Who Will DH?

[bmfc1]

The Royals 4 starters are right-handers. Does Cuddyer DH? Kelly Johnson? Does Lagares go to CF, Yo to LF, and Conforto to DH?

[TransMonk]

Pending the knowledge on actual match ups based on announced starting pitching, I would think we would see Conforto in left with Johnson DHing in Game 1.

[Ceetar]

probably Cuddyer, but maybe Uribe?

[Gwreck]

TransMonk wrote: Pending the knowledge on actual match ups based on announced starting pitching, I would think we would see Conforto in left with Johnson DHing in Game 1.

Exactly what I would do.

[Edgy MD]

We may see a game or so with Conforto DH-ing and Laggy in center. He's hot!

[Lefty Specialist]

They're so righty-heavy that I'm guessing Kirk Nieuwenhuis gets more AB's than Coach Cuddy.

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

Let's go with Cuddyer, because it's sporting to go into a fight with one arm tied behind your back.

[Edgy MD]

Cuddy isn't sucky!

If I have to put it on a bumper sticker, I will!

[ashie62]

Sign Dave Kingman.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Edgy MD wrote: Cuddy isn't sucky! If I have to put it on a bumper sticker, I will!

I have no idea why Willets is so consistently down on Cuddyer. While it's true that he hasn't been as good as the Mets had hoped, and that he hasn't played up to his salary, he's certainly been a contributor.

[ashie62]

Cause he lost his job to a AA guy?

[Edgy MD]

That's about as weird a statement as there is.

Just about all of them AA guys, until they're not. Bryce Harper was a AA guy. Wasn't as good down there as Conforto was, though.

Everybody gets outplayed by somebody, and that's a good thing if you're a fan. It's bad logic to insinuate that somebody sucks because somebody else is better. He was/is here to play his best until Conforto or Nimmo or somebody pushed him aside. It was a two-year deal for a reason.

He's contributed. God willing, he'll contribute again. There's every chance he will.

[Vic Sage]

i think it'll be K.J. primarily, maybe Nieuwenheis. Cuddyer may be limited to PHing against Danny Duffy and Franklin Morales. Or Collins could go for D and start Lagares in CF, and DH Conforto.

[HahnSolo]

Vic Sage wrote: Or Collins could go for D and start Lagares in CF, and DH Conforto.

I'm down with this. I think Conforto has looked a bit uncomfortable in the OF this postseason.

[Guest Mets � Willets Point]

Because it seems like everytime Cuddyer comes to bat he pops up or hits a weak grounder on the first pitch. He's an easy out. Even when Duda was slumping he'd at least make the pitcher work a little bit.

Who bats after Cuddyer?
The other team!

[Benjamin Grimm]

Well, there's what seems, and what actually is. He undeniably had a bad September, but in July and August he was a valuable role player:

[list:1655ef1k]July, 10 games: .310/.355/.510
August, 17 games: .375/.423/.583[/list:u:1655ef1k]

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Vic Sage wrote: Or Collins could go for D and start Lagares in CF, and DH Conforto.

This. As strong an outfield defense as possible, given the Royals' propensity for contact/relative unwillingness to take walks. I have a feeling we're headed for more close-and-late action in all of these.

[Centerfield]

• July, 10 games: .310/.355/.510
  August, 17 games: .375/.423/.583

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Well, there's what seems, and what actually is. He undeniably had a bad September, but in July and August he was a valuable role player:

Sure. But what were his numbers in April, May, June, September and October? (Don't bother to look, they are not good.) He had a good stretch in July and August, but he's not been good otherwise. He has a .699 OPS for the season. That is terrible for a corner outfielder. And it is about 125 to 150 points lower than I was hoping for when we signed him.

He is extremely lucky that the two balls he misplayed in Game 1 of the NLDS never came back to bite them.

Michael Cuddyer Sucks.

And because he sucks, there is absolutely, positively no way he does anything good during the World Series. Now way he gets a big hit late to win a game. Mark this down. You can take this to the bank.

[Edgy MD]

Well, he acknowledged September. October is scarcely relevant, as small sample as it is.

At this point he's not a corner outfielder, but a reserve. And not sucky.

You will sing of him before all is said and done. Why not sing now?

[Centerfield]

Edgy MD wrote: Well, he acknowledged September. October is scarcely relevant, as small sample as it is. At this point he's not a corner outfielder, but a reserve. And not sucky. You will sing of him before all is said and done. Why not sing now?

Wait. Not sucky for a corner outfielder? Or not sucky as a reserve? He certainly sucked as a corner outfielder. Which is why he is now a reserve.

And I (or WP) can justifiably criticize him since he was signed to be a good, run producing (starting) corner outfielder.

I'm glad you have confidence that he will do something good. I am saying unequivocally that there is no chance in the world he will get a big hit in the World Series. None. Zero.

Michael Cuddyer sucks.

[Ceetar]

.287/.330/.425 for a 112 wRC+ since his DL stint.

If you buy that a lot of his problem was his knee injury (and he reportedly was hurting more and more as a game went on, and his numbers heavily reflected this) then he's basically Michael Cuddyer, career 12% better than average guy. Or you know, slightly better than Daniel Murphy guy.

He's a better hitter than Juan Lagares. He might be better in the platoon split than Granderson and is at least a safer bet than Conforto in that regard.

He's almost definitely better than Uribe, Plawecki and Johnson.

[Edgy MD]

Centerfield wrote: Michael Cuddyer sucks.

Your track record in these declarations is less than strong.

[Centerfield]

Edgy MD wrote: Centerfield wrote: Michael Cuddyer sucks. Your track record in these declarations is less than strong.

Yet surprisingly consistent.

Like I said. Michael Cuddyer sucks. There is no chance he will get any big hits in the World Series.

[seawolf17]

Cuddy was 6-19 as a pinch-hitter this year. That's something.

But no, I don't know that I want him getting too many ABs in the Series.

[Centerfield]

Ceetar wrote: .287/.330/.425 for a 112 wRC+ since his DL stint. If you buy that a lot of his problem was his knee injury (and he reportedly was hurting more and more as a game went on, and his numbers heavily reflected this) then he's basically Michael Cuddyer, career 12% better than average guy. Or you know, slightly better than Daniel Murphy guy. He's a better hitter than Juan Lagares. He might be better in the platoon split than Granderson and is at least a safer bet than Conforto in that regard. He's almost definitely better than Uribe, Plawecki and Johnson.

Plawecki yes, but Uribe and Johnson? Both had OPS's in the mid 700's. (Johnson .750, Uribe .737). I'd go with either of those guys over MC at this point (so long as Uribe is healthy).

I agree about a Granderson/Cuddyer platoon. I think that is probably the way to go for RF in 2016. But there's no way I'd play him in the field during this WS. It's probably his injury but he's looking bad out there.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Centerfield wrote: Ceetar wrote: .287/.330/.425 for a 112 wRC+ since his DL stint. If you buy that a lot of his problem was his knee injury (and he reportedly was hurting more and more as a game went on, and his numbers heavily reflected this) then he's basically Michael Cuddyer, career 12% better than average guy. Or you know, slightly better than Daniel Murphy guy. He's a better hitter than Juan Lagares. He might be better in the platoon split than Granderson and is at least a safer bet than Conforto in that regard. He's almost definitely better than Uribe, Plawecki and Johnson. Plawecki yes, but Uribe and Johnson? Both had OPS's in the mid 700's. (Johnson .750, Uribe .737). I'd go with either of those guys over MC at this point (so long as Uribe is healthy).

You'd likely be wrong to do so. Those late-season/post-DL numbers of Coach Cuddy's are pretty much right in line with his career averages, and though he may be a shitshow in the field, he's still good-to-great with the bat, the occasional terrible-looking approach aside.

Not to mention that his career numbers against righties (.272/.329/.447, 7.1% BB rate/18.6% K rate) compare VERY favorably to our nominal righty-killers' equivalent numbers (.244/.330/.421, 11% BB rate/22.1% K rate for Johnson; .245/.314/.423, 8.8% BB rate/30.5% K rate for Nieuwenhuis). So... not strictly a platoon DH, either.

Edited October 26, 2015 by Guest

[Benjamin Grimm]

I think he failed to be an adequate choice as a starting outfielder. I think he's a better-than-average right-handed bench player.

[Vic Sage]

i'm with CF... as long as he and i consistently declare that "Cuddyer Sucks" as often as we did Granderson, we're bound to get something useful out of him.

[Edgy MD]

The Boobird's Failsafe returns.

[Centerfield]

The Boobird's Failsafe returns.

You've used this phrase before. I'm not sure what this means, but I suspect it's meant to undermine my points about Granderson and Cuddyer. And now I feel constrained to reply.

I was happy to eat crow in the other thread because, although it was not the point of the "Sucks" thread, I didn't think that Granderson was going to improve. But he did. A lot. And so, for that reason, I'm happy to to be wrong. But don't take that to mean that somehow my original post was wrong (or that you were correct).

On the day I posted the Granderson thread, my points were:

1. Granderson sucks (as of May 6, .690 OPS).
2. Granderson sucked last year too. (.714 OPS)
3. He makes a lot of money. ($16 million)
4. Because he sucks and makes a lot of money, this hurts the team.
5. Despite hurting the team for a year plus, he gets very little criticism.

All of those points were and are still, correct.

The main arguments offered against my thesis by you and others were (as I interpreted them) as follows:

1. He doesn't suck. He has a good OBP
True. He had a good OBP of .364. He also had a slugging PCT of .326. Which means overall he sucked. Shaun Marcum had a great strikeout to walk ratio. But overall ended up 1-10 with an ERA over 5. Suck.

2. I don't care about Granderson. I care about the aggregate of the team.
This is just idiotic thinking. And doesn't really contest the fact that Granderson sucked.

3. You can still win with average guys on your team.
True. But you would hope highly paid corner OF'ers would not be the "average guys" the other players have to carry.

4. I don't think you should release Granderson.
Agreed. Never condoned releasing him. Condoned criticizing him.

None of these arguments successfully challenged any of my above points. Curtis Granderson played poorly, and warranted criticism.

Then an amazing thing happened. Granderson turned it around and had an OPS over .840 the rest of the way, resulting in a final OPS of .821. Suddenly, Curtis Granderson was great, even carrying the team at times. And though there were lots of reasons for the Mets turnaround, Granderson was right in the middle of things.

I suspect that it is your belief that this turnaround undermines my original point. It does not. Granderson with a .690 OPS sucks and hurts the team. Granderson with an .840 OPS is great and helps the team.

Now, to address your phrase. You say "Failsafe", with the implication that I say things in a way where I can never be proven wrong. I absolutely agree with this. And the reason this is true is my point was not a prediction. It was a statement of, what I believed to be, very obvious facts. You, and others, chose to contest those facts. Why? I'm not sure. Again, to me, this all seemed very obvious. But that is your right. Your prerogative. But it is very hard to argue against statements of fact backed up by the appropriate numbers. And one should expect resistance when one contests those facts with selective data and ancillary points.

And finally, you say "Boobird". And the only intent I can read into this is to apply judgment to my way of thinking. We seldom disagree when I have positive things to say about the team or a player. The arguments we have are when I am critical. That's fine. I understand we have different philosophies on what it means to be a fan. You seem to be more supportive and positive. I like to believe I am more even handed (positive when warranted, negative when warranted). But some may say I lean more to critical. That's fine. The difference here is I don't feel the need to undermine your philosophy with, simply-stated, name calling. I can sit here and say "The Clueless Optimists' Failsafe" or something of the like. But there is no point in doing so.

When resorting to name-calling or altering another's point, to further your interests, you are likely on the losing end of the argument.