User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.5214 seconds
53 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
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.
1. JRVJ Posted: August 01, 2011 at 01:21 PM (#3890152)This surprisingly good season is going to allow him to make enough to retire well in the Dominican.
I'm not entirely sure why the Royals didn't trade him, but I suspect it could be because his market value wasn't that high.
The market value is never high for the worst player in baseball, this season notwithstanding.
And how exactly have you proven this, Jeffty?
Alex Gordon looked really good in the Red Sox series (the most I've seen him play this year), and the Royals should be pretty pleased with how he seems to be working out...
Dividing by zero?
I tend to agree. My opinion of Francoeur, based on the enormous sample size of his two dozen games with Texas last season, is that he can help as a role player on a good team. Such guys (Melky would seem to be another) can sometimes start on bad teams. Kansas City right now is your basic bad team.
They are objectively both having good years, but somehow I think this is a coincidence and not likely to become a lifelong habit in either case.
Melky was the starting centerfielder on a championship team. Francouer was one-half of a starting outfielder on a runner-up. It may not be proof, but his comment isn't terribly far off.
And if they were repeat their 2011 seasons, then yes, they both are more than capable of serving as starting outfielders on championship teams. I'm sure there are a handful of contenders this season who would have loved to have plugged the production from either of them into their outfield when the 2011 campaign began.
Strange that the pipeline of Frenchy stories at BTF, or the weekly updates of his hitting since some selected end point, has kind of dried up as he's turned in a nice little season.
All this seems to prove is that sometimes great teams have a shitty starter or two.
I don't think Frenchy's comment was meant to suggest that he and Melky were good enough to be the two worst players on a championship team. Although I'm sure that's true.
What is nice is that he had a bounce back July so you don't get those silly stupid endpoint stats where someone says "he's batting this low of a number from a certain date" implying that is his true skill level(it's no more his true skill level than the first month of his hot hitting)
Could be a supply issue, where he doesn't need fluffing from the press as much when he's actually playing well.
Their previous employer leaps to mind.
So his true skill is some sort of mashup of two numbers in which both don't reflect his true skill?
Once again Jeff finds himself on a hot streak but it isn't any kind of a sustainable hot streak. Well, unless you are Ty Cobb or Ted Williams that is. For the month of July he only went hitless in 5 games over the 25 games he played. Now that isn't like his April where he went hitless only 3 times in 26 games but it is pretty close to his peak. When he isn't on a hot streak banging out a single a game and the occasional double nearly every day his performance at the plate is very close to zero. At some point he'll cool off again and we'll see the below replacement level numbers from him again.
yes, and that;s true of almost everyone- no one is as good as their numbers from a hot streak and no one is as bad as their numbers from a slump.
Of course it is. Right?
Except his "slump" are his usual numbers.
Of course it is. Right?
So Jeff's true skill are the numbers he has right now? So then wasn't his true skill a .733 OPS a little over a month ago as well? But now his true skill is a .790 OPS?
The point is that you can never slice up his numbers and select a sample that looks right. You just take all of his numbers without prejudice. You must understand this.
No, 790 is not our best guess at his true talent, because it's way above his career mark. But that doesn't mean we ignore his hot July.
But no one finds it necessary to bump old French threads to point out his hot numbers employing selectively chosen end points. Just as Repoz and Gamingboy and Tripon don't find it necessary to post as many Francouer articles when he's playing well.
Frenchy - performance-based snark opportunites = not as much fun for BTFers.
I don't think Frenchy's found a new level as a hitter. I think he's having a nice little season and has been a nice pickup for the Royals. Considering the amount of bandwidth we spend mocking him, acknowledging that fact shouldn't be so difficult.
Who said we ignore a hot July? Not accepting his numbers at face value or expecting those numbers to hold up for the entire season does not mean one is ignoring his July.
The point is that you can never slice up his numbers and select a sample that looks right. You just take all of his numbers without prejudice. You must understand this.
Who does understand this? You bring up a hot July. Others, perhaps even you, brought up a hot start, some others brough up a terrible May and June. Still others brought up the fact that Jeff has been sub par for many seasons.
This is kind of the Royals problem though. They are both playing at the same time. The Royals are a little better, but a lot of that is due to having 5 or 6 of these types of players on the field at the same time. All guys that could contribute to a championship caliber team. Unfortunately, 2 or 3 good to great players plus 5 or 6 of these guys is not a championship quality team.
Well how bout the fact that the last few seasons prior to this, your CF and RF have sucked nuts, and you have a young outfielder in AAA hitting a .900 OPS? What a stupid trade deadline. I fear contract extensions are forthcoming.
Even with his bounceback, his numbers since Cinco de Mayo are .256/.314/.401.
My BTF team still hates you, Dayton.
I don't think that this year's numbers are necessarily Jeff's "true skill level," and I doubt that CFB does either. But it's nonsense to hunt within his 2011 numbers for a sample that conforms to our preconceived notions, and the members of BTF should be smart enough that it never happens.
No Frenchy's usual numbers merely look like someone else's slump
Frenchy's slumps are things like August 2008 (.206/.264/.268)
May 2009 : .206/.264/.268 or July 2010: .206/.264/.268
That is a .714 ops, roughly speaking around a 100 ops+....that is far from being a completely useless player or even a bad 5th or 4th outfielder, heck a 100 ops+ out of an above average defensive outfielder is probably more than acceptable for a non-contending team and even passable for a contending team, you would like a better obp out of him of course but it's not the train wreck of a player that seemed to be the norm when people were posting their silly little "he's only hit ------ since----- quotes".
That's because the articles are fawning about how he's turned it around. When someone falls for the Francoeur "turn around" trap for the ninety billionth time, they deserve to be reminded of their stupid article when he's sporting a .700 OPS two months later.
Yep, he had a solid July though. Surprised me. Good for him.
(I admit that I would be curious to know whether the Kansas City media is churning out daily Frenchy tributes. Even with better material to work with, I would guess they're not. The Frenchy phenomenon seemed to have a lot to do with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution wanting to make the local boy into a hero. But, can't say for sure.)
Yes, this is correct.
Prior to the trading deadline, Frenchy vs. Melky was an interesting dilemma. On one hand, Frenchy's contract was up, and he is Frenchy... on the other hand, you could get more for Melky, and Lorenzo Cain is at his most valuable if he plays CF. So you could have reasonably traded either one. But they didn't, and I can't fathom an argument for keeping both. Cain is both better than Frenchy and cheaper. He's also 25 already. I don't see how you can leave him in the minors again next year.
Yea, he's not useless, and he'd probably make for a good platoon partner for a contender - which is why its baffling why the Royals kept him around. Either he (a) completely craters, (b)hits about .700 OPS, which isn't useless, but isn't valuable either, or (c) keeps this up - in which, who cares? He's not part of the future, Lorenzo Cain is and we're not getting a chance to see him.
That's pretty much it, his BABIP is right at his career average- his Ks' are down, but not by enough to make a big difference- his ISO is .192, last 3 years it was .120, .143 and .134, league ISO is DOWN too so he's moved even more relative to league.
What's notable is that all his other "first time" with anew am surge have been largel;y BABIP inspired-
BABIP with Braves in 2005: .337
BABIP with Mets 2009: .336
BABIP with Rangers 2010: .340
But BABIP now is just .293 (Career is .298)
Career ISO is .161, now he's at .192
he had a .189 in 2006, non pitcher's NL were at .170 that year
AL ISO is .136 this year- so relative to league he's shown tremendous improvement
Lorenzo Cain - meh
as you note 25 already
how is Cain
better than someone like (Keep in mind the PCL is at .287/.360/.453 this year)Josh Satin
That said, the WORST Frenchy can do to you is post a nice little year and get re-signed and then put up an 85 OPS + next year for you next year. Frenchy is 27, the smart money says this is his career year, the fanboy will look at ages 21-23, ignore 24-26 and draw a straight line- the hard part is this- the smart money is not ALWAYS right and the fanboy is not wrong EVERY time.
He probably is meh, but so is Frenchy, and Cain is young and cheap and cost-controlled for six more years. Frenchy will be long gone by the time the Royals are any good.
Eh. Frenchy's 27, Melky's 26, Cain's 25. Frenchy and Melky both had more at bats at age 21 than Cain's ever had. All three of them are playing well; I'd be happy with any two of them next year if the price is right.
I'm not sure why age matters that much. Its controllable years that matter. I guess if the Royals were in good shape for being a .500 team or contending in the Central (but I repeat myself) I would somewhat agree with you. But they're not even close until they get some kind of pitching. And unless they start pulling Ubaldo Jimenez trades left and right, they're not going to have that next year. So what exactly is the point of keeping them? The next good Royals team is beyond 2012, when Melky and Frenchy are either going to suck again, or be too expensive to be worthwhile. Lorenzo Cain at least has a chance to be part of the next good Royals team.
I don't know that he's a star but a 25 year old centerfielder who can hit .300, play some defense and run a bit probably deserves a look.
He's walking in July. Never seen that before.
So does Kila by that logic.
Neither Melky nor Frenchy are so good that being free agents is going to make them unaffordable (I think).
Ignoring the issue of cost, the player with the best odds of being on the next good Royals team is whoever ends up being the best hitter. Their age 27-32 physical primes significantly overlap, they all have defensive value, they all have moderately good bats.
No, he's a pretty good defender.
Royals will have a solid lineup next year. Too bad the pitching is awful, though that has room to grow. Duffy and Paulino look good, and Crow will be starting next year. Too bad Montgomery and Hochaver are spitting the bit this year.
C: Pena/Perez
1st: Hosmer
2nd: Giovatelli
SS: Escobar
3rd: Moustakis
OF: Gordon/Cain/Melky/Frenchy
DH: Butler
If you can outbid other teams to keep Melky and/or Frenchy. And why do that when you already have a player that's likely as good in Cain and you can use those resources to shore up your awful pitching staff?
And we'll never know what Cain's possibility is if he is wasting away in Omaha.
I don't see how. Out of 1337 PAs among OF this year for KC, Melky/Gordon/Frenchy had 1246 of them, or 93% of the playing time.
And if you don't appreciate that, let me remind you: this is America, dammit.
Or, I guess I could wait and see what he does in the majors. But with Francouer and Melky around it might be a couple years before that happens.
Melky or Frenchy. On the killing bit. No reason to think they're not a good #### (and Frenchy has those "intangibles") but I don't think ####### them will do Cain any good.
Melky or Frenchy. On the killing bit. No reason to think they're not a good #### (and Frenchy has those "intangibles") but I don't think ####### them will do Cain any good.
But sometimes a bad streak can and should be dismissed, if the player was suffering a temporary malady that's unlikely to recur. Like Ubaldo Jiminez's cracked fingernail early this season. His performance under that condition is not really relevant to projecting his future performance. Problem is, we don't have any way to statistically distinguish such a factor from a real slump.
Mike Emeigh always warned us he might turn into Jose Guillen. Guillen stunk (80 OPS+ through age 26), busted out at age 27 (142 OPS+), put up three years of 115-120 (and one of 75!), then 3 years of 94.
Or both Frenchy and Melky might turn back into pumpkins and Cain will be starting real soon
I thought we all agreed we weren't going to use "part of the next good XXXX team" anymore.
Scott
(Probably an ignorant newbie question, right?)
I'm on board with this.
That's called independent scouting, and it would be the greatest ####### thing since sliced bread if we could get thorough scouting that was actually independent of results and publically available.
I think it is.
Eh, that's the problem isn't it? Neither of them is actually good enough to not be completely fungible. If by the time the Royals are good(ish), except for a black hole in the OF, you can go and get a different Francoeur/Melky shaped peg and slot it in there. There a dime a dozen.
There is really no reason why either of them should be a) blocking somebody who might be non-fungible and needs playing time, and b) not be traded for potentially usefull pieces.
I posted in another Frenchy thread about 2-3 weeks ago, that at the time, his seasonal numbers, his numbers from the previous 30 days or so, and his career numbers were nearly identical.
