Jump to content
NBC Sports Edge Forums

Mac Williamson 2018 Outlook


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, JFS179 said:

 

 

Looks like a swing worth a roster spot to me. 

 

Giddy up. 

Good stuff. Not quite as high of a leg kick as Justin Turner but you can see the similarities. I YouTubed his highlights from last year and he had virtually no leg kick at all.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 209
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

How do you know this?    Dude has a totally reworked swing and the contact has gone way up since then.   I think you can throw out the earlier numbers and if you just focus on his

JD is going to become the next Mac Williamson.  I slotted Mac right next to Jose Martinez in my lineup so they can talk about swing changes and launch angle. 

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, meh2 said:

Good stuff. Not quite as high of a leg kick as Justin Turner but you can see the similarities. I YouTubed his highlights from last year and he had virtually no leg kick at all.

 

I noticed a lot of Turner similarities too. Leg kick, weight transfer, athletic bend in the knees, mammoth weight transfer as he swings (driven by that leg kick), and his hands pre-swing and then just driving right to the ball. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing really to add to the analysis already on the thread, but i'm all over this one. hoping this is another in the long line of late bloomer / swing adjustment guys like JDM/donaldson/pham/jose martinez, not to mention the obvious justin turner / same instructor connection. 

 

you're never sure these gambles are gonna work until they work, but i'd always rather pick the guy up and see how it goes

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Gambino said:

Who is this hitting instructor...is he baseball’s Tom Brady Diet?

 

Williamson with 111 exit velocity ... to Right Center?  That was Bonds like... but from a Righty??? 

 

That may have been one of the most impressive bombs I’ve seen in this park, Barry included. Wow.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That was definitely impressive, and while he's only gotten 1 hit in each of his 4 games since being called up, he is a tempting pickup for the time being.  Some potential tough pitching matchups are ahead, but he's still making me consider it at least.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Czar said:

 

How do you know this? 

 

Dude has a totally reworked swing and the contact has gone way up since then.

 

I think you can throw out the earlier numbers and if you just focus on his numbers since he reworked the swing, they are crazy.

 

Nobody is even talking about his spring either.  It was a joke that he didn't make the club out of spring so they could hold on to the likes of Gorkys Hernandez. He should have been the starting LF with Pence on the bench given his spring numbers.

 

If you combine spring, AAA, and current AB's, he is hitting .378 with 12 homeruns and 29 RBI in his last 98 at-bats. Yes, I know those ABs don't count and are against inferior competition, but those are the numbers that we have to go off of since he retooled his swing.  He has only K'd 21 times in those 98 AB's, so while also showing a major power increase, he has also increased his contact over what he was doing previously.  That is where I would look to see if there are major swing changes.  Has the contact increased?  Last year in AAA, he was striking out 26% of the time and while 50 AB is incredibly small on the sample size scale, he was at 10% in that time frame this year.  That is significant and shouldn't be ignored in this discussion.  If he was still striking out 25-30% of the time, I'd be pretty pessimistic, but if he can hold those gains and maybe cut that K% to 20%, I'm much more optimistic.  You aren't looking at the same player that he was before.  The guy is toolsy as hell if he can just figure out his swing, which we might be witnessing.

 

I don't know what we have yet, but I have a roster spot to try and find out.

 

I've been patiently waiting for the @The Czar take on Williamson.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wxmilkman said:

that was some straight pop! But Mac will not be a fantasy asset. 

 

2 hours ago, wxmilkman said:

 

These videos are somewhat orgasmic

 

Um ... so which is it?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JFS179 said:

Um ... so which is it?

 

Eh, there are plenty of players with sexy looking swings that don't produce value in fantasy leagues.  I think the disconnect here might be that some are buying into the "changed swing / changed results" narrative and some aren't.  I'm often skeptical of these narrative-based rationales for touting a player, because I feel like we never hear about all the times a player changes things and they don't work -- just the ones that do work.  But maybe there's something to this, and if the cost is the worst player on your roster right now, well, there aren't many leagues where that's not worth a shot for at least one team.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, tonycpsu said:

 

Eh, there are plenty of players with sexy looking swings that don't produce value in fantasy leagues.  I think the disconnect here might be that some are buying into the "changed swing / changed results" narrative and some aren't.  I'm often skeptical of these narrative-based rationales for touting a player, because I feel like we never hear about all the times a player changes things and they don't work -- just the ones that do work.  But maybe there's something to this, and if the cost is the worst player on your roster right now, well, there aren't many leagues where that's not worth a shot for at least one team.

 

Fair point - but in most leagues you either have to jump and see what comes of it, or you'll never own the player.  

 

So we jump, and hope.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, JFS179 said:

Fair point - but in most leagues you either have to jump and see what comes of it, or you'll never own the player.  

 

Yeah, that's what I was saying -- you probably got lost in my quadruple-negative there.  :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tonycpsu said:

 

Eh, there are plenty of players with sexy looking swings that don't produce value in fantasy leagues.  I think the disconnect here might be that some are buying into the "changed swing / changed results" narrative and some aren't.  I'm often skeptical of these narrative-based rationales for touting a player, because I feel like we never hear about all the times a player changes things and they don't work -- just the ones that do work.  But maybe there's something to this, and if the cost is the worst player on your roster right now, well, there aren't many leagues where that's not worth a shot for at least one team.

That's why I always take a numbers based approach to go with the new scouting reports.

 

One of the things that turned me on the AAAA Nelson Cruz when I first started posting here was that he had changed his swing, but it was resulting in a much higher contact % and he was also walking a great deal more in the minors.  I was convinced that when Texas gave him another shot, he was going to perform.  Contrast that with another guy that was being hyped at the same time in Dallas McPhereson.  While Cruz was showing huge gains in patience and plate discipline, McPhereson was not despite his monster AAA numbers.  Long story short, one guy figured it out, another did not, which is why I always look at the contact %'s first to see if there are changes.  It's not an end all, be all, but I think it's a starting point when discussing a new swing.  Also why I like Jose Martinez over Davidson as I discussed in those threads.

 

What makes this one very different is that Mac didn't spend much time down in AAA this time around, but the gains seem similar to me.  Cruz was allowed to spend most of 2008 in AAA, so I had a lot more data to go off of.  If Mac was allowed to spend 100 games down there, it would let us collect a lot more data on his new approach.  We don't have that luxury like we had with 2008 Cruz.

 

I'm not in any way saying he is going to be Nelson Cruz, but I'm saying the arguments that I saw back in 2008 are the same, which is why I try to bring numbers an analysis to the debate instead of solely saying, "hey, this guy changed his swing."

 

Player A changed his swing.  Player A is making better contact. Player A is showing more power.  Sometimes you have to throw out the old data because it no longer applies if that guy has a different swing or a new pitch.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, tonycpsu said:

 

Eh, there are plenty of players with sexy looking swings that don't produce value in fantasy leagues.  I think the disconnect here might be that some are buying into the "changed swing / changed results" narrative and some aren't.  I'm often skeptical of these narrative-based rationales for touting a player, because I feel like we never hear about all the times a player changes things and they don't work -- just the ones that do work.  But maybe there's something to this, and if the cost is the worst player on your roster right now, well, there aren't many leagues where that's not worth a shot for at least one team.

 

Happ and Kiermeir come to mind so far this season as swing/approach changes that didn't produce results in small sample sizes

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, The Czar said:

Player A changed his swing.  Player A is making better contact. Player A is showing more power.  Sometimes you have to throw out the old data because it no longer applies if that guy has a different swing or a new pitch.

 

The problem I have with starting the clock at the swing change is that it fails to capture fundamentals like plate discipline that don't really change much with a mechanical adjustment.  If the new swing is allowing him to make better contact, then that's certainly compelling, and he may be worth buying on the strength of that possibility alone, but it doesn't mean the old data should be thrown out entirely, especially when, as you note, the only sample of data we have to work with is so compromised.

 

I think his real value is probably somewhere between the video game numbers in those 98 PA and the more pedestrian numbers he was putting up last year in a much larger sample between AAA and the majors.  So, like, maybe some incremental contact improvements to get the K% just south of 30%, which could maybe goose the AVG up to the .250 range.  That can certainly play if the power is as legit as it looks, and I trust your analysis enough that I added Mac everywhere he was available based on it, but I'm doing so with ceiling expectations more along the lines of peak Mark Trumbo than peak Boomstick.  I'd obviously take either of those for the price, but I just don't think a swing change makes him a new player -- it just gives that same player a new tool to work with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, tonycpsu said:

 

The problem I have with starting the clock at the swing change is that it fails to capture fundamentals like plate discipline that don't really change much with a mechanical adjustment.  If the new swing is allowing him to make better contact, then that's certainly compelling, and he may be worth buying on the strength of that possibility alone, but it doesn't mean the old data should be thrown out entirely, especially when, as you note, the only sample of data we have to work with is so compromised.

 

I think his real value is probably somewhere between the video game numbers in those 98 PA and the more pedestrian numbers he was putting up last year in a much larger sample between AAA and the majors.  So, like, maybe some incremental contact improvements to get the K% just south of 30%, which could maybe goose the AVG up to the .250 range.  That can certainly play if the power is as legit as it looks, and I trust your analysis enough that I added Mac everywhere he was available based on it, but I'm doing so with ceiling expectations more along the lines of peak Mark Trumbo than peak Boomstick.  I'd obviously take either of those for the price, but I just don't think a swing change makes him a new player -- it just gives that same player a new tool to work with.

 

I actually like the Mark Trumbo comparison a lot looking at their stats.

 

I think Mac is still going to be ultra-aggressive and he will still K a lot, but I'd take .250 with 30 bombs for sure.  I think the Giants would be pretty happy with that as well given their need for power in that stadium.  I do know that they had him rated much higher than Adam Duvall (another comparable guy given the numbers) in their own system and part of why they were willing to part with Duvall. Mac is also a better athlete and defender, which was a factor.  He has been very injury prone in the minors though and has missed lots of time in development along the way, which is also something to be aware of and also might explain why his numbers are all over the place, even in the minors. He missed a full year with TJ in 2014 and had a broken collarbone last year I believe.  He was super raw when they drafted him and they knew he was a project, so losing that time hurt a lot, but he certainly has some legit tools.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Czar said:

 

I actually like the Mark Trumbo comparison a lot looking at their stats.

 

I think Mac is still going to be ultra-aggressive and he will still K a lot, but I'd take .250 with 30 bombs for sure.  I think the Giants would be pretty happy with that as well given their need for power in that stadium.  I do know that they had him rated much higher than Adam Duvall (another comparable guy given the numbers) in their own system and part of why they were willing to part with Duvall. Mac is also a better athlete and defender, which was a factor.  He has been very injury prone in the minors though and has missed lots of time in development along the way, which is also something to be aware of and also might explain why his numbers are all over the place, even in the minors. He missed a full year with TJ in 2014 and had a broken collarbone last year I believe.  He was super raw when they drafted him and they knew he was a project, so losing that time hurt a lot, but he certainly has some legit tools.

 

This. 

 

I thought his tools were very intriguing when he was coming out of college.  And as you noted he's had a ton of injuries in the minors which have hampered his development.

 

Trumbo...Duvall... those are viable possible outcomes and I agree that the Giants would take that at this point. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...