The biggest statistical difference is that it's only fastballs Howard's been hitting. Unless Josh Kalk's cards lie, Howard has only gotten extra-base hits on fastballs and cutters. His slugging average is the same as his batting average on sinkers and sliders (where both are 0) and curveballs and change-ups.

He also won't move up in the batter's box despite the suggestions from hitting guru/manager Charlie Manuel to do so.

Did you know Howard is older than Albert Pujols? True story!

I would be remiss if I didn't mention that Albert Pujols has a receding hair line and is therefore 3 years older than his listed age.

Holy Sugar! That card is utterly insanely awesome.

Comparing the player cards linked from #1, it struck me that the biggest difference between 2007 and 2008 is the proportion of pitches that Howard has seen that are fastballs, with an equally large decrease in sliders. There has also been a less dramatic increase in both changeups and curves.

According to the card, Howard has put one ball in play that was a slider so far this year.

I wish I could send that link to someone at the Mets.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention that Albert Pujols has a receding hair line and is therefore 3 years older than his listed age.

By itself that wouldn't mean much. Some people just lose their hair earlier than others. The 25 year old son is better evidence of his real age, as are photos of him playing alongside Babe Ruth.

Agreed with Chris, those cards are awesome. I wish I had a better sense of context (what's good, what's bad) for some of them. For instance...

JD Drew:
currently hitting: .284 AVG, .414 SLG (with a .392 OBP, he has a 118 OPS+)

according to his card:
against 226 fastballs (52 in play): .212 AVG, .346 SLG
agaisnt 3 sinkers (1 in play): .000 AVG, .000 SLG
against 41 curveballs (7 in play): .286 AVG, .429 SLG
against 52 sliders (13 in play): .308 AVG, .462 SLG
against 45 changeups (9 in play): .333 AVG, .333 SLG
against 12 splitters (1 in play): .000 AVG, .000 SLG
against 16 cutters (3 in play): .667 AVG, 1.667 SLG

Which all is cool to see, but I'm not sure what to make of it. I mean, clearly Drew is hitting better (in a small sample) against offspeed pitches than he is against fastballs (when he puts the ball in play or strikes out), but it could well be thatmany players do that (though it would surprise me) or it could be that the fact that 25% of fastballs end up being put in play is more meaningful.

I dunno. First reaction is to say (from a limited sample) that Drew's bat has slowed down and he's now living off pitcher mistakes, that he can't catch up to a good fastball, but (small sample issues aside), I'm not sure there aren't a ton of other possible explanations. For all I know, Drew's numbers against sliders are worse than his numbers against curves (compared to other players). I'm hesitant to do more interpretation without context.

Others' thoughts?

He’s one of the most promising young hitters in many years,

Huh?

Howard turns 30 next year...

I guess, depending on the context, that he's still a "young hitter"....

I like the called strike on the bottom left of the curveball chart.

Ryan Howard along with Prince Fielder could be the next Bonds and Griffey, Stargell and McCovey, Foxx and Gehrig or... this?

Ryan Howard along with Prince Fielder could be the next Bonds and Griffey, Stargell and McCovey, Foxx and Gehrig or... this?

Dude, that is racially insensitive. How about this?

Or this:
http://www.generallyawesome.com/marshmallow_man.JPG

Side note: how do you do links?

Second side note: is it the rule of thumb that Latin players like by 3 years? I guess too much would be obvious, but how do we know he's not really 32 or something.

could be the next Bonds and Griffey, Stargell and McCovey, Foxx and Gehrig.

Sim scores thinks the Cash, C. Fielder, Gentile, or Mo Vaughn career paths or more likely.

Side note: how do you do links?

Click on the < a > button; follow the instructions (best to have the URL ready to paste). Your browser may whine about scripted windows.

1. I'm guessing whenever a player is slumping horribly, they aren't doing well on fastballs in the zone ... so I'm not sure this is telling us anything this early in the season. Don't get me wrong, as one of the few (the only?) to suggest that Howard's Ks were going to catch up with him and he couldn't keep hitting at his historic on-contact levels, I'm more than willing to believe this slump is "for real." But it takes more evidence.

2. The line about Bonds, Griffey, etc. was nuts if for no other reason than Howard's age. McCovey's not too much of a stretch though as he didn't become full-time until age 25 (brilliant move by the Giants!).

Unless it turns out he’s Dave Kingman.

He's got a much better batting eye than Kingman

But if you neutralize Kingmna's 1979 season to 2006 Philly you get: .297 .353 .631

If you neutrailze Cecil Fielder's 1990-92 seaosn to 2006 Philly you get:
.305/.410/.649
.280/.369/.547 and
.268/.353/.504

Hopward over the SAME ages has gone
.313/.425/.659 to
.268/.392/.584 to
.171/.280/.357 (so far)

not as close as I thought, but I still see Howard as the second coming of Cecil...

I'm more than willing to believe this slump is "for real." But it takes more evidence.

he's hitting .171/.280/.357, if this slump is for real, wow, just wow.
I didn't think his on contact numbers could hold up, because they were just so far out there, but I still thought we'd see a few years of .250/.350/.525 to .265/.365/.550 type performances

By suggesting his slump might be "for real" I didn't mean he's a true 170 hitter. That's why I put it in quotes. But I certainly don't blame you for not understanding that.

So what did I mean?

First, I assumed last year's rate of 2.5 AB per K was a fluke and he'd return to something a bit more "normal" ... but he's at it again. Second, I did assume that his "true" on-contact performance might well be in the 400/800 territory (Ruth/Thome). But if his slump is "for real" then maybe his "true" K-rate is around 40% of ABs and he's more like a "true" 360/720 hitter on-contact.

If he's gonna K in 40% of his ABs (not PAs, I'm too lazy for that), then even if he's 400/800 then that's a 240 BA and 480 SLG overall ... which is not that great for a slow, poor fielding 1B even with a lot of walks. If he's at 360/720, he'll be out of baseball soon (220/440) which doesn't seem possible to me.

The key point to me is that he simply can't continue to K in 40% of his ABs.

Are any of the high-K all-stars doing well this year?

Howard's been awful;
Wily Mo Pena's been awful;
Carlos Pena's been pretty mediocre;
Dunn has cut his K-rate but is having an off-year;
Cust has a lovely OPS+ but is hitting 263/432 -- it's walking once per 4 PA that's doing it for him -- though that SLG is still well above-average so far this year;
BJ Upton has brought his K-rate back to 1 per 4 and is doing nicely (still with quite high on-contact BA though);
Thome's pretty average but I'd put that on age -- his K-rate this year is pretty normal for him;
Mark Reynold's has come tumbling back to earth -- and the scary thing is he's putting up a nice 373/687 on-contact and still stinks.

I'm probably missing some. Cust is the only guy here still carrying a super-high K-rate and doing well but that's mainly the huge number of walks he's drawing (nothing wrong with that, it's a key to success for this type of hitter) and the 407 on-contact BA. There are a number of guys doing well on the cusp of the "unsustainable K-rate" (about 1 per 3.5) like Justin Upton, Dan Uggla and some others.

It's early yet of course and I don't mean that above list to conclusive in any sense. Guys like Thome and Dunn show you can have very productive careers with K-rates around 1 per 3 or 3.5 AB and it's possible that Howard will yet show you can push that out to 1 per 2.5. I just find it odd that it seems almost all the established high-K guys (who are still K'ing lots) are getting off to lousy starts.