Choo Named AL's Best in September
This is very exciting for Choo and I am extremely happy for him. For some reason this also jogged my memory in regards to his Korean military obligation (good news trumped by bad news - must be NE Ohio thing). Was his obligated service ever resolved or could he be "defecting" to the US during his prime years?
9 months ago
ShawnK
42 comments
0 recs |
Comments
I’m really glad to see Choo get some national recognition. I’ll bet that not many Indians fans realize how great he’s been the past couple months. Good for him.
Plus, he gets a 52-inch HD TV! I’m sooo jealous (mine is only 42").
The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay
by Buckeye Brad on
Sep 29, 2008 5:40 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
You know, I think a lot of Indians fans actually DO know that Choo’s been great. It’s been awfully hard not to notice him. But, I agree that it’s nice to see him getting recognition. Now maybe Wedge will play him some more against lefties!!
by peter m on
Sep 29, 2008 5:54 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Ryan Garko, September .384 .442 .616 1.058
Shin-Soo Choo September .400 .464 .659 1.123
Pretty close, huh?
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on
Sep 29, 2008 6:14 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Too little, too late for Garko. Choo isn’t implicated in our meltdown. Go Choo, go!
by jhon on
Sep 29, 2008 6:19 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Tell you what. Let’s choose up sides. I go first. I take Choo. You get Garko.
by peter m on
Sep 29, 2008 8:15 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
1 recs
Also, Choo had 97 PAs to Garko’s 84. And Choo basically repeated his August rates. I choose Choo.
by jhon on
Sep 29, 2008 8:24 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Thinking about it some more, especially since you’re all over CC for his bad month, let me summarize Garko’s ‘08 campaign:
He was good for one month. He was bad in another month. He was among the handful of the worst players in the game in four other months. And he wasn’t even injured. He’s 27! This is his peak!
If he’s on the comeback trail, he’s still got a long way to go. In his “good” year he was not quite as effective as Ben Broussard.
by jhon on
Sep 29, 2008 8:41 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Look, I’m not putting up Garko for the league MVP, I’m just saying he had a pretty good month. And you’re both on I say that Garko has a higher VORP at the end of ’09 than Choo. A six pack of your favorite barley beverage?
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on
Sep 29, 2008 10:41 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
What’s your reasoning behind this? Playing time? I’m not sure I see this from your point of view.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on
Sep 29, 2008 10:58 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Here’s my reasoning: I think that both Garko and Choo’s future are a crap-shoot. Actually I like Choo a little better than Garko. KInda like I liked Westbrook a little better than Lee at the start of this season. The way I see it, it’s an even money bet.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on
Sep 30, 2008 2:09 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Everyone’s a crapshoot.
I’m pretty sure Choo had more outfield assists, so that settles it.
by Jay on
Sep 30, 2008 2:54 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yeah, but Garko had more POs.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on
Sep 30, 2008 3:12 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yeah, but if they swapped positions, Choo would have more POs than Garko, but Garko might not have more outfield assists than Choo.
by Jay on
Sep 30, 2008 3:53 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Choo has twice as many helmet flaps as Garko.
by FredOx on
Sep 30, 2008 4:09 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That’s the problem with the bet — PT. We don’t know how the team will use either of these players next year since both are potentially involved in semi-platoon situations (Garko with VIc; Choo with Francisco/Gutierrez). A better bet would be over a longer period — in two years , say, who has the best numbers?
By the way. Last time I looked (admittedly a few days ago), Garko was the third worst 1st baseman (in terms of OPS anyway) in the AL — only Kevin Millar and Daric Barton were worse. And, that included most of his September hot streak.
by peter m on
Sep 30, 2008 11:57 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Gload and Cairo were worse, but they probably didn’t have enough AB to make the list. Casey Kotchman was worse, too, but he fled for the NL, where his OPS dropped even more for the Braves. Garko was pretty bad, though. Only Barton, Cairo and Gload had fewer homers. On the upside, he had more triples than Millar and Kotchman combined.
by FredOx on
Sep 30, 2008 12:54 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
How do these guys compare defensively?
I’ll refrain from a gut input.
by jhon on
Sep 30, 2008 1:09 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
kotchman by all accounts is top notch defender
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on
Sep 30, 2008 2:55 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Just like Choo’s performance at the end of the season, I think that Garko’s started to turn it around. And I admit, he sure as hell stunk for a good part of the year. I think he can play pretty close to his September stats for most of next year.
BTW, you think that Garko will get more PT than Choo? Garko’s got at least as much competition for PT as Choo. It’s at the very least a wash.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on
Sep 30, 2008 1:56 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
We need to stop pretending like Garko had a great month. I mean, he did on balance, yes, but he actually had a 623 OPS through the first 12 days, consistent with his overall suck for the prior 140 days, and in fact actually a little worse.
No, his season-ending surge was actually just 11 starts and one pinch-hit single, 48 PA over a 16-day stretch, but it was one hell of a 16-day stretch with a 1399 OPS. True, he saw 16 out of 35 balls in play fall in for hits, and 4 out of 17 flyballs go for home runs, but then again he did have seven hits out of 20 go for extra bases … although that that’s not all that good … and his walk rate was still kind of weak.
He ain’t back, and even if he is, he was never all that great.
by Jay on
Sep 30, 2008 3:07 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Oooh, can I get in on this? I choo choo choose Choo. I could use some Burning River here on the east coast…
by Peter Bendix on
Sep 30, 2008 10:58 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I’ll throw in a Stanford souvenier beer mug if you’re right, since you’re really going out on a limb and you’re just the only one left in Garko’s corner.
by jhon on
Sep 30, 2008 1:11 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I’ve been there before. I’ve got a pretty decent record with long shots, but I’ll admit this one’s about 20-80. I’ve got the 20.
Resident LGT beer kinda sewer
by mauichuck on
Sep 30, 2008 1:52 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I’m still in Garko’s corner. I think most of his problems have been psychological. He suffered from Lofton disease. He would hit a couple of HRs and then start to lengthen his swing and uppercut. But, unlike Lofton, Garko is a pretty smart guy and I think he will learn to overcome this bad habit. So, I think he still has potential upside and we should give him at least one more year to show which Garko we are getting.
by elsandito on
Oct 1, 2008 12:17 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
In 2006, Garko hit .247/.352/.420 in triple-A. In 2005, he hit .303/.384/.498 in triple-A.
I don’t think he’s suffering from Lofton disease, so much as suffering from just-isn’t-that-good disease. I think there’s probably a chance that he returns to 2007 form, but that’s his ceiling and best-case-scenario. And if he doesn’t return fully to 2007 form, he’s probably a liability.
by Peter Bendix on
Oct 1, 2008 1:06 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
When you say he has hit his ceiling and reference an historical set of numbers, you are saying he has no upside. But, I am saying he can improve on his history. I realize there’s a significant chance that he won’t, but he’s the type of bright guy who might. He isn’t all that expensive and we owe it to ourselves to give him every chance.
by elsandito on
Oct 1, 2008 6:31 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The Indians already gave Garko a big chance, and he pooched it. Unlike Lofton, Garko doesn’t have the athleticism to compensate for extended periods of suckitude. His fielding is substandard. His value now consists as a backup in case Hafner 2008 returns next season. And Hafner didn’t look any different after his extended DL stint.
by odradek on
Oct 1, 2008 7:09 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It’s true that Garko has already been given a fair chance. He failed to capitalize on that chance up to this point.
by elsandito on
Oct 1, 2008 7:56 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Maybe he’s bored with the big leagues?
by odradek on
Oct 1, 2008 7:07 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Look, we are all in Garko’s corner, it’s just that some of us are clear on his limitations. The idea that Garko has anything on Lofton is a bad joke. Lofton finished his last season ranked #10 among all active players for times on base. Garko likely will never finish in the Top 10 in any season, let alone for his career.
Contact hitting is the only thing Garko really has ever done well, but his career best is .289, while Lofton has hit better than .300 in eight different full seasons. Lofton finished exactly fourth in batting average three times, while Garko has yet to crack the Top 30.
