May 23, 200719 yr Reggie! Reggie! are you serious? I can understand rooting for the guy, but I would like to see a bit more logic onh this decision than "we are winning with Reggie batting lead off, so lets keep doing the same thing" If they bat him 8th, he is sure to be a blackhole and with the way Olivo is playing, our 7-8-9 is abysmal. They put him at leadoff, and while the numbers aren't there right now he looks much better at the plate in his limited at bats this year than all of last year. He will see better pitches with Uggla, Hanley and Cabs in back of him instead of Mitre, Olsen and Kim. It's certainly worth the try to hit him leadoff for a week or two. The team is playing well, and although it isn't because he is hitting first, something is going on there. I see your point on the 7-8-9 blackhole. and it is a valid one. A balanced line up is important. But committed to Reggie long term? Where is the logic there?
May 23, 200719 yr There's no sense in Reggie leading-off and anyone trying to justify will look foolish, in my opinion. Last year he saw 3.52 pitches per AB. This year the pitches per AB is down to 3.10.
May 23, 200719 yr Watch the game, forget the ridiculously small sample size of 28 at bats in which numbers can be skewed with one great and or terrible afternoon. He looks better at the plate and is taking more pitches. Not to mention he has struckout just 3 times if he bombs, he bombs He def looks much more comfortable and relaxed then he ever did in the 8 hole. He is also going to see better pitches then when he was in the 8 hole. We haven't seen him in the leadoff spot enough to make a good decision. Besides why do all the Armchair GM's on this board complain about a lineup that has us on a 4 game winning streak? Sit back, relax and enjoy the ride while our team is clicking. :thumbup
May 23, 200719 yr He's the same guy. He still can't hit. He still takes circuitous routes on balls. He still throws to the wrong base. He still overthrows cut-off men. He still nonchalantly catches balls. He still wears his hat funny. He's the same guy.
May 23, 200719 yr Watch the game, forget the ridiculously small sample size of 28 at bats in which numbers can be skewed with one great and or terrible afternoon. He looks better at the plate and is taking more pitches. Not to mention he has struckout just 3 times if he bombs, he bombs He def looks much more comfortable and relaxed then he ever did in the 8 hole. He is also going to see better pitches then when he was in the 8 hole. We haven't seen him in the leadoff spot enough to make a good decision. Besides why do all the Armchair GM's on this board complain about a lineup that has us on a 4 game winning streak? Sit back, relax and enjoy the ride while our team is clicking. :thumbup Hi there, armchair GM here, Because the logic that it "won" us four games is eventually going to mean we'll stick with it despite it "losing" us 10 games. Just because it's working doesn't make it a good idea, or the best idea. It's like winning Russian Roulette and then expecting every chamber to be empty. At the end of the day, it's just stupid. I have no problem keeping Reggie in the lineup, just not leading off.
May 23, 200719 yr Watch the game, forget the ridiculously small sample size of 28 at bats in which numbers can be skewed with one great and or terrible afternoon. He looks better at the plate and is taking more pitches. Not to mention he has struckout just 3 times if he bombs, he bombs He def looks much more comfortable and relaxed then he ever did in the 8 hole. He is also going to see better pitches then when he was in the 8 hole. We haven't seen him in the leadoff spot enough to make a good decision. Besides why do all the Armchair GM's on this board complain about a lineup that has us on a 4 game winning streak? Sit back, relax and enjoy the ride while our team is clicking. :thumbup Hi there, armchair GM here, Because the logic that it "won" us four games is eventually going to mean we'll stick with it despite it "losing" us 10 games. Just because it's working doesn't make it a good idea, or the best idea. It's like winning Russian Roulette and then expecting every chamber to be empty. At the end of the day, it's just stupid. I have no problem keeping Reggie in the lineup, just not leading off. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Why mess with something that's working. Fish have looked great lately and that includes Reggie. It's nice to see some consistency in the lineup instead of this shakeup we see all the time from day to day. I'm sorry perhaps I'm too optimistic for ya.
May 23, 200719 yr Watch the game, forget the ridiculously small sample size of 28 at bats in which numbers can be skewed with one great and or terrible afternoon. He looks better at the plate and is taking more pitches. Not to mention he has struckout just 3 times if he bombs, he bombs why isnt carroll being given a shot? He is ripping the ball pretty good, do they just wanna take their time or do they have concerns for defense?
May 23, 200719 yr Watch the game, forget the ridiculously small sample size of 28 at bats in which numbers can be skewed with one great and or terrible afternoon. He looks better at the plate and is taking more pitches. Not to mention he has struckout just 3 times if he bombs, he bombs He def looks much more comfortable and relaxed then he ever did in the 8 hole. He is also going to see better pitches then when he was in the 8 hole. We haven't seen him in the leadoff spot enough to make a good decision. Besides why do all the Armchair GM's on this board complain about a lineup that has us on a 4 game winning streak? Sit back, relax and enjoy the ride while our team is clicking. :thumbup Hi there, armchair GM here, Because the logic that it "won" us four games is eventually going to mean we'll stick with it despite it "losing" us 10 games. Just because it's working doesn't make it a good idea, or the best idea. It's like winning Russian Roulette and then expecting every chamber to be empty. At the end of the day, it's just stupid. I have no problem keeping Reggie in the lineup, just not leading off. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Why mess with something that's working. Fish have looked great lately and that includes Reggie. It's nice to see some consistency in the lineup instead of this shakeup we see all the time from day to day. I'm sorry perhaps I'm too optimistic for ya. that's like saying, my car is still running so why change the oil. Reggie is not a lead-off hitter.
May 23, 200719 yr There's no use for stats in this argument, like Ramp said, the sample size is too small. I think putting Reggie at the 1 spot most definitely gives him the best chance to succeed, and just might be our best option right now. I would love to see someone like Carroll, or even Hermansen come up and take that spot for awhile, but Reggie has looked better than he ever has in the major leagues. But putting Reggie at 1, gives a 3-4-5-6 heart of Hanley, Miggy, Hammer, and Hermida... and those guys are our run producers. That is a very intimidating stretch for a pitcher... any pitcher. He will do nothing anywhere else in the lineup, unless it's in the front half surrounded by consistent hitters. He's going to have to learn to get on base more, and I think he is deep in that process right now. EDIT: If this was De Aza we were talking about, who was leading off with the exact same production... we would all be falling over our tongues with praises of "how he just makes things happen, just look at our win streak."
May 23, 200719 yr Watch the game, forget the ridiculously small sample size of 28 at bats in which numbers can be skewed with one great and or terrible afternoon. He looks better at the plate and is taking more pitches. Not to mention he has struckout just 3 times if he bombs, he bombs He def looks much more comfortable and relaxed then he ever did in the 8 hole. He is also going to see better pitches then when he was in the 8 hole. We haven't seen him in the leadoff spot enough to make a good decision. Besides why do all the Armchair GM's on this board complain about a lineup that has us on a 4 game winning streak? Sit back, relax and enjoy the ride while our team is clicking. :thumbup Hi there, armchair GM here, Because the logic that it "won" us four games is eventually going to mean we'll stick with it despite it "losing" us 10 games. Just because it's working doesn't make it a good idea, or the best idea. It's like winning Russian Roulette and then expecting every chamber to be empty. At the end of the day, it's just stupid. I have no problem keeping Reggie in the lineup, just not leading off. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Why mess with something that's working. Fish have looked great lately and that includes Reggie. It's nice to see some consistency in the lineup instead of this shakeup we see all the time from day to day. I'm sorry perhaps I'm too optimistic for ya. that's like saying, my car is still running so why change the oil. Reggie is not a lead-off hitter. Yeah well you usually get that done when your little orange oil light turns on.... ...I don't think Reggie's emergency oil light has illuminated just yet!
May 23, 200719 yr Watch the game, forget the ridiculously small sample size of 28 at bats in which numbers can be skewed with one great and or terrible afternoon. He looks better at the plate and is taking more pitches. Not to mention he has struckout just 3 times if he bombs, he bombs He def looks much more comfortable and relaxed then he ever did in the 8 hole. He is also going to see better pitches then when he was in the 8 hole. We haven't seen him in the leadoff spot enough to make a good decision. Besides why do all the Armchair GM's on this board complain about a lineup that has us on a 4 game winning streak? Sit back, relax and enjoy the ride while our team is clicking. :thumbup Hi there, armchair GM here, Because the logic that it "won" us four games is eventually going to mean we'll stick with it despite it "losing" us 10 games. Just because it's working doesn't make it a good idea, or the best idea. It's like winning Russian Roulette and then expecting every chamber to be empty. At the end of the day, it's just stupid. I have no problem keeping Reggie in the lineup, just not leading off. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Why mess with something that's working. Fish have looked great lately and that includes Reggie. It's nice to see some consistency in the lineup instead of this shakeup we see all the time from day to day. I'm sorry perhaps I'm too optimistic for ya. A car still runs with a check engine light on. You want to wait until the belts explode?
