Comments on: Sophomore Mets

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 00:41:15 +0000

I love how you assume that someone you know absolutely nothing about is “some couch jockey” who has no idea what they are talking about.

By: MetsFan

MetsFan — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 10:18:27 +0000

SNY…
I have actually listened to Ron Darling call a game. Probably about 40 before I started tuning him out. He is certainly not the worst in the business. My issue with the crew is the same as pretty much every other crew. They regurgitate the common old school baseball wisdom. Productive outs, hit and run, good bunters, clutch hitting, etc. Maybe it’s asking too much for the announcers to read a little literature and sprinkle the broadcast with knowledge based on stats and their (more astute than my) eyes. I agree they had a good early call on Murphy. But they failed to point out that what was happening might be an aberration since he didn’t post high walk rates in the minors. Like most other announcers, nothing is a product of chance. Everything that happens has an explanation.

“Keith Hernandez, whose numbers at the plate speak for themselves”
This is silly. Numbers don’t speak. If these numbers chose to speak they would probably say “Keith Hernandez was a good hitter.” Not “Keith Hernandez’s career 128 OPS+ predetermines that he is a fine announcer.” Skill in a sport and skill in analysis a/o coaching are not the same thing. This has been proven many times.

MetsFan

By: MetsFan

MetsFan — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 09:50:52 +0000

Jim –
Your response is dumb enough that it barely dignifies a response. Though I’m bored, so I’ll go ahead.

I never said eyeball evaluations are worthless compared to stats. This statement wouldn’t even make sense since being worthless is absolute , not relative, independent of making a comparison of value to something else. Something could be worth less than something else, but I would never say worthless compared to. So cheers to your misquote.

What I did say: Some couch jockey’s eyeball evaluations are worthless.

Save the scouting vs. stats argument for a context where it actually applies.

By: caseyB

caseyB — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 21:36:32 +0000

As for Keith and Ron, I highly respect their analysis of the technical aspects of the game — hitting and pitching — but I disagree with them often when it comes to analysis of the team or the more psychological aspects of the game , especially when pertaining to Mets players. Gary? He’s a top notch broadcaster and one of the very best in the business. But I don’t necessarily think he has great insight into the game the way Keith and Ron do.

By: caseyB

caseyB — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 21:31:40 +0000

I agree with LTF in the sense that Murphy was not sent to the AZ league to learn 2nd so that he can play it this year. Omar has stated that he was slotted to play 2nd in the AZ for a long time and, in addition, their ability to slot players in at positions is limited to what’s available. So if the AZ team only had a 2nd base slot open at the time, then maybe that is why they put Murphy there.

At any rate, I believe he will play LF for most of the year. If he has a good year, I think it’s first base or LF for him in 2010.

By: Jim

Jim — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 06:33:47 +0000

If eyeball evaluations are so worthless compared to stats, then why do ballclubs even have scouts?

By: SNYWatcherInMA

SNYWatcherInMA — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 04:13:51 +0000

MetsFan:

Dude, have you EVER listened to Ron Darling call a game? The guy has an INCREDIBLE eye for the nuance of the game, particularly weaknesses in a player’s form and adjustments that need to be made to improve a player’s game. Furthermore, I suspect that Keith Hernandez, whose numbers at the plate speak for themselves, knows a little something about how a player will develop, as well as the highlights in their swing that show them to be a well-seasoned hitter. Their predictions for Murphy to distinguish himself at the plate in his first season came in the first few days of his playing time, and they were right. I’d say their endorsement in an argument counts for more than you give it credit for.

Respect the pros, folks. Can’t leave out Gary Cohen, either – the guy keeps winning those awards for his announcing for a reason.

By: uncutsports

uncutsports — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 04:45:17 +0000

I agree with matt,

The bellow link will give you uncut sports vidoe’s,

http://www.theuncutsportsshow.com/promocontest/

By: Marc

Marc — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 02:55:13 +0000

At this point, Murphy certainly does appear to be the best option at second base for the Mets. Don’t count him out at second base, regardless of the line from the org yet.

By: MetsFan

MetsFan — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 02:21:13 +0000

LongTimeFan
Do you read this site? Your eyeball evaluations of “aggressiveness” in the outfield and so forth are worthless. In a limited sample these guys have not been butchers in the field, which is nice and given lack of experience, speaks to possibly being above average outfielders. A team doesn’t slot someone at 1st b/c the player is comfortable there. Neither of these guys will likely ever have the power to overcome the positional adjustment. If Murphy proves to be a decent hitter and can serviceably play 2nd base, he’ll have more value to the organization. Castillo has a few months to prove that he can still play or else his contract is simply a sunk cost.
Finally, in constructing an argument, you never want to use Ron Darling or Keith Hernandez as support. If anything, the opposite.
MetsFan