TCust and Mike Wilson,
that's the platoon I would like to see! (Assuming Milton is elsewhere...which Z seems to be discounting now)
My problem with the Cust signing is that it was only ONE year. It should have been two.
This year will be nice...but if for only one year he just impedes PA's I would like to see go to guys who might actually be around in '12. Cust should have been signed to '12, too. That's our window.
Anyway...I just did a quick search. Here were the parameters. In MLB history, any single season, minimum: 500 PA's, .400 OBP, 30K/100AB's, 25 HR.
It has happened 13 times. Names?
1. Mark McGwire 1X ('98..the 70 tater year)
2. Jim Edmonds 2X (This was the one name that surprised me)
3. Ryan Howard 1X
4. Jack Clark 2X (The first guy to do it--'87 with the Cardinals)
5. Jim Thome 5X
6. Adam Dunn 1X ('02, ironically when he hit only 26 homers)
7. Jack Cust 1X ('07)
Pretty lofty company.
I've written, BTW, about those '87 Cards. If the M's are in that mold (not a lot of dingers) we have to remember that the Cards were a team with plenty of pop. It is true that they only had one guy with more than 12 homers (Clark, 35..Willie McGee was next with 12), they still hit a bunch of x-base hits. Clark and McGee both had 69, Terry Pendleton had 45 and Ozzie had 44. We need Smoak to turn into a 30 double and 20 homer guy and Ackley to become a 40 and 12 player. That kind of pop makes up for Figgins and Guti.
BTW, if you expand that previous search by dropping the OBP to .380 you find that it has been done 25 times. Three new names appear: Stargell once, J. Bay once, Jay Buhner once
All the other names remain the same. Cust is still on the list just once (and the least "valuable" of the seasons because he only had 507 PA's in '07), but you get the idea.
Cust is Adam Dunn (7X on the list) and Jim Thome (6X on the list) light.
Rarefied air. Granted that was one season for Cust, but he remains in that same mold. It should have been a 2 year deal. The M's may regret that!
moe
Q. Has anybody ever approached him for a Babe Ruth movie?
How does Cust compare to Russell Branyan, if not The Babe?
A. Compared to Russell the Muscle, Jack Cust is -- >less talented, more effective ... less powerful, more productive ... less athletic, younger and healthier.
Cust is the most extreme TTO player who ever lived. Fully 55% of Cust's at-bats require no fielder.
But Russell Branyan is Three True Times the physical specimen that Cust ever was. You won't see the 450-foot-long, 100-foot-high shots with Cust; Jack is a mere mortal hitting home runs normal distances.
Yet, Cust works the count much more carefully. Cust is Branyan ---- > with a professor's pair of spectacles and a professor's more-doughy body.
...............
Don't undersell Cust. Branyan is a solid 5.5 runs per 27. Cust is a solid 6.5 runs per 27. And Cust is healthier.
Those of us who wanted Russell Branyan, may have gotten an upgrade on him.
.
Q. Does SSI intuit Jack Cust to be getting old?
A. Cust is year to year, yes, but fortunately he's only 31 turning 32.
Before 2010, Ron Shandler picked Cust to decline due to age, based on three factors: (1) dropoff vs LHP .. (2) dropping XBA (expected batting average) ... (3) "eroding EYE".
I disagreed with 2 and 3, and I was right about both.
...............
But Jack is indeed dropping off vs. LHP's, which is a flashing neon light about his reflexes. The backup alarm light? Sure enough, Cust had a bad year in 2010 vs. power pitchers.
Also, Cust's performance is dropping off against fastballs. He used to just wear them out, but his run values are off by 50% even when he gets his favorite pitch.
.................
Cust was never the kind of special talent that you expect to last until --- > age 35. I think he's going to be fighting the birthday in 2011.
.
Q. Can the Mariners cope with that?
A. They can if they bat him against righties. Last year, Cust tatoo'ed all righties to the tune of .285/.410/.470.
Cust is going to give you a .400 OBP, with nice power, against righties. End of story.
But get him off the field against lefties. And guess what: Milton Bradley is better when he's hitting LHP's.
.
Q. Then what are these noises the M's are making about Cust batting against both lefties and righties?
A. Zduriencik doesn't make those noises unless he means them. So unfortunately, the M's spend April and maybe May, realizing that Cust's game doesn't work any more, not against crisp lefty stuff.
We remember very well that Capt Jack thought Branyan could hit lefties, and it turned out that he could. Sure.
But this is different. Branyan had never had a shot, and Branyan was a physical specimen. Cust? He's got normal reflexes, and he's a little soft, and he's a little old, and I don't think he can defend himself against a lefty slider.
.
.
Comments
BTW, if you expand that previous search by dropping the OBP to .380 you find that it has been done 25 times. Three new names appear: Stargell once, J. Bay once, Jay Buhner once
Ya, Buhner was actually a more TTO-oriented player than we might think...
Bone: 87:155 EYE, 34 HR per 162
Branyan: 63:176 EYE, 31 HR per 162
Jim Lefebvre responded to his TTO inkblot test by trying to keep Buhner out of the major leagues. At a time when the Mariners had no hitting.
Lefebvre literally believed that any newcomer with a high BB/K/HR total was a non-MLB(TM) player.
Cust is Adam Dunn (7X on the list) and Jim Thome (6X on the list) light.
Rarefied air. Granted that was one season for Cust, but he remains in that same mold. It should have been a 2 year deal. The M's may regret that!
Cust: 107:197 EYE, 27 HR per 162 ... 122 OPS+
Dunn: 111:183 EYE, 40 HR per 162 ..... 133 OPS+
Dunn Lite is a good way to put it. Only problemo being that Dunn is a given, and Cust is a bit less of a guarantee.*
Considering that Dunn cost 4/$56M, and Cust only 1/$2.5M, this is one instance in which I'd prefer the Dunn Lite price :- )