Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 51

Thread: Leadoff Thread!

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    24,686
    vCash
    2500
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleeper View Post
    .270, 13 HR's, 58 RBI's.

    That was our third best hitter? No wonder we sucked
    BA and RBI are a terrible way to judge a hitter because they are really flawed. His OBP (.373) was very good and was an above average hitter last year (.341 wOBA). His OBP alone would make him a good lead off hitter just sucks that he does't have much speed. Mattingly wasted him at the bottom of the lineup last season.
    Last edited by SFrush90; 12-21-2012 at 02:23 PM.

    2010, 2012, and 2014 WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,068
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by SFrush90 View Post
    BA and RBI are a terrible way to judge a hitter because they are really flawed. His OBP (.373) was very good and was an above average hitter last year (.341 wOBA). His OBP alone would make him a good lead off hitter just sucks that he does't have much speed. Mattingly wasted him at the bottom of the lineup last season.
    AJ is a good hitter and you're right that DMatt wasted him in the 8 slot, but considering that he did bat 8th most of the year, and you'd have to figure his OBP would decline elsewhere in the lineup.

    In contrast, and in line with what you're hinting at, I think his power numbers and BA could see significant increases if he were hitting in front of anyone, but the pitcher.

    He'd be a great #2 hitter, but if we land a good lead off hitter (like Bourn or Andrus), I think he's destined for 6th or 7th depending on who we get in trade and free agency.

    Bourn (or Andrus)
    CC
    Kemp
    AdGon
    Hanley
    Asdrubal (or Swisher)
    AJ Ellis
    Mark Ellis

    In either scenario, there's a ton of speed at the top of that lineup... Possibly the fastest outfield in baseball history with the addition of Bourn
    Introducing Dodgers' Opponents' 2014 Lineups

    1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 -

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    24,686
    vCash
    2500
    I think he'd be a great #2 hitter as well, but I figure he won't be hitting there since it seems Crawford will be instead. If Crawford could bat well from the lead off spot that'd be an awesome 1-2.

    2010, 2012, and 2014 WORLD SERIES CHAMPIONS!

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,528
    vCash
    1500
    Don't really buy the idea that some one cant hit lead off. Can't and don't want to are two different things Hitting is hitting, they just need to change their approach one or two time a game. Someone leads off every inning the last time I looked. Just have to be willing to take more pitches, but if it is in their zone then have at it
    Last edited by old blue; 12-21-2012 at 07:50 PM.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,068
    vCash
    1500
    Agreed, Blue.

    I just think if we can get prime production from the guy by batting him #2, that's what we should do, and we should get a leadoff hitter who is not only comfortable batting leadoff, but thrives there.

    Besides, how sick would it be to have Bourn and/or Crawford on base with no outs with Kemp, AGon, and Hanley coming up?
    Introducing Dodgers' Opponents' 2014 Lineups

    1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 -

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,528
    vCash
    1500
    That is what I am thinking. You have speed. Pitching,and power in the middle of the line up. Good def. but need to be better def at ss

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Honolulu, HI
    Posts
    8,941
    vCash
    1500
    Put AJ at leadoff...

    136-206, 66% CMP, 1,517 Yds, 7.36 Avg, 9 TD, 4 INTs, 60.9 QBR, 94.3 RTG

    This man is making me question my sexuality

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,136
    vCash
    1500
    As frustrating as he's been, I believe it would be a good idea to give Dee Gordon a chance to lead off but I would also move him to 2nd base. We already have two good starters to trade, adding a Ellis as a chip in a deal with Harang or Cap would be of even more value.

    I'd give Dee the playing time mostly because the leadoff guy everyone wants so much in Michael Bourne was terrible for a while before becoming one of the most sought after free agents this off season. Maybe all Dee needs is to get more playing time at the big league level before realizing his potential and I'd rather have him play and be learning and getting acclimated then have Ellis taking a spot for one more season when he's clearly on his way out and way under producing.

    An infield of Cruz, Hanley, Dee, and Gonzalez with A.J. and FedEx catching would be great and if the Dee project doesn't work out we can always pick up a replacement at the trade deadline. Either way Dee is the only true lead off hitter on the roster, he wasn't converted to it, he's always been a leadoff guy and his speed is still undeniable which he can use to make up for some of his mistakes.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Brea,CA
    Posts
    32,200
    vCash
    1500
    I agree. Dee still deserves another chance


  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,068
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Dodger_fan View Post
    As frustrating as he's been, I believe it would be a good idea to give Dee Gordon a chance to lead off but I would also move him to 2nd base. We already have two good starters to trade, adding a Ellis as a chip in a deal with Harang or Cap would be of even more value.

    I'd give Dee the playing time mostly because the leadoff guy everyone wants so much in Michael Bourne was terrible for a while before becoming one of the most sought after free agents this off season. Maybe all Dee needs is to get more playing time at the big league level before realizing his potential and I'd rather have him play and be learning and getting acclimated then have Ellis taking a spot for one more season when he's clearly on his way out and way under producing.

    An infield of Cruz, Hanley, Dee, and Gonzalez with A.J. and FedEx catching would be great and if the Dee project doesn't work out we can always pick up a replacement at the trade deadline. Either way Dee is the only true lead off hitter on the roster, he wasn't converted to it, he's always been a leadoff guy and his speed is still undeniable which he can use to make up for some of his mistakes.

    Normally I'm all for giving a young guy a shot, especially when that guy is a speedster. I have a soft spot for speedsters and lead off types because that's the way I've always played.

    There's just too many problems with Dee, however. We're hoping he can be a lead off hitter - which he hasn't shown the ability to do at this level - and we're hoping he can be good with the glove - which he hasn't shown the ability at all.

    If we start our season with Dee leading off and sliding to 2nd while getting rid of Mark Ellis, we're creating a much larger problem down the line if Dee doesn't pan out. Mark Ellis is a great defensive 2nd baseman which somewhat makes up for the void we currently have at SS (with either Hanley or Dee). A middle infield consisting of Dee and Hanley would be horrid.... HORRID.

    If Dee doesn't pan out by the All Star break we'd have to trade for a second baseman that can lead off which puts us at a major disadvantage in negotiations, and in the scope of players we can pursue. Our infield, and our lead off situation, need to be figured out before the season starts. Being in our current financial situation, we should only be heading into the trade deadline looking for slight tweaks, not major pieces.

    I do not believe that Michael Bourn will be a Dodger, and ultimately I think Dee is on our opening day roster, but he will not and should not be a starter, IMO.
    Introducing Dodgers' Opponents' 2014 Lineups

    1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 -

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Brea,CA
    Posts
    32,200
    vCash
    1500
    Not a starter... YET


  12. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    912
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by GibbyIsMyHero View Post
    Normally I'm all for giving a young guy a shot, especially when that guy is a speedster. I have a soft spot for speedsters and lead off types because that's the way I've always played.

    There's just too many problems with Dee, however. We're hoping he can be a lead off hitter - which he hasn't shown the ability to do at this level - and we're hoping he can be good with the glove - which he hasn't shown the ability at all.

    If we start our season with Dee leading off and sliding to 2nd while getting rid of Mark Ellis, we're creating a much larger problem down the line if Dee doesn't pan out. Mark Ellis is a great defensive 2nd baseman which somewhat makes up for the void we currently have at SS (with either Hanley or Dee). A middle infield consisting of Dee and Hanley would be horrid.... HORRID.

    If Dee doesn't pan out by the All Star break we'd have to trade for a second baseman that can lead off which puts us at a major disadvantage in negotiations, and in the scope of players we can pursue. Our infield, and our lead off situation, need to be figured out before the season starts. Being in our current financial situation, we should only be heading into the trade deadline looking for slight tweaks, not major pieces.

    I do not believe that Michael Bourn will be a Dodger, and ultimately I think Dee is on our opening day roster, but he will not and should not be a starter, IMO.
    Dee will start in AAA..he aint starting on the MLB squad & no need to have a guy on the bench who cant hit..serves as a defensive liability..and needs AB's to get better..just sayin..

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Brea,CA
    Posts
    32,200
    vCash
    1500
    They could keep him as a pinch runner, but starting him in AAA isn't a bad idea at all


  14. #44
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,464
    vCash
    1500
    If Gordon is not the starting SS for the Dodgers, he will be at AAA. He needs to play everday to continue to develop. Sitting on the bench and pinch running a couple a days a week does him no good at all. He is not a late inning defensive replacement.

    As far as a leadoff hitter goes we need someone who will get on base, with Kemp, Agon, Hanley and Ethier hitting behind them. If A.J. could continue to have a .370 obp I would say have him hit leadoff, Jason Kendall was a catcher who hit leadoff for years. You don't have to be fast, you just have to be on base for the big boys.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,068
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by blazer5 View Post
    Dee will start in AAA..he aint starting on the MLB squad & no need to have a guy on the bench who cant hit..serves as a defensive liability..and needs AB's to get better..just sayin..
    I didn't mean to say Gordon would still be in the big league club, just that he'd still be in our system in some fashion. His ML service ticker is already counting, however, so it wouldn't totally surprise me if he was on the ML roster though he should start in AAA.
    Introducing Dodgers' Opponents' 2014 Lineups

    1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 -

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •