PDA

View Full Version : Helton outside of Coors debate


It's Time
11-15-2005, 02:03 PM
I'll be incredibly disappointed if Frank doesn't sign. However, if it's partially or completely because the Sox made a move for a Thome/Delgado/Helton (and resigned Konerko), or because he wasn't healed enough by 12/7 arb deadline for them to make him an offer, I'll understand. It'll suck and I'll be bemoaning the Sox luck in this, but I'd understand.


And I'll root like hell for him to do well wherever he is, probably een when he's playing the Sox, as long as he doesn't beat us!

Helton becomes ordinary if he is not playing 81 games at Coors. Thome is coming off an injury as well and while he is a devastating hitter, I'd take Frank when healthy.

Delgado and Konerko is a pipe dream IMO.

Palehose13
11-15-2005, 02:14 PM
Helton becomes ordinary

What do you consider ordinary?

Helton has a .297 career BA on the road. His power numbers would drop, but I think he would still hit 20 HR's in the cell. IMO, that a little better than ordinary and I would love to have Helton on the team.

It's Time
11-15-2005, 02:16 PM
What do you consider ordinary?

Helton has a .297 career BA on the road. His power numbers would drop, but I think he would still hit 20 HR's in the cell. IMO, that a little better than ordinary and I would love to have Helton on the team.

Ordinary in terms of power numbers and run production.

Palehose13
11-15-2005, 02:25 PM
Ordinary in terms of power numbers and run production.

Well, run production is dependent on if your team will be on the bases for you to have RBI opportunities. His RISP is pretty decent and most of his HR's occur when the bases are empty. This leads me to believe that his high BA will produce a good amount of RBI's if given the opportunity.

You haven't really told me what you think "ordinary" numbers are, but I would be happy with a player hitting .300/20/80 (and I think I am underestimating his HR's and RBI's at the Cell).

It's Time
11-15-2005, 02:27 PM
Well, run production is dependent on if your team will be on the bases for you to have RBI opportunities. His RISP is pretty decent and most of his HR's occur when the bases are empty. This leads me to believe that his high BA will produce a good amount of RBI's if given the opportunity.

You haven't really told me what you think "ordinary" numbers are, but I would be happy with a player hitting .300/20/80 (and I think I am underestimating his HR's and RBI's at the Cell).

That's EXACTLY what I mean when I say ordinary. If Paul put up .300/20/80, many people here would be saying dump the slug.

Flight #24
11-15-2005, 02:28 PM
Helton becomes ordinary if he is not playing 81 games at Coors. Thome is coming off an injury as well and while he is a devastating hitter, I'd take Frank when healthy.

Delgado and Konerko is a pipe dream IMO.Any injury debates about Thome have to be doubled or tripled with respect to Frank. Put it this way - if KW decides not to make a deal for a hitter like Helton/Thome because he's got Frank, that's ridiculously irresponsible. Frank cannot be counted on to get through a full season, assuming he's even ready to play by opening day in the first place (something that's not certain).

When healthy, I'd take Frank over just about any hitter in baseball, bar maybe 5. But he's not healthy, and no one knows if he ever will be truly healthy ever again, which is why we're having this discussion.

Palehose13
11-15-2005, 02:30 PM
That's EXACTLY what I mean when I say ordinary. If Paul put up .300/20/80, many people here would be saying dump the slug.

I highly doubt it. I would love if Paulie could hit .300 and .322 RISP. My problem with Paulie is that he usually isn't clutch...(.246 RISP).

slavko
11-15-2005, 02:38 PM
I highly doubt it. I would love if Paulie could hit .300 and .322 RISP. My problem with Paulie is that he usually isn't clutch...(.246 RISP).

Gospel. Learn it. Plus he was under .200 RISP when we had our big run pre-All Star Game. Don't hyperventilate over PK.

Palehose13
11-15-2005, 02:42 PM
Gospel. Learn it. Plus he was under .200 RISP when we had our big run pre-All Star Game. Don't hyperventilate over PK.

Don't get me wrong, I do want PK back. But I wouldn't be crying if Helton or Delgado replaces him.

1951Campbell
11-15-2005, 02:49 PM
Ordinary in terms of power numbers and run production.

The Cell is a real hitter's park. While it doesn't offer hitters an advantage on an order of magnitude as the Coors effect, I still think 81 games at the Cell really helps a hitter, so all this talk of a huge drop-off is a little overblown.

Domeshot17
11-15-2005, 02:51 PM
Last Year is a horrible look for Helton, and I would like to propose another alternative haha.

He made his first trip the DL, slumped before it, a little after, and then got hot.

I would assume that when the guys in the order that used to protect you, Larry Walker(was there until the end of 2004), Vinny Castilla, Bichette etc, are replaced by some kids that havent found a groove, and there is not much infront of you to drive in, The numbers will go down.

Keep in mind the dimensions of the park as well. Yes the ball carries in coors, but the corners are a good 15-20 shorter at USCF and CF is 34 feet shorter, and the power alleys come in more, so Helton, a guy who uses those allies a ton, will see more balls go over the wall than off them at coors. Colorado had argueable one of the worst all around teams in baseball last year, and Helton was caught in the middle. Think what having Pods and Tadahito infront of you can do for those rbi totals.

AZSoxFAN
11-15-2005, 07:19 PM
What do you consider ordinary?

Helton has a .297 career BA on the road. His power numbers would drop, but I think he would still hit 20 HR's in the cell. IMO, that a little better than ordinary and I would love to have Helton on the team.

Helton hasn't had much help since Walker left. I'd like to see his numbers with a strong lineup. He's a horse.

Frater Perdurabo
11-15-2005, 09:30 PM
Helton should hit more HRs but fewer doubles at the Cell. (His road stats should stay about the same). So, all things being equal, I'd expect him to produce more RBIs and a slightly lower average playing for the Sox when compared to his career seasonal norms.

Man Soo Lee
11-16-2005, 02:23 AM
I highly doubt it. I would love if Paulie could hit .300 and .322 RISP. My problem with Paulie is that he usually isn't clutch...(.246 RISP).

In 2002, Konerko hit .303 with RISP.
2003: .218
2004: .314
2005: .246

Does his ability to hit in the clutch vary from year to year? Or is ~140 at bats an inadequate sample size?

If you add the four years together, he's hit .274 with 31 homers in 576 ABs. Those numbers, including the ABs, pretty much match his 162 game Seasonal Averages (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=3747) for his career.

(I hope this post doesn't lead to a stathead vs. traditionalist debate over the existence of clutch hitting. I was just noting that if you look at a larger sample, Konerko's performance with RISP isn't bad.)

Flight #24
11-16-2005, 10:22 AM
Ordinary in terms of power numbers and run production.

I think you need to take a better look at his numbers. Last year, his ASB splits were:
pre-ASB: .287/.414/..474
post-ASB: .367 / .488 / .623 :o:

Which is consistent with his struggling through injuries the first half.

2005 road totals: .287 / .418 / .453
2004 road totals: .326 / .446 / .544
3-yr road totals: .313 / .433 / .505
Which is also consistent with his '05 campaign being injury-adjusted.

Stats with RISP:
2005: .322 / .527 / .443 / 115ABs
2004: .315 / .505 / .480 / 127ABs
3-yr: .352 / .525 / .536 :o:

If you're upset because his RBI totals were down, don't forget that he had about 20 fewer ABs with RISP than Paulie, which doesn't factor in things like I believe Paulie probably had more times with multiple men in SP than Helton (given the general quality of their teammates).

Overall, looks like 2005 was abnormally down due to injury. Unless you think he's on the juice, although he's generally been considered a good guy and hasn't been under much if any suspicion (by that broadcaster, who later recanted & said he had no actual basis for saying that).

That contract's a beast. But as a player, Helton's almost certainly going to come in and instantly be our best hitter. And USCF isn't that much different from Coors in terms of hitting HRs, which is why you often hear it referred to as "Coors East".

Randar68
11-16-2005, 12:00 PM
Helton should hit more HRs but fewer doubles at the Cell. (His road stats should stay about the same). So, all things being equal, I'd expect him to produce more RBIs and a slightly lower average playing for the Sox when compared to his career seasonal norms.

How can people have this discussion and not mention his .400+ OBP...

The guy would hit .300-30-120 in USCF with Pods/Iguchi in front of him and do so with a .420 OBP!

Ordinary my ass.

Helton was hurt, coming off shoulder surgery, which is why his 1st half was so poor (nevermind aforementioned NOBODY in the order)...

Again, people would be out of their melons if they would take Konerko over Helton if the Rockies made the cost equivalent by eating enough salary. Helton is a legit Gold Glover, is not a baseclogger, hits doubles, has a league-leading type of OBP and would likely by a 30 HR and 100+ RBI guy every year in addition.

He's a LH'd Frank Thomas with far better defense.

maurice
11-16-2005, 01:30 PM
In the past couple of years, this board has gone from "the grass is always greener" to "no grass is greener than Konerko's." Please stop smoking the grass, folks. Helton (and Giles and Delgado) > Konerko. It's not even close.

Again, people would be out of their melons if they would take Konerko over Helton if the Rockies made the cost equivalent by eating enough salary.

But Konerko over Helton makes perfect sense . . . if you fixate on Helton's home-road splits and ignore Konerko's home-road splits. Nobody makes better use of a HR-friendly home field than Konerko. Helton's "home field dropoff" going from Coors to Coors East would be very little if anything.

santo=dorf
11-16-2005, 01:43 PM
Konerko 3 year splits
Road: .248/.324/.432/.756
Home: .288/.377/.563/.940

How come it's ok to dismiss Konerko's 2003 seson, yet people here think Helton's 2005 campaign is a trend of the future? :?:
Helton's "bad" season was tremendously better than Konerko's bad year.

It's Time
11-16-2005, 02:41 PM
He's a LH'd Frank Thomas with far better defense.

:?: :rolleyes: . Step away from the computer if you actually believe that ****! Put Frank in Coors 81 games a year and he would have hit 70 HR every year. I'll give you the defense but that's it.

pmck003
11-16-2005, 04:46 PM
I agree that Helton is an improvement over Konerko, but I don't agree that having Pods and Iguchi before him would be a major factor as the guys in the rockies order were pretty decent at getting on base (especially when Barmes was playing earlier and later in the year.) A good reason for Heltons second half was the play of Matt Holiday batting behind him, who arguably had one of the better second-halves in mlb.
Another factor about Coors field that I've heard many people say, including some Sox fans this year, is not only how long the ball carries but the size of the gaps in the outfield.

Randar68
11-16-2005, 10:15 PM
:?: :rolleyes: . Step away from the computer if you actually believe that ****! Put Frank in Coors 81 games a year and he would have hit 70 HR every year. I'll give you the defense but that's it.

High average, tons of run production, very high OBP, and a SLG% in the .550-.600 range...

Helton has less pure power but more doubles and better speed.

Sorry you don't like it, but Helton is far closer to Frank in his Prime than he is to Konerko in his prime.

Because they wear a Sox uniform does not somehow add mythical powers to their repertoire. This is he some reasoning people claimed last year when reacting strongly against Andruw Jones or Nick Johnson for Maggs trades last year...

It's Time
11-16-2005, 10:19 PM
High average, tons of run production, very high OBP, and a SLG% in the .550-.600 range...

Helton has less pure power but more doubles and better speed.

Sorry you don't like it, but Helton is far closer to Frank in his Prime than he is to Konerko in his prime.

Because they wear a Sox uniform does not somehow add mythical powers to their repertoire. This is he some reasoning people claimed last year when reacting strongly against Andruw Jones or Nick Johnson for Maggs trades last year...

The gaps in Coors are as big as Detroit, which is why he has so many doubles. Helton is good but to compare him to Thomas is pretty unfair considering the parks they play in. The infield at Coors is like an ice rink, balls get through holes with ease.

nodiggity59
11-16-2005, 10:20 PM
High average, tons of run production, very high OBP, and a SLG% in the .550-.600 range...

Helton has less pure power but more doubles and better speed.

Sorry you don't like it, but Helton is far closer to Frank in his Prime than he is to Konerko in his prime.

Because they wear a Sox uniform does not somehow add mythical powers to their repertoire. This is he some reasoning people claimed last year when reacting strongly against Andruw Jones or Nick Johnson for Maggs trades last year...

I agree with you on Helton. The guy is a straight up stud.

On the Jones-Maggs front, however, I have to say that Jones had not earned his $12mil price tag for a few years before this year. He bounced back this year and it's given me a few sleepless nights, but it really did seem unwise financially at the time.

Randar68
11-16-2005, 10:31 PM
I agree with you on Helton. The guy is a straight up stud.

On the Jones-Maggs front, however, I have to say that Jones had not earned his $12mil price tag for a few years before this year. He bounced back this year and it's given me a few sleepless nights, but it really did seem unwise financially at the time.

Isn't that the point of buying low? We were willing to pay Maggs 12 million a year and now Konerko ~13 million, but people were gunshy about Jones in CF???

This is the home-team-infatuation I referred to. Juvenile, frankly.

Randar68
11-16-2005, 10:47 PM
The gaps in Coors are as big as Detroit, which is why he has so many doubles. Helton is good but to compare him to Thomas is pretty unfair considering the parks they play in. The infield at Coors is like an ice rink, balls get through holes with ease.

Helton's Career #'s:
4560 AB, 1535 H, 373 2B, 271 HR, 915 RBI, 773 BB, 622 K, .337 avg, .433 OBP, .607 SLG% , 1.040 OPS

Frank's career #'s:
6956 AB,2136 H,447 2B,448 HR, 1465 RBI, 1466 BB, 1165 K, .307 avg, .427 OBP, .568 SLG%, .995 OPS


You think Park factor is really the overwhelming difference here? Ummm, ok, Cheech.

It's Time
11-16-2005, 10:53 PM
You think Park factor is really the overwhelming difference here? Ummm, ok, Cheech.

Not at all. I mean Coors field has never inflated anyones numbers. He's a very good hitter but he's not on the level of Frank. Sorry, I'm not buying the **** you are selling, Rockie man.

It's Time
11-16-2005, 11:08 PM
Helton's Career #'s:
4560 AB, 1535 H, 373 2B, 271 HR, 915 RBI, 773 BB, 622 K, .337 avg, .433 OBP, .607 SLG% , 1.040 OPS

Frank's career #'s:
6956 AB,2136 H,447 2B,448 HR, 1465 RBI, 1466 BB, 1165 K, .307 avg, .427 OBP, .568 SLG%, .995 OPS


You think Park factor is really the overwhelming difference here? Ummm, ok, Cheech.

Chew on this for a while and get back to me. This is a few years back but if you don't understand the impact, you're delusional. Again, if Frank played at Coors his whole career he would have dwarfed Helton's numbers.

The altitude of Coors distorts baseball in ways that could not have been foreseen. For example, a home run ball that flies 400 feet at sea level would travel 430 feet in this ballpark. In 1999, Coors became the most prolific offensive ballpark ever created (http://www.baseball-statistics.com/Ballparks/hilo.htm). The Rockies and their opponents combined for 303 homeruns, the most ever in a season at one stadium with one or more tenants. The longest homerun ever in Coors field was a 496 ft bomb by Mike Piazza.


The park factor in 1996 still ranks as the highest of all time for a ballpark in a single season, while the park factors in 1995, 1999, and 1998 rank third, fourth, and fifth all time. (Only the 1877 season of the Louisville Baseball Park breaks Coors' dominance).



Why exactly is Coors so prolific? There are five principal reasons:



1) The ball travels as much as 10 percent farther in the thin air;



2) Curve balls break as much as 25 percent less in the thin air;



3) The ball travels to the outfield more quickly, leaving fielders less time to react (the range of an outfielder may be reduced by 8 feet, while the range of infielders is reduced by 8-12 inches);



4) Coors has a hard infield and hard, straight, quirky walls, so balls skip through the infield as if they were hit on cement.



5) The outfield is one of the biggest in the majors, so that routine pop-ups fall for singles and line singles roll for doubles or triples.



More than just home runs, the park also yields more triples than any other ballpark. In part, this is due to the thin air, but the long distance to the right field corner (350 feet) gives runners an extra two seconds to get to third base compared to a park with a 325-foot right field wall. The quirky walls and extensive right-field foul territory means that the ball doesn't bounce straight back to the outfielder; the ball caroms off the hard walls at odd angles.



There is also a little nook in the right field wall, about ten feet from the corner, where two sections of the fence come together. At that point, the wall takes a sharp turn; if the ball hits to the left of that nook, it can bounce back towards the infield, but if it hits to the right of thae nook it will carom towards center field. Right fielders tracking baseballs into that nook face a dilemma as to how play the ricochet - more than one has run all-out to the corner, only to have the ball come back past them at impossible speed.



Defense: Coors places a premium on speed because of it's spacious dimensions. The infield is so hard, and the grass so short, that the infielders feel like they're playing on artificial turf. The team has been planning to grow the grass a little longer and give the pitchers an element of support.


Error Index:118110Infield-error Index:10589




Who benefits: Anyone with a bat. The Rockies hit 77 points higher here than on the road, and belted 144 of 223 team homers here in 1999; the park has turned great players like Larry Walker into MVPs and mediocre players like Dante Bichette and Vinny Castilla into All-Stars.

No one benefits more than Jeff Cirillo, whose gap power is perfectly suited to the large outfield. In 2000, he hit .403 at home and .299 on the road; last season, he hit .362 at home and just .266 on the road. Larry Walker has also been a major major beneficiary - last season he hit .406 at home and just .293 on the road; in 2000 he hit .359 at home and .259 on the road.

Todd Helton also has benefited- last season, he hit 98 points higher at home and hit 27 of his 49 HR here; in 2000, he hit 38 points better and clocked 27 of 42 homers at home.



Overall, the Rockies had a home-road differential of +178 in runs scored. The next highest in the National League was Arizona, in lively Bank One Ballpark, with a +58.


Who gets hurt: Anyone who has to eventually throw to anyone with a bat. In 1999, the Rockie's ERA was 2.27 runs higher at home than on the road. They yielded 159 of the 237 opponent home runs at home.

The park seems to ruin good pitchers in their road performances as well. Mike Hampton and had trouble adjusting in his first season in the thin air, after signing a $121 million, 8-year contract; after starting the season by going 9-2, with a 2.98 ERA, he faded in the second half and gave up a career high 31 HR. Oddly, hust 8 of those 31 were at home, and he hada 5.10 ERA outside of Coors. Denny Neagle also struggled, posting a 5.11 ERA on the road and a 5.70 ERA in Denver. Brian Bohanon and Scott Elarton (a 17 game winner with Houston) both had ERAs of over 7 at home and around 5 on the road.

Flight #24
11-16-2005, 11:35 PM
Helton's Career #'s:
4560 AB, 1535 H, 373 2B, 271 HR, 915 RBI, 773 BB, 622 K, .337 avg, .433 OBP, .607 SLG% , 1.040 OPS

Frank's career #'s:
6956 AB,2136 H,447 2B,448 HR, 1465 RBI, 1466 BB, 1165 K, .307 avg, .427 OBP, .568 SLG%, .995 OPS


You think Park factor is really the overwhelming difference here? Ummm, ok, Cheech.

It's misleading to look at "rate" stats because until last year, Coors was a much better hitters park than Comiskey/USCF. Actually, Frank's had pretty few ABs since the roof came on, which seems to have upped the hitting.

Also, you're comparing Helton's first 9 years with Frank's 16. Frank's last few years have been up & down because of age and because he's 5 years older and has a lot more miles on him. You'd expect him to decline. Over the next 5 years I'd expect Helton to decline as well.

IMO Frank > Helton. But that's no knock on Helton because Frank > most hitters in baseball history. Helton's still a pretty damn fine hitter himself, and Helton > Konerko (and all but maybe 10 hitters in baseball today).

Tragg
11-17-2005, 01:27 AM
In the past couple of years, this board has gone from "the grass is always greener" to "no grass is greener than Konerko's." Please stop smoking the grass, folks. Helton (and Giles and Delgado) > Konerko. It's not even close.



But Konerko over Helton makes perfect sense . . . if you fixate on Helton's home-road splits and ignore Konerko's home-road splits. Nobody makes better use of a HR-friendly home field than Konerko. Helton's "home field dropoff" going from Coors to Coors East would be very little if anything.
I'm not sure I agree because a)age - those guys are getting up there and b)power, which meant a LOT to this team last year; they don't replace Konerko's HR totals; and c)we have to give up players for any of those guys (except Giles) - and their salaries will be high just like Konerko's. So in effect, we would be trading Konerko plus whomever we actually trade, for Delgado/Helton.

gr8mexico
11-17-2005, 12:51 PM
I think Helton would be the best option for the Sox to add. Doesn't strike out a whole lot like other power hitters, BB alot and he is 3 years younger then Thome. If the Sox would be able to sign Paulie and bring in Helton it would make the Sox alot better to defend there title. Just Imagen having Helton batting in front of Konerko WOW. Helton's numbers would not drop 1 bit @ U.S it would probally make his numbers look better just because he would have Paulie batting right behind him. The Rockies didn't have anyone that was good batting around him and of course no one was on base when he would hit most of his HR the Rockies didn't really have good leadoff hitter or a #2 guy.

maurice
11-17-2005, 04:26 PM
a)age - those guys are getting up there

Helton is only 32, so the length of his deal is a much greater concen than his age.
Delgado is 33, but essentially has only a 3-year deal.
Giles is 34 and probably will sign a short deal for that reason.

Konerko's looking for 5 years, but he's hardly a lock to perform at his peak level 4 or 5 years down the line (or even in 2006).

Nonetheless, I'm most concerned about helping the team the next few years, while we have a championship calibur pitching staff. There's no reason to believe that Helton, Delgado, and Giles will suddenly drop off by a wide margin (making them worse than Konerko) in the next 2 or 3 years.

b)power, which meant a LOT to this team last year

They all SLG well and (with the exception of Helton) would SLG even better in the Cell. Conversely, Konerko's SLG is much, much worse away from the Cell.

they don't replace Konerko's HR totals

This is precisely the same argument used by those who claimed that the 2005 Sox would finish in 4th place. It was wrong then, and it's wrong now.

HR totals are meaningless in isolation, especially if the other players have a higher AVE, a higher OBP, more run production, far more 2B, and/or play in less hitter friendly parks. Besides, I suspect that Delgado would replace Konerko's HR totals (or come very close) while continuing to outperform Konerko in every other offensive category. You also could make up for any drop off in HR totals by adding a more powerful DH than Everett, which shouldn't be very difficult.

c)we have to give up players for any of those guys (except Giles)

And to the extent that we trade extraneous MLB players with multi-million dollar contracts (e.g., Marte, Rowand, Hernandez), that would free up even more money to help pay for a second slugger -- maybe even Konerko. Also, KW won't have to give up many good players if he agrees to pay $13+ mil. / year. In other words, the quality / quantity of the players given up would be inversely proportional to the amount of salary the Sox would have to pay, so it's a bit of a wash.

Tragg
11-17-2005, 06:48 PM
This is precisely the same argument used by those who claimed that the 2005 Sox would finish in 4th place. It was wrong then, and it's wrong now.

HR totals are meaningless in isolation, especially if the other players have a higher AVE, a higher OBP, more run production, far more 2B, and/or play in less hitter friendly parks. Besides, I suspect that Delgado would replace Konerko's HR totals (or come very close) while continuing to outperform Konerko in every other offensive category. You also could make up for any drop off in HR totals by adding a more powerful DH than Everett, which shouldn't be very difficult.
They were wrong about our home run totals going down. They forgot to factor in the long absences of Frank/Maggs in 2004, and they didn't factor in that we happened to fill holes with guys who could hit between 15 and 30 to make up for the loss.
But were they wrong about the importance of the home run?
You study parks (I don't), but tell me, aren't many home run parks often double-unfriendly; and many "pitchers parks" with big alleys are double friendly? So do those doubles hitters translate equivalently when put into a home run park?

One other thing - OBP is a useful tool, but it equates a walk with a single, when the two aren't equivalent - the single is worth a lot more. Better than BA which gives no credit to a walk, certainly


And to the extent that we trade extraneous MLB players with multi-million dollar contracts (e.g., Marte, Rowand, Hernandez), that would free up even more money to help pay for a second slugger -- maybe even Konerko. Also, KW won't have to give up many good players if he agrees to pay $13+ mil. / year. In other words, the quality / quantity of the players given up would be inversely proportional to the amount of salary the Sox would have to pay, so it's a bit of a wash.
And to the extent that the teams will trade us helton/delgado/thome for marte/rowand/hernandez, I have no complaints.

ChiSoxIn06
11-17-2005, 08:20 PM
I will take helton over konerko anyday...no offense but he is just one of the best pure hitters in the game right now...coors effect aside...the stats he puts up are home and away so its not like all his numbers are inflated as you guys believe...and as far as the frank and helton comparisons go we cant compare the 2 until thier careers are both done.

maurice
11-18-2005, 06:57 PM
They were wrong about our home run totals going down.

No, they were absolutely right that the Sox HR total would go down. It went down a lot -- from 242 HR in 2004 to 200 HR in 2005.

But were they wrong about the importance of the home run?

Obviously.

Aren't many home run parks often double-unfriendly; and many "pitchers parks" with big alleys are double friendly?

It depends. It appears that the Cell turns 2B into HR. OTOH, Coors' probably favors both 2B and HR, while Comerica probably turns HR into 2B.

In any event, Delgado (for example) hits lots of HR and lots of 2B, no matter what park he's in. He's just a really good hitter.

OBP is a useful tool, but it equates a walk with a single, when the two aren't equivalent - the single is worth a lot more.

Sometimes, but the guys I'm talking about usually have better OBP and better AVE than Konerko.

Tragg
11-18-2005, 07:11 PM
No, they were absolutely right that the Sox HR total would go down. It went down a lot -- from 242 HR in 2004 to 200 HR in 2005.
On a relative basis they didn't go down near what was predicted. We were 4th in the league in homers in 2005 compared to tied for first in 2004. The predictions were far more dire than that.

This team could use some OBP invigoration - no argument here.

maurice
11-18-2005, 07:28 PM
On a relative basis they didn't go down near what was predicted.

No doubt. Heck, people here gave me heat for my prediction that the Sox would hit 200 HR in 2005.
:cool: