brockpapersizer

Giancarlo Stanton 2017 Outlook

Recommended Posts

Just now, taobball said:

 

And then what happened in 2016 :rolleyes:

 

I'm not saying I won't draft VMart, I think he's still going too late for his talent in drafts, but I'm lower on him than I would be in a typical year because I consider things like O-Contact to be a skill that shows aging and V-Mart had gone from 88.1% to 81.5% to 75.1% the last three years. His contact in the zone has gone from 95.0% to 91.3% to 90.6%. His SwStr% has gone from 3.5% to 6.0% to 7.3%. His K% has gone from 6.6% to 10.7% to 14.8%. His K% and SwStr% were the highest of his career. 

 

I'm not saying the guys done or anything, but if I'm looking for a classic case of identifiable age deterioration, and comparing it to people who I don't believe have it, I don't know how it gets more obviously than with these V-Mart numbers. 

 

Where was the identifiable age regression after 2014 going into 2015?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hailtoyourvictor said:

 

Where was the identifiable age regression after 2014 going into 2015?

 

I mean those rates are from 2014 to 2015 to 2016, but I never said anything about it being identifiable after 2014, and 2015 I don't think was age deterioration I think it was pretty obviously injury. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, taobball said:

 

I mean those rates are from 2014 to 2015 to 2016, but I never said anything about it being identifiable after 2014, and 2015 I don't think was age deterioration I think it was pretty obviously injury. 

 

You said that age regression is identifiable and cited Victor Martinez. He regressed from 2014 to 2015 and it was unidentifiable using K% and Contact%. 

Share this post


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

 

You said that age regression is identifiable and cited Victor Martinez. He regressed from 2014 to 2015 and it was unidentifiable using K% and Contact%. 

 

Don't know how else to say it so I'm just going to repeat it fifty times.

 

INJURY INJURY INJURY INJURY INJURY INJURY INJURY INJURY INJURY

 

I cited V-Mart as showing age related regression NOW and over the span of the last three years.  I have no idea why you want to go back 2015 where he clearly had I believe pretty serious back issues, missed 40 games, and was never healthy and argue that his age was the factor there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if his poor 2015 is written off as because of injury and not because of regression (which I personally don't think should be considered mutually exclusive), then how did you project regression in 2016? By using his 2015 K% and Contact% that you just said were obviously because of injury and not because of age? That is inconsistent logic.

Share this post


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

 

Don't know how else to say it so I'm just going to repeat it fifty times.

 

INJURY INJURY INJURY INJURY INJURY INJURY INJURY INJURY INJURY

 

I cited V-Mart as showing age related regression NOW and over the span of the last three years.  I have no idea why you want to go back 2015 where he clearly had I believe pretty serious back issues, missed 40 games, and was never healthy and argue that his age was the factor there. 

 

No, it was a knee injury that he kept retweaking throughout the year. I think most would agree that his age played a part in the prolonged healing process that led to retweaks. That's science, bub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"2015 numbers don't matter when discussing age regression because those numbers happened due to INJURY INJURY INJURY"

"VMart's 2016 age regression was predictable using his 2015 numbers."

 

 

 

:wacko::wacko::wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the point of sending me this via PM:

 

"

Keep going in the Stanton thread. I like when you dig yourself a hole and make yourself look silly.

"

 

I believe there's an evident three year trend in V-Mart's contact abilities in that he's posted his lowest rates either of his career or in a long time in 2016. I don't consider what happened in 2015 a result of age regression. I agree with you that aging and injuries are correlated but while a guys healthy and while he's hurt he's two different people in a vast number of cases. If Cruz got hurt that would be a different scenario. Does he have a slightly elevated risk of injury because he's 36? Probably, but I think that's more than baked into his value at this point, and I typically don't project injuries for players who have been largely healthy for a long period of time. If you don't think there's a difference in comparing the age regression of someone like V-Mart RIGHT NOW, like I was talking about, where he posted a career high K%, a career high SwStr%, and his lowest contact rates at the very least with the Tigers and Nelly Cruz, who's posted three straight career years with numbers in the same categories being incredibly consistent with his career norms, I don't know what to tell you.

 

What I can tell you is that if you're just going to troll me I'm not going to reply anymore, so I've said my two cents. This arguments over. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stanton is basically the same player as Chris Davis, a guy who's going a few rounds later.  Both have massive power, both strike out a lot, both have pedestrian contact rates, and both walk a lot.  And while we say Stanton is capable of 50 if healthy, Davis has actually done it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, phillyphan21 said:

Stanton is basically the same player as Chris Davis, a guy who's going a few rounds later.  Both have massive power, both strike out a lot, both have pedestrian contact rates, and both walk a lot.  And while we say Stanton is capable of 50 if healthy, Davis has actually done it.

 

I agree on some principles but Stanton still has the upside. There is no power like Stanton power. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I remember looking at a Home Run and someone said it was the longest "Non-Coors, Non-Stanton Home Run," which is funny to me, because Stanton is such a constant compared to the rest of the league on mammoth distances that it's more about who's #2 than who's #1, because #1 is fairly a given. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, taobball said:

 

I agree on some principles but Stanton still has the upside. There is no power like Stanton power. 

 

I do think Stanton is a bit better than Davis, but I also take injury into account.  Only three players averaged at least 420 ft/HR last year, and the other two were Rockies (CarGo and Story).  He's just been injured so much, and home runs in general seem to be on the upswing, that I'm more hesitant to take him early than I have been in the past.  He's obviously the premiere power hitter, but I get the feeling he'll go ahead of his ADP, and I'm not sure I'm comfortable reaching for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, phillyphan21 said:

 

I do think Stanton is a bit better than Davis, but I also take injury into account.  Only three players averaged at least 420 ft/HR last year, and the other two were Rockies (CarGo and Story).  He's just been injured so much, and home runs in general seem to be on the upswing, that I'm more hesitant to take him early than I have been in the past.  He's obviously the premiere power hitter, but I get the feeling he'll go ahead of his ADP, and I'm not sure I'm comfortable reaching for him.

 

I don't disagree on the principle of ADP, or anything you've said in regards to drafting Stanton, just the principle of overall talent evaluation. I don't think comparing HR distances to Stanton's does justice to the fact that there is one Giancarlo Stanton when it comes to power and then there's the rest of the league. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rational part of my fantasy baseball mind says Nelson Cruz has been/is the better value but the unrestrained part believes in the 60 home run season. 

Edited by Chaco Chicken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, taobball said:

What is the point of sending me this via PM:

 

"

Keep going in the Stanton thread. I like when you dig yourself a hole and make yourself look silly.

"

 

I believe there's an evident three year trend in V-Mart's contact abilities in that he's posted his lowest rates either of his career or in a long time in 2016. I don't consider what happened in 2015 a result of age regression. I agree with you that aging and injuries are correlated but while a guys healthy and while he's hurt he's two different people in a vast number of cases. If Cruz got hurt that would be a different scenario. Does he have a slightly elevated risk of injury because he's 36? Probably, but I think that's more than baked into his value at this point, and I typically don't project injuries for players who have been largely healthy for a long period of time. If you don't think there's a difference in comparing the age regression of someone like V-Mart RIGHT NOW, like I was talking about, where he posted a career high K%, a career high SwStr%, and his lowest contact rates at the very least with the Tigers and Nelly Cruz, who's posted three straight career years with numbers in the same categories being incredibly consistent with his career norms, I don't know what to tell you.

 

What I can tell you is that if you're just going to troll me I'm not going to reply anymore, so I've said my two cents. This arguments over. 

 

 

If you don't consider 2015 a result of age regression, then how on earth could you have 2015's K% and Contact% to predict regression in 2016?

 

At least TRY to be consistent, bub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, taobball said:

 

I don't disagree on the principle of ADP, or anything you've said in regards to drafting Stanton, just the principle of overall talent evaluation. I don't think comparing HR distances to Stanton's does justice to the fact that there is one Giancarlo Stanton when it comes to power and then there's the rest of the league. 

 

Sure, and it's not like I dislike Stanton.  I'd probably take him at current ADP (36), but I suspect that a decent number of owners will take him earlier than that.  There is only one Stanton, and I made a point to mention the other two were Rockies to show you need the thin mountain air to compare.  It's just that shortened year after shortened year has me cautious.  If he were like prime Tulo and there were no one at his position to compare to, I'd largely ignore the injury risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man I don't want this to sound like an endictment on this guy at all but he seems legit cursed, like I know it's partially a bias in terms of looking for things that are getting him hurt, but I turn on the Marlins game to watch Straily and Conley and I see Grichuk hit a double and I back up and see Stanton batting and I go "Well of coures I'm gonna watch this first Stanton AB" and pitch FOUR he takes a pitch up and in that hit either the butt of the bat or just above his hands as he cowered away for a foul and I'm just like... not his fault buut people just love to peg this dude. 

Edited by taobball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I missing something with all these injuries? Weren't most of them via a HBP and kinda fluky?

 

We aren't talking chronic soft tissue or leg issues, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, cad300 said:

Am I missing something with all these injuries? Weren't most of them via a HBP and kinda fluky?

 

We aren't talking chronic soft tissue or leg issues, right?

Well yeah, but a lot of people get HBP. 7 seasons, and just 2 over 125 games. Maybe the ability to get out of the way is a skill set he lacks. Either way, it's enough of a track record that I wouldn't bet the over on 125 games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, cad300 said:

Am I missing something with all these injuries? Weren't most of them via a HBP and kinda fluky?

 

We aren't talking chronic soft tissue or leg issues, right?

 

He got hit in the face once -- that's a fluke.

 

The rest, to me, do seem to often come from a breakdown of the kinetic chain -- in his legs especially.  It honestly makes me wonder if he's just carrying too much weight in his upper half for his lower half to handle, OR if his proprioception is lacking compared to that of his peers, and thus he's more likely to misstep when playing at full speed, causing injury.  Or if it's a lack of concentration at times?  Idk... but I'm leaning more chronic in nature for the lower body injuries than fluke.

 

2011 -- hamstring and quad strains

2012 -- knee and abdominal strains

2013 -- hamstring and shoulder strains

2014 -- hit in face by a pitch (fluke)

2015 -- broken hand - HBP (fluke)

2016 -- groin strain

 

So, that's 6 straight years of less than full health, four of which involved injuries to his lower half.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cad300 said:

Am I missing something with all these injuries? Weren't most of them via a HBP and kinda fluky?

 

We aren't talking chronic soft tissue or leg issues, right?

Didn't he have both knees scoped also?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proprioception (/ˌproʊprioʊˈsɛpʃən, -priə-/ PRO-pree-o-SEP-shən), from Latin proprius, meaning "one's own", "individual", and capio, capere, to take or grasp, is the sense of the relative position of neighbouring parts of the body and strength of effort being employed in movement.

 

There's a cut and paste so you all can follow JFS's last post. Of course, I already knew what it meant. Ahem...:rolleyes:

Edited by Stats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stats said:

Proprioception (/ˌproʊprioʊˈsɛpʃən, -priə-/ PRO-pree-o-SEP-shən), from Latin proprius, meaning "one's own", "individual", and capio, capere, to take or grasp, is the sense of the relative position of neighbouring parts of the body and strength of effort being employed in movement.

 

There's a cut and paste so you all can follow JFS's last post. Of course, I already knew what it meant. Ahem...:rolleyes:

 

Sorry... it's the body's awareness of itself in space.  I believe it differs person to person, and to some extent it can be lost/developed.  For example, I had ankle surgery to rebuild the ATF ligament in my left ankle, and once cleared to walk, even after a couple months of PT and such, I could just step on something slightly uneven (like a dip in the grass while mowing my yard), and my ankle would shoot pain and my brain would interpret that as spraining my ankle.  I wasn't actually spraining my ankle though, which I'd realize after a few minutes... my body was just trying to get back its awareness of how far a normal ankle flexes and such -- it was interpreting non-injury events as injuries to protect itself.  It has since come back to nearly 100% -- it may be less than it was, but it's not noticeable to me.

 

In the case of Stanton, what I meant was things like... I think it's plausible some dudes need to concentrate on exactly where they're placing their foot each step.  Some guys have things like base running come more naturally to them, where they don't really need to visually see their foot hit the inside corner of the bag - they just know they did cause they told their legs to do it and that's what happened, while other guys need to look down at the base and see where their foot lands.  Some of that comes with repetition (like NFL combine drills and being able to look up at the coach instead of down at the bags), but some, I think, is inherent -- natural to each individual.  I think a plausible extension of this could be where a guy has to be more conscious of his acceleration and deceleration to protect against soft tissue injuries instead of just playing.

 

I also think it's totally plausible that Stanton is just wound too tight.  I would love to hear he spent an offseason focusing on flexibility and yoga and stretching and that sort of thing -- in addition to weights instead of in place of them... I'm sure he does some stretching, but the more flexible dudes are, the more injury resistant they are.  It's the types of things you'd think star athletes would spend tons of time doing, but they don't.  Idk, maybe Stanton is as flexible as his body will allow - he's maximized that, and yet he's still injury prone -- also a plausible thing to me.

 

Disclaimer - I am not a doctor or a PT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say this for Stanton, which some have hinted at but I'm not sure I've seen directly stated.  The injury cost, for the first time that I can recall, is baked into the price.  Even his Steamer projection -- .268/.363/.557 with 34 HRs and 74 RBI is over a projected 120 games.  So while I'd probably prefer a guy like Cruz over him, there's some guys he's being drafted around that may get to 34 HRs over 155 games.  If Stanton plays 155 games, he's going to hit 40+.

 

In other words, some guys need to have their 90th percentile projection to come true to match Stanton's power, whereas Stanton just needs to stay healthy.  He doesn't need to get any better or have the stars align.  Just health.

 

It's why, especially in shallower leagues, the Stanton + Replacement Player argument holds so much water.  When he's healthy, Stanton's going to put up rate stats of a first round player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JFS179 said:

I will say this for Stanton, which some have hinted at but I'm not sure I've seen directly stated.  The injury cost, for the first time that I can recall, is baked into the price.  Even his Steamer projection -- .268/.363/.557 with 34 HRs and 74 RBI is over a projected 120 games.  So while I'd probably prefer a guy like Cruz over him, there's some guys he's being drafted around that may get to 34 HRs over 155 games.  If Stanton plays 155 games, he's going to hit 40+.

 

In other words, some guys need to have their 90th percentile projection to come true to match Stanton's power, whereas Stanton just needs to stay healthy.  He doesn't need to get any better or have the stars align.  Just health.

 

It's why, especially in shallower leagues, the Stanton + Replacement Player argument holds so much water.  When he's healthy, Stanton's going to put up rate stats of a first round player.

 

Is he though if he's hitting .260 or below... idk... I'm just not that confident in the BA I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...