| Name | BA/OBP/SLG | XBH-RBI | K:BB |
| Berkman | .275/.377/.498 | 56-89 | 107:77 |
| Matsui | .255/.314/.364 | 30-39 | 78:34 |
| Johnson | .247/.288/.385 | 30-43 | 92:18 |
| Manzella | .245/.294/.344 | 27-33 | 86:26 |
| Keppinger | .282/.341/.399 | 31-40 | 37:33 |
| Maysonet | .240/.307/.344 | 20-23 | 64:25 |
| Blum | .238/.299/.367 | 23-39 | 52:23 |
| Lee | .292/.341/.503 | 59-97 | 56:37 |
| Bourn | .264/.335/.365 | 28-28 | 94:42 |
| Pence | .284/.344/.483 | 58-75 | 104:47 |
| Towles | .254/.335/.409 | 25-38 | 61:27 |
| Castro | .248/.315/.354 | 25-39 | 78:31 |
Should these hold up, and they've been pretty accurate, the Astros would have no .300 hitters on the 2010 club. There would be a huge drop-off from Tejada's 09 to Manzella's '10, and Chris Johnson would actually be an upgrade over Geoff Blum. Obviously they still don't think much of Chris Johnson's strike-zone control.
2 comments:
Erm, I'm not sure you could say Johnson would be better than Blum going by these projections; he'd have a higher OPS, but OBP is valued higher than SLG point for point. I'm not sure what the math would come out to, but they'd be very, very close in value (or lack thereof).
The only notable upgrade over last year according to these projections is at catcher, I guess; but it's a nice one. Would be funny, having so much better of a bat at catcher than third base...
That's probably an accurate statement. I guess it's more appropriate to say that Johnson would be about the same as Blum, but younger, (slightly) cheaper, though Johnson's projects to strikeout almost twice as much as Blum.
And if by "funny" you mean "depressing," that's spot-on.
Post a Comment