Regarding this year, the basic problem is that all three outfielders have been a nice surprise. That's such an unprecedented state of affairs for the Royals, I'm content to sit and let it mellow.
and yet NOW
his numbers over the last 28 days are .313/.389/.513 (last 14 are .341/.451/.610)
which has dragged his season up to .272/.326/.464 which considering overall offensive levels is quite a bit higher than his career mark of .268/.312/.429
of course this is Frenchy so if we check back in 30 days he might have gone .225/.258/.305 in the meantime and at such time, his seasonal numbers, his numbers from the previous 30 days or so, and his career numbers might nearly be identical... again
Except, his career numbers are quite a bit better than .225/.258/.305. I'm not making any judgements, predictions, or anything else. I just thought it was kind on neat how all three (career, season, recent), all coincided at the time. Of course no player ever hit precisely as his "true talent level" all the time. Tony Gwynn was a .338 career hitter, and yet rarely had a seasonal batting average anywhere near .338. He had 7 seasons of .351 or higher, 10 seasons of .324 or lower, and only 3 seasons within 12 points of .338.
To chime in, that's what bugs people about the "Frenchy's Finally Puttin' It Together!" articles - the numbers are always along the lines of he's hitting .367/.387/.512 since his grandmother's birthday or something like that, i.e. numbers that are clearly at the most cursory glance unsustainable and if anything, indicate the exact opposite of the idea that he's breaking out. That they're usually/always written by the breed of sportswriter whose fondest wish is to wake up Christmas morning and find out that the whole saber revolution was just a bad dream only throws fuel on the fire.
This time it's a little different because the numbers show he actually took a walk for a month. It's possible he pulled a Jose Bautista on us and suddenly figured everything out overnight, but there have been SO DAMN MANY of these articles over the last five years that it's kind of like a bad comedy routine. And I figure we only get one Jose Bautista a decade. That being said it is a new decade.
1: I said, "he might have gone"
2: His track record indicates that he's just as capable of going .225/.258/.305 for a month as he is of going .313/.389/.513.
Ok I may have misread how you meant that comment.
That's part of the fun of Frenchy... What baffles me is that having seen a lot of Frenchy with the Braves and Mets (I have not seen him in his Royals' incarnation), I have no idea where these Frenchy rooters/apologists are coming from or what they think they see- what I've seen is a guy who has no clue or approach when it cones to hitting, no picth recognition and a too long swing- sure he can hit the ball hard if the sweet spot of his bat hits the ball by accident- but even when he's hot he does not look like he can hit and yet many other observers, apparently including professional scouts, look at him and think that not only can/should this guy hit, but that he's a star hitter- I don't get it, I'm baffled.
WRT Frenchy 2011? My guess is that it is a mirage, 90% of it is a power spike, like Tino Martinez in 1997 hittng 44 home runs - basically Tino in 1997 was the same hitter he alwaya was, but for some reason that year 15 or so balls made it over the fence that didn't/wouldn't any other year- obviously Tino's baseline was far higher that Fremnchy's though. Or better yet- Tony Gwynn 1986- hit 14 homers, I read an interview with him, said he'd worked out, adjusted his swing and went into 1986 hoping to hit 12-18 homers- career high was 6 before that- the after the year he examined very HR on video- EVERY HR in 1986 came off a hanging curveball while Gwynn was ahead in the count- everyone- that was a pitch and HR situation he'd Homer off of BEFORE 1986 as well- so Tony in the off season before 1987 realized that his 1986 HR spike was nothing he'd done differently - it was random happenstance.
I think that's what's going on with Frenchy a half dozen extra balls have cleared the fence for some reason. Turn 6 of his homers into flyouts and he's the same .257/.313/.404 hitting Frenchy we've come to know and luv
I actually don't think this is the case. Tino in 97, for example, hits 31 doubles and 44 home runs. In nearly every other year of his career but two, Tino hits more doubles than homers. Francoeur actually has 28 doubles to 14 homers. If anything, the evidence is against your hypothesis--according to Fangraphs here, his Hr/FB% is 9.9%, which is hardly unsustainable.
If I were to point to one thing that seems to be different, Francoeur seems to be swinging and missing less frequently--nearly a quarter less than his career averages. Most of that appears to be due to laying off a particular spot in the strike zone. His Z-Swing rate is lower than at any other point in his career.
It's entirely possible that Francoeur has actually changed as a hitter.
Well Melky is not yet eligible for FA, so unless they non-tender him or trade him, he'll be back. Frenchy has a "mutual option" and seems to love it here (because they let him play you see) so it wouldn't surprise me to see him come back too.
And if there really IS a wolf this time, we're all getting devoured because we quit listening to the media about five dozen "Wolf! WOLF!!" screamings ago.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main