Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
GREEDY

A Nick Madrigal Sized Sample

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, fathom said:

Ugh, he’s just not physically strong enough to play at this level.  I also wonder if their efforts to have him gain weight have hurt his speed even more.

How much weight do you think he’s gained that would actually have impacted his speed?  He’s still a scrawny little b****.  His speed may not be as advertised, but he’s certainly not a below average runner for all major leaguers.  This is an obvious sample size bias.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the bat will be fine.  I still expect a .290+ hitter annually.  He's never going to hit for power, nor will I ever expect it.  But the defense has been shockingly bad.  The guy just seems so tense and like he isn't have any fun.  Needs to just relax and play the game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, Quin said:

After listening to Beckham on Garfein's podcast, Beckham might be someone Madrigal should try talking to about not being hard on yourself, i.e. learn from Gordon's mistakes.

Or Konerko.  Or Carlos Quentin...and that’s yet another reason they have guys like Thome around the team, Darrin Jackson as well.   Menechino is a former infielder as well.

Edited by caulfield12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta say, it’s pretty funny seeing some of the same people that anointed the likes of Tyler Saladino, Nicky Delmonico and Daniel Palka as future starters after a small sample size then kill prospects after an even smaller sample size.
 

I didn’t like the pick of Madrigal when it happened because I thought his ceiling was too low for a top 10 pick. But it is what it is now, throw the memory of what pick he was away.
 

Last year he hit the ball very well, this year he’s struggled through 20 something AB’s. If there’s a reasonable middle ground of him hitting .300/.340 without the mental errors in the field we’ll be perfectly fine with him as a starting 2B. And I’m pretty confident he’ll be able to do that. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

I gotta say, it’s pretty funny seeing some of the same people that anointed the likes of Tyler Saladino, Nicky Delmonico and Daniel Palka as future starters after a small sample size then kill prospects after an even smaller sample size.
 

I didn’t like the pick of Madrigal when it happened because I thought his ceiling was too low for a top 10 pick. But it is what it is now, throw the memory of what pick he was away.
 

Last year he hit the ball very well, this year he’s struggled through 20 something AB’s. If there’s a reasonable middle ground of him hitting .300/.340 without the mental errors in the field we’ll be perfectly fine with him as a starting 2B. And I’m pretty confident he’ll be able to do that. 

There is a big, big, big difference between "I want to see what this guy can do on my 2018 team that is slated to lose 100 games, because if I can get even a bench player out of a Delmonico or a DH out of Palka that means I don't have to spend extra money on an Edwin Encarnacion or trade for Mazara in a few years" and "This team is slated to go to the playoffs this year and this guy will start 140 games on the way there". 

If we're ready to throw in the towel on the season and trade away anyone who's a FA at the end of the year, then it's fine to allow Madrigal to have the whole year to work through problems. No one is, except for today's lineup. The standard was supposed to be different when we're trading for veteran guys rather than trading them away.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TheFutureIsNear said:

I gotta say, it’s pretty funny seeing some of the same people that anointed the likes of Tyler Saladino, Nicky Delmonico and Daniel Palka as future starters after a small sample size then kill prospects after an even smaller sample size.
 

I think it is the lack of a path towards being an above average 2B that is worrisome.

We've seen countless from our fanbase say: "I think he'll be fine" and then say something like: "he won't hit for any power but he is gonna hit .300".  I hate to break it to y'all but .300 with no power, limited walks and even average defense is not only NOT FINE, but it is downright bad. 

There is a disconnect from what people think is acceptable for Nick and what would actually be a good player.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

Longenhagen had him as a 70 runner.  70. And he claims to have watched him live. The hell was he lookin at.  

Pac 12 must play with 75 foot base paths because I have no clue how he could be graded that high. I hope he can get it together defensively because that's what we really need. As a 9th hitter I'm fine with the lack of power and incredible contact, but we need that speed and defense that was advertised.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn’t think speed would be impacted much by sample size

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, GREEDY said:

I think it is the lack of a path towards being an above average 2B that is worrisome.

We've seen countless from our fanbase say: "I think he'll be fine" and then say something like: "he won't hit for any power but he is gonna hit .300".  I hate to break it to y'all but .300 with no power, limited walks and even average defense is not only NOT FINE, but it is downright bad. 

There is a disconnect from what people think is acceptable for Nick and what would actually be a good player.  

Nobody ever thought he was going to hit for any power.  That's nothing new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing that concerns me the most is his defense.  He just doesn't make the plays a big league 2B needs to make.  I don't know how long this can be attributed to jitters.  It isn't even that he doesn't make the great plays.  He often doesn't make the regular plays.  It is frustrating and he is costing his pitchers.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
54 minutes ago, TheFutureIsNear said:

 

 

 

54 minutes ago, TheFutureIsNear said:

I gotta say, it’s pretty funny seeing some of the same people that anointed the likes of Tyler Saladino, Nicky Delmonico and Daniel Palka as future starters after a small sample size then kill prospects after an even smaller sample size.
 

I didn’t like the pick of Madrigal when it happened because I thought his ceiling was too low for a top 10 pick. But it is what it is now, throw the memory of what pick he was away.
 

Last year he hit the ball very well, this year he’s struggled through 20 something AB’s. If there’s a reasonable middle ground of him hitting .300/.340 without the mental errors in the field we’ll be perfectly fine with him as a starting 2B. And I’m pretty confident he’ll be able to do that. 

Funny you should mention Saladino because he actually played the excellent defense with well above average speed and base running that Madrigal was purported to possess, but in fact has been quite the opposite. The bat really isn’t the issue here. We know what kind of hitter he is. The issue is the bat doesn’t play without the aforementioned. A young hitter is going to have ups and downs, but the speed and defense is either there or it isn’t. Throw in poor fundamentals, it doesn’t look good

Edited by Vulture
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Vulture said:

I wouldn’t think speed would be impacted much by sample size

I wonder what they consider for this metric? Just home to first? Only running on ground balls? I have no clue what they consider. Does anyone know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

There is a big, big, big difference between "I want to see what this guy can do on my 2018 team that is slated to lose 100 games, because if I can get even a bench player out of a Delmonico or a DH out of Palka that means I don't have to spend extra money on an Edwin Encarnacion or trade for Mazara in a few years" and "This team is slated to go to the playoffs this year and this guy will start 140 games on the way there". 

If we're ready to throw in the towel on the season and trade away anyone who's a FA at the end of the year, then it's fine to allow Madrigal to have the whole year to work through problems. No one is, except for today's lineup. The standard was supposed to be different when we're trading for veteran guys rather than trading them away.

Maybe you were saying the reasonable things in the 1st paragraph...but not everyone, and I doubt it was even the majority. Hell, there were people talking about Mendick as if he was a decent player just last year. I get that its the internet and a message board, but this board’s knee jerk reactions seem to be high even for the internet’s standards.

And why are you acting like Madrigal has been flat out awful at all times? He had a .370 OBP his 1st taste of the big leagues last year. Obviously he needs to cut down the errors, can’t have that. But there’s a huge middle ground between “hes hurting the team” and “he shouldn’t have been drafted that high”. I think people are having a hard time with that for Madrigal, and to a lesser extent Collins as well. 

And I’m not saying you can’t send him down if he keeps hitting this poorly, just saying that maybe 21 PA’s is a little too early to make this thread.
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

The thing that concerns me the most is his defense.  He just doesn't make the plays a big league 2B needs to make.  I don't know how long this can be attributed to jitters.  It isn't even that he doesn't make the great plays.  He often doesn't make the regular plays.  It is frustrating and he is costing his pitchers.  

I wonder if this is where his instincts vs. ability is going haywire. His arm isn't amazing, maybe he's trying to compensate for how much faster game is than he expected by rushing, and that's what is causing the mistakes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, GREEDY said:

I think it is the lack of a path towards being an above average 2B that is worrisome.

We've seen countless from our fanbase say: "I think he'll be fine" and then say something like: "he won't hit for any power but he is gonna hit .300".  I hate to break it to y'all but .300 with no power, limited walks and even average defense is not only NOT FINE, but it is downright bad. 

There is a disconnect from what people think is acceptable for Nick and what would actually be a good player.  

But that wasn't the general expectation. I think the "optimistic but realistic" expectation for Nick was to be around a .320 hitter with around a .350 OBP, post an .OPS of around .780, play a "good" defensive 2B and just be a scrappy, grindy, smart player that always annoys a fanbase of the other team. The 2020 season from David Fletcher in Anaheim as an example, maybe with a slightly lower OPS from Nick. I think if Nick does that, most everyone is accepting of that. 

We really haven't seen that yet, and in fact he's cost the Sox games with his poor judgement and baseball IQ, which I don't think any of us had on our radar. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Markbilliards said:

I wonder what they consider for this metric? Just home to first? Only running on ground balls? I have no clue what they consider. Does anyone know?

Feet per second in player’s fastest one second window

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering it’s based on a single instance at a players top speed, I wouldn’t think sample size would have much effect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

The thing that concerns me the most is his defense.  He just doesn't make the plays a big league 2B needs to make.  I don't know how long this can be attributed to jitters.  It isn't even that he doesn't make the great plays.  He often doesn't make the regular plays.  It is frustrating and he is costing his pitchers.  

This is the very thing that makes me think he'll be fine. Not making routine plays is totally aberrational; he's been doing it his whole career, and slow grounders are no harder in MLB than in the Minors or college. Missing plays like that is definitely attributable to jitters. Hopefully he gets over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its sad that Madrigal cant be seen as a rookie dealing with adjustments and learning pains like our other struggling rookies when they first came up. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, reiks12 said:

Its sad that Madrigal cant be seen as a rookie dealing with adjustments and learning pains like our other struggling rookies when they first came up. 

I think it’s the defense that is getting him a short leash with (most) fans. He’s just been flat bad at 2B in the bigs and has cost us in some huge spots. Including basically losing us a playoff game. So yeah, while I personally am more than happy to keep running him out there and truly do think he’ll be fine, but the criticism is warranted. 

  • Fire 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, reiks12 said:

Its sad that Madrigal cant be seen as a rookie dealing with adjustments and learning pains like our other struggling rookies when they first came up. 

when you're billed as a high floor guy because of defense, "baseball smarts" and ability to consistently put the ball in play and you're producing negative WAR as a top 5 pick that's just how it is.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Tony said:

But that wasn't the general expectation. I think the "optimistic but realistic" expectation for Nick was to be around a .320 hitter with around a .350 OBP, post an .OPS of around .780, play a "good" defensive 2B and just be a scrappy, grindy, smart player that always annoys a fanbase of the other team. The 2020 season from David Fletcher in Anaheim as an example, maybe with a slightly lower OPS from Nick. I think if Nick does that, most everyone is accepting of that. 

We really haven't seen that yet, and in fact he's cost the Sox games with his poor judgement and baseball IQ, which I don't think any of us had on our radar. 

That's the thing he just needs to be a guy.  Not only is he not a guy but he is hurting the team with bad defense and low baseball IQ.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, reiks12 said:

Its sad that Madrigal cant be seen as a rookie dealing with adjustments and learning pains like our other struggling rookies when they first came up. 

Having a team that thinks it can make the playoffs is not "Sad". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×