Underachievers and overachievers in 2009

[Zagi-CRO]

With three weeks left in the season, it’s a fine time to recognize our underachievers and overachievers in 2009!

Overachievers
C
Miguel Montero Diamondbacks
1B
Kendry Morales Angels
2B
Aaron Hill Blue Jays
3B
Pablo Sandoval Giants
SS
Jason Bartlett Rays
RF
Jayson Werth Phillies
CF
Denard Span Twins
LF
Adam Lind Blue Jays
DH
Jason Kubel Twins
SP
Adam Wainwright Cardinals
Scott Feldman Rangers
RP
Andrew Bailey Athletics
David Aardsma Mariners

Underachievers
C
Geovany Soto Cubs
1B
Jason Giambi Rockies
2B
Kelly Johnson Braves
3B
Adrian Beltre Mariners
SS
J.J. Hardy Brewers
RF
Brian Giles Padres
CF
Chris Young Diamondbacks
LF
Randy Winn Giants
DH
Pat Burrell Rays
SP
Fausto Carmona Indians
Francisco Liriano Twins
RP
Brad Lidge Phillies
Manny Corpas Rockies
------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you think about? What's your favorite?

[Rich the Giants fan]

I don't agree with Morales, Sandoval and Lind as overachievers. Span and Hill are borderline as well.

[Rich the Giants fan]

I don't agree with Morales, Sandoval and Lind as overachievers. Span and Hill are borderline as well.

Wainwright doesn't belong either.

[Domenic]

I'm not quite sure why Werth is listed as an overachiever, either:

2008 - .273/.363/.498/.861, 121 OPS+, .301 EQA
2009 - .266/.369/.519/.888, 129 OPS+, .305 EQA

I also don't think that we can call a rookie an overachiever or underachiever - this includes Sandoval and Bailey.

[UnderPressure]

The Giants as a team (overachievers).

[Honus Wagner Rules]

The Giants as a team (overachievers).

No doubt! :hyper:

[STLCards2]

The Giants as a team (overachievers).

Outstanding starting pitching, great defense, solid pen, poor offense in a weaker NL? I would expect that team to range from 10-15 games over .500. Don't see this as overachieving at all.

Wainright has gotten some hit luck this year, yes. However, Wainright was a highly touted guy coming up with the Braves, was traded for then big-shot J.D. Drew, was a lights out playoff closer, and was a very good starter with a few injuries in 2007 and 2008. Not suprising in the least that he is having a great year during his first fully healthy season.

[Rich the Giants fan]

The Giants as a team (overachievers).

Now that I can agree with.

[Rich the Giants fan]

Outstanding starting pitching, great defense, solid pen, poor offense in a weaker NL? I would expect that team to range from 10-15 games over .500. Don't see this as overachieving at all.

Wainright has gotten some hit luck this year, yes. However, Wainright was a highly touted guy coming up with the Braves, was traded for then big-shot J.D. Drew, was a lights out playoff closer, and was a very good starter with a few injuries in 2007 and 2008. Not suprising in the least that he is having a great year during his first fully healthy season.

Great defense? Eh. Renteria is a wreck at short. Velez plays nearly everyday. Fred Lewis occasionally gets to take the field. Cutoff men are routinely missed, especially by Aaron Rowand. Bengie Molina isn't what he used to be, by quite a lot. Pablo Sandoval has been surprisingly competent at third (but is playing first down the stretch), though he's no threat to win a gold glove. Juan Uribe catches most of what's hit at him and has a cannon for an arm, but don't go expecting anything in the way of range.

For a team that's supposed to be based on pitching and defense, I find them to be lacking quite a bit of the former.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Outstanding starting pitching, great defense, solid pen, poor offense in a weaker NL? I would expect that team to range from 10-15 games over .500. Don't see this as overachieving at all.
Huh? At the start of this season you expected the Giants to be 12 games over .500 in mid September and contending for a playoff spot? C'mon now. The Giants were coming off four straight losing seasons. They didn't address the greatest need in the offseason which was a legit power hitter. And there was much dispute over whether Matt Cain, he of the 15-30 W-L record in 2007-08, would ever take the next step. There was much talk of trading Cain for a power hitter. Not one Giant fan that I know was predicting a winning record in '09 (I was hoping for 76 wins myself) but you were expecting the Giants to be good?

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Great defense? Eh. Renteria is a wreck at short. Velez plays nearly everyday. Fred Lewis occasionally gets to take the field. Cutoff men are routinely missed, especially by Aaron Rowand. Bengie Molina isn't what he used to be, by quite a lot. Pablo Sandoval has been surprisingly competent at third (but is playing first down the stretch), though he's no threat to win a gold glove. Juan Uribe catches most of what's hit at him and has a cannon for an arm, but don't go expecting anything in the way of range.

For a team that's supposed to be based on pitching and defense, I find them to be lacking quite a bit of the former.

These Giants sure lack quite of bit of athleticism as well.

[Rich the Giants fan]

Wow, Fangraphs has the Giants listed with the 3rd best team UZR in the majors. I'm not buying that with Donald Trump's money.

[EricAnno]

What about Adam Dunn for overachievers?

Sure, we all expected the stuff that Dunn has become known for, 40 home runs, 90+ RsBI, 100+ walks, 170+ K's.

But the guy is hitting .282, almost 20 points higher than his previous career high. He is also posting a .410 OBP, ten points higher than his previous career high, and he's slugging .553, his highest since 2004. His OPS is .970, and his OPS+ is a great 153. He is doing this under the radar, playing for a very bad Washington Nationals team, but he's showing an enormous improvement in various categories when compared to his stats from the last couple of seasons.

[brett]

Underachievers
Matt Holliday

Overachievers
Matt Holliday

[STLCards2]

Great defense? Eh. Renteria is a wreck at short. Velez plays nearly everyday. Fred Lewis occasionally gets to take the field. Cutoff men are routinely missed, especially by Aaron Rowand. Bengie Molina isn't what he used to be, by quite a lot. Pablo Sandoval has been surprisingly competent at third (but is playing first down the stretch), though he's no threat to win a gold glove. Juan Uribe catches most of what's hit at him and has a cannon for an arm, but don't go expecting anything in the way of range.

For a team that's supposed to be based on pitching and defense, I find them to be lacking quite a bit of the former.

There DEF (% of BIP converted into outs compared to league) has led the majors most of the year. That is the hallmark of good defense. Not to mention being 3rd in UZR. I can see one stat being off, but noth of them? Doubt it.

[Rich the Giants fan]

There DEF (% of BIP converted into outs compared to league) has led the majors most of the year. That is the hallmark of good defense. Not to mention being 3rd in UZR. I can see one stat being off, but noth of them? Doubt it.

You can believe whatever you want. The Giants defense is anything but great.

[STLCards2]

You can believe whatever you want. The Giants defense is anything but great.

Reagrdless of the pitching/defense ratio, their pitching staff has given up the fewest runs in the league, which was predicted by many coming into the season. Their offense is not good, but the staff is better than their offense is bad. With that mix in the relatively weak NL, 10-12 games over .500 is not suprising at all.

Their pythag. w% has them 9 over, so they are winning very slightly over what their run scored/run allowed differential would indicate.

[baseball junkie]

How about Magglio Ordonez -- who just had his $18 million 2010 option vested today bases on plate appearances. He's been fairly horrible. And Detroit is once again :banghead:

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Reagrdless of the pitching/defense ratio, their pitching staff has given up the fewest runs in the league, which was predicted by many coming into the season. Their offense is not good, but the staff is better than their offense is bad. With that mix in the relatively weak NL, 10-12 games over .500 is not suprising at all.

Their pythag. w% has them 9 over, so they are winning very slightly over what their run scored/run allowed differential would indicate.

Who predicted this? I read everything about the Giants and I never once read anyone predict the Giants would allow the fewest runs in the league.

[Milt on Tilt]

Who predicted this? I read everything about the Giants and I never once read anyone predict the Giants would allow the fewest runs in the league.

It was actually pretty reasonable prediction. I in fact told many of my friends this. They significantly upgraded their bullpen, added Randy Johnson who was pretty good last year, have Lincecain and play in San Francisco. I don't think this really should surprise anyone.

[9RoyHobbsRF]

It was actually pretty reasonable prediction. I in fact told many of my friends this. They significantly upgraded their bullpen, added Randy Johnson who was pretty good last year, have Lincecain and play in San Francisco. I don't think this really should surprise anyone.

nobody out here thought they get within a sniff of .500

they over achieved big time and to say they didnt is just hindsight

the way they started the season was a prime example (started 2-7 and looked pitiful)

[9RoyHobbsRF]

Reagrdless of the pitching/defense ratio, their pitching staff has given up the fewest runs in the league, which was predicted by many coming into the season. Their offense is not good, but the staff is better than their offense is bad. With that mix in the relatively weak NL, 10-12 games over .500 is not suprising at all.

Their pythag. w% has them 9 over, so they are winning very slightly over what their run scored/run allowed differential would indicate.

that is irrelevant to what forecasters thought before the season started

it is like a nobody winning a car race and then someone saying well he led a lot of laps so his winning is not a surprise

[Honus Wagner Rules]

It was actually pretty reasonable prediction. I in fact told many of my friends this. They significantly upgraded their bullpen, added Randy Johnson who was pretty good last year, have Lincecain and play in San Francisco. I don't think this really should surprise anyone.

The sounds like hindsight to me. In 2008 the Giants finished 9th in runs allowed. And that's with Lincecum winning the 2008 CYA. You thought adding an aging past-his-prime Randy Johnson and Jermey Affeldt would have allowed the Giants to jump all the way to the top in fewest runs allowed?

[Milt on Tilt]

nobody out here thought they get within a sniff of .500

they over achieved big time and to say they didnt is just hindsight

the way they started the season was a prime example (started 2-7 and looked pitiful)

This is not true. Many intelligent fans saw their pitching staff and said, 'Hey, this team isn't the worst in the majors. There's no way they can win their division but I won't be surprised if they finish second out there.'

They aren't finishing second (or will they?), but that's because I didn't expect the Rockies to be this good.

ETA: Sorry I didn't notice, "out here". That may be true, but that doesn't mean others didnt think this.

[9RoyHobbsRF]

This is not true. Many intelligent fans saw their pitching staff and said, 'Hey, this team isn't the worst in the majors. There's no way they can win their division but I won't be surprised if they finish second out there.'

They aren't finishing second (or will they?), but that's because I didn't expect the Rockies to be this good.

disagree (respectfully)

Barry Zito was a denigrated a free agent signing in history
his two year record was horrendous, he is 1/5 of their starting rotation

Matt Cain was a tough luck loser
no one predicted he would turn it around the way he did

the fifth starter was undetermined or at best an unproven Jonothan Sanchez

Randy Johnson would prove to be the broken down 45 year old guy that he is

Lincecum had a monster year last year
at best he might duplicate it

where is this fantastic great pitching staff

it is in the hindsight evaluation of too many

[Milt on Tilt]

The sounds like hindsight to me. In 2008 the Giants finished 9th in runs allowed. And that's with Lincecum winning the 2008 CYA. You thought adding an aging past-his-prime Randy Johnson and Jermey Affeldt would have allowed the Giants to jump all the way to the top in fewest runs allowed?

I thought Randy would be a bit healthier, 150 innings or so at 3.90 ERA. I thought Bobby Howry was valuable. I thought Jonathon Sanchez would pitch more to his abilities, and he has. And most importantly I thought Cain-Lincecum-Sanchez would take steps forward. I didn't predict they would allow the fewest runs, but it wouldn't have been ridiculous to do so.

[Milt on Tilt]

disagree (respectfully)

Barry Zito was a denigrated a free agent signing in history
his two year record was horrendous, he is 1/5 of their starting rotation


This is very true. But there was reason to believe he could be an ok starter still. His FIP from '06-'08 was around 4.80. Certainly nothing to pay 16 Million for, but valuable enough if he isn't at the top of the rotation. I did not see him improving to the degree he has this year.

[Rich the Giants fan]

Reagrdless of the pitching/defense ratio, their pitching staff has given up the fewest runs in the league, which was predicted by many coming into the season. Their offense is not good, but the staff is better than their offense is bad. With that mix in the relatively weak NL, 10-12 games over .500 is not suprising at all.

Their pythag. w% has them 9 over, so they are winning very slightly over what their run scored/run allowed differential would indicate.

The Giants playing with a winning record, and competing for a playoff spot, was something no sane person would have predicted prior to the season. I certainly didn't see anyone predicting they'd perform nearly this well.

If you look at stats now and say they are playing as expected in correlation to their stats, that's fine (though I am still surprised given their anemic offense). But to say they aren't overachieving in relation to preseason expectations is wickedly wrong.

[Milt on Tilt]

Name who exactly on the pitching staff is overachieving. Matt Cain? Perhaps, but I've always been a fan.

[9RoyHobbsRF]

The Giants playing with a winning record, and competing for a playoff spot, was something no sane person would have predicted prior to the season. I certainly didn't see anyone predicting they'd perform nearly this well.

If you look at stats now and say they are playing as expected in correlation to their stats, that's fine (though I am still surprised given their anemic offense). But to say they aren't overachieving in relation to preseason expectations is wickedly wrong.

agree 100 %

[Rich the Giants fan]

Name who exactly on the pitching staff is overachieving. Matt Cain? Perhaps, but I've always been a fan.

Who said it was only the pitching staff that was overachieving? It's the team that's overachieving as a whole which is possible while still witnessing the pitchers pitch well.

[Milt on Tilt]

Who said it was only the pitching staff that was overachieving? It's the team that's overachieving as a whole which is possible while still witnessing the pitchers pitch well.

But the offense is bad. Really bad. The reason they are a contender (kind of) is because of their pitching staff. If they are overachieving as a team it's likely either because A) You thought their offense was going to be even more full of awfulness, or B) their pitching staff has been better than you expected.

I don't see A as the explanation, so I assume you are in camp B. This stands to reason that someone in their pitching staff was overachieved.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Who said it was only the pitching staff that was overachieving? It's the team that's overachieving as a whole which is possible while still witnessing the pitchers pitch well.

The Giants as a team are overachieving despite the Giants poor offense. If the Giants had even a league average offense they would be serious World Series contenders this season.

[willshad]

Overachievers:

1. Jason Bartlett
2. Joe Mauer
3. Matt Cain

Underachievers:

1. The Mets
2. Roy Oswalt
3. Lance Berkman

[CandlestickBum]

But the offense is bad. Really bad. The reason they are a contender (kind of) is because of their pitching staff. If they are overachieving as a team it's likely either because A) You thought their offense was going to be even more full of awfulness, or B) their pitching staff has been better than you expected.

I don't see A as the explanation, so I assume you are in camp B. This stands to reason that someone in their pitching staff was overachieved.

We added Affelt and Medders in the offseason, for a long stretch this year the Giant's had the #1 bullpen in the MLB.

Currently the pitching staff is ranked #1 or #2 in all pitching categories.

YoY ERA is down significantly, almsot a full run. I attribute this mostly to the revamped bullpen, and Zito's


Rk Year Lg W L Finish RA/G ERA G CG SHO SV IP H R ER HR BB SO WHIP SO/9 HR/9 E DP Fld% PitchAge
1 2009 NL West 79 67 3 3.73 3.51 146 10 18 37 1305 1142 545 509 124 526 1169 1.239 7.22 0.73 93 124 0.985 28.8
2 2008 NL West 72 90 4 4.69 4.38 162 4 2 41 1442 1416 759 701 147 652 1240 1.32 6.52 0.59 96 130 0.983 27.1

YoY ERA is down significantly, almsot a full run. I attribute this mostly to the revamped bullpen, and Zito's improvement, which almost mirrors the staffs as a whole:


Year W L W-L% ERA G GS GF CG SHO SV IP H R ER HR BB IBB SO HBP BK WP BF ERA+ WHIP H/9 HR/9 BB/9 SO/9 SO/BB
2008 10 17 0.37 5.15 32 32 0 0 0 0 180 186 115 103 16 102 10 120 4 0 3 818 85 1.6 9.3 0.8 5.1 6 1.18
2009 10 12 0.455 3.94 30 30 0 1 0 0 178.1 164 80 78 19 71 6 141 8 2 2 754 109 1.318 8.3 1 3.6 7.1 1.99

So, Zito has done as well as anyone could have hoped for based on the second half of last year where he showed signs of coming out of his funk, and the great contributions by the relievers.

I don't know if anyone "overachieved", but as a unit things really came together nicely.

[EricAnno]

Overachievers:

2. Joe Mauer


Huh?

The guy has two batting titles under his belt (only full-time catcher to win one). I get that he has a ton of power this year, but how is he overachieving? I thought we had already established that he was one of the best hitters in all of baseball.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Huh?

The guy has two batting titles under his belt (only full-time catcher to win one). I get that he has a ton of power this year, but how is he overachieving? I thought we had already established that he was one of the best hitters in all of baseball.

Until this year, Mauer wasn't much on HR power. That's the only thing can think of.

So if that's your focus, there you go.

[History Of Baseball Fan]

One of the biggest underachievers would be Vernon Wells.

[EricAnno]

Until this year, Mauer wasn't much on HR power. That's the only thing can think of.

So if that's your focus, there you go.

Yeah, I guess.

But I wouldn't call him an "overachiever". The guy is already one of the best hitters in the American League, hell in all of baseball. The fact that he has added power doesn't make him an "overachiever", just an improvement.

[EricAnno]

One of the biggest underachievers would be Vernon Wells.

Indeed. :banghead:

[willshad]

Huh?

The guy has two batting titles under his belt (only full-time catcher to win one). I get that he has a ton of power this year, but how is he overachieving? I thought we had already established that he was one of the best hitters in all of baseball.

There really in no comparison between how Mauer has hit in his career up until 2009, and how he has his hit this season. Not only has he doubled his previous high in home runs (in an injury shortened season), but his batting average in about 50 points higher than his career average. That isnt over achieving to you?? If he really is this good then he is among the top 5 or 10 greatest hitters of all time. An over achiever doesn't necessarily have to be a poor player having a great season, it can be a very good player having an out of this world season.

[Milt on Tilt]

Ah, you edited your post. I was going to attack your assertion that prior to 2009, Mauer hit like Pudge. Well done on your retraction.

[Seattle1]

You should probably take Beltre off your underachievers list. He has been injured this year. He got nailed with a double whammy. First his shoulder, then when he got back from that his nuts.

[CandlestickBum]

He got nailed with a double whammy he got from his nuts.

Fixed.

<see what I did there? :shhh: >

[9RoyHobbsRF]

There really in no comparison between how Mauer has hit in his career up until 2009, and how he has his hit this season. Not only has he doubled his previous high in home runs (in an injury shortened season), but his batting average in about 50 points higher than his career average. That isnt over achieving to you?? If he really is this good then he is among the top 5 or 10 greatest hitters of all time. An over achiever doesn't necessarily have to be a poor player having a great season, it can be a very good player having an out of this world season.


ummmmmm no

[willshad]

ummmmmm no

have you seen his stats? You're telling me that if he continued hitting at this level for the rest of his career that he will not be one of the best hitters ever?

[EricAnno]

have you seen his stats? You're telling me that if he continued hitting at this level for the rest of his career that he will not be one of the best hitters ever?

Mike Piazza's 1997 season was every bit as good as Mauer's 2009 season, if not better. He's never mentioned in the five or ten greatest hitters of all-time.

And you did not say anything about continuing this success for years. You said that "if hes really this good" that he's among the five or ten greatest hitters of all-time. I'm not trying to be mean or anything, but you should be a little clearer when it comes to assertions like that. Many people, like myself and Roy probably misunderstood what you were trying to say.

[9RoyHobbsRF]

have you seen his stats? You're telling me that if he continued hitting at this level for the rest of his career that he will not be one of the best hitters ever?

Joe Mauer is hitting .374 with 26 HR and a .610 slugging average and a .441 OB%

a .610 slugging average does not rank within the top 5 single season SA of all time
it does not rank within the top 10
it does not rank in the top 20
it does not rank in the top 50
it does not rank in the top 100
it does not rank in the top 200

an OBP of .441 is not in the top 5 single season of all time
not in the top 10
not in the top 20
not in the top 50
not in the top 100
not in the top 200

a .374 BA is n ot in the top 5 of all time
not in the top 10
not in the top 20
not in the top 50
not in the top 100
it IS in the top 200

26 HR is not in the top 5 of all time
not in the top 10
not in the top 20
not in the top 50
not in the top 100
not in the top 200
not in the top 500

you want me to add 2B 3B, SB or RBI (all of which Mauer is less than stellar)?

[Milt on Tilt]

Joe Mauer is hitting .374 with 26 HR and a .610 slugging average and a .441 OB%

a .610 slugging average does not rank within the top 5 single season SA of all time
it does not rank within the top 10
it does not rank in the top 20
it does not rank in the top 50
it does not rank in the top 100
it does not rank in the top 200

an OBP of .441 is not in the top 5 single season of all time
not in the top 10
not in the top 20
not in the top 50
not in the top 100
not in the top 200

a .374 BA is n ot in the top 5 of all time
not in the top 10
not in the top 20
not in the top 50
not in the top 100
it IS in the top 200

26 HR is not in the top 5 of all time
not in the top 10
not in the top 20
not in the top 50
not in the top 100
not in the top 200
not in the top 500

you want me to add 2B 3B, SB or RBI (all of which Mauer is less than stellar)?

His OPS+ is currently 182. Barry Bonds career OPS+ is 182. His statement is accurate. But it doesn't even matter. Mauer isn't a 182 OPS+ guy. Therefore he's overachieving.

The original statement, that you disagreed with was:
"If he really is this good then he is among the top 5 or 10 greatest hitters of all time"

This good being, 182+ he has this season.

[9RoyHobbsRF]

His OPS+ is currently 182. Barry Bonds career OPS+ is 182. His statement is accurate. But it doesn't even matter. Mauer isn't a 182 OPS+ guy. Therefore he's overachieving.

The original statement, that you disagreed with was:
"If he really is this good then he is among the top 5 or 10 greatest hitters of all time"

This good being, 182+ he has this season.

Joe Mauer is not close to being a top 5 or top 10 hitter all time no matter how you try to slice and dice it

he is among the top 5 or 10 greatest hitters of all time was the quote

[9RoyHobbsRF]

an adjusted OPS+ of 182 would rank 165th best all time for single seasons

this is not some miracle hitting year for Mauer

it is not in the top 200 hitting seasons of all time

[willshad]

an adjusted OPS+ of 182 would rank 165th best all time for single seasons

this is not some miracle hitting year for Mauer

it is not in the top 200 hitting seasons of all time

my point was that Mauer's lifetime OPS+ before this season was somewhere around 120 I believe, so I think that suddenly having a 182 OPS+ season is indeed 'overachieving'. If he didn't miss a month and still maintained those rates, it would probably be the best hitting season as a catcher ever. Before this year, he was a very good hitter, but nowhere near an all time great one.

[9RoyHobbsRF]

my point was that Mauer's lifetime OPS+ before this season was somewhere around 120 I believe, so I think that suddenly having a 182 OPS+ season is indeed 'overachieving'. If he didn't miss a month and still maintained those rates, it would probably be the best hitting season as a catcher ever. Before this year, he was a very good hitter, but nowhere near an all time great one.

how does that make him the 5th best hitter of all time?

[willshad]

how does that make him the 5th best hitter of all time?

If he REALLY is this good ( as good as he has been in 2009), then that would make him one of the best hitters ever, would it not?

[538280]

One of the biggest underachievers (or just a straight dissapointment) is BJ Upton. I remember after his 2007 season thinking that Upton was going to be one of the most exciting players in baseball for years to come. He was a player who could play multiple positions, hit for power, had a ton of speed, walked a lot, he could do everything and was my favorite type of power/speed player. In 2008 he didn't hit for the same power, but after the playoffs when he hit 7 HRs (vs. 9 in the regular season) and slugged .652 I thought he would get that stroke back, but this season he's just been an all around awful hitter. He's hitting .232/.303/.361. He's hitting for a very low average and not walking or hitting for power like he used to, he just looks lost at the plate frequently. Hopefully he can get back but to me the only player competing with him for the most dissapointing season is Daisuke Matsuzaka (and he did pitch 6 scoreless in his last start).

[9RoyHobbsRF]

If he REALLY is this good ( as good as he has been in 2009), then that would make him one of the best hitters ever, would it not?

see post #48

[Milt on Tilt]

see post #48

I literally yelled out a profanity. The quote you responded to was

"If he really is this good then he is among the top 5 or 10 greatest hitters of all time"

You took it out of context to say "he is among the top 5 or 10 greatest hitters of all time"

This quote is not, as you must believe, implying that Joe Mauer is a top ten hitter of all time. Let me break this down for you. If he really is the good, meaning if his true talent level was that of an 182 OPS+, that would make him a top ten hitter of all time. This is a TRUE statement. No one argues that Barry Bonds is a top ten hitter of all time. Barry Bonds 'talent level' was that of a 182 OPS+. If Mauer's true talent level was equal to that of Barry Bonds, and Barry Bonds is a top ten hitter, that would make Mauer a top ten hitter. No?

But this is NOT being claimed. This is why he was stated as over-achieving. No one thinks he's a top ten hitter of all time. No one has even thought of claiming this. No one has said this is amongst the ten greatest hitting seasons of all time. No one.

Do you follow?

[9RoyHobbsRF]

do you follow that Mauer 2009 is not in the top 200 in single season performance for OB%, Slugging, HR, or in the top 150 for BA or OPS+

[9RoyHobbsRF]

I literally yelled out a profanity. The quote you responded to was

"If he really is this good then he is among the top 5 or 10 greatest hitters of all time"

You took it out of context to say "he is among the top 5 or 10 greatest hitters of all time"

This quote is not, as you must believe, implying that Joe Mauer is a top ten hitter of all time. Let me break this down for you. If he really is the good, meaning if his true talent level was that of an 182 OPS+, that would make him a top ten hitter of all time. This is a TRUE statement. No one argues that Barry Bonds is a top ten hitter of all time. Barry Bonds 'talent level' was that of a 182 OPS+. If Mauer's true talent level was equal to that of Barry Bonds, and Barry Bonds is a top ten hitter, that would make Mauer a top ten hitter. No?

But this is NOT being claimed. This is why he was stated as over-achieving. No one thinks he's a top ten hitter of all time. No one has even thought of claiming this. No one has said this is amongst the ten greatest hitting seasons of all time. No one.

Do you follow?

no a 182+ OPS for one season (and not even a full one to be honest) measured against a career of 20 years or more is like saying Tony CLoninger is the greatest hitter of all time because he hit two grand slams in one game and Willie Mays and other greats never did that

it was a less than astute observation/deduction

[willshad]

no a 182+ OPS for one season (and not even a full one to be honest) measured against a career of 20 years or more is like saying Tony CLoninger is the greatest hitter of all time because he hit two grand slams in one game and Willie Mays and other greats never did that

it was a less than astute observation/deduction

That is exactly why it is 'overachieving'!!!!!!!!!!!!! He is hitting at a Barry Bonds level, when in reality, at his 'normal' level of hitting, he is NOT even close.

I never said, or implied, that Mauer was a top 10 hitter all time, or even that this SEASON was a top 10 all time hitting season. What i was saying was that if Mauer CONTINUED to hit at this level, throughout the rest of his career, then he would be a top 10 all time hitter.

[willshad]

do you follow that Mauer 2009 is not in the top 200 in single season performance for OB%, Slugging, HR, or in the top 150 for BA or OPS+

Yes I follow, Buit Hank Aaron never had a season that was this good in batting average or on base percentage, and only a few better in slugging percentage. Hank Aaron is still a top 10 all time hitter. Also, Mauer is a CATCHER. How many catchers have matched his offense this season, even for one year? Piazza, Campanella, maybe Dickey..that's about it. True, his season isn't as valuable as their best seasons, due to the missed time...but that doesn't make it any less overachieving for the time he HAS played.

[Milt on Tilt]

Hey, give him a break. Admitting your wrong is difficult.

[9RoyHobbsRF]

Yes I follow, Buit Hank Aaron never had a season that was this good in batting average or on base percentage, and only a few better in slugging percentage. Hank Aaron is still a top 10 all time hitter. Also, Mauer is a CATCHER. How many catchers have matched his offense this season, even for one year? Piazza, Campanella, maybe Dickey..that's about it. True, his season isn't as valuable as their best seasons, due to the missed time...but that doesn't make it any less overachieving for the time he HAS played.

In 2009 Mauer is slugging .612 in a league that slugs .424

In 1963 Aaron slugged .586 in a league that slugged .364

Mauer slugged 44% better than league
Aaron slugged 61% better than league

Mauer had the higher slugging percentage, Aaron was much more impressive vs league

Mauer slugged .661 at home. .567 on the road
Aaron slugged .550 at home, .620 on the road

In road games, in a league that had 16.5% more offense, Mauer was outslugged by Aaron .620 to .567

yes I was really wrong

[dominik]

Of course he is having a career year he is not likely to repeat.
But of course he is overachieving on a very high level since he won batting titles and was the best hitting catcher of the league before.

You could say that he is just hitting his prime with age 25 fright now. He won't remain a 30 HR guy, but I could imagine him being the dominant player of the AL and hitting 20-25 HRs with a 330-360 BA in the next 4 or 5 years.

[538280]

Mauer is probably overachieving somewhat in that he is hitting .373, and his highest BA prior to this year was .347. Even though he was a 2 time batting champion and has proved to be among the best hitters for average in the league, still .373 is 26 points higher than he had ever hit in the past. However, the biggest part which makes Mauer's 2009 different from the Mauer of 2006-2008 (who probably deserved 2 MVPs himself) is the power hitting. Mauer was never much of a power hitter before this year, his relative ISOs were below league average. However this season he is slugging .612 with a .373 BA for a .239 ISO, that's vs. .158 league for a 150 relative ISO. This is really what has made this season so off the charts for Mauer, that he has added a new power dimension to his game. I don't think we can say this really is a fluke. Mauer very well could have just become a new hitter, a more complete one who isn't just a high BA hitter but also hits for power. It's unlikely he'll hit .373 again next year if he keeps up that pace with what little is less, but he could very well keep his power for years to come and still be a better hitter than he was 2006-2008.

[willshad]

Of course he is having a career year he is not likely to repeat.
But of course he is overachieving on a very high level since he won batting titles and was the best hitting catcher of the league before.

You could say that he is just hitting his prime with age 25 fright now. He won't remain a 30 HR guy, but I could imagine him being the dominant player of the AL and hitting 20-25 HRs with a 330-360 BA in the next 4 or 5 years.

you do realize that would make him probably the greatest catcher of all time, right?

[dominik]

Yes I do. Maybe the projection is a little to high but if he stays healthy I would guess he has the potential to do so.

I would correct myself and lower it maybe a little bit to 315-350(maybe one or 2 "down years") with around 20 HRs. This would be still awesome. Of course for this to happen everything would have to go right.

[Milt on Tilt]

Over the next 5 years he will hit .335 averaging 24 HR, 90 RBI and 90 R.

[Milt on Tilt]

you do realize that would make him probably the greatest catcher of all time, right?

You mean he isn't already?



I kid.

[Trickyhop]

Although I think Beltre can belong on the list, he has been injured a lot this season. Maybe not the best guy to put on the list seeing as he hasn't even played the whole season.

[STLCards2]

Beltre: if a guy underachieves in all but one of the 11 seasons iof a career, what is more likely: the guy has oddly poor seasons year after year after year? Or the guy was incredibly lucky during the single outlier? The fluky .325 BABIP might be a good starting point to answer this question (under .285 rest of career). His impossibly unsustainable 17.9 HR/FB (under 9 for rest of career) might be the other half of the equation.

As far as Mauer - his BABIP and HR/FB is way higher than his career totals too. He is not a true .370 hitter, but he may be a consistant .340 hitter for a while. Tough to say if his power is real, but his 2009 HR/FB is almost 3x higher than it was before this year. He could have "found" his HR stroke, but I'll need to see another year of this to believe it. Either way, the man can and will rake for a long time!

[Trickyhop]

Beltre: if a guy underachieves in all but one of the 11 seasons iof a career, what is more likely: the guy has oddly poor seasons year after year after year? Or the guy was incredibly lucky during the single outlier? The fluky .325 BABIP might be a good starting point to answer this question (under .285 rest of career). His impossibly unsustainable 17.9 HR/FB (under 9 for rest of career) might be the other half of the equation.


It's called: steroids. :D

[STLCards2]

It's called: steroids. :D

Of course that is possible, but he that is speculation.

[nerfan]

In my opinion Mauer is well on his way to becoming a top 10 catcher of all time. Gary Carter's around number 10 right now, Carter never had a season this good. Of course, Mauer's going to have to stay healthy, but if he can stay in the .340 range for another 6 years with 25 HR power (for about a 150 OPS+), that's a Hall of Famer right there and probably one of the greatest catchers ever. Bench nor Berra ever hit like that.

[blacksilverfan12]

For underachievers, no Milton Bradley?

[willshad]

In my opinion Mauer is well on his way to becoming a top 10 catcher of all time. Gary Carter's around number 10 right now, Carter never had a season this good. Of course, Mauer's going to have to stay healthy, but if he can stay in the .340 range for another 6 years with 25 HR power (for about a 150 OPS+), that's a Hall of Famer right there and probably one of the greatest catchers ever. Bench nor Berra ever hit like that.

I think he might end up a top 10 (or even top 5) all time catcher, but I believe that offensively, this season is a total fluke. In all likelyhood Mauer will go back to hitting .320-.330 with 10-15 home runs a season. Still mighty impressive for a catcher.

[willshad]

Of course that is possible, but he that is speculation.

Are we talking about roids for Beltre of Mauer? Their situations are pretty similiar (one amazing hitting season thats totally out of context with the rest of their career).

[moldyoldie]

Biggest underachiever in my world is Magglio Ordóñez of my Tigers. Though he's made a recent push for .300, he's become a singles hitter who's constantly looking to go to right-field. Pulling the ball leads to groundouts and double-plays and his gap power seems to have dissipated. As posted earlier, he's now vested for $18+ million next season! :confused:

Another disappointing Tiger is Curtis Granderson, whose power numbers have increased at the cost of his ability to be an offensive sparkplug at the top of the order. He's hovered around .250 all season and still can't handle southpaws. Recently, he's been pinch-hit for in late innings, something I never thought I'd see.

Balancing out the above has been the surprisingly solid Tigers starting rotation, namely newcomers Edwin Jackson and rookie Rick Porcello, and the work of the bullpen. Jackson and newly-anointed bullpen ace Fernando Rodney may be deemed overachievers.

[STLCards2]

Are we talking about roids for Beltre of Mauer? Their situations are pretty similiar (one amazing hitting season thats totally out of context with the rest of their career).

I am not talking about any single player on steroids - Trickyhop was speculating about Beltre, and you are now speculating about Mauer. I would say "it is possible" for any player, since that is technicaly true.

[538280]

Are we talking about roids for Beltre of Mauer? Their situations are pretty similiar (one amazing hitting season thats totally out of context with the rest of their career).

Mauer's year could very well end up being out of context with his career, but it's too early to say that. As I've said before the big difference between this year and his other years (he also had great years in 2006 and 2008) is the power. It's possible that he's found a power stroke that he didn't have before. I am sketpical of that and would have to see it again before I predict it, but it's far too early to say that this year is equivalent to Adrian Beltre's 2004. #1 because he may really be a power hitter, and #2 because even if this year is out of context he's still a GREAT player, while Belte has only been okay outside of 2004.

[Tenorman]

Offensively, my underachiever of the year is Vernon Wells. Defensively, he's as good as any center fielder in the game, but come on .262 BA, 15 HR, 66 RBI??? This was supposed to be the Jays' feared slugger, not Adam Lind or Aaron Hill. C'mon Vernon... time to step up and earn that monster contract.