Diamondbacks young guys

[BC867]

I was curious about the D'backs young guys' hitting vs., for example, the Dodgers young 1B, James Loney.

PLAYER.....G...AB...R...2B...3B...HR...RBI...OBP...SLG...AVG
Loney......45..158..17...8.....3.....4.....23....379...487....323

Jackson...93...302..40..22....1.....7.....35....359...417....268
Reynolds.66...211..33...14...3......8.....32...316...464.....256
Drew.....103..383..39....21..3......3......38..296....371....238
Young....100..379..55....18..2.....19.....40...290...449....240
Quentin..71...216...28....14..0......5.....28...297...343....208

Not one of the Diamondbacks could touch Loney in Batting Average, On-base percent, or Slugging percent. And with fewer at-bats than any of the D'backs, Loney looks to be proportional to, or better than any of them in the other categories.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mark Grace said something very interesting during a recent game. He said that young ballplayers are pigeon-holed early into what "they are" . . . and gave Mark Reynolds as an example.

He said the D'backs ID'd him as a HR hitter.

And here's Reynolds (who has more RBI's per at-bat than the other D'backs) striking out alot and spending alot of time on the bench . . . because the Coaching staff has him swinging for the fences.

James Loney is more productive than Reynolds, or any of the D'backs young guys, because evidently the Dodgers coaching staff doesn't have him swinging for the fences on every at-bat.

Bob Brenly may be gone, but his Bench Manager and his staff have the team playing AL baseball in the NL.

Yes, the D'backs are on a hot streak now . . . but look how much better the young guys could be (like Loney) if managed better.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

I lost when you implied Grady Little was a good manager.

 

[coyoteshockeyfan]

And here's Reynolds (who has more RBI's per at-bat than the other D'backs) striking out alot and spending alot of time on the bench . . . because the Coaching staff has him swinging for the fences.

Where is it written that young Conor Jackson gets the nod over young Mark Reynolds? They say that Reynolds shows tremendous power potential in batting practice.

Yes, it's batting practice, but the better you do there, the better potential for games.

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=1398832&postcount=7


Way to kill your own credibility.

 

[hafey]

Mark Grace was talking about the minor leagues, specifically the player's first year in the system with regard to the pigeon holing.

 

[HooverDam]

I do agree w/ the part of of your post that says Melvin tries to have the team swing for the fences too much. I'd like to see the team run, use its speed, hit and run, etc etc more often. Chris Youngs improved baserunning has helped improve this to some degree, but I'd like to see it done even more.

 

[Dback Jon]

Chris Young is 10 times the player that Loney will be. Not even close.

 

[Gaddabout]

A light-hitting first baseman? I'm not sure that makes Loney a great prospect. He can hit the ball. That's why he's here. But his ceiling is much lower than almost all of the other guys you mentioned. Most importantly, center fielders like Young make just as much impact with their gloves as they do with their bat. It's accepted baseball wisdom that it's OK to sacrifice some offense for any kind of excellent middle fielder defense -- catcher, short, second, and center. That's the heart of a defense. The fact that you also get 19 homes runs out of a center fielder that can actually flash leather is a major plus.

I'd say Dback Jon is exactly right about Young. I'd also much rather have a 1B who does more damage with fewer hits. Any corner fielder needs to be an RBI producer to be consider a great prospect.

 

[green machine]

I don't think he's saying that Loney is a better prospect or a better player, but rather questioning why their numbers aren't equal or better then Loney's.

 

[Brian]

I don't think he's saying that Loney is a better prospect or a better player, but rather questioning why their numbers aren't equal or better then Loney's.

All of their numbers are disconcerting. I wonder myself why the numbers aren't better. The Dbacks are 30th in the league in runs scored. I don't understand why we have so many players hovering around .240-.245

This team is going to be incredible in 3-4 years. I am loving the direction they are going.

I agree that the glove work is just as important. In 2001 (the World Series) they were #1 in defense if memory serves.

 

[Gaddabout]

I don't think he's saying that Loney is a better prospect or a better player, but rather questioning why their numbers aren't equal or better then Loney's.

Mainly, I think it's because Jeff Kent's injury has allowed Loney to play 1B because the Dodgers have no one else there. That and the fact he has a natural lefty swing that won't change for anyone or anything -- and he's not asked to do much but make contact -- allowed him a long grace period.

But now Loney's in a major slump. That average has tumbled over 100 points in one month. Pitchers have found holes in his swing. He hasn't adjusted, and now they're talking about playing him in right field. I guarantee you the more they experiment with Loney in other positions in the field, the more he will struggle at the plate.

The guy's just a good natural hitter, but I reiterate that his ceiling is not all that high, and the longer this season goes on I'm not sure his everyday production has been that much better than some of the other guys who struggled mightily early on.

If someone wants to make an argument the waiting period on Connor Jackson is coming to a close, I won't argue with that.

 

[BC867]

I lost when you implied Grady Little was a good manager.

There's a difference between 'good' and better than ours.

That average has tumbled over 100 points in one month.

I don't think anyone expected Loney to continue hitting over .423. But his average, OBP and (most interesting for a 'light-hitting first baseman') Slugging Percentage are higher than any of the D'back kids.

I don't think he's saying that Loney is a better prospect or a better player, but rather questioning why their numbers aren't equal or better then Loney's.

Yes, that's the point.

Originally Posted by BC867 ...
Where is it written that young Conor Jackson gets the nod over young Mark Reynolds? They say that Reynolds shows tremendous power potential in batting practice.

The best way for a young power hitter to hit homeruns is to not try on every pitch (which leads to strikeouts and riding the bench).

Who can forget Steve Finley and Tony Womack accumulating mediocre stats while trying to put every pitch into the air (while Bob Melvin was Bench Coach)?

 

[jjdowney]

who remembers whem renyolds was called up from AA. his first month or so was amazing. he hit .400 something with 4-6 Hrs. looks a bit better than Loney's first month or so. and now loney is slumping, kinda like renyolds or any rookie for that matter. He isn't that much better, no matter who the manager is, rookies will almost undoubtedly slump once pitchers figure them out.

 

[scXfreakX]

Well it's not a fair comparison because Loney hasn't played as many games as the others so yeah, he might have a better average. Chris Young is a million times better than Loney. Young does everything.

 

[BC867]

Chris Young is a million times better than Loney. Young does everything.

Add the word "potentially" and I agree.

But that's the problem. Under Melvin's inconsistent leadership (in the lineup, out of the lineup, batting high, batting low), the young Diamondbacks are falling short of their potential, even at this point.

 

[jjdowney]

Add the word "potentially" and I agree.

But that's the problem. Under Melvin's inconsistent leadership (in the lineup, out of the lineup, batting high, batting low), the young Diamondbacks are falling short of their potential, even at this point.

I think that there has been a fairly nice consistency to the lineup lately. Snyder has been moved around a little buton the whole I think Young is starting to figure out the lead off spot with hudson and byrnes behind him.

 

[D-Dogg]

This team is going to be incredible in 3-4 years. I am loving the direction they are going.

Sweet, I'll check back in in two years.

 

[Dback Jon]

Loney post-All Star break

23 87 8 23 5 1 1 7 6 11 0 1 .264 .316 .379 .695

August

6 21 0 3 1 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 .143 .250 .190 .440

 

[BC867]

The guy's (Loney is) just a good natural hitter, but I reiterate that his ceiling is not all that high, and the longer this season goes on I'm not sure his everyday production has been that much better than some of the other guys who struggled mightily early on.

It's now a month later for this thread, so I compared the Diamondbacks 5 young guys vs. the Dodgers 4 young guys . . . and to see if Loney has fizzled.

The Dodgers four kids -- Matt Kemp, James Loney, Russ Martin and Andre Ethier -- current batting averages as of September 12 were from .287 up to .335. Loney's is still up there at .322. All very respectable.

The D'backs five kids -- Conor Jackson, Mark Reynolds, Chris Young, Stephen Drew and Carlos Quentin -- current batting averages were from .281 down to .215. Ugh.

