Aaron Judge

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

To whoever has been arguing Judge just had a typical season with ups and downs: not.

Nah...it becomes sample size. as long as you hit well enough for the 2nd half.. a month might as well be 3 days of slumping. Talk of any slump in 2017 for Judge is silly. Its like saying he went 0-4 yesterday so thats a slump... One good day of hitting negates many many bad days. If you fail 7 out of 10 times you are going to the HOF if career is long enough.

Also the fact that your best month of the 2nd half is the last month during the playoff race makes that month more important than any other 2nd half months. Yeah all the games count, but if you use that argument than all of his stats count too

[rats60]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

Nah...it becomes sample size. as long as you hit well enough for the 2nd half.. a month might as well be 3 days of slumping. Talk of any slump in 2017 for Judge is silly. Its like saying he went 0-4 yesterday so thats a slump... One good day of hitting negates many many bad days. If you fail 7 out of 10 times you are going to the HOF if career is long enough.

Also the fact that your best month of the 2nd half is the last month during the playoff race makes that month more important than any other 2nd half months. Yeah all the games count, but if you use that argument than all of his stats count too

It is not sample size when the two months after the end of the first half you hit .182/.346/.365. Judge has had a hot 2 weeks after a bad 2 months. Those 2 weeks are not important considering the Yankees already had the wild card wrapped up. It would be one thing if he led them to the division. However, his hot streak has come too late for it to matter.

[MattyC]

This is a general statement and not directed at anyone in particular.

I get that the flood of data on baseball these days can provide some valuable insight, and it's always been a game that has loved its hallowed stats and records— yet it seems like some fans these days don't even need to watch the game and absorb all there is to absorb about it and the individual human players; they just need their stat sheets and calculators. It's a very dry and one-dimensional way to view the game, and risks missing a lot of pleasurable aspects.

[packs]

I agree 100%. Once I said Bernie Williams was one of the most clutch hitters I've ever seen and someone laughed at me and put up some inane stat to show I was wrong, even though I watched the guy play every day. I was at those games and I knew when Bernie comes up, he's going to put us ahead. But some guy who probably only watched Bernie casually when his team played theirs told me I didn't know what I was talking about.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by MattyC

This is a general statement and not directed at anyone in particular.

I get that the flood of data on baseball these days can provide some valuable insight, and it's always been a game that has loved its hallowed stats and records— yet it seems like some fans these days don't even need to watch the game and absorb all there is to absorb about it and the individual human players; they just need their stat sheets and calculators. It's a very dry and one-dimensional way to view the game, and risks missing a lot of pleasurable aspects.

I think that's a bit of a false dichotomy, sure the stats are what people logically use in the context of an argument, but that doesn't mean the same folks aren't watching and enjoying the game as a true fan would.

[MattyC]

I never said that those who view and speak of such stats only truck in those stats and ignore the other aspects of the game and players. Just saying that what I hear in some discussions does lead me to think that there are lots of guys who do lean on that data— either exclusively or at the cost of other aspects. It is just an impression I get, from what is said in some baseball discussions these days.

I can admit I am certainly someone who runs more on feel, instinct, and emotion, based on what I do for a living— and that is also how I approach the game and collecting. Just a shared observation among us fans/collectors. I always learn and glean good stuff from absorbing the very stat-centric baseball points of view I read around the web. I do think it can also be a good thing to temper that baseball worldview with some emotion/intangibles.

[ullmandds]

Do any of y'all think $5K for a topps signed 1 of 1 celebrating aj's recordbreaking moment is a "good" investment?????

[MattyC]

I bought one of those for $500, happily. I think as an investment, who knows; it will depend on the unknown future of Aaron Judge's career. If he stays a beloved Yankee, the Yankee fanbase certainly has its share of well-heeled collectors who may want to have that 1/1 in their collection. Only time will tell on that one, from an investment standpoint.

Given the card and the moment it commemorates, and using my own motivations for buying one as a touchstone, I would hazard that it was bought by a hardcore Judge collector. If it's a collector like me with 10x my bankroll, I can see him spending 5k the way I spent five hundo.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I bought one of those for $500, happily. I think as an investment, who knows; it will depend on the unknown future of Aaron Judge's career. If he stays a beloved Yankee, the Yankee fanbase certainly has its share of well-heeled collectors who may want to have that 1/1 in their collection. Only time will tell on that one, from an investment standpoint.

Given the card and the moment it commemorates, and using my own motivations for buying one as a touchstone, I would hazard that it was bought by a hardcore Judge collector. If it's a collector like me with 10x my bankroll, I can see him spending 5k the way I spent five hundo.

i thought about it but couldnt do it. to me these topps "moments" cards have the potential to be produced in greater #'s than regularly issued cards. Not likely I know...but plausible????

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by rats60

It is not sample size when the two months after the end of the first half you hit .182/.346/.365. Judge has had a hot 2 weeks after a bad 2 months. Those 2 weeks are not important considering the Yankees already had the wild card wrapped up. It would be one thing if he led them to the division. However, his hot streak has come too late for it to matter.

The wild card was far from wrapped up. Plus getting home field means something as well. Andrew McCutchen was horrid to start the year for months i believe...that doesnt matter now for him this season even though they long shot for playoffs... .182 is still better than .090.... you cant hit .270 all year and be a 50 homer hitter in most cases... sometimes you face a bunch of aces in a row or hot teams combined with a few bad weeks....

you also forget that weeks in baseball do make up for months...if Judge hit 20 homers in those 2 weeks....you think we would be having this conversation if he had 60 plus homeruns? nobody would care about the 'slump; hitting 50 plus homers with 5 or so games to go accomplishes the same thing, he didnt play a full season and he will have 110-115 rbis as well.. if he did not' slow down temporarily he probably has arguably the best hitting season of all time...

[frankbmd]

I believe Judge would be the first MVP, or ROY for that matter, with 200+ strikeouts, and possibly could finish the year with more Ks than Nellie Fox had in his entire 19 year major league career (216).

Granted Nellie didn't hit the long ball, but Joe DiMaggio almost had one home run (361) for every time he struck out (369). Judge currently has over 4 strikeouts (245) for each home run (54).

Three more dissimilar good ballplayers would be hard to name.

[MrSeven]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

I believe Judge would be the first MVP, or ROY for that matter, with 200+ strikeouts, and possibly could finish the year with more Ks than Nellie Fox had in his entire 19 year major league career (216).

Granted Nellie didn't hit the long ball, but Joe DiMaggio almost had one home run (361) for every time he struck out (369). Judge currently has over 4 strikeouts (245) for each home run (54).

Three more dissimilar good ballplayers would be hard to name.

Strikeouts are far more common today then when Joltin' Joe played.

Bob Feller's 8.1 strikeouts per 9 innings ratio was remarkable in 1946 (only the 4th time it had happened in the NL since formation).

From 2000 to 2015, it has happened 290 times.

https://www.theringer.com/2016/6/17/...g-63da5eb7b35d

For a more modern comparison, Jim Thome comes to mind. 2548 career strike outs to 612 home runs.

[Bill77]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

Three more dissimilar good ballplayers would be hard to name.

One that comes to mind is Mike Trout. Not to say that Trout is a bad player because he is not but the similarities to his 2014 season a Judge's 2017 season are crazy. And Trout also has a greater than 4 to 1 SO to HR ratio for his career so far.

[packs]

People keep bringing up the slump but in the month of September Judge has hit 13 homers and cemented a playoff spot for his team. The Yankees did not have anything guaranteed at the start of the month and now they've clinched. If Jose Ramirez's play in the final month of the season is something that makes him a contender, why would the same not be said about Judge? I realize the Indians record is tied into Ramirez's performance, but they were in either way being 8 games up on the Twins on September 1.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by packs

People keep bringing up the slump but in the month of September Judge has hit 13 homers and cemented a playoff spot for his team. The Yankees did not have anything guaranteed at the start of the month and now they've clinched. If Jose Ramirez's play in the final month of the season is something that makes him a contender, why would the same not be said about Judge? I realize the Indians record is tied into Ramirez's performance, but they were in either way being 8 games up on the Twins on September 1.

If Judge didnt slump and hit consistently for the entire year and thus no super hot weeks and ended up with the same statistics, isnt it the same thing? Stats are stats. Its a slump if it causes you not to get your statistics. If you get your stats, theres no slumps. Add to the fact he plays in New York and they made the playoffs as cherry on top.

Now a guy like Thames on the brewers...he had a 2nd slump...thats a real slump..

[rats60]

Originally Posted by packs

People keep bringing up the slump but in the month of September Judge has hit 13 homers and cemented a playoff spot for his team. The Yankees did not have anything guaranteed at the start of the month and now they've clinched. If Jose Ramirez's play in the final month of the season is something that makes him a contender, why would the same not be said about Judge? I realize the Indians record is tied into Ramirez's performance, but they were in either way being 8 games up on the Twins on September 1.

Again, Judge was still horrible the first 9 days of September. He has been hot 2 weeks, not the whole month. When Judge started hitting, the wild card was pretty much wrapped up. It would have taken an epic collapse for the Yankees to miss the playoffs. If the Yankees had gone 0-14 instead of 10-4, they would still be tied for the 2nd wild card spot. 7-7 and they still have a playoff birth clinched and are ahead of the Twins.

Ramirez hot streak started in August when the race was close and now they have the league's best record. That is huge. The Indians streak was historic. Ramirez performance during that streak was insane. 29-2 can't be ignored. Until the season is over, nothing is written in stone, but at this point Ramirez has been the league's most valuable player in my opinion.