Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Greydawgfan1

Madrigal.

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Mercedes was taken out of the game due to an injury, but please carry on with the narrative that best suits your anger. And no, people think he will "get better" because he's 24 years old and has played a whopping 45 big league games. What a novel theory!

He has a 107 OPS+, which is why he continues to play and not face "consequences" because you typically want a guy who is better than league average with the bat in the lineup batting 9th. Another novel theory.

I was thinking he might have been Danny's dad, not Danny himself.

 

Edited by ron883
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Mercedes was taken out of the game due to an injury, but please carry on with the narrative that best suits your anger. And no, people think he will "get better" because he's 24 years old and has played a whopping 45 big league games. What a novel theory!

 

Dude, nearly 7,500 posts, and you still haven't been right once. Perhaps one day your posts will "get better".

 

 

Edited by South Side Hit Men
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

I've said it before and I'll say it again. 

If Nick was a 7th round pick and not the 4th overall selection but everything else stayed exactly the same.......95% of fans are OK with Nick. 

Might not be fair, but I believe it to be the truth. 

and I'll say this until I'm blue in the face, that's because fans have NO IDEA what they're talking about when it comes to the likelihood of success from the #4 overall draft pick.

Madrigal has already been more successful than many players drafted #4 overall since 1990:

 

4th-picks.png

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, South Side Hit Men said:

Dude, nearly 7,500 posts, and you still haven't been right once.

 

And the error should have been charged to Madrigal.

So he got pulled from the game because he wasn't feeling good physically or mentally and that's Nick Madrigal's fault.

Amazing logic all around.

Apologies if what you define as right doesn't mean a whole lot to me.

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fans will have high expectations for 1st round picks, ESPECIALLY top 5 picks. It is what it is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Nick Madrigal; now responsible for Yermin Mercedes psyche.

Soxtalk.com

He's the only one that said that. I'm just pointing out that you were wrong. 

  • Like 1
  • Fire 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ron883 said:

He's the only one that said that. I'm just pointing out that you were wrong. 

Got it; I wasn't sure after the first tweet was posted about it but after yours I was certain. Thank you for your service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

and I'll say this until I'm blue in the face, that's because fans have NO IDEA what they're talking about when it comes to the likelihood of success from the #4 overall draft pick.

Madrigal has already been more successful than many players drafted #4 overall since 1990:

 

4th-picks.png

I've never really grasped this argument. Yes, he was the 4th overall pick. But the Sox also could have drafted the *5th* best player in the draft at 4 if they wanted. Lets look at some of the picks at No. 5 since 1990:

Buster Posey

Matt Wieters

Ryan Braun

Mark Teixeira

JD Drew

Vernon Wells

6th overall pick? 

Anthony Rendon

Zach Wheeler

Zack Greinke 

Derek Jeter

7th overall pick?

Max Fried

Clayton Kershaw

Troy Tulowitski

Nick Markakis 

Prince Fielder 

 

The point is there is plenty of talent at 4-5-6-7 of the MLB Draft. Maybe Nick is one of the best of the entire 2018 class. I'm rooting for that to happen. But when you are selected that high, expectations are also high. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, gusguyman said:

I was curious about the debate so I dusted off the baseball simulator I wrote and simulated the 2019 season (that's what I have data for) assuming every White Sox hitter would hit according to Madrigal's career stats.

FWIW the Chicago Madrigals were last in the league with a runs per game average of 3.52.

I don't think that actually means much in terms of Madrigals value to the actual White Sox. Personally I am of the opinion that his stat line can be very useful in the actual Sox lineup. But it does show that a lineup of 9 Madrigals would not be a successful baseball team. 

I've got to question this.

There is a direct correlation between wRC+ and runs scored/produced. Madrigal's career wRC+ is 110 as of today. That would have been the 8th best team value in 2020 and the 5th best in 2019. If you had a team compiled of 9 players with wRC+ of 110, I don't think statistically it could be the worst offense in baseball regardless of how you get to that value. To put it in perspective, there were teams with wRC+ of 76 and 73 in 2019 and 2020. You might want to recheck your model because that simulator is not projecting run production correctly somewhere.

Edited by Look at Ray Ray Run

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

and I'll say this until I'm blue in the face, that's because fans have NO IDEA what they're talking about when it comes to the likelihood of success from the #4 overall draft pick.

Madrigal has already been more successful than many players drafted #4 overall since 1990:

 

4th-picks.png

That rubbish is not how a competent person evaluates a draft pick. Looking at who the White Sox passed over with their pick is what is relevant, not who San Diego drafted in 2003. Picking Nick over Kelenic, the player the Sox passed over, is the pertinent information.

He has some value, won't be as big a blunder as when Hemond picked Kurt Brown 5th in 1985 over Barry Bonds (6th), Schueler picked Jason Dellaero 15th over Lance Berkman (16th), or when Kenny picked Jared Mitchell 23rd over Mike Trout 25th.

Share this post


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

I've never really grasped this argument. Yes, he was the 4th overall pick. But the Sox also could have drafted the *5th* best player in the draft at 4 if they wanted. Lets look at some of the picks at No. 5 since 1990:

Buster Posey

Matt Wieters

Ryan Braun

Mark Teixeira

JD Drew

Vernon Wells

6th overall pick? 

Anthony Rendon

Zach Wheeler

Zack Greinke 

Derek Jeter

7th overall pick?

Max Fried

Clayton Kershaw

Troy Tulowitski

Nick Markakis 

Prince Fielder 

 

The point is there is plenty of talent at 4-5-6-7 of the MLB Draft. Maybe Nick is one of the best of the entire 2018 class. I'm rooting for that to happen. But when you are selected that high, expectations are also high. 

I mean, you're conveniently leaving out:

Bubba Starling
Matt Hobgood
Kyle Zimmer (who I guess is finally a decent reliever)
Mark Rogers
Chris Lubanski
Clint Everts
Justin Wayne
BJ Garbe
John Patteson
Ariel Pietro
Josh Booty
Jeff Granger
Chad Mottola
Kenny Henderson
Kurt Miller
Nick Gordon and Corey Ray haven't lit the world on fire either

That means over 50% of the #5 overall picks were also busts.

Were some good players drafted, yes. But a 50% bust rate isn't something to revel at while being critical of a guy who has reached the big leagues in two years.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, South Side Hit Men said:

Dude, nearly 7,500 posts, and you still haven't been right once. Perhaps one day your posts will "get better".

 

 

As @Tony and I were saying last night that's a pretty cool man management decision from TLR and something I don't think the previous two "players' managers" would have made.  He has enough clout to do that and then mention it to the media, which I think is helped by his "player managers" he has.  I wonder if Jose talked to Yermin and then Tony and they made the decision after some deliberation.  Yea he should have caught the ball but his 2B also shouldn't have aimed it at his big toe.  Just take the rest of the day off and go get'em tmr might not have been the worst idea there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, South Side Hit Men said:

That rubbish is not how a competent person evaluates a draft pick. Looking at who the White Sox passed over with their pick is what is relevant, not who San Diego drafted in 2003. Picking Nick over Kelenic, the player the Sox passed over, is the pertinent information.

He has some value, won't be as big a blunder as when Hemond picked Kurt Brown 5th in 1985 over Barry Bonds (6th), Schueler picked Jason Dellaero 15th over Lance Berkman (16th), or when Kenny picked Jared Mitchell 23rd over Mike Trout 25th.

Jered Kelenic has accomplished literally nothing as a big leaguer but if you read this forum only you'd think he was in the HOF.

You had an 11% chance of finding a successful player in picks 1-5 in the 2000's. A successful pick is defined as averaging more than 1.5 WAR per season.

Year pick 1-5 pick 6-10 pick 11-15 pick 16-20 pick 21-25 pick 26-30
00-05 2 5 5 3 4 1
06-10 4 3 1 0 2 2
All 6 8 6 3 6 3
Percentage 11% 15% 11% 5% 11% 5%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I mean, you're conveniently leaving out:

Bubba Starling
Matt Hobgood
Kyle Zimmer (who I guess is finally a decent reliever)
Mark Rogers
Chris Lubanski
Clint Everts
Justin Wayne
BJ Garbe
John Patteson
Ariel Pietro
Josh Booty
Jeff Granger
Chad Mottola
Kenny Henderson
Kurt Miller
Nick Gordon and Corey Ray haven't lit the world on fire either

That means over 50% of the #5 overall picks were also busts.

Were some good players drafted, yes. But a 50% bust rate isn't something to revel at while being critical of a guy who has reached the big leagues in two years.

 

Nothing was "convenient" about it. You made the claim Nick has been more successful than most of the players picked at 4 since 1990. That may be true, but what about the players picked at 5,6,7? I don't know I'd use the same phrasing of "Nick has been more successful than" when those names listed were picked in those slots. 

In terms of reaching the big leagues quickly....I'm not sure how important that really is to the discussion. Everyone knew Nick was a very "advanced" hitter when drafted and he was close to being ready based on his historically low strikeout rate. The issue with Nick has always been floor and celling. 

I'm simply saying two things:

1. Nick 100% has a target on his back because of where he was selected. The expectations are simply different for someone like him compared to a mid-round selection...as they should be

2. When selecting 4th, there is absolutely an argument to be made that ideally, you're looking to draft an "impact" player. Everyone has a slightly different definition of what that means. I've maintained that if Nick is plays as advertised when the Sox drafted him...I'll be OK with the pick. I don't feel like he has thus far. I also believe he has plenty of room for growth and improvement. I also understand some of the complaints or concerns from people who bring up valid arguments about his celling. 

Share this post


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

I've never really grasped this argument. Yes, he was the 4th overall pick. But the Sox also could have drafted the *5th* best player in the draft at 4 if they wanted. Lets look at some of the picks at No. 5 since 1990:

Buster Posey

Matt Wieters

Ryan Braun

Mark Teixeira

JD Drew

Vernon Wells

6th overall pick? 

Anthony Rendon

Zach Wheeler

Zack Greinke 

Derek Jeter

7th overall pick?

Max Fried

Clayton Kershaw

Troy Tulowitski

Nick Markakis 

Prince Fielder 

 

The point is there is plenty of talent at 4-5-6-7 of the MLB Draft. Maybe Nick is one of the best of the entire 2018 class. I'm rooting for that to happen. But when you are selected that high, expectations are also high. 

This is cherry picking at its finest.  I can promise there will be one or two players selected after Madrigal that will have a better overall career than him.  And Madrigal haters will constantly mention that the Sox blew the pick because they could have selected one of those guys (while of course omitting to mention the other 28 guys selected in the first round who were busts).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

To reframe this discussion - is it possible that Nick is truly nearly a zero home runs MLB player? In 705 minor league at bats he had 4 home runs across all levels...

I think whether he is a 0-2 home runs player per season vs. being capable of 5-6 home runs a year makes a seemingly GIGANTIC difference in his value.

Edited by Greg Hibbard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My god this board can be toxic at times.  It's like Madrigal is a complete bust.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Nothing was "convenient" about it. You made the claim Nick has been more successful than most of the players picked at 4 since 1990. That may be true, but what about the players picked at 5,6,7? I don't know I'd use the same phrasing of "Nick has been more successful than" when those names listed were picked in those slots. 

In terms of reaching the big leagues quickly....I'm not sure how important that really is to the discussion. Everyone knew Nick was a very "advanced" hitter when drafted and he was close to being ready based on his historically low strikeout rate. The issue with Nick has always been floor and celling. 

I'm simply saying two things:

1. Nick 100% has a target on his back because of where he was selected. The expectations are simply different for someone like him compared to a mid-round selection...as they should be

2. When selecting 4th, there is absolutely an argument to be made that ideally, you're looking to draft an "impact" player. Everyone has a slightly different definition of what that means. I've maintained that if Nick is plays as advertised when the Sox drafted him...I'll be OK with the pick. I don't feel like he has thus far. I also believe he has plenty of room for growth and improvement. I also understand some of the complaints or concerns from people who bring up valid arguments about his celling. 

Tony,

I 100% understand the point youre making, and I may also prefer higher upside talent but if Nick Madrigal has a long MLB career - which looks like it may be the case - you just can't say it was a terrible pick or a bust. The reason I brought up his time to the majors is because plenty guys never reach the majors in the top 5, and many who do don't stick around for longer than a year or two. When analyzing the pick it's important to hold the standard to a level that we have seen in the past.

Madrigal may never be a superstar player, but being a productive and useful major league player is a hit on the 4th overall pick. Fans can certainly set their bar wherever they wish, but setting it at an irrational level that is sans any historical analysis or probability isn't a fair way to critique and analyze a player IMO.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hogan873 said:

My god this board can be toxic at times.  It's like Madrigal is a complete bust.

I am skeptical of Madrigal's value (in this thread and outside of it) but I don't think he's a bust, even at 1.5-1.7 WAR. I just think there would be better options, even in-house, if he doesn't have enough. I also think it's perfectly fine to draft a player 4th overall and end up with an extremely valuable utility infielder. It's really hard to make it in the major leagues. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, South Side Hit Men said:

That rubbish is not how a competent person evaluates a draft pick. Looking at who the White Sox passed over with their pick is what is relevant, not who San Diego drafted in 2003. Picking Nick over Kelenic, the player the Sox passed over, is the pertinent information.

He has some value, won't be as big a blunder as when Hemond picked Kurt Brown 5th in 1985 over Barry Bonds (6th), Schueler picked Jason Dellaero 15th over Lance Berkman (16th), or when Kenny picked Jared Mitchell 23rd over Mike Trout 25th.

It's actually not, and it's not rubbish to use historical outcomes to compare and project future outcomes. That's literally how ever projection model is built.

We get that you're the greatest hindsight general manager in the history of the world, but sadly you're not running the White Sox and we're stuck with these fake professionals that don't have your HOF eye for talent.

  • Fire 2

Share this post


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

To reframe this discussion - is it possible that Nick is truly nearly a zero home runs MLB player? In 705 minor league at bats he had 4 home runs across all levels...

I think whether he is a 0-2 home runs player per season vs. being capable of 5-6 home runs a year makes a seemingly GIGANTIC difference in his value.

Only three were hit over the fence.  

Share this post


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

To reframe this discussion - is it possible that Nick is truly nearly a zero home runs MLB player? In 705 minor league at bats he had 4 home runs across all levels...

I think whether he is a 0-2 home runs player per season vs. being capable of 5-6 home runs a year makes a seemingly GIGANTIC difference in his value.

This is where I have a problem with the determination of his value.  I don't care if he hits home runs.  That's not where his value is.  His value is getting on base, or as happened last night, making contact and driving in/moving over runners.  A player like Madrigal should be evaluated based on what his strengths should be.  Not home runs or OPS or slugging.  But, yes, he needs to improve on defense and baserunning.

I can see the draft pick argument, but he's still a work in progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

It's actually not, and it's not rubbish to use historical outcomes to compare and project future outcomes. That's literally how ever projection model is built.

We get that you're the greatest hindsight general manager in the history of the world, but sadly you're not running the White Sox and we're stuck with these fake professionals that don't have your HOF eye for talent.

Lol at not knowing that Mike Trout will be probably the greatest player that has ever stepped on the diamond.

South Side Hit Men had it all figured it out in his basement draft board, which is located next to a 500 page fanfiction on DiBartolo purchasing the Sox 40 fucking years ago.

  • Fire 1

Share this post


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

I am skeptical of Madrigal's value (in this thread and outside of it) but I don't think he's a bust, even at 1.5-1.7 WAR. I just think there would be better options, even in-house, if he doesn't have enough. I also think it's perfectly fine to draft a player 4th overall and end up with an extremely valuable utility infielder. It's really hard to make it in the major leagues. 

Good point.  I was okay with trading him when there were discussions over the winter, mainly because he would have probably been the easiest to replace with a free agent signing (Yolmer Sanchez, I'm not looking at you).

It'll be interesting to see how all those drafted around him are doing in another year or two.  Maybe Madrigal ends up being the best pick for the Sox (based on needs and availability).

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.

×