Page 2 of 2

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 3:48 pm
by JakeTrain72
Yoda wrote:
stumpak wrote:What makes you think he will hit .290? He hasn't done that in years.

Obviously Giambi will have more value than Sosa in 2005, but any argument that hinges on him returning to his BA from 2000 or 2001 strikes me as wishful thinking of a similar vain to the people who thought that Sosa would rejuvenate in Baltimore.


I agree. At first glance you get excited by his second half numbers and expect him to post them or improve upon them. If not for his huge July, his BA would've been much lower than .270.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/538 ... A39HmFCLcF


I think he has rebounded. I do not think he "lost" his talent but wasn't back to where he was. I think he has gotten back to driving the ball. He has a great eye and forces pitchers to throw to him. Add to that, the fact he is coming into the year on a high note instead of an extremely low note and has protection in the order. Not predicting .330's but .290 is certainly realistic.

Now if you believe he has regressed or had a fall out due to the roids, then I can understand you thinking he tops out at .270 or so. I just think he still has the talent to hit around .300 and he puts in a ton of work off the field to get there.

And no-I am not a damn Yankees fan in case you were curious. :-b

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 3:58 pm
by Yoda
JakeTrain72 wrote:
Yoda wrote:
stumpak wrote:What makes you think he will hit .290? He hasn't done that in years.

Obviously Giambi will have more value than Sosa in 2005, but any argument that hinges on him returning to his BA from 2000 or 2001 strikes me as wishful thinking of a similar vain to the people who thought that Sosa would rejuvenate in Baltimore.


I agree. At first glance you get excited by his second half numbers and expect him to post them or improve upon them. If not for his huge July, his BA would've been much lower than .270.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/538 ... A39HmFCLcF


I think he has rebounded. I do not think he "lost" his talent but wasn't back to where he was. I think he has gotten back to driving the ball. He has a great eye and forces pitchers to throw to him. Add to that, the fact he is coming into the year on a high note instead of an extremely low note and has protection in the order. Not predicting .330's but .290 is certainly realistic.

Now if you believe he has regressed or had a fall out due to the roids, then I can understand you thinking he tops out at .270 or so. I just think he still has the talent to hit around .300 and he puts in a ton of work off the field to get there.

And no-I am not a damn Yankees fan in case you were curious. :-b


If he rebounded in the second half, then how do you explain his .264 BA which included the monster July where he hit .355?
:-?

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 4:45 pm
by JakeTrain72
Yoda wrote:
JakeTrain72 wrote:
Yoda wrote:
stumpak wrote:What makes you think he will hit .290? He hasn't done that in years.

Obviously Giambi will have more value than Sosa in 2005, but any argument that hinges on him returning to his BA from 2000 or 2001 strikes me as wishful thinking of a similar vain to the people who thought that Sosa would rejuvenate in Baltimore.


I agree. At first glance you get excited by his second half numbers and expect him to post them or improve upon them. If not for his huge July, his BA would've been much lower than .270.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/538 ... A39HmFCLcF


I think he has rebounded. I do not think he "lost" his talent but wasn't back to where he was. I think he has gotten back to driving the ball. He has a great eye and forces pitchers to throw to him. Add to that, the fact he is coming into the year on a high note instead of an extremely low note and has protection in the order. Not predicting .330's but .290 is certainly realistic.

Now if you believe he has regressed or had a fall out due to the roids, then I can understand you thinking he tops out at .270 or so. I just think he still has the talent to hit around .300 and he puts in a ton of work off the field to get there.

And no-I am not a damn Yankees fan in case you were curious. :-b


If he rebounded in the second half, then how do you explain his .264 BA which included the monster July where he hit .355?
:-?



I did say I thought he rebounded last season. I consider his 2005 season to be a rebound. I do not think his 2005 numbers, or any splits, indicate he rebounded. As you can tell I haven't tried to support my prediction by using any numbers or stats, especially from last season. How the hell could I? they are nothing great, especially when you take out the one month. To me, Giambi showed he can still be one the better fantasy players in 2005.

All I am trying to say is that I predict Giambi to have a great season in 2006 and it has nothing to do with the numbers he put up in 2005. It has more to do with how he played and improved and got himself back on track. Give him more time (this offseason), entering the season with more promise and less scrutiny, and all the intangibles you like to have out of your fantasy players (supporting team, place in the batting order, home stadium, etc) and I think he does well.

I may be dead wrong. But I doubt if you get him with a 4-6 round draft choice he will be the biggest bust on your team. Since I doubt anyone will pick him higher than the 4th round, I doubt he is much of a bust for any owner who takes him.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 4:47 pm
by Yoda
JakeTrain72 wrote:
Yoda wrote:
JakeTrain72 wrote:
Yoda wrote:
stumpak wrote:What makes you think he will hit .290? He hasn't done that in years.

Obviously Giambi will have more value than Sosa in 2005, but any argument that hinges on him returning to his BA from 2000 or 2001 strikes me as wishful thinking of a similar vain to the people who thought that Sosa would rejuvenate in Baltimore.


I agree. At first glance you get excited by his second half numbers and expect him to post them or improve upon them. If not for his huge July, his BA would've been much lower than .270.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/538 ... A39HmFCLcF


I think he has rebounded. I do not think he "lost" his talent but wasn't back to where he was. I think he has gotten back to driving the ball. He has a great eye and forces pitchers to throw to him. Add to that, the fact he is coming into the year on a high note instead of an extremely low note and has protection in the order. Not predicting .330's but .290 is certainly realistic.

Now if you believe he has regressed or had a fall out due to the roids, then I can understand you thinking he tops out at .270 or so. I just think he still has the talent to hit around .300 and he puts in a ton of work off the field to get there.

And no-I am not a damn Yankees fan in case you were curious. :-b


If he rebounded in the second half, then how do you explain his .264 BA which included the monster July where he hit .355?
:-?



I did say I thought he rebounded last season. I consider his 2005 season to be a rebound. I do not think his 2005 numbers, or any splits, indicate he rebounded. As you can tell I haven't tried to support my prediction by using any numbers or stats, especially from last season. How the hell could I? they are nothing great, especially when you take out the one month. To me, Giambi showed he can still be one the better fantasy players in 2005.

All I am trying to say is that I predict Giambi to have a great season in 2006 and it has nothing to do with the numbers he put up in 2005. It has more to do with how he played and improved and got himself back on track. Give him more time (this offseason), entering the season with more promise and less scrutiny, and all the intangibles you like to have out of your fantasy players (supporting team, place in the batting order, home stadium, etc) and I think he does well.

I may be dead wrong. But I doubt if you get him with a 4-6 round draft choice he will be the biggest bust on your team. Since I doubt anyone will pick him higher than the 4th round, I doubt he is much of a bust for any owner who takes him.


:-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :-? :-?