May 22, 200917 yr I am so sick and tired of this scrrrrrrrrrrub. He cant hit, he cant field and he cant run. He just flat out sucks and its time for this organization to move in a different direction. I dont care what the alternatives are just get rid of him. He is a loser and a curse.
May 22, 200917 yr He's a terrible fielder, yes. But you can't really say he's too bad of a hitter. He is a great OBP guy and is still too young to write off. His fielding is awful, and I think "Hermida'd" should become a verb to describe poor play in the outfield, but his hitting is not among this team's biggest problems.
May 22, 200917 yr He can hit and gets on base, he needs to learn how to dive head first, he has average speed and can steal a few bases. How are you blaming him when guys like Coghlan are hitting .170?
May 22, 200917 yr The guy's batting .262/.381/.390 for Pete's sake. That's not unbelievable, but it's quite solid. Would people be happier if he was hitting .262/.350/.452? Or .262/.330/.492? Because all of those lines make for just about the same hitter, as far as overall value is concerned. This is really one of the most annoying parts about this sight. Last year he sucked, sure, but his production is decent this year at the very least.
May 22, 200917 yr Well, while Kobe and co. captured how I think about the suggestion posed by the OP... the logic is... Hermida's an average fielder at best. His bat has been solid all year, and just yesterday he hit a big HR, but because we didn't win the game, it gets completely ignored. Of ALL of the holes on this team, to target Hermida is not just outright laughable, it's outright ignorant. You wanna blame somebody? Blame the SP for not going as deep as they should.
May 22, 200917 yr The guy's batting .262/.381/.390 for Pete's sake. That's not unbelievable, but it's quite solid. Would people be happier if he was hitting .262/.350/.452? Or .262/.330/.492? Because all of those lines make for just about the same hitter, as far as overall value is concerned. This is really one of the most annoying parts about this sight. Last year he sucked, sure, but his production is decent this year at the very least. Last year he had an OPS+ of 91... and basically only sucked at home... was he not good last year? Yeah, but I still wouldn't say "sucked" overall... Also... Dim, you fail at gif posting
May 22, 200917 yr He's not a bad outfielder. He's average defensively. He gets on-base at a high ass %, so he's not a bad hitter. You don't know what you're talking about, and the FO does. So he's staying.
May 22, 200917 yr Hahaha, Hermida and "great" in the same sentence. hahahahaha Dude is a SCRUB. He doesn't hustle and plays horrible defense. Any of us could play better D than him in the outfield. The only thing i'll give him is his patience because he does get a good amount of walks, and he runs into one every now and then. But people need to stop regarding him as a prospect with alot of potential, because he has been here for a few years already. He can't get away with the "potential" excuse anymore.
May 22, 200917 yr The guy's batting .262/.381/.390 for Pete's sake. That's not unbelievable, but it's quite solid. Would people be happier if he was hitting .262/.350/.452? Or .262/.330/.492? Because all of those lines make for just about the same hitter, as far as overall value is concerned. This is really one of the most annoying parts about this sight. Last year he sucked, sure, but his production is decent this year at the very least. :notworthy :notworthy :thumbup
May 22, 200917 yr Author Hahaha, Hermida and "great" in the same sentence. hahahahaha Dude is a SCRUB. He doesn't hustle and plays horrible defense. Any of us could play better D than him in the outfield. The only thing i'll give him is his patience because he does get a good amount of walks, and he runs into one every now and then. But people need to stop regarding him as a prospect with alot of potential, because he has been here for a few years already. He can't get away with the "potential" excuse anymore. Perfectly said He is a way below average player defensively, and doesnt even hustle in the outfield. Im sick of watching a consistent 250 hitter SUCK defensively. Why not play amezaga in his place, they would prob hit for the same average and Alfredo is a gold glover. Yes he wont drive in as many runs but he also wont come close to Hermida's k total. Not to mention the most unclutch player on earth, in that one game in Washington he defiently hired those angles from angles in the outfield, I'd serisouly bet he did.
May 22, 200917 yr Hahaha, Hermida and "great" in the same sentence. hahahahaha Dude is a SCRUB. He doesn't hustle and plays horrible defense. Any of us could play better D than him in the outfield. The only thing i'll give him is his patience because he does get a good amount of walks, and he runs into one every now and then. But people need to stop regarding him as a prospect with alot of potential, because he has been here for a few years already. He can't get away with the "potential" excuse anymore. Perfectly said He is a way below average player defensively, and doesnt even hustle in the outfield. Im sick of watching a consistent 250 hitter SUCK defensively. Why not play amezaga in his place, they would prob hit for the same average and Alfredo is a gold glover. Yes he wont drive in as many runs but he also wont come close to Hermida's k total. Not to mention the most unclutch player on earth, in that one game in Washington he defiently hired those angles from angles in the outfield, I'd serisouly bet he did. Hmm, well said indeed.. if you guys have never watched baseball a day in your collective lives. :thumbup Now, in reality land... Jeremy Hermida is OPSing .835 with guys on base... (batting .275 for those into that sort of thing, but OPS is better) In reality land, Jeremy Hermida is batting over .300 with 2 outs... and OPSing over .900 In reality land, in "late and close" Hermida is OPSing .955 and batting .292, again, if you're into that sort of thing... (Late & Close are PA in the 7th or later with the batting team tied, ahead by one, or the tying run at least on deck.) In reality land, Hermida is OPSing over .900 in "high leverage" situations In reality land, Hermida has been average defensively in RF for almost the entirety of his career (through +/-) and is switching to an easier position in LF. Meaning he'll be, at worst, average... and he's only -1 this year... which isn't super-ultra-mega-terrible. So, I'll keep watching baseball in reality land!
May 22, 200917 yr The guy's batting .262/.381/.390 for Pete's sake. That's not unbelievable, but it's quite solid. Would people be happier if he was hitting .262/.350/.452? Or .262/.330/.492? Because all of those lines make for just about the same hitter, as far as overall value is concerned. This is really one of the most annoying parts about this sight. Last year he sucked, sure, but his production is decent this year at the very least. This is so wrong.
May 22, 200917 yr With additional weight given to OBP, which is about the closest correlation to run production one will find First line value (.262/.381/.390): .962 Second line value (.262/.350/.452): .977 Third line value (.262/.330/.492): .987 So a 2.5% variance is probably safe to call "about the same hitter" in overall value.
May 22, 200917 yr The guy's batting .262/.381/.390 for Pete's sake. That's not unbelievable, but it's quite solid. Would people be happier if he was hitting .262/.350/.452? Or .262/.330/.492? Because all of those lines make for just about the same hitter, as far as overall value is concerned. This is really one of the most annoying parts about this sight. Last year he sucked, sure, but his production is decent this year at the very least. This is so wrong. So I added 2 SLG points for every 1 OBP point, instead of 1.8:1. And this is a necessary response? Even with the "mistake" I made, Puma showed that it's pretty close, anyway. At least you added a link, but that was just a useless response.
May 22, 200917 yr Author Bottom line is that he is truly a 250 hitter that doesnt drive in many runs and is way below average defensively. If you think he is above average or even average your just wrong. But I guess the bottom line is that they really have no replacements so we have to live with his scrub loser ass for another year. On the bright side Beinfest will probably use his magic to trade scrub boy to some dumb ass like Minaya for a decent player. On a related note, does anyone know when Logan Morrison is comin back from his injury?
May 22, 200917 yr The guy's batting .262/.381/.390 for Pete's sake. That's not unbelievable, but it's quite solid. Would people be happier if he was hitting .262/.350/.452? Or .262/.330/.492? Because all of those lines make for just about the same hitter, as far as overall value is concerned. This is really one of the most annoying parts about this sight. Last year he sucked, sure, but his production is decent this year at the very least. This is so wrong. So I added 2 SLG points for every 1 OBP point, instead of 1.8:1. And this is a necessary response? Even with the "mistake" I made, Puma showed that it's pretty close, anyway. At least you added a link, but that was just a useless response. If you want a quick and easy way of calculating run production then use the very simple "runs created" formula which weights OBP and SLG equally. The formula is: OBP x SLG If you prefer precision and are willing to invests the effort then use the "extrapolated runs" formula which is the most precise run production estimator. If you use extrapolated runs formula you'll quickly conclude that your post was nonsense.
May 22, 200917 yr Bottom line is that he is truly a 250 hitter that doesnt drive in many runs and is way below average defensively. If you think he is above average or even average your just wrong. But I guess the bottom line is that they really have no replacements so we have to live with his scrub loser ass for another year. On the bright side Beinfest will probably use his magic to trade scrub boy to some dumb ass like Minaya for a decent player. No, actually. You are.
May 22, 200917 yr If you want a quick and easy way of calculating run production then use the very simple "runs created" formula which weights OBP and SLG equally. The formula is: OBP x SLG If you prefer precision and are willing to invests the effort then use the "extrapolated runs" formula which is the most precise run production estimator. If you use extrapolated runs formula you'll quickly conclude that your post was nonsense. He said that "about the same value". As pointed out above, we're talking about basically a 2.5% difference between the lowest OPS/highest OBP he posted, and the highet OPS/lowest OBP he posted. So that means if the lowest OPS posted 100 runs, the highest OPS created 102.5 runs in the same amount of PA. So yes, they are around the same value, it isn't nonsense.
May 22, 200917 yr and actually, going by 1.8, it's First line value (.262/.381/.390): 1.076 Second line value (.262/.350/.452): 1.082 Third line value (.262/.330/.492): 1.086 it's only a 1% difference. At which point for every 100 runs the first line creates, we're talking about the highest OPS only creating somewhere around 101 runs (and to create 100 runs, we're talking about 650+ PA). and extrapolated runs only correlates to runs at a 0.5% better rate than obp*1.8+SLG. Yeah, it's better. But he wasn't going for pression, that's why he said "about the same value", and it's only a 0.5% difference in correlation between xr and weighted OBP.
May 22, 200917 yr Well using runs created (OBP x SLG) the three scenarios he gave created 0.149, 0.158 and 0.162 runs per PA. The difference between the 0.149 and 0.162 is 9.3%. In my opinion that's not about the same.
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.