tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2074246508221440257.post7612257347234174297..comments2023-10-17T10:45:07.796-04:00Comments on FJB: It's Super Willie TimeUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2074246508221440257.post-16070590960236784062009-06-30T01:49:53.873-04:002009-06-30T01:49:53.873-04:00Glad to hear about the delay. I thought he had sw...Glad to hear about the delay. I thought he had swung from average to terrible based on his play this past week. If there was that much variance in what looked like a decent week from Willie, I'd have to give up on defensive statistics altogether.<br />I agree, I bet Willie proves to be above average in center by the year's end.Bland Monikerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03756521017662140542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2074246508221440257.post-72555248244301906532009-06-29T22:44:52.581-04:002009-06-29T22:44:52.581-04:00Yes, the sample sizes are really small.
But the ...Yes, the sample sizes are really small. <br /><br />But the UZR stats are updated at Fangraphs only once a week. Those numbers haven't changed since I did my post. That's why I used his career number for CF, which is +2.3.<br /><br />I would take the over on a bet that he ends up over that number if he plays every day from here on out.Stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14109288910583404941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2074246508221440257.post-60432354583688627182009-06-29T21:55:08.183-04:002009-06-29T21:55:08.183-04:00It's been a week, but I just checked and Willi...It's been a week, but I just checked and Willie's UZR/150 in CF is now -21. Dukes is -23. I know we're dealing with small sample sizes but they aren't THAT small are they?Bland Monikerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03756521017662140542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2074246508221440257.post-60128911932734895032009-06-22T17:25:19.657-04:002009-06-22T17:25:19.657-04:00Yes! Thanks for writing this post. I was nodding m...Yes! Thanks for writing this post. I was nodding my head the whole time. I've long thought that the best move this offseason wasn't signing Dunn or Beimel, but resigning Harris to a two year deal.<br />BtB did a ranking on players by position at the end of last season. <a href="http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2008/10/29/648300/best-left-fielders-of-2008" rel="nofollow">Harris ranked as the 6th best LF in the majors.</a> And he only played about 2/3rds of the time as the rest of the guys.<br /><br />The real solution here is to trade one of Willingham, Dunn or Johnson (in that order), so we aren't forced to play the nightmare OF of Willingham/Dukes/Dunn. It's not a coincidence we've been playing better since Willingham went on the BL. It's not his defense that makes us worse, but the repercussions that come with giving him playing time, like moving Dunn to RF.<br /><br />Willingham has shown he's got lots of value. For crying out loud, he has a .390 wOBA, and he's actually been good defensively (0.8 URZ150). The more I write, the less convinced I am that Willingham is the problem, and that it's not Dunn who's the problem.<br /><br />Actually... Willingham has posted a higher WAR than Dunn (1.0 to 0.9) in 100 fewer plate appearances.Willhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01902355704452340677noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2074246508221440257.post-61342786956609739432009-06-22T13:33:58.070-04:002009-06-22T13:33:58.070-04:00Yeah, the 7th inning of game 1 against the Yankees...Yeah, the 7th inning of game 1 against the Yankees proved to us what we have known for a while now. Having anybody other than Harris in CF will cost almost the Nats at least a run per week, probably more.<br /><br />Dukes: good athlete, got in good position to catch both balls hit to deep center, missed both with his glove. Very few people are good enough to play CF... Dukes belongs in right, Harris in center, and Patterson at Syracuse.Deacon Drakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17827411603052143857noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2074246508221440257.post-17431608936309902962009-06-22T13:28:21.216-04:002009-06-22T13:28:21.216-04:00On that score, why did Manny do a double switch in...On that score, why did Manny do a double switch in the 8th inning yesterday? The pitcher spot was due up 2nd in the inning, so Manny replaced Kip Wells and then did a double switch that put Hanrahan in Kearns' #5 hole (7th batter due up) and put Willingham in the #9 hole (due up 2nd).<br /><br />Isn't the clear play there to keep the pitcher in the #9 hole (and keep Kearns in right) and then pinch hit Willingham for Hanrahan in the 9th? The score at the time of the double switch was 6-2, so you KNEW that Hanrahan wasn't going to pitch a second inning because the only way you could tie the game up was to rally in the 9th (which means you would have to pinch hit for Hanrahan anyway when his turn came up, which is what happened).<br /><br />So no matter what, your second batter in the 9th was going to be Willingham (if he was the first hitter you wanted to use off the bench) and you could always use Dukes to hit for Kearns if his spot came up. The net effect of Manny doing a double switch was only to take out a superior fielder (Kearns) in the 8th in favor of an inferior fielder (Willingham) with no benefit whatsoever to your offense.John O'Connorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014476389355562158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2074246508221440257.post-67696085117343081902009-06-22T11:48:59.767-04:002009-06-22T11:48:59.767-04:00HAPPY 31ST BIRTHDAY TO WILLIE!!!HAPPY 31ST BIRTHDAY TO WILLIE!!!Cheryl Nicholshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07830926041656122687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2074246508221440257.post-32303905841345897412009-06-22T11:22:18.512-04:002009-06-22T11:22:18.512-04:00Well, if you know and I know, and Bowden has been ...Well, if you know and I know, and Bowden has been put out to pasture, then who is putting Dunn Dukes and Willingham in the outfield right behind Guzman?Bennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2074246508221440257.post-42692642402534628702009-06-22T10:33:44.922-04:002009-06-22T10:33:44.922-04:00it is very hard to get a young, non-flame throwing...<i>it is very hard to get a young, non-flame throwing, pitcher to throw strikes if he has no confidence in the men behind him.</i><br /><br />This isn't overlooked by me. It's argument #1, 2, and 3 in my mind.Stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14109288910583404941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2074246508221440257.post-22025799445777365812009-06-22T10:18:42.263-04:002009-06-22T10:18:42.263-04:00Well Steve, you are a classier man than I, because...Well Steve, you are a classier man than I, because I would have linked to highlights of Dukes and Milledge thrashing around in center like trout on a river bank.<br /><br />I think that one of the things that is overlooked as well in the debate over center field (and shortstop) and the vilification of Randy St Claire is that it is very hard to get a young, non-flame throwing, pitcher to throw strikes if he has no confidence in the men behind him. The Expos always tried to play a good defense because their team was based on young pitching. <br /><br />So many of our problems come from the poor defense, and there is no doubt that the mini-upturn was a largely a product of real big league defense be it Harris, the resugent Hernandez or Dukes.Bennoreply@blogger.com