Mike Trout needs his own thread

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (791 of them)

...

mookieproof, Thursday, 8 August 2013 02:30 (six years ago) link

Two-run homer first time up tonight. If it weren't for that (still weird) -1.4 defensive number, he'd probably be on his way to about a 12.0 WAR for the year.

clemenza, Thursday, 8 August 2013 02:35 (six years ago) link

Angels have to be trying to lock him up for like decade.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Thursday, 8 August 2013 02:55 (six years ago) link

Two-run homer first time up tonight. If it weren't for that (still weird) -1.4 defensive number, he'd probably be on his way to about a 12.0 WAR for the year.

― clemenza, Wednesday, August 7, 2013 10:35 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

fangraphs is much kinder, but even they have him as a neutral defender rather than a huge minus.

anyway OPS above 1.000 now - .333/.424/.580

k3vin k., Thursday, 8 August 2013 08:25 (six years ago) link

just turned 22 yesterday btw

k3vin k., Thursday, 8 August 2013 08:34 (six years ago) link

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/happy-22nd-birthday-mike-trout-2/

re: mookie's post. look at that list. nothing but inner-circle guys

k3vin k., Thursday, 8 August 2013 08:40 (six years ago) link

I wonder if the guy mistakenly left A-Rod off the list. Baseball Reference has him at 14.3 through age 21, which would safely put him on there. Is there that much difference between the two methods?

Just to be annoyingly nitpicky, I'm not sure I'd call Arky Vaughan inner-circle. On the merits, maybe, although his numbers were mostly compiled in the '30s. In the popular imagination, no. He's just not that famous.

clemenza, Thursday, 8 August 2013 12:43 (six years ago) link

he was one of Nixon's all-time shortstops!

Miss Arlington twirls for the Coal Heavers (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 8 August 2013 12:47 (six years ago) link

"Goddamit, Bob, I don't care about the Negro in Chicago or those two guys from Jew York City--give me Arky Vaughan."

clemenza, Thursday, 8 August 2013 13:01 (six years ago) link

the list is sorted by wRC+ - i'm not sure how to calculate that but a-rod's might not have been above vaughn's 131 if you count his first two full seasons plus his assorted call-ups prior to that

k3vin k., Thursday, 8 August 2013 13:02 (six years ago) link

this was a really great read:
http://thelinedrive.com/2012/09/19/the-day-i-pegged-mike-trout/

frogbs, Thursday, 8 August 2013 13:18 (six years ago) link

Not the best time for A-Rod testimonials, but when I was checking his numbers, I'd forgotten he only played 146 games in his sort-of-rookie season. Not nearly as abbreviated as Trout's 2012, but if you give back even 10 of those 16 missing games, he almost surely would have had 400 total bases (379 for the year).

clemenza, Thursday, 8 August 2013 13:27 (six years ago) link

Similar to the Fangraphs piece above, but ranked by WAR, so A-Rod's high. The inner-circleness holds until #12, where Vada Pinson shows up. (Pinson's prolonged drift into retirement at age 36 has always fascinated me.)

http://mlb.si.com/2013/08/08/mike-trout-birthday-angels/

clemenza, Friday, 9 August 2013 22:16 (six years ago) link

trout somehow just leapfrogged everyone else and now leads the league in bWAR?

k3vin k., Saturday, 10 August 2013 13:16 (six years ago) link

hm, looks like he's gone from -1.5 dWAR to -1.1 over the past week. robbing that home run a couple nights ago probably helped

k3vin k., Saturday, 10 August 2013 13:17 (six years ago) link

Is there a good explanation for the over 3 dWAR swing between last year and this year? Is Trout really not making that many plays this year that your replacement level player would (and that he did last year)?

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 13:35 (six years ago) link

I think the 2.1 dWAR from last year is actually wackier than the minus 1.1 from this year.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 13:38 (six years ago) link

there have been a few articles about it - it basically boils down to the fact that he had like 4 incredible home run robs in like 5 months last year and, until yesterday, had none so far this year. it is pretty suspect that his dWAR numbers are so bad (at least on b-r) given his speed. fangraphs had him as a neutral defender up until a couple days ago

k3vin k., Saturday, 10 August 2013 13:51 (six years ago) link

So robbing a home run = a 1/4 of a win? That seems more suspect to me than his dWAR #s this year since I thought one win basically boiled down to 10 runs above replacement.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 13:59 (six years ago) link

Actually even more than a 1/4 since that was an explanation for a nearly 4 dWAR swing.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 14:03 (six years ago) link

I love the idea of defensive metrics like WAR but swings like this are a lot harder to understand than their offensive counterparts.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 14:05 (six years ago) link

I've been following Trout and Cabrera on Baseball Reference, and here's something I don't quite understand. I knew, once Trout got hot (and especially with Cabrera missing games), it was only a matter of time before Trout moved to the top of the list. Today seems like an odd day for it to happen, though Yesterday, Cabrera was up 6.2 to 6.1; this morning, it's Trout 6.4, Cabrera 6.2.

