Schierholtz Must Start in RF

roflcopter

I’m having trouble following some of this.

Schierholtz must start over Bowker because Bowker is too inconsistent. For one thing, he receives an inconsistent amount of playing time.

Schierholtz should start over Bowker because Bochy gives Bowker inconsistent playing time? That doesn’t sound like it’s Bowker’s fault. Either I’m misreading what you’ve written or this just doesn’t make sense to me.

Schierholtz can work the pitcher and coax a walk, and can rack up hits consistently.

Nate has a walk percentage of 4.4% in the Major Leagues. Even in the Minors, his BB% was never above 5.6%. That’s absolutely horrendous, and indicates that he’s very much a free swinger and doesn’t work the count.

It remains to be seen if he can “get hits consistently,” but he most certainly does not work the count.

Also, I would very much like to read everything it is you have to say and digest it. But it is nearly impossible when everything is posted as one big paragraph.

Well, Nate should start against lefties because he is batting over .300 against lefties in his career. Much better than Torres. And defensively he adds another element. However, Bowker is the far better hitter so far, so start him against righties.

Bowker can hit a two-run homer one day and go 0-5 the next.

So could every other baseball player, ever.

Schierholtz can work the pitcher and coax a walk

/swings at HBP slider

BOWKER HAS HAD HIS CHANCE!!!

he has much higher upside and made PCL pitchers his bitch last year, while using a new approach (which would lead me to assume he would’ve suffered through some growing pains while attempting). At the end of the year I wouldn’t be shocked if Bowker was the clean up hitter (though I suppose that is more indicative of my feelings on Huff although he has surprised me in a SSS)

Torres is 1-14 . . . .

If you want to assert positively that Eugenio Velez, Bengie Molina, and Travis Ishikawa are, in that order, the three best batters on the Giants—which, on the 2010 stats through and including Saturday the 17th, they are—do so and we’ll go on from there. If you are not willing to assert that, then stop taking silly potshots at other players based on 14 ABs. Were it me, I’d give the everyday RF job to Torres as his to lose, and I don’t mean in a week or even a month. Notice that I’m not swearing on a stack of Baseball Prospectuses1 that he can absolutely, positively do the job—but I am saying that there’s plausible reason to think he could, and lots of reasons to think he’d at very worst still be better than Bowkerholtz.

As has been noted, Nate Schierholtz—while he is a fine fielder and probably is nice to little children and small animals—is not a major-league batter. His worst numbers come from the season in which he had the most playing time. What, exactly, is supposed to be left to find out about him?

And Bowker’s major-league numbers are even worse. But, because after a stint with the Big Club, he was able—as virtually every player in the same circumstances has been—to beat up AAA pitching, he is seen as the next peelable banana. Demonstrating what Dr. Sam famously called “the triumph of hope pver experience”, his fans think he should get playing time. I agree—provided we’re speaking of Fresno.

Amusing sidebar: Velez’s career offensive productivity (through & including Saturday’s game) exactly equals Schierholtz’s. both are more than 10% better than Bowker. Read ’em and weep.

……………..

1 Or is that Prospectii?

Makes sense to me. Well, hm (scratches bald head) . . . I reckon it could be argued that in Park-Of-Many-Names RF is even more critical than CF.

Mainly because I think he has messed up his swing through the trials of Bochism, and stands a good chance of rebounding (even if he still has 1 hbp/strike per season) and finding his power (but not for finding a BB%>6). Bowker, I think, will be exposed again by big league pitching, and maybe he can work a few more walks, and he’ll certainly bop a few dingerz. I mostly think this about them, because it is the opinion and hope I have been nurturing for a couple of years now, and because I’ve been more impressed by Nate than by Dr John-boy Bowker when I’ve seen them play. But i didn’t watch the HBP/swinging strike games. So there is some bias in my sample.

Velez, I might be coming around on… but isn’t he the oldest? For now we are still talking about proven candidates for the 4/5 outfield spot and hoping they can prove they belong in the starting lineup.

But really, if DeRosa is out the outfield is obvious: Ishi, Velez, Torres. Go Giants!

I like what I’ve seen of Nate so far this season, but it’s just a few at bats. Bowker did it over a full season at AAA last year, and continued to do so all during spring training and the first couple of weeks of this season. (when he’s played) They made the commitment to Bowker as the starting RF, and I see no reason based on his play the first two weeks that he should be benched.

It’s two weeks into the season and I’m not writing Bowker off. He hasn’t had consistent playing time and that’s not his fault. Give him more PA’s and then if he’s not producing after a while, then we’ll see. Though it’s only a super small sample size from Nate I like what I’ve seen. It seems that he’s getting a little better with pitch recognition but again it’s only a small sample size so I’m not going to be saying that Nate’s plate discipline has been transformed. I’d like to see Nate in RF and Bowker in CF or the other way around.

Something will, though.

Bowker does deserve a chance but not ahead of Nate. Nate was almost carrying the team at the plate last season before he decided to run into the outfield wall and hurt himself. And I love Nate’s D. I don’t mind seeing those two platoon as long as they are getting consistent ABs and I don’t have to watch Velez and Torres take any starts away from them. Nate looked okay at the plate those last couple of games against lefties (this is completely meaningless to the Bork of course).