Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#1321695 - 12/05/10 06:44 PM Cards sign Lance Berkman *
sdoyel Offline
LIKE A BOSS

Registered: 09/23/03
Loc: Dallas
Sounds like Holliday will move to RF so Berkman can play LF. Guess we will see how suspect his defense is, but no question the guy can hit. Likely will bat 2nd in the order in front of Pujols.

Time to reclaim the Central!
_________________________
F.O.E.
"We just say let your nuts hang...." -Darnell Jackson
#KUboobs

Top
#1321696 - 12/05/10 06:56 PM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: sdoyel]
and_one Offline
Max Falkenstien

Registered: 06/19/09
Loc: Colorado
sh!t, I was thinkin' that my guys might have a shot at him ....

Top
#1321697 - 12/05/10 08:52 PM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: sdoyel]
JFish26 Offline
Max Falkenstien

Registered: 03/17/05
Loc: KC, MO
Quote:

Sounds like Holliday will move to RF so Berkman can play LF. Guess we will see how suspect his defense is, but no question the guy can hit. Likely will bat 2nd in the order in front of Pujols.

Time to reclaim the Central!




No question the guy can hit? He's going to be 35 and coming off the worst full season of his career.
_________________________
2013-14 -- One for the other thumb.

Top
#1321698 - 12/05/10 09:53 PM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: JFish26]
Rocky6 Offline
Phog Fanatic

Registered: 10/17/10
Big news was the Nats signing Werth.

Top
#1321699 - 12/05/10 09:58 PM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: Rocky6]
JFish26 Offline
Max Falkenstien

Registered: 03/17/05
Loc: KC, MO
Horrible, horrible move.
_________________________
2013-14 -- One for the other thumb.

Top
#1321700 - 12/06/10 12:16 AM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: and_one]
ManhattanHawk7 Offline
Pure Jayhawk

Registered: 02/18/04
Loc: Castle Rock
Quote:

sh!t, I was thinkin' that my guys might have a shot at him


I was hoping he would sign elsewhere. No way he can cover enough ground necessary in spacious coors. Though they do need a RH bat to go in the outfield and hopefully first.
_________________________
I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Top
#1321701 - 12/06/10 12:35 AM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: JFish26]
CrimsonNBlue Offline
Tee Y

Registered: 10/04/05
Loc: KC, MO
Quote:

Horrible, horrible move.




Scott Boras would disagree

but seriously, that contract is ridiculous. I think that's about what Vernon Wells got and look how that turned out.

the Nats move pretty much gives Theo Epstein no options to sign a big outfielder. This will drive Crawford's price to about 8 years/152-160 mil.
_________________________
"...in my opinion, the most prestigious chair in all of college basketball." -Bill Self

Top
#1321702 - 12/06/10 08:33 AM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: ManhattanHawk7]
and_one Offline
Max Falkenstien

Registered: 06/19/09
Loc: Colorado
I was thinking the bat and @ 1st. The Rocs are okay in the OF

Top
#1321703 - 12/06/10 12:38 PM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: JFish26]
IchioKU Offline
Junior Jayhawk

Registered: 02/26/05
Quote:


No question the guy can hit? He's going to be 35 and coming off the worst full season of his career.





It's obviously questionable if he can hit like he did in 2006, but I don't think it's a stretch to expect at least a 2009 season out of him.

Power stats may go down without the Crawford porch, but hitting in front of Albert may be the better advantage.

I agree with the first post in that it's concerning watching our defense slip another notch despite a pitch to contact staff philosophy.

Top
#1321704 - 12/06/10 12:45 PM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: IchioKU]
JFish26 Offline
Max Falkenstien

Registered: 03/17/05
Loc: KC, MO
Lineup protection is mostly a myth. And I don't think it's reasonable at all to expect him to be a .907 OPS hitter (over 136 games) at the least.
_________________________
2013-14 -- One for the other thumb.

Top
#1321705 - 12/06/10 01:40 PM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: JFish26]
IchioKU Offline
Junior Jayhawk

Registered: 02/26/05
Quote:

Lineup protection is mostly a myth.





