Ackley

[hawkfan1073]

Anyone else realize that for the month of August he is hitting .371 with an OPS of .920?

Maybe, just maybe he has made adjustments?

 

[hawkfan1073]

Oh and Smoak is only hitting .345 with an OPS of 1.083

Whatever kool-aid they are drinking they should stick with it.
Personally, I feel this might be Ibanez's influence in the clubhouse....

 

[cezero]

I don't understand the obsession with Ackley. He's played well for less than a month. Big whoop. Until he proves he can stay above .250 for a few months in a row, he's garbage. If he's still on this team as an everyday player in 2014, then it means that our prospects like Franklin are tragically horrible.

Smoak is getting there, but I won't acknowledge it's real unless he keeps it up the rest of the season.

 

[cezero]

That came across more acerbic than I meant.

Sorry.

 

[johnfree63]

I'll go a little further then Cezero. This off-season I'm looking to upgrade on both Smoak and Ackley. We've seen some stretches of good baseball from them before, then they puke. I just don't trust them.

 

[Logicallylethal]

Not sure I understand the gripe on Smoak. He looks absolutely settled in as a hitter and has been performing well for a good chunk of the year. Even if you factor in his early month struggles...his avg, obp and slg are still good.

Ackley on the other hand...we're all just cautiously optimistic with the guy. He still has a lot to prove but these are definitely good signs.

 

[hawkfan1073]

Didn't say they were team saviors or anything....just recognizing that they are playing better baseball. They might not be total losses...I've seen guys take longer to get it going in their careers before.

 

[johnfree63]

Not sure I understand the gripe on Smoak. He looks absolutely settled in as a hitter and has been performing well for a good chunk of the year. Even if you factor in his early month struggles...his avg, obp and slg are still good.

It's because none of us have ever seen a player as bad as Smoak was for as long as he was turn it around. I still think that Smoak and Ackley are going to fail every time they come to the plate. It's became a learned behavior response, kind of like an Elephant that won't try to break it's chains as an adult because it wasn't able to when it was young.

 

[johnfree63]

Didn't say they were team saviors or anything....just recognizing that they are playing better baseball. They might not be total losses...I've seen guys take longer to get it going in their careers before.

Please name one. Seriously.

 

[cezero]

Unless Ackley has a miraculous end to the season, we need to hope beyond hope that the front office tries their damndest to replace him with a competent center fielder, and that Franklin proves the rest of this year and in spring training next year that he deserves to replace Ackley in the infield. Ackley being on this team in 2014 will be indicative of a shitty team yet again, IMO.

Best case scenario would be Ackley being anything near league average behind the plate the remainder of the year. That's probably a pipe dream, no matter how much people still think he might amount to something.

So a more realistic best case scenario is that the M's are in a position in 2014 to use a player of Ackley's "caliber" off the bench or as a utility guy.

 

[SeattleCoug]

This team has about 10 problems bigger then Smoak so I dont feel the need to bash a guy hitting around .290 since May 1.

As for Ackley its nice to seem him look more comfortable but my issue is I dont see him as OF. I dont think he has the arm or range for that. I think he is either the 2B or he wont have a spot on this team. I have to think a move/trade is coming with Franklin or Ackley in offseason. We shall see

 

[hawkfan1073]

Please name one. Seriously.

Michael Young's first 2 years in the Majors he hit .249 and .262 with an OPS of .699 and .690.
Dustin Ackley in his 1st 2 seasons(less overall games played) has pretty similar #'s.

Young didn't figure it out until he turned 26. Ackley will be turning 26 this coming year.

You asked for one....there you go.

 

[hawkfan1073]

Michael Young Statistics and History - Baseball-Reference.com

Dustin Ackley Statistics and History - Baseball-Reference.com

references

 

[cezero]

Michael Young's first 2 years in the Majors he hit .249 and .262 with an OPS of .699 and .690.
Dustin Ackley in his 1st 2 seasons(less overall games played) has pretty similar #'s.

Young didn't figure it out until he turned 26. Ackley will be turning 26 this coming year.

You asked for one....there you go.

After his first year (covering approximately 162 games), Young's BA was below .250 for fewer than 20 days.

After his first year (covering approximately 162 games), Ackley's BA was above .250 for no more than 7 days.

That's just one stat. The comparison becomes worse when you look comparatively at their respective WAR, OBP, and UZR after a year in the bigs.

At his 2 year mark, Ackley was hitting .202 compared to Young who was in the .260s.
There has to be a better example you can come up with.

 

[hawkfan1073]

After his first year (covering approximately 162 games), Young's BA was below .250 for fewer than 20 days.

After his first year (covering approximately 162 games), Ackley's BA was above .250 for no more than 7 days.

That's just one stat. The comparison becomes worse when you look comparatively at their respective WAR, OBP, and UZR after a year in the bigs.

At his 2 year mark, Ackley was hitting .202 compared to Young who was in the .260s.
There has to be a better example you can come up with.

I was just throwing out an example of a player that took a couple years to get going. Can't deny it took Young a couple years. Was he overall better than Ackley? Yes but it doesn't mean Ackley can't turn it around.

Your numbers are wrong by the way....at year 2 mark for both players Ackley was hitting .242 and Young hit .253
OBP for Young was .298 and .308/ Ackley was .348 and .294

They really are pretty comparable actually.

Thats my answer, sticking with it. I'm not digging for any more stats.

Point being is Ackley could very well turn it around a la Michael Young and if Texas gave up on Young before he turned 26 they would have missed out on a 7 time all star.

 

[cezero]

With Ackley's time at AAA this year, he has about 2 years +1 month of MLB play under his belt.

At 2 years +1 month of MLB play, Young was hitting .300+ with an OPS of .800+ and never looked back.

At 2 years +1 month of MLB play, Ackley's at .235 with an OPS of under .600, and that's after being super hot for the better part of a month.

Young showed every indication for a full year before he became AS caliber that he was going to be very good. Ackley has not in any way, shape or form done the same.

It's fine that you believe in magic, and I hope you're somehow onto something with this. But the comparison to Young is really kind of silly to me.

 

[hawkfan1073]

But the comparison to Young is really kind of silly to me.

It's good to have an opinion, congrats!

 

[blstoker]

Here's one:

Barry Bond

Bonds batted .256 for his first 4 seasons before batting .313 over the next 15. Every offensive category drastically improved after his 4th season.

 

[cezero]

Comparisons to Michael Young were really bad.

Bonds is a whole new level.

Ackley's OBP has been below .300 for almost a year...oftentimes well below that, even making it into the high .100s and extremely low .200s at times.

That's monumentally bad. Remarkable, really.

Bonds' OBP fell below.300 exactly one day in his first season...that would be his 2nd day in MLB. That's it.

At his very worst in his first 2 years in MLB, Bonds' average OPS was still nearly 200 points higher than Ackley's.

Tonight, for the first time in nearly a year, Ackley got his SLG above .300 (.301 to be exact).

Other than the first few games of his 2nd year in the bigs, Bonds' SLG was 150-250 points higher than that every day.

If you're trying to be silly, you're succeeding admirably. Any other all time greats Ackley compares with?

 

[cezero]

Everybody on here is pretty damn cool.

I truly don't understand how people can't see what's right in front of them regarding Ackley. It's been this way for a long time, too. Truly baffling.