The Flagrant Fan Blogs: Ike Davis

Showing posts with label Ike Davis. Show all posts

Free Ike Davis

<div style="text-align: justify;">The <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/player_search.cgi?search=Ike+Davis">Ike Davis</a> Experience in New York needs to end. It is as simple as that. The former first  round draft pick who showed great promise in the minors and in flashes in the big leagues is  just stuck with the Mets and needs a change of scenery. It remains to be seen if such a  change will change what has become a nightmare for the player, his team and the fans. But  the Mets cannot commit to him at this point and the only shot he seems to find himself  again is to go away.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">When you look at <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/player_search.cgi?search=Ike+Davis">Ike Davis'</a> numbers, they are just goofy. The difference between the first  half <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/player_search.cgi?search=Ike+Davis">Ike Davis</a> and the second half is like two different people. Who knows why. Maybe he  needs a sports psychologist or something. But it really is a Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde thing. </div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the second half, <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/player_search.cgi?search=Ike+Davis">Ike Davis</a> is a career .869 OPS guy. In the first half, he is a .697. He has  a career OPS of .584 in May with a .184 batting average. In contrast, his batting average for  September is .289. And there is more.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In the first half, his strikeout rate is 25.4% and his walk rate is 10.1%. In the second half,  his strikeout rate is 22.1% and his walk rate is 14.9%. It is freaky.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">His real struggles last year included facing left-handed pitching. He was awful against them  to the tune of a .406 OPS. But as with Granderson and Long on the other side of the city,  strategies against southpaws can be taught.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Everything came to a head last year. He had his typical terrible first half. He got sent to the  minors where he was absolutely great and he finished the season with the Mets decently. But  his power disappeared. He has a .192 career ISO and that fell to .129 in 2013. His home run  per fly ball ratio fell from over 21% in 2012 to 11.8% in 2013.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">It just gets to the point where the player just seems all messed up. And <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/player_search.cgi?search=Ike+Davis">Ike Davis</a> is all  messed up. He needs to get out of New York where the managerial and coaching staff has  been stable for several years and go get a fresh perspective somewhere.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But where? The need for first basemen around baseball is slight. The best locations for him  to have a chance to resurrect his career would be for the Brewers or the Pirates. The Pirates  are back to the <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/sanchga01.shtml">Gaby Sanchez</a> option. I have never been a fan of Sanchez who can hit for  average occasionally but offers little else.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The Brewers currently have journeyman, <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/f/francju02.shtml">Juan Francisco</a>, as their first baseman on their  depth charts. Seriously? <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/player_search.cgi?search=Ike+Davis">Ike Davis</a> would have to be an upgrade over that. Rumors are that  the Mets are asking a lot for Davis. They should not. They should just move him for  something useful.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">This is a case where a team like the Mets is stuck with a puzzle they cannot figure out and  <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/player_search.cgi?search=Ike+Davis">Ike Davis</a> is languishing in New York and his career is rotting before our eyes. For their own  sake and for Davis', the Mets need to trade him soon to a good home like Pittsburgh or  Milwaukee and see if Davis is done or the next <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/davisch02.shtml">Chris Davis</a>.</div>

Free Ike Davis

The Ike Davis Experience in New York needs to end. It is as simple as that. The former first round draft pick who showed great promise in ...

+ Read more »

