Ryan Sweeney's power potential.

by Asfan4ever723 on Sep 14, 2008 1:05 PM EDT Comment 70 comments

He came into the season as sort of a disappointing prospect who stalled a bit at the AAA level the past 2 seasons. Although may have been rushed and was young for those levels at 21/22. He was basically a throw in w/ the Swisher deal and buried down the depth chart. Fast forward, to almost the end of the season and he's managed to remain at the mlb level, while more highly regarded OF prospects like Buck/Gonzalez are in AAA right now for the pcl championship.

Sweeney has remained around that .290 range mos the season, but the power hasnt come yet. but the hr's he has hit have gone far...2nd deck in toronto and half way up the bleachers in detroit. So at 6'4" yuu would think that more power is on its way. plus he shown the ability to play all 3 OF positions. So is he still viewed as a 4th OF type or maybe more? I've read comparisons from kotsay to ethier? where would you rank him compared to a david murphy, ellsbury, spahn or brandon moss...other rookie OF's. Your thought's on ryan sweeney?

Batting Statistics

Year	Team	Lg	Age	Org.	Level	Pos	Ln	G	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	SB	CS	BB	SO	HBP	IBB	SH	SF	DP	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS	GB%
2003	great flls	Pio	18	La	Rk	of		10	34	0	12	2	0	0	4	0	2	2	3	0	0	0	0	1	.353	.389	.412	801	--
	Bristol	App	18	Chw	Rk	of		19	67	11	21	3	0	2	5	3	0	7	10	1	0	1	0	1	.313	.387	.448	835	--
2004	Winst-Salm	Caro	19	Chw	A+	of		134	515	71	146	22	3	7	66	8	6	40	65	7	1	3	2	3	.283	.342	.379	721	--
2005	Birmingham	Sou	20	Chw	AA	of		113	429	64	128	22	3	1	47	6	6	35	53	7	4	7	5	5	.298	.357	.371	728	--
2006	Charlotte	IL	21	Chw	AAA	of		118	449	64	133	25	3	13	70	7	7	35	73	3	3	3	2	9	.296	.350	.452	802	--
	Chi Wh-Sox	AL	21	Chw	MLB	cf-rf	1,8,3	18	35	1	8	0	0	0	5	0	0	0	7	0	0	0	0	1	.229	.229	.229	458	40%
2007	Charlotte	IL	22	Chw	AAA	of		105	397	50	107	17	2	10	47	8	5	48	71	1	2	2	2	14	.270	.348	.398	746	--
	Chi Wh-Sox	AL	22	Chw	MLB	lf-cf	9,8	15	45	5	9	3	0	1	5	0	1	4	5	0	0	0	0	2	.200	.265	.333	598	58%
2008	Sacramento	PCL	23	Oak	AAA			8	34	5	14	4	0	1	5	0	0	3	4	0	0	0	0	0	.412	.459	.618	1077	--
	Oakland	MLB	23	Oak	MLB			77	241	35	74	10	2	3	35	8	1	21	37	1	0	2	5	0	.307	.358	.402	760	--

Major League Totals - 3 Season(s)								110	321	41	91	13	2	4	45	8	2	25	49	1	0	2	5	3	.283	.332	.374	706	40%
Minor League Totals - 6 Season(s)								507	1925	265	561	95	11	34	244	32	26	170	279	19	10	16	11	33	.291	.353	.405	758

0 recs | Comment 70 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

4th outfielder

From what I understand his power issues stem, not from any physical problem, but from his swing. Pretty much he’s a power hitter using a lead-off hitters swing.

Unless he totally re-does his swing to take advantage of his natural power, instead of his average speed, he’ll be a forth outfielder as soon as Oakland can get 3 serviceable outfield hitter healthy at the same time.

Sometimes life will strike you out on a curve ball and the only choice you have is to flip off the umpire and walk to first base anyway.

by Threepwood XX on Sep 14, 2008 8:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

+1

I think the A’s should completely revamp his approach in the minors next year. The lack of oomph on his batted balls this year has very little to do with his age and a whole lot to do with his swing technique. He tries to go inside-out on EVERYTHING.

He does have upside but it’s not going to materialize without a conscious change in his hitting strategy.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 14, 2008 9:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Where would you rank him compared to a david murphy, ellsbury, spahn or brandon moss...other rookie OF's"

Below them all. He’s so fringy. Heck, I think Moss, Spahn and Murphy might very well be 4th OFers – and I think theyll be BETTER 4th OFers than Sweeney.

by alskor on Sep 14, 2008 8:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I see him being above Murphy/Spahn/Moss

But prob bellow Ellsbury. If he does find his power hes better than them all. Just my opinion. Also his defense is very very good.

"With 16-year-old Dominican righty Michel Inoa in tow, Gio Gonzalez improving at Triple-A and lefty Brett Anderson carving up Double-Abatters along with Simmons and Trevor Cahill, Oakland’s pitching depthis officially the envy of baseball." - BaseballAmerica.com

by Syphon on Sep 15, 2008 2:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Im sorry

but the lack of “love” Sweeney is getting this season is funny. Epecially when compared to Ellsbury and all the hype around this kid. I have nothing against Ellsbury as he is a fun player to watch, and will likely have a productive major league career. He’s fast as hell, and very good defensively. That said, everyone hypes this kid beyond belief when in reality Sweeney is having a much better season, in a much tougher ballpark, and he’s 17 months younger then Ellsbury!! Before BoSox fans rip me for saying this, let me say that I know Ellsbury is a burner on the basepaths and likely a future gold glover. Sweeney has been outstanding defensivley this season, and has above average speed. I do, however, realize that in both these categories the edge goes to Ellsbury. Defense and speed are a huge part of the game, and Ellsbury is excellent in that regard. Sweeney is no slouch himself. The thing I dont understand is everybody rips Sweeney for his lack of power, yet Ellsbury at 25 years old has very little himself. He never really hit for power in the minor leagues, and isn’t hitting for power now yet he is an all-star starter whereas Sweeney is already labeled a 4th OF. Again, I realize how Ellsbury uses his speed and defense so well, i’m just putting things into perspective. Take a look at their stats people. Ellsbury this year is at .265/.328/.365 for a .693 OPS. Sweeney this year is at .294/.353/.395 for a .748 OPS. Keep in mind that Sweeney has managed this with inconsistent playing time due to nagging, wierd injuries all year long and playing in a big-time pitchers park. I’m not saying that Sweeney is, or will be a better player then Ellsbury. I’m simply saying that Sweeney has done nothing to prove that he won’t be a productive starter, especially when compared to Jacoby. As far as the lack of power goes, it may play a factor, and it may not. I’ve seen Sweeney absolutely crush the ball showing that the power is there. Like PT stated, its more of an “issue” (if thats what you want to call it) with his swing thing anything. He hits more line drives then anyone else on the A’s. He doesnt have that lift in his swing to get the ball up in the air, and he does have an inside-out swing a lot, but if those are the reasons he’s not hitting a lot of long balls, ill take it and watch him adjust as time goes on. I think Sweeney is going to be an excellent major leaguer, and until he proves otherwise I think people need to sit back and see what happens.

by JPShark on Sep 15, 2008 12:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Excuse it

Everyone ripped on Ellsbury as a minor leaguer for having no power till he came up big in the playoffs. Now he has pretty much gotten a free pass as a player. Power in a prospect can be very overrated sometimes. I agree I think Sweeney will do fine as an everyday outfielder, but I am not sure if he will be one in Oakland if Gonzalez and Buck have breakout seasons next year.

Another outfielder that has no power, but is looking good for Oakland right now is Rajai Davis.

by Zabat on Sep 15, 2008 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sweeney

fell off my radar about three years ago. He has never done anything to impress anyone. Ellsbury hit in the minors and hit a ton.

The inside out/Mark Teahen swing screams 4th OFer. He’s fringy as hell and doesnt impress me at all.

by alskor on Sep 15, 2008 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"hit a ton"

what is your definition of that? his 70 ab stint in AA from 07 could be considered that + his early mlb stint. otherwise, he hit very well as a college player who was promoted fairly quickly by boston

by Asfan4ever723 on Sep 15, 2008 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Look

He doesnt look like he’s ever going to hit enough to hold down a corner OF job in MLB, and he doesnt look like his defense will be good enough to hold down a CF job. Where does that leave him? FOURTH OUTFIELDER. He’s a tweener and I dont see him ever hitting.

by alskor on Sep 15, 2008 10:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So ill ask you again

How many times have you actually seen Sweeney play this season? You keep making these bold statements like “he’s done nothing to impress anyone”, “he’s fringy as hell”, and “he’s a tweener” yet you have no evidence to back it up. In fact he doesn’t have enough MLB experience for you to have any evidence to back it up. You dont ever see him hitting, yet he’s hitting .294 as of today. If he only turns out to be a 10-12 HR a season guy, which i’m willing to bet he puts up better power numbers then that in the near future, he’ll still be good enough to start with his defense and that batting average. As I said before, not everyone is fixated on power. He’s got good speed, and has hit for good average. I’ve seen him play in person about 14-15 games, and watched 75% of the A’s games on T.V. and can tell you right now I think he’ll end up a 15 HR guy with a solid average and if he can end up a .370 or so OBP guy he would make a nice leadoff or #2 hitter. I’ll tell you straight up that if theres a runner in scoring position and the A’s need a run he’s the guy I want at the plate. I can tell by the way that you judge his defense that you couldn’t have seen him more then a few times this season because if you had you would be with every other A’s fan out there who has been nothing short of impressed.

by JPShark on Sep 15, 2008 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

three years ago

you gave up on a toolsy 20 year old hitting .298 in AA?
Thats pretty silly

by nms on Sep 15, 2008 4:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That and the "has never done anything to impress anyone" cracked me up

The guy has been a top prospect for almost 5 years. It’s totally legitimate to argue that he might end up a 4th OF, but to act as though the guy has never been talked about as a real prospect is absurd. Sweeney must’ve impressed somebody enough to make his major league debut when he was 21 years old.

by thejd44 on Sep 16, 2008 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So which of his crappy minor league seasons impressed you?

I dont understand where people get the idea he was considered a top prospect. He hasnt been considered a top prospect in years… the accolades stopped when he dissappointingly never hit ever.

Im looking at the prospect rankings – BP in 2007 had him as a two star prospect, 8th best in the Sox system, behind JACK EGBERT. Here’s what KG wrote:

Year In Review: The former first-round pick spent his second year at Triple-A and went backwards. Many believe it’s time to stop talking about projection with him.

The Good: Sweeney is big, athletic, and not without some offensive skills. He has a quick, short stroke, gap power, and a nice feel for contact. He works the count well and doesn’t strikeout often. He’s an average runner who can play center field in a pinch, and his arm is among the best in the system.

The Bad: Always projected to develop power, Sweeney is now stuck as a tweener–-without true center field skills or the power to play everyday in a corner. He’s always struggled against good lefties, and failed to make adjustments in 2007 to address the problem. He played with little energy down the stretch, and did not get a September callup.

Perfect World Projection: At this point, it’s hard to see Sweeney as more than a fourth outfielder and occasional starter, though he still has some believers among scouts.

Even in 2006, he wasnt all that:

The Bad: Has completed a year of Triple-A, yet we still need the word ‘potential’ when talking about his power, which will likely top out at about 20 home runs annually, at most. Overly aggressive at the plate, with tremendous plate coverage almost working against him at times. Can hold his own in center, but not in the long-term.

In a Perfect World, He Becomes: A starting big league outfielder—chances for above-average production are good, chances for star-level production are not.

Lets look at John Sickels on this very site:

Chicago White Sox top 20 prospect for 2008

Ryan Sweeney, OF, Grade C+ (I don’t think his power is going to develop. Ranks 12th on Oakland list)

Chicago White Sox top 20 in review (from August of this year!)

5) Ryan Sweeney, OF, Grade C+
.293/.344/.388 for Oakland. Lack of power is going to make him a bench guy.

This really shouldnt be a controversial discussion. This guy is not good. Why are you people in love with him? No he didnt kill my dog, but apparently a lot of Ryan Sweeney family members post on this site!

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

he was on someone's radar

i dont know how weak the white sox system was in late 2006, but BA ranked sweeney as their top prospect

TOP TEN
PROSPECTS
1. Ryan Sweeney, of
2. Josh Fields, 3b
3. Lance Broadway, rhp
4. Kyle McCulloch, rhp
5. Charlie Haeger, rhp
6. Aaron Cunningham, of
7. Adam Russell, rhp
8. Lucas Harrell, rhp
9. Matt Long, rhp
10. Chris Carter, 1b

BA 2007 top 100

50. Travis Buck, of, Athletics
51. Clay Buchholz, rhp, Red Sox
52. Donald Veal, lhp, Cubs
53. Travis Snider, of, Blue Jays
54. Chuck Lofgren, lhp, Indians
55. Ryan Sweeney, of, White Sox
56. John Danks, lhp, White Sox
57. Humberto Sanchez, rhp, Yankees
58. Troy Patton, lhp, Astros
59. Jonathan Sanchez, lhp, Giants
60. Carlos Gomez, of, Mets

BP’s top 100 from feb 2007

61. Edinson Volquez, RHP, Rangers, 23
62. Daric Barton, 1B, Athletics, 21
63. Sean West, RHP, Marlins, 21
64. Angel Villalona, 3B, Giants, 16
65. Humberto Sanchez, RHP, Yankees, 24
66. Ubaldo Jimenez, RHP, Rockies, 23
67. Travis Buck, OF, Athletics, 23
68. Ryan Tucker, RHP, Marlins, 20
69. Ryan Sweeney, OF, White Sox, 22
70. Ian Stewart, 3B, Rockies, 22
71. Christopher Volstad, RHP, Marlins, 20
72. Josh Fields, 3B, White Sox, 24
73. Jonathan Sanchez, LHP, Giants, 24
74. Brandon Morrow, RHP, Mariners, 22

by Asfan4ever723 on Sep 16, 2008 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

As I said

He took a nose dive after that because he still didnt hit for power.

I didnt say he was never held in high regard, I said its been a few years.

by alskor on Sep 17, 2008 12:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Power and perception

The reason people are dogging on Sweeney is because he was thought to have a chance to actually develop some power at some point. With Ellsbury, that was never an attribute. When Sweeney failed to develop into a 25 HR hitter over night he was labeled as a disappointment. All Ellsbury had to do was make some good catches and steal some bases and everyone in Sauks nation fell in love with him. We’ve become so focused on instant gratification with these guys. Look at Ludwick.