May 23, 200719 yr Watch the game, forget the ridiculously small sample size of 28 at bats in which numbers can be skewed with one great and or terrible afternoon. He looks better at the plate and is taking more pitches. Not to mention he has struckout just 3 times if he bombs, he bombs He def looks much more comfortable and relaxed then he ever did in the 8 hole. He is also going to see better pitches then when he was in the 8 hole. We haven't seen him in the leadoff spot enough to make a good decision. Besides why do all the Armchair GM's on this board complain about a lineup that has us on a 4 game winning streak? Sit back, relax and enjoy the ride while our team is clicking. :thumbup Hi there, armchair GM here, Because the logic that it "won" us four games is eventually going to mean we'll stick with it despite it "losing" us 10 games. Just because it's working doesn't make it a good idea, or the best idea. It's like winning Russian Roulette and then expecting every chamber to be empty. At the end of the day, it's just stupid. I have no problem keeping Reggie in the lineup, just not leading off. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Why mess with something that's working. Fish have looked great lately and that includes Reggie. It's nice to see some consistency in the lineup instead of this shakeup we see all the time from day to day. I'm sorry perhaps I'm too optimistic for ya. A car still runs with a check engine light on. You want to wait until the belts explode? Reggie's check engine light is not on, he just got a tuneup. I think we really wore out this analogy :lol
May 23, 200719 yr Watch the game, forget the ridiculously small sample size of 28 at bats in which numbers can be skewed with one great and or terrible afternoon. He looks better at the plate and is taking more pitches. Not to mention he has struckout just 3 times if he bombs, he bombs He def looks much more comfortable and relaxed then he ever did in the 8 hole. He is also going to see better pitches then when he was in the 8 hole. We haven't seen him in the leadoff spot enough to make a good decision. Besides why do all the Armchair GM's on this board complain about a lineup that has us on a 4 game winning streak? Sit back, relax and enjoy the ride while our team is clicking. :thumbup Hi there, armchair GM here, Because the logic that it "won" us four games is eventually going to mean we'll stick with it despite it "losing" us 10 games. Just because it's working doesn't make it a good idea, or the best idea. It's like winning Russian Roulette and then expecting every chamber to be empty. At the end of the day, it's just stupid. I have no problem keeping Reggie in the lineup, just not leading off. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Why mess with something that's working. Fish have looked great lately and that includes Reggie. It's nice to see some consistency in the lineup instead of this shakeup we see all the time from day to day. I'm sorry perhaps I'm too optimistic for ya. A car still runs with a check engine light on. You want to wait until the belts explode? Reggie's check engine light is not on, he just got a tuneup. I think we really wore out this analogy :lol .214 That light's on.
May 23, 200719 yr Reggie! Reggie! are you serious? I can understand rooting for the guy, but I would like to see a bit more logic onh this decision than "we are winning with Reggie batting lead off, so lets keep doing the same thing" If they bat him 8th, he is sure to be a blackhole and with the way Olivo is playing, our 7-8-9 is abysmal. They put him at leadoff, and while the numbers aren't there right now he looks much better at the plate in his limited at bats this year than all of last year. He will see better pitches with Uggla, Hanley and Cabs in back of him instead of Mitre, Olsen and Kim. It's certainly worth the try to hit him leadoff for a week or two. The team is playing well, and although it isn't because he is hitting first, something is going on there. I see your point on the 7-8-9 blackhole. and it is a valid one. A balanced line up is important. But committed to Reggie long term? Where is the logic there? I think we are looking too much into the words Fredi used. Long term could be 10 days for all we know. Maybe trying to instill some confidence in Reg. As for why Carroll hasn't been giving a shot yet..... Reggie has seen all of 28 at bats, Hermansen is probably ahead of him, Cody Ross should be back within the month, De Aza could be back soon, and Brett probably needs to prove he can hit for another month or so
May 23, 200719 yr When optimism gets in the way of making rational decisions, optimism must be thrown out the window for realism. But hey, that's just my opinion. The fact is Reggie will not come close to putting up the numbers needed by this team for him to be a productive lead-off hitter. He has a hard enough time becoming a productive member of the line-up! The only level at which he got on-base at a respectable rate was rookie ball (.360) and high A+ (.348), other than that he has a career on-base percentage in pro baseball of .303. That's terrible. That's craptastic. Anyone who can justify putting Reggie at lead-off (other than the 'well it's working for us now' argument) is just being a Reggie homer. Reggie is an athlete, not a baseball player.
