Sign in to follow this  
rageous

After today Pujols will have played in more games than Trout in the last 3 years

Recommended Posts

That's very concerning as Pujols has produced -2.3 WAR in those past 3 years according to fangraphs.

Between Bour, Walsh, Thaiss, and Ward they have all been pretty miserable and unable to really take away any playing time from Pujols.

Unless any of those players break out next we can expect to see Pujols get majority of playing time again next year as he will again produce at or below replacement level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rageous said:

That's very concerning as Pujols has produced -2.3 WAR in those past 3 years according to fangraphs.

Between Bour, Walsh, Thaiss, and Ward they have all been pretty miserable and unable to really take away any playing time from Pujols.

Unless any of those players break out next we can expect to see Pujols get majority of playing time again next year as he will again produce at or below replacement level.

Pujols has produced, 23 HRs 90 RBIs 21 doubles 52 Runs, this season. Yet, he’s a negative WAR ... what a screwed up stat.

It is a little concerning about Trout. Hopefully his body holds up well over the next 12 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

Pujols has produced, 23 HRs 90 RBIs 21 doubles 52 Runs, this season. Yet, he’s a negative WAR ... what a screwed up stat.

It is a little concerning about Trout. Hopefully his body holds up well over the next 12 years. 

Yeah thats really got me that he could possibly be that low.   I looked it up on fangraphs and it said -0.1 which is still odd with those numbers.  It literally has Tovar and Cowart above him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, floplag said:

Yeah thats really got me that he could possibly be that low.   I looked it up on fangraphs and it said -0.1 which is still odd with those numbers.  It literally has Tovar and Cowart above him. 

His hitting is basically league average for his position but his bad defense and baserunning weigh him down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rageous said:

His hitting is basically league average for his position but his bad defense and baserunning weigh him down.

it's league average overall.  For his position, he's got the second lowest wRC+ at 99 (just a shade better than hosmer) among the 22 qualified players.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

Pujols has produced, 23 HRs 90 RBIs 21 doubles 52 Runs, this season. Yet, he’s a negative WAR ... what a screwed up stat.

Despite the fact that you are stuck in a pre-sabermetrics paradigm and seem to almost willfully resist understanding WAR, I'll break it down for you. First and foremost that it is meant to represent the total contribution of a player, meaning their hitting, their baserunning, their defense, and with a positional adjustment (meaning, Albert would have a higher WAR if he was a shortstop, everything else being equal).

Albert's hitting .251/.311/.448, which is a 99 wRC+ -- almost exactly league average (100 wRC+), but below average for a first baseman. Add in the fact that he's a bad baserunner and a below average defender and you get -0.1, pretty much a replacement player. 

I think fWAR perfectly describes Pujols: he's basically a replacement player. What that means is that Albert could be easily replaced by a minor league journeyman. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rageous said:

His hitting is basically league average for his position but his bad defense and baserunning weigh him down.

No i get that, my comment was more directed at the stat itself over the why... but thank you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, floplag said:

No i get that, my comment was more directed at the stat itself over the why... but thank you. 

the stat is what it is.  If you understand how it works then it would make a lot more sense.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone help me out here.  Wasn’t there a team a while back that had a generational talent for 11 years.  They were unable to sign him as he signed with someone else who offered a too long, too expensive deal to watch him break down and fail.  I hope the angels didn’t do that with Trout.  Any remember what team that was?

 

 

 

 

and I don’t think the angels made a mistake to sign but rarely have these 10+ year deals made sense in the end.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • AngelsWin.com Ad-free Membership Options