Of course, we all would, but come on, how sustainable is that with a k rate near 60%?

Probably impossible to sustain.  

 

But, IMO, I've been fairly encouraged by Park's ABs so far.  

 

His and Buxton's ABs aren't in the same universe.  Again...IMO.

 

Of course, we all would, but come on, how sustainable is that with a k rate near 60%?

nothing a .400 BABIP can't sustain. (like he has now).

Bright spot: I don't miss seeing Brian Dinkleman in the starting lineup.

I think everyone is rightfully giving him a pass since literally ever time he faces a pitcher it's for the first time. Guys like Buxton, Rosario, Sano and Plouffe continuing to flail away at pitch after pitch are embarrassing themselves, to be honest.

Buxton is seeing most of these guys for the first time too.

My post wasn't meant to rip Park but more to defend Buxton. Let's give him a couple hundred AB's before we talk demotion. His defense makes him an above replacement level player with anything above .600 OPS. Which, yes, I realize he's well below even that right now.

 

Probably impossible to sustain.  

 

But, IMO, I've been fairly encouraged by Park's ABs so far.  

 

His and Buxton's ABs aren't in the same universe.  Again...IMO.

 

Park has had good at bats. Buxton looks slightly less embarrassing than I would in the box.

 

nothing a .400 BABIP can't sustain. (like he has now).

It's 13 ABs ferpetesakes.  Jeebus.  And that BABIP doesn't include a HR, which, for some inexplicable reason, isn't a "ball in play."

Probably impossible to sustain.

 

But, IMO, I've been fairly encouraged by Park's ABs so far.

 

His and Buxton's ABs aren't in the same universe. Again...IMO.

My post was to point out how ridiculous it would be to send down Buck after 5 games, not to say I've given up on Park.

 

Buxton is seeing most of these guys for the first time too.
My post wasn't meant to rip Park but more to defend Buxton. Let's give him a couple hundred AB's before we talk demotion. His defense makes him an above replacement level player with anything above .600 OPS. Which, yes, I realize he's well below even that right now.

 

Yes he is seeing many for the first time, and looking way way way overmatched in doing so. This guy was supposed to be a can't miss stud, right? He's only a rookie by a few ABs. Hard to see much improvement at this point.

 

It's 13 ABs ferpetesakes.  Jeebus.  And that BABIP doesn't include a HR, which, for some inexplicable reason, isn't a "ball in play."

It matters when one praises his batting line while having that many strikeouts and we are talking about sustainability of those numbers (and the person I quoted was talking about sustainability).  With those Ks, his numbers wouldn't be like that without that BABIP.

Edited April 10, 201610 yr by jimmer

 

My post was to point out how ridiculous it would be to send down Buck after 5 games, not to say I've given up on Park.

Fair enough.

 

And for what it's worth, I agree on Buxton.  I'd just let him play.  For one thing, who's going to take his place? 

 

Of course, we all would, but come on, how sustainable is that with a k rate near 60%?

How sustainable is a 60% K rate for a hitter who can square them up like that?

11 k's in 16 ABs for the can't miss stud prospect. haha cmon now.

 

 

Probably impossible to sustain.  

 

But, IMO, I've been fairly encouraged by Park's ABs so far.  

 

His and Buxton's ABs aren't in the same universe.  Again...IMO.

 

Agreed. Thus far, Park has been having quality at-bats (fouling off pitches, working the count, etc.). He hasn't been swinging at junk.

 

Park is actually at .231/.375/.462 for the year coming into today.  I'd be thrilled with that if he ended up the year there.

 

Buxton:  .133/.133/.267.  

That's a cheap thrill, though.

 

How sustainable is a 60% K rate for a hitter who can square them up like that?

Did you see how often he struck out in an inferior league?

Positives:  I grow more and more convinced with each game that the Twins are going to threaten the MLB record for fewest GIDP's in a season.

 

 

 

Yes he is seeing many for the first time, and looking way way way overmatched in doing so. This guy was supposed to be a can't miss stud, right? He's only a rookie by a few ABs. Hard to see much improvement at this point.

and we've officially gone off the deep end...

 

That's a cheap thrill, though.

At my age, I take 'em at any price.

Yes he is seeing many for the first time, and looking way way way overmatched in doing so. This guy was supposed to be a can't miss stud, right? He's only a rookie by a few ABs. Hard to see much improvement at this point.

Can't miss doesn't mean he won't struggle.

His body of work in the minors combined with his tools suggest he'll figure it out eventually.

The one place he's guaranteed to NOT learn how to hit MLB pitching is on AAA.

 

and we've officially gone off the deep end...

 

Sorry, but when we can all point to specific ABs in which he hasn't looked horrendous (because there are so few of those), there's a big problem. K'ing out doesn't even utilize his speed.

Hey, I haven't played baseball since high school, maybe I should also get a crack at hitting in the 2-hole instead of Escobar.

11 k's in 16 ABs for the can't miss stud prospect. haha cmon now.

Ahh, the massive 16 AB sample size. How could so many scouts have missed so badly on this kid.

 

Just for kicks, how did Mike Trout do in his first couple hundred AB's?

Baseball isn't supposed to be as difficult as the twins are making it.

How sustainable is a 60% K rate for a hitter who can square them up like that?

It's not, it was used in response to a triple slash reflecting 14 AB's to make a point.

 

Can't miss doesn't mean he won't struggle.
His body of work in the minors combined with his tools suggest he'll figure it out eventually.
The one place he's guaranteed to NOT learn how to hit MLB pitching is on AAA.

Not necessarily so. He may be so overmatched he gets ground into the ground mentally. Finding out you can hit AAA pitching consistently has often been valuable to hitters. Isn't that why AAA exists, after all?

 

Ahh, the massive 16 AB sample size. How could so many scouts have missed so badly on this kid.

Just for kicks, how did Mike Trout do in his first couple hundred AB's?

 

I don't know, did he occasionally make contact?

 

Ahh, the massive 16 AB sample size. How could so many scouts have missed so badly on this kid.

Just for kicks, how did Mike Trout do in his first couple hundred AB's?

 

Buxton's not Trout. You know why? No one's close to Trout. The sooner the comparison ends for Twins fans the better everyone will be able to judge his progress.

OK...let's everyone complain about Nolasco, not about our fellow Twins fans.

 

kthanks.

 

 

 

Did you see how often he struck out in an inferior league?

 

Yes, nowhere near 60%.  Not even half that.  His OPS given the K's was the discussion.  But my point is it's moot.  Park won't strike out 60% of the time, thus making his OPS more sustainable.  .825 sustainable, maybe not.  K's should normalize for Park and Buxton.  Hitting a breaking ball is hard, but talented hitters learn.

Hey, at least Nolasco is off to a good start today.   That's something, I suppose.