General Baseball Chit-Chat Thread

[Tim]

 

 

There is a difference between actual production and projections. I don't hate Schwarber, I just think that the Cubs would be a better team if they had traded him a couple of years ago when his trade value was high and we probably could have received some young pitching. I admire his work ethic and his majestic HRs, but he is still a DH/platoon OF.

Fine - How about Schwarber's actual 2018 production of .238/.356/.467? Considering most of Burnitz's best seasons came during the juiced ball era, that Schwarber line from last year is more than comparable. He's also rating as an above average defender again, no matter how many times you try to claim that he's best served as a DH.

 

Oh, but I'm sorry. Go ahead and keep banging your head against this one.

 

 

In case you haven't noticed we're in the juiciest of the juice ball eras right now.

I'd take the time to refute this, but squally did the job quite well.

 

Again, your quote is that you'd like to have someone like Burnitz in LF when we've got someone basically just like Burnitz (with better defense) in LF already. If you can't just own up and admit that you blew this one, then there is really no purpose in talking to you about anything.

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

Am I the only Cubs fan around who wishes we still had Seal Boy? I’d rather have him over Descalso right now.

 

The guy who has 7 home runs in 90 PAs after 10 in the previous 947? Sure? I don't think it's a hot take to say you'd rather have LaStella's April over Descalso's, but I remain pretty confident that we'll have the better player going forward.

I looked at LaStella's stats a few days ago, and he's doing this with a pretty absurdly low BABIP, if I remember correctly.

[squally1313]

Am I the only Cubs fan around who wishes we still had Seal Boy? I’d rather have him over Descalso right now.

 

The guy who has 7 home runs in 90 PAs after 10 in the previous 947? Sure? I don't think it's a hot take to say you'd rather have LaStella's April over Descalso's, but I remain pretty confident that we'll have the better player going forward.

I looked at LaStella's stats a few days ago, and he's doing this with a pretty absurdly low BABIP, if I remember correctly.

.188, so yeah. I mean, obviously you discount the HR/FB rate given his career/stature, but everything is really impressive, given the sample size...walk rate is double the K rate, hard hit rate is triple the soft hit rate, etc. But...90 PAs. We know what he is. Good for him/the Angels...god knows they need it. But I'll take Descalso.

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

 

The guy who has 7 home runs in 90 PAs after 10 in the previous 947? Sure? I don't think it's a hot take to say you'd rather have LaStella's April over Descalso's, but I remain pretty confident that we'll have the better player going forward.

I looked at LaStella's stats a few days ago, and he's doing this with a pretty absurdly low BABIP, if I remember correctly.

.188, so yeah. I mean, obviously you discount the HR/FB rate given his career/stature, but everything is really impressive, given the sample size...walk rate is double the K rate, hard hit rate is triple the soft hit rate, etc. But...90 PAs. We know what he is. Good for him/the Angels...god knows they need it. But I'll take Descalso.

I think maybe I'd prefer LaStella, but it definitely isn't something I'm losing sleep over. They are obviously comparable.

[Backtobanks]

Fine - How about Schwarber's actual 2018 production of .238/.356/.467? Considering most of Burnitz's best seasons came during the juiced ball era, that Schwarber line from last year is more than comparable. He's also rating as an above average defender again, no matter how many times you try to claim that he's best served as a DH.

 

Oh, but I'm sorry. Go ahead and keep banging your head against this one.

 

 

In case you haven't noticed we're in the juiciest of the juice ball eras right now.

 

Current OPS league wide is .742 (245/321/421), which is 18th in the last 30 years. Jeremy Burnitz played over 100 games every year from 1997 to 2006. All 10 of those years had a higher league wide OPS than 2019. 2000 was the highest, at .782.

 

 

Of course steroids had nothing to do with the statistics in those years. Look at the numbers of HRs hit 6105 in 2017, 5610 in 2016, and 5585 in 2018 while the ball is juiced. The other top years 5693 in 2000, 5528 in 1999, and 5458 in 2001 the players were juiced more than the balls.

[squally1313]

 

 

In case you haven't noticed we're in the juiciest of the juice ball eras right now.

 

Current OPS league wide is .742 (245/321/421), which is 18th in the last 30 years. Jeremy Burnitz played over 100 games every year from 1997 to 2006. All 10 of those years had a higher league wide OPS than 2019. 2000 was the highest, at .782.

 

 

Of course steroids had nothing to do with the statistics in those years. Look at the numbers of HRs hit 6105 in 2017, 5610 in 2016, and 5585 in 2018 while the ball is juiced. The other top years 5693 in 2000, 5528 in 1999, and 5458 in 2001 the players were juiced more than the balls.

 

What are you even arguing at this point? Semantics? That line Tim referenced is better today than it was in Burnitz' era because the average production today is worse than the average production then.

[Regular Show]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

Super impressive throw, but he also almost took his pitcher's head off. The pitcher is suppose to go into a proper crouch when the catcher rises to make the throw towards 2B. Not sure what the pitcher was thinking there...

