Ecofolux

Matt Olson 2020 Outlook

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, jmcampbe11 said:

 

You're quoting a VERY small sample size (post all-star break) when you speak of his batting average. I think his CEILING is .260, but I'm expecting him to be much closer to his .254 career batting average. 

Also, you might want to dial back the arrogance / underlying condescension in your replies. You can't predict the future and neither can I. You're opinion is no more educated or valuable than mine or anyone else's for that matter.

 

You cant say his ceiling is 260 when he hit 268 last year brotha 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Slatykamora said:

That's just not happening(or less then 1 percent). He doesn't have the same all fields power Alonso has.

He can reach the 40s.. 50+ takes the guys who can spray their power better.

Oslon hits as many as he does because his approach is near maxed towards his raw power already. Hes s tick below the Alonso, Judge, Stanton, Gallo, Sano terms of raw power. Better hit tool helps play better then Sano.

 

Hey I didn't say what the chances were that he'd reach that ceiling! I agree and personally if I have to draft Olson before pick 50 (to get him) I'd rather wait on some of the players you mentioned like Gallo and Sano for my power. Or even take a flyer on someone like F.Reyes or K.Davis even later.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, kmoore1521 said:

 

You cant say his ceiling is 260 when he hit 268 last year brotha 

 

Settle down Hulkster. I prefaced it with "I think". He also didn't play a full season last year. 

Edited by jmcampbe11
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, jmcampbe11 said:

 

I can if I preface it with "I think" like I did. He also didn't play a full season last year. 

 

well we just saw it isnt his ceiling, so your wrong by saying/thinking 260 is his ceiling

 

Edit: he had 482 AB's last year so "didnt play a full year" loses a lot of its merit

Edited by kmoore1521

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, kmoore1521 said:

 

You cant say his ceiling is 260 when he hit 268 last year brotha 

Well he prefaced it with "I think," so he does have a right to his opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, ToO_BaD said:

Well he prefaced it with "I think," so he does have a right to his opinion.

 

He Hit 268 last year, so its now a fact it isnt his ceiling, maybe a given year sure but need to specify 

Edited by kmoore1521

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kmoore1521 said:

 

well we just saw it isnt his ceiling, so your wrong by saying/thinking 260 is his ceiling

 

Edit: he had 482 AB's last year so "didnt play a full year" loses a lot of its merit


We're talking about his 2020 ceiling. And if it's such a given then why are NONE of the projections sites buying him being able to hit over .260? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, kmoore1521 said:

 

He Hit 268 last year, so its now a fact it isnt his ceiling

Last time I checked this is 2020.  He was making a prediction on this season.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jmcampbe11 said:


We're talking about his 2020 ceiling. And if it's such a given then why are NONE of the projections sites buying him being able to hit over .260? 

 

I was seeing a lot of player comparisons in your recent discussion, and when speaking of ceilings in that context for upside and what not as i saw that term being used as well, we have seen 260 isnt Olson's ceiling for BA 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kmoore1521 said:

 

I was seeing a lot of player comparisons in your recent discussion, and when speaking of ceilings in that context for upside and what not as i saw that term being used as well, we have seen 260 isnt Olson's ceiling for BA 

 

No worries. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, jmcampbe11 said:

 

You're quoting a VERY small sample size (post all-star break) when you speak of his batting average. I think his CEILING is .260, but I'm expecting him to be much closer to his .254 career batting average. 

Also, you might want to dial back the arrogance / underlying condescension in your replies. You can't predict the future and neither can I. You're opinion is no more educated or valuable than mine or anyone else's for that matter.

 

Again, you're choosing to focus on just one of the many sample sizes being presented. .267 over a full season (127 games played, 483 AB). Is that also a small sample size? His ceiling is .260 because you say it is? He literally just hit .267. In your other posts you talk about how until something happens it's not a reality. It just happened. The .276 I have cited from June on is also a 395 AB sample size. Is that not relevant? 

Whatever you're expecting is fine. I'm here for the debate and discussion. I just think you are restricting what is in the realm of possibility based on inconsistent logic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys realize you're arguing the difference in 3 hits over 482ABs right? 260 vs 268, who cares

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jmcampbe11 said:


We're talking about his 2020 ceiling. And if it's such a given then why are NONE of the projections sites buying him being able to hit over .260? 

 

No one said it's a given. Projection sites tend to be conservative. I've tried pretty hard to point out some of the things that many projections are seemingly not taking into consideration throughout this thread. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, jmcampbe11 said:

 

You're quoting a VERY small sample size (post all-star break) when you speak of his batting average. I think his CEILING is .260, but I'm expecting him to be much closer to his .254 career batting average. 

Also, you might want to dial back the arrogance / underlying condescension in your replies. You can't predict the future and neither can I. You're opinion is no more educated or valuable than mine or anyone else's for that matter.

 

I think its fair to say Olson has a higher ceiling than Moustakas which is the context of the past few posts. 

It's an opinion but not all opinions are the same. If you don't think that's fair to assume that, then have at it.

I prefer opinions more rooted in important data point though.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mjb03003 said:

 

Again, you're choosing to focus on just one of the many sample sizes being presented. .267 over a full season (127 games played, 483 AB). Is that also a small sample size? His ceiling is .260 because you say it is? He literally just hit .267. In your other posts you talk about how until something happens it's not a reality. It just happened. The .276 I have cited from June on is also a 395 AB sample size. Is that not relevant? 

Whatever you're expecting is fine. I'm here for the debate and discussion. I just think you are restricting what is in the realm of possibility based on inconsistent logic. 

 

2 minutes ago, WahooManiac said:

You guys realize you're arguing the difference in 3 hits over 482ABs right? 260 vs 268, who cares

 

He's lowering the bar. Last week he said that Olson would be a .280+ hitter this season and that's largely why he drafted him 33rd overall in the forum mock draft. So, yes now it does seem like we're splitting hairs, but the divide was initially much greater. Just giving you some context (if you want it). 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WahooManiac said:

You guys realize you're arguing the difference in 3 hits over 482ABs right? 260 vs 268, who cares

 

I realize this. It's why batted ball data matters. If you consistently hit the ball hard, and/or hit line drives, and/or hit the ball on the barrel, and/or have a certain launch angle... you can start to predict a few more batted balls becoming hits vs. someone who does less of these things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, roadawg said:

 

I think its fair to say Olson has a higher ceiling than Moustakas which is the context of the past few posts. 

It's an opinion but not all opinions are the same. If you don't think that's fair to assume that, then have at it.

I prefer opinions more rooted in important data point though.

 

 

I never argued that, but I think even with his upside the gaps pretty small given the lack of depth at 2B. It's really pretty atrocious after the Muncy / Moustakas tier. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jmcampbe11 said:

 

 

He's lowering the bar. Last week he said that Olson would be a .280+ hitter this season and that's largely why he drafted him 33rd overall in the forum mock draft. So, yes now it does seem like we're splitting hairs, but the divide was initially much greater. Just giving you some context (if you want it). 

 

Show me where I said this. I said he *could* be a .270-275 hitter based on some of the improvements he displayed as a hitter in 2019. Specifically from June on (where he hit .276 over nearly 400 AB). 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, mjb03003 said:

 

I realize this. It's why batted ball data matters. If you consistently hit the ball hard, and/or hit line drives, and/or hit the ball on the barrel, and/or have a certain launch angle... you can start to predict a few more batted balls becoming hits vs. someone who does less of these things. 

 

And if roughly 85% of your power typically comes from pulling the ball then teams tend to adjust...and implement shifts...pitch you away, etc. 

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/players/matt-olson/14344/spray-charts?position=1B&type=battedball

 

This has been fun (not really), but I'm done. Please contact my press secretary for any further Matt Olson inquiries :)

 

 

 

 

Edited by jmcampbe11
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jmcampbe11 said:

 

And if roughly 85% of your power typically comes from pulling the ball then teams tend to adjust...and implement shifts...pitch you away, etc. 

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/players/matt-olson/14344/spray-charts?position=1B&type=battedball

 

 

 

 

 

If I'm reading this correctly, Olson was the 10th most shifted against hitter in baseball last season. He was shifted against 87% of the time.

https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/visuals/batter-positioning?playerId=621566&teamId=&opponent=&firstBase=27&shift=1&season=2019&attempts=25&batSide=L&gb=1&fb=1

He seemed to handle it better than most if you look at his wOBA when shifted against. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, jmcampbe11 said:

 

Hey I didn't say what the chances were that he'd reach that ceiling! I agree and personally if I have to draft Olson before pick 50 (to get him) I'd rather wait on some of the players you mentioned like Gallo and Sano for my power. Or even take a flyer on someone like F.Reyes or K.Davis even later.  

 


The main reason his ADP is what it is isn’t just the power. It’s because 1B isn’t a deep position. If Olson was a DH or OF, his ADP would be lower. What is more relevant than his production compared to other power hitters is his production compared to other 1B.

Some have brought up the argument to avoid that entire group of Olson/Goldy/Rizzo/Abreu and wait for Hoskins or Sano. It’s a risky strategy because if you miss out on those guys, you will end up with a Voit, E5 or Walker as your 1B. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, jmcampbe11 said:

 

I never argued that, but I think even with his upside the gaps pretty small given the lack of depth at 2B. It's really pretty atrocious after the Muncy / Moustakas tier. 

 

he could hit 15 more hrs than an average 1b and have 40 more rbi/r.

 

you did say all opinions are equal and everyone's guess is the same and they are not.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jmcampbe11 said:

 

...maybe the underlying numbers don't support growth? It's not like it's just one site, all of them are projecting him to basically equal last years numbers. 

I guess I would turn that around, do the underlying numbers support high performance for Moustakas in age 31 season?  Seems to me like those projections are based on on assumptions like: being in a better lineup, more playing time, and park factor.  But Oakland was a top 10 team in runs scored last year and Olson is in the middle of that lineup (and has already logged a season playing every game).  Olson has a higher hard hit percentage, higher barrel rate and higher exit velocity than Moustakas.  So again we come back to the notion of one player having no growth at age 25 and the other player performing at near career highs at age 31.

Me personally, I find it very difficult to ascribe a ceiling to a player this early in his career.  Maybe Olson doesn’t have it in him to hit north of .260 again... maybe he doesn’t have it in him to hit 40+ HR.  But given how hard he hits the ball, I’m willing to bet on him outperforming his projections more than I am Moustakas.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ToO_BaD said:

Well he prefaced it with "I think," so he does have a right to his opinion.

Well, he was factually wrong. You can't make a statement of fact into an opinion. And the fact is, a player right in the heart of his prime, doesn't have a ceiling below what the player just achieved last year.

  • Thanks 1

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...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.