year. Of course Piere could change that with more rbi chances...