ESPN Insider says ....
in [Cincinnati Reds]
|
Prev: Nats Ink Willy
Next: Gomes a red again
From: John Kasupski on 21 Feb 2010 23:33 On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 07:32:00 -0500, "Kommienezuspadt" <NoSpam(a)NoThanks.net> wrote: > >"John Kasupski" <w2pio(a)spamfilter.verizon.net> wrote in message >news:j9k1o55feo210kgmbnm634eh858agj9ucv(a)4ax.com... >> On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 22:20:52 -0500, "Kommienezuspadt" >> <nospam(a)nothanks.net> >> wrote: >> >>>Now -- would he have been enough to move them up in the standings? I guess >>>we'll not know that but I like to think he would have been an OBP >>>improvement over Cabrera at the #2 spot or Stubbs in the #1 spot which I'm >>>guessing is what we're going to see unless Dusty writes the catcher in the >>>#2 hole because he can handle bat & won't clog the bases or some other >>>such >>>nonsense. >> >> I fail to see how hitting Hernandez or Hanigan in the #2 hole would help, >> seeing >> as how they both put up 84 OPS+ last year. >> >> And by traditional baseball standards, it *would* clog the bases. You can >> call >> that nonsense if you wish, but Jocketty is not a stathead GM and Baker is >> not a >> stathead manager. If that's what you want to see, have fun watching the >> Oakland >> AAAA's (the AL version of the Pirates) confound the "experts" by finishing >> in >> the AL West cellar again despite being picked by PECOTA to win the >> division. >> >> JK >> > >I was just quoting some Dusty nonsense. I fail to see where I suggested >hitting the catcher in the 2 hole was a good idea. You also fail to see my point, which is that you (and others here) are expecting the Reds' manager and general manager to conduct the affairs of the team in a manner that is consistent with what sabermetrics would suggest are good practices - which is an unrealistic expectation, since Walt Jocketty is not a saber-inclined GM and Dusty Baker is not a saber-inclined field manager. >see here --- >"On-base percentage is great if you can score runs and do something with >that on-base percentage," Baker said. "Clogging up the bases isn't that >great to me. The problem we have to address more than anything is the home >run problem." > >(Emphasis added.) In March 2004, Baker said, "I think walks are overrated >unless you can run. If you get a walk and put the pitcher in a stretch, that >helps, but the guy who walks and can't run, most of the time he's clogging >up the bases for somebody who can run." Viewed from the standpoint of saber, this may indeed be "nonsense" - but, again, Dusty is not a stathead manager. Viewed from a standpoint of traditional baseball, it is not nonsense - and is in fact accurate from that point of view. >=== And I do think I recall Dusty hitting Red's catchers in the 2 hole last >year. http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/2009-batting-orders.shtml Hanigan batted second once, on August 2 against the Rockies. The lineup for that game was Sutton (LF), Hanigan (C), Votto (1B), Phillips (2B), Rolen (3B), Gomes (RF), Nix (CF), Gonzalez (SS), Arroyo (P). That was the only time all year when the catcher hit in the 2 hole, unless it happened in another game either as the result of a double switch or because the backup catcher was used as a pinch-hitter for whoever started in the #2 slot. JK
From: John Kasupski on 22 Feb 2010 00:09 On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 11:00:47 -0500, "David Short" <David.No.Short(a)Spam.Wright.Please.Edu> wrote: >You do understant the those numbers you posted give Gomes a slugging >percentage of 931. Not even close, but you corrected this in a subsequent post. >Any other questions? Yes...why is it such a big surprise that Taveras stayed on the 25-man while Gomes was sent to the minor leagues? Gomes was signed to a minor league contract to begin with. Taveras was signed to