you're right; "over the top" may have been... well, over the top - i merely meant, "this is a guy we need to stay in contention/make the playoffs." updawg, completely irresponsible; but certainly not baseless, lest we assume he sold jennings as, "we'll never be able to resign him; his elbow is gimpy, and he'll have no actually impact on our making the postseason... but, i don't know - kinda got a gut feeling about the guy..." not really. they're 9 games under .500, yes? and that's with pence and lee performing well-above expectations (remember, they didn't even think pence would be up this year; or, at least, not this soon). berkman would definitely make a difference, but not a 9-win difference. he's walking an awful lot - on pace for 120+ (he's only posyed one 120+ walk season previously), and that's with him struggling. if he were "berkman," and even after he regains "berkman" status, those walks are only going to increase. when you have 4-5 outs in every line-up, it's kind of easy to work around the few guys who can hurt you.
I don't agree completely--not every walk, when Berkman is Berkman, remains a walk. Some of those walks in which he popped up strike 2 into the 3rd base seats becomes a double in the gap. The OBP goes up as he strikes out less and hits weak-assed (sorry dcfma) popups less, and the walks may go up a little, but I don't believe by much.
This might be random, but 'if Berkman were Berkman,' what do y'all think the effect would be on Lee's production so far would be? The reason I ask is b/c, at least as of a few days ago, Lee was #1 or 2 in the league in RBIs. Would Lee's RBIs be higher b/c Berkman would have been on base more if he was normal Berkman, or would they be lower b/c Berkman might have driven more of the people that were on base during his AB leaving less for Lee to drive in. I ask b/c I agree the offense would improve alot w/ Berkman hitting. But I am wondering how much would the offense improve if the only change in the current lineup/effectiveness was to be Berkman hitting?
It seems to me that Lee's RBI's would probably stay about the same as the opportunities to knock Lance in would increase more than the opportunities Lance would take off the base paths. I can't explain why, but I think the Astros offense improves up and down the order when Lance is hot. I have nothing to back that up its just a perception I've had in the past. I also think that moving Biggio out of the leadoff spot is necessary to turn the offense around. Then both Lance and Lee will have more opportunities for RBIs
It is so embaassing that Biggio is still leading off. That might be more annoying to me about this team this year than anything else. (I just wonder if Garner is deciding this or Drayton). I really hope there is at least a few weeks stretch when we have Berkman hitting this year so we can see what happens. It's sad then when we finally have a proper slugger hitting behind him, he nosedives (hopefully temporarily) as a slugger.
If Garner can't fill out his lineup card the way he wants, he should be raising hell in the press and anywhere else (he would probably get fired, but have some pride, man). If he is filling it out the way he wants, he should be fired.
I don't know. I would think the proper way to run a franchise is for the gm and manager to work together to make personnel decisions (gm with final say) with sign off from the owner. The manager would then have the responisibility of taking the pieces and winning with them. How else can there be any accountability? If Drayton or Tim are forcing lineups on Garner, we can be welcomed to Dallas Cowboy hell.
You guys should look at Bill James' "Runs Created" stat as a rudimentary measure of what Lance Berkman normally brings to the game... comparing his numbers thru 1/3'd of the season, he's on pace to create about 50 less runs than he normally does. 50 runs is a big deal... a huge deal... especially when you factor in James' pythagorean W's-L's formula, that uses runs scored (vs. allowed) as a measure of expected winning percentage. Also, the fact that Lance is slugging at ADAM EVERETT levels speaks for itself. And if Lance is going, he is the type of player that can elevate an entire lineup... and can impact the type of pitches they ALL see.
yes, losing berkman's bat has had an impact; but pence is more than making up for it - he's on pace for a berkman-like 132 RC, and remember: he wasn't originally part of this equation. so pence is picking up the berkman slack... and the team is still 9 games under .500. he's on pace to walk 124 times; his career high is 127. IOW, teams are not going to let lance berkman beat them, regardless of his numbers. and i think you're overrating impact. how does your approach to 4-5 sure outs in the line-up every night change with lance berkman hitting? berkman turned in arguably his best season last year, and ausmus, everett and biggio all posted career low OPSs.
Why was Berkman able to produce the "best" season of his career last year, when there was no Carlos Lee, no Hunter Pence, and Luke Scott for only a third of the year? Did teams just lose the scouting report? As for the performance this year... Pence is making up for Ensberg's hot start last year, as well as Scott's hot finish. Lee is filling in for Berkman. Thus, I'd like to see what this team can do if Berkman comes into his own. Also, they can't afford Biggio to bat leadoff against righties anymore.
I noticed that Ausmus started yesterday. Is Munson only going to be his backup? Or is the painfully long era as Ausmus as our starting catcher actually about to end?
i have no idea where you're going with this, but i'll bite: because things like line-up protection and the like are bogus and false. that's why this notion that berkman being berkman would have a positive effect up and down the line-up is so unfounded. if anything, he'd be getting even more free passes and we'd have to rely even more on some of the worst offensive players in baseball. it'd be a better team, sure. the point is: this roster was constructed around the idea of berkman and lee anchoring the offense. even with pence filling in for berkman, the team is STILL 9 games under .500. it speaks to the larger issue - this is a poorly constructed team. they may get lucky: berkman may turn it on, pence may stay hot, and they may ride those 3 bats. to where, however, is the question. even in your scenario, with lee = berkman 06 and pence = ensberg/scott 06, that was still a .500 team last year by virtue of a strong finishing kick. for most of the year, they were below .500 and fairly mediocre. i get that .500 puts us in position to win the division, and i won't quibble with that. but meandering along with a .500 team is not ideal.
Well, a .500 team last year... with an added bat this year... is a start to search for the improvement that we're expecting from them. They haven't seen the added results of an added bat due to Berkman (and others) bigger struggles. Things like Biggio's average/OBP against right handers plummeting to below horrible lows are going to have to be eliminated once he gets to 3000. They still also need Loretta to keep it up, they need Lamb to start hitting again, they need Scott/Ensberg (one of them) to come up with something that is at least average, and they need the affore-mentioned stars to play like stars. It doesn't just have to be Berkman-Lee... but when one of those two isn't performing, it outweighs all the other defeciencies. They're still going to need improvement from Lamb, Scott, and Ensberg as well.
You couldn't possibly come to this as an exclusive conclusion by watching his plate appearances. He's visibly uncomfortable (and he says so), he's chasing god-awful pitches low and away, and popping up hittable ones. Yes, teams may be pitching around him, but no more than they did *last* year when there was no Carlos Lee behind him. Again, some of those walks he's on pace for were doubles last year. It's an artificially-inflated OBP. I completely disagree! And so do most baseball people. But what do they know?
but that's the point - they didn't "add" a bat; berkman + the hot hands of ensberg/scott last year became berkman + lee. they then gambled they'd get additional production from ensberg and/or scott, two probablities that left a lot to be desired, to say the least (something you and i discussed last week). he's on pace for 125-130 walks this year, and that's with him posting a .342 SLG%. you actually think teams would be walking him less if he was slugging his career average of .555? btw, he totaled 98 walks last year; in the four years prior, he totaled 91*, 127, 107 and 107. [* the pace was actually 109, but, of course, he missed all of april] so last year, he posted his BEST year ever while on, arguably, the worst offensive team he's certainly ever played with... and yet, he totaled his fewest walks since 2001... yeah, meaning the pitches were hittable. not many players turn "balls" into doubles with any kind of regularity. he's being pitched around. ok, then please explain why berkman posted the best offensive season of his career last year with zero protection in the line-up. next, explain why this year, with carlos lee and now hunter pence in the line-up, he's turning in the worst offensive season of his career. here's more splainin' for ya to get to: why, if berkman being berkman would have this up-and-down impact on the line-up, did three of our everyday players last year (+, after april, ensberg) turn in the worst OPS numbers of their careers despite berkman posting one of his best?
I don't think expecting at least average production from etiher Scott or Ensberg "left a lot to be desired." As it is, one of them STILL may close out the remaining 100+ games with some decent production. You're honestly pushing your "hindsight makes me the smartest guy alive" if you really had as little faith in BOTH of them to provide something to the everyday lineup. I already said that the key to an improved offense, with the addition of Lee, would be to have one of the those two show up. Since Pence came, it seemed to mitigate that loss... but without Berkman performing, as well as neither Scott or Ensberg, they're in a bigger hole than they were in last year. Regardless... Pence/Lee/Berkman (if Lance shows up) is still greater than last year's Scott+Ensberg/Berkman. They should be better, and we've yet to see if they can be with the lack of the players producing like they should.
Yes, because EVERYONE thought Burke & Scott would suck. That's why folks had been screaming for them to get starting gigs for a season or more.
