Real-deal Gordon Beckham’s goal: .300, not 25 homers
It might be a bit much to equate Gordon Beckham with Cal Ripken, Jr., depicted here in 1993 (Image via Wikipedia)
You love the smart young guy who keeps his head when all others around him are losing theirs.
So when the only option is to look forward a few years rather than gaze around at the late-season wreckage that is otherwise known as the Chicago White Sox, nifty rookie Gordon Beckham shows he has the right stuff to polish his game into the player he’ll be when physical maturity intersects with mental acuity.
Would the friendly Georgia product, a top candidate for American League rookie of the year honors at his adopted position at third base, rather be a .300 hitter or a 25-home-run guy?
“.300 hitter,” Beckham replied, without hesitation.
Simple logic. .300 hitters are born, you can’t teach contact, plate discipline and a good swing. Power develops from such good hitting mechanics.
“I don’t think your swing changes because you hit a few home runs,” Beckham said. “Home runs take care off themselves through good swings. I don’t see it as changing your swing to hit home runs. It doesn’t happen that way.”
Beckham figures he was close to a pro-rated 20-homer pace in 2009 based on not playing in the majors the first two months.
In the post-steroid (hopefully) era, Beckham figures he’ll “get bigger and stronger, keep growing into my body and hopefully it grows in a good way.”
If so, he’d follow the path taken by such Hall of Fame chaps as Cal Ripken, Jr., Ryne Sandberg and Robin Yount — all infielders who did not start out as strongmen, but matured later on in their career as RBI men.
Sox manager Ozzie Guillen believes Beckham will average between 20 and 25 homers simply by natural development.
“The way he plays right now, yes, but you don’t know how baseball (turns out),” Guillen said. “I don’t think he’s going to be a one-year wonder. This kid is a baseball player. This kid will be a great leader. I’d like to see him with three or four years in the big leagues. He has a great chance to be a great leader. He has a chance to be a guy we can build around — he can be that good.”
Guillen never played against Sandberg so he can’t really compare Beckham with the all-time Cub. Ripken would be more of an analogy, he suggested.
But to avoid putting too much pressure on Beckham, don’t equate him with Ripken. The iron man was American League rookie of the year in 1982, slugging 27 homers. The next year, he was MVP as the Orioles won the World Series. There was no gradual buildup of power. Ripken was a solid 25-homers-a-year guy from the get-go.
Sandberg’s role model makes more sense. He started as a seven-to-eight-homer slap hitter in 1982, was persuaded by 1984 Cubs manager Jim Frey to turn on the ball and boosted himself into the 20 to 25 range a few years into his career, and then finally matured to hit 30 and then 40 homers as he reached his 30th birthday.
Whatever Beckham’s specific numbers now or in 2012, he’s not too good to be true. Any kid who thinks contact before muscling up should earn the right to go through 10 slumps before he’s ever booed. From eight miles north, are you watching, Mr. Soriano?
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Ryne who? We’re hoping Beckham matures into, say, a Harold Baines. There’s a little whiff of Wrigley Field locker room in here, George, but thanks for a very nice profile nonetheless.
I can see your allegience, Jeffrey. I have to mention Sandberg because he built up his power over the years — that’s a famous story. Beckham and Sandberg BOTH started as natural shortstops who moved to third in their first season. Both would be quite powerful for middle-infielder types. Soriano? He admitted he’s not an on-base percentage guy who can be patient when I asked to compare his style with Kosuke Fukudome’s. Soriano would be wise to adopt the take-two, hit-to-right style if his old all-or-nothing style ain’t working any more. If Beckham can at a young age have an intelligent, logical approach, why not Soriano at 33?
In response to another comment. See in context »It’s an apt comparison, George. And what I find most astonishing about the Soriano question is that it was entirely predictable. As soon as they threw all that money at him and brought him to the North Side as a kind of savior, it seemed inevitable that he wasn’t going to do well.
The White Sox themselves had a lot to do with Soriano’s signing. When the Cubs endured thousands of no-shows at the end of the 2006 season and faced a competitor for corporate sponsors only one year removed from a World Series title, they had to make a big splash, and fast, with the Soriano deal. Eventually they figured the deal would go bad, but hoped to win something before that happened.
In response to another comment. See in context »