Trout had an okay game yesterday: 0-2, but he drew two walks and stole two bases. Cabrera was 2-5 with (as you may have read) a home run--no extra credit for the who and when of the latter, but still. Neither guy made an error. Putouts, assists, or great plays, I don't know.

I know it's all context-driven, but based on that, how did Trout move up three-tenths of a game, and Cabrera only one-tenth? Maybe Baseball Reference is a day behind on their WAR calculations, but I don't think so.

clemenza, Saturday, 10 August 2013 14:48 (six years ago) link

yeah it's puzzling. like i said it looks like trout's gain was on the defensive side, where he went from -1.4 to -1.1 (i think overnight) - but that must be from the robbed home run, i'd have thought

k3vin k., Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:28 (six years ago) link

trout's defensive numbers this year are also lower because he's been playing more LF than he did in 2012 so he's working against stricter positional adjustments

J0rdan S., Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:33 (six years ago) link

WAR's positional, right? You're x number of games above the current replacement level at your position, as measured against everybody else playing the same spot? I sometimes wonder if a hidden contributing factor might be--in the case of these two guys--that, as a group, third basemen had a better night last night than center fielders. Sounds bizarre, I know, but I'm trying to understand how Trout makes up ground on Cabrera last night. (If Trout's great catch was the night before, presumably that had already been figured in prior to today's calculations.)

clemenza, Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:43 (six years ago) link

i think that the positional baselines for WAR are fixed and not based on how other players at the same position do on a night-to-night basis

i could be wrong tho

J0rdan S., Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:44 (six years ago) link

the catch wasn't even all that great tbh, but that's all i can think of that would cause that swing

sarge what do you mean by that? he played some LF early in the year, but aren't LFers theoretically less skilled than CFers? if anything on the defensive side that should have helped him?

k3vin k., Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:47 (six years ago) link

xp

k3vin k., Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:47 (six years ago) link

Okay. I would think they'd adjust the baseline periodically, though--the replacement level for first basemen during the McGwire-Bagwell-Thomas-Palmeiro-McGriff era must have been historically high.

If anybody else can explain how 0-2 with two walks and two stolen bases makes up two-tenths of a game on 2-5 with a home run, please do. (Would the fact that Cabrera's home run tied the game in the 9th inning be worth anything--does WPA figure into WAR?)

clemenza, Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:50 (six years ago) link

"trout's defensive numbers this year are also lower because he's been playing more LF than he did in 2012 so he's working against stricter positional adjustments"

Yeah this makes no sense to me either. If he was 2 wins better than replacement at CF then in theory he'd be way better than a replacement LF not way worse.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:52 (six years ago) link

xp I don't think any WPA stuff is used. I think this is a question you'd have to ask the B-R guy to get an answer.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:52 (six years ago) link

his fielding runs above average hasn't moved on fangraphs for at least a week

k3vin k., Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:55 (six years ago) link

"trout's defensive numbers this year are also lower because he's been playing more LF than he did in 2012 so he's working against stricter positional adjustments"

Yeah this makes no sense to me either. If he was 2 wins better than replacement at CF then in theory he'd be way better than a replacement LF not way worse.

― One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, August 10, 2013 11:52 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

defensively yeah but offensively you'd think corner outfielders are more replaceable than center fielders?

k3vin k., Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:56 (six years ago) link

And even WPA was used I wouldn't think that Trout would get a bump from it.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:56 (six years ago) link

Okay. I would think they'd adjust the baseline periodically

they do, probably during each offseason. it's not like "oh, every other third baseman in mlb went 0-4 last night so now miguel cabrera's war has shot up"

J0rdan S., Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:56 (six years ago) link

xp yeah I'm talking about just in terms of the defense relative to a replacement LF.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 15:59 (six years ago) link

I notice also that, after months of Gomez (mostly) and Kershaw leading the NL, McCutchen is tied this morning--first time, I think.

clemenza, Saturday, 10 August 2013 16:03 (six years ago) link

LF is the easiest OF position so the positional adjustment is more severe i.e. a good LF is gonna have a lower defensive rating than a good CF because a much higher number of players can play LF well than can play CF well. so even if we assume (for the sake of the example) that trout is playing the exact same quality defense in 2013 as he did in 2012 but his playing time is more slanted towards LF than that good defense in LF in 2013 is gonna count for less than all the good defense in CF in 2012.

J0rdan S., Saturday, 10 August 2013 16:03 (six years ago) link

A cast of characters that includes Raul Ibanez and Chris Carter for example.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 16:04 (six years ago) link

I think that difference is counted into the ACTUAL positional adjustment for LF (at least in Fangraphs). Either way according to B-R Trout is basically as bad a fielder this year as Raul Ibanez. I just don't see how that's possible.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 16:06 (six years ago) link

LF is the easiest OF position so the positional adjustment is more severe i.e. a good LF is gonna have a lower defensive rating than a good CF because a much higher number of players can play LF well than can play CF well. so even if we assume (for the sake of the example) that trout is playing the exact same quality defense in 2013 as he did in 2012 but his playing time is more slanted towards LF than that good defense in LF in 2013 is gonna count for less than all the good defense in CF in 2012.

― J0rdan S., Saturday, August 10, 2013 12:03 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

ok yeah this makes sense

k3vin k., Saturday, 10 August 2013 16:06 (six years ago) link

that final "than" should be "then"

J0rdan S., Saturday, 10 August 2013 16:06 (six years ago) link

Also Trout's still played most of his games at CF.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 16:09 (six years ago) link

We're not talking about all CF in 2012 and all LF in 2013.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 16:10 (six years ago) link

per fangraphs

2012

LF - 328 innings - 1.5 UZR
CF - 885 innings - 12.0 UZR

2013

LF - 297 innings - 2.5 UZR
CF - 700 innings - -3.1 UZR

so he's playing a bit more in LF and has just been worse in CF

my guess is that he bulked up a bit last offseason and it's hurt his CF defense a bit

J0rdan S., Saturday, 10 August 2013 16:13 (six years ago) link

i mean if you split the difference between the two seasons he still grades out as a plus defensive CF

J0rdan S., Saturday, 10 August 2013 16:14 (six years ago) link

J0rdan always blaming the roids.

One bad call from barely losing to (Alex in SF), Saturday, 10 August 2013 16:14 (six years ago) link

yeah the defensive stats are always really volatile and you're supposed to have at least 3 years of data for it to mean anything

k3vin k., Saturday, 10 August 2013 16:16 (six years ago) link

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/9543335/why-mike-trout-more-valuable-miguel-cabrera-mlb

can someone post this?

k3vin k., Monday, 12 August 2013 15:44 (six years ago) link

will carroll tweeted that thyroid issues aren't even covered by TUEs

bauer's friend tweeted this and then deleted both tweets:

Update: Bauer now, through his P.R. people, tells us that he said or meant to say that "IF" Trout has this exemption, he has a league-approved medical exemption. Bauer clarifies that he doesn't know whether Trout has one or not.

and then:

MLB and the MLBPA jointly released the following statement saying no player has ever received an exception for HGH under the current program.

Basically, statements about Mike Trout using HGH and having an exemption for it are false. pic.twitter.com/EaND5zfC1n

— Kyle Glaser (@KyleAGlaser) January 17, 2020

℺☽⋠⏎ (✖), Saturday, 18 January 2020 01:24 (eighteen hours ago) link

Lol I think he was maybe just repeating something that Scott Brosius’ kid tweeted yesterday.

omar little, Saturday, 18 January 2020 01:33 (eighteen hours ago) link

dang, didn't baseball twitter just get sonned by someone claiming to be beltran's niece, like yesterday?

But guess what? Nobody gives a toot!😂 (Karl Malone), Saturday, 18 January 2020 01:46 (seventeen hours ago) link

yo is it true baseball twitter got sonned by a alleged burner account after a mlb beef??????

Andy K, Saturday, 18 January 2020 02:47 (sixteen hours ago) link

beltran's niece actually turned out to be the burner of annoying twitter person IncarceratedBob

do keep up everyone, this is all very important

℺☽⋠⏎ (✖), Saturday, 18 January 2020 03:48 (fifteen hours ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.