Livin' La Vida Larnach?

When I looked at yesterday's game he was one of the few hitters to do well. I think he's about to bring that batting average up to where he will be more than acceptable

50 minutes ago, mikelink45 said:

When I looked at yesterday's game he was one of the few hitters to do well. I think he's about to bring that batting average up to where he will be more than acceptable

Hmm, he had two hits; the sky opened and the Angels sang.?

That he was removed from the gam made little sense, the end of the month will say more,

5 minutes ago, RpR said:

Hmm, he had two hits; the sky opened and the Angels sang.?

The end of the month will say more.

Now, now, let's not be a cynic.  Obviously, it will take some time to see if he has really figured things out.  That is to be expected.  But his at bats, especially when confronted with off speed stuff, are much better than last year by a substantial margin.  I think that is the point mikelink45 is making.

I love how baseball has transformed. When a player is sucking, there are now advanced stats to say that he is so much better than his performance and actual outcomes say they are. Now you can hit .220, and with the "advanced stats", be considered above above average at the plate. Who would have thunk it?

I like Trevor Larnach and think he has a future at the plate. I'm just guessing that athleticism and defense will return with the deader ball and this puts a premium on strong outfield defense. In turn, the demand for strong defenders puts Larnach as a DH. If Martin can maintain a .400 OBP in the bigs and run around LF with authority, there is less room for those who are defensively challenged in an era of hitters who send the ball into the outfield.

6 hours ago, h2oface said:

I love how baseball has transformed. When a player is sucking, there are now advanced stats to say that he is so much better than his performance and actual outcomes say they are. Now you can hit .220, and with the "advanced stats", be considered above above average at the plate. Who would have thunk it?

And that's not the conclusion you should draw from the advanced stats. Larnach has a .630 OPS. That's not good. And if he were to continue like this the entire season, it wouldn't be a good season either. 

All the advanced stats are saying is that there are a lot of reasons to believe he won't continue to have a .630 OPS for the rest of the year. Or, translated into perfectly old school, non-analytics terms: He has really hit the ball well and just has had rotten luck. If he continues doing that, the luck will likely turn around. Simple as that.

Now, you are of course free to ignore what the advanced stats are saying. In this case, let's just hope you'll be pleasantly surprised if he does start getting actual good results. ?

5 hours ago, Sielk said:

And that's not the conclusion you should draw from the advanced stats. Larnach has a .630 OPS. That's not good. And if he were to continue like this the entire season, it wouldn't be a good season either. 

All the advanced stats are saying is that there are a lot of reasons to believe he won't continue to have a .630 OPS for the rest of the year. Or, translated into perfectly old school, non-analytics terms: He has really hit the ball well and just has had rotten luck. If he continues doing that, the luck will likely turn around. Simple as that.

Now, you are of course free to ignore what the advanced stats are saying. In this case, let's just hope you'll be pleasantly surprised if he does start getting actual good results. ?

et al........ thanks.... I get it. Good summary. I understand that is the conclusion the presenters want me to draw. They are right sometimes, and many times not. I tend to go with actual performance. I don't think it is just luck to be able to be a situational hitter. Some luck, sure, as is all at bats. I don't think Larnach "sucks", but I am not going to sugar coat that he is sucking right now. I always welcome players, including those that the same advanced stats are saying they are hopeless, to surprise me. 

4 hours ago, h2oface said:

et al........ thanks.... I get it. Good summary. I understand that is the conclusion the presenters want me to draw. They are right sometimes, and many times not. I tend to go with actual performance. I don't think it is just luck to be able to be a situational hitter. Some luck, sure, as is all at bats. I don't think Larnach "sucks", but I am not going to sugar coat that he is sucking right now. I always welcome players, including those that the same advanced stats are saying they are hopeless, to surprise me. 

No problem with that. I just think situational hitting is far more difficult than many people think unless you're Luis Arraez or one of those superstar hitters that just do everything very well. But most players, now and in the past, have to specialize on their own approach and perfect it, in my opinion. That can still work well if the approach is sound but it does make luck a bigger factor. (There are of course hitters whose approach is inherently flawed, like Kepler, but that's a different story.)

That said, I like how Larnach has been looking lately even without looking at a single stat. Had a very nice two-out 2-RBI single yesterday and came so close to hitting a homer if the wind hadn't pushed the ball in (talk about bad luck). I hope he can build on that and improve.

Stats aside, through the eye test I see growth in Larnach with more of his swings going to left-center and centerfield, I would like to see Max Kepler do that with more frequency too (he had a hit there on Saturday I believe.)   

Larnach did spend hours more than anyone not named Jake Cave in the batting cages this spring.

And then today, first inning, bases loaded in the first, 2 outs ....... and he watches the close first strike change up, swings and fouls at the close ball change up for strike two, and then watches a third called strike fastball at 94, perfect hitters pitch, right down the middle, no movement, and strands all 3 runners for the third out. Damn.

Then in the third inning, he comes up with runners on second and third with one out, works the count to 2-2, and then watches another fastball, the seemingly only pitch he can now hit, for a called strike 3. Slow learner. At least it wasn't right down the middle.

6 hours ago, Halsey Hall said:

Larnach did spend hours more than anyone not named Jake Cave in the batting cages this spring.

Send Larnach down and bring Fisher up , see how he does in the Minors.

Fisher is hitting more Home Runs in the Minors now than Cave.

It could act as a jolt of reality, although I doubt Larnach will ever be better than he is now.

6 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

All you can ask players to do is take the right approach, improve the approach if it isn't working, and hope the results reward the process.  No one, not with advanced stats, eye test, or anything else in the history of baseball is going to bad mouth a player who is stinging the ball all over and just having bad luck.  

The advanced stats aren't perfect, they just try to identify players that are doing things right, even if the results haven't shown it yet.  Or, vice versa, guys who have results that look unsustainable.  Reality often vindicates those conclusions over time.

Some of the posts in this thread to the contrary....woof.  If you don't understand it, just ignore it and steer clear of it.  Opening your mouth to admit just how poorly you understand it is a bad look.

There is not such thing as bad luck, one makes one's own luck.

If one is "stinging" the ball where they are standing , try stinging it where they are not standing.

Just now, Mike Sixel said:

Hahahahahahahaha. Just. Wow. On a site with ridiculous takes, this is perhaps the most ridiculous ever. 

Only the obtuse believe in luck.