tyler colvin is not that great

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

When I see Colvin, I think of Francoeur.

I see Rick Ankiel.

 

I see myself in this thread.

 

Great objective analysis. It would make Al Yellon weep.

 

Well, if you want to know why I see similarities in Colvin and Francouer, I could provide those.

 

Colvin through 75 games this year and 180 PA has posted a 121 OPS+. Not bad at all.

 

Francouer in his first 70 games albeit 274 PA, had a 124 OPS+.

 

Francouer's line was 300/336/549/884 (ba/obp/slg/ops) with an 11/58 bb/k ratio.

Colvin's current line 271/313/554/867 with 11/49 bb/k ratio is similar to me.

 

A key difference was that Francoeur put up those numbers at age 21, while Colvin is 24. Also, Francouer maintained that line over a greater number of plate appearances.

 

On the other hand, when we look at what Francouer did over the next few seasons, we see that he was still able to provide some homeruns, but eventually his inability to consistently make contact while not walking provided increasing diminishing returns on his value.

 

I think that unless Colvin makes adjustments that I'm not sure we have any reasonable evidence to think he can make, he's going to have more liabilities than value in the very near future.

 

Just as he appears a bright spot on the horizon, so did Francoer to Brave fans in 2005, but we shouldn't ignore the fact that striking out a ton while walking little is usually an omen of bad things to come.

[Formerly Snayke]

I was complimenting you guys and making fun of Al. You didn't have to go through all that.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I was complimenting you guys and making fun of Al. You didn't have to go through all that.

 

My sarcasm detector went off, and so I provided the rationale behind my thinking.

[Guest]

I know UZR has not stabilized at this point, but if you believe UZR at all, then Tyler Colvin is a top 5 corner OF in the game this season.

 

His UZR/150 is right in line with Justin Upton and Ben Zobrist. His defensive value is mostly due to range but I would say he's better than "a bit above average" defensively.

 

He's got 26 starts as a corner OF. There's a lot more statistical and scouting information suggesting that he's merely a bit above average, moreso at LF than RF.

[ScrubMD]

Tyler Colvin is not a very good corner outfielder. Depending on how much you believe different systems, he's a bit above average at the corners, and below average in CF, at best. He's a low OBP, potentially high IsoP corner OF who will probably flirt with an .800 OPS. He's great to have around as a reserve OF(especially if he continues to not have a large platoon split), but the problem is that if he's playing everyday then the team probably isn't very good.

Not necessarily. He's fine to have out there as a cheap player with mediocre to decent production if you're adding an Adrian Gonzalez at first base & such. He's the kind of player where you take advantage of any cheap production he can provide, then if he doesn't grow as a player, you trade him or non-tender him when his price starts to grow.

 

Kinda like Theriot.

 

This is my thinking. If he can provide cheap, adequate production that allows us to spend more elsewhere, then I'm happy with him.

[jersey cubs fan]

Tyler Colvin is not a very good corner outfielder. Depending on how much you believe different systems, he's a bit above average at the corners, and below average in CF, at best. He's a low OBP, potentially high IsoP corner OF who will probably flirt with an .800 OPS. He's great to have around as a reserve OF(especially if he continues to not have a large platoon split), but the problem is that if he's playing everyday then the team probably isn't very good.

Not necessarily. He's fine to have out there as a cheap player with mediocre to decent production if you're adding an Adrian Gonzalez at first base & such. He's the kind of player where you take advantage of any cheap production he can provide, then if he doesn't grow as a player, you trade him or non-tender him when his price starts to grow.

 

Kinda like Theriot.

 

This is my thinking. If he can provide cheap, adequate production that allows us to spend more elsewhere, then I'm happy with him.

 

I'm happy for cheap adequate production, but I wouldn't be too happy if they penciled him into a corner position. Theriot was adequate for a short period because he played SS. But they also endured a season of crap in his first year, and are paying him millions to suck this year. The danger is holding on too long to somebody who gives you a brief period of cost effective production. Unless Colvin takes a huge step forward, he's not somebody you want as your opening day starting RF, barring an unexpected upgrade in performance at some other position. If you had a Chase Utley at 2B, maybe you can deal with that. But if you're a top payroll club expecting to be among the best teams, willingly opening a season with somebody who is likely to be an out machine starting at a position that needs to produce.

[rawaction]

When I see Colvin, I think of Francoeur.

I see Rick Ankiel.

