I feel that if the price on the proven All-Star Olson is right, you have to make that move. He will be an upgrade over Lowe offensively and defensively and you know what you're getting.
With that being said, I believe Lowe still has quite a bit of potential. He has something the Rangers lineup sorely needs more of: plate discipline. His 12.5% walk rate in 2021 was well above league average and the best among current Rangers (including Seager and Semien). His 25.2% strikeout rate was only slightly worse than league average (24%) in 2021 and I believe can be improved upon with a year of experience under his belt and the help of the new hitting coaches.
As most Ranger fans are aware, Lowe struggled to hit high velocity. The biggest improvement the SF Giants made under Donnie Ecker was hitting the fastball better. The Giants as a team crushed fastballs last season. If anyone can fix Lowe's problem there it would seem to be Ecker.
Lastly, I want to point out Lowe was in the 91st percentile in max exit velo, 77th percentile in average exit velo and 74% in hard hit rate. He has legit power. This is where his second big weakness shows up; hitting the ball on the ground too much. If Lowe can elevate the ball more, he hits it more than hard enough, often enough, to see a major spike in his power numbers.
Again, if the price is right on Olson, I think you go get the proven star. There is reason for optimism with Lowe if that doesn't come together, though.
Terrific post Tyler Cole. Given that there will likely be a bidding war brewing on Olson, and that 22 is about continuing the building process, I'd started to rethink my position with Lowe already and the analysis here has me thinking maybe that's the play after all.
Jeff, what is your opinion on the Nathaniel Lowe/Matt Olson conundrum?
What might be a "reasonable" trade scenario for Olson? Would Lowe, Solak, 3X middle infield prospects not named Justin Foscue get the A's interest? Is that too much?
I love the thought of Olson in powder blue Ranger gear signed to a multi-year extension and the Rangers with the best infield in baseball, but cheap(inexpensive) 1B gives you tons of options.
I've said that if you have a chance to get Matt Olson, you get him. A few concerns: Is he going to re-sign/sign an extension. If you're going to trade away a pile of prospects (I would think Foscue would be in the deal), you can't let him leave in two years. If he intends to hit the open market, why not try to sign him then and use the prospects to add pitchers if the pitching prospects don't come through? As for Lowe, one thing the Rangers have been very good with the past few years is their pro scouting. They think there's more there.
I feel that if the price on the proven All-Star Olson is right, you have to make that move. He will be an upgrade over Lowe offensively and defensively and you know what you're getting.
With that being said, I believe Lowe still has quite a bit of potential. He has something the Rangers lineup sorely needs more of: plate discipline. His 12.5% walk rate in 2021 was well above league average and the best among current Rangers (including Seager and Semien). His 25.2% strikeout rate was only slightly worse than league average (24%) in 2021 and I believe can be improved upon with a year of experience under his belt and the help of the new hitting coaches.
As most Ranger fans are aware, Lowe struggled to hit high velocity. The biggest improvement the SF Giants made under Donnie Ecker was hitting the fastball better. The Giants as a team crushed fastballs last season. If anyone can fix Lowe's problem there it would seem to be Ecker.
Lastly, I want to point out Lowe was in the 91st percentile in max exit velo, 77th percentile in average exit velo and 74% in hard hit rate. He has legit power. This is where his second big weakness shows up; hitting the ball on the ground too much. If Lowe can elevate the ball more, he hits it more than hard enough, often enough, to see a major spike in his power numbers.
Again, if the price is right on Olson, I think you go get the proven star. There is reason for optimism with Lowe if that doesn't come together, though.
Solid analysis. I didn't get into the power, but it's in there and it's real. It's just getting it out, and maybe Ecker does that.
Terrific post Tyler Cole. Given that there will likely be a bidding war brewing on Olson, and that 22 is about continuing the building process, I'd started to rethink my position with Lowe already and the analysis here has me thinking maybe that's the play after all.
Jeff, what is your opinion on the Nathaniel Lowe/Matt Olson conundrum?
What might be a "reasonable" trade scenario for Olson? Would Lowe, Solak, 3X middle infield prospects not named Justin Foscue get the A's interest? Is that too much?
I love the thought of Olson in powder blue Ranger gear signed to a multi-year extension and the Rangers with the best infield in baseball, but cheap(inexpensive) 1B gives you tons of options.
I've said that if you have a chance to get Matt Olson, you get him. A few concerns: Is he going to re-sign/sign an extension. If you're going to trade away a pile of prospects (I would think Foscue would be in the deal), you can't let him leave in two years. If he intends to hit the open market, why not try to sign him then and use the prospects to add pitchers if the pitching prospects don't come through? As for Lowe, one thing the Rangers have been very good with the past few years is their pro scouting. They think there's more there.