Those Dodgers batting averages pick up where the D'backs leave off.

Slugging percentage looks like this:

MATT KEMP.................DODGERS............ .523
JAMES LONEY..............DODGERS............ .522
RUSS MARTIN.............DODGERS............ .475
MARK REYNOLDS.........DIAMONDBACKS... .473
CHRIS YOUNG.............DIAMONDBACKS... .472
CONOR JACKSON.........DIAMONDBACKS... .456
ANDRE ETHIER............DODGERS............ .450
STEPHEN DREW.........DIAMONDBACKS.... .362
CARLOS QUENTIN........DIAMONDBACKS... .352

The Dodgers come out on top in both hits-per-AB and total-bases-per-AB.

The Diamondbacks are in 1st place and the Dodgers are not. Of course, other factors beside young position players come into play.

When when it comes to getting the most out of young talent, the Dodgers clearly out-class the D'backs.

Is it because, as Mark Grace said on the air, the Diamondbacks encourage their young players to swing for homeruns? Evidently the Dodgers do not.

It's a shame to see our young guys falling short.

Even Chris Young (despite his potential 30/30 season) has a batting average of .237 and a slugging percentage of .472 (which is 5th on the combined list above).

These statistics represent a good enough sample to conclude that D'backs management are not equipped to get good performances out of the future of the team -- our wealth of young position player talent. It's a shame.

 

[Dback Jon]

You call this impressive?

Post All-Star 55 198 24 59 12 1 8 32 14 28 0 1 .298 .344 .490

You over value average, under value runs, etc. Diamondback young guys are FAR FAR superior to the low ceiling players the Dodgers are trotting out.

 

[BC867]

Diamondback young guys are FAR FAR superior to the low ceiling players the Dodgers are trotting out.

That could very well be. As a D'backs fan, I'd like to believe that.

But why are the Dodger kids batting .335, .322, .297 and .287 . . . and our guys batting ..281, .268, .237, .229 and .215?

With higher slugging percentages -- more bases per at-bat.

If the Dodger kids are overachieving, good for their management.

If our kids are underachieving, why? Why? Because they became part of what appears to be the team batting philosophy -- swing for the fences consistently, instead of picking your spots.

Our young position players are not the problem. Team management is.

It's gotten us 1st place this year in a very up-and-down season. But it does not bode well for the future.

Think Lyle Overbay. He failed here. But prospered in Milwaukee, where he didn't have to pretend that he was a homerun hitter.

 

[DWKB]

Well for starters, wasn't the hitting coach fired mid-season in a very public way getting a lot of blame for the offensive struggles? Certainly the upper management has some blame for that but at least they've reacted fairly rapidly on it.

Mr. .281 has actually hit .303 since the ASB and has hit .292 for all non-April ABs. April was when he should have been DLed with a hamstring injury but played through the pain and hit .215

Mr. .268, aside from a half season at the launchpad of Lancaster where he hit .337, he's never hit above .275 in the minors. Given that, a .268 avg for his first call-up isn't that poor. Mr. 268 is a power hitter who Ks a lot, he wasn't considered a high ceiling prospect and earned his notoriety through minor league performance.

Mr. .237 is also a high power, high K, low avg kinda player. He should be hitting higher than .237, but I wouldn't predict more than .275 at the most.

Mr. 229 has just had a struggling year. He is a SS, though, so the offensive production does get some relief.

Mr. 215 torn his non-throwing labrum in the preseason and has been playing with it that way all year.

As for SLG%, you'd expect it to be higher since AVG is included in SLG%. ISO (Isolated Power) takes the AVG out of the equation.

With that, you've now got:

Young        .235     CF
Reynolds     .204     3B
Loney        .200     1B
Kemp         .185     RF
Jackson      .175     1B
Martin       .177     C
Either       .162     LF/RF
Quentin      .137     RF
Drew         .134     SS

I put the positions there too to give some perspective.

 

[Dback Jon]

Good post, DWKB!