I always felt that if Sweeney was going to develop into someone who hits with some authority it may take a while, so I’m with JPShark with an attitude of wait and see a bit longer.

by slurve on Sep 15, 2008 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

Slurve makes a good point. Sweeney’s always been thought of a guy that would develop power, but as he moved up the minors he just hasn’t. That being said, he’s still only 23, and a season of 15-20hr might be his max. If playing full-time, I think 10-15hrs is realistic over the next few years.

by RoundingThird4Home on Sep 15, 2008 7:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

10-15

and that would make him a terrible starting RF/LF with his contact skills.

by alskor on Sep 15, 2008 10:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

with

his contact skills?? Are you just reaching for things now or what?? The guy has a whopping 54 K’s in 103 games and is sporting a .294 AVG yet your coming out and saying he has poor contact skills. If he ends up averaging 14 HR’s a season, and maintains batting averages around where he’s at this season he’ll be right near the .800 OPS range. He may not achieve this, or he may surpass this as he develops. The point is that the guy has done nothing to prove he can’t be a starter in the major leagues. He’s having a solid rookie campaign at 23 years old, and nothing less, period.

by JPShark on Sep 16, 2008 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

54 Ks in 344 ABs

Extrapolate to a full season. Not that good. If he had 550 ABs that would be 86 Ks. Am I supposed to be impressed by this?

Given his minor league track record I dont see much reason to think he will be a .294 hitter. He’s hit a career .291 in the minors, so there’s not really much reason to think he would hit there or better in the majors. Lets look at his MLE from last year: .226/.304/.316. Awesome.

He looks like a .750 OPS guy who cant really play CF. Where does that leave him? Not hitting enough to be a corner OFer. Not catching enough to be a CFer. Fourth Outfielder all the way.

OH WAIT – one more thing! He hasnt hit Lefties! Split of .313/.368/.443 vs RHP vs. .232/.309/.244. All his 5 HRs came against RHP. The splits are closer in the minors, though.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I never

asked you to be impressed with the K rate. I was simply saying that his K rate is far from terrible, and certainly doesn’t show that his contact skills are bad as you are trying to present. Is it not possible that a 23 year old is finding his own in his first full season in the bigs after being mishandled and rushed by his former organization? I’m not really concerned with the splits as long as the overall numbers are there, and see no reason why those splits cant improve over time as most young hitters make adjustments as part of the development process. My whole point all along has been that while Ryan Sweeney may end up a 4th OF’r, he has done nothing in his rookie season to suggest that. After taking all things into consideration from this season, as well as future development, his stats indicate he may be a starter more-so then not.

by JPShark on Sep 16, 2008 1:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

the only way

your argument holds true is if you are assuming that a talented 23 or 24 yo rookie can not improve.
Sounds pretty weak to me.

People are great at telling you what the stats ARE, but there aren’t a whole lot of folks out there that can tell you what those stats MEAN or what a guys stats WILL BE (and what that will mean)

by nms on Sep 16, 2008 1:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Minor league stats

when properly interpreted, are as predictive of future major league performance as major league stats.

Given his performance as a professional ballplayer to date I am not impressed with Mr. Sweeney. Sure, we can throw our hands up in the air and say “He can IMPROVE!” – but what reason has he given us to think he will improve? a 344 AB MLB performance – where he showed no power? The most logical interpretation of this is SSS, and again, his 2008 isnt really impressive at all.

Im not saying he can’t get better – I AM saying there isnt much reason to believe he will get better. Let me show you a stat and I’ll tell you what it means: .395 SLG – with a .102 ISO. That means this player does not hit for extra bases. What was his minor league SLG? .405. His ISO? .114. What does this mean? It means this guy will almost certainly never hit for power. What does THAT mean? It means no team in their right mind would use a player who hits for such an empty average in a corner OF spot. Which means he needs to be a plus defender in CF to make it as a major leaguer. Im not sold on that happening. I certainly dont think it will happen with the A’s, who have much better CF candidates all over the place, and much better bats they’ll want to use in the corner OF spots.

Ryan Sweeney is just not that good, has never been very good and there exists little to no reason to believe he will improve enough to be a major league starter.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 4:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why don't you account for the fact that he's been very, VERY young for every league he's played in?

I’d rather have a guy who was slightly above average, but 2 years younger than he should’ve been for a league than a guy who absolutely mashed but was a year or 2 older than he should’ve been for the league.

I think there’s plenty of reason to think he’ll get better. I actually don’t see much reason to think he can’t.

by thejd44 on Sep 16, 2008 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ARL

only takes you so far. You actually have to produce at least once for me.

Even given ARL there is no reason to think he will ever hit for power, considering:

a) his powerless, sissy, inside out, Mark Teahen swing; and
b) the fact he has NEVER hit for power EVER.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

It isn’t only his lack of HR that leads me to believe he won’t hit for power. He also has topped out at 25 doubles which leads me to believe that he isn’t driving the ball hard to the gaps. I don’t understand how people believe he will hit 20+ HR when his minor league numbers have never been remotely close. In 1928 minor league at bats he has only 34 homers and a .405 slugging. It isn’t like scouts are projecting a big power spike and personally I think those who believe he will do so are going to be very disappointed.

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift

by King Billy Royal on Sep 16, 2008 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Far as I'm concerned, that split is a good thing

A guy who is a plus hitter against righties and a minus against lefties is a distinctly better player than one who is mediocre against both, because he can be platooned effectively. Major platoon splits are only a negative when a guy is an everyday player against both types of starters.

