Adam Laroche - Arguably the Best Pirates 1B Since Pops!
by Slick1 on Jun 20, 2009 6:58 PM EDT
Email
Print
With all of the people overly excited with the prospect of Adam Laroche being traded I thought I'd do a little fanpost on Adam since I'm sure there won't be any shrines set up by fans commemorating his time spent with the Bucs. Adam may be one of the most hated players in Pirates history and for reasons that continue to escape me. I've read numerous blogs where posters consantly suggest we should "dump" Laroche for a bag of balls or flat out release him because any replacement would surely perform better. Well, everyone calling for the end of the Adam Laroche tenure in Pittsburgh may soon get their wish, but I caution you all to be aware of the fact that this team will not improve simply by subtracting Adam from the lineup and replacing him with someone on our roster. Plain and simple we will be a weaker team offensively and defensively. So before he is gone I would like to conduct a little history lesson because I believe that Adam is the best Pirate's first baseman since Willie Stargell ended his career there. Hope you all enjoy the post and I'm interested to hear everyone's comments.
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO AVG OBP SLG OPS
1982 - J. Thompson: 550 87 156 32 0 31 101 101 107 .284 .391 .511 .902
1983 - J. Thompson: 517 70 134 20 1 18 76 99 128 .259 .376 .406 .782
1984 - J. Thompson: 543 61 138 22 0 17 74 87 73 .254 .357 .389 .746
1985 - J. Thompson: 402 42 97 17 1 12 61 84 58 .241 .369 .378 .747
1986 - S. Bream: 522 73 140 37 5 16 77 60 73 .268 .341 .450 .791
1987 - S. Bream: 516 64 142 25 3 13 65 49 69 .275 .336 .411 .747
1988 - S. Bream: 462 50 122 37 0 10 65 47 64 .264 .328 .409 .737
*1989 - S. Bream: 36 3 8 3 0 0 4 12 10 .222 .417 .306 .723
1990 - S. Bream: 389 39 105 23 2 15 67 48 65 .270 .349 .455 .804
1991 - O. Merced: 411 83 113 17 2 10 50 64 81 .275 .373 .399 .772
1992 - O. Merced: 405 50 100 28 5 6 60 52 63 .247 .332 .385 .717
1993 - K. Young: 449 38 106 24 3 6 47 36 82 .236 .300 .343 .643
*1994 - B. Hunter: 233 28 53 15 1 11 47 15 55 .227 .270 .442 .712
*1995 - M. Johnson: 221 32 46 6 1 13 28 37 66 .208 .326 .421 .747
*1996 - J. King: 453 69 30 24 1 17 80 51 74 .287 .357 .457 .814
1997 - K. Young: 333 59 100 18 3 18 74 16 89 .300 .332 .535 .867
1998 - K. Young 592 88 160 40 2 27 108 44 127 .270 .328 .481 .809
1999 - K. Young: 584 103 174 41 6 26 106 75 124 .298 .387 .522 .909
2000 - K. Young: 496 77 128 27 0 20 88 32 96 .258 .311 .433 .744
2001c - K. Young: 449 53 104 33 0 14 65 42 119 .232 .310 .399 .709
2002 - K. Young: 468 60 115 26 1 16 51 50 101 .246 .322 .408 .730
2003 - R. Simon: 307 34 84 14 0 10 51 12 30 .274 .305 .417 .722
*2004 - D. Ward: 293 39 73 17 2 15 57 22 45 .249 .305 .474 .779
2005 - D. Ward: 407 46 106 21 1 12 63 37 60 .260 .318 .405 .723
*2006 - S. Casey: 213 30 63 15 0 3 29 23 22 .296 . 377 .408 .785
2007 - A. Laroche: 563 71 153 42 0 21 88 62 131 .272 .345 .458 .803
2008 - A. Laroche: 492 66 133 32 3 25 85 54 122 .270 .341 .500 .841
2009 - A. Laroche: 230 37 60 21 1 9 32 36 55 .261 .357 .478 .835
*Years in which 1B AB’s were split over two or more players due to platoons, injuries or trades. In each case I chose the player with the most G’s played at 1B with the exception of 1989 when numerous players were rotated in and out of the position over the year so there is no significant split. Bream was the hands down starter so I just left his stats in there.
Below are Adam's numbers in Atlanta.
Atlanta:
2005 - A. Laroche: 451 53 117 28 0 20 78 39 87 .259 .320 .455 .775
2006 - A. Laroche: 492 89 140 38 1 32 90 55 128 .285 .354 .561 .915
Next is a look at the career numbers of the three best offensive 1B over the last 25 years: Kevin Young, Jason Thompson and Adam Laroche.
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO AVG OBP SLG OPS
Career - Young: 3,897 536 1,007 235 17 144 606 336 882 .258 .324 .438 .762
Career - Thompson:4,802 640 1,253 204 12 208 782 816 862 .261 .366 .438 .804
Career - Laroche: 2,552 361 693 188 6 120 418 273 601 .272 .341 .491 .832
Now let's take a look at how the each performed during their Pirates career. I didn't have access to all the information to accurately state this next section (I got sick of researching stats) so I excluded statistical outliers for Thompson and Young. I eliminated season stats in which the players had less than 250 AB's. In Adam's case I left in 2009 even though he was below 250 AB's because the other players have accumulated a lot more AB's over their careers than Adam has to date. I then took an overall average of each player's OPS during their stay in the Burg. This is not exact for the reasons mentioned but my exclusions/inclusions hurt my argument more than help it. In Thompson's case it did hurt him slightly. In 1981 he had an OPS of .898 in 223 AB's. Had I left 81' in it would have raised his Pitt. career OPS to .815. In Young's case the season's I excluded he had less than 200 AB's in each season and the stats would have pulled down his OPS.
Pirates Career:
OPS
Young: .773 slightly overstated from outlier exclusion
Thompson: .794 slightly understated from outlier exclusion
Laroche: .826 slightly understated from outlier inclusion
As you can see Laroche has a better OPS than both Thompson and Young. The best offensive season for the three players is listed next:
Career Years:
OPS
Young: .909
Thompson: .902
Laroche: .915
Unfortunately Adam's best season came while he was in Atlanta. His best for the Pirates was last year when he had an OPS of .841. However, I have a suspicion that 2009 will be his best year given his nice start in April and his numbers in June to date. Adam has a 1.034 OPS in June and he is just getting going.
So, decide for yourself who is the best Pirates 1B since Willie but given the revolving door at the position over the last 25 years it is amazing how under appreciated Adam Laroche is. It's baffling. The numbers above are simply offensive stats; I didn't even mention defense. Without spending more hrs looking up defensive metrics I'll just say that from my memory alone I don't believe that Thompson or Young were known for their defense at first. I could be wrong. Either way, we will miss Adam when he is gone...believe in that!
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of the managing editor (Charlie) or SB Nation. FanPosts are written by Bucs Dugout readers.
91 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Simple answer
The Bucs’ haven’t been well represented at first base since Pops. Your stats seem to indicate KY has been the most productive, but that’s like being the named the tallest midget.
Guess it depends on how you look at it...
but I thouhgt the nuumbers indicate the Laroche has been the most productive. That is unless you are including RBI in your decision. And I think the tallest midget is way off base. It’s not like the three had a career .700 OPS. They may be league average 1B but they were hardly horrible. You picked up on my 1st point which was we have had a lot of crap at 1st over the years. You would think that given the crap, that when we acquire a 1B who puts up an OPS over .800 combinded with very good defense fans would appreciate it. He’s brought stability to the position. Is he a superstart? No. But he’s a solid 1B and for the amount of have he receives you would have think that he was one the person who caused Rothlisberger’s accident a few years back.
The Young question...
…comes down to peak v. career. Young had a slightly higher peak, IMO, but he also had seasons where he was well below average, while LaRoche does not.
Give It Time
Laroche is comparable to Young at the same age. Young had a big drop-off at age 30. Laroche will be 30 next year. Will Laroche drop-off too? We’ll know next year. But you can’t really say that Laroche doesn’t have the drop-off that Young has because Laroche still has half of his career ahead of him.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 22, 2009 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions
But the question...
…was about who has been the best 1B for the Pirates. It’s exclusively about performance-to-date. So anything from the future, such as a future LaRoche dropoff, is necessarily out of bounds.
That's Exactly My Point
We can’t discuss a drop-off at age thirty for Laroche because it hasn’t happened yet, and it might never happen. So therefore, we can’t compare Laroche at age thirty to Young at age thirty. The comparisons have no meaning.
Laroche and Young are similar at similar ages, before age thirty. That’s all we know. Anything else is just pissing around.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 22, 2009 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Sure, we can compare them.
We’re comparing what both players have done as starting first baseman for the Pirates, in isolation from any age-related factors or future projections. Once they’ve both spent one season as the starter, it’s a reasonable comparison.
LaRoche has had three seasons where he was a solid first baseman, Young had one season that was a little better than LaRoche’s best, two that were in the same general vicinity, and three that were poor-to-awful. Therefore, it comes down to the question of whether you grade on peak (i.e. best single season contribution) or career (i.e. average level of performance).
I think the problem with LaRoche
is that we are all expecting more than what he is giving.
Sure, he’s got alright offensive numbers that improve after July, and all that.
But the “lack” of homers (in other words, fewer than we’d like) and the constant GIDPs (as of late) or just groundouts to 2nd are getting on nerves. And then you take away Nate (trade) and Doumit (injury) and his lack of power right now is even more noticeable because no one else is going deep.
The complaints will let up eventually… Mario will wake back up, realize it’s time for him to start playing better, and do so. But until then, people will be clamoring for his head.
Me? I just want him to take a day or 2 off and realize that GIDPs and groundouts to 2nd are more harm than good.
True Blue Jazz
Bucco Ball
I'm on Twitter
RIP Nick Adenhart. 4/9/09
No...
his numbes after July are better than alright. He has over a .900 OPS in the 2nd half. That’s really good. His pedestrian first half brings his overall numbers down to alright. The Nate trade and Douimit injury should have no bearing on how we look at Laroche. I understand your point but the hate for Adam has gone on since he arrived in Pittsburgh.
Your right...
I read your post again and I misunderstood the first time. I basically regurgitated what you already said about his July numbers. Sorry. Still don’t agree with GIDP and RISP BA comments though. Those numbers will regress or gravitate towards a players career numbers over time. His poor numbers in those areas this year are just normal variation from his career averages.
Agreed
but people see it more now that he’s in the middle of the line-up and is the ‘best’ hitter on the team.
True Blue Jazz
Bucco Ball
I'm on Twitter
RIP Nick Adenhart. 4/9/09
Oh no numbers hurt my eyes!
Yes you might have “statistics” which I suppose are “objective” “measures” of “performance”. But I mean, come on, we all KNOW that Adam LaRoche doesn’t care, right? I mean, just look at how he doesn’t try to pick fights with the other team, or make outrageous statements to the media. He also doesn’t go completely apeshit and look like a moron when he makes mistakes. Another telltale sign that he doesn’t care is the fact that he doesn’t unbutton his jersey very much.
sigh...
just look at how he doesn’t try to pick fights with the other team
I miss Eye Chart. (Not as a full-time 1st baseman, but seriously… could he have been much worse than Monroe or the likes?)
True Blue Jazz
Bucco Ball
I'm on Twitter
RIP Nick Adenhart. 4/9/09
Yeah...
I’ll bet when he gets up there with the bases loaded he thinkg “Damn management for trading Bay, Nady and McClouth! I’ll show them by grounding into another DP…that’ll teach em!”
lol
Well, anything to show management, I guess.
True Blue Jazz
Bucco Ball
I'm on Twitter
RIP Nick Adenhart. 4/9/09
That's all you have to add?
If you disagree with the premise please explain why. Your recent comments on Laroche are only part of the reason for this post…I’ve been planning to do this for a while because I am extremely dumbfounded by the amount of hate Laroche receives. It has to be more related to the fact that expectations for Laroche were so high (as mentioned above) when we acquired him. It has to be that fans were expecting a 35 plus HR per year player and when they realized that was not what was received it disappointed fans so much the disappointent turned into hate and irrationality. It can’t be that the majority of Pirates fans are too simple minded to comprehend that overall stats matter, can it? Can a person really believe that a run in July is worth less than a run in April? I don’t know the answer to that which is the reason for the post.
I hate LaRoche because
a.) He’s a terrible for the first half of the season. C’mon 0 for April ?!?
b.) He only hits when we have no chance of making .500
c.) He’s amazingly un-clutch. When we need that big hit or long sac fly he whiffs or grounds out. He’s got great stats, but he only seems to produce when we’re up by alot or down by alot.
d.) I know I’ll get blasted for this, but he’s totally c-blocking my favorite player Steve Pearce.
e.) He never lived up to my expectations. I know that this isn’t his fault, but I really hoped that they’d name the river landing behind Clemente Wall to LaRoche’s Landing because of all the homers he’d hit beyond there.
"Baseball is better than football. Think about it, eighty degrees, a cold beer and a short-sleeve shirt is better than 30 degrees, a hip flask and six layers of clothes under a lap blanket. Take your pick: suntan or frostbite. " - Thomas Boswell
by Ketcham Bruce on Jun 20, 2009 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions
The best reason to trade Adam is that he is at his peak right now. If his numbers move drastically without a lot of steroids in the next couple years, it will be in the downward direction.
by Gorkys n' Beans on Jun 20, 2009 11:13 PM EDT up reply actions
He's a FA after this year so that's kind of a moot point...
unless we plan to extend him which we don’t. The fact that as of right now he doesn’t qualify as a Type A or B (props to Thunder for making this point earlier) we have no reason to even offer him ARB unless we just want him around for 1 more season.
Uhhh....ok, here it goes again.
a) no arguent
b) no statistics exist to suggest that a run in July is worth less than a run in April. Would you be happier if Laroche was on fire in e 1st half leading us to a record over .500 at the all-star break only to slump in the 2nd dropping our overall win total to were it normally is over he last how many years? 67-73.
c) Bases Loaded 39 34 11 3 0 2 41 5 0 12 0 0 .282 .327 .513 .840 (last 3 years)
Scoring Position 397 147 109 28 1 12 168 63 3 112 1 0 .275 .365 .441 .806 (last 3 yeas)
Runners On 717 176 205 56 2 28 213 93 6 199 2 4 .286 .365 .487 .852 (last 3 yrs)
These are his stats from 2006 – 2008. These numbers do not suggest that he is “unclutch” if such a thing suggested. As I’ve sated before that stats such as BA with RISP tend to reflect a players career averages over time. Laroche’s numbers definitely reflect that. There is absolutely no evidence outside of public opinion to suggest that Laroche is “unclutch” NONE!
d) I can’t argue this because I have no idea what the future holds for Pearce. I do know that until recently Pearce has done nothing to warrant being handed an every day job at 1B and I’m skeptical that he will put numbers better than Adam has over his career.
e) the main reason I wrote this post because I believe the reason he is so hated is because we expected a 35 plus HR per year player and we’re disapponted when it was obvious that he wasn’t. At least that makes sense. Outside of that the hate for Mario us absurd!
Don’t beat your head against the wall with this one, Slick.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 21, 2009 12:28 AM EDT up reply actions
Can't help it...
this one gets me. I undersand the general plight of the Pirates fans. I understand the hate directed towards Nutting and Littlefield and Tracy and Thrift and so on….. But I don’t understand the hate for a player that has performed better than any other at his position in the last 25 years. It makes absolutely no sense and I’m just waiting for one of the haters to provide me with some solid evidence as to why we should hate Mario as much as the average seems to. I guess that is too much to ask.
Well,
if you’re waiting for the intended to do so, you’re in for a loooooooooooooooong wait.
See below comment.
“Never let facts get in the way of a good argument.”.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 21, 2009 12:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah it is. Have you seen LaRoche hit with the bases loaded? Have you seen him hit with RISP? That’s all I need to say. He’s Adam LaChoke. Be gone.
I have seen him in the situations you refer to. See below...again!
Bases Loaded 39 34 11 3 0 2 41 5 0 12 0 0 .282 .327 .513 .840 (2006-2008)
Scoring Position 397 147 109 28 1 12 168 63 3 112 1 0 .275 .365 .441 .806 (2006-2008)
Runners On 717 176 205 56 2 28 213 93 6 199 2 4 .286 .365 .487 .852 (2006-2008)
Why let facts get in the way of ignorant opinions? Hate him all you want. That’s your perrogative. But don’t make blind, ignorant statements like he can’t hit with RISP or with the bases loaded when the facts clearly state otherwise. And when you make statements like he should be relesed because his production could easily be replaced by someone on our roster it clearly shows that you have no idea what you are talking about. You are letting your emotions get in the way of the facts. The facts clearly show that Laroche is a better player than you are giving him credit for.
And need I explaint once again, that the stats you refer to (BA with bases loaded and BA with RISP) are meaningless when taken in a season to season context. Those numbers will gravitate to a player’s career averages over time. Laroche’s numbers clearly indicate that is the case. If you can show me a statistic to prove that Adam is “unclutch” as you suggest than please do it and I will be happy to change my opinion. But until then, you are making statements based on emotion and not facts. And childish little nicknames like Adam Lachoke won’t change the fact that Adam is one of the best 1B we have seen in the Burg in a long time.
Tag…you’re up!
I forgot the header...
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB HBP SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS
Doesn’t do a lot of good down here so just focus on the last 4 numbers in the above post.
Ok, you win. I don’t want to argue with you because we are never going to see eye to eye on this. I don’t care what he did the previous two years before now. Those years are in the past. It’s about the now. This year alone, here are some stats for you on LaRoche:
Bases empty-.290 avg.
Overall with RISP-.227 avg.
Breaking down RISP:
Bases loaded-.000 avg, 1 RBI
Runners at 2B and 3B-.000 avg. 0 RBI
Runners at 1B and 2B-a bit better with a .280 avg. and 7 RBI
It’s pretty cut and dry. He’s not getting it done. Don’t give me stats about the past. All anybody cares about is the now.
Eight Six
He’s had eighty-six plate appearances this year with RISP. You can’t really draw any broadly meaningful conclusions from eight-six plate appearances.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 21, 2009 1:57 AM EDT up reply actions
…and you can’t use stats from two or three years ago to justify LaRoche’s terrible hitting with RISP this year. So what’s the difference? In that case, me and slick are both in the wrong.
IF..and a big IF...
at the end of the year Adam’s numbers with bases loaded and RISP are still where they are today you argument will hold a “little” more water. But you cannot seem to comprehend the fact that BA with RISP is a statistic that will eventually regress or gravitate to a player’s career averages. There’s no tangible evidence out there to suggest that a player is more “clutch” than another player. Let’s look at it another way. Michale Jordan hit 25 gamin winnning shots throughout his career. Awesome right? What if I told you MJ also missed 31 game winning shots at the buzzer. Does the fact that he missed more than he made make him “uncluth?” No! It just means that the law of averages has taken effect. If you flip a coin 20 times and you get tails 15 times does that mean you are a “tails” kind of guy? No that would be ridiculous. Open up your mind and see the bigger picture.
Yeah there is a tangible way to suggest that a player is more clutch than anotther, and you saw it tonight. With a runner on first base in the bottom of the ninth, Todd Helton hits a mammoth walk-off HR tonight. If Adam LaRoche is up in that same situation, he hits into a double play. That’s the difference in a clutch player and an ordinary player.
The Clutch Skill
Todd Helton hit a big home run tonight. No one could argue with that. But if you’re proposing that there’s such a thing as a cluch skill, then you should be able to show, over a very large sample size, that some players perform better than they would otherwise be expected in clutch situations.
No one has ever shown such a thing.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 21, 2009 2:25 AM EDT up reply actions
No I don’t think there’s really a clutch skill, but I wouldn’t say it’s just a coincidence either. David Ortiz in the playoffs a few years ago was the definition of clutch.
Nonsense
No I don’t think there’s really a clutch skill, but I wouldn’t say it’s just a coincidence either.
It’s got to be one or the other. It can’t be both. Either there’s a clutch skill, or it’s just a coincidence. It can’t be both, and it can’t be neither.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 21, 2009 2:33 AM EDT up reply actions
It’s just a matter of bearing down, blocking everything else out, and giving the moment your ultimate concentration. You realize the task at hand and you get the job done no matter what. If you want to call that a skill, then yes, there is a clutch skill. It takes a special player to be able to do that.
A Description Is Not Proof
You described what you think the clutch skill is, but you didn’t present anything that proves that it exists. We can describe all kinds of things that aren’t real.
The unicorn has white fur and a sparkling spiraled horn.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 21, 2009 2:51 AM EDT up reply actions
Evidence please.
Are you really going to make me look up Helton’s career averages with RISP or Runners on Base to prove my point? Really? I’ve given you three years worth of data for Laroche and you have given me 1 AB for Helton. Really? That is your argument, really?
LaRoche may be the best first baseman we’ve had in a long time, but it’s only because the ones we have had before him were absolutely terrible, borderline minor leaguers. Brad Eldred? Craig Wilson? Sean Casey, when he was old and washed up? Give me a break. Yeah, compared to them, he looks great. He is not good, Slick. End of story.
By the way...
Here’s Helton’s stats with RISP this year:
Bases loaded: .750 avg, 1 HR, 11 RBI
Runners at 2B and 3B:.000 avg, but still has 3 RBI
Runners at 1B and 2B: .400 avg. 4 RBI
Take this for what it's worth. It's an attempt to determine if a player is "clutch".
Link.
Read “2002 version of runs created”
This is an example...
…of the fundamental difference between statistics that are meant to be a record, and statistics that are meant to be a predictive tool.
If someone produced in the clutch in a given year, it’s appropriate that they be given credit for those extra runs when assessing their value in that year. This is the case with the RC flavor you cited above. If you’re trying to formulate a future projection, however, it’s nothing but an additional source of noise for your data.
I wasn't trying to say it should be used to predict data, or that it should be used at all.
I just thought I’d point it out since I’ve seen so many arguments on whether a player is clutch or not.
No, Slick is right.
The wide year-to-year variance in his situational numbers only demonstrates that in MLB, such numbers only display random fluctuations, and not some kind of repeatable skill.
If there are “un-clutch” hitters, they get weeded out in high school, or grade school. Everybody in MLB is “clutch”, which means that effectively, no one is.
Leadoff?
But if you really think that such a small sample size means anything, then note that out of the seventy-one times Adam Laroche has lead off the inning, he’s hitting .313. So by that reasoning, he should be our leadoff hitter.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 21, 2009 2:01 AM EDT up reply actions
Where is cocktails with the beating the dead horse graphics?
I think I may have said this before but once again “…the stats you refer to (BA with bases loaded and BA with RISP) are meaningless when taken in a season to season context. Those numbers will gravitate to a player’s career averages over time. Laroche’s numbers clearly indicate that is the case.” Please come up with a better reason to hate Laroche this season. This pathetic loser is leading the team in HR’s and OPS at this stage of the game so please come up with some credible stats to support your case. I’ve provided you with three years of statistics to suposrt my argument and as Androgen JJ stated you havve given me 86 PA to support years. Hmmmm….which one makes more sense? I guess “common sense ain’t so common.”
Twenty-First
Adam Laroche is probably one of the Pirates’ best two hitters, but he’s the he has the 21st highest OPS among all first basemen. in the major leagues. He’s not really a good first baseman.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 21, 2009 2:15 AM EDT up reply actions
21st to date...
that is why you cannot look at his numbers to date and evaluate him based on that. Especially given his career second half splits. I’m not sayting that Laroche is the best 1B ever. I’m just saying that he is a lot better than the average fan is giving him credit for. And he is definitely better than the garbage we have been throwing out there for the majority of the last 25 years. That’s all I’m saying.
Splits
His splits are weird; I’ll give you that. But still, if you believe that his splits are real (and by real I mean, that they demonstrate a real skill and not just random noise) then you’d still have to agree that he’s not very good right now, even though he might be good in two months.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 21, 2009 2:30 AM EDT up reply actions
2008 Full Year Stats
If you check out his stats for the entire 2008 season, he’s still only 19th. So really, I’m not seeing how he’s a good player.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 21, 2009 2:43 AM EDT up reply actions
He’s not, plain and simple. You know what? It really doesn’t matter because LaRoche isn’t going to be in the Burgh for much longer. He will be off our hands and the fans of the next team he goes to can have this argument.
I Don't Know About That Trade
In order to trade Laroche, we’ll need to find a team that has a worse first baseman than Laroche is. And really, not a lot of teams would view Laroche as a significant upgrade.
Really, the only teams who are in a pennant race, and who have a first basemen who is significantly worse than Laroche are the Dodgers and the Angels. So if he’s going, maybe he could go to one of those teams.
But since there’s such little demand for a mediocre hitting first baseman, I’d bet he’s going nowhere.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 21, 2009 3:25 AM EDT up reply actions
Mets...Tigers (DH)...RedSox (if Ortiz doesn't come around)...Giants...
to name a few. There will be a market given his second half numbers.
Eh
As mediocre of a first basemen as he is, he’s an even worse DH. And I can’t see the Red Sox throwing David Ortiz under the bus like that. They already have plenty of bench players who are better hitters than Laroche anyway.
You may have a point with the Mets though. Tatis kind of sucks, but Laroche is only marginally better.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 21, 2009 1:08 PM EDT up reply actions
True about Ortiz...
although I think 2nd half Laroche is a little more than marginally better than Tatis. IDK, going off the top of my head here, haven’t looked up Tatis’ stats.
Your list is flawed.
It isn’t restricted by playing time, so you have guys like Joey Votto up there with only 126 AB. And it isn’t restricted to primary position, either, so you also have guys on the list who mostly play a different position (Pablo Sandoval, Victor Martinez, etc.), but who have a handful of games at 1B.
I’ve given you your stats. Once again, you’re tryin’ to justify his terrible hitting this year with stats from the PAST 3 years. You want to accuse me of ignoring stats when you’re doing the exact same thing. NOBODY CARES ABOUT THE PAST! It’s over! All that matters is what he is doing right now, as in this year, and I’ve given you stats for THIS YEAR. What is it with your man crush on LaRoche? But I’m done. You win.
Not All Stats Are Created Equal
You keep bringing up stats, but just because something is a number doesn’t mean that it actually means anything. BAw/RISP is basically meaningless. BAw/RISP with a small sample size is even more meaningless.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 21, 2009 2:19 AM EDT up reply actions
Just answer me this, Androgen JJ: Do you want Adam LaRoche up to bat with the bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth inning and the winning run on second base?
Yes
He’s one of the team’s three best hitters, along with Freddy Sanchez and maybe Andrew McCutchen (although it’s hard to tell with Cutch because he hasn’t been on the big team for long and so, small sample size). So yes, I would want one of our best hitters to be up in a high leverage situation.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 21, 2009 2:27 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, it is.
I can’t believe that you still don’t undertstand that RISP numbers have NO PREDICTIVE VALUE.
Seriously, here’s a simple test for you. Pick a set of random hitters, look at their 2008 RISP numbers and their 2008 overall numbers, and see which one’s a better predictor of their 2009 RISP performance.
Go ahead, I’ll wait.
Magic
She’ll just say that in the good years, those players had extra courage. And in the bad years, they lost their nerve.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jun 22, 2009 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Cutch or Sanchez, and it’s not even close. I know we don’t agree on LaRoche, but please tell me that you agree that Cutch and Freddy are the two best players on our team.
Can't do that.
Freddy is the exception to the rule. His numbers with men on base and RISP are a lot higher than his norms to date. Cutch’s sample size is wat too small for me to base an opinion. Listen ms, I’m not trying to say Laroche is the second coming of Babe Ruth, all I’m trying to say is that the guy is not as bad as the average fan has made him out to be. That’s all!
It's no man crush...
it’s frustration with ludricous arguments. You were the one who said in another post that you don’t care about career totals that you only care about the last three years. And when I give you the last three years you say you only care about this year. Well this year Laroche is on a pace to put up better numbers than any year he has been in the Burg and you STILL are not satisfied. Make up your mind, decide on a position and stick with it. Otherwise you are just spewing a bunch of nonsense.
Mario+Slick 4ever and Always
"So you think 25 percent of the country is retarded?! Yea. Atleast 25 percent. Well lets so a sample. There are 4 of us an you're retarded. Thats 25 percent." Southpark; Mystery of the Urinal Deuce
by gorillakilla34 on Jun 21, 2009 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions
Unfortunately...
since Willie retired…there’s been a whole lot of lousy at 1B for the Pirates. OPS+ is not position dependent. It adjusts for park factors and league averages in that particular season. An OPS+ of 100…as seen in the other rating post…just means league average…which includes catchers…middle infielders…etc.
For instance…the LOWEST season OPS+ that Adam Dunn has had is 114 (career is 131). Adam LaRoche’s career OPS+ is 115 with a high of 130 his last year in Atlanta.
First basemen (and a few ex-Pirates) (active) with career OPS+ higher than Adam LaRoche
Pujols 171
Thome 148
Berkman 147
Giambi 144
Hafner 142
Helton 141
Cabrera 140
Delgado 138
Giles 136
Ortiz 135
Teixeira 135
Bay 132
M Alou 128
Morneau 126
C Pena 126
D Lee 122
V Martinez 122
R Sexson 120
M Stairs 119
M Sweeney 118
P Konerko 115
And a few just below him…
A Ramirez 114
McLouth 110
Casey 109
Nady 108
Wigginton 104
J Guillen 100
Hinske 100
Minky 100
And fielding-wise…by any stat on baseball prospectus…he’s near average.
The UZR from fangraphs.com that everyone was crowing about for Nyjer…well…Adam is a -1.6 and the UZR/150 (season projection) is -5 (with 6 NL 1B ahead of him). Last year…he was -5.9 (with 6 NL 1B ahead of him)…2007 he was +6.3. Ryan Howard finished well ahead of him last year and is well ahead this year…and no one considers him a GG first baseman.
Unfortunately…while he may be the best 1B the Pirates have had in a while…he’s nowhere close to being at the top of the list overall…and easy to see why he’s a Type B (if that) when he becomes eligible for free agency at the end of the season.
True Thunder...
and thanks for the input. But the argument is that he has been one of the better, if not the best, Pirate 1B since Willie. Your stats and mine together both prove we have been, and still are, severly lacking at the postion when looking at the entire league’s sats overall. The only point I’ve been trying to make is that Adam is one of the best we’ve have seen in the Burg in quite some time and it amazes me, given his numbers, how much fans cannot stand him. It’s definitely confusing to say the least.
Simply...
with Adam’s splits…by the time he starts hitting his stride…the Pirates have been buried the last couple of years. The fans see him performing poorly when they perceive it does matter…and see him performing better when they perceive it doesn’t matter…because the Pirates are already dead in the water. Add in his laid back attitude (at least as perceived by the public)…and it doesn’t sit well with a fan base in a blue collar area.
Even in the Lumber Company days…the Pirates were perceived as hustling and feisty. Adam doesn’t fit that role for the fans.
That's probably true.
But I don’t see him as a guy who doesn’t hustle. His reaction to the McClouth trade and the Beltran comments prove that the guy cares. My only argument is that the fact that he is a second half performer should not devalue him as a player overall. I get the feeling that most fans only take into consdideration is first half performance when evaluating him as a player. You have to look at overall numbers when evaluating a player. If we only focussed on Bond’s playoff numbers while he was in the Burg you would think he was a pathetic waste of roster space. We all know that was not the case as much as most of us might hate him. As I’ve said before, Laroche is not the second coming of Babe Ruth and that is not the argument I’m trying to make. All I’m saying is, given the garbage we have trotted out to 1B over the last 25 years you would think we would have appreciated Laroche a little more than we have. And we might once he is dealt to a contender.
And...
oh by the way…small sample size alert…those that are in love with the UZR numbers…they show Cutch in the negative numbers. Y’all think he’s a below average fielder??
Don’t trust your numbers alone…trust your eyes too. UZR placement among NL at each position…those with enough games to qualify.
C No qualifier
1B Adam LaRoche 7th
2B Freddy Sanchez 7th
SS Jack Wilson 1st (2nd behind Andrus in MLB)
3B Andy Laroche 5th
LF Nyjer Morgan 1st in MLB
CF Andrew doesn’t qualify…Nate was/is 7th
RF Moss not enough games to qualify…but would be 1st in NL (2nd behind N Cruz in MLB)
P No UZR numbers…but RF/9 has Duke 8th and Maholm 9th.
Cutch's UZR sample is so small as to be meaningless.
And while UZR is a good defensive measure, it has serious limitations for 1Bs and Cs, who have significant job responsibilities beyond just covering lots of ground and fielding BIP, which is what it’s mostly measuring.
I just dislike the "he always grounds out to second" argument.
LaRoche has grounded out to the second baseman 303 times in his career, a span of 2,876 PA. That comes out to 10.5% of PA that are groundouts to second. Now, that’s not terribly low, but it’s not enough to run him out of town, especially when one considers he has an XBH rate of 10.9%.
Freddy Sanchez, who is rarely put down for his groundouts to short (since he’s right handed), has the exact same rate. In 2,747 PA, Freddy has grounded out to short 289 times, giving him a 10.5% rate as well, compared to an 8.2 XBH%.
Take that for what it’s worth.
Fuggin' Freddy
always grounds out to short.
Run him out of town!
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jun 22, 2009 9:41 PM EDT up reply actions
haha…he’s probably saying “Could somebody else on this team do something besides me hitting doubles and Andrew hitting triples? We would deeply appreciate it.”
doesn't care?
I’m pretty sure Adam cares about the game of baseball or he wouldn’t be in the majors. Yeah, he doesn’t show much emotion, but that is because of the meds he takes for ADD. His playing would be worse if didn’t have the meds. He isn’t the worst player in baseball he just is typically someone who hits better in the 2nd half. Tons of players/teams are like that all over sports. It seems like LaRoche is the player who gets bashed the most and I don’t really understand all the reasoning behind it… as for Pearce playing 1st, maybe if he would have gotten atleast some hits when he was brought up he could have been considered…
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
