But, power is weighted more heavily in WAR so I'm confused by your logic. If a non power guy is a 3 WAR player, he's hitting a **** load of singles then.
Acuna to AAA
- Thread starter mqt
- Start date
But, power is weighted more heavily in WAR so I'm confused by your logic. If a non power guy is a 3 WAR player, he's hitting a **** load of singles then.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
3 questions. Are you surprised by the development of Acuna's power? Does it change your thinking a bit on the team's need to acquire power hitting prospects? If we were a team closer to contention and were lacking in power, would you be ok with us acquiring a player like Kemp to replace a left fielder who was a productive player but lacked power? I realize the answer to the last question depends on things like price, but as a general proposition.
I think the key from a power perspective is that you need it on your team. If you replace Marky with Acuna (going from 4HR/yr to 24HR/yr) then you are ok to move in the other direction at another position. Kemp is currently seen as essential due to him being one of 2 power guys. If you add Acuna, then you could replace Kemp (30HR/yr) with a Fisher (20HR/yr) because you made up the difference somewhere else.
I think that is why the Braves need to get a 3B or LF with power (like a Fisher / Davis from Houston). If you had FF, Acuna, 20HR guy at LF and 3B, then you could play your OBP guys across the rest of the lineup (Ender, Albies, Swanson, Camargo). If you do not get the HR from those positions, then our team as being constructed will fail to produce enough runs.
Teams need good hitters. Most good hitters have decent power. Therefore, most good teams have decent power. That does NOT mean good teams must have decent power to be good.
That correlation is what leads many to incorrectly assume good teams need power.
Many folks confuse correlation with causation all the time. It is a common logical error people make.
That correlation is what leads many to incorrectly assume good teams need power.
Many folks confuse correlation with causation all the time. It is a common logical error people make.
This thought process is what brought Kemp to the Braves sadly.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
No, not from my standpoint. I do not say individual power alone is of utmost consideration only that team power is a must unless you are willing to play very long odds. So, when I see roster construction with not enough team power you can look at that easily and say, chances are, it's not going to work. Line-up construction, to me, is a balance where historical tradition plays a part because it is self reinforcing from within baseball. For example, a SS with good power and hit tools in the minors but marginal range is not typically developed for better range. They are moved to a different position where their bat can reach the majors faster, most often to 3B where their marginal SS range becomes plus and their SS arm is still playable. So, when you get a shortstop at the majors who has the hit tool, power AND range then you have a star and someone who will be paid like a star.
So, when you are constructing a team at the ML level, all things being equal (which is never the case) you get better monetary value by finding your power and production from traditional positions - 1B, 3B, LF, RF, 2B, C. That doesn't mean you don't want a power/production guy at short. It's just that if you have that guy there he is going to cost you and rightly so.
So, when I look at the Braves and see them sign a RF (Markakis) who isn't a production bat that tells me that they have to make up for that deficiency at one of the other positions. When you have deficiencies at RF, 3B, 2B and catcher in power/production it isn't a mystery as to why the Braves offense has sucked over the last few years and will continue to sputter off and on until those are fixed in a real way. The FO brought Kemp in as a reaction to the fact that RF, 3B, 2B, C AND LF were all deficient. IMO, they decided that one horrible defensive position was worth the added production if that production could mitigate the lack of production at some of the other positions. I saw that as a counter-productive, cosmetic, lipstick on a pig move designed for the masses as the move into the new park happened.
Again they just need good hitters and players in general. Power is a common factor among good hitters because it's the easiest to find. That doesn't make it a necessity though. I wouldn't go looking for power just for the sake of it. Again I think this is what led Kemp to the Braves. They wanted that power in the middle of the lineup with seemingly not much thought to his defensive abilities or that his overall offensive game has been declining.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
1. Acuna's power - somewhat surprised but not overly. Guys like me don't have the same scouting reports on international signings like Acuna so you don't build expectations. What was his power profile by scouts when he was signed? I don't know. If it was a US guy, and his power projection out of HS was a 30 and he started hitting like a 70, then yes I would be surprised because I would have created an expectation in my mind about what he would become. I am thrilled he's hitting well and projecting for top power. The Braves sorely need it.
2. Power acquisition - not really. I think we see Freeman's best years over the next year or two and then he will begin to decline as all players do. Inciarte, Swanson and Albies don't appear to be major power threats yet they do appear to be part of the long term core thinking. That tells me that you need good to very good power/production (not excluding everything else) from RF, LF, 3B and C. Acuna is part of that hopefully. I don't really see C in the system with an outside hope for Herbert - Cuberland won't be a catcher. Maitan and Waters could be the long term answers at LF and 3B but they are a long, long way away. It wouldn't hurt to have someone who can be the guy at 3B and LF today and do it well - say the Braves sign Moustakas for 3B as a FA and trade for Fisher from Houston to combine with Kemp in the short term.
3. NO at this point because of the player like Kemp part. Kemp was really a non-starter for me because I didn't believe in his upside. I said before this season that he would get into the best shape of my life, start strong then pull a hammy (you can't pull fat). Guess what happened.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I think an outfield of Mallex Smith/Inciarte/Acuna would have been a terrific asset. Very good production at low cost. I believed that before Acuna's power started developing and I certainly believe it now.
Harry seems to be operating under this assumption that a team needs X amount of power (however that's measured) to be good. If the team is missing power from RF, it needs to add power at SS to get back to X.
I don't see it that way at all.
If you have an OF producing 10 WAR, you have a good OF. Period. That's the whole point of the WAR statistic.
You will PROBABLY have decent power from the unit, because good baseball players typically have good power. You will PROBABLY have some good defense coming out of that unit, because good baseball players typically play good defense. If you are choosing between a 1 WAR LFer with excellent power, or a 2 WAR LFer with poor power, I think the choice is obviously the 2 win player.
This idea that you need X amount of power, Y amount of on base, and Z amount of defense is a complete fallacy...except in the extremes. All power, or all on base, or all defense likely won't work. Conversely, having nothing in one of those categories also won't work.
The Braves are not bad because Markakis has little power, or because Kemp is a terrible defender. The Braves are bad because they are getting negative WAR from their corner OF positions. How each player arrived at that poor WAR value is completely irrelevant.
I don't see it that way at all.
If you have an OF producing 10 WAR, you have a good OF. Period. That's the whole point of the WAR statistic.
You will PROBABLY have decent power from the unit, because good baseball players typically have good power. You will PROBABLY have some good defense coming out of that unit, because good baseball players typically play good defense. If you are choosing between a 1 WAR LFer with excellent power, or a 2 WAR LFer with poor power, I think the choice is obviously the 2 win player.
This idea that you need X amount of power, Y amount of on base, and Z amount of defense is a complete fallacy...except in the extremes. All power, or all on base, or all defense likely won't work. Conversely, having nothing in one of those categories also won't work.
The Braves are not bad because Markakis has little power, or because Kemp is a terrible defender. The Braves are bad because they are getting negative WAR from their corner OF positions. How each player arrived at that poor WAR value is completely irrelevant.
Southcack77
Well-known member
I wouldn't say the Braves are bad because they have poor corner outfield defense.
I would say in general their primary problem is that their pitching has been terrible and their offense has been so-so.
I think there are a lot of ways you could construct a championship baseball team. Some of them are more likely than others. A lineup full of single hitters is probably not an especially likely way to go, but it can been done.
It's a combination of everything. That's how it works. The Braves are -13 to -19 runs on defense in the corners. That's a problem. An even bigger problem when the offense coming out of those has been below average overall as well.
Southcack77
Well-known member
offense in right is about dead average. Left has been below after Kemp's recent slump. A month ago he was above average, but that's the way it goes. He has regressed due in part to nagging injury which is more or less what I predicted. It's why older players don't perform.
steveAKAslick
Mashin' to Mississippi
Saw this in one of the comments section on Talking Chop...
Watching Ronald Acuna play, Triple-A Gwinnett coach John Moses can’t help but think of another famously precocious outfielder.
"I just get the feeling when the pitcher is about ready to release the ball, it’s almost like he can tell exactly where the ball is going to go. He has that instinct, a lot like when I was over with [Ken] Griffey Jr.," said Moses, who served as a first-base and outfield coach with Seattle from 1998 to 2003. "He was the same way with it, especially when he was younger. He could recognize the pitch right out of the pitcher’s hand."
Watching Ronald Acuna play, Triple-A Gwinnett coach John Moses can’t help but think of another famously precocious outfielder.
"I just get the feeling when the pitcher is about ready to release the ball, it’s almost like he can tell exactly where the ball is going to go. He has that instinct, a lot like when I was over with [Ken] Griffey Jr.," said Moses, who served as a first-base and outfield coach with Seattle from 1998 to 2003. "He was the same way with it, especially when he was younger. He could recognize the pitch right out of the pitcher’s hand."
Know how you know the hype is getting silly?
When someone bring up Maddux or Griffey Jr.
Southcack77
Well-known member
I've read one of each today.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
Acuna the next Maddux?
I'd take it.
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
I will leave WAR out of it and make it simple.
I did the work before and am not interested in doing it again. However, IIRC, in the last 30 years there have been about 250 playoff teams. Of those teams only about 5-10 teams that were under league average in HR's hit have made the playoffs. Of those only 2-3 won a WS (Giants, Royals). The numbers are rough but close. So, if a team hits less than league average in HR, they have about a 5% chance or less to make the playoffs and about a 1% chance at winning a WS.
So, yes, you can construct your team however you want. And, you can win a WS with a relatively light hitting team. But the odds aren't good.
I want to be clear and say that just because you do hit for a lot of power doesn't necessarily mean you'll be any good. It just means that you have that particular part of the winning equation checked.
League average HR changes from year to year but a good general target is about 150 team HR. So, if you want to play Mallex (projected 5-10 HR), Inciarte (5-10) and pre power Acuna (5-10) or a total of about 23HR for the three, then the rest of the team needs to be able to supply about 127 HR to put you on target to hit that general goal of 150 team HR. That would mean you would need a good bench (10-15), 1B (30), 3B (30), 2B (20), C (20), SS (12) to get you there. And that's with no margin for error.
You can absolutely ignore power as an indicator of success but real history says that you do so at your own risk.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I'm curious if your assertions are unique to power. Wouldn't teams below league average in defense also have low probabilities of success. Same with teams below league average in OBP, in pitching, etc.