[NonProfitCow]

Kluber with a fractured forearm from a comebacker

[NonProfitCow]

[Backtobanks]

 

Current OPS league wide is .742 (245/321/421), which is 18th in the last 30 years. Jeremy Burnitz played over 100 games every year from 1997 to 2006. All 10 of those years had a higher league wide OPS than 2019. 2000 was the highest, at .782.

 

 

Of course steroids had nothing to do with the statistics in those years. Look at the numbers of HRs hit 6105 in 2017, 5610 in 2016, and 5585 in 2018 while the ball is juiced. The other top years 5693 in 2000, 5528 in 1999, and 5458 in 2001 the players were juiced more than the balls.

 

What are you even arguing at this point? Semantics? That line Tim referenced is better today than it was in Burnitz' era because the average production today is worse than the average production then.

 

The HR rate is skyrocketing now as compared to the steroid era when we know players were using steroids to hit HRs which sounds to me like the ball is juiced now.

[squally1313]

 

 

Of course steroids had nothing to do with the statistics in those years. Look at the numbers of HRs hit 6105 in 2017, 5610 in 2016, and 5585 in 2018 while the ball is juiced. The other top years 5693 in 2000, 5528 in 1999, and 5458 in 2001 the players were juiced more than the balls.

 

What are you even arguing at this point? Semantics? That line Tim referenced is better today than it was in Burnitz' era because the average production today is worse than the average production then.

 

The HR rate is skyrocketing now as compared to the steroid era when we know players were using steroids to hit HRs which sounds to me like the ball is juiced now.

 

And...what does that have to do with anything? Are we really just at juiced ball vs juiced players after all of this? Who cares? Offense is down compared to where it was 20 years ago. By every meaningful measure.

[Backtobanks]

 

What are you even arguing at this point? Semantics? That line Tim referenced is better today than it was in Burnitz' era because the average production today is worse than the average production then.

 

The HR rate is skyrocketing now as compared to the steroid era when we know players were using steroids to hit HRs which sounds to me like the ball is juiced now.

 

And...what does that have to do with anything? Are we really just at juiced ball vs juiced players after all of this? Who cares? Offense is down compared to where it was 20 years ago. By every meaningful measure.

 

 

Juiced ball means more HRs. We are at record-setting era with the number of HRs. Maybe offense is down because everybody is swinging for the fences because the ball is juiced and you're rewarded handsomely for hitting .230 with 25 HRs and striking out 160 times a year.

[David]

jesus christ

[squally1313]

 

The HR rate is skyrocketing now as compared to the steroid era when we know players were using steroids to hit HRs which sounds to me like the ball is juiced now.

 

And...what does that have to do with anything? Are we really just at juiced ball vs juiced players after all of this? Who cares? Offense is down compared to where it was 20 years ago. By every meaningful measure.

 

 

Juiced ball means more HRs. We are at record-setting era with the number of HRs. Maybe offense is down because everybody is swinging for the fences because the ball is juiced and you're rewarded handsomely for hitting .230 with 25 HRs and striking out 160 times a year.

 

I don't really care why offense is down? This whole thing started because you said it'd be nice to have Burnitz's slash line in left field. You were then told that Schwarber basically already gives you that, with better defense. And then you were told that a roughly .800 OPS is more valuable in 2019, when the average OPS is .740ish, than literally every year Burnitz played, where the average OPS was higher. So...Schwarber > Burnitz, agreed?

[CyHawk_Cub]

Make it stop

[We Got The Whole 9]

Looking at the top 30 fwar offensive leaderboard is funny right now. There's maybe 10 players on there that you would expect to be on there.

 

The Royals have 3 on there, in Mondesi, Gordon, and Dozier

 

You have Andrus, Gallo, Polanco, Alonso, Anderson (1.9 walk rate with a 410 wOBA; where are the articles decrying this as impossible like we got with Javy?), Lowe, Mancini, McNeil, etc.

 

Seeing DeJong 3rd just pisses me off.

[Brian]

Thor did the old pitch a complete game shut out and hit a solo hr for the 1-0 victory today.

[badger]

https://www.theplayerstribune.com/en-us/articles/rich-hill-mlb-dodgers

 

 

 

Jesus

 

Recommendation, don’t read this at work.

 

I really wish I would have read this before I read the article. That was horsefeathering heartbreaking.

[Backtobanks]

 

And...what does that have to do with anything? Are we really just at juiced ball vs juiced players after all of this? Who cares? Offense is down compared to where it was 20 years ago. By every meaningful measure.

 

 

Juiced ball means more HRs. We are at record-setting era with the number of HRs. Maybe offense is down because everybody is swinging for the fences because the ball is juiced and you're rewarded handsomely for hitting .230 with 25 HRs and striking out 160 times a year.

 

I don't really care why offense is down? This whole thing started because you said it'd be nice to have Burnitz's slash line in left field. You were then told that Schwarber basically already gives you that, with better defense. And then you were told that a roughly .800 OPS is more valuable in 2019, when the average OPS is .740ish, than literally every year Burnitz played, where the average OPS was higher. So...Schwarber > Burnitz, agreed?

 

First, any discussion about Schwarber and Burnitz should never be about defense because both should be described as "adequate" defensively. As I posted before, Schwarber wouldn't be removed so often for defensive reasons if he was "above average" as many of you claim. Defensive statistics are questionable at best (i.e. Schwarber could be rated better than Griffey JR. according to some stats. You don't really believe Schwarber > Griffey JR. defensively, do you?) Secondly, Burnitz had an avg. .826 OPS and 138 runs scored over a 14 year career, while Schwarber's avg. numbers are .803 with 86 runs scored in his career. Also, Schwarber's numbers include more platooning against lefties. Obviously there are many players I would have in LF over Burnitz or Schwarber, but since Burnitz' name was brought up in jest, I would pick Burnitz over Schwarber.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm not going to look it up, but I find Jeromy Burnitz averaging 138 runs per season over his career to be slightly dubious.

[Cubswin11]

 

 

Juiced ball means more HRs. We are at record-setting era with the number of HRs. Maybe offense is down because everybody is swinging for the fences because the ball is juiced and you're rewarded handsomely for hitting .230 with 25 HRs and striking out 160 times a year.

 

I don't really care why offense is down? This whole thing started because you said it'd be nice to have Burnitz's slash line in left field. You were then told that Schwarber basically already gives you that, with better defense. And then you were told that a roughly .800 OPS is more valuable in 2019, when the average OPS is .740ish, than literally every year Burnitz played, where the average OPS was higher. So...Schwarber > Burnitz, agreed?

 

First, any discussion about Schwarber and Burnitz should never be about defense because both should be described as "adequate" defensively. As I posted before, Schwarber wouldn't be removed so often for defensive reasons if he was "above average" as many of you claim. Defensive statistics are questionable at best (i.e. Schwarber could be rated better than Griffey JR. according to some stats. You don't really believe Schwarber > Griffey JR. defensively, do you?) Secondly, Burnitz had an avg. .826 OPS and 138 runs scored over a 14 year career, while Schwarber's avg. numbers are .803 with 86 runs scored in his career. Also, Schwarber's numbers include more platooning against lefties. Obviously there are many players I would have in LF over Burnitz or Schwarber, but since Burnitz' name was brought up in jest, I would pick Burnitz over Schwarber.

[We Got The Whole 9]

He used runs

[squally1313]

 

 

Juiced ball means more HRs. We are at record-setting era with the number of HRs. Maybe offense is down because everybody is swinging for the fences because the ball is juiced and you're rewarded handsomely for hitting .230 with 25 HRs and striking out 160 times a year.

 

I don't really care why offense is down? This whole thing started because you said it'd be nice to have Burnitz's slash line in left field. You were then told that Schwarber basically already gives you that, with better defense. And then you were told that a roughly .800 OPS is more valuable in 2019, when the average OPS is .740ish, than literally every year Burnitz played, where the average OPS was higher. So...Schwarber > Burnitz, agreed?

 

First, any discussion about Schwarber and Burnitz should never be about defense because both should be described as "adequate" defensively. As I posted before, Schwarber wouldn't be removed so often for defensive reasons if he was "above average" as many of you claim. Defensive statistics are questionable at best (i.e. Schwarber could be rated better than Griffey JR. according to some stats. You don't really believe Schwarber > Griffey JR. defensively, do you?) Secondly, Burnitz had an avg. .826 OPS and 138 runs scored over a 14 year career, while Schwarber's avg. numbers are .803 with 86 runs scored in his career. Also, Schwarber's numbers include more platooning against lefties. Obviously there are many players I would have in LF over Burnitz or Schwarber, but since Burnitz' name was brought up in jest, I would pick Burnitz over Schwarber.

 

Regarding defense: Schwarber is at a 0.9 defensive rating for his career per FG. Burnitz, for his career, is at -44.3. We can split hairs on Schwarber's defense ("is he adequate or acceptable???") even more if you want, but dismissing it outright is wrong. Modern baseball teams, and the Cubs in general, put a premium on defense, and have usually had at least one of Almora or Heyward sitting on the bench to come in late. This also ignores the fact in those situations Schwarber is still playing 7ish innings of defense, and as discussed above, doing it better than Jeremy Burnitz.

 

Burnitz's career high in runs scored (which, nice stat in general) is 104, so...yeah.

 

They have stats that compare offensive output to the rest of the league. Burnitz for his career has a 110 wRC+. Schwarber has a 112. Again, that solely values hitting, see above for defense. FG also has Schwarber as the better baserunner.

 

What am I doing with my life.

[Clem Fandango]

I'm not going to look it up, but I find Jeromy Burnitz averaging 138 runs per season over his career to be slightly dubious.

 

Probably because he averaged 66 runs. Looking at his BR page, the only way he could've said that was he looked up his career totals, and saw that he averaged 139 H per 162 games, and thought that was a) the runs column and b) the career average row which c) neither of them were nor d) was the number 138

[jersey cubs fan]

At the risk of muddying up the burnitz thread