BSL: 2022 in Review: Ryan Mountcastle
https://baltimorespo...an-mountcastle/
Posted 26 October 2022 - 01:19 PM
Posted 26 October 2022 - 02:18 PM
Another thing I think we need to consider regarding Mountcastle's power (and for everyone, really) is the leaguewide decrease in home runs for 2022.
2022 the league as a whole hit 700 fewer home runs than in 2021. That's despite eliminating the DH and seeing nearly 5000 more PAs for non-pitchers. Non-pitchers hit a HR in 3.35% of PAs in 2021 (which is nearly exactly the same overall rate from '16-'21). That fell to 2.86% of PAs in 2022. That's about a 15% drop in HR-rate on a relative scale.
Mountcastle hit HR in 3.57% of PA in 2020, 5.63% in 2021, and then 3.61% in 2022. So in addition to considering the impact of the wall and wondering if Mountcastle simply didn't hit as well as he did in 2022, I'd also look at a leaguewide power outage as representing a part of his decline.
Posted 26 October 2022 - 03:45 PM
Another thing I think we need to consider regarding Mountcastle's power (and for everyone, really) is the leaguewide decrease in home runs for 2022.
2022 the league as a whole hit 700 fewer home runs than in 2021. That's despite eliminating the DH and seeing nearly 5000 more PAs for non-pitchers. Non-pitchers hit a HR in 3.35% of PAs in 2021 (which is nearly exactly the same overall rate from '16-'21). That fell to 2.86% of PAs in 2022. That's about a 15% drop in HR-rate on a relative scale.
Mountcastle hit HR in 3.57% of PA in 2020, 5.63% in 2021, and then 3.61% in 2022. So in addition to considering the impact of the wall and wondering if Mountcastle simply didn't hit as well as he did in 2022, I'd also look at a leaguewide power outage as representing a part of his decline.
Posted 26 October 2022 - 04:03 PM
I feel like it would be a luxury to move away from and try to improve on Mountcastle in '23. Hes cheap, hes still young, he hit the ball hard last year. If we had the payroll capability to try to improve Id do it but assuming we are going to come in under 100 mil on the payroll we need to focus at other positions
Posted 26 October 2022 - 04:56 PM
He's the lowest priority for me amongst the spots/players we could upgrade.I feel like it would be a luxury to move away from and try to improve on Mountcastle in '23. Hes cheap, hes still young, he hit the ball hard last year. If we had the payroll capability to try to improve Id do it but assuming we are going to come in under 100 mil on the payroll we need to focus at other positions
Posted 26 October 2022 - 10:50 PM
We need better performance from 1B next year, but I think it's reasonable to hope to get that better performance from Mountcastle himself.
I would expect RM to be better next year than this year.
I've commented your other post also and when they play with whatever change, suddenly offense goes up and the pitching doesn't look as good.
Posted 26 October 2022 - 10:54 PM
We've said it a bunch but it's nice to not have any one position that is an obvious disaster. Allows them to cast a wide net for upgrades rather than needing laser focus on a particular position. However, I do have some concern that they will use that as an excuse to not upgrade. Hopefully that proves to be paranoia.
Posted 27 October 2022 - 10:00 AM
Given how well he hit the ball last year and the gap in his actual vs. expected stats, I'd say it's pretty likely Mountcastle has a better year next year. Expected stats should never be taken as gospel, but when you have the biggest gap between actual and expected wOBA and SLG in all of baseball, that's an extreme that I think is inevitable to adjust, at least somewhat
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |