Jump to content

Madrigal.


Greydawgfan1

Recommended Posts

Looks like a good draft pick by the Sox. Good little hitter. Seems like the kind of guy who is only going to get better and be a guy that gets on base at a productive clip. If he can stay healthy he should have a nice career. Not everybody has to hit 20 home runs. He's going to be a better than average second baseman offensively and hopefully average defensively. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Madrigal now has a 117 wRC+ and is on pace for 3.0 fWAR over the full season.  If he can tighten up the defense a bit further he will be a pretty nice little player.

Stone mentioned something about him making an adjustment with how he stands in the batters box tonight.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

Stone mentioned something about him making an adjustment with how he stands in the batters box tonight.

I wonder when that adjustment was made. The first 2 weeks of May saw Madrigal hitting with a sub 500 OPS, look where he is now in the last 30 games. Crazy good production lately. Madrigal leading off in front of Tim would be an interesting play:

Madrigal

Anderson

Moncada

Abreu

Grandal

Mercedes

Vaughn

Garcia

Mendick/Hamilton

That is a lineup worth putting out there for a few games to see how it clicks.

Madrigal.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, WhiteSoxFan1993 said:

I think Madrigal works better behind TA rather than in front. TA is faster and better base runner and Madrigal is a better hit/run guy.

Thats true, either way I would like to see Madrigal spend more time in top whether it be 1 or 2. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without Eloy/Robert, the lineup is kind of a free for all but when this team is right, Madrigal should be in the #9 spot.

Players Madrigal is currently outslugging (minimum 100 PAs) - Vaughn, Moncada, Grandal and Eaton.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, harkness99 said:

he has gotten better lately at 2nd then earlier in the year - some of these "runs saved" stats that everyone accepts now are a bit of a head scratcher to me.

the new era of subjective stats.

What are you getting at? That you don't understand them and are therefore BS or just don't understand? 

  • Like 1
  • Fire 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Baron said:

What are you getting at? That you don't understand them and are therefore BS or just don't understand? 

And here I thought we passed the point of mocking people who disagree with some metrics by saying they "don't understand them" like 10 years ago. Oh well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Baron said:

What are you getting at? That you don't understand them and are therefore BS or just don't understand? 

I understand it fine... Sabermetrics are interesting but some of them really try to statistically prove things that fall into the realm of opinion.

runs saved isn't a meaningless stat - it's just also subjective in some way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Greg Hibbard said:

Runs saved seems very situational, doesn’t it? If Madrigal’s defensive range costs a hit on a play where the Sox are up big or down big, it’s seemingly inconsequential to the result. Am I wrong in that assumption?

sure, but that's not measuring his talent. 

"runs saved" is basically just some translation of outs to runs.  Tango has the math done and so do many others.  But you don't need a degree in stats to see that Madrigal is a mediocre 2B at best.  Maybe he can get better, but it's going to take a lot of work.  To be fair, he's really still a rookie and many rookies to improve defensively, even mediocre tools ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, harkness99 said:

I understand it fine... Sabermetrics are interesting but some of them really try to statistically prove things that fall into the realm of opinion.

runs saved isn't a meaningless stat - it's just also subjective in some way.

It isn't totally accurate -- or, more precisely, it doesn't track 1:1 with what it attempts to measure -- but it isn't at all "subjective."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, chitownsportsfan said:

sure, but that's not measuring his talent. 

"runs saved" is basically just some translation of outs to runs.  Tango has the math done and so do many others.  But you don't need a degree in stats to see that Madrigal is a mediocre 2B at best.  Maybe he can get better, but it's going to take a lot of work.  To be fair, he's really still a rookie and many rookies to improve defensively, even mediocre tools ones.

i will say that madrigal has been better than he was earlier in the year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Eminor3rd said:

It isn't totally accurate -- or, more precisely, it doesn't track 1:1 with what it attempts to measure -- but it isn't at all "subjective."

by subjective i mean its based on the analysis on what a better than average play is... ect ect.

I know they try to break it down into parts but its still trying to quantify an opinion of what these plays are.... 

This isn't new to baseball.. i mean if an error is made, people will often disagree if it was an error or not.   

I'm not saying it has no value by any means.

 

Link to comment
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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...