Orlando Hudson

[logan82]

I don't think 2008 looks like an outlier at all.

 

Maybe he improved, but if I am building a MLB team and already have a very good SS I am not willing to take that chance unless I know my team isn't competing for a playoff spot. A year when he had an OBP 24 point higher, SLG 68 points higher and OPS 100 points higher than in any other season looks like an outlier to me. I am not saying that he isn't as good as his 2008 numbers suggest.

[sveumrules]

not sure if this is the thread to talk about orlando hudson or not anymore, but just thought i'd point out something i found interesting...

 

rickie weeks

age 23 | 363/404

age 24 | 374/433

age 25 | 342/398

 

orlando hudson

age 25 | 328/395

age 26 | 341/438

age 27 | 315/412

 

hudson never put up and ops+ of 100 or more until his age 28 season.

[TooLiveBrew]

Ha! Hijacked back to its original topic... thanks for posting that, sveum. I'm still a true believer in Rickie's talent, & naiively think he's going to have a strong season at the plate in 2009.

[craigharmann]

I really think this is a make or break year for Weeks. If we see the Rickie Weeks of the last 2 years, I think DM will either look at other options. Hopefully he's going to show the potential that we've all been wanting to see out of him. As nice as Hudson would be, I think Rickie is the man this year.

[endaround]

Last 2 years? Weeks was good in 2007. Again with the idea of Weeks sucking in 2007, I thought that one was finally dispelled. And he was basically average last year. Cheap average players just aren't that easy to replace especially since the Brewers have no real internal options at this point. Maybe if they move Green but he's still at least two years out.

[Invader3K]

Really? Good? He hit about the same as he did in 2008...about a .235 batting average, though his OBP and SLG were slightly higher (though in less games played). I think we know about what we have with Rickie at this point. He'll hit for a low average, hit about 15 homers a year, steal about 20 bags, strike out over 100 times, and play subpar defense. Where the big mystery is at this point is beyond me. Everyone was saying last year was Rickie's "put up or shut up year", even some of his biggest fans on this board. Well, it came and went. I don't think we really need an entire season again to figure out what he's capable of.

[craigharmann]

OK, but Rickie's potential is far beyond average. Speed and power were supposed to be his strengths. Have only seen those in spurts. That's what I'm getting at. Consistency. Unless consistency for Rickie is average, he's below expectations. Mine, at least.

[Invader3K]

Well, that's the thing...you can say any player has the "potential" to do more, but the guy has been in the majors long enough that I think we know what his "potential" to do is realistically going forward.

[Robideaux]

Well, that's the thing...you can say any player has the "potential" to do more, but the guy has been in the majors long enough that I think we know what his "potential" to do is realistically going forward.

So to paraphrase you, "If a player has not reached his "potential" by the age of 25, he ceases to have the "potential" to do better than he has already done."

 

I repectfully disagree. I think your premise in inherently flawed. That doesn't mean that Rickie is going to be an All-Star someday, but it does mean that it is not unrealistic just because he hasn't done it yet.

 

I'm sure we could make a list a mile long of players who had their best season after the age of 25.

[endaround]

Really? Good? He hit about the same as he did in 2008...about a .235 batting average, though his OBP and SLG were slightly higher (though in less games played). I think we know about what we have with Rickie at this point. He'll hit for a low average, hit about 15 homers a year, steal about 20 bags, strike out over 100 times, and play subpar defense. Where the big mystery is at this point is beyond me. Everyone was saying last year was Rickie's "put up or shut up year", even some of his biggest fans on this board. Well, it came and went. I don't think we really need an entire season again to figure out what he's capable of.

 

Yes good. Not sure whats hard to see about that. He was worth about 3 wins above replacement including his defense making him about 1 win above average.

[TCSM]

Rob, Weeks has not warranted anything for someone to say he's going to have a better year let alone a "break out" season. Last year at some point I brought up this same exact situation, yet everyone insisted this would be his year(08', once again). A year later and we are STILL saying the exact same things. Why!?

 

How long can we hang onto him? Personally I would throw some competition his way. A perfect example, Ray Durham. I'm not using him exactly, but last years scenario made Weeks realize he's very replaceable.

[TheCrew07]

I can see both sides of this issue, Weeks is ultra talented there's no doubt, but how long is reasonable to wait on that talent? What if he never comes close to his potential? Hall might be the best all around athlete on the team, potential doesn't mean much if the player doesn't use it.

 

I'm largely indifferent and I hope that Gamel sticks at 3B so the conversation becomes Weeks vs Green, much like Hardy vs Escobar. 4 years ago I was really excited about Weeks, now he's become very replaceable in my opinion. People will argue that he's average, I personally don't care much for defensive metrics and never have because they give too much credit for range, or place too much emphasis on the extremes, so I don't see him as an averagish defender. I will agree that he's averagish at the plate, but being almost directly in the middle of all qualified 2B isn't anything to write home about, especially with his natural tool set. The fact that his draft class was weak doesn't really have anything to do with his performance on the field, or the results he's put up relative to his potential. He disappointing simply because the results haven't matched the tools to this point.

 

While he's disappointing, he's not killing the team by any stretch, and they don't have a viable replacement today, so I'm okay with him. Like I said orginally, I'm largely indifferent because he's not horrible and he's not an asset, he's just kind of there, and he's there with a reasonable salary relative to his production.

[Ennder]

Weeks is not a problem on the team so I doubt Melvin tries to replace him. If he continues to play like this he'll probably just let Weeks walk when he becomes a FA or trade him. Average players have a lot of value and that is basically what he has been in his career.

[TooLiveBrew]

Rob, Weeks has not warranted anything for someone to say he's going to have a better year let alone a "break out" season. Last year at some point I brought up this same exact situation, yet everyone insisted this would be his year(08', once again). A year later and we are STILL saying the exact same things. Why!?

 

How long can we hang onto him? Personally I would throw some competition his way. A perfect example, Ray Durham. I'm not using him exactly, but last years scenario made Weeks realize he's very replaceable.

 

Durham is a far inferior fielder & weaker hitter at this point, and Weeks was better than Ray for the entire time after he came over from SF. Weeks is cheap & roughly league-average. Basically any alternate solution you can come up with is just going to cost a lot in terms of salary and/or prospects (to acquire someone if it's via trade). Not to mention that it's unlikely to improve that much over Rickie anyway.

 

To me the Weeks thing is just like Sheets's health/durability. People just fight & claw their way against seeing anything aside from what they already think they know or want to see. Weeks just isn't bad -- he's not. He's not the butcher people continue to claim he is in the field, and he's not the loser they say he is at the plate. The funny part to me is that 'we are STILL saying the exact same things' about Rickie that are just either untrue or blown out of proportion.

 

 

Like I said orginally, I'm largely indifferent because he's not horrible and he's not an asset, he's just kind of there, and he's there with a reasonable salary relative to his production.

 

Well-said. The only thing I add in here is that I feel the same way, but that on top of all that, his upside as we've seen is pretty huge. At this point I guess I'm over hoping or even expecting to see him tear it up for an entire season, but as long as he can mix in some of those flashes of brilliance at the plate he'll continue to at worst be a league-avg. player.

[naivin]

To me the Weeks thing is just like Sheets's health/durability. People just fight & claw their way against seeing anything aside from what they already think they know or want to see.

I agree.

[Fatter than Joey]

If he continues to play like this he'll probably just let Weeks walk when he becomes a FA or trade him.

 

This seems contradictory -- If Weeks as an "average player" has value, why would DM let him walk? Why not pay him the going rate for average players?

 

Weeks was better than Ray for the entire time after he came over from SF.

 

Ray put up way better numbers in 2008 than Weeks did.

 

People just fight & claw their way against seeing anything aside from what they already think they know or want to see.

 

If you compare Weeks to each NL team's composite 2bman in 2008.

 

Weeks would have the worst BA, the 7th best OBP, the 11th best SLG and the 9th overall OPS. -- That, to me is below average production.

 

He's not the butcher people continue to claim he is in the field,

 

He is definitely a bad second baseman, if you want to argue to what degree he is bad, that's a good topic for debate, but he doesn't play 2b well.

[TooLiveBrew]

I had a feeling you'd be around soon, FtJ...

 

Ray put up way better numbers in 2008 than Weeks did.

 

I didn't say he had a better year than Durham at the plate.

 

 

He is definitely a bad second baseman, if you want to argue to what degree he is bad, that's a good topic for debate, but he doesn't play 2b well.

 

Yup. He's not as bad as many people vow. Whether people like it or not, he gets to a lot of balls that other 2B don't. And of course I won't sit here & dispute that he botches easy plays at times.

 

 

If you compare Weeks to each NL team's composite 2bman in 2008... Weeks would have the worst BA, the 7th best OBP, the 11th best SLG and the 9th overall OPS. -- That, to me is below average production.

 

You can throw out BA since you're using OBP, and 7th out of 16 is average or above. 9th in OPS is average or below. Basically, he's a league-average hitter at 2B, and I am of the belief that his defense relative to his peers isn't bad enough to drag him down out of overall league-avg. territory.

[Fatter than Joey]

I didn't say he had a better year than Durham at the plate.

 

So you are saying that Weeks was so far superior in the field that it washed away Durham's offensive advantage? If you are,

I'd probably have to see some sort of stats to back that up.

 

He's not as bad as many people vow.

 

I am awesome, but I am not many people. I think Weeks is defensively among the worst starting second basemen. Even if he isn't as bad as the "many people vow" it certainly doesn't mean he is good.

 

Whether people like it or not, he gets to a lot of balls that other 2B don't.

 

I like that he gets to a lot of balls, in fact I love it.... -- What I don't like is the 17 hops it requires him to get the ball to 1b.

 

You can throw out BA since you're using OBP

 

No you can't throw out BA. Especially since the Weekster's keep talking about his potential improvement in BA. Hitting a baseball with a bat is a skill, one that Weeks is about the worst in the NL at among second basemen. I am not optimistic that Weeks can improve his BA -- and I think if that is the case, he will be walked much less in the future.

 

Weeks saving grace is that he can draw walks, and for that I will tip my hat to him. If he couldn't draw walks, he'd be playing in Pittsburgh right about now.

 

I certainly can buy into the idea that we don't have reasonable options to replace him, and if he gets $2M in Arbys, we have bigger problems to solve.

[Oldcity]

If he continues to play like this he'll probably just let Weeks walk when he becomes a FA or trade him.

 

This seems contradictory -- If Weeks as an "average player" has value, why would DM let him walk? Why not pay him the going rate for average players?

Because right now he's an average player who is cheap. If he's still average when he reaches free agency, and is paid like an average player, he'll no longer have the good value he has now. If he's still average by FA the Brewers may get more value out of Taylor Green or somebody else cheap.

 

Edit: Hey, the 5k mark! Fitting that it's a post defending one of Weeks or Sheets. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

[TCSM]

TLB, I wasn't specifically pointing out Durham for the 09' replacement, rather using him as an example of what we could and should do.

[TooLiveBrew]

No you can't throw out BA. Especially since the Weekster's keep talking about his potential improvement in BA. Hitting a baseball with a bat is a skill, one that Weeks is about the worst in the NL at among second basemen.

OBP & OPS include everything that BA gives. What you want to see out of a higher BA will be reflected in higher OBP & OPS.

Even if he isn't as bad as the "many people vow" it certainly doesn't mean he is good.

Notice that word's lack of existence in my post regarding his defense. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

I am not optimistic that Weeks can improve his BA -- and I think if that is the case, he will be walked much less in the future.

As usual, we feel differently on Rickie. I think it's entirely reasonable for him to improve on his BA from 2008, and by quite a bit. Heck, it could happen just from dumb luck and/or random variance.

So you are saying that Weeks was so far superior in the field that it washed away Durham's offensive advantage? If you are,
I'd probably have to see some sort of stats to back that up.

Yes. At 2B, Durham's lack of range made/makes him an inferior defender. Plus,

Durham (joined MIL 7/21/08)
7/21-31: .222/.263/.389/.652 - (19 PA)
Aug. '08: .263/.364/.421/.785 - (44 PA)
Sep. '08: .314/.407/.549/.956 - (59 PA)
Aggregate: .280/.369/.477/.846 (122 PA)

Weeks
7/21-31: .290/.361/.516/.877 - (36 PA)
Aug. '08: .247/.344/.395/.739 - (93 PA)
Sep. '08: .283/.415/.528/.944 - (65 PA)
Aggregate: .269/.371/.461/.832 (194 PA)


Durham was slightly better, but in fewer PA to Weeks (which does make Rickie's production a tick more valuable than just the naked rate stats show). Of course, the question remains whether Durham's presence helped inflate Weeks's production by shielding him from tougher RHP, but that's pretty subjective. I'm not sure how I'd approach that, though there isn't much question that Durham faced some tough RHP to spell Weeks. The raw stats, though, certainly don't reinforce that Durham was better at the plate with the Brewers than Weeks over the same timespan.

And the math on the 7/21-31 stat lines is my own, so I apologize if there are any errors (I think I got things right).


TLB, I wasn't specifically pointing out Durham for the 09' replacement, rather using him as an example of what we could and should do.

I guess -- to me -- the point is that whoever you can come up with that's going to be a significant upgrade over Weeks is either going to cost a lot of money, some top prospects, or both. Durham, who many suppose was better than Weeks after his acquisition in 2008, actually wasn't. Weeks was better, though like I said there's some room for debate when considering the caliber of RHP each guy faced.

[Gobias Industries]

I'd kind of just like to say that I think Weeks' ceiling is that line of .269/.371/.461/.832. Unless he changes his approach, I don't really ever see him hitting over .270. If he could even just hit .250 consistently, he'd be really valuable because of his on-base skills.

 

After last year, I've really harbored my expectations for him. And I am a Weekster.http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif I was worried after he looked like garbage in Spring Training, and for some reason, he didn't do anything until after the all-star break. Maybe he's just a second half player? I personally have no idea; the guy has me puzzled.

[Fatter than Joey]

OBP & OPS include everything that BA gives.

 

Yawn. Yes, I know this, however a hit is not the same as the walk -- I have already stated that Weeks can draw walks. I would hope that he would not be the 2b with the worst BA in the NL (based on my composite team/2b comparison). Weeks is fantastic at getting walks, terrible at hitting.

 

Notice that word's lack of existence in my post regarding his defense.

 

OK Fair enough, -- Let me how I think of Weeks defense in Star War terminologies...

 

Weeks v. C3PO -- Weeks gets to more balls, than C3PO, but C3PO makes better throws.

Weeks v. R2D2 -- Weeks throws the ball better than R2D2, but gets to less balls.

 

There. I hope we are now on the same page.

 

I think it's entirely reasonable for him to improve on his BA from 2008, and by quite a bit.

 

Agreed, if Weeks's BA slips in a substantial manner, he probably will not be playing fulltime. He has more room ahead than behind.

 

Yes. At 2B, Durham's lack of range made/makes him an inferior defender.

 

I don't think you can just say that authoritatively. Let's look at the facts.

 

Durham v. C3PO -- Durham gets to less balls than C3PO but makes better throws.

Durham v. R2D2 -- Durham gets to less balls than R2D2 but makes many better throws.

 

And the math on the 7/21-31 stat lines is my own, so I apologize if there are any errors (I think I got things right).

 

I said Durham was better in 2008 -- so your math seems lacking.

 

who many suppose was better than Weeks after his acquisition in 2008, actually wasn't. Weeks was better

 

Who are these "many" that you keep referring to? -- Are they like the "chosen" or the "forgotten"?

 

Why does it matter more that Durham was better than Weeks post-acquisition when Durham was better over 2008? Durham improved our 2b situation from when he was acquired. Durham was a better 2b in 2008.

[Ennder]

Yawn. Yes, I know this, however a hit is not the same as the walk -- I

 

But the hits are taken into account by SLG. Two players with a .350 OBP and .450 SLG are pretty much exactly as productive as each other even if one hits .300 and the other hits .200. The average just doesn't matter if you have the other info.

[TheCrew07]

I'm not sure how that's mathematically true Ennder and I would really like to see a statistician prove that mathematically. The less hits a player gets, the less chance of a runner on base scoring or moving up an extra base. Maybe I just had too much calculus/physics in college but I haven't seen proof, just educated guesses. I'm still waiting for integral type proof that casts away all doubt and proves to be an indisputable fact.

 

Hypothetically speaking Player A gets 200 singles, Player B gets 100 doubles, no other hits on the season... they could have the same OPS, but wouldn't the situations be the determining factor in how valuable each player is? Who's the more valuable player for the season? How about for their career? Is a double with 2 out and no one on as valuable as a single with runners at 2nd and 3rd and 2 outs? Is a double with 2nd and 3rd and 2 out truly more valuable than a single if the next batter makes an out? Maybe this is why I have such a problem with the notions of luck, variance, and noise... because it's very difficult to account for the situation so instead we try to heap enough data into a sample that the situations even themselves out.