They've started.JMDurron said:I haven't been watching as many games as usual this season, but from watching highlights and the games that I do manage to catch, it seems like the NESN broadcasts aren't saying anything about how close Ortiz is to 500 HRs. Are they actually mentioning it elsewhere in the broadcasts and I've just missed it, or does it strike anyone else as odd that NESN's ignoring this potential marketing angle to get people watch "Big Papi's March to 500", or something similar?
YTF said:Nice to see that David's able to play back to back (day after night) at first base with nothing on the line now. Well, there is that home run thing I guess.
Stop with facts. David Ortiz is a selfish suckhead and the obvious problem with this team for the last 13 years.Red(s)HawksFan said:
1) National League rules.
2) Napoli's gone.
3) He never refused to play 1B in back to back games or at all, despite popular belief.
He only ever stated he preferred not to play in the field all that often. Shocking stance from a 40-year-old, isn't it?
Ortiz playing 1B more often earlier in the year wasn't exactly going to be a difference maker as far as where this team is/was in the standings.
He'd hit perfectly well against lefties for years (averages in the 260s and above, with good power), spanning several hundred at bats. The idea (taken by many here and many more outside of here) that he simply lost that ability over the winter and needed to be platooned seemed kind of silly.The Gray Eagle said:Since July 1, Ortiz is hitting .348 against lefthanded pitchers, with 5 HRs.
Red(s)HawksFan said:
1) National League rules.
2) Napoli's gone.
3) He never refused to play 1B in back to back games or at all, despite popular belief.
He only ever stated he preferred not to play in the field all that often. Shocking stance from a 40-year-old, isn't it?
Ortiz playing 1B more often earlier in the year wasn't exactly going to be a difference maker as far as where this team is/was in the standings.
djhb20 said:He'd hit perfectly well against lefties for years (averages in the 260s and above, with good power), spanning several hundred at bats. The idea (taken by many here and many more outside of here) that he simply lost that ability over the winter and needed to be platooned seemed kind of silly.
Maybe there's evidence that when a hitter declines he loses it against same sided pitchers first, but I've never seen that.
Hopefully he keeps it up.
I don't think its strange at all. I think it's really as simple as NL rules = business as usual, back at DH by the end of the week; AL rules = uh oh, this isn't what we usually do, how often do they want me playing first now? I'm not ok with this.YTF said:Guys my point was this. At that particular time, just before the All Star break, the Sox were just 4 games under .500 in a division that still seemed up for grabs and likely the only shot the Sox had at making the playoffs. I know he didn't refuse to play 1st base, but he publicly said he didn't care to play in the field at a time when he was being asked to occasionally do so. A time when he may have been the better option given Napoli's struggles and an option that would allow Ramirez to DH which might allow for a better defensive option in left as well as a more productive bat than what Napoli was providing. It was an opportunity to put a better team on the field at a time when the Sox had a chance to do better. No it's not a shocking stance from a 40 year old which makes it a bit stranger now with not much left to play for. The thing is with David is that it's off putting that his differences, displeasure and complaints always seems to be done in public. I'll be forever grateful for his contributions here and his ability to at times put this franchise on his back and carry it. I hope he hit's his 500th this season and hits another 30 next season, but does that mean I can't question something that strikes me as strange? Perhaps he was concerned about getting injured and not acquiring enough PAs for his option to kick in and now that's no longer a concern.
If David Ortiz had publicly lobbied to play more first base it would have been equivalent to him saying, "I think Mike Napoli sucks and his presence on the team is killing us." No veteran is going to do that to another veteran. There's really nothing more to it than that.Laser Show said:I don't think its strange at all. I think it's really as simple as NL rules = business as usual, back at DH by the end of the week; AL rules = uh oh, this isn't what we usually do, how often do they want me playing first now? I'm not ok with this.
Even with this hot streak, his OPS vs. LHP is still only .538 this season.djhb20 said:He'd hit perfectly well against lefties for years (averages in the 260s and above, with good power), spanning several hundred at bats. The idea (taken by many here and many more outside of here) that he simply lost that ability over the winter and needed to be platooned seemed kind of silly.
Maybe there's evidence that when a hitter declines he loses it against same sided pitchers first, but I've never seen that.
djhb20 said:But the idea that a small sample size of plate appearance in which he sucked against lefties means he should be platooned, after 4 straight years of excellent hitting against lefties,
Edit, NM, I thought you were trying to use those numbers to argue that Ortiz was cooked. That's what I get for posting before I'm fully awake.StupendousMan said:
Baseball-reference can provide data to support your argument. Maybe you should use it.
Ortiz against LHP, simple OPS
2011 0.989
2012 0.985
2013 0.733
2014 0.893
2015 0.619
Have at it.
A small sample size could also be using a recent hot streak to dismiss half a season of being a black hole against lefties.djhb20 said:Of course David Ortiz is going to age and get worse as a hitter. But the idea that a small sample size of plate appearance in which he sucked against lefties means he should be platooned, after 4 straight years of excellent hitting against lefties, is and was a little over the top.
Nice to see that David's able to play back to back (day after night) at first base with nothing on the line now. Well, there is that home run thing I guess.
Stop with facts. David Ortiz is a selfish suckhead and the obvious problem with this team for the last 13 years.
I mean seriously, maybe now someone can try to retcon Ortiz's career into being all accumulated during garbage time.
He's lost that ability in the past and then regained it. There's nothing silly about thinking that it's possible he might lose it again at some point and not be able to regain it.djhb20 said:He'd hit perfectly well against lefties for years (averages in the 260s and above, with good power), spanning several hundred at bats. The idea (taken by many here and many more outside of here) that he simply lost that ability over the winter and needed to be platooned seemed kind of silly.
threecy said:We're not talking about a prospect or someone in their prime. We're talking about someone who will be 40 in 3 months. He will lose the ability to hit MLB pitching anytime between now and a few seasons from now, suddenly or gradually. It's not an idea or theory, but rather a fact based upon every hitter in MLB history.
threecy said:A small sample size could also be using a recent hot streak to dismiss half a season of being a black hole against lefties.
4 straight years, 10 straight years, it doesn't matter because we're trying to project someone who will be 40 this fall. He simply won't be maintaining or improving his baseline in the medium term.
I think there are competing views clouded by being fans - folks who want to assume his elite production will continue indefinitely vs. folks who want him to retire while he's still a great player.smastroyin said:Of course age is against him, but there is an IMO insane rush to be the person who cuts early rather than late. I guess that's fine. It's what we're here for.
threecy said:I think there are competing views clouded by being fans - folks who want to assume his elite production will continue indefinitely vs. folks who want him to retire while he's still a great player.
Twas ever thus. Every kid finally has the "aha" moment when the finality of age and skill hits home. (I think mine involved Walt Frazier.)I think there are competing views clouded by being fans - folks who want to assume his elite production will continue indefinitely vs. folks who want him to retire while he's still a great player.
joe dokes said:Twas ever thus. Every kid finally has the "aha" moment when the finality of age and skill hits home. (I think mine involved Walt Frazier.)
Just as there are very few players who remained this productive past 40, there are also very few who even got near 40 who "went out on top." I don't possess skills at anything like a great baseball player possesses baseball skills, but I think I understand that few players want to retire and then have second thoughts that he might have still had something left to give. The flipside of that, of course, is the risk that the player's last several hundred IP or PAs prove that, in fact, he had nothing left.
Especially when you're paid more money than most of us will make in a lifetime to hang around for those last several hundred plate appearances.joe dokes said:Twas ever thus. Every kid finally has the "aha" moment when the finality of age and skill hits home. (I think mine involved Walt Frazier.)
Just as there are very few players who remained this productive past 40, there are also very few who even got near 40 who "went out on top." I don't possess skills at anything like a great baseball player possesses baseball skills, but I think I understand that few players want to retire and then have second thoughts that he might have still had something left to give. The flipside of that, of course, is the risk that the player's last several hundred IP or PAs prove that, in fact, he had nothing left.
foulkehampshire said:Whats really impressed me about Ortiz is that he's been able to consistently dominate offensively over the years despite multiple obstacles:
A true testament to his preparedness and ability to adjust his game. Everything has trended in the game to make it harder to hit but he keeps going. Its unbelievable.
- A devastating wrist injury in 2008.
- Increased utilization of defensive shifts.
- Better pitching.
- Bigger strike zone.
- Age.
Especially when you're paid more money than most of us will make in a lifetime to hang around for those last several hundred plate appearances.
For what it's worth, Williams' 1959 season was plagued by a neck injury at the start (presumably age was a factor in sustaining the injury, as well as a slow recovery). If I recall correctly, he took a pay cut and returned in 1960 to go out on a higher note (not his first retirement either).WenZink said:
Ted Williams had a terrible year at 40, in 1959, and then came back in 1960 to have an OPS of 1.096 (in just 390 PA, though.) But that was Ted. Most everyone else stays a year too long, and I can't blame them, especially in today's era, where one more year is a lot of money.
threecy said:Even with this hot streak, his OPS vs. LHP is still only .538 this season.
threecy said:For what it's worth, Williams' 1959 season was plagued by a neck injury at the start (presumably age was a factor in sustaining the injury, as well as a slow recovery). If I recall correctly, he took a pay cut and returned in 1960 to go out on a higher note (not his first retirement either).
Anecdotally, I believe from Yaz according to Yaz when a retired Williams gave him some tips in the early 1960s, Williams still had an MLB caliber bat as was routinely hitting bombs.
Baseball Reference hadn't processed last night's game yet.DrewDawg said:
Actually, it's .619
Or for that matter, why the 1978 1 game playoff (F'ing Dent) counts as regular season, but not the pennant series after it.Andrew said:Something I have always wondered: why don't we include postseason stats for career counting? It seems kind of lame to just not count that. It's not like those games are of less importance.
Adding post season performance would move a lot of Yankees up a lot of charts.Andrew said:Something I have always wondered: why don't we include postseason stats for career counting? It seems kind of lame to just not count that. It's not like those games are of less importance.
I don't buy the argument that it's not fair to count them because getting the chance to be in the postseason to hit those homers is the product of your team and not an individual achievement. Over the course of a 20-year career there are a myriad of different reasons why you might get more chances than someone else. And while your team success gave you the chance to do it, you still had to actually hit them.
From my point of view David Ortiz already has 508 home runs in major league games.
Best explanation I've heard for why we shouldn't count post season stats.Rasputin said:Adding post season performance would move a lot of Yankees up a lot of charts.
threecy said:Or for that matter, why the 1978 1 game playoff (F'ing Dent) counts as regular season, but not the pennant series after it.
Sounds kind of like the wildcard play-in?Sampo Gida said:
That game counted for the regular season as it decided the regular season standings.
The difference is that one was required to resolve a regular season tie and the other is just another far too short round of playoffs.threecy said:Sounds kind of like the wildcard play-in?
He looks like he's always swinging for the fences to me, not that there's anything wrong with that if you make contact enough.wilked said:492 now
8 to go, 44 games. He would need about one every 5-6 games. His career average is one every 4.5 games, last season he hit one every 4 games.
Barring a bad streak he should get there this year. The last 7 games are on the road, before which (Sept 21) they have a 7 game homestand. If he is within 3 at the beginning of that homestand I bet we see him swinging for the fences on most pitches
Al Zarilla said:He looks like he's always swinging for the fences to me, not that there's anything wrong with that if you make contact enough.
HriniakPosterChild said:A lost season is not a bad time to use that strategy.