May 23, 200719 yr When optimism gets in the way of making rational decisions, optimism must be thrown out the window for realism. But hey, that's just my opinion. The fact is Reggie will not come close to putting up the numbers needed by this team for him to be a productive lead-off hitter. He has a hard enough time becoming a productive member of the line-up! The only level at which he got on-base at a respectable rate was rookie ball (.360) and high A+ (.348), other than that he has a career on-base percentage in pro baseball of .303. That's terrible. That's craptastic. Anyone who can justify putting Reggie at lead-off (other than the 'well it's working for us now' argument) is just being a Reggie homer. Reggie is an athlete, not a baseball player. Even though it's AAA, 2 things stand out from Reggie's 6 weeks in Albuquerque. His .353 OBP and his .373 OBP with no one on base.
May 23, 200719 yr When optimism gets in the way of making rational decisions, optimism must be thrown out the window for realism. But hey, that's just my opinion. The fact is Reggie will not come close to putting up the numbers needed by this team for him to be a productive lead-off hitter. He has a hard enough time becoming a productive member of the line-up! The only level at which he got on-base at a respectable rate was rookie ball (.360) and high A+ (.348), other than that he has a career on-base percentage in pro baseball of .303. That's terrible. That's craptastic. Anyone who can justify putting Reggie at lead-off (other than the 'well it's working for us now' argument) is just being a Reggie homer. Reggie is an athlete, not a baseball player. Even though it's AAA, 2 things stand out from Reggie's 6 weeks in Albuquerque. His .353 OBP and his .373 OBP with no one on base. Based on what I've seen of Reggie Abercrombie over the last year and the statistics over his career, I have serious doubts he can maintain a OBP even 15-25 points lower than that. Even if he did manage to produce at that level (.335-.345 OBP), Hanley Ramirez could easily post a .370-.380 OBP which would lead to more production in terms of runs driven in by those in the lower part of the line-up.
May 23, 200719 yr Reggie looks like sh*t because he is a sh*tty player. If anything he looks worse at the plate than last season, and his defense is still craptacular. Move Hermida up to the top, leave Hanley in the middle, and move Reggie to Pizza Hut.
May 24, 200719 yr Fredi is calling into Sid Rosenberg now...highlight so far, Fredi will keep Abercrombie at the 1 hole for "long term" and Hanley is a "middle of the lineup man" WOW. Fredi lost like 10 points with me there. Reggie is getting all the opportunities with this org. Hopefully he proves us wrong and can take advantage of it Try about 50 with me. I think he is a great guy and everything but he has made too many blunders, lacks fire and leaves you scratching your head with his usage of players and pitchers
May 24, 200719 yr The Marlins were winning despite Reggie leading off, not because of it. On a side note, I found it funny that the day Fredi says Reggie will be the leadoff hitter longterm he benches him.
May 24, 200719 yr On a side note, I found it funny that the day Fredi says Reggie will be the leadoff hitter longterm he benches him. Reggie only plays against LHP (Even though he's hit RHP better then LHP). I'm sure he meant the Amezaga/Reggie platoon leading off.
May 24, 200719 yr Reggie! Reggie! are you serious? I can understand rooting for the guy, but I would like to see a bit more logic onh this decision than "we are winning with Reggie batting lead off, so lets keep doing the same thing" Basically, Reggie Abercrombie IS the next Ken Griffey Jr. You mean the poor defensive centerfielder that Griffey has been late in his career or the way they hurt their teams (by Griffey collecting paychecks from the DL and Reggie stepping into the batter's box)? If it ain't broke don't fix it. The motto of the chicken. Too afraid to make any changes until absolutely necessary. They are also likely to make bad decisions when forced to.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.