Forecasts for Fifteen: Curtis Granderson

[Edgy MD]

Hey, there. I'm Curtis Granderson. Met fans rejoiced when I was signed away from the Yankees. Well, six or seven of them did anyhow. I grew up in Chicago and my favorite show was Saved by the Bell. The problem was my Metly career got off to a start that was too little AC and far too much Screech.



But I'm still a dude.



How much dude will I be in 2015. What do you think?

[TransMonk]

I expect a line very similar to last year's. .225BA, 20ish HRs and 65ish RBIs with an OPS around .715...my hope is that he can cut down on the Ks and land with a total around 120 rather than 140.

I also hope that Terry finds a spot in the lineup for him and Curtis can own the spot. I have to think shuffling between lead-off and cleanup is tough.

[Vic Sage]

.230 / 25hr /80runs / .340 OBP / .410 slg

He'll start as #6 hitter, then tried again as a leadoff hitter when Lagares proves to be inadequate, but he too will fail and flail before settling in as the #2, behind Murphy, who is the only guy on the roster who can work the count, get on with some consistency and run ok... until he's traded and Herrera comes up.

[Frayed Knot]

Kind of funny how much he resembles Eric Young Jr. in the field.

[Guest themetfairy]

Things can only get better for him.

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

Curtis is a quality guy and we moved in the fences. I think the 25 homers sounds good, and the average gets a little better. I'd be happy with .250 and 80 rib.

[Edgy MD]

Vic Sage wrote: ...but he too will fail and flail before settling in as the #2, behind Murphy, who is the only guy on the roster who can work the count, get on with some consistency and run ok...

Murphy? Really?

Spent the better part of his career with the tagline "He'd be a pretty good hitter if only he could get the walks."

Work the count + get on with some consistency + run OK = Wright, certainly, but I guess he gets removed from the conversation because he's earmarked for the three-hole.

I trust Granderson by those terms as much as or more than Murphy. Maybe I'll trust Lagares and/or den Dekker soon also. But Murphy does bring significantly more contact than Granderson, and that's not nothing.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Qualified optimism.

135 G, 530 PA, 80 R, 23 HR, 65 RBI, 10 SB, 46 XBH, .248/.335/.462

[batmagadanleadoff]

Granderson's Met season was seen by many as a minor flop, a letdown from his Yankee years, based on expectations that his 2014 season should have been better. I didn't see it that way. Despite the peaks and valleys, I thought that overall, we got more or less, the player that Grandy was. Is. Take out the Yankee Stadium bias from his numbers, and account for half a season in Citi Field, and the Mets got about what they should've expected to get. I'd expect about the same from Grandy this year, plus a little less to account for Grandy's advancing age, which in baseball years is now approaching AARP levels -- and plus a little more if he can exploit the closer right field fence. And even though those potential newfound HR's wouldn't have gone out last year, they'll still count and there's value in being able to exploit your home field environment and being able to hit HR's at a rate that exceeds the overall stadium HR rate.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I sort of agree with Batmags here on getting what Grandy had, although I'd say many fans would consider that a Major Flop.

Still I'm not convinced there's no chance he can't benefit from the fence and the better lineup everyday and the mojo of playing on a 102 win team.

239/330/400 24 HRs

[MFS62]

His old batting coach + shorter right field fence = a good year.
.265 - 25 - 85

Later

[Benjamin Grimm]

I'm not very optimistic here. .225, 22 homers. A few hot streaks and some long stretches of futility.

[dgwphotography]

80 Runs 25 HR 75 RBI .246 BA .345 OBP .450 SLG

[Edgy MD]

I'm close to that. I'd bet tempted to give him more RBI and a little more slugging, just 'cuz, but I imagine he'll see some time in the one and two holes.

.252 BA .345 OBP .479 SLG

[smg58]

The defining question of the Mets' 2015 season will be how quickly they realize that Granderson is no longer a better ballplayer than Kirk Nieuwenhuis.

[TransMonk]

The forecasts of an OBP above .330 seem overly optimistic to me. What are the reasons that folks believe he'll improve (drastically in some forecasts) in that area? Reuniting with Kevin Long?

[Edgy MD]

It's not that drastic. I mean, he reached at .326 last year. If you replay last season plate appearance for plate appearance, he'll get an OBP bump just from the new wall.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

The batting averages are where we're too optimistic, I'd say. I dunno if Grandyman ever hit .265, much less be expected to do it at 33.

But you never know!

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: It's not that drastic. I mean, he reached at .326 last year. If you replay last season plate appearance for plate appearance, he'll get an OBP bump just from the new wall.

Will he? like what? .002? It's such a tiny change and the maybe 1-2 home runs that might land there will be negated by the one or two balls that don't fall in because the outfielders now covers a larger percentage of the grass.

People seem to forget Granderson had a wRC+ of 108 last season, so he was 8% better than average. It's not great, but he had a few valleys and not enough peaks. Level it out some and it'll be very helpful.


.240/.340/.433 should get him closer to a 117 wRC+ (career average) 23 HR, 14 SB. Will spend some time at leadoff early but he'll have a good power week and Collins will move him to 6th except against the rare game he gets against lefties that Duda doesn't when he'll be leading off again.

Moves to left and his arm doesn't hurt his defense as much. Puts up a solid 3.9 fWAR.

[Edgy MD]

Ceetar wrote: It's not that drastic. I mean, he reached at .326 last year. If you replay last season plate appearance for plate appearance, he'll get an OBP bump just from the new wall. Will he? like what? .002?

Or maybe .004, which is what we're talking about and all we ned.

Ceetar wrote: It's such a tiny change

We don't need much.

Ceetar wrote: and the maybe 1-2 home runs that might land there

And maybe 3-4. Five wouldn't be unreasonable either.

Ceetar wrote: will be negated by the one or two balls that don't fall in because the outfielders now covers a larger percentage of the grass.

Maybe. I don't think that's how smaller parks tend to work.

Ceetar wrote: People seem to forget Granderson had a wRC+ of 108 last season, so he was 8% better than average. It's not great, but he had a few valleys and not enough peaks. Level it out some and it'll be very helpful.

Let's have a year without straw men here at the Crane Pool.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy MD wrote: Let's have a year without straw men here at the Crane Pool.

"You don't really mean that, do you"?

[Ceetar]

It's not a straw man when it's true..

[Edgy MD]

No, it is.

I shouldn't have to walk you through this, but when you are directly addressing my contention on the issue of Granderson's OBP, and then build on that this nebulous third person of "people seem to forget" you are deliberately implying that I am part of this group, when I in fact am not.

I understand rhetorical devices, and when folks are using them. If you have a group of people you take issue with, I would beg you to identify them. Name names. Else you are putting arguments on others in order to defeat them and crown yourself champion. But this glory will always be unsatisfying. Fleeting. Ephemeral. To be an intellectual leader in a universe of one inside your own head. What joy can that sustain?

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: No, it is. I shouldn't have to walk you through this, but when you are directly addressing my contention on the issue of Granderson's OBP, and then build on that this nebulous third person of "people seem to forget" you are deliberately implying that I am part of this group, when I in fact am not.

I tell you this every time, but you don't listen.

I'm not including you, or anyone specifically. There exists a perception that I thought was worth making light of.

Would it make you feel better if I'm simply said "Granderson was ok last year, and I think he can be better."?

And the outfield definitely works that way, but the fence differences are so negligible that I don't even think it's worth mentioning as a factor. But in theory a CF plays one step more towards left because he doesn't need that step to right to cover that extra 40 sq ft of grass that's now behind the wall. He now gets to, in general, a larger percentage of the outfield grass, meaning BABIP should drop.

[Edgy MD]

Ceetar wrote: I tell you this every time, but you don't listen.

Every time what?

Ceetar wrote: I'm not including you, or anyone specifically. There exists a perception that I thought was worth making light of.

Yes, you're addressing me, and then suddenly you're not. You're speaking to the wind. This is the great out of the straw man argument. Come on. Who are you speaking of?

Ceetar wrote: Would it make you feel better if I'm simply said "Granderson was ok last year, and I think he can be better."?

It's not about feelings.

Ceetar wrote: And the outfield definitely works that way, but the fence differences are so negligible that I don't even think it's worth mentioning as a factor.

If it definitely works this way, I would ask you to definitely prove it.

Ceetar wrote: But in theory a CF plays one step more towards left because he doesn't need that step to right to cover that extra 40 sq ft of grass that's now behind the wall.

Is it a theory? Or is it "definite"?

Ceetar wrote: He now gets to, in general, a larger percentage of the outfield grass, meaning BABIP should drop.

And number should be almost exactly proportionate to the number of balls that land beyond the wall. I don't think that would be true, and I'd like to see the data demonstrating this.

[Ceetar]

I mean, it's hard to pull conclusions out of the noise sometimes. Is the BABIP at say Citi Field lower because the Mets offense was bad? Is it the way the field plays? I'm not going to write a whole statistics paper for you, but since batters have very little control over where the ball goes, a lot of it comes down to luck. The ball is going to be aimed at a spot on the grass somewhere, and there are a finite amount of those spots. If you take some of the ones away that frequently go for hits (the part that's now home runs) it only stands to logic that a lower percentage of balls per AB will land on the grass without being caught.

Sure, every single one of Curtis Granderson's fly balls could land in that tiny section of Citi Field that's newly a home run territory. It's highly unlikely though. You're welcome to predict his HR totals or his average will go up because of this, but I'm just trying to point out that I don't think there's a good reason to do so.



https://twitter.com/charmingaxelotl/status/464518734334291968 "Curtis Granderson sucks"

yeah well, no he didn't. Here's one example of someone that thinks Curtis sucked. I'm speaking directly to him. Hey axelotl. Curtis was actually okay last year.

[Edgy MD]

Ceetar wrote: Sure, every single one of Curtis Granderson's fly balls could land in that tiny section of Citi Field that's newly a home run territory. It's highly unlikely though.

Here's another thing I didn't assert which you imply I did.

Gonna be a long year.

[batmagadanleadoff]

[youtube:2rkjzdlw]LzJH9qi9jCY[/youtube:2rkjzdlw]

[Guest d'Kong76]

Can't think of any reason he'll be better than last year (even
with the fences) and will probably drop off last year's numbers
because he's, ya know, like 34 or so.

[Lefty Specialist]

Fences will help slightly but age will hurt slightly. So he'll be roughly where he was last year.

20/65/.225