Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Greydawgfan1

Madrigal.

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Perfect Vision said:

I would check your math on that.  9 guys with a .350-.375 OBP and 27 outs.  How many times on base?

About 13 baserunners per game. Yes, that' s a lot, but it's still only 1 in most innings, and that 1 is never a home run, and in the other innings you mostly getting 0-1 runs with 2 baserunners in an inning. Contact doesn't automatically mean runners advance. There are still flyouts and groundouts that don't advance runners.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Perfect Vision said:

I would check your math on that.  9 guys with a .350-.375 OBP and 27 outs.  How many times on base?

You said he'd be on base 16-19 times per game.  That is incorrect.  And it isn't close. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we really arguing over an unprovable 9-Madrigal hypothetical and acting like we really know the outcome.  Really.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

Are we really arguing over an unprovable 9-Madrigal hypothetical and acting like we really know the outcome.  Really.

Would you rather face 9 Madrigal sized Madrigals or one Abreu sized Madrigal? 

Edited by GREEDY
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GREEDY said:

You said he'd be on base 16-19 times per game.  That is incorrect.  And it isn't close. 

 

Assuming all Madrigals, every plate appearance would be expected to produce 0.63-0.64 outs.  So it would take over 42 plate appearances to produce 27 outs.  Over 42 plate appearances is going to produce 16 times on base.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GREEDY said:

Would you rather face 9 Madrigal sized Madrigals or one Abreu sized Madrigal? 

The clown car can fit them all

Share this post


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

I reacted to your judging.  Small sample size only applies to the haters here.

 

 

In his greatest strength.  Now do literally every other aspect of the game.  Amazing.

 

 

 

lol keep moving the goal posts, thats your greatest strength

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what a great thread. 

.327 career batting average out of the 9th spot is controversial. 

I miss the days of Yolmer Sanchez, Brett Lawrie, Chris Getz, Brett Lillibridge, etc. 

 

I'm going to start a thread for Dallas Keuchel now. Is he really a suitable #3 pitcher in our rotation?  

 

 

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


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

what a great thread. 

.327 career batting average out of the 9th spot is controversial. 

I miss the days of Yolmer Sanchez, Brett Lawrie, Chris Getz, Brett Lillibridge, etc. 

 

I'm going to start a thread for Dallas Keuchel now. Is he really a suitable #3 pitcher in our rotation?  

 

 

no he isn't.  And I've stated this.  He is a #4 in a legit playoff, world series contending team.  Though I am using his 2020 as a SSS, I predict him more the 3.75 ERA/FIP guy.

Edited by Squirmin' for Yermin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WhiteSoxFan1993 said:

I think I've said this before. If you have 9 Madrigals in your lineup, you'll have an awful offense. However, having one of them amongst a lineup of powerful free swingers is very useful. When he comes up with runners on base, you have a good chance that he won't kill the rally.

You sure wouldn't have many complete games thrown against you.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A team full of Madrigal's would have a great defense.

My guess is the same people that hate Madrigal are the same group that is pining for the return of Dane Dunnign to be the ACE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I really like the back and forth of hard stats being used here. Obviously not all of them are in favor of Madrigal but IMO saying he "needs" this or that to be above average is arbitrary. 

A guy who is consistently batting above .300 and virtually never swinging and missing? That guy is contributing in numerous ways and is ultimately someone you won't have to worry about. He starts playing more solid defense... and if we are still actually debating him on this team it would be absolutely absurd.

Edited by RagahRagah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he can hit 300 with a 350 obp I'm fine with that. He needs to tighten up his defense but I'm not worried about that either. 

I still would like him to become like a 6-8 Homer guy at least but if he really is a 1-3 Homer guy but the rest is good I'm fine with that. 

Yes, the power is a little disappointment so far as most prospect guys would hope he would get to 10-12 homers power but if everything else is in line that would be OK. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

2 hours ago, BrianAnderson said:

what a great thread. 

.327 career batting average out of the 9th spot is controversial. 

I miss the days of Yolmer Sanchez, Brett Lawrie, Chris Getz, Brett Lillibridge, etc. 

 

I'm going to start a thread for Dallas Keuchel now. Is he really a suitable #3 pitcher in our rotation?  

 

 

Counterpoint: It’s perfectly legit for White Sox fans who had to suffer through late career Juan Pierre to wonder whether a .300 hitter without much in the wheels, power, or defense department might be a liability. Pierre hit .308 with a .370 OBP in 2009 for the dodgers just before coming to the Sox and it was a whopping 1.2 WAR. When he became a .280/.340 hitter for the Sox, he dipped into 0/negative WAR territory. I think Madrigal has upside and I’m excited about him on this team but BA is not the greatest measure here. His ceiling without  power, wheels, or defense is not much higher than his high floor.
 

 

Edited by Greg Hibbard
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Greg Hibbard said:

 

Counterpoint: It’s perfectly legit for White Sox fans who had to suffer through late career Juan Pierre to wonder whether a .300 hitter without much in the wheels, power, or defense department might be a liability. Pierre hit .308 with a .370 OBP in 2009 for the dodgers just before coming to the Sox and it was a whopping 1.2 WAR. When he became a .280/.340 hitter for the Sox, he dipped into 0/negative WAR territory. I think Madrigal has upside and I’m excited about him on this team but BA is not the greatest measure here. His ceiling without  power, wheels, or defense is not much higher than his high floor.
 

 

Pierre had only 425 AB's in 2009.  When he played 162 games in 2004 his WAR was 4.0.  I know Madrogal type players are not everyone's cup of tea...but, I will take Nick over the .220 player to hits 16-20 home runs any day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, chitownsportsfan said:

omg I'm dying.  @greg775 better up your game you got competition.

You mean in comparing Timmy to Manny Sanguillen? Being a comparison guy? Or being positive. El Rockin is the most positive poster in history. I'd love to be known as dat.

Share this post


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

Pierre had only 425 AB's in 2009.  When he played 162 games in 2004 his WAR was 4.0.  I know Madrogal type players are not everyone's cup of tea...but, I will take Nick over the .220 player to hits 16-20 home runs any day.

Yes, but extrapolating his 2009 to 600 PAs you still come in at a 1.65 WAR - is that acceptable to you for a starter? 

also, that 162 game 4 WAR campaign included 3 home runs, 12 triples (to lead the league) and 45 stolen bases. Are you suggesting that Nick is capable of any or all of those feats?

To key off of similar stats to what you mentioned consider Adam Dunn’s 23 year old season - .215 batting average, 27 home runs, 469 PAs, 1.7 WAR. He had a ton of walks which made his obp .350. I know you said less home runs but Adam Dunn has an atrocious batting average in that line and was still able to easily generate plenty of WAR. 

Madrigal is actually exactly my cup of tea....I love his game...if he has just a LITTLE more pop (3-4 homers, 8-10 triples) I fear he is a 0 home runs, 2 triples, 15 doubles, 140 singles with about 40 walks player...the value in creating runs from that stat line seems problematic. 

 

 

Edited by Greg Hibbard
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Yes, but extrapolating his 2009 to 600 PAs you still come in at a 1.65 WAR - is that acceptable to you for a starter? 

also, that 162 game 4 WAR campaign included 3 home runs, 12 triples (to lead the league) and 45 stolen bases. Are you suggesting that Nick is capable of any or all of those feats?

To key off of similar stats to what you mentioned consider Adam Dunn’s 23 year old season - .215 batting average, 27 home runs, 469 PAs, 1.7 WAR. He had a ton of walks which made his obp .350. I know you said less home runs but Adam Dunn has an atrocious batting average in that line and was still able to easily generate plenty of WAR. 

Madrigal is actually exactly my cup of tea....I love his game...if he has just a LITTLE more pop (3-4 homers, 8-10 triples) I fear he is a 0 home runs, 2 triples, 15 doubles, 140 singles with about 40 walks player...the value in creating runs from that stat line seems problematic. 

 

 

For one, you are comparing a Juan Pierre on the wrong side of 30 and the tail end of his career to Nick Madrigal who just started his. Two, you picked a random statline for Madrigal based on your fears and then made it a fact. What? Hes on pace for 8-10 triples, hes on pace for more than 20 doubles. Thats what you like to see right? Your imaginary stat line would be problematic but he hasnt shown that that is going to be what happens. We look at Robert and say "hes going to get better", then why cant Madrigal? We see Vaughns .630 OPS and say he needs more time and experience then why cant we say the same for of Madrigal? Yeah Madrigal isnt going to develop power like Vaughn or Robert, but what if he is able to control the field better? Shoot balls down the line and in the gaps with his developed elite bat control? What if he works with the Chicago White Sox strength and conditioning coach?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Juan Pierre, a guy who relied on legs at the end of his career v. Madrigal 40 games into his are not very comparable. 

I'll continue to drive the Madrigal bandwagon along with the Carlos Rodon bandwagon as I have for the past few years. These are guys that are important to this team & have their roles. The world has gone mad with Statcast. In a world where OBP, BA, contact metrics, etc. are all at multi-decade lows it's refreshing to see the other side. 

It's at bats like Moncada, Grandal, or Vaughn have that are super important throughout not just a game, but a season. The 14 pitch at-bat by Bobby Dalbec won't show up in the box score or in articles, but that was an important plate appearance. 

At bats like Madrigal have putting the ball in play and advancing runners or getting on base and re-adjusting the defense alignment, putting the pitcher out of the stretch, etc.  is important not only in game, but over a full season.

Robert's and Eloy's launch angles and exit velocity are just as important too. It takes a mix of all sorts of guys to make a championship team. You see some of these teams, Cubs maybe being the best example lately - a team over the past few years that have a bunch of statcast guys who singularly are good, but as a collective struggle because they don't have a good mix. All or nothing baseball is a fad. The pendulum swung from the Hawks and the TWTW to full Billy Baseball and statcast. The reality, like most things in life is that the middle grey area is the best. The Sox have that this year with a mix of the Eaton/Madrigal types. The guys who see pitches per plate appearance in Grandal/Moncada/Vaughn and the statcast superheros Abreu/Eloy/Robert. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Juan Pierre’s age has nothing to do with this discussion. His inability to do much more than hit singles and be below average at everything else at that point in his career is absolutely a fair comparison to what we all think is Madrigals floor. Some of you are quite defensive - I’m still optimistic about Madrigal. I will maintain until I’m blue in the face that if he has very low to nonexistent power  he’s a bust as a first rounder. My point is that a singles hitter - even a .300+ singles hitter with a very high OBP - has a low WAR and we have seen that as white Sox fans firsthand. 

Edited by Greg Hibbard

Share this post


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

Juan Pierre’s age has nothing to do with this discussion. His inability to do much more than hit singles and be below average at everything else at that point in his career is absolutely a fair comparison to what we all think is Madrigals floor. Some of you are quite defensive - I’m still optimistic about Madrigal. I will maintain until I’m blue in the face that if he has very low power he’s a bust as a first rounder. My point is that a singles hitter - even a .300+ singles hitter with a very high OBP - has a low WAR and we have seen that as white Sox fans firsthand. 

His age does have something to do with it as that is when his speed and defense declined to a point where it made his WAR negative. Madrigal defense and base running will improve with experience. Pierre's wasn't going to improve at that age. So if your point is that Madrigal can't improve his defense or baserunning due to some factor like Pierre's aging then you could be correct. However, Madrigal's low HR totals alone doesn't make him a bust. If his defense and baserunning doesn't improve and he doesn't hit for 2B and 3B, then he's a bust. However, if some of his stats show he is above average such as his OPS+ where he is above average, I don't think he is a bust.

Share this post


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

His age does have something to do with it as that is when his speed and defense declined to a point where it made his WAR negative. Madrigal defense and base running will improve with experience. Pierre's wasn't going to improve at that age. So if your point is that Madrigal can't improve his defense or baserunning due to some factor like Pierre's aging then you could be correct. However, Madrigal's low HR totals alone doesn't make him a bust. If his defense and baserunning doesn't improve and he doesn't hit for 2B and 3B, then he's a bust. However, if some of his stats show he is above average such as his OPS+ where he is above average, I don't think he is a bust.

I think my point keeps getting missed. WAR does not care if you are a 23 year old up and coming hitter or a 31 year old hitter on the decline. WAR is WAR.

My point in the comp was to illustrate what a singles hitter that doesn’t do much else would look like in terms of WAR for the White Sox. If Madrigal hit .308/.365/.392/.757 with 20 doubles, 10 triples, 0 home runs, and 30 SB people would over the moon at those raw stats. 

In Pierres case he was measured in terms of WAR against other LF, and maybe that crippled him, I’m not sure how it changes for Madrigal compared to other 2B, but if he did end up with a 1.7 or so WAR with all those raw stats that feels disappointing to me. The other thing about Pierre is that he also struck out a lower percentage of the time. 
 

 

Edited by Greg Hibbard
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, Greg Hibbard said:

I think my point keeps getting missed. WAR does not care if you are a 23 year old up and coming hitter or a 31 year old hitter on the decline. WAR is WAR.

My point in the comp was to illustrate what a singles hitter he doesn’t do much else would look like in terms of WAR for the White Sox. If Madrigal hit .308/.365/.392/.757 with 20 doubles, 10 triples, 0 home runs, and 30 SB people would over the moon at those raw stats. 

In Pierres case he was measured in terms of WAR against other LF, and maybe that crippled him, I’m not sure how it changes for Madrigal compared to other 2B, but if he did end up with a 1.7 or so WAR with all those raw stats that feels disappointing to me. The other thing about Pierre is that he also struck out a lower percentage of the time. 
 

 

That's all true. I guess everyone else is saying that that may be true at this moment in time. However, many people think he has the capacity to improve on the metrics that declined for Pierre (defense and baserunning) that made his WAR what is was at your prescribed moment in time.

So you are correct today. But, he is not a finished product, and you may be wrong as his career progresses and he improves. He will not be a singles hitter without defense and baserunning as he is today. 

Edited by ptatc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Greg Hibbard said:

If Madrigal hit .308/.365/.392/.757 with 20 doubles, 10 triples, 0 home runs, and 30 SB people would over the moon at those raw stats. 

Hes not far away from being that player after 150 career atbats and people here hate the ever loving shit out of him

Share this post


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

Hes not far away from being that player after 150 career atbats and people here hate the ever loving shit out of him

How in the world is 1 career triple and 3 steals close to being that player?  Also people hate him more for his terrible defense and choking in pressure situations. 

  • Like 1

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.

×