Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
In response to #3: I don't think he's that bad an outfielder, but he is prone to injuring himself.
If he can stay on the field for 140 games in one of those places he'd likely swat 40 bombs and get himself in line for a $100 million contract from some team that doesn't grasp park effects.
completely unaware of park effects in 2012
You're telling me I'm supposed to believe that an MLB team doesn't "grasp" a concept that 1,000s of dudes on the internet "grasp"?
and he's hitting the snot out of the ball
He was, for a week. Excluding that first week, he's hitting .224/.355/.362 since.
Boy, you don't follow the Royals at all, do you?
Jesus. Of all the places on the internet, I would hope that this is one where people understand not to do this nonsense. Also, redundant!
I understand perfectly well the problems with picking and choosing my endpoints. But it's not like I'm selecting two weeks in June to say that he's a crappy hitter. I don't think he's just simply a league average hitter. I'm just pointing out that for over a month, which makes up about 85% of his season so far, he has, unequivocally, not hit the snot out of the ball. I'm more than willing to be persuaded that you should pay him because that one week of a 2.000 OPS is worth it, but I'm having a hard time counting on it to happen again.
Well, I was also going to work in something along the lines of "Probably hundreds of thousands of dudes on the internet grasp the concept of 'Under no circumstances should you pay Jason Kendall to play baseball', but..."
I'm more than willing to be persuaded that you should pay him because that one week of a 2.000 OPS is worth it, but I'm having a hard time counting on it to happen again.
Three years, he's 29, it's $9 million/year, and he's hitting the snot out of the ball?
The question I have, however, is why on Earth did the Padres give him a no-trade clause?
I don't love the years/money aspect of the deal, as Quentin is an unexceptional, inconsistent, oft-injured OF/DH heading into his 30s, but it ain't terrible.
You don't count on another week of 2000 OPS, you just take the overall statistics as they are. There's just no reason to parse them like that. It doesn't serve any purpose.
But of course SOSH U is right, his 2012 sample is small enough that it doesn't really do much at all to shift our opinion of his talent one way or the other. And you're right, he's probably not a 900 OPS hitter in Petco (or anywhere else).
Is it really so totally impossible that a guy who has caught TWO THOUSAND Major League games might be useful to have around your minor leaguers? Is there some other awesome catcher the Royals could have signed to play in AA Northwest Arkansas? If Jason Kendall can teach one younger Royal one halfway useful thing about baseball the signing is worth it.
I don't think you take the overall statistics as they are, especially considering, as we all agree upon, the too small a sample size. I think you do have to parse them to show how much one good week can affect the overall numbers.
All he did was refute the statement that "he's (present tense) hitting the snot out of the ball".
So tell me, why do you discount good weeks?
I couldn't disagree with this more. What you're doing is taking a perfectly acceptable set of numbers and fudging them in order to fit a narrative. And you're making the sample size even smaller.
He was arguing that eliminating Quentin's one hot week gave the most accurate view of his talents
Next time, I'll just say something boring like "he's actually still the 116 OPS+ guy he was coming into the season." I hope that will appease you.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (1 members)
Page rendered in 0.4459 seconds, 57 querie(s) executed