I completely disagree. Perhaps I'm not understanding exactly where you are coming from. Maybe you mean that the difference between Pujols and Lee isn't significant, but I would still question that.

Quote:


And I don't think it's reasonable at all to expect him to be a .907 OPS hitter (over 136 games) at the least.




Well, the 1BB/5.5PA might be tough to replicate hitting in front of Albert (yes, I am assuming I am right about lineup protection). But, I fully expect the .275 average and .510 SLG. Especially if LaRussa successfully limits his exposure to lefties.

Top
#1321706 - 12/06/10 01:46 PM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: IchioKU]
JFish26 Offline
Max Falkenstien

Registered: 03/17/05
Loc: KC, MO
You are not right about lineup protection. Good hitters are good hitters. Bad hitters are bad hitters.

And I just don't see Berkman being as good as he was even two years ago. Age always wins in the end, and I don't see how moving to a more difficult ballpark and being asked to play the outfield regularly helps things.
_________________________
2013-14 -- One for the other thumb.

Top
#1321707 - 12/06/10 01:56 PM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: JFish26]
jayhwk01 Offline
Timmy's Nemesis

Registered: 01/22/05
Loc: Mt. Oread's Shadow
Fish and I have argued this numerous times. I still stay sabermetrics can't measure everything and this is one of them. I played and coached baseball too long to think who is in the lineup and where in the lineup does not matter but Fish and I will never agree on this one.

However, he is right about Berkman. He is not now nor will he likely ever again be the hitter he once was and those 35 year old legs in the OF will likely be a huge liability. Bad deal for the Cards IMO.
_________________________
kusports.net Peace Out and Rock Chalk Jayhawk.

Top
#1321708 - 12/06/10 03:02 PM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: jayhwk01]
IchioKU Offline
Junior Jayhawk

Registered: 02/26/05
You can disagree with lineup protection as a theory, but noting a recent statistical analysis, even from a respected source, does not categorically make it mythical.

First off, your point and reference must assume only common real world scenarios. It would only be antagonistic for someone to say that they would not pitch differently to Lance Berkman with Albert Pujols hitting behind him instead of someone like Randy Johnson (i.e. putting more emphasis on thro [edit for missing the rest of this sentence] wing strikes).

Barry Bonds would not be intentionally walked with the bases loaded if Barry Bonds were on deck as well.

I realize that last example may make my point seem absurd, but I don't think it's a fallacy to slide gently down the slope to having Albert Pujols hitting behind player x and having a positive affect on their performance.

We will see.

As for father time and the outfield draining Berkman's bat through his legs, well, I'll have to say that a .275BA/.500SLG for Berkman already takes those variables into account, IMHO. This is one of the top all around NL hitters over the past 10 years.

If Larry Walker and Will Clark can have a couple seasons of platoon success in StL, I am going to give Berkman the benefit of the doubt in predictions.


Edited by IchioKU (12/06/10 03:04 PM)

Top
#1321709 - 12/06/10 03:13 PM Re: Cards sign Lance Berkman [Re: IchioKU]
JFish26 Offline
Max Falkenstien

Registered: 03/17/05
Loc: KC, MO
From the reference I linked:

Quote:

While we were looking at protection, we were also curious in identifying another possible spillover, which we call the effort externality. While having a good hitter batting behind you might put more balls in the strike-zone, it doesnt mean these pitches are of the same quality than with a poor hitter on-deck. Its not that the pitcher just wants to avoid walking a batter when a good hitter follows. The pitcher wants to keep the hitter off-base any way he can. Pitchers are not dumb. They understand that putting more balls in the strike-zone increases the chance that the hitter will reach base via a hit, possibly with power. So, pitchers may reach back for a little extra gas in these situations. This means that a good on-deck hitter has reason to lower a current batters chances of reaching base via a walk AND a hit. If the effort effect is larger than the protection effect, then a good on-deck hitter can hurt rather than help the batter in front of him.




Basically, the study concluded that one of the reasons the data showed no meaningful protection effect is that, to the extent it might exist, it is mitigated by what they call the "effort externality."
_________________________
2013-14 -- One for the other thumb.

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >

Preview