 

I see myself in this thread.

 

Great objective analysis. It would make Al Yellon weep.

 

Well, if you want to know why I see similarities in Colvin and Francouer, I could provide those.

 

Colvin through 75 games this year and 180 PA has posted a 121 OPS+. Not bad at all.

 

Francouer in his first 70 games albeit 274 PA, had a 124 OPS+.

 

Francouer's line was 300/336/549/884 (ba/obp/slg/ops) with an 11/58 bb/k ratio.

Colvin's current line 271/313/554/867 with 11/49 bb/k ratio is similar to me.

 

A key difference was that Francoeur put up those numbers at age 21, while Colvin is 24. Also, Francouer maintained that line over a greater number of plate appearances.

 

On the other hand, when we look at what Francouer did over the next few seasons, we see that he was still able to provide some homeruns, but eventually his inability to consistently make contact while not walking provided increasing diminishing returns on his value.

 

I think that unless Colvin makes adjustments that I'm not sure we have any reasonable evidence to think he can make, he's going to have more liabilities than value in the very near future.

 

Just as he appears a bright spot on the horizon, so did Francoer to Brave fans in 2005, but we shouldn't ignore the fact that striking out a ton while walking little is usually an omen of bad things to come.

 

Frenchy is a good comparison. I thought of the Ankiel one also. Both are decent. And yes, it looks like Colvin will be capable of a similar career as Francoeur. Because of his lack of ability to take a walk and propensity to K, he'll likely have some seasons of mid .800s OPS's if he is lucky that year and some seasons where he can't break .700.

 

I stil don't think that means he's likely to do anything good or bad. He's most likely to be unpredictable.

[jersey cubs fan]

Frenchy is a good comparison. I thought of the Ankiel one also. Both are decent. And yes, it looks like Colvin will be capable of a similar career as Francoeur. Because of his lack of ability to take a walk and propensity to K, he'll likely have some seasons of mid .800s OPS's if he is lucky that year and some seasons where he can't break .700.

 

I stil don't think that means he's likely to do anything good or bad. He's most likely to be unpredictable.

 

What if we call that predictably inconsistent?

[risico]

Francoeur never struck out as much as Colvin is striking out though. Francoeur was a guy who would swing at everything and always struck out quite a bit, but Colvin's K rate is much higher by comparison.

[lumafia]

When I see Colvin, I think of Francoeur.

I see Rick Ankiel.

 

I see myself in this thread.

 

Great objective analysis. It would make Al Yellon weep.

 

Well, if you want to know why I see similarities in Colvin and Francouer, I could provide those.

 

Colvin through 75 games this year and 180 PA has posted a 121 OPS+. Not bad at all.

 

Francouer in his first 70 games albeit 274 PA, had a 124 OPS+.

 

Francouer's line was 300/336/549/884 (ba/obp/slg/ops) with an 11/58 bb/k ratio.

Colvin's current line 271/313/554/867 with 11/49 bb/k ratio is similar to me.

 

A key difference was that Francoeur put up those numbers at age 21, while Colvin is 24. Also, Francouer maintained that line over a greater number of plate appearances.

 

On the other hand, when we look at what Francouer did over the next few seasons, we see that he was still able to provide some homeruns, but eventually his inability to consistently make contact while not walking provided increasing diminishing returns on his value.

 

I think that unless Colvin makes adjustments that I'm not sure we have any reasonable evidence to think he can make, he's going to have more liabilities than value in the very near future.

 

Just as he appears a bright spot on the horizon, so did Francoer to Brave fans in 2005, but we shouldn't ignore the fact that striking out a ton while walking little is usually an omen of bad things to come.

 

Frenchy is a good comparison. I thought of the Ankiel one also. Both are decent. And yes, it looks like Colvin will be capable of a similar career as Francoeur. Because of his lack of ability to take a walk and propensity to K, he'll likely have some seasons of mid .800s OPS's if he is lucky that year and some seasons where he can't break .700.

 

I stil don't think that means he's likely to do anything good or bad. He's most likely to be unpredictable.

 

 

His numbers also compare favorably to Prince Fielder's numbers in his 1st 183 ab's.

 

Prince Fielder through 183 ab's:

.257 BA, .305 OBP, .437 SLG, .742 OPS

12 doubles, 7 HR, 30 RBI, 14 BB, 45 SO, 3.73 Pitches per Plate Appearance

 

Tyler Colvin through 183 ab's:

.262 BA, .307 OBP, .519 SLG, .826 OPS

9 2B, 1 3B, 12 HR, 34 RBI, 13 BB, 54 SO, 3.71 Pitches per Plate Appearance

[SouthSideRyan]

Great, now somebody's going to take that seriously.

 

I'm low on Colvin, but I still got pissy when I saw him being compared to Francouer...And now I see the follow-up that he doesn't look as good as Francouer. Ugh.

 

SELL SELL SELL

[Guest]

Prince Fielder was also 21 when he made his MLB debut, and had a .297/.398/.524 MiLB line.

[treebird]

Prince Fielder was also 21 when he made his MLB debut, and had a .297/.398/.524 MiLB line.

 

this is illustrative of the point i really, really wanted to make in this thread. if colvin had other things in his background to be excited about, it'd be easy to be thrilled about his future. given his age and track record, though, the main reason for the enthusiasm about him is also the main thing we should be ignoring.

[Geech]

this is illustrative of the point i really, really wanted to make in this thread. if colvin had other things in his background to be excited about, it'd be easy to be thrilled about his future. given his age and track record, though, the main reason for the enthusiasm about him is also the main thing we should be ignoring.

 

IT'S CREEPY HOW HARD YOU ARE TRYING TO DOWNPLAY HIS PERFORMANCE. Stop being so creepy, Tree.

 

By the way, Tyler Colvin is posting a park-adjusted wOBA of .359 by hitting beyond his ability. For comparison purposes, Fukudome's park-adjusted wOBA is .350.

[lumafia]

Prince Fielder was also 21 when he made his MLB debut, and had a .297/.398/.524 MiLB line.

 

Fine. Larry Walker made his ML debut at 23, played his first full season at the age of 24 and his numbers in the first 200 AB's are favorable to Colvin as well.

 

Look guys. I'm not saying Colvin will have careers like Prince or Larry Walker. Most likely, his career won't be close to either. I'm simply saying that it is too early to make a decision on whether or not he is going to maintain his pace, or have a productive career.

 

Considering the direction of our current team, it would be logical to suggest that he get more regular playing time versus RH and LH pitching. The club needs to know what they've got before they make a decision.

[rawaction]

Prince Fielder was also 21 when he made his MLB debut, and had a .297/.398/.524 MiLB line.

 

this is illustrative of the point i really, really wanted to make in this thread. if colvin had other things in his background to be excited about, it'd be easy to be thrilled about his future. given his age and track record, though, the main reason for the enthusiasm about him is also the main thing we should be ignoring.

 

That's a fine point. And I agree with it. But I think it's pretty clear to see how that point would get lost in a thread called "Tyler Colvin is not that great" where you also say, "we should not be particularly excited about him" and "there isn't much reason for enthusiasm here".

[Little Slide Rooter]

Why the [expletive] cant we be somewhat excited about Colvin? Nobodys expecting the next Albert Pujols here. Colvin, Castro, and Soto are all great young players, they're great building blocks, but I dont see any of them as the cornerstones of the future if the Cubs are going to become serious contenders again. These are guys that should be great to have around for fairly cheap so that you can go out and build them around 1 or 2 top of the line guys of the Adrian Gonzalez or Prince Fielder like. What the Cubs truely lack are 3-4 type hitters, and if we got those Castro could be a 2 hitter and Colvin and Soto should end up as very solid 5 and 7 guys with Soriano batting 6th.

[Sammy Sofa]

What the Cubs truely lack are 3-4 type hitters, and if we got those Castro could be a 2 hitter and Colvin and Soto should end up as very solid 5 and 7 guys with Soriano batting 6th.

 

I'm sorry, but what has Colvin done that indicates he should be hitting ahead of Soriano already? People rail on Soriano for his OPS, but my God, he's positively Dunn-like compared to Colvin so far.

 

And you're hindering the Cubs chances to get the "3-4 hitters" they need by already slotting Colvin into a corner OF spot.

[treebird]

Prince Fielder was also 21 when he made his MLB debut, and had a .297/.398/.524 MiLB line.

 

this is illustrative of the point i really, really wanted to make in this thread. if colvin had other things in his background to be excited about, it'd be easy to be thrilled about his future. given his age and track record, though, the main reason for the enthusiasm about him is also the main thing we should be ignoring.

 

That's a fine point. And I agree with it. But I think it's pretty clear to see how that point would get lost in a thread called "Tyler Colvin is not that great" where you also say, "we should not be particularly excited about him" and "there isn't much reason for enthusiasm here".

 

if you had asked me before the season, i would've said tyler colvin was not that great and that there wasn't much reason for enthusiasm. as i said before, if you already loved him, awesome, continue to do so. i didn't and dont.

Edited July 6, 2010 by treebird

[risico]

Why the [expletive] cant we be somewhat excited about Colvin? Nobodys expecting the next Albert Pujols here. Colvin, Castro, and Soto are all great young players, they're great building blocks, but I dont see any of them as the cornerstones of the future if the Cubs are going to become serious contenders again. These are guys that should be great to have around for fairly cheap so that you can go out and build them around 1 or 2 top of the line guys of the Adrian Gonzalez or Prince Fielder like. What the Cubs truely lack are 3-4 type hitters, and if we got those Castro could be a 2 hitter and Colvin and Soto should end up as very solid 5 and 7 guys with Soriano batting 6th.

 

Possibly because he swings and misses almost twice as often as the average MLB hitter. It could also be that he strikes out in about 30% of his at-bats. It could also be that his HR/FB rate is the highest in the majors, higher than those of Jim Thome, Joey Votto, and David Ortiz.

 

First, those swing and miss rates don't bode well for him in the future as a guy who can make consistent contact.

 

Second, I'm inclined to think that his HR/FB rate is unsustainable and that it will fall.

[imb]

im excited about colvin's past-tense, not so much his future tense

[Fred Hornkohl]

im excited about colvin's past-tense, not so much his future tense

 

Oh, I had no idea that Tyler was so tense. Maybe we need to call in a masseuse ???

[Productive Outs]

Why the [expletive] cant we be somewhat excited about Colvin? Nobodys expecting the next Albert Pujols here. Colvin, Castro, and Soto are all great young players, they're great building blocks, but I dont see any of them as the cornerstones of the future if the Cubs are going to become serious contenders again. These are guys that should be great to have around for fairly cheap so that you can go out and build them around 1 or 2 top of the line guys of the Adrian Gonzalez or Prince Fielder like. What the Cubs truely lack are 3-4 type hitters, and if we got those Castro could be a 2 hitter and Colvin and Soto should end up as very solid 5 and 7 guys with Soriano batting 6th.

 

Please don't insult Soto and Castro by grouping them with Colvin.

[SouthSideRyan]

What the Cubs truely lack are 3-4 type hitters, and if we got those Castro could be a 2 hitter and Colvin and Soto should end up as very solid 5 and 7 guys with Soriano batting 6th.

 

I'm sorry, but what has Colvin done that indicates he should be hitting ahead of Soriano already? People rail on Soriano for his OPS, but my God, he's positively Dunn-like compared to Colvin so far.

 

And you're hindering the Cubs chances to get the "3-4 hitters" they need by already slotting Colvin into a corner OF spot.

 

Don't forget, Colvin slots ahead of Soto in the lineup too

[jersey cubs fan]

Why the [expletive] cant we be somewhat excited about Colvin? Nobodys expecting the next Albert Pujols here. Colvin, Castro, and Soto are all great young players, they're great building blocks, but I dont see any of them as the cornerstones of the future if the Cubs are going to become serious contenders again. These are guys that should be great to have around for fairly cheap so that you can go out and build them around 1 or 2 top of the line guys of the Adrian Gonzalez or Prince Fielder like. What the Cubs truely lack are 3-4 type hitters, and if we got those Castro could be a 2 hitter and Colvin and Soto should end up as very solid 5 and 7 guys with Soriano batting 6th.

 

 

That word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

Soto has a track record of success that justifies excitement. Castro has a track record of success at a position where it doesn't take all that much to be really valuable. Colvin is not great. He's not a great building block. It might be great to have him around, although it might just be pretty nice. The point that is being repeatedly made, and repeatedly ignored, is that he is not great. He's an okay piece with some gigantic flaws to his game, the kind of flaws that can really hamstring an otherwise physically capable player. He had a great start to this season, when used sparingly, but the more he has played the more his numbers have dropped, and the more frequently he has made outs. If you want to be excited about him, go ahead, but I think the time for that was about a month ago. Over the past 28 days, his line is .244/.272/.500 with 20 K in just 81 PA, and only 3 BB. Aside from the surprising amount of HR, those are the types of numbers his minor league career more or less predicted. They aren't great.