There is no reason to think Lofton isn’t a pretty smart guy in conventional terms, by the way — no puzzling career moves or foolish quotes that I can remember, and he did was at Arizona for three years. It ain’t Stanford, but he is better educated than the great majority of major leaguers.
But when it comes to baseball smarts, Lofton leaves Garko in the dust. Lofton has a career walk rate of 10.2, while Garko’s is 7.1. What does that tell us about which one is a “pretty smart guy?” If Garko’s approach to the plate were more intelligent — more fundamentally sound — we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Whatever his faults, Kenny drew far more walks and, swung at more strikes, hit the ball harder, made fewer outs and simply got on base more.
I’d also suggest that it takes some kind of smarts to win five straight stolen base titles — Lofton was very fast, but he wasn’t the fastest player in the majors during his career. He he finished as the active leader with 622 — the current active leader has 429. In fact, only four active players are even within 300 of Lofton, and at least two of those four shouldn’t be anything but a bench guy at this point.
He also drove in 255 runs in 272 sac-fly situations, including 65 sac flys. Garko has been good but not as good, with 55 RBI in 72 sac-fly situations. Who’s smarter? Who’s better at tailoring his game better to the situation?
Fact is, there’s no reason to doubt Lofton’s intelligence, and there’s plenty of reason to doubt Garko’s ability to transmute whatever he does or doesn’t understand about hitting into his actual quality of play. If his approach to hitting were as sound as Lofton’s — even in his good months — then we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Not to mention, if he were capable of winning five SB titles and four Gold Gloves in CF, then we wouldn’t care that he’s such a mediocre hitter.
by Jay on
Oct 1, 2008 8:00 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
My reference to Lofton was Kenny’s bad habit of overswinging with uppercut after hitting a couple of homers, instead of continuing to slash at the ball. Kenny was a heck of a contact hitter and a heck of a player. You understood my reference, don’t even try to deny this.
by elsandito on
Oct 2, 2008 9:03 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yes, I know Kenny got homer-happy sometimes and hit way too many popups. I don’t recall him being totally awful for four or five months at a time, though, and I don’t agree with the idea that Garko can work out his problems better than Kenny because he’s smarter. For one thing, I don’t know that he is smarter, and for another, I definitely don’t know that he’s smarter in any particular way that would actually matter.
by Jay on
Oct 2, 2008 11:50 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You continue to press on the notion that I am comparing Lofton to Garko. If I had said that Garko stretches in the on deck circle like Babe Ruth used to, you would start throwing comparison stats at me. A reference is just that, it’s not any attempt to compare two people.
by elsandito on
Oct 2, 2008 3:40 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
unlike Lofton, Garko is a pretty smart guy and I think he will learn to overcome this bad habit.
My impression was that this was a comparison of Lofton to Garko — I think that would be anyone’s impression. If you didn’t mean it to be a comparison, okay.
by Jay on
Oct 2, 2008 3:53 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
OK, you got me. I failed to realize that I was comparing the two in terms of this particular habit. It frustrated me that Lofton had already left Cleveland before he was able to break this habit. And, to see a guy with Lofton’s ability fall prey to this lousy habit frustrated me even more.
But, in my mind, and maybe only my mind, I wasn’t intending to measure these guys up against each other. Maybe I should have stated it in a way that indicated that I think Garko is a pretty bright guy, without casting aspersion on Lofton’s intellect.
by elsandito on
Oct 2, 2008 5:10 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Did Lofton ever break the habit? I wasn’t aware.
Lofton was a serviceable and reliable veteran for a long time after he left Cleveland, but there’s no doubt Indians fans enjoyed the “steak” in terms of his best years.
by Jay on
Oct 2, 2008 5:13 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I saw a girl in a Choo T-shirt today. I shall regret not stopping to talk to her for the rest of my life.
by Voltaire on
Sep 30, 2008 5:08 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
how’d she look
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on
Sep 30, 2008 6:51 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs















