Muk for Mac
- Thread starter nsacpi
- Start date
Dave Cameron also said before the 2014 season that the Cubs would be contenders and the Royals were overrated. Clearly he is never wrong...
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/5-things-i-believe-about-the-2014-season/
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/5-things-i-believe-about-the-2014-season/
Of course it has an effect, but if you think Mac is suddenly going to be a bad hitter outside of NY, you are crazy. He is hitting better away from NY this year for crying out loud. He has always hit better at home than on the road, even when he was in Atlanta.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Yes, but that doesn't explain him struggling last 2 years and then doing great this year. It's because of sampling issues. 2014, about 250 PA each way, 2015 about 270 each way, this year about 170 PA. None of those numbers show anything significant, putting them all together you see something more interesting.
Look at other splits (OPS) for McCann's other seasons.
2013 .858/.740
2012 .688/.708
2011 .877/.759
The real general trend is that McCann generally hits better at home when he's hitting well. Not always the case of course. But it's generally true.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
More importantly, McCann brings butts to the seats. He's a local boy who does great work in the community, he's exactly what the Braves need going into the new park. Bringing him to Atlanta whether VIa Markakis or not is important from a marketing standpoint.
Actually he said "the Cubs might be better than 74 wins". They won 73 games. He was off by 1-2 wins. What an idiot!
He also said "I don't see them getting to 90+ wins" about the Royals. They won 89 games. How was he wrong?
No he actually said they were forecasted for 74 wins, but he saw them being a .500 team. Quite a difference. And the Royals made the playoffs and went to the WS, but somehow they were overrated???
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Did you read the article? He said he could see the cubs being 3-5 wins better or possibly contending for .500 and they were 7 games better. He picked apart writers who had them winning the division and winning 90+ games and they fell just shy. ANd that was with unlikely seasons from Duffy, Ventura, and Vargas who all had their lowest ERA seasons as starters
This is a really odd callout. (ignoring that of course everyone is wrong at times)
His comment on the Cubs was "I believe that the Cubs might be better than we think." He said his model predicted 74 wins; they won 73. Where did he say they would be a contender that year?
We have all discussed the Royals at length. They "consistently" lucked their way into the playoffs until they didn't (2016).
I never said he was going to be a bad hitter and certainly didn't say he would be right away. He's a league average catcher at age 32, which will likely decline over the next couple years to below average. (if not below average next year) Next year he will be 33. Why would it makes sense to A) have him on the team B) pay him anywhere close to 17 million dollars?
No, he didn't. You aren't very bright. When someone says "I don't think .500 season is completely out of the question," it doesn't mean "I see them being a .500 team."
We don't know how the park will play until you get in it. Also, if it is advantageous for lefties, there are other lefties that could take advantage of the right field porch.
He actually said he didn't see the Royals winning 90+ games. They won 89. Cameron was right, but Carp obviously didn't read anything other than the section header of the article. Shocking, I know.
He will now continue to argue semantics because that's all he has left.
I didn't say it makes sense to acquire him. However, the reasoning is because he is an old expensive catcher, not because he only hits well in NY.
My point was that his numbers are helped by hitting in NY. This is undeniably true. You can look at a multitude of factors: YS helps lefties. McCann has hit better at home. McCann has several homers over the past 2 years that would not have been homers in most parks; including Turner Field. I believe he has 2 homers this year that wouldn't have been homers in ANY other park.
OK, but if the question being discussed is "should the Braves acquire McCann?", and you say "no" and then back it up with "his offense is bolstered by hitting in NY", you are implying he would not hit well outside of NY.
I think he would hit just fine outside of NY, but that doesn't fix the real issue with acquiring Mac...that issue being he is and old expensive catcher.
That he would not hit as well outside of NY.
GovClintonTyree
<B>Vencer a Los Doyers</B>
Interesting argument for you to make, Zito.
My take was that we were going to need a vet C to handle the young pitching, Anthony has outlived his usefulness, if we're going pay a catcher, we could do worse. Plus all that stuff.
dak
Well-known member
I'm generally a fan of Dave Cameron, but not sure I understand his point on this one. I didn't think we got the right value in the Kemp trade, but I didn't have any problem with the "philosophy" of the move. The Braves are team that has bottomed out in the rebuild process and has started to build back up to contend in 2017. I think its very appropriate to sign veteran stop gaps in that situation. Now the Markakis signing in Fall 2014 . . . that was not a good philosophy.