What if I told you that in the 2020 mini-season, Pete Alonso hit like this:
.231/.326/.490, 16 HRs, 35 RBIs.
Meanwhile, player #2 hit like this:
.277/.338/.610, 22 HRs, 52 RBIs.
A lot better, huh?
Player #2, I am sure you’ve figured out, is Luke Voit.
But Luke got off to a slow start in 2021 for the Yankees, a team that hit 222 home runs, so the leash was short. Luke ended up with just 11 HRs and 35 RBIs in 213 at bats.
But over 2020 and 2021, in just 426 at bats, he hit 33 HRs and drove in 87 runs. I’d take that, wouldn’t you.
20% more at bats over that span would have looked like this:
533 at bats, 42 HRs, 110 RBIs, .258. Yep, I’d take that.
Imagine Baty or Vientos doing that in 2024? We’d be doing cartwheels.
In fact, those, pretty much, are Pete Alonso numbers.
2022, some slippage: 22 doubles, 22 HRs in 500 at bats.
2023? He got few ABs in the majors, with Stearns’ Milwaukee Brewers, but in AAA in the minors, he raked:
45 games, 156 at bats, 15 HRs, 43 RBIs, .615 slugging %.
He is 33 this season, but why couldn’t he have a strong 2024…with the Mets?
He is only a 1B/DH, but was a good catcher in the lower minors in 2013. 45 games, 38% CS rate, 3 errors. Never caught again, not sure if that was a physical issue, or more because the Cardinals, his team back then, thought his best position would be first base.
After all, the Cards did have the great Yadier Molina doing their catching strongly through 2021. As a Met, perhaps he could catch in a pinch.
Being a guy like myself who loves power, I am pulling for Voit.
Before I go, as everyone ponders a Pete Alonso $$ super-extension, let’s remember how, in 2020 and 2021, at the age of 29-30 (Alonso’s current age range), Voit put up Alonso-like #s.
Voit likely is not that 2020-21 player anymore, at age 33.
Alonso might similarly fade, too, when he is 33. Let the spender beware.
BRANDON WOODROOF?
Headed elsewhere. How many Brandons can one team have, anyway?
Keep in mind that a good wood roof needs great roof tile.
Yesterday I went to The Athletic, and wrote how Rendon sounded like Alonso does now before he signed his big deal. Too, while everyone says that Nimmo jumped ship and went to Boras too to get his free agent deal done, those were different circumstances. Both DeGrom and Nimmo were CAA clients when the agency liquidated its baseball operations and went mostly NBA. Both guys found new reps. Alonso is switching solely for the purpose of squeezing out every penny. If the old adage that actions speak louder than words holds true, why would a player that can be reasonable and wants to stay in New York, switch to an agent that takes his clients to free agency and hunts for every dollar?
ReplyDeleteMy verdict is in: trade Alonso, only if the package is worth it. Otherwise, what’s the benefit of then dealing with backlash?
Yes, Voit is a good comp, not perfect, but good.
Voit had a miserable MLB season last year
ReplyDeleteBig difference than AAA pitching
Voit is a good comp? He’ll probably be gone by June!
ReplyDeleteBarring serious injuries elsewhere, he'll be upstate or gone by OD.
DeleteVoit Doubters!
ReplyDelete.253/.339/.468 slash line career is not bad. They will find out this spring what is left in Voit's tank.
Yes, Voit faltered in the majors in limited (70+) ABs...why? Don't know. That .615 slug % in the minors, though, was the best in the Mets system (major or minor) last year.
He was 2 for 16 to start, then .250 (13 for 52 after that).
ReplyDeleteCould have been a slow start and sporadic opportunity.
He had a neck strain, went on IL mid-May, then was released a few weeks later. I do not plan to look into it more. We'll see what he does.
ReplyDeleteIf Voit makes the roster, who would be cut to make room? We're likely to have a 4-man bench again, and right now that's Narvaez, Wendle, Taylor and Stewart. All of them play positions that Voit can't.
ReplyDeleteIf Volt makes the team we are in trouble.
ReplyDeleteWe’re in trouble,75 win season,fifth place!
ReplyDeleteIf MeGill and Vientos come through which looks more and more likely this is a playoff team.
ReplyDeleteLOU LOU LOU!
ReplyDeleteIf Voit makes the team, Vientos does not.
ReplyDeleteThat's for sure. That's a no-win, sure-lose situation.
DeleteR69, I agree, don't want to see Vientos lose ABs. I don't know if Voit has an out of his contract when he leaves spring training if he has not made the team. Players in his and Bickford's situations are getting severely squeezed $$-wise. Bickford has 3 full seasons in, but has to go to arbitration to get just 20% over MLB minimum, rather than the 10% above minimum after 3 years.
ReplyDeleteAmed Rosario hasn't been great, but he signs as a free agent at a mere twice the MLB minimum? Crazy. With so many teams willing to pay multi-hundred million contracts, the more marginal guys get squeezed on pay. There is only meaningful free agency for the stars. Rosario is a prime example of how lower productive players like him get screwed.
I do not think Voit is finished yet. Yet, back in "1969", teams had 15 offensive players, today it is 13. That's a lot of jobs lost.
There were 15 X 20 teams, 300 players in a country of 200 million. Now it is 13 x 30 = 390 players, a mere 33% increase in offensive players, but a 70% increase in population. Players like Voit, who'd likely be happy to be on a roster even at $1 million, and who can still play, are caught in the numbers game. Go back to 15 offensive players. Increase team salary caps by $2 million. 60 more offensive players would get to play. Teams could carry a 3rd catcher or a speedster or a slugger in his twilight, or a pinch hitting specialist.
Pitchers? Take a look at how many pitchers the Mets used in 1969 - 15. 15 X 20 teams is 300.
Nowadays, the average is 30. 30 X 30 teams is 900. Drastic increase.
33% more hitters, 200% more pitchers.
Give each team 15 offensive players, not 13, and Vientos will play and we can find out if Voit is a viable major leaguer still without making it mutually exclusive. Then, if Voit made the team, and he falters, you cut him after 2 months and bring up Acuna or Gilbert.
Carry 12 pitchers,14 position players!
ReplyDeleteWoodrow, teams have that choice. But most have 13 pitchers in this max velocity, max torque era to avoid a rash of injuries.
ReplyDeleteSo leave that at 13. 15 offensive players instead of 13 would be better, in my opinion, because it gives more roster flexibility and essentially is 60 more people major league jobs. There are in my mind easily, 60 caliber players playing in the minor leagues throughout baseball because there is no room at the inn. so they get screwed. So the way I see it you up team caps by $2 million and every team must have 15 offensive players. If lower budget teams, like Oakland, want to go cheap, they can have two minute minimum wage players there two additional 15 player guys. I’ll get more radical. If the owners don’t want to pay it, then that extra $2 million should be assessed out of current players salaries to the extent their salaries are over $10 million. So, if the Mets have eight guys and their salaries over 10,000,000 are 75 million, those guys would prepare pay a proportional share of that $2 million. Not a lot of money.
Eric Hosmer retire at age 34. He was a very fine player until age 30. Age 31,some splippage. Age 32 more slippage. Age 33, a lot more slippage. Age 34, retired. Remember that with Pete not being extended. Hosmer was terrific in his 20s. Then he turned 31 and he was lousy. I Would not extend Pete. See where he is at the end of the year if he hasn’t been traded in midyear.
ReplyDelete