Tigers sign Prince - 9/214 - Heyman

[SouthSideRyan]

Prince Fielder, 2008 baserunning

 

9 out on the basepaths

2 caught stealings

1st to third on a single: 4 for 38

1st to home on a double: 5 for 13

2nd to home on a single: 4 for 12

 

That's some pretty darn bad baserunning. I don't know if it's worth -9 runs or whatever, but it's awful.

 

Is that saying he was only on 2nd 12 times when a single was hit. That seems insanely low to me.

 

 

It looks like he tried scoring on a single while at 2B 12 times. He may have gone from 2B to 3B 20 times on a single (made up number based on that not being posted).

 

Reading it like that would say Fielder made 63 outs on the basepaths.

[ConstableRabbit]

Is that saying he was only on 2nd 12 times when a single was hit. That seems insanely low to me.

no.

 

It should have been 14, but otherwise, yes.

Oh. Successful attempts/total attempts would be a lot more useful.

 

There are certainly situations where it wouldn't make sense to go second to home on a single, for example. Those shouldn't count against a player's baserunning acumen.

 

Sorry, Mariner's Revenge.

 

ETA: but yes, that would make his baserunning stats truly historically awful.

[davearm2]

Prince Fielder, 2008 baserunning

 

9 out on the basepaths

2 caught stealings

1st to third on a single: 4 for 38

1st to home on a double: 5 for 13

2nd to home on a single: 4 for 12

 

That's some pretty darn bad baserunning. I don't know if it's worth -9 runs or whatever, but it's awful.

 

Is that saying he was only on 2nd 12 times when a single was hit. That seems insanely low to me.

 

 

It looks like he tried scoring on a single while at 2B 12 times. He may have gone from 2B to 3B 20 times on a single (made up number based on that not being posted).

That can't be the correct interpretation. Otherwise he's thrown out at home the other 8 times. That clearly isn't right.

[treebird]

Prince Fielder, 2008 baserunning

 

9 out on the basepaths

2 caught stealings

1st to third on a single: 4 for 38

1st to home on a double: 5 for 13

2nd to home on a single: 4 for 12

 

That's some pretty darn bad baserunning. I don't know if it's worth -9 runs or whatever, but it's awful.

 

Is that saying he was only on 2nd 12 times when a single was hit. That seems insanely low to me.

 

 

It looks like he tried scoring on a single while at 2B 12 times. He may have gone from 2B to 3B 20 times on a single (made up number based on that not being posted).

 

Reading it like that would say Fielder made 63 outs on the basepaths.

 

if you read it that way fielder's adjust obp is like .030. i'm pretty sure he didn't get thrown out at home 16 freaking times last year.

[MSG T]

Prince Fielder, 2008 baserunning

 

9 out on the basepaths

2 caught stealings

1st to third on a single: 4 for 38

1st to home on a double: 5 for 13

2nd to home on a single: 4 for 12

 

That's some pretty darn bad baserunning. I don't know if it's worth -9 runs or whatever, but it's awful.

 

Is that saying he was only on 2nd 12 times when a single was hit. That seems insanely low to me.

 

 

It looks like he tried scoring on a single while at 2B 12 times. He may have gone from 2B to 3B 20 times on a single (made up number based on that not being posted).

That can't be the correct interpretation. Otherwise he's thrown out at home the other 8 times. That clearly isn't right.

 

 

??? What's not correct? I was just throwing a number out there, but if he was on 2B 32 times when a single was hit and stopped at 3B 20 of those times, would that not account for the 12 times (or 14 on the edit provided) he tried scoring? And that he was successful 4 of those times he tried to score?

 

Heck, he could have stayed at second 20 times on a single also. Those numbers weren't given, just the number of times he went from 2B to home on a single. How many times did he stop at 3B? How many times did he stay at 2B?

[NonProfitCow]

Last year he went 2nd to home 10/24, stopped at 3rd 13/24 and was thrown out once.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

??? What's not correct? I was just throwing a number out there, but if he was on 2B 32 times when a single was hit and stopped at 3B 20 of those times, would that not account for the 12 times (or 14 on the edit provided) he tried scoring? And that he was successful 4 of those times he tried to score?

 

Heck, he could have stayed at second 20 times on a single also. Those numbers weren't given, just the number of times he went from 2B to home on a single. How many times did he stop at 3B? How many times did he stay at 2B?

 

You are reading this completely incorrectly.

 

He was on second and a single was hit 14 times. That's it. Eight times he stopped at third, four times he scored, twice he was thrown out.

 

It's all right here:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/NL/2008.shtml

[MSG T]

2nd to home on a single: 4 for 12

 

 

OK, but I was basing my comments off of this, which doesn't mention stopping at 3B.

 

 

I realize you edited it later to read 14 times and not 12.

[davearm2]

Prince Fielder, 2008 baserunning

 

9 out on the basepaths

2 caught stealings

1st to third on a single: 4 for 38

1st to home on a double: 5 for 13

2nd to home on a single: 4 for 12

 

That's some pretty darn bad baserunning. I don't know if it's worth -9 runs or whatever, but it's awful.