Lyle Overbay?? Lyle Overbay??? You mean current .243 hitting, .398 SLG Lyle Overbay???

 

[BC867]

As for SLG%, you'd expect it to be higher since AVG is included in SLG%. ISO (Isolated Power) takes the AVG out of the equation.

With that, you've now got:

Young        .235     CF
Reynolds     .204     3B
Loney        .200     1B
Kemp         .185     RF
Jackson      .175     1B
Martin       .177     C
Either       .162     LF/RF
Quentin      .137     RF
Drew         .134     SS

I put the positions there too to give some perspective.

How many total bases each player is averaging per at bat is a pure statistic that satisfies me as a D'backs fan.

Subtracting factors may get you get where you want . . . but doesn't change their performances on the field.

The fact is that Matt Kemp and James Loney are averaging over a half a base per at-bat, which is a combination of singles and extra base hits.

Of the other 7 young guys compared, the other 2 Dodgers and all 5 Diamondbacks are under half a base.

It would be nice if two of our guys would have developed as well as Kemp and Loney in terms of both batting average (.335 and .322 are commendable in anyone's book) and slugging percentage (each over .500).

And I don't believe that using the Batting coach as a scapegoat is valid. He evidently followed the company line, which Mark Grace described on the air. Swing for the fences -- all or nothing.

 

[DWKB]

How many total bases each player is averaging per at bat is a pure statistic that satisfies me as a D'backs fan.

Subtracting factors may get you get where you want . . . but doesn't change their performances on the field.

The fact is that Matt Kemp and James Loney are averaging over a half a base per at-bat, which is a combination of singles and extra base hits.

Of the other 7 young guys compared, the other 2 Dodgers and all 5 Diamondbacks are under half a base.

It would be nice if two of our guys would have developed as well as Kemp and Loney in terms of both batting average (.335 and .322 are commendable in anyone's book) and slugging percentage (each over .500).

And I don't believe that using the Batting coach as a scapegoat is valid. He evidently followed the company line, which Mark Grace described on the air. Swing for the fences -- all or nothing.

Well subtracting AVG from SLG gets you the actual power the player produces per AB, you understand this, right? I mean you know it's an actual stat that's on ESPN and everything and measures a real component of a players game. I thought that's what you were trying to get to with SLG comparisons.

Why didn't you address the injuries?

If you're gonna pull out the "Slice it anyway you want, doesn't change the performance on the field" phrase, then I think the DBack players win 83 to 78 and any point you want to make against them loses, right?

Player     Win Shares
Martin       25
Snyder       16        (whom you forgot, if Martin, why not him?)
Young        15
Drew         14
Either       13
Jackson      12
Loney        11
Reynolds     10
Kemp         10
Quentin       6

Yes, the Dodgers players are performing better than the DBacks players right now, but your way of whitewashing the reasons why is where I have issue with your argument.

 

[BC867]

If you're gonna pull out the "Slice it anyway you want, doesn't change the performance on the field" phrase ...

I enjoy reading your point of view, DWKB. But it seems that winning a debate is more important than discussing why the D'backs young players are putting up such disappointing numbers (and I used the Dodgers as an example).

BTW, if you're going to attribute a quote to me, please make it something I actually said.

I have to chuckle. You're younger than my two sons. Whenever we have a discussion, my older son turns it into a debate, which he makes more important than the issue itself, like turning his thoughts into my quotes, etc.

My bottom line is that it bothers me to see our young guys get off on the wrong foot, because (once again, per Mark Grace) the D'backs pre-define their players, then demand that they play that way.

In the Diamondbacks case, it means uppercutting the ball and going for the low percentage result of a homerun.

I've been a National League fan for 55 years and in Management within industry for 43. I really enjoy the concept of identifying the strong points of a person, and working to develop them . . . vs. forcing them to fit into the concept of the Manager.

Numbers won't change that feeling. Or even an inconsistent season where we're up-and-down-and-up-and-down, etc. The bottom line is that our young guys are having disappointing starts to their Major League careers.

That's a shame.