AngelsFanSince86

Yea I know defensive WAR is pretty unreliable. Didn't think it was that bad. Just wondering if I am missing something.

So I was looking at 3B fielding stats because one of my friends had mentioned Donaldson has 15 errors on the season. David Freese interestingly enough has made the fewest errors among 3rd baseman (1 error, giving him the highest fielding % as well), although his range factor is among the lowest at 2.21. On the other hand, Donaldson has the highest range factor of any 3rd baseman (3.47), but has made the second most errors at 15 and has the 4th lowest fielding %. Yet Donaldson has a dWAR of 2.1 and Freese has a dWAR of -0.5. Not incredibly surprised by Freese's given his limited range, but how is Donaldson's so high? His range is greater, but he's also made twice as many errors as the average 3rd baseman.

Yeah I think he and Santiago are taking notes from the wrong vet

Way to hang on to that lead Skaggs

Great AB by Ianetta

Oh man, poor Raul. The Royals should do him a favor and NOT let him play anything other then DH or PH if they just have to let him hit. It's just sad to have moments like these the last memories of him as a baseball player.

Yeah even though I'm long over him being snubbed, its funny that it seems people always add a team being in playoff contention as a great reason to add merit to a given player. Unless of course he is on the Angels I guess.

I second this.

Yeah I've been watching the pitchfx zone they have on the gameday app and he hasn't been getting some of those high strikes that are in the zone.

While that is true, the team starting ERA in 2002 was still 4.00. The Angels current team starting ERA is 3.76.

First, I have already said that I would choose trout over kershaw of we are picking one player to be on a team. Just thought I would clarify before moving on... You act like every other pitcher never pitched in the minors. Kershaw only has 4 seasons of around 200 IP. Felix has had 7. Dan haren had about 7 before he has issues. To think a pitcher of his caliber doesn't have more in him when compared to other lesser pitchers just doesn't make sense. Of course anything can happen, but based on career IP he should have at least a few more years of top quality production that should only get better considering he hasn't hit his prime. Notice how Felix is having an insane year and just hit the first year of his prime. He got to the mlb just as early as Clayton did.

I think that debate will happen down the line because both haven't gone through their prime but kershaws career numbers are significantly better then his. Enough to make up for the difference in leagues and divisions. Kershaws ERA is over twice the average starting ERA difference between leagues. I am not at my computer to look up the average league difference in ERA+ and FIP, but it seems his lead is large enough to make up for it.

The thing is he hasn't hit his prime yet and the assumption is he will get better before he gets worse. Also, most good pitchers stats are most skewed by their first few years moreso then their last whereas kershaw hasn't had an ERA above 3.00 after his first year.

That is tough. Based on what they have done already, both could be one of the best to ever play. Kershaw has done it for much longer though so I will go with Kershaw, for now. Both are the best at what they do. I don't understand how Kershaw is arguably the best. Who comes close? He isn't even in his prime yet and he already has 6 1/2 years of stats that give him a 2.55 ERA, a half point below the next qualified starter. He has every qualified starter beat in ERA, FIP, and ERA+ by a decent margin. I would rather have Trout then Kershaw because he is an every day player, but I think at this point its safer to say Kershaw has been better at his trade then Trout has (as ridiculous as that sounds).

Those other fans are thinking "are you kidding me? that was Trout HR ball! Why would you throw that back!?"

Wow, I almost feel bad for the Rangers...no not really

Calhoooooooun!

In the words of J.P., "hey, it could happen!"

Good point, but thats what pitchers do, they adjust. What I see is a trend that has been occurring since before the Angels got him. After his big year in 2010, he had a steady drop in his contact rate on pitches other then fastballs. Which is why it makes sense he is getting less fastballs. He has been pretty consistent in his contact rate on fastballs. If you look in 2011, he was actually thrown slightly more fastballs then in 2010. And while his contact rate on those was also a bit higher, his contact rate was much worse on other pitches. Enter 2012 where all scouting reports point to Hamilton struggling with other pitches and his fastball % drops and so does his contact on other pitches. So then in 2013 when the Angels just gladly overlook this troubling trend, they pick him up. Meanwhile scouting reports show that the prior years strategies have worked pretty well so they continue to use them and Hamilton continues to struggle. Interestingly his contact rate on other pitches was up in 2013 (higher then 2011 or 2012), but he had all kinds of issues last year so his down year may be more attributable to his inability to square up the ball when he does make contact. Now we are in 2014 and opposing pitchers are continuing their trend for the fourth year and Josh is struggling to hit off-speed pitches. This is what we got ourselves into. the evidence was there. Josh, as I have said many times now, is incredibly inconsistent though and could end up smashing off-speed pitches on the regular later in the season. I don't ever expect him to be at his top form ever again. I know he has the ability to go on a huge hot streak still, but the chances of him ever being the Hamilton he once was were pretty slim before the Angels ever signed him.

Thanks for posting that. Definitely intersting to see. However, I still hold my stance that its hard to compare half a seasons numbers to his prior full seasons. Everything about Josh is inconsistent so it will be really hard to gauge until the season is over. All we can hope is that these stats are skewed at the current moment.

Pretty much this. I mean this is how Josh has played. You can't really compare his current numbers to career numbers because he has historically been all over the place. His career and season numbers mask his slumps and hot streaks. I was also against Hamilton coming to the Angels. Always seemed like a whiner and has been one of the most inconsistent hitters and certainly THE most inconsistent good hitter in the game. If you look at 2012, the year before we acquired him, his stats were pretty similar. He started out the season strong, hitting near .400 and had a SLG % of over .700. Then in June he struck out 35 times in 107 PA (compared with this June where he had 33 SO in 106 PA). His SLG % also dropped to .436 for that month. In July of 2012 he hit .177 with a .354 SLG %, but was striking out a little less. However, he is getting on base more this year because his BB rate is up. I would have to do the research to compare his contact rate in those months though (but am too lazy right now). Point being, Josh is one of the most streaky hitters in all of baseball. When he's good there is no one better. When he is bad, pretty much everyone is better. To be honest, based on how he has hit in the past its probably best that he is slumping now. You really want him to save his hot streak for the end of the season otherwise he will be worthless when you need him most. Based on last year there may be cause for concern, but we won't really know until the season is over. The cause for concern with him was when he was signed. But now he is here and we are reaping what we sowed.

That was great. Thank you

Well thats that. Apparently I have failed in life

haha never seen it actually.

I'm pretty new to this site, but have been on here reading threads since last season. Some of the posters on here can be a little brash and straight forward, but that is what I like about this site. It would be annoying if it weren't for the fact that the people who frequently post on here know more about baseball and the Angels then any other Angels forum you will find. People here have done their research and (for the most part) don't talk out of their behind. I have learned a lot from this site and I hope I can contribute in the future. I guess my point is, grow up and lighten up. If you take people too seriously it will stress you out too much. It is the internet and nobody is forcing you to be here. If you think you could do a better job then by all means start your own forum instead of attacking the people who run this site. Personally I find the conversation on here (this thread particularly) to be hilarious.