Another Jimmy thing
I feel like I have written about 10 defenses of Jimmy Rollins over the last calendar year, but the short stop's wherewithall as a leadoff hitter was a topic of conversation again today, so I ended up writing about why he is STILL the proper choice to hit at the top of the lineup in a column that will hit the paper tomorrow (and the website shortly before). Clarification: I actually think Chase Utley would be a pretty darn good leadoff hitter, but that ain't happening.
Another Jimmy thing
David Murphy, Daily News Staff Writer
I feel like I have written about 10 defenses of Jimmy Rollins over the last calendar year, but the short stop's wherewithall as a leadoff hitter was a topic of conversation again today, so I ended up writing about why he is STILL the proper choice to hit at the top of the lineup in a column that will hit the paper tomorrow (and the website shortly before). Clarification: I actually think Chase Utley would be a pretty darn good leadoff hitter, but that ain't happening.
Anyway, tomorrow you can read all about why Rollins will and should be leading off instead of Ben Revere. Today, I'll leave you with the Jimmy things that did not get into the paper.
My favorite is that Ben Revere is now "Tootsie Pop."
On whether the Phillies have improved enough to catch the Nationals: "Adams, the two Youngs. Unfortunately the one is not going to start the season with us right away, but we did what we needed to do. We just needed to fill a couple of holes and get the other guys back healthy, and we've done that. Adams is going to be huge from what he's done and being able to continue that, it's going to be great. Mikey Young, he's just a professional hitter, as sarge would say. The little man out in center field, Tootsie Pop, Ben Revere, he's going to bring that energy. Shane left, and we've got a guy who can come in and steal bags, so we don't miss a beat there. It's different, but it's a great dynamic what we have now. It's a good feeling. As you can see, it's nice and calm. Last year, everybody was uncertain. There's a lot more certainty around here."
On him saying last year that if the Phillies were healthy the Nationals were a second-place team: "Yes, but it doesn’t matter. That was last year. And this year is different. Nothing has changed in our mentality or my mentality about how I feel about where this team should be or will be. The players we have, I like it. I was talking to Charlie, the bullpen is good. The lineup has an opportunity to be real deep. Play some good quality baseball on both sides, the mental side of the game, it’s going to be a fun team."
On what they have to do to chase down the Nationals: "Nothing. Nobody is in first place. No one is in last place. So, when the season starts everybody is 0-0. Play some good quality baseball, we’ll be right where we need to be."
On the importance of having a healthy Howard, Utley and Halladay: "Very big. Those are three huge pieces of the puzzle. But not only that, have Cliff have a little bit of luck this year. If those guys are healthy you know they’re going to perform. Their track record shows it. Unfortunately, when they’re not healthy the track record shows for that, too. But they look good. Chase I knows feel good, Ryan, I got to work out with him in the offseason before we started all of this, he was loking and feeling good, his weight is at a place where his legs can handle it. And everybody is in the right mindframe. We’r e acomplete team. We’re not going out there with role players. We’re going out there with everyday players, every game. And that’s the plan right now until that changes."
On what he would say to folks who say Phillies are an old team and their best days are behind them: "Well, half of it is true. We’re definitely an older team, especially when you look around our division. Are the better days behind us? It’s going to be sunny in Philly when we get there. It looks like some pretty good days ahead of us for me."
On the young players fighting for roster spots: "They're good. When I was there, we had young talent, but not really the veteran guys who had success. They were going from the twilight years into the light and weren't really able to stick around for this. I was able to be here through it all. We weren't a bad team at all when I came up, we were just third to the Mets and Braves and a long ways back. These guys have seen us win, have an opportunity to make a name for themselves so that when we are gone, they can keep that tradition going. That would be something nice around here. That isn't something we've had around here. Teams have this short span, and then they are bad for a long time. That's not the direction this organization wants to go. We've been there and the fans have been through that, and that's not fun for anybody."
On whether he thinks any of the young players can have a breakout season: "I hope they all do. I hope they all are in the running for some kind of special award at the end of the year. Darin Ruf, what he did last year between the beginning of the season and through winter ball -- 52 home runs -- I wonder what he can do if he gets a whole season up here if he makes the squad. Domonic has had some opportunities, but not a true opportunity to just go out there and play. It's always, 'You can't do this, you can't do that.' Then he got hurt, went back to Triple-A, came back up. So he was doing the yo-yo. Whoever makes the squad and gets in the outfield gets to go out there and play every day. You give them a real look and find out if they can play at this level."
On Jayson Werth's comments that the Nationals are the most complete team he has ever played on: "He's probably right. We had some teams here that found ways to win, but we were by no means a complete team. We found ways to get the job done, to compensate for our shortcomings. He's over there, he knows his players, the talent level. He should be excited."
- Talk about being in "mid-season form" -- your right there with this one, advanta! Anytime you have a guy like Rollins that shows that kind of pop in his bat, he should be hitting in the 5 or 6 hole. I might go as low as 7 on this team. And, it makes even more sense when you bring a guy like Revere, a solid candidate to lead off, on board. But, like you said, the "chomper" is ultimately content to continue his bromance with Rollins, to the detriment of the team. That's one of Manuel's greatest faults, other than the fact that he couldn't manage to turn a profit with a lemonade stand in Hell.
This year is different...Phildelphia Sport's Team's motto: forgot - don't expect any different results!— STEPHEN1988- They have a term for that for those that DO expect different results when doing the same thing over and over again -- it's called insanity or, in this case with Amaro, incompetency.
- Out of the 16 NL leadoff hitters in 2012, Rollins had the...
9th highest OBP
6th highest OPS
3rd highest walk rate
2nd lowest strikeout rate
Even if you include his popups with his strikeouts, the combination would still be one of the lowest among NL leadoff hitters.
Rollins is not the ideal leadoff hitter, but I can't think of a single starter the Phillies have had in recent years who would have fit better in the leadoff spot than where they actually hit.— schmenkman - You can't? I can. His name was Juan Pierre and he played for us last year. You conveniently left him out of the discussion and I know you know better. Pierre hit over .307 with an OBP of .351 and 37 stolen bases. Rollins hit .250 with a .316 OBP and 30 stolen bases. There goes that theory. Amaro, in his ultimate "wisdom" decided to let Pierre go. Another brilliant move by the boy genius.
- ghost -- this has been asked before and apparently Pierre is the only one that comes to mind. If you think of any others, let us know.
So this was Pierre at the start of the 2012 season:
- barely made the team, most people thought he shouldn't have
- coming off a season with .657 OPS and .329 OBP
You're saying that despite this, and despite the fact that he was expected to play every day, they should have made him the leadoff hitter.
Or should they have made Pierre the leadoff hitter AFTER Rollins started hitting well in May? From early May on, Rollins was the much better hitter overall, and there wasn't much difference in their OBP (.324 vs. .342).
And assuming Pierre wouldn't play every day, you would then shuffle the lineup vs. LHPs, and who would lead off then? And all for what kind of improvement?
Pierre ended up having a good year last year, and we should be grateful for it. But it was only the second year out of the last 8 in which he wasn't a way below average hitter. It's great that the Phillies got that out of him, but at the age of 35, the chances he would repeat it are pretty slim, and I am not surprised they let him go.— schmenkman - ...and despite the fact that he was NOT expected to play every day...— schmenkman
- In this lead-off hitter debate, it is worth noting that Charlie Manuel values having a guy with some power hitting at the top of the lineup. In some ways, it makes sense. Basically, he doesn't want to see a lineup with solid 7 and 8 hitters left on base, in scoring position after a pitcher sac bunts, for example, because the lead-off guy lacks the power to get them home consistently. While I tend to be more traditional and favor a more prototypical slap-hitting lead-off hitter, having some power in that spot does make sense with the way the Phillies' lineup is usually constructed.— OutofTownPhillyFan
- @schmenkman: I tried 5 times to respond to your post. I'll just say this. Check you stats again regarding Pierre being a "way below average hitter" for 6 out of the last 8 years. If you regard nothing less than a .275 average since 2000 as "way below average", please compare Rollins BA with Pierre's, take 2 aspirin, and call me in the morning.
- @ghost, if you're of the opinion that batting average is all you need to know about a hitter, then I might as well quit now and leave you to your devices.
But surely you've at least heard rumors that batting average might not be the be-all and end-all. That it doesn't tell you how much a player gets on base because it ignores walks. That it treats every hit the same, whether it's single or extra base hit. When you look at all of a hitter's contributions at the plate, then absolutely -- Pierre has been a way below average hitter in 6 of the last 8 years.— schmenkman - @schmenkman: Nice try, but it wasn't all about BA. YOU'RE the one that mentioned BA. Go back and read my original post, which you are now ignoring. Pierre had Rollins in BA, OBP, and SB. EXACTLY what you're looking for in a lead off hitter. Stop trying to do the end run around the stats as they exist. Look them up for yourself. And stop repeating that Pierre was a "way below average hitter." That is a fabrication. In your words, "I'll leave you to your devices."
- ghost, I never mentioned BA until you used it to claim that Pierre wasn't below average.
Now that we at least seem to agree that there is more to hitting than batting average, there are a couple of comprehensive hitting stats we can use to see how good Pierre has been.
One is the more mainstream OPS, and then OPS , which normalizes it for the league (100=league average, 101= 1% better, etc.)
The more accurate hitting stat is wOBA, and then wRC normalizes that for the league and player's home park.
I'll list for OPS and wRC for Pierre from 2001 (his first year as a regular), until 2012:
OPS 89, 69, 94, 107, 84, 82, 77, 75, 105, 79, 78, 95
wRC 91, 64, 100, 111, 83, 81, 82, 76, 106, 80, 79, 99
OPS can be found by googling "pierre baseball reference"
wRC can be found by googling "pierre fangraphs"— schmenkman - schmenkman, as long as you're "Googling", complete stats on both players can be found by Googling "Juan Pierre's Stats" and "Jimmy Rollins Stats", both of which pull up links of interest (2nd and 3rd links listed) from ESPN. There is where you (and others that would like to see which one of our arguments hold water) will get the whole picture.
- schmenkman: by the way, use "Yahoo" and not "Google". That's what I use and will give you the correct order of the links I mentioned.
- fyi, there were "plus" signs in my last comment which apparently got stripped off by the editor. The headings to the left of the numbers are OPS plus and wRC plus.
I'm a little baffled as to why you pointed me to the espn stats, since those basic stats would be included wherever one looked, including baseball reference and fangraphs.— schmenkman
