woofy25 wrote: ↑05 Feb 2026 16:10 pm
NYCardsFan wrote: ↑05 Feb 2026 10:11 am
Shady wrote: ↑05 Feb 2026 10:01 am
craviduce wrote: ↑05 Feb 2026 09:58 am
Shady wrote: ↑05 Feb 2026 09:55 am
Both Church and Saggese have the potential to show vast improvement.
everyone has potential to show vast improvement
I disagree. Some improvement, yes, vast improvement only some. An example of vast improvement as a MLB hitter. Alec Burleson.
Alec Burleson (xBA/xWOBA)
2023: .272/.337
2024: .270/.333
2025: .272/.345
"Vast improvement"
You're just trolling right?
.244/.300/.390/.691/87
.269/.314/.420/.735/105
.280/.343/.459/.801/125
Year/BABIP/BA/xBA/wOBA/xWOBA/BB%/K%
2023:
.261/.244/
.272/.300/
.337/6.6%/13.0%
2024:
.276/.269/
.270/.319/
.333/5.9%/12.8%
2025:
.312/.290/
.272/.346/
.345/7.1%/14.5%
Point-to-point (per Shady’s preferred template): +51 pt difference in BABIP ==> +46 pt difference in BA and wOBA,
ZERO difference in statcast xBA, and a +8 pt difference in xWOBA. Hmmm . . . It’s almost as if Burleson wasn’t nearly as bad as his baseball card stats may have suggested (at least to you and Shady, apparently) in 2023, and conversely he arguably wasn’t quite as good as those baseball card stats may have suggested in 2025.
No one questions the obvious fact that his raw outcomes improved, but Shady's claim was that Burleson is "vastly improved" as a hitter--not merely that he had better outcomes--which is a claim about his underlying skill level. I mean, I could sign up for "improved"--for example, his O-swing% was down 5%, which is encouraging--but "
vastly improved"? The variance in his production is almost entirely a function of BABIP--do you have a view on what Burleson's "true" baseline BABIP is (or should be)? If so, on what basis? I, for one, have no idea where it will settle based on these numbers. You and I had this same discussion a year or so ago, so I won't belabor the point, but there's a difference between process, peripherals, batted-ball variance, and raw outcomes/baseball card stats. Where you seem to perceive fundamental underlying "trends" in skill, I see an awful lot of statistical noise that is difficult to interpret or forecast. It appears we aren't going to convince each other, which of course is perfectly fine.