Cowart

[Oz27]

10 minutes ago, Blarg said:

Cowart is no Hall of Fame player waiting to break out. 

Bench was 19 years old when he had that first cup of coffee and hit .163. At 20 he was an All Star won Rookie of the Year and a Gold Glove.

This is where I call you an idiot and you throw a fit because you had stats, stats dammit that proved.... Your an idiot.

 

Yeah, because I totally said he was the next Johnny Bench 

I was asked a question, I answered it, and you come in throwing insults for no apparent reason other than your own lack of comprehension. I was asked if there was a precedent for someone struggling like this and then becoming good and I showed there was. I never said he was going to become Johnny Bench. Is that too complicated for you to understand?

[Lou]

 

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

Lou is doing his impersonations of Lifetime and TrollDaddy in the same thread.  

what have I said that is incorrect?  i have provided facts. why is it that all of a sudden the stat guys completely abandon them when it goes against their argument. sorry, can't have it both ways.  cowart has sucked and the numbers prove it.  the argument against is completely based on "should"s 

he should be playing 

we should see what he can do

he should play over ______

 

 

[Lou]

1 hour ago, Dochalo said:

game on in the background while working.  he made a great play to end the game.  saved two runs.  so he's +1 on the night.  even if his offense is 0, that's 162 runs save over a full season or about 16 WAR.  

if he would have homered each AB we would have have 5 more runs, so over a full season that would be adjusted to -648 runs. Would that be a WAR of about -64 ? 

is that good? 

[Lou]

1 hour ago, Oz27 said:

Okay, if you really want to know, there are seven hall of famers who had an OPS below .550 in a minimum of 75 plate appearances in their rookie season (excluding pitchers). The most recent was Johnny Bench, who had a .462 in 93 PAs. 78 All Stars fit that criteria, including a heap this year (Jose Bautista, Adam Jones, Jackie Bradley, Michael Saunders, Anthony Rizzo and Jose Iglesias).

If we want to be really pedantic and limit it to exactly Cowart's stats (a .487 OPS or worse in 72 or more plate appearances in a rookie season), we still get 10 All Stars and one member of the HOF.

Btw, if anyone cares I got this through the Baseball Reference play index. It is the best $30 I spend each year, I get hours of fun from it.

the argument had nothing to do with a minimum number of plate appearances in their rookie season

 

[Angels#1Fan]

I hope Cowart makes it at some point, but I really just don't get all of the whining about him not getting more playing time given there is so little time left in the season. Everyone here is quick to point out small sample sizes and how one shouldn't be judged on it. So what is all the frothing about him not getting a handful of at bats now? At some point Cowart has to be evaluated on his performance, he just played his way out of the line-up with a series of absolutely horrid at bats.

I seriously doubt that this is a make it or break it time for Cowart..he'll get another chance next year, but it might be his last. 

[Oz27]

7 minutes ago, Lou said:

the argument had nothing to do with a minimum number of plate appearances in their rookie season

 

Way to avoid the point of the post. As should be pretty obvious, a minimum number of PAs is needed to avoid players who recorded, say, an 0-for-1 or a 2-for-20 showing up in the data. Countless good players had a .000 batting average in their first season, from something like an 0-for-3, and I was merely avoiding that.

[Lou]

the point was your post had nothing to do with the argument 

[Lou]

5 minutes ago, Angels#1Fan said:

I hope Cowart makes it at some point, but I really just don't get all of the whining about him not getting more playing time given there is so little time left in the season. Everyone here is quick to point out small sample sizes and how one shouldn't be judged on it. So what is all the frothing about him not getting a handful of at bats now? At some point Cowart has to be evaluated on his performance, he just played his way out of the line-up with a series of absolutely horrid at bats.

I seriously doubt that this is a make it or break it time for Cowart..he'll get another chance next year, but it might be his last. 

which is exactly what I've been saying this entire time

it's baffling 

[Oz27]

2 minutes ago, Lou said:

the point was your post had nothing to do with the argument 

Are you trying to be like Lifetime now? You asked me to name players who had started their careers similarly poorly and I provided information about how many had done so. How the fuck are you claiming that "had nothing to do with the argument"?

[Lou]

no, you made the case for players who had a minimum of 75 ABs. that is not nearly the same as a player who had 68 ABs to begin their career. are those numbers based on 75 ABs or 411, 1057 or 642? over 75 ABs would include every single player that has spent more than a few months in the majors. 

so either argue the point or move on.

thats how the fuck I am claiming that

[Lou]

oh yeah.

Laughable 

[Lou]

on second thought, don't bother. I really don't give a damn about Cowart. he has sucked major league ass and that's a fact. 

Fin 

[Angels#1Fan]

10 minutes ago, Lou said:

it's baffling

I have to agree.

[Oz27]

5 minutes ago, Lou said:

no, you made the case for players who had a minimum of 75 ABs. that is not nearly the same as a player who had 68 ABs to begin their career. are those numbers based on 75 ABs or 411, 1057 or 642? over 75 ABs would include every single player that has spent more than a few months in the majors. 

so either argue the point or move on.

thats how the fuck I am claiming that

The numbers I showed you consisted of players who had 75 or more plate appearances in a season in which they were a rookie (a number chosen to give us a minimum sample size similar to 2016 Cowart) and who absolutely sucked in those plate appearances, posting an OPS below .550. To be absolutely clear, that was not a 75 plate appearance sample of their rookie season, it was their entire rookie season. All of those I listed or referred to had rookie seasons that consisted of 75 or more plate appearances in which they were similar to, equally bad, or worse than 2016 Cowart. 78 people, who had rookie seasons in which they lodged at least 75 PAs and had an OPS of .550 or below, went on to become All-Stars and eight made the Hall of Fame.

Again, you asked me how many players had been similarly bad to Cowart and went on to be good. I told you. You've gone on a weird rant since I did. "Baffling".

[Blarg]

There are thousands with same amount of at bats that never became good players so pulling a 19 year old Johnny Bench out of your ass and saying that comparison is relevant is why your arguments are irrelevant. You want to make a case for Cowart with a lower percentile of success of players that failed to perform in their first 75 at bats than his lack of success. You're batting like .015.

 

[Blarg]

There are thousands with same amount of at bats that never became good players so pulling a 19 year old Johnny Bench out of your ass and saying that comparison is relevant is why your arguments are irrelevant. You want to make a case for Cowart with a lower percentile of success of players that failed to perform in their first 75 at bats than his lack of success. You're batting like .015.

 

[Oz27]

5 minutes ago, Blarg said:

There are thousands with same amount of at bats that never became good players so pulling a 19 year old Johnny Bench out of your ass and saying that comparison is relevant is why your arguments are irrelevant. You want to make a case for Cowart with a lower percentile of success of players that failed to perform in their first 75 at bats than his lack of success. You're batting like .015.

 

Can you actually read? You sure make it look like you can't.

I was asked how many players had been as bad as Cowart early in their career and then became good. I answered. I never said he was going to become good, let alone that he was going to become Johnny Bench, but I merely showed there are many examples of players starting similarly poorly and then becoming good. It's not that complicated, you know? At least it shouldn't be.

[NrM]

man you know this is the darkest of timelines when an utility player's playing time is the most heated thread we've had in months.

[Stradling]

2 hours ago, Lou said:

 

what have I said that is incorrect?  i have provided facts. why is it that all of a sudden the stat guys completely abandon them when it goes against their argument. sorry, can't have it both ways.  cowart has sucked and the numbers prove it.  the argument against is completely based on "should"s 

he should be playing 

we should see what he can do

he should play over ______

 

 

Their point is in a lost season play the guy with upside or that is unknown over the known commodity, I agree.  

[Troll Daddy]

5 hours ago, Stradling said:

Their point is in a lost season play the guy with upside or that is unknown over the known commodity, I agree.  

It's still ML baseball not ST. 

[Blarg]

7 hours ago, Oz27 said:

Can you actually read? You sure make it look like you can't.

I was asked how many players had been as bad as Cowart early in their career and then became good. I answered. I never said he was going to become good, let alone that he was going to become Johnny Bench, but I merely showed there are many examples of players starting similarly poorly and then becoming good. It's not that complicated, you know? At least it shouldn't be.

You took 0.001% of players to make an argument for Cowart becoming a success. For a guy that thinks stats are all important you are completely ignoring them. 

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

9 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

It's still ML baseball not ST. 

At this point in the season, it's more about going thru the motion of playing baseball with meaningless games. I mean were going nowhere, the A's are going nowhere and they way it looks at the moment the Astros aren't going anywhere this season either. So this last week of the season is time to see what we have to look forward to in the future. I doubt it's Pennington or Petite.

[Troll Daddy]

 Cowart needs to be put in situations were he can succeed and build some confidence at the plate. This may be one of the reason you don't see him as a everyday player.

He'll get more chances now that Escobar is dealing with shoulder issues.

Don't worry Be Happy

 

 

[AngelsLakersFan]

10 hours ago, Oz27 said:

Yeah, because I totally said he was the next Johnny Bench 

I was asked a question, I answered it, and you come in throwing insults for no apparent reason other than your own lack of comprehension. I was asked if there was a precedent for someone struggling like this and then becoming good and I showed there was. I never said he was going to become Johnny Bench. Is that too complicated for you to understand?

Lol, Oz, you can't win in this thread. It's like arguing with your retarded cousin at Thanksgiving, even if you win you lose.

[Oz27]

6 hours ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

Lol, Oz, you can't win in this thread. It's like arguing with your retarded cousin at Thanksgiving, even if you win you lose.

Maybe I should have expected such a reaction when I called Johnny Bench vastly inferior to Cowart and declared Cowart a certainty to break the home run record and hit .400 for his career.