Email
PrintComments
Hey look 43%
of non Mariner fans who read Tango’s blog think that Vidro will OPS .700 the rest of the year. And this is really a testament to the strength of reputation in this sport; Vidro was a good hitter five years ago, so people still give him the benefit of the doubt.
by Bearskin Rugburn on Jul 11, 2008 9:54 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It's more a testament to regression to the mean.
Vidro sucks, but he’s not a true-talent .600 OPS hitter.
BABIP, 2007: .342 and not sustainable
BABIP, 2008: .233 and not sustainable
.700 is a completely reasonable projection for the rest of the season. His LD% is at 18.9, so that BABIP should be somewhere around .300.
I can’t believe I’m defending Jose Vidro. But there it is.
by Teej on Jul 11, 2008 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dunno', I think it's entirely possible that he's done for.
by acblue on Jul 11, 2008 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sure.
His K’s are up, his walks are down. I imagine he’s close to done.
I’m just saying .700 is about where the projection should be. Somewhere between last year and the first half of this year.
Says Dave Cameron:
Marcel, CHONE, and ZIPS all had Vidro projected around a .740 OPS heading into this year, thanks to a pretty significant regression from his flukey BABIP last year. 250 miserable at-bats at this age have to have knocked him down to a true talent .700 to .720 OPS.
by Teej on Jul 11, 2008 10:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you take his stats, regress them, and apply a generic age adjustment,
Vidro is something like a true talent 269/.333/.374 hitter. The great thing about this poll is that M’s fans who watch him every day may see something, scouting wise, that others don’t. I’m curious to see if the non-M’s-fans think he’s about what his regressed stats say he is and if the M’s fans think he’s much worse—and who’s right.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jul 14, 2008 6:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The problem is that the "generic age adjustment" doesn't really apply to everyone
Certain skillsets do not degrade slowly with age, they completely and suddenly collapse.
by OlSalty on Jul 14, 2008 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He is not an MLB player
He doesn’t hit the ball hard, most of his contact results in 14 hoppers to the secondbaseman, rarely hits LDs, or hard FBs. Of course all this is said with disclaimer of having to statistical evidence to back it up—but it feels like he hasn’t hit a line drive in months.
by JI on Jul 14, 2008 8:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I were voting in the poll - which I'm not - I'd say that he's worse that a .700 OPS
His bat just looks ridiculously slow, and he has no footspeed whatsoever. But, his regressed stats say one thing and our eyes say something else. That’s what makes this interesting.
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jul 15, 2008 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We're also more pissed off at him than non-M's fans
So that’s going to skew the results, probably more than any special scouting knowledge we may have.
by Graham on Jul 15, 2008 10:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not that we can really prove anything with an n=1
by Jeff on Jul 14, 2008 9:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
r^2 = 1, too!
That’s why I said I was curious, not “this will make it into the next issue of Nature!”
Children, until we have taught them better, will be perfectly happy with a seasonal round of games in which conkers succeeds hopscotch.
by salb918 on Jul 15, 2008 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
