Author Topic: Michael Taylor superstar  (Read 35757 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline varoadking

  • Posts: 19398
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #100: July 01, 2015, 11:52:23 AM »
I believe in Werth too but he is too slow now. Turner has the potential to become an elite leadoff hitter. Espinosa has the speed and the bat now. He doesn't take a lot of walks, but starting off games with doubles is just as good as a walk and a SB.

Espinosa is second on the team in walks with 23, with a walk to AB rate of more than 1 in 10.

Offline dracnal

  • Posts: 1012
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #101: July 01, 2015, 01:08:34 PM »
Espinosa is second on the team in walks with 23, with a walk to AB rate of more than 1 in 10.

Imagine rewording this statement and making it in February:

'I predict by July, Espinosa will be second on the with walks and a walk to AB rate of more than 1 in 10.'

Can anyone come up with a similarly reworked phrase about any stat for this current year that would have been ridiculed more deeply?

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 18809
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #102: July 01, 2015, 01:12:38 PM »
Imagine rewording this statement and making it in February:

'I predict by July, Espinosa will be second on the with walks and a walk to AB rate of more than 1 in 10.'

Can anyone come up with a similarly reworked phrase about any stat for this current year that would have been ridiculed more deeply?

Ian desmond will be hitting .222/.266/.352 while playing the worst defense at short stop in the majors

Offline NJ Ave

  • Posts: 3037
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #103: July 01, 2015, 01:55:25 PM »
Can anyone come up with a similarly reworked phrase about any stat for this current year that would have been ridiculed more deeply?

Max Scherzer will break out of his fragile human form to become a demi-god.

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 9088
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #104: July 01, 2015, 01:57:57 PM »
Ian desmond will be hitting .222/.266/.352 while playing the worst defense at short stop in the majors
... and on pace for 192 strikeouts.

Offline Monarch

  • Posts: 534
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #105: July 01, 2015, 02:40:21 PM »
Ian desmond will be hitting .222/.266/.352 while playing the worst defense at short stop in the majors

I would been skeptical with this proclamation, but I would have added that I wouldn't be surprised either. my whole thing with him before the season was "let him hit 30 HR and 100 RBI and then let someone else pay for it afterward." I still hope I'm correct on the later part of that statement.

Offline Ali the Baseball Cat

  • Posts: 14372
  • babble on
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #106: July 01, 2015, 02:43:21 PM »
The transcendental wizardry that resides in the bullpen will compensate for the weakness of the rotation

Offline whytev

  • Posts: 8768
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #107: July 01, 2015, 06:11:21 PM »
Espinosa is second on the team in walks with 23, with a walk to AB rate of more than 1 in 10.

Great! It's hard to get used to new Danny.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35048
  • Champs!
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #108: July 07, 2015, 03:33:40 PM »
Taylor up to top 5 in UZR now. Third highest WAR on the team behind Harper and Danny.

Offline Elvir Ovcina

  • Posts: 1834
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #109: July 07, 2015, 06:13:56 PM »
Werth could become a DH on an AL team

Last year's Werth, yes.  Not so much for this year's edition.  The big problem would obviously be the contract, both in terms of the money and the full no-trade clause Werth would need to waive.  The longer he stays out with the injury, too, the worse it would be to try to move him.  Curious if your view has changed on this post in the month-plus since you wrote it.

Offline Matugi

  • Posts: 3494
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #110: July 10, 2015, 01:02:12 PM »
If he had enough games played at a singular position Taylor would almost assuredly win the GG this year.  He's an UZR of 12.2 this year, good enough for fourth in the majors.

Offline whytev

  • Posts: 8768
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #111: July 10, 2015, 10:26:57 PM »
If he had enough games played at a singular position Taylor would almost assuredly win the GG this year.  He's an UZR of 12.2 this year, good enough for fourth in the majors.

Okay, let's not pretend the gold glove award is rational.

Offline Matugi

  • Posts: 3494
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #112: July 16, 2015, 03:15:15 PM »
Taylor is now second among all outfielders in fdWAR (13.6, based on UZR) and first in the NL.  Absolutely elite defender at this point in the season.

Offline Truconfidence

  • Posts: 2793
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #113: July 16, 2015, 04:13:08 PM »
His ability to now hit the off speed pitches that has happened over the last month has been amazing to watch. I can't wait till he has a balanced approach to maybe take some walks. Lol

Offline BeltwayBaseball

  • Posts: 926
  • I want to get off Ted & Mark's Wild Ride
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #114: July 16, 2015, 04:19:19 PM »
Taylor is now second among all outfielders in fdWAR (13.6, based on UZR) and first in the NL.  Absolutely elite defender at this point in the season.

This is what makes his high-power, high-speed, but low-OBP and high-K offense acceptable. Unlike Ian Desmond.

Not to mention the clutch factor. The broadcasters have touted it a handful of times this year that Taylor's homers have all either given the Nats the lead or a tie late in game, like the one in New York or the grand slam in Arizona. He's had other clutch singles, doubles, walks etc too.

Offline Matugi

  • Posts: 3494
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #115: July 16, 2015, 04:25:07 PM »
He's a perfect bottom of the order guy.  Never gonna be great contact but he's someone you absolutely need in your lineup because of his defense a la Billy Hamilton or Juan Lagares.

Offline dracnal

  • Posts: 1012
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #116: July 16, 2015, 04:25:12 PM »
I still have trouble with the whole 'clutch' thing.  I think it's one of the quintessential areas where confirmation bias will entrench that view of someone regardless of the evidence.

ie MAT is clutch, so any time he doesn't deliver in a high pressure situation it's 'a good ballplayer still fails at the plate 7 out of 10 times' while someone not clutch (Harper haters, I'm looking at you) gets 'Even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally.'

The number of situations where 'clutchness' applies are just too darned statistically small to mean anything.  How many PAs in a season does a guy have where 'clutch' is a factor?  I'm sure Baseball Almanac or one of the other stat mining sites can spit out the statistical average number of times a season a player comes to the plate with RISP and 2 outs, team behind by at least one but no more than three runs, and compare the BA for the league as a whole in that situation to any given individual, but while that will give you a statistically significant average for MLB as a whole, I think it's just too small for anyone given batter to make any conclusion.

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 24062
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #117: July 16, 2015, 04:33:18 PM »
After the Souza ---> Devon White discussion in the Former Nats thread, I looked up White's comps on Baseball-Reference.  Both he and Mike Cameron have two common comps - Chet Lemon and Brady Anderson - in their top 10.  White's closest comp is Amos Otis.  Cameron's is Jim Wynn. 

I'd love it if Michael Taylor could have a career like any of those guys, but I wonder who he is closest to.  We've always said Cameron, but I don't know if the build is the same.  Maybe Chet Lemon.  Taylor is an inch taller than Cameron and the same weight.  I'm guessing he'll end up bigger than Cameron, but since he's already  24, I don't know how much more he'll put on.  White is an inch shorter and 40 pounds lighter. Lemon 2 inches shorter than taylor and 20 pounds lighter, but, given the height difference, might be another comp for Taylor. 20 HR power, +/- 4, for most of his career with < 5-10 SBs.  Fewer Ks, but that is probably era.  Cameron is probably closer.
Anyone think 15 -  25 HRs and very good defense in CF without a stellar OBP or average is what we'll end up with?

Offline Matugi

  • Posts: 3494
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #118: July 16, 2015, 04:40:58 PM »
I think he'll be a career .260/.315/.425 guy with 20/20 potential and lots of strikeouts but will win 3-4 gold gloves in his time here.  Basically he can probably top out at a 4.5-5.0 WAR guy

Offline whytev

  • Posts: 8768
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #119: July 17, 2015, 02:52:18 AM »
Anyone think 15 -  25 HRs and very good defense in CF without a stellar OBP or average is what we'll end up with?

Yes. And sooner than you think. But replace "very good" with "world class."

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 24062
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #120: July 17, 2015, 09:28:42 AM »
He has to get to the low 20s% in his K rate and a BB rate closer to 10% in order to be a major force offensively. Do that, and he can be a 20/20 guy.

Offline Smithian

  • Posts: 8657
  • Team America 2017
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #121: July 17, 2015, 09:41:16 AM »
Still not sure about him as a CF, but I think he is the perfect 4th OF. Can play in the middle or corner defensively and has shown he can carry his weight offensively if called upon for long stretches. I like him off the bench. I like him as a pinch hitter since he has shown he can put one over the wall.

If Span commands too much money it wouldn't be a total disaster to start Taylor next season.

Offline NJ Ave

  • Posts: 3037
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #122: July 17, 2015, 09:42:09 AM »
He has to get to the low 20s% in his K rate and a BB rate closer to 10% in order to be a major force offensively. Do that, and he can be a 20/20 guy.

What are we considering a "major force offensively"? Span has basically been a top-40 offensive player for the last 2 years, when healthy. I don't know if that's realistic for Taylor, but that's what I'd consider a "major force offensively".

I think he can settle safely into a "positive offensive player" role and still be a huge contributor because of his defense. He can do that without *too* much improvement on his walk and K rates, if the changes he makes allow him to tap into more of his power. Guys like Ozuna, Desmond, Byrd have been productive offensively recently with that profile. When you add in Taylor's defense he could be a 3.5 win player just as a neutral offensive player.

But I agree it would be nice if his approach improved more than that.

Offline Matugi

  • Posts: 3494
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #123: July 17, 2015, 09:57:00 AM »
Still not sure about him as a CF, but I think he is the perfect 4th OF. Can play in the middle or corner defensively and has shown he can carry his weight offensively if called upon for long stretches. I like him off the bench. I like him as a pinch hitter since he has shown he can put one over the wall.

If Span commands too much money it wouldn't be a total disaster to start Taylor next season.

At this point in their respective careers Taylor's defense is far better than Span's.

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 24062
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
Re: Michael Taylor superstar
« Reply #124: July 17, 2015, 10:02:37 AM »
NJ Ave - I'm thinking of a Mike Cameron (11% BB, 24% K for career, .195 ISO, close to .340 OBP) type of player.  Maybe that is  an unfair comparison.  In his prime, Cameron was a 25 SB guy.  You are probably right that it is too much to expect.  Add that with stellar defense from age 24 to 30, and that is a star.

Taylor had that kind of walk rate in the high minors (2012 A+ on up). The K rate only started to push over 25% last year in AA and AAA.  Granted, better pitchers, so not to unusual.  If he were an 8% BB / 25% K guy, I'd really think we'd be in for some 5 WAR years.