Eg: if we take his and Rajai Davis’s hitting splits as the gospel, they’re definitely a plus tandem in the OF (Rajai doesn’t look it, but you have to evaluate his defense as well).

That said, the extreme small sample size of his at-bats to date warns against drawing any conclusions yet.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 16, 2008 2:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guess youre right

It shouldnt be an issue because its exceptionally unlikely any team is foolish enough to give this guy an everyday job.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 4:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Did Ryan Sweeney kill your dog or something?

Seriously. The guy is 23 and already an above-average player. Nobody is saying he’s Willie effing Mays over here. If you actually think there are 90 outfielders who deserve to be starters over him, you haven’t seen very much baseball. Are you sure you’re not Keith Law? He’s the guy who argued with me saying Aaron Rowand was a 4th outfielder (and I’m not comparing the two players, just pointing out how quickly people throw around the term without thinking about what it actually means).

This year, Sweeney has a .278 EQA. As a rookie (basically, if not actually). A 23-year-old rookie. That makes him a tick above average at LF and RF, and quite a bit above in CF.

by thejd44 on Sep 16, 2008 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

In no way is he an above average major league player

344 ABs of around .300 with absolutely no SLG does not make you an above average major league OFer.

Why is everyone hung up on this guy’s empty average? His EqA is all average driven, and as you say that is truly only a tick above average. Its basically league average(.275). So if he continues to hit .303 he can stay around average. The average EqA for LF has to be above .275, too. What’s your source for this? EqA is not adjusted for position…

Even if you want to argue that he’s been an average MLB hitter this year there is nothing in his history, stats or even tools I would argue, that would give the indication he will continue to be average or above average in the future.

Lets look at Sweeney’s PECOTA. BP had him down for 476 ABs, hitting .263/.326/.390 with 8 HRs. His weighted mean EqA projection was .263. This is not an above average major league OFer. Throw in a

Im honestly puzzled why anyone would be excited at all about this guy. He is what he is – a guy who cant hit much, whose value is tied in completely to his batting average, who cant hit for any power whatsoever(and an unnacceptable amount for a starting MLB OFer), and who plays pretty good defense, but not enough to demand he’s in the lineup despite his bat. He’s going to be one of the better 4th OFers in baseball, and then probably out of the game in 5 or 6 years.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sorry

lost a sentence. Should read:

Throw in his line this year (.294/.335/.375 with 5 Hrs) and I guarantee his PECOTA next season is going to look just as bad, if not worse.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

The only positions I will take an empty BA from are top defensive middle infielders or catchers. If you are playing OF or corner infield then you better have some pop in that bat or at least blazing speed. Sweeney has neither of these.

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift

by King Billy Royal on Sep 16, 2008 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not just you

but no major league team would consider actually handing this guy a corner OF spot. No way that happens. Not even the Nats.

Fourth OFer, or guy who starts on a bad team because of an injury to a starter.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm looking for where I mentioned his BA

He has an ABOVE AVERAGE EQA FOR HIS POSITION. And he’s a plus corner OF. I really, really struggle to understand how anybody can look at an advanced (not perfect, but advanced) metric and then use batting average as an argument against it.

by thejd44 on Sep 16, 2008 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I said BA, not you

His EqA is driven by his AVG. It is the major component that is making his EqA so high.

Im struggling to understand why youre being such a dick about this. Since you used such an advanced metric I would have assumed you know that hits are the biggest component factor in EqA.

This is significant because I was arguing his average is probably not sustainable and the evidence shows he will likely be closer to a .265-275 hitter, which would also likely drop his EqA to below average. EqA = (H + TB + 1.5*(BB + HBP + SB) + SH + SF) divided by (AB + BB + HBP + SH + SF + CS + SB).

Say hi to your cousin Ryan for me next time you talk to him.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And why do you think he won't sustain his average?

The entire argument you’re making is that he has a singles-hitter swing. So either he has the type of swing that’s going to keep getting him the line drive singles, or he doesn’t have that type of swing and the power will come. Pick one, because having it both ways doesn’t work.

by thejd44 on Sep 16, 2008 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think he's a singles hitter

that will hit around .265 with patience but not much power. You know… a fourth OFer.

I think he has the type of swing that pitchers will expose at the MLB level because they dont fear his power at all.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And there is definitely an in between

because there is absolutely no reason to believe power will come.

We might as well look for Ichiro’s power to come next year.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ok, you're being ridiculous now

And it’s kind of sad, really.

First, I’m not talking about his batting average. I agree that he has to hit around .300 at his current rate of production to be useful. But he hits a ton of line drives so I don’t really see why this is such a difficult thing to accept as a possibility.

Next, bbpro has EQA by position here: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/statistics/eqa2008.php

It’s free content, so everybody can see. Click position totals. This doesn’t appear to separate AL and NL, so there might be a case there that in the AL Sweeney is a little bit below average offensively. But that leads me to my next point:

I don’t think people understand what the word average means. So say Sweeney is a couple points below that offensively, that makes him bad? That assumes that all 60 starting corner OFs are above average, and they’re getting an equal number of at bats as every backup player who makes up the below average. That just doesn’t make any damn sense. And we haven’t even talked defense, where Sweeney is a plus player and more than worth a starting spot on a significant number of teams.

It appears you’re using Sweeney slightly exceeding his projections (something not uncommon for a 23-year-old player) as proof that he isn’t good? Seirously? That actually makes sense to you? It’s not as though Sweeney has been very lucky, he’s been better than PECOTA expected. Looks a lot more like improvement (but not quite breakout) than anything. Also a pretty good sign that he might continue to get better.

Sweeney will need to work on his swing to hit for the power that people expected from him, but as it currently stands he’s still putting up numbers that make him a decent player. A team full of decent players will get you pretty far.

by thejd44 on Sep 16, 2008 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You yourself just pointed out that he was a .313/.368/.443 hitter against righties

I’ll tolerate differences in opinion, but not rank stupidity— and the argument that that line does not justify a guy starting in corner OF (or at any position, really) is rank stupidity.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 16, 2008 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You know

you constantly make outrageous statements like “rank stupidity.” What is the problem with people on this board?

The line against Lefties indicates he will not be an EVERY DAY starter as discussed above. Youre the only one who is defining “starter” as platoon starter.

How very stupid of you. I just wont tolerate that.

Seriously cut the f***ing insults out of your posts. It just makes everyone think youre an a**hole and you do it in every post.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

OK, so your argument is

that his value as a platoon player “shouldn’t be an issue”… because he won’t be an everyday starter.

That’s a completely illogical argument. Platoon players can be extremely valuable to their teams. Curtis Granderson can’t hit lefties worth a damn and he’s one of the most valuable hitters in baseball.

Sorry, I’m not going to sugarcoat it when you make bad arguments. You choose to take it personally, that’s your own problem.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 16, 2008 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Granderson vs Lefties

This year he is hitting .268 with a .426 SLG against lefties. Not great but definitely better then ‘not worth a damn’. The reason he is one of the best hitters is because overall he hits .300 with 20+ HR and 15+ triples over a full season. Sweeney has no chance of numbers like that.

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift

by King Billy Royal on Sep 16, 2008 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Alright then

Eric Chavez. Trot Nixon, during his better years. If you don’t like the Granderson example, there are plenty of other players who either were platooned or should have been (or at least, in Chavez’s case, buried in the nine-hole and treated as defensive specialists against lefties).

Ultimately the point here is that if a guy is strong against one handedness of pitching, he has substantial value to a team (especially if it’s against righties) above and beyond what his “OPS if he was playing everyday” would tell you.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 16, 2008 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Im not arguing that

I believe youre right, and its something that is often overlooked.

I just dont think Ryan Sweeney is a good hitter even against RHPs, or that he will be. Again, no power at all. With a .100 ISO you really cant even platoon that guy in a corner…

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 6:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Platooning

Wouldn’t that at least make him a ‘part time fourth OF’?

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift

by King Billy Royal on Sep 16, 2008 6:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're really getting into semantic gimmickry

if you try to argue that the guy with the third-most ABs in an outfield, who is #3 on the depth chart, is a “fourth outfielder.” If you have 4 primary guys— a CF, an RF and a platoon in LF— the left-hander in that platoon will be the #3 outfielder by every logical definition of the term.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 16, 2008 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No team

will take a guy who hits with as little power as Sweeney and stick him in a corner OF spot, even on a platoon basis.

My point was your insults dont add anything to your arguments, which are often good.

In this case, I think youre just confusing things by trying to make a point that platoon players are underrated. They likely are, but even if Sweeney gets a platoon job, that should be construed as not a starter in the way we’ve been defining it for this argument.

Granderson may not hit lefties as well, but he does face them. He’s not in a strict platoon. Sweeney, I would imagine, would at best be in a strict platoon… he would sit against LHP most likely. This is relevant because we were discussing his ceiling as a player/prospect, not his value to a team…

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It DOES affect his ceiling

That’s the problem with your argument. Let’s say a guy is the modern day Ripken, plays every day, threatens to shoot his manager if he takes him out of the lineup, whatever.

Over the course of a whole season, he is:

10 RAA against RHP, and
-10 RAA against LHP.

Not great, right? League average. Now, suppose you platoon him so that he gets almost no at-bats against lefties. Suddenly he’s a 10 RAA player. That’s a big deal— it’s a full win derived just from using your personnel differently. Every manager should be expected to identify an inefficiency that large.

If you just look at his minor league numbers, they’re normally going to assume implicitly that he’s playing every day. Minor league managers don’t platoon their players because they want diagnostic info, not to maximize their team’s raw winning percentage. So those numbers might suggest a ceiling of a league average player. If you can identify the platoon split and use it at the MLB level, you will have a player whose “ceiling” in terms of actual runs created is higher than the minor league stats make it appear.

As for the other argument, relating to power, honestly, you’re just barking up a tree on that one. Numerous hitters with less power than Sweeney have seen extended tours as corner outfielders— Reggie Willits, Scott Podsednik and Jason Tyner come off the top of my head and those are just from the last two seasons. They’re not numerous, but they exist.

The important question is not whether a guy can hit like a corner OF qualitatively, it’s can he hit like a corner OF quantitatively— in practice, a league average corner OF is about 5 batting runs above average. If you hit better than that, you are a plus hitter in the corner OF. If not, you’re a minus. It really doesn’t matter how you compile those 5 runs.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 16, 2008 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What happened to Willits, Podsednik, and Tyner?

The answer is that they failed to hold onto their jobs for prolonged periods of time.

What is the other difference? Willits, Podsednik, and Tyner all added the stolen base component in their starting seasons. Sweeney does not have that ability.

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift

by King Billy Royal on Sep 16, 2008 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Right

Plus Those guys all were constantly bitched about as being terrible other than one luck fueled year by Pods, and an amazing (and also lucky) rookie season by Willits.

Tyner is just terrible, while Willits and Pods brought more to the table than Sweeney does(better OBP, speed and contact for Willits, better contact and speed for Pods). Heck, for the sake of argument I’ll even concede that Sweeney might be as good a hitter (minus the speed of these boys). Lets say he is – that makes him what? One of the 5 or 10 worst starting OFers in baseball? Meaning he’d be better served as a 4th OFer. If Sweeney turns out to be Jason Tyner with less defense Im pretty sure I was right about him all along.

I dont agree with your argument anyway, though… its the same as pointing to Livan Hernandez this year or Luis Mendoza and saying “see! 6.00 ERA pitchers with crappy stuff CAN make the rotation!”

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 7:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm really not sure why you're having so much trouble with this

If Sweeney hits like a league-average corner outfielder in Oakland, which is to say a .750 or so OPS, with average defense, he is a league-average player.

This is trivially obvious stuff here. If he does better than that standard, he is better than league average. If he does worse, he is worse than league average. If he does it in a platoon setup, his value will be a little less because he is doing it in fewer games, hence he will have to be a bit better than the above to be a player of average value.

How exactly he generates his run value, power, defense, steals, average, walks, whatever, is totally irrelevant.

None of this has anything to do with Sweeney’s personal characteristics or what I believe he will eventually do in MLB. It’s true of every player in baseball.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 16, 2008 8:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Their difference was entirely batting average

You’re right that their seasons were largely identical, but any advantage Sweeney had was not in power (they has the same isolated power) or in plate control, but in batting average on balls in play. If you assume that at the moment, they are equal hitters, then Ellsbury’s added speed and defense should make him a significantly more valuable player. Maybe we should consider them more equal – I certainly agree that people are probably overrating Ellsbury and maybe underrating Sweeney – but I think the point is that at the plate, neither Sweeney or Ellsbury are especially good players. With his other strengths, Ellsbury begins to add value

www.loftylantern.com

by OldProspects on Sep 15, 2008 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why are you assuming that their innate BABIP are the same?

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 16, 2008 2:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

Ellsbury will ALWAYS hit for a crazy high BABIP because, like Ichiro, he is so fast he creates more hits for himself.

Guys who hit the ball very hard or burn on the basepaths hits for higher BABIPs. BABIPs for hitters arent as much lucky as they are with pitchers.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 4:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Um, no

Guys who slap the ball around usually have LOWER BABIP, not higher. Speed is not well correlated with BABIP; power is.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 16, 2008 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Line drive power is....

Hulking strikeout prone sluggers are not.

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift

by King Billy Royal on Sep 16, 2008 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Give me a list of the players you define as "hulking strikeout prone sluggers"

I’ll guarantee you that they will have career BABIPs above average. In fact, I’d be surprised if ANY of them, much less most of them, have BABIPs below league average.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 16, 2008 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Frank Thomas immediately came to mind when you said "hulking strikeout prone slugger"

.310 career BABIP.

Im not saying I 100% agree with his point, but line drive % correlates well with BABIP.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 7:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

From Firstinning.com

First off, I never stated that they had BABIP BELOW LEAGUE AVERAGE. I stated that line drive power hitters tend to have higher BABIP. Please do not put words in my mouth. However, since you want to believe that all sluggers have high BABIP I decided to examine the leading strikeout prone sluggers and examine their BABIP this season. To find these hitters I looked at the top 9 strikeout prone hitters who have at least 20 homeruns.

From firstinning.com:
A hitter’s BABIP describes the proportion of balls in play that result in hits. The average BABIP is usually around .300 at the major league level, but the league average can be as high as .340 in some of the lower minor leagues. Although BABIP is a repeatable skill to some degree, an unusually high or low BABIP is usually an indicator of good or bad luck.

Adam Dunn:
2008 Cincy .303
2008 Dbacks .249

Mark Reynolds
2008 .329

Chris Young
2008 .303

Dan Uggla
2008 .327

Ryan Howard:
2008 .283

Jack Cust:
2008 .311

Carlos Pena
2008 .304

Jim Thome
2008 .276

Nick Swisher
2008 .248

As you can see 4 of these hitters have BABIP below .300. Only 2 have BABIP significantly better than .300 while 3 are around the average mark.

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift

by King Billy Royal on Sep 16, 2008 7:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

..........

and you’re picking out 2008 instead of their career lines why, exactly?

League average in MLB is actually consistently very near .290, so let’s get that clear. WIth that out of the way, they line up:

Dunn: average
Reynolds: way above average
Young: really shouldn’t be on here, as he isn’t “hulking,” but below average
Uggla: above average
Howard: above average
Cust: way above average
Pena: slightly above average
Thome: way above average
Swisher: well below average
Thomas: above average

So we have a lineup of 10 guys where two are below average in BABIP, and they are by far the most questionable inclusions on the list, based on defensive position and (in Young’s case) speed. Swisher, eh. I’ll give you that. He’s had a weird season and somewhat of a weird career.

It’s certainly true that LD rate correlates better with BABIP than the power/K combo, but that’s not what alskor argued (nor what I argued against). I said power was better correlated than speed, which it is.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 16, 2008 8:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thoughts

I am just going by what the website stated in regards to .300. The reason I didn’t go with the career numbers is the same reason you did not go with the career numbers when examining the top BABIP hitters in the Chris Carter thread. I figured that if you felt the most recent data was relevant there, then you would feel it was relevant here as well. I am not arguing that power doesn’t correlate better then speed, and I might add I never stated that power hitters who K have low BABIP. All I said was that power hitting line drive hitters are the ones who tend to have the highest BABIP. You tried to put the other words in my mouth.

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift

by King Billy Royal on Sep 16, 2008 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Your Carter Post

This is the reason why I used the current strikeout leaders from the leaderboard:

Your Post under Chris Carter thread:
You would expect a much better than .296 BABIP from a slugger
David Ortiz is no one’s idea of a speedster and hits into the shift to boot, and his career BABIP is .311. Jack Cust’s career BABIP is .340. Ryan Howard’s is .332.

Most guys who consistently post BABIPs above league average are power hitters, not Ichiro-type speedsters. The current leaderboard goes Bradley, C. Jones, Manny, Berkman, Holliday, Fred Lewis, Kemp, Nady, Pujols, Hawpe. There are a few outliers having fluke seasons (hello, Fred Lewis) but most of those guys are mashers.

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift

by King Billy Royal on Sep 16, 2008 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

There is no such thing as a "career leaderboard"

If you’re looking for league leaders, you kinda have to use the current season.

Notice that in the first paragraph, where I’m talking about specific guys, I use career stats.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Sep 16, 2008 10:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

by definition strike-out prone guys HAVE to have high BABIPs to be in the Major Leagues because, if they didn’t, they would be worthless hitters even after you think about all of the homers

by nms on Sep 18, 2008 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They both correlate well

Youre assuming “speed” goes hand in hand with “slap hitter.”

I dont think that’s true. Ellsbury is certainly not a slap hitter. He generates a lot of backspin and loft, which is why some think he will hit for more power(Im not sold). Ichiro IS a slap hitter and routinely has obscenely high BABIPs… though it is almost always a bad idea to use Ichiro as an example of anything because he’s such a unique hitter…. but I think you see my point.

by alskor on Sep 16, 2008 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What he has done

this season has impressed many people. Not everyone is fixated on power, and some think its a good thing that he has shown the ability to take the ball the other way. He’s hitting .294, and wouldn’t be doing that if he didnt indeed have the ability to use the whole field. Its also not like he doesnt ever pull the ball. I have seen him yank several line drives down the RF line and into the gap in right center for doubles. If my memory serves me correctly all of his HR’s were pulled. He hits the ball hard, and does it often. Alskor, can I ask you how many games you have actually seen Sweeney play this season whether it be on T.V. or in person??

by JPShark on Sep 15, 2008 2:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

like most A's players

he also hits much better on the road 140 pts in OPS higher than home…he could use improvement vs lefties too, early season they were platooning him with brown at times

that might be a similar situation with cunningham around eventually

on wed/thurs they expect to call up buck/gonzalez/denorfia + OF’s who’s already at the mlb level…not sure what they have planned for even murton/patterson…big OF roster crunch they’ll have to deal with at some point.

by Asfan4ever723 on Sep 15, 2008 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

At this point, Murton and Patterson don't really register on the OF depth chart

And Patterson only registers on the 2B depth chart because Ellis is hurt and a FA next year.

by thejd44 on Sep 16, 2008 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i wonder about his injuries impacting his power

he had a wrist issue his last year with the white sox, which may have had an impact on his lower-than-expected power numbers. this year, he’s had several ailments that may also have impacted his power. i’m not saying there’s a direct correlation (he could just be a no-power guy), but that could explain some of the power drought, because as some have mentioned, he hits the ball pretty hard and has a frame that would suggest he’d have some power. though i also do suspect its partly to do with his swing, which most certainly limits his power.

by guy incognito on Sep 16, 2008 2:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs