Torii Hunter

[NorthSideSox72]

I never get the logic of putting your worst hitter leadoff because he's resembles somewhat of a leadoff hitter. You want to give the most plate appearances to your worst hitter? That makes no sense. Why not just bat them 9th, move everyone else up a spot, and give the most PA to a good hitter? Afterall, the only inning that they truly are a leadoff batter is the 1st. If you don't have a true and quality leadoff hitter, don't force it. Hunter leading off the game is a hell of a lot more dangerous than Richar, and ultimately will create more runs over the course of the season.

1. I don't think Richar would be the worst hitter in that lineup. Uribe would be. I think Richar can be a reasonably high OBP guy, which is what I'd want in a leadoff hitter more than anything else.

 

2. The whole point of my posts about this, as I stated, were that there was no real leadoff hitter in there. Did you miss that part?

 

3. You would put Hunter there? And who at #2? I don't think Hunter is a bad idea there, mind you.

 

[hitlesswonder]

If we did pick up Jenkins and Hunter for LF and CF, that makes for a serious lineup of hitters, but... no real leadoff guy

 

That's just it isn't it? Don't you think if the Sox sign Hunter, Owens will be the LF? That's why KW said Fields is likely ticketed for AAA. That's why Fields isn't playing LF in the AFL. The Sox believe they have to have a speedy leadoff-man, and so they're going waste LF on Owens (or maybe Shannon Stewart) while shelling out $80M for a .330 OBP player to man CF.

 

If the plan is Owens & Hunter, it's an absolutely insipid offseason plan. The Sox biggest offensive failing is their lack of OBP, especially at the top of the order. And the solution appears to be using $80M to do make that not better at all. It's a huge misallocation of resources. They're going to spend a ton of money to give the most at-bats to the guys that make the most outs. I can't imagine any other organization in baseball being this stupid.

[sircaffey]

1. I don't think Richar would be the worst hitter in that lineup. Uribe would be. I think Richar can be a reasonably high OBP guy, which is what I'd want in a leadoff hitter more than anything else.

 

2. The whole point of my posts about this, as I stated, were that there was no real leadoff hitter in there. Did you miss that part?

 

3. You would put Hunter there? And who at #2? I don't think Hunter is a bad idea there, mind you.

 

1. Yes, I agree with you there. But the potential is definitely there that Richar could be the worst hitter in that lineup.

 

2. I know what you were talking about, I was just talking more in general. Not really directly to you, although I did quote your post.

 

3. I don't care who bats 2nd. The only time he's really batting "#2" is the first inning. The rest of the game you have Richar batting #1 (even though he's 9th), Hunter bats #2, and so on. I garauntee a first 3 of Hunter, Thome, Konerko would score more 1st inning runs (and more runs over the course of the season) than Richar/Hunter/Thome. That's the point.

Edited November 8, 2007 by sircaffey

[Balta1701]

3. I don't care who bats 2nd. The only time he's really batting "#2" is the first inning. The rest of the game you have Richar batting #1 (even though he's 9th), Hunter bats #2, and so on. I garauntee a first 3 of Hunter, Thome, Konerko would score more 1st inning runs than Richar/Hunter/Thome. That's the point.

With our lineup though, that's not the issue at all. The issue is going to be that they'll always be hitting in front of Thome and Konerko. Which means they better either be getting on base a lot, because those 2 knock the ball out of the park a lot, or they better be getting either themselves or the person in front of them into scoring position, because those 2 guys are really good at driving folks in. If Hunter has a .330 OBP and it's Uribe, Hunter, then Thome, then I'm afraid Big Jim is going to be mashing a lot of solo shots.

[southsideirish71]

With our lineup though, that's not the issue at all. The issue is going to be that they'll always be hitting in front of Thome and Konerko. Which means they better either be getting on base a lot, because those 2 knock the ball out of the park a lot, or they better be getting either themselves or the person in front of them into scoring position, because those 2 guys are really good at driving folks in. If Hunter has a .330 OBP and it's Uribe, Hunter, then Thome, then I'm afraid Big Jim is going to be mashing a lot of solo shots.

 

The only thing having him in front of Thome would be the amount of fastballs he would see. Hunter is a dead fastball hitter and would benefit from that. However his patience would not make him a good fit at number 2.

 

[sircaffey]

The difference between an order that goes 1-2-3 of Richar-Hunter-Thome and an order that goes 9-1-2 of Richar-Hunter-Thome is that Richar gets 18 more PA than Hunter, 36 more than Thome, and so on over a whole season (every spot in the lineup is worth roughly 18 PA). Richar gets basically 100 more PA in the leadoff spot than in the 9th spot over the course of the season, yet he bats in the same spot relative to everyone else in the order in both cases.

 

Now if Richar develops into a good hitter, it would be worth it to keep him there to give Hunter-Thome-etc PA with runners on, but putting speed guy there just for the sake he is speedy, hurts the run production of the team.

[sircaffey]

With our lineup though, that's not the issue at all. The issue is going to be that they'll always be hitting in front of Thome and Konerko. Which means they better either be getting on base a lot, because those 2 knock the ball out of the park a lot, or they better be getting either themselves or the person in front of them into scoring position, because those 2 guys are really good at driving folks in. If Hunter has a .330 OBP and it's Uribe, Hunter, then Thome, then I'm afraid Big Jim is going to be mashing a lot of solo shots.

 

Jim is going to mashing solo homers no matter what. This team's OBP is not it's strong suit. All you can do to maximize Thome's run production would be to get him more PA. (unless KW pulls a rabbit out of his hat that can get on base 35% of the time)

Edited November 8, 2007 by sircaffey

[sircaffey]

Jim is going to hit HR no matter what, you are correct. They don't, however, have to all be solo shots. It's up to Kenny to make that happen.

 

Well, obviously, but none of the names really floating around would solve this problem and we aren't really flooded with trading chips. With Hunter, there is nothing we can really do to help Thome hit more HR with runners on besides hitting Konerko ahead of him, and then Konerko has the same problem. It sucks, I know. For all this "speed, fundamentals" crap Ozzie and KW have been preaching, we are 2001-2004 just with a different set of hitters.

[RockRaines]

I'd actually like Luke Scott in the #2 spot......

[hitlesswonder]

Well, obviously, but none of the names really floating around would solve this problem and we aren't really flooded with trading chips. With Hunter, there is nothing we can really do to help Thome hit more HR with runners on besides hitting Konerko ahead of him, and then Konerko has the same problem. It sucks, I know. For all this "speed, fundamentals" crap Ozzie and KW have been preaching, we are 2001-2004 just with a different set of hitters.

 

Well, picking up a guy that has a .350 OBP shouldn't be that damn hard. Luke Scott shouldn't cost much. If the Nats sign a CF Church should be available. Mark Loretta is old as rock but should be good for a .350 OBP (although not much else). Same with Iguchi.

 

Putting Owens and Hunter at one and two would be an OBP disaster.

[GreatScott82]

Okay saying is if we do indeed get Hunter and with Uribe coming back, the only open spot for a leadoff hitter is LF.. this being the assumption that Crede will be dealt.. (Boras turned down any sort of negotiations with KW this offseason on a Crede extension). So the time is now to trade Crede.. hopefully for that leadoff hitter and maybe some pen help.

[NorthSideSox72]

Well, picking up a guy that has a .350 OBP shouldn't be that damn hard. Luke Scott shouldn't cost much. If the Nats sign a CF Church should be available. Mark Loretta is old as rock but should be good for a .350 OBP (although not much else). Same with Iguchi.

 

Putting Owens and Hunter at one and two would be an OBP disaster.

While Owens is not my first choice by any means, I wouldn't call him an OBP disaster either. I don't think .350 is out of his reach. .330-.340 is probably more realistic, though.

 

[Kalapse]

I'll take Kosuke Fukudome in one of the top 2 spots.

[NorthSideSox72]

I'll take Kosuke Fukudome in one of the top 2 spots.

Did we ever learn more about his injury issue, though?

 

[elrockinMT]

We are excited aren't we about Hunter? We may have the inside track right now, but you have to wonder about the money and years. And there ain't no hometown discount I am pretty sure. Plus we need to get some middle relief pitchers. But, they might not be all that expensive.

[sircaffey]

Well, picking up a guy that has a .350 OBP shouldn't be that damn hard. Luke Scott shouldn't cost much. If the Nats sign a CF Church should be available. Mark Loretta is old as rock but should be good for a .350 OBP (although not much else). Same with Iguchi.

 

Putting Owens and Hunter at one and two would be an OBP disaster.

 

One would think you could. However, I don't have much faith in KW to get us one. I really think Owens did enough for Kenny and Oz to justify him leading off. As much as I pray I am wrong, I think we sign Hunter, we have our starting OF (and that does not include Fields in LF).

[Vance Law]

Well, picking up a guy that has a .350 OBP shouldn't be that damn hard. Luke Scott shouldn't cost much. If the Nats sign a CF Church should be available. Mark Loretta is old as rock but should be good for a .350 OBP (although not much else). Same with Iguchi.

 

How many more times do you think a guy with a .350 OBP gets on base compared to a guy with a .330 OBP?

In 600 plate appearances.......12 more times in the whole season. That is 2 more times per month.

 

So with Thome hitting home runs in, let's give him, 6% of his plate appearances. How many solo shots is Thome expected to hit with the .330 OBP guy leading off that would have been 2-run shots with the .350 guy? 1.

 

[Steve9347]

Okay saying is if we do indeed get Hunter and with Uribe coming back, the only open spot for a leadoff hitter is LF..

Scott Podsednik.

 

Yup. It'll happen.

[hitlesswonder]

How many more times do you think a guy with a .350 OBP gets on base compared to a guy with a .330 OBP?

In 600 plate appearances.......12 more times in the whole season. That is 2 more times per month.

 

So with Thome hitting home runs in, let's give him, 6% of his plate appearances. How many solo shots is Thome expected to hit with the .330 OBP guy leading off that would have been 2-run shots with the .350 guy? 1.

 

Well, what do we project Owens OBP to be? I'd be shocked if it's over .315ish given a full year of at-bats. The issue isn't just making a few less outs; it seems like the Sox could get 2 guys with .350 OBPs in the 1 & 2 slots instead of .315/.330 for a lot less than $80M. And the offense would be just as good or better. Maybe I'm completely wrong -- someone can go ahead and show me that Ryan Church and Mark Loretta would have far fewer runs created than Owens/Hunter (I suppose it's possible -- Hunter's power is a significant factor).

[CWSGuy406]

How many more times do you think a guy with a .350 OBP gets on base compared to a guy with a .330 OBP?

In 600 plate appearances.......12 more times in the whole season. That is 2 more times per month.

 

So with Thome hitting home runs in, let's give him, 6% of his plate appearances. How many solo shots is Thome expected to hit with the .330 OBP guy leading off that would have been 2-run shots with the .350 guy? 1.

 

I think Hitless' underlying point is that the Sox still -- for whatever reason -- believe that they have to have a "leadoff hitter" on the team. They've made "leadoff hitter" a need even though it shouldn't really be one. Improving the team OBP is one thing, but forcing yourself to get a "leadoff man" is dumb.

 

To apply that to the Sox, they should be trying to get the best possible players at SS/LF/CF. They shouldn't pigeon-hole it by saying that one of those spots have to be occupied by a true leadoff hitter.

 

And that's why I'll be uber-pissed if Josh Fields opens the year in AAA because the organization is too f***ing stupid and has Jerry Owens in LF. I don't care if that means Fields has to open the year in LF with Crede at third, Uribe at short and Hunter in CF. Even if that group is a little low on OBP (they're a lot of low), it wouldn't be a whole lot different from the groups we've seen for the past six-seven years -- lots of homers (good), lots of Ks (bad), relatively low OBP (bad). But the homers themselves will carry the offense to be, at the very least, league average, and probably a little bit better.

[Kalapse]

Did we ever learn more about his injury issue, though?

He's supposed to be 100% by the start of the season.

[Vance Law]

I think Hitless' underlying point is that the Sox still -- for whatever reason -- believe that they have to have a "leadoff hitter" on the team. They've made "leadoff hitter" a need even though it shouldn't really be one. Improving the team OBP is one thing, but forcing yourself to get a "leadoff man" is dumb.

 

To apply that to the Sox, they should be trying to get the best possible players at SS/LF/CF. They shouldn't pigeon-hole it by saying that one of those spots have to be occupied by a true leadoff hitter.

 

And that's why I'll be uber-pissed if Josh Fields opens the year in AAA because the organization is too f***ing stupid and has Jerry Owens in LF. I don't care if that means Fields has to open the year in LF with Crede at third, Uribe at short and Hunter in CF. Even if that group is a little low on OBP (they're a lot of low), it wouldn't be a whole lot different from the groups we've seen for the past six-seven years -- lots of homers (good), lots of Ks (bad), relatively low OBP (bad). But the homers themselves will carry the offense to be, at the very least, league average, and probably a little bit better.

 

I can't possibly imagine Fields starting at AAA with Owens starting in LF. I feel relatively certain that's not going to happen.

 

 

[sircaffey]

I can't possibly imagine Fields starting at AAA with Owens starting in LF. I feel relatively certain that's not going to happen.

 

I'm with you there. I do think the choice here is Crede or Fields, and it has nothing to do with Owens. I don't see Josh in LF next season. I do see him at 3B with Owens in LF, unfortunately.

[Wanne]

I'm with you there. I do think the choice here is Crede or Fields, and it has nothing to do with Owens. I don't see Josh in LF next season. I do see him at 3B with Owens in LF, unfortunately.

 

 

I'd rather have Richar at 2nd and leading off than have Owens as an everyday player.

[DBAHO]

It would be a lot of pressure to put on Richar at such an early stage of his major league career, but at least you know he's got decent plate discipline and a good K/BB ratio, so it wouldn't be the worst move I guess, still he's probably far more suited as an 8th or 9th hitter in the lineup.