 

Is that saying he was only on 2nd 12 times when a single was hit. That seems insanely low to me.

 

 

It looks like he tried scoring on a single while at 2B 12 times. He may have gone from 2B to 3B 20 times on a single (made up number based on that not being posted).

That can't be the correct interpretation. Otherwise he's thrown out at home the other 8 times. That clearly isn't right.

 

 

??? What's not correct? I was just throwing a number out there, but if he was on 2B 32 times when a single was hit and stopped at 3B 20 of those times, would that not account for the 12 times (or 14 on the edit provided) he tried scoring? And that he was successful 4 of those times he tried to score?

 

Heck, he could have stayed at second 20 times on a single also. Those numbers weren't given, just the number of times he went from 2B to home on a single. How many times did he stop at 3B? How many times did he stay at 2B?

The implication that he was thrown out at home on a single 8 times out of 14 is not correct, just like I said.

 

But don't listen to me. A bunch of other folks are trying to help you out here too.

[MWV]

Last season, Prince took an extra base in 26% of his opportunities, ranking him 191/209 in MLB (arbitrary cutoff: 400 PA).

An aside: 2 worst players in this sample, at 8% and 11%, respectively, were Konerko and Dunn.

[MSG T]

I got it, but when I see, he went from second to home 4 of 12, that says to me he went to home 12 times and was successful 4 times, thus thrown out 8 times.

[SouthSideRyan]

Prince Fielder, 2008 baserunning

 

9 out on the basepaths

2 caught stealings

1st to third on a single: 4 for 38

1st to home on a double: 5 for 13

2nd to home on a single: 4 for 12

 

That's some pretty darn bad baserunning. I don't know if it's worth -9 runs or whatever, but it's awful.

 

Is that saying he was only on 2nd 12 times when a single was hit. That seems insanely low to me.

 

It looks like he tried scoring on a single while at 2B 12 times. He may have gone from 2B to 3B 20 times on a single (made up number based on that not being posted).

 

Reading it like that would say Fielder made 63 outs on the basepaths.

 

if you read it that way fielder's adjust obp is like .030. i'm pretty sure he didn't get thrown out at home 16 freaking times last year.

 

Prince should really stop trying to go 1st to 3rd. I don't think the 4 extra bases are worth the 34 out tradeoff.

[Old Style]

I wonder if Theo reads his copy when he's taking a dump in that all white bathroom in his new Wrigleyville abode.

 

http://espn.go.com/mlb/hotstove11/story/_/id/7347878/the-book-prince-fielder

[Guest]

Brett's update on the matter.

 

So much for the Chicago Cubs’ lack of money – which nobody really believed anyway.

 

According to CBS’s Jon Heyman, the Chicago Cubs are “definitely in [the] mix for [P]rince [Fielder” (Twitter has been a boon to the bracket industry). Ah, that “definitely” word again. Heyman notes that Fielder’s age, 27, makes him much more attractive to the Cubs than Albert Pujols, and notes that Fielder fills a number of holes for the Cubs, including first base, the cleanup spot, and power from the left side.

 

Heyman’s report comports with what I’ve heard about the Cubs’ interest, though I’d caution that I still doubt the Cubs would be willing to make an offer to Fielder for more than six years at the absolute longest – and it’s easy to see another team being willing to add on that seventh (or eighth) year. As they did with Pujols, I’d imagine the Cubs would prefer to make Fielder a shorter-term, higher annual dollar offer. Six years and $150 million seems about right, if not a bit high – but you will necessarily pay a premium for the kind of big bat that comes along only once every few years (if that).

 

 

More at link. http://www.bleachernation.com/2011/12/13/obsessive-prince-fielder-watch-the-cubs-are-definitely-in-the-mix-for-prince-fielder/

[Exile on Waveland]

I am sure everyone knows this, but I think we should be clear. Fielder's performance has "fluctuated" but these are his two "down" years:

 

2008: 276/372/507, 130 OPS+, 34 home runs

2010: 261/401/471, 135 OPS+, 32 home runs (lead the league in walks)

 

I repeat: those are his "bad" years. That is still some very good offensive production. The Cubs really, really need offense -- specifically power -- and we're haggling about base-running and defense. Not that those things don't detract value from Fielder . . . but I feel like Allen Iverson: "base running, man, we're talking about base running." The Cubs better sign some damn good base runners to make up for those 32-50 home runs.

Edited December 13, 2011 by Exile on Waveland

[SouthSideRyan]

You've gotta sell Fielder on the 6 year deal allowing him to get another 6 year deal immediately after. The nice side-effect if he buys into that is he makes damn sure to keep himself from gaining 100 pounds over the next 6 seasons.

[Guest]

I am sure everyone knows this, but I think we should be clear. Fielder's performance has "fluctuated" but these are his two "down" years:

 

2008: 276/372/507, 130 OPS+, 34 home runs

2010: 261/401/471, 135 OPS+, 32 home runs (lead the league in walks)

 

I repeat: those are his "bad" years. That is still some very good offensive production. The Cubs really, really need offense -- specifically power -- and we're haggling about base-running and defense. Not that those things don't detract value from Fielder . . . but I feel like Allen Iverson: "base running, man, we're talking about base running." The Cubs better sign some damn good base runners to make up for those 32-50 home runs.

 

Stop boiling it down to just his offensive numbers as if his major negatives as a baserunner and fielder don't matter.

 

He's so bad at the latter two that they significantly bring down his value. It's as silly as turning a blind eye to anything else. Like saying a pitcher just wins or something. Yea, he can hit, but it's not like those other negative things he's doing aren't happening.

 

His value is a combined product of all these things.

 

He was worth 2.1 and 2.7 WAR those years, regardless of how good a hitter he still managed to be.

[SouthSideRyan]

There's something to be said for not taking defensive metrics at face value, especially those for first basemen.

[Guest]

There's something to be said for not taking defensive metrics at face value, especially those for first basemen.

 

A fair point.

[mul21]

I am sure everyone knows this, but I think we should be clear. Fielder's performance has "fluctuated" but these are his two "down" years:

 

2008: 276/372/507, 130 OPS+, 34 home runs

2010: 261/401/471, 135 OPS+, 32 home runs (lead the league in walks)

 

I repeat: those are his "bad" years. That is still some very good offensive production. The Cubs really, really need offense -- specifically power -- and we're haggling about base-running and defense. Not that those things don't detract value from Fielder . . . but I feel like Allen Iverson: "base running, man, we're talking about base running." The Cubs better sign some damn good base runners to make up for those 32-50 home runs.

 

Stop boiling it down to just his offensive numbers as if his major negatives as a baserunner and fielder don't matter.

 

He's so bad at the latter two that they significantly bring down his value. It's as silly as turning a blind eye to anything else. Like saying a pitcher just wins or something. Yea, he can hit, but it's not like those other negative things he's doing aren't happening.

 

His value is a combined product of all these things.

 

He was worth 2.1 and 2.7 WAR those years, regardless of how good a hitter he still managed to be.

 

Well, considering how bad the current Cubs are at hitting a baseball, particularly over a fence, I really don't care about the base running and defense as long as he's not David Ortiz bad in the field or worse than any of the Molinas on the bases.

[CubColtPacer]

There's something to be said for not taking defensive metrics at face value, especially those for first basemen.

 

Definitely. 1st baseman are easily the hardest for defensive metrics to do, and metrics aren't that great yet for any position. But does anyone through scouting think that Fielder is even an average 1st baseman defensively? We can quibble over how bad but he is definitely below average.

 

And the baserunning stats were presented here and they jive with what his body type would indicate-Fielder is an awful baserunner.

[jersey cubs fan]

He's so bad at the latter two that they significantly bring down his value.

 

Which still leaves that value at very freaking high.

[Guest]

He's so bad at the latter two that they significantly bring down his value.

 

Which still leaves that value at very freaking high.

 

Not the two years in question.

[Guest]

There's something to be said for not taking defensive metrics at face value, especially those for first basemen.

 

I had that thought, but it's not like they're cratering his value with bizarre outliers. BIS, Total Zone, UZR, DRS, the Fan's scouting report, and everything I've ever heard about Prince as a defender all agree, he's a poor defender in the neighborhood of -7 runs.

[Guest]

I am sure everyone knows this, but I think we should be clear. Fielder's performance has "fluctuated" but these are his two "down" years:

 

2008: 276/372/507, 130 OPS+, 34 home runs

2010: 261/401/471, 135 OPS+, 32 home runs (lead the league in walks)

 

I repeat: those are his "bad" years. That is still some very good offensive production. The Cubs really, really need offense -- specifically power -- and we're haggling about base-running and defense. Not that those things don't detract value from Fielder . . . but I feel like Allen Iverson: "base running, man, we're talking about base running." The Cubs better sign some damn good base runners to make up for those 32-50 home runs.

 

Stop boiling it down to just his offensive numbers as if his major negatives as a baserunner and fielder don't matter.

 

He's so bad at the latter two that they significantly bring down his value. It's as silly as turning a blind eye to anything else. Like saying a pitcher just wins or something. Yea, he can hit, but it's not like those other negative things he's doing aren't happening.

 

His value is a combined product of all these things.

 

He was worth 2.1 and 2.7 WAR those years, regardless of how good a hitter he still managed to be.

 

Well, considering how bad the current Cubs are at hitting a baseball, particularly over a fence, I really don't care about the base running and defense as long as he's not David Ortiz bad in the field or worse than any of the Molinas on the bases.

 

The things ALL matter. When it comes down to it, those years he was worth 2.1 and 2.7 wins above a replacement player (this, obviously, operating under the assumption that WAR and defensive WAR numbers are good at measuring what they're intended to measure). In other words, he was an average to barely above average player those two years.