March 20, 201214 yr And Coghlan's numbers also show he is a better second-half player than first-half. His rookie season he was pretty average the first three months and really turned it on in the second half. Some guys are just slow starters; look at a guy like Dan Uggla last year. No, the numbers do not show that he is a better second-half player. They show that one year he had a crazy flukey second half of the season, fueled, as Penguino pointed out like 4 posts ago, by an absurd, .406 BABIP. And that was the only season that he truly was able to show consistent at bats as an every day presence in the lineup. You say it's absurd, maybe it was his potential? Who are you to say, considering he did in fact achieve those numbers?
March 20, 201214 yr I say it's absurd because nobody has ever been able to sustain a .400 BABIP for more than a few months at a time. That was a fluke. It wasn't the result of being in the lineup every day. It was random chance. The highest BABIP for a career in history is Tom McCreery at .390 and then Ty Cobb at .378. Both of their careers began over 100 years ago. He is not going to sustain anything close to a .400 BABIP, and since his successes int hat second half of the year were almost entirely based on that BABIP, it's pretty easy to say it wasn't his potential.
March 20, 201214 yr I love Coghlan, but his two month stretch was pretty streaky. I don't think he was ever a .330+ hitter. More like a .270-.280 career hitter who is capable of hitting .290+ once in a while.
March 20, 201214 yr As for Coghlan, I still think he has potential, so I'd rather see him get consistent at bats in the minors than get rusty on the major league bench.
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.