Rank 'Em: Franchise Cornerstone

[Clay]

Scott will be on my list... but I'd take Chavez over him for three reasons:

- Younger
- Baserunning
- $$

But, I agree, Scott... simply by being a high talent Middle IF makes him Top 10 caliber.

[BradZ]

If people are gonna rank Chavez that high and not have Scott on the list, I'm confused. Is it the 3 year age difference? Scott is a better player than Chavez. People may think otherwise and that's fine but I don't see how you can have one on the list and not the other.

Disagree with Scott being better than Chavez. Chavez's ability on the bases gives him the edge. Plus, Chavez is still "growing".

[Jistic]

Basestealing ability isn't high on my list as there's a ton of players in the BLB....too many that can steal bases. Scott's got a better eye, which to me is bigger.

Picking either one is a win. I just don't understand how you can have one on the list and not the other. Saying theres a big difference between them is crazy. One guy is younger, but as we know in this game that doesn't always mean someone is gonna get better. Sometimes it's the opposite.

[BradZ]

Basestealing ability isn't high on my list as there's a ton of players in the BLB....too many that can steal bases. Scott's got a better eye, which to me is bigger.

Picking either one is a win. I just don't understand how you can have one on the list and not the other. Saying theres a big difference between them is crazy. One guy is younger, but as we know in this game that doesn't always mean someone is gonna get better. Sometimes it's the opposite.

5 tool vs. 4 tool, I'll take the 5 tool guy (also, I never said I wouldn't put Scott on my list)

[Delandis]

If there is such a thing of too good of an eye, Scott just missed it because of that for me. His OBP is always insane, but it just seems like he should put the ball in play a bit more. He doesn't produce enough runs.

[Jistic]

The lineup he's in also plays a factor I believe. That's why Pawtucket has scrubs all batting .300. Gotta pitch to someone.

[Jake]

The lineup he's in also plays a factor I believe.

Fuck off.

I think I'd probably put Chavez a sliver above Scott, but the one thing Scott has is that a good eye never goes away. When he's 35 and doesn't have the same power/contact, he'll still have that eye.

[Ryan]

If there is such a thing of too good of an eye, Scott just missed it because of that for me. His OBP is always insane, but it just seems like he should put the ball in play a bit more. He doesn't produce enough runs.

I'm not singling you out by any means, but your comment made me curious to see how accurate is really was.

So I looked, and Scott is ranked 7th all time in RC/27. Just for clarification, this stat estimates how many runs a team made up of the same player would score per 27 outs, or an entire nine inning game.

If you look at a ball put in play and its possible outcomes, you have to understand that for every walk he takes, which is a guaranteed base, he's giving the next guy an opportunity to drive in a run.

Put the ball in play, and now you're factoring the defense into the play. What if there was a guy on first? Now theres a possibility of a double play on a ground ball. But a walk is an automatic base. You could have an infield of Ozzie Smiths or Ozzie Osbourns. It wouldn't matter.

Put the right guy(s) behind him and you have a very high probability to turn those walks into runs.

Bottom line, in my opinion, this is a guy you can build a team around.

Is he possibly the single most underrated player in this league? [/rant]

[funclown]

The lineup he's in also plays a factor I believe. That's why Pawtucket has scrubs all batting .300. Gotta pitch to someone.

Hey!!! Those are legit BLB players your poking fun at.

[Jistic]

I'm not singling you out by any means, but your comment made me curious to see how accurate is really was.

So I looked, and Scott is ranked 7th all time in RC/27. Just for clarification, this stat estimates how many runs a team made up of the same player would score per 27 outs, or an entire nine inning game.

If you look at a ball put in play and its possible outcomes, you have to understand that for every walk he takes, which is a guaranteed base, he's giving the next guy an opportunity to drive in a run.

Put the ball in play, and now you're factoring the defense into the play. What if there was a guy on first? Now theres a possibility of a double play on a ground ball. But a walk is an automatic base. You could have an infield of Ozzie Smiths or Ozzie Osbourns. It wouldn't matter.

Put the right guy(s) behind him and you have a very high probability to turn those walks into runs.

Bottom line, in my opinion, this is a guy you can build a team around.

Is he possibly the single most underrated player in this league? [/rant]

Bravo. RC/27 is one of my absolute favorite stats. And yes he is under rated...except by me

[Ryan]

Bravo. RC/27 is one of my absolute favorite stats. And yes he is under rated...except by me

It's always been one of mine as well, and to be honest, I learned something about one of my own players when I checked that all-time list of RC/27 greats.

My very own Ivan Garcia is #9 on that list, ahead of some pretty big names. Now, small sample size I know, but still thats 2400 PA's. I'm almost ashamed to have not known that prior to looking at the list.

[Delandis]

I'm not singling you out by any means, but your comment made me curious to see how accurate is really was.

So I looked, and Scott is ranked 7th all time in RC/27. Just for clarification, this stat estimates how many runs a team made up of the same player would score per 27 outs, or an entire nine inning game.

If you look at a ball put in play and its possible outcomes, you have to understand that for every walk he takes, which is a guaranteed base, he's giving the next guy an opportunity to drive in a run.

Put the ball in play, and now you're factoring the defense into the play. What if there was a guy on first? Now theres a possibility of a double play on a ground ball. But a walk is an automatic base. You could have an infield of Ozzie Smiths or Ozzie Osbourns. It wouldn't matter.

Put the right guy(s) behind him and you have a very high probability to turn those walks into runs.

Bottom line, in my opinion, this is a guy you can build a team around.

Is he possibly the single most underrated player in this league? [/rant]

I probably should have looked up the stat, but I did use the word "seems," so I think I'm in the clear.


I definitely understand the impact of OBP. I've got 4 or 5 guys in the top 20 in walks. However, for me, that first guy that I pick, has to be able to not only to get on base, but he's got to have the desire to clear bases. We have played against Scott a lot over the years, and quite frankly, we just weren't as afraid of him as some other hitters in the league because there was a good chance he'd be content to sit on pitches to take a walk. We would always rather face him than a guy like Woodbury, Alverez, Kinsey or Shitty who can not only take a walk, but will consistently, punish you for making a mistake.

BTW, its not Scott is crap because he's #11 or #12 on a list.

[BradZ]

My only argument against using RC/27 for a player like Scott (and this may be counterintuitive or flat out wrong) is for a player with his contact skills and power skills the team/lineup would be better off with him putting more balls into play (with authority) than depending on a less capable player to drive him in once he gets on base. Especially considering he is a "station-to-station" type baserunner. Essentially his incredible batting eye diminishes his other two great offensive strengths by limiting the times they come into play.

[Jistic]

Again, depends on who's around him. Guys that hit with authority usually come up short in other areas. That's why I'm a fan of the RC/27. Again this is a MIDDLE INFIELDER we're talking about.

[Delandis]

Again, depends on who's around him. Guys that hit with authority usually come up short in other areas. That's why I'm a fan of the RC/27. Again this is a MIDDLE INFIELDER we're talking about.

This is a legitimate question from a non-baseball guy, and really, I'm not trying to be a Skerik, but what does playing middle infield have to do with his plate performance?