Rizzo

[sneakypower]

Christ! Brandon Belt is putting up .829 Do you call him an all star at 1b?

allow me to introduce to you the .830 OPS all-star 1B

http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=/i/headshots/mlb/players/full/30399.png&w=350&h=254

Edited September 25, 2013 by sneakypower

[SABR Gamer]

Rizzo could still end up being an .850+ OPS guy, I mean [expletive], even TT said he'd be there already with a BABIP lower than he had last year.

 

The guy is only 24, playing his first full year and has had terrible BABIP luck. Let's give him a little more time before we jump to any final conclusions (most of you obviously haven't).

 

Hell, Rizzo ending up as a close to .900 OPS guy isn't completely out of the question yet. That would easily put him as one of the top 1B in baseball, especially if he can be above average defensively, which seems to be a pretty realistic expectation.

[Guest]

Christ! Brandon Belt is putting up .829 Do you call him an all star at 1b?

 

Brandon Belt is not near the fielder Rizzo is. Like not even sort of.

[SABR Gamer]

I am simply saying that if you think we can be a contender with our current lineup and Rizzo jumping up70- 80 points in OPS, your looney.

 

Yeah, that's definitely what everyone here has been saying. You nailed it.

[Clem Fandango]

Christ! Brandon Belt is putting up .829 Do you call him an all star at 1b?

 

For what it's worth, among full time 1B in the major leagues with at least 200 PA's in the 2nd half, Brandon Belt ranks as the 4th best 1B in all of baseball in OPS. He's developed into an all-star talent who gets overshadowed by guys like Goldschmidt, Freeman, and Votto (the 3 who are better than him). Belt is turning out to be every bit the player the Giants hoped he would be. His 2nd half slash line is .324/.388/.505/.893 and he's a 4 win player as a result. He'd be a very valuable asset to any team moving forward.

 

sin choo choo

 

Ha!

[imb]

I really want to change my name to "your looney"

[Guest]

I just wanna ride the sin choo choo

[Guest]

I just wanna ride the sin choo choo

Whatever happens on the sin choo choo stays on the sin choo choo.

[Have a seat, Neifi]

Rizzo could still end up being an .850+ OPS guy, I mean [expletive], even TT said he'd be there already with a BABIP lower than he had last year.

 

The guy is only 24, playing his first full year and has had terrible BABIP luck. Let's give him a little more time before we jump to any final conclusions (most of you obviously haven't).

 

Hell, Rizzo ending up as a close to .900 OPS guy isn't completely out of the question yet. That would easily put him as one of the top 1B in baseball, especially if he can be above average defensively, which seems to be a pretty realistic expectation.

How much of his low BABIP is due to luck vs. factors likely to be predictive of future BABIP struggles is sort of the million dollar question, though.

[Guest]

Rizzo's BABIP drop seems pretty correlated to his batted ball profile changing(LD% down, IFFB% up, HR/FB down) as opposed to defenses adjusting to his spray chart. I have a good bit of confidence in his ability to make adjustments to start hitting the ball with more authority, so to me it's a good thing that his BABIP struggles have more to do with what happens before ball hits bat than after.

[ConstableRabbit]

Rizzo could still end up being an .850+ OPS guy, I mean [expletive], even TT said he'd be there already with a BABIP lower than he had last year.

 

The guy is only 24, playing his first full year and has had terrible BABIP luck. Let's give him a little more time before we jump to any final conclusions (most of you obviously haven't).

 

Hell, Rizzo ending up as a close to .900 OPS guy isn't completely out of the question yet. That would easily put him as one of the top 1B in baseball, especially if he can be above average defensively, which seems to be a pretty realistic expectation.

How much of his low BABIP is due to luck vs. factors likely to be predictive of future BABIP struggles is sort of the million dollar question, though.

He's swinging at about the same % of pitches in the zone and making contact with about the same proportion in the zone as last season. He's also laying off more pitches outside the zone and taking walks at a higher rate.

 

But his LD% is down significantly. Is this a mechanical thing?

[neely crenshaw]

Christ! Brandon Belt is putting up .829 Do you call him an all star at 1b?

allow me to introduce to you the .830 OPS all-star 1B

http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=/i/headshots/mlb/players/full/30399.png&w=350&h=254

 

Man, you guys are something. The point was brandon belt is putting up those numbers and no he is not considered an all star type first baseman.

Craig also had an OPS of .872 at that time, not .830 that he has now.

Of course even at that, there were Votto, Goldschmidt,and Freeman to go along with Craig. All of which were pushing .900 ops or above.

So unless you count a getting voted in by the fans..when stats don't really matter or being the lone rep for your team, .820 ain't getting it done at first base

 

saddest part is you guys are defending this by hoping he becomes Belt, is that really what you had pictured?

 

I like him, he's probably my favorite player but it doesn't make me blind to fact that so far he is no where near what we were sold.

[Backtobanks]

Christ! Brandon Belt is putting up .829 Do you call him an all star at 1b?

allow me to introduce to you the .830 OPS all-star 1B

http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=/i/headshots/mlb/players/full/30399.png&w=350&h=254

 

Man, you guys are something. The point was brandon belt is putting up those numbers and no he is not considered an all star type first baseman.

Craig also had an OPS of .872 at that time, not .830 that he has now.

Of course even at that, there were Votto, Goldschmidt,and Freeman to go along with Craig. All of which were pushing .900 ops or above.

So unless you count a getting voted in by the fans..when stats don't really matter or being the lone rep for your team, .820 ain't getting it done at first base

 

saddest part is you guys are defending this by hoping he becomes Belt, is that really what you had pictured?

 

I like him, he's probably my favorite player but it doesn't make me blind to fact that so far he is no where near what we were sold.

 

Also, he was being marketed as the face of the franchise and being in the middle of the league's 1B doesn't say much for the franchise.

[neely crenshaw]

I am simply saying that if you think we can be a contender with our current lineup and Rizzo jumping up70- 80 points in OPS, your looney.

 

Yeah, that's definitely what everyone here has been saying. You nailed it.

 

Well I am looking realistically at it. I want us to contend soon. Unless you see the Cubs spending a bunch of money or making some huge trades- which I don't, we are dealing with what we have and a few small pickups.

 

you must be saying we can compete with our current guys and some re-tread pick ups or we are just going to hope every player we have has a career year.

I am saying I don't see us getting a couple big bats, so if we want our offense to get better and help us contend, Rizzo at .820 isn't getting us to even .500 ball.

[Guest]

I am simply saying that if you think we can be a contender with our current lineup and Rizzo jumping up70- 80 points in OPS, your looney.

 

Yeah, that's definitely what everyone here has been saying. You nailed it.

 

Well I am looking realistically at it. I want us to contend soon. Unless you see the Cubs spending a bunch of money or making some huge trades- which I don't, we are dealing with what we have and a few small pickups.

 

you must be saying we can compete with our current guys and some re-tread pick ups or we are just going to hope every player we have has a career year.

I am saying I don't see us getting a couple big bats, so if we want our offense to get better and help us contend, Rizzo at .820 isn't getting us to even .500 ball.

 

How many qualified hitters this year have an OPS above .850? Just guess without looking it up.

[neely crenshaw]

Look back at the my post that shows what the play off teams have.

Every team has one, and most have several.

 

I take this as saying we can compete with Rizzo as our big bat if he brings his OPS up to .820. I can't see where that plays out in reality. Of course you can say anything can happen, and I'm sure there is some team that won with that type of offense. I am trying to judge what is likely to happen in real terms. It sure seems that except for that 1 in 100 season, the stats say you need either a big time guy (.900 or above), or a couple of guys above .800 and usually at least 1 way above.

[neely crenshaw]

I am simply saying that if you think we can be a contender with our current lineup and Rizzo jumping up70- 80 points in OPS, your looney.

 

Yeah, that's definitely what everyone here has been saying. You nailed it.

 

Sorry for thinking we all are wanting to succeed. He is dead on, If Rizzo jumps to an .820 OPS he can certainly be our middle of the order bat. Of course we still be losing 90 games, but that's obviously fine.

 

Now if your plan says we get Stanton to hit behind him, then I'll agree. Until something is added, you can't simply say he's fine at that rate, because the stats say differently.

[Sammy Sofa]

Someone, please, take the [expletive] shot.

[Clem Fandango]

saddest part is you guys are defending this by hoping he becomes Belt, is that really what you had pictured?

 

No one ever said anything remotely close. You used Belt as a comparative example for a poor excuse for an "all-star". Some people countered with examples of comparable choices (Allen Craig; sneaky's post), statistical proof to suggest Belt has got all-star potential (my post), and that he's not even remotely close as a match defensively against Rizzo (David's post).

 

As far as I can see we were the only ones who addressed your Brandon Belt analogy, and none of us said we hope Rizzo becomes what Brandon Belt is today. Like not even close. But hey...

 

http://i.imgur.com/Y80vPZZ.gif

[mul21]

Someone, please, take the [expletive] shot.

 

Good? Or were you looking for more?

 

I am simply saying that if you think we can be a contender with our current lineup and Rizzo jumping up70- 80 points in OPS, your looney.

 

Yeah, that's definitely what everyone here has been saying. You nailed it.

 

Sorry for thinking we all are wanting to succeed. He is dead on, If Rizzo jumps to an .820 OPS he can certainly be our middle of the order bat. Of course we still be losing 90 games, but that's obviously fine.

 

Now if your plan says we get Stanton to hit behind him, then I'll agree. Until something is added, you can't simply say he's fine at that rate, because the stats say differently.

 

In case you were curious, just last year, the San Francisco Giants won the World Series with 1 (yes, 1) qualified player with an OPS higher than .789. Yes, it was Buster Posey and he was awesome, but he was surrounded by utter crap. I'm pretty certain that's not the plan for the Cubs, especially with what's coming up soon from the minors.

[bukie]

Look back at the my post that shows what the play off teams have.

Every team has one, and most have several.

 

I take this as saying we can compete with Rizzo as our big bat if he brings his OPS up to .820. I can't see where that plays out in reality. Of course you can say anything can happen, and I'm sure there is some team that won with that type of offense. I am trying to judge what is likely to happen in real terms. It sure seems that except for that 1 in 100 season, the stats say you need either a big time guy (.900 or above), or a couple of guys above .800 and usually at least 1 way above.

21 players total have an OPS over .850. The last place Blue Jays have 3 of them, and the last place Rockies have another two. The Rays and Indians have zero, and the only playoff teams that have more than one are the Cardinals (Carpenter, Holliday) and Reds (Votto, Choo). Four playoff teams have a player with a .900 OPS or better (Cabrera, Ortiz, Votto, McCutchen).

 

The offensive environment is severely changed from what it was 3-5 years ago, and will remain that way for the foreseeable future. Your opinions are so far from the realm of reality, it's pointless to even address them, but hopefully this minor look gives you a vague idea how absurd you are.

[Guest]

Look back at the my post that shows what the play off teams have.

Every team has one, and most have several.

 

I take this as saying we can compete with Rizzo as our big bat if he brings his OPS up to .820. I can't see where that plays out in reality. Of course you can say anything can happen, and I'm sure there is some team that won with that type of offense. I am trying to judge what is likely to happen in real terms. It sure seems that except for that 1 in 100 season, the stats say you need either a big time guy (.900 or above), or a couple of guys above .800 and usually at least 1 way above.

21 players total have an OPS over .850. The last place Blue Jays have 3 of them, and the last place Rockies have another two. The Rays and Indians have zero, and the only playoff teams that have more than one are the Cardinals (Carpenter, Holliday) and Reds (Votto, Choo). Four playoff teams have a player with a .900 OPS or better (Cabrera, Ortiz, Votto, McCutchen).

 

The offensive environment is severely changed from what it was 3-5 years ago, and will remain that way for the foreseeable future. Your opinions are so far from the realm of reality, it's pointless to even address them, but hopefully this minor look gives you a vague idea how absurd you are.

 

Except here where we're going to be stacked with 25 year old power hitters as far as the eye can see.

[Guest]

Look back at the my post that shows what the play off teams have.

Every team has one, and most have several.

 

I take this as saying we can compete with Rizzo as our big bat if he brings his OPS up to .820. I can't see where that plays out in reality. Of course you can say anything can happen, and I'm sure there is some team that won with that type of offense. I am trying to judge what is likely to happen in real terms. It sure seems that except for that 1 in 100 season, the stats say you need either a big time guy (.900 or above), or a couple of guys above .800 and usually at least 1 way above.

 

There are 21 qualified players with an OPS over .850(there were 28 last year). Brandon Belt is 30th in MLB in OPS.

 

The point here, that has been made in several iterations to you, is that your sense of scale for what's necessary to be a good or great offensive player, and therefore a good or great total offense, is out of whack. This is not the late 90s or even 2008, and our expectations need to adjust accordingly.

 

What that means for Rizzo, is if like you mention that he only ends up as "Brandon Belt with better defense", that means he's a 4+ win player, and a borderline Top 5 1st Baseman. That's more than fine, especially since he has potential to be even better than that given his age, pedigree, and past success. Obviously he will need to improve upon this year, but worrying that he has such a huge hill to climb to be a .900 OPS player is like complaining that Javier Baez has a ways to go before he actually has Gary Sheffield's career numbers. Yes, it's a possibility because of his talent, but it's not remotely necessary for him to be fulfilling his intended role and being a very valuable player.

[bukie]

Except here where we're going to be stacked with 25 year old power hitters as far as the eye can see.

 

I'm concerned whether the Cubs will have any hitters with the combination of power and patience, but power looks to be available in spades.

[Guest]

Except here where we're going to be stacked with 25 year old power hitters as far as the eye can see.

 

I'm concerned whether the Cubs will have any hitters with the combination of power and patience, but power looks to be available in spades.

 

Soler profiles that way.

 

We'll see how Bryant develops. And maybe Baez can scare his way to walks eventually.