Time Ticking For Giambi? - Page 3

Johnny Slick · 05-11-2005, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Moyer

No we haven't. At least not significantly.

There have been tons of guys who hit dead ends in their early 30's in the past 10-15 years, you just don't remember who they are anymore.

I bet they remember Don Mattingly and Mike Greenwell...

CommishJoe · 05-11-2005, 04:06 PM

Heck, who needs Giambi when you've got Tino

Johnny Slick · 05-11-2005, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CommishJoe

Heck, who needs Giambi when you've got Tino

Tino's OPS is at its highest point in 8 years! Clearly, steroids are involved!

Melo · 05-11-2005, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Slick

Tino's OPS is at its highest point in 8 years! Clearly, steroids are involved!

either that or he's been chowing down all his greenies before his next drug test...

TonyJ · 05-11-2005, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlyons

Actually, the power has shown plenty of decline. He's hit only one homerun so far in approximately 100 plate appearances, and his slugging percentage is hovering around the .350 mark. There was a thread a while back about Alex Sanchez having an empty batting average; Giambi has an empty OBP.

Ummmm, actually he has three homers. One out of every five of his hits has been a home run. His slugging percentage is low, yes...because he's hitting .195. Show me a player hitting .195 with a high slugging percentage and I'll be impressed.

Long_Long_Name · 05-11-2005, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyJ

Ummmm, actually he has three homers. One out of every five of his hits has been a home run. His slugging percentage is low, yes...because he's hitting .195. Show me a player hitting .195 with a high slugging percentage and I'll be impressed.

Show me a player hitting .195 and chances are he's not contributiong much to your team's offense.

Joshv02 · 05-11-2005, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyJ

His slugging percentage is low, yes...because he's hitting .195. Show me a player hitting .195 with a high slugging percentage and I'll be impressed.

Did you call?

TonyJ · 05-11-2005, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Long_Long_Name

Show me a player hitting .195 and chances are he's not contributiong much to your team's offense.

Only it's not true in Giambi's case. He does have a .385 OBP, after all. Batting average is a component of offense, not an end.

lincarnate · 05-11-2005, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Moyer

If I were Joe Torre, not only would I keep him in the majors...I would hit him leadoff until he broke out of his slump. He would, in all seriousness, probably be one of the top 5 leadoff hitters in baseball right now.

Signed,
Paul DePodesta

To be honest, there's worse things that you could do if you were the Yankees, like batting Tony Womack in the top 8 spots.

TonyJ · 05-11-2005, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joshv02

Did you call?

All hail the three true outcomes!

mlyons · 05-11-2005, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyJ

Ummmm, actually he has three homers. One out of every five of his hits has been a home run. His slugging percentage is low, yes...because he's hitting .195. Show me a player hitting .195 with a high slugging percentage and I'll be impressed.

Sorry, mixed up doubles and homers on the stat line I was reading. Regardless, one homer for every five hits sounds relatively nice, until you realize it's also one homer for every 30 plate appearances. If slugging percentage seems skewed, how about this: his ISO is .130 (as a point of comparison, Orlando Cabrera's ISO is .151).

TonyJ · 05-11-2005, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlyons

Sorry, mixed up doubles and homers on the stat line I was reading. Regardless, one homer for every five hits sounds relatively nice, until you realize it's also one homer for every 30 plate appearances. If slugging percentage seems skewed, how about this: his ISO is .130 (as a point of comparison, Orlando Cabrera's ISO is .151).

Right, but the one homer for every thirty plate appearances can be explained by the fact that he a) is hitting under .200 and b) is walking a ton. When he actually gets a hit, a fair number of them have been home runs. I won't say definitively that he hasn't lost any power, I'm saying we don't know but, at least to my eyes it doesn't look like he has lost much. My main point is simply that it is waaaay too early in the season to judge him and that the Yankees send him to the minors at their peril. Give the man some time. He's always hit in the past until last season, which was the result of health issues. He's off the juice now and the parasites may have sapped his strength, but it's far too early to say. The Yankees and Yankee fans are overreacting right now.

mlyons · 05-11-2005, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyJ

Right, but the one homer for every thirty plate appearances can be explained by the fact that he a) is hitting under .200 and b) is walking a ton.

ISO factors out both batting average and walks, and he still ends up doing worse than Orlando Cabrera, who's not exactly known as a power hitter. As a different point of reference, during his peak seasons from 2000-2003, his ISO numbers were .314, .317, .284, .277. Admittedly, we haven't even the quarter mark of the season, so sample size is an issue, but that's still a huge drop in power.

TonyJ · 05-11-2005, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlyons

ISO factors out both batting average and walks, and he still ends up doing worse than Orlando Cabrera, who's not exactly known as a power hitter. As a different point of reference, during his peak seasons from 2000-2003, his ISO numbers were .314, .317, .284, .277. Admittedly, we haven't even the quarter mark of the season, so sample size is an issue, but that's still a huge drop in power.

Yeah, he hasn't hit any doubles so his ISO is down even though he's hit more home runs. Let's have a thought experiment, granted it is one that would be nearly impossible IRL. Let's say Giambi finished up the season with 24 home runs and 8 doubles while maintaining his current batting average. He would have a low ISO because, while he hit home runs, he didn't hit any doubles. Would you say that he didn't have any power, or would you say that the home runs show that he has power, but for whatever reason he didn't hit any doubles? I'd tend towards the latter, which is why I said that his power appears to be there, even with just one double and a terrible batting average.

mlyons · 05-11-2005, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyJ

Yeah, he hasn't hit any doubles so his ISO is down even though he's hit more home runs. Let's have a thought experiment, granted it is one that would be nearly impossible IRL. Let's say Giambi finished up the season with 24 home runs and 8 doubles while maintaining his current batting average. He would have a low ISO because, while he hit home runs, he didn't hit any doubles. Would you say that he didn't have any power, or would you say that the home runs show that he has power, but for whatever reason he didn't hit any doubles? I'd tend towards the latter, which is why I said that his power appears to be there, even with just one double and a terrible batting average.

If he hit 24 homeruns and 8 doubles, he would be hitting with power. Unfortunately, he's actually on pace to hit closer to 15 homers and 5 doubles -- and that's assuming he turns into a full-time player again. Those aren't power numbers, no matter how you cut it.

Johnny Slick · 05-11-2005, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mlyons

If he hit 24 homeruns and 8 doubles, he would be hitting with power. Unfortunately, he's actually on pace to hit closer to 15 homers and 5 doubles -- and that's assuming he turns into a full-time player again. Those aren't power numbers, no matter how you cut it.

...and I'm gonna have to call sample size again. He's looking bad? Fine. Don't make a statistical argument to say he's looking bad.

Jason Moyer · 05-11-2005, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Slick

...and I'm gonna have to call sample size again. He's looking bad? Fine. Don't make a statistical argument to say he's looking bad.

I continuously find it amusing that statistics are viewed as useless by so many people, yet everyone will jump on "OMG GIAMBI IS HITTING .195". I just had a ******ed conversation with a Royals fan, trying to explain to him that part of the problem with the Royals is their refusal to recognize good players...in this case I was explaining that Calvin Pickering might be their best hitter, but he keeps getting optioned to AAA. I explained MLE's and such, and he said "statistics are dumb". Then 5 minutes later he said "wtf, he's hitting .148, how can you call that good?" .148...through 20 plate appearances...argh...

Jason Moyer · 05-11-2005, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lincarnate

To be honest, there's worse things that you could do if you were the Yankees, like batting Tony Womack in the top 8 spots.

Giambi is 3rd on the team in OBP, despite hitting .195. How would hitting him leadoff be a bad idea?

crazyhorsejohnny · 05-11-2005, 10:50 PM

Leadoff? Are you crazy? Are you related to BB?

Long_Long_Name · 05-11-2005, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazyhorsejohnny

Leadoff? Are you crazy? Are you related to BB?

Related to BB? Who's BB?

05-11-2005, 04:06 PM	#42
CommishJoe Global Moderator Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Minneapolis, MN Posts: 5,238	Heck, who needs Giambi when you've got Tino __________________ Joe Success isn’t owned. It’s leased. And rent is due every day.

05-11-2005, 10:50 PM	#59
crazyhorsejohnny All Star Reserve Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Ottawa Posts: 818	Leadoff? Are you crazy? Are you related to BB?