The Ike Davis dilemma

<div style="text-align: justify;">In a media market such as New York, <strong><a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/player_search.cgi?results=davisik02,davisik01&utm_campaign=Linker&utm_source=direct&utm_medium=linker-www.blogger.com" target="_blank">Ike  Davis</a></strong> of the Mets has been the topic of much conversation. As such, I am not sure how much more I can add to the conversation. At the very least, there are no emotional ties to the situation for me, so perhaps I can look at it from a calmer, less passionate perspective. The starting point of the story is that Ike  Davis has nearly duplicated a disastrous April and May in 2012 this season. The two-month mess so nearly doubles what happened last year that it illustrates the dilemma this brings to the Mets.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">How closely does Ike  Davis' 2013 first two months resemble his first two months of a year ago? Check it out:</div><ul><li style="text-align: justify;">2012 (through the end of May): .170 average, .524 OPS, 5 doubles, 5 homers, 12 walks, 49 K's</li><li style="text-align: justify;">2013 (through May 26th): .148 average, .475 OPS, 2 doubles, 4 homers, 16 walks, 54 K's.</li></ul><div style="text-align: justify;">Think about that for a minute. That is basically two months of a season that offers nothing but a black hole of a lineup spot. And if truth be told, 2013 is trending worse than 2012.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The dilemma for the Mets is that last season, Davis went the rest of the season hitting 21 more doubles, 27 more homers and 49 more walks. For as bad as Davis was in the first two months of 2012, he ended the season a plus 6.9 runs better than average on offense and with an OPS+ of 111. Patience with Davis appeared to be warranted and he had an .888 OPS in the second half. Can Ike  Davis pull his season out of a hat (using polite speech here) again?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The dilemma goes deeper. It really was not until June 12 last season that Ike  Davis started hitting. In other words, his woes went another two weeks. With crushing media and fan displeasure, are the Mets going to watch Ike  Davis struggle two more weeks?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And as decent as Davis' season was in the end a season ago, there were two major problems that remained. First, he struggled mightily at Citi Field. Secondly, he was awful against left-handed pitching. Let's look at both of those a little more closely.</div><ul><li style="text-align: justify;">2012 (Home): .188/.277/.342.</li><li style="text-align: justify;">2012 (Away): .262/.335/.566.</li><li style="text-align: justify;">2012 (against lefties): .174/.225/.355</li></ul><div style="text-align: justify;">This year's numbers thus far are so abysmal that the splits are meaningless. They are all bad. But if last year is a guide, then even if Davis pulls the same rabbit out of the hat this year that he did a year ago, then he is still going to struggle in half of his games (home) and in games against left-handed pitching. Consider that Ike  Davis has walked just once against a left-handed pitcher all season.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The assumption so far has been that Ike  Davis can finish this season like he did 2012. That is a huge leap of faith though. Can a guy keep playing a quarter of the season so poorly and still come out at least smelling decent? That, my friends, is not something I would bet on. And the problem right now is that Davis has confused everyone with what kind of talent he is. You cannot keep digging this kind of hole and expect to climb out.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">But let's say he does do the same thing as last year and finishes near last year's numbers or a little below them. Is he still worth it? After all was said and done last season, Ike  Davis was the sixteenth most valuable first baseman in baseball. Sixteenth when there are thirty teams does not seem to make the patience make sense. Davis is having a better defensive season this year than a year ago and that helps. And his base running is better too.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">My assumption here is that Davis will not end up with as good as offensive numbers this season. His stats this year, as bad as last year's were at this time, still regressed. His defense and base-running make up the difference. But even a strong finish like last year will still make him finish in the bottom tier of value for first baseman. And I have already stated that such a strong finish is a long shot.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">In my opinion, you cannot have a guy continue to stink up a quarter of your season. As good a guy as Davis is, as much as people like him, he is not the player that is going to get the Mets where they need to go. I like the guy too. But it is time for the Mets to cut bait and move on. </div>

The Ike Davis dilemma

In a media market such as New York, Ike Davis of the Mets has been the topic of much conversation. As such, I am not sure how much more I ...

+ Read more »

Slugging ugly

<div style="text-align: justify;">    The 2012 regular season is in the books. And it has been an amazing season. We had someone hit for the Triple Crown. We had a rookie who hit 30 homers and steal more than 40 bases. We've seen more than a half a dozen no-hitters including some perfect games. Stars like Braun and Cano had massive seasons with high batting averages. Three starting catchers batted over .310. Yes, there were superstar performances all over the place. But there were also some oddities. This particular post focuses on one of them: Slugging ugly.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">There were three players this season that hit over 30 homers and batted under .240. Does that seem not so odd to you? Perhaps that is telling about this age of baseball that few would think that fact is very odd. But consider that of all the seasons had by all the players through the years, such a combination has only happened 39 times. And only two times in baseball history has it happened with three players in the same season. Those occurred in the 1985 (three) and 1986 (four) seasons when Kingman, Canseco and Deer roamed the earth.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Of the 39 times such a combination has happened, fourteen have come in the last ten seasons, or thirty-six percent of the entire total. So you could say this is a product of our times. 30 of the 39 occurrences have happened since 1985. The first time that it ever happened was in 1966 when Rocky Colavito did it. So what we have is a fairly modern phenomenon.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Oh! You are probably wondering who the three players were that did it this year: <strong><a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/grandcu01.shtml?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=linker&utm_campaign=Linker" target="_blank">Curtis  Granderson</a></strong>, <strong><a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/dunnad01.shtml?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=linker&utm_campaign=Linker" target="_blank">Adam  Dunn</a></strong> and <strong><a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/davisik02.shtml?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=linker&utm_campaign=Linker" target="_blank">Ike  Davis</a></strong>. More about their seasons in a bit. Before we talk more about those three, a little more context needs to be painted.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">The common denominator of all these seasons has been strikeouts. The average batted ball finds a hole somewhere and lands safely for a base hit somewhere about 30 percent of the time. We call that BABIP or batting average for balls in play. The less balls you put in play, the lower your batting average is going to be. If you strikeout a lot, you are not putting the ball in play. Those are outs that add nothing to the player or their team. These 39 seasons averaged 143 strikeouts per player. Eight of the 39 seasons were players who led their league in strikeouts that season.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Another commonality these seasons share is walks. The average season of those 39 totals 69 walks. So these players basically had three major outcomes to their seasons. They either struck out (a lot!), walked or homered.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Despite the high walks and the more than 30 homers in these seasons, the average slugging percentage of these 39 seasons was only .470. You would expect someone who hit 30 homers to slug, 500 right? It only happened in six of these seasons.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Okay, back to our trio this season. Between them, Granderson, Davis and Dunn totals a whopping 558 strikeouts. Davis had 141 while Granderson struck out 195 times and Adam  Dunn finished with 222, one shy of the major league record.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Again, if we apply our BABIP logic to their strikeouts, if Davis would have put a ball in play instead of those 141 strikeouts, he would have had 42 more hits. Granderson would have had 58 more hits and Dunn would have hit 67 more hits just putting the ball in play. That certainly would have helped their batting averages. Instead, Granderson hit .232, Davis .227 and Adam  Dunn hit all of .204.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">There are questions that come out of such results. First, where is the dividing line as to the value of these players? With so much emphases on on-base percentage now, batting average is a bit passe. such thinking keeps guys like Pena and Uggla employed. But are such players really that valuable offensively?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">For a plate appearance, there seems to be only one event that contributes less to a team's success than a strikeout and that his hitting into a double-play. So the win probability added on a strikeout is in the negative side of the equation. And yet, there always seems to be a place in baseball for lefty relievers and guys who can crush the ball and walk a lot whether or not they can hit otherwise.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">And it is hard to fathom a season like Adam  Dunn's from a pitcher's point of view. Why would you ever walk the guy? Adam  Dunn walked 105 times! The guy is large. Very large. As such, he has one of the largest strike zones in baseball. Yes, he is selective at the plate and that is to his credit. But why would you walk him?</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">If you turn those 105 plate appearances into 105 at bats instead, Dunn is only going to have a two in ten chance of getting a hit and of those two hits, there is less than a one in ten chance of him hitting a homer. There is a three and a half out of ten possibility he is going to strike out and an eight of ten chance he is going to make an out. If you were a pitcher, wouldn't you like those odds? So the walks are something that is hard to understand.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;">Three players batted under .240 and hit more than thirty homers this season. Again, let it sink in that this has only happened 39 total times in baseball history. Leave it to others to figure out the value added by such seasons. There is not enough smarts in this chair to figure something like that out. But the feat is still astounding. More astounding still? Two of those players did it with more than 40 homers. THAT has only been done five times in MLB history and two of them came this season. And one player, Adam  Dunn, has three of those five seasons.  </div>

Slugging ugly

The 2012 regular season is in the books. And it has been an amazing season. We had someone hit for the Triple Crown. We had a rookie who...

+ Read more »