Should Austin Kearns be a

Discuss all things Cardinals Baseball
User avatar
Popeye_Card
GRB's most intelligent & humble poster
Posts: 29877
Joined: April 17 06, 11:25 am

Re: Should Austin Kearns be a

Post by Popeye_Card »

haltz wrote:
Popeye_Card wrote:I don't agree that Ludwick is "just as good". Kearns will be 28 this year (entering his "baseball prime"), and at this point you could pretty easily feel comfortable penciling him in for .265/.365/.425 production. In a good year, it could be .285/.385/.475 production pretty easily. Ludwick is a year older, and last year posted a .267/.339/.479 line in mostly cherry-picked AB's. He has maybe a tinge more power, but I'd prefer to have Kearns' OBP.
The pitchers Ludwick faced had a .341/.409 against line, and the pitchers Pujols faced had a .337/.408 line. Woohoo. Ludwick is also 22 mos older than Kearns, and definitely has enough pop to make up for the OBP.
That's not really what I'm talking about. Ludwick was given hand-picked matchups vs. pitchers. He's a fastball hitter. He was placed in games mostly against fastball pitchers. When the situation called for more of a junk hitter, up trots So Taguchi instead. That's what I mean by cherry-picked AB's. Place him in there against pitchers of all types, and his production most likely slips.
If we can lock in Kearns--who is a slightly above average hitter and slightly above average defender at the corners--for $5MM in '08, $8MM in '09, and a $10MM option in '10 by only giving up Reyes
Teams should be tripping and falling over .280 EqA corner outfielders. We just DFA'd one. Granted, the defense is nice, but Ludwick brings that as well.

This really has nothing to do with Reyes as far as I'm concerned.
Kearns is a better player than both Ludwick and J-Rod. Let's not trip up comparing stats of full-time players vs. part-time players.

I speak of Reyes because I assume that's going to be what's asked for. Nats need pitching, and we have a guy that's clearly available in trade.

--P--

User avatar
haltz
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 22034
Joined: November 9 06, 6:45 am
Location: a proud midwestern metropolis

Re: Should Austin Kearns be a

Post by haltz »

Popeye_Card wrote:That's not really what I'm talking about. Ludwick was given hand-picked matchups vs. pitchers. He's a fastball hitter. He was placed in games mostly against fastball pitchers. When the situation called for more of a junk hitter, up trots So Taguchi instead. That's what I mean by cherry-picked AB's. Place him in there against pitchers of all types, and his production most likely slips.
Everyone is a fastball hitter.

Fastballs seen in 2007

Ludwick: 48%
Pujols: 46%
Taguchi: 50%
Let's not trip up comparing stats of full-time players vs. part-time players.
I'm not.

User avatar
Popeye_Card
GRB's most intelligent & humble poster
Posts: 29877
Joined: April 17 06, 11:25 am

Re: Should Austin Kearns be a

Post by Popeye_Card »

haltz wrote:
Let's not trip up comparing stats of full-time players vs. part-time players.
I'm not.
By the numbers you keep posting, you are.

--P--

User avatar
haltz
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 22034
Joined: November 9 06, 6:45 am
Location: a proud midwestern metropolis

Re: Should Austin Kearns be a

Post by haltz »

Popeye_Card wrote:
haltz wrote:
Let's not trip up comparing stats of full-time players vs. part-time players.
I'm not.
By the numbers you keep posting, you are.

--P--
The pitch-type splits and quality of opposition I only posted to respond to your points about usage.

User avatar
Popeye_Card
GRB's most intelligent & humble poster
Posts: 29877
Joined: April 17 06, 11:25 am

Re: Should Austin Kearns be a

Post by Popeye_Card »

haltz wrote:
Popeye_Card wrote:
haltz wrote:
Let's not trip up comparing stats of full-time players vs. part-time players.
I'm not.
By the numbers you keep posting, you are.

--P--
The pitch-type splits and quality of opposition I only posted to respond to your points about usage.
But they tell us absolutely nothing about "usage". The percentage of fastballs one sees doesn't have anything to do with how well he hits them, and the quality of fastballs he does hit.

At some point you have to put the statistics aside, and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of a player. Ludwick is a useful player, but he's likely not a productive full-time MLB hitter.

--P--

User avatar
JL21
NPR & THT Contributor
Posts: 36130
Joined: April 18 06, 7:44 am
Location: Chocolate City

Re: Should Austin Kearns be a

Post by JL21 »

To stray a bit from the Ludwick v. Kearns thing, wouldn't it seem that the OF is set as such?

v. RHP's: Duncan in LF, Edmonds in CF, Ankiel in RF
v. LHP's: Barton in LF, Ankiel and Ludwick in CF/RF

That's not a bad set of OF'ers. None of them are stars but they've all got diverse enough skill sets that you could mix and match them into a reasonably productive, league-average OF with potential for more thanks to Ankiel, Duncan, and Barton (and heck, Edmonds too if he's somehow healthy and can channel '00-'05).

User avatar
haltz
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 22034
Joined: November 9 06, 6:45 am
Location: a proud midwestern metropolis

Re: Should Austin Kearns be a

Post by haltz »

Popeye_Card wrote:But they tell us absolutely nothing about "usage". The percentage of fastballs one sees doesn't have anything to do with how well he hits them, and the quality of fastballs he does hit.
Are you joking? You said Taguchi gets the junkballers and Ludwick gets the fastballers. In fact, it's the opposite. We also have quality of opposition. All of this quantified at bornybits and baseballprospectus. And getting hits off of piped fastballs does not put Ludwick in the minority!
At some point you have to put the statistics aside, and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of a player. Ludwick is a useful player, but he's likely not a productive full-time MLB hitter.
At some point you have to put gut feelings away and rely on statistics. Ludwick is a good player that hasn't gotten much of a shot for various reasons, and is likely to be a productive full-time MLB hitter ... That was easy.

User avatar
JL21
NPR & THT Contributor
Posts: 36130
Joined: April 18 06, 7:44 am
Location: Chocolate City

Re: Should Austin Kearns be a

Post by JL21 »

In fairness re: Taguchi and Ludwick seeing fastballs, do we know the quality of those fastballs? It's one thing to see 50% FB's that average 87-88. It's something else to see 50% that are 91-92.

In some ways, Ludwick is similar to Duncan. He's not the best pure hitter and could use a little more patience, but the guy is country strong and it shows up in these mammoth, light tower shots. Both have surprising speed for their sloth-like bodies. The difference is that Duncan is a little better hitter in general but Ludwick runs circles around him defensively.

User avatar
haltz
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 22034
Joined: November 9 06, 6:45 am
Location: a proud midwestern metropolis

Re: Should Austin Kearns be a

Post by haltz »

RC21 wrote:In fairness re: Taguchi and Ludwick seeing fastballs, do we know the quality of those fastballs? It's one thing to see 50% FB's that average 87-88. It's something else to see 50% that are 91-92.
We know the quality of the pitchers. If Ludwick gets put in against fastball pitchers, it would seem to be their better pitch anyway, right? Maybe that accounts for the flip flop. They throw their B stuff to Ludwick, but Ludwick still creamed fastballs and sliders last year. This all seems like a real reach, and you could say it about absolutely anyone who hasn't gotten his shot at a full-time job.

I'm sure teams have a scouting report on him. They do on everyone. I mean, Ludwick started a ton of games last year, and it's not like you always see scrubs in PH duty.

Faceman
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 4811
Joined: May 23 06, 11:56 am
Location: Memphis, TN

Re: Should Austin Kearns be a

Post by Faceman »

haltz wrote:
Faceman wrote:Why does him being the opposite of the usual platoon guy make him any less of a platoon player?
Because the Cardinals have a ton of left-handed outfielders.

Just because he's hit righties better in a 704-plate appearance split doesn't mean he has reverse splits though.
OK - I don't really understand what you guys are saying here.

Here is what I know.

The Cards have a bunch of LH OF's.

The Cards suck at hitting lefties.

Ludwick, even though Right handed at the bat, hits lefties much worse than he hits righties.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bs ... &year=2007

So, regardless or which side of the plate the OF is hitting from, don't we still need someone who can hit lefties?

Like Kearns?
http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bs ... =kearnau01

Whether he is worth $9MM I don't know. But he and Ludwick aren't the same player. Ludwick is a platoon player even though he is obviously backwards from the normal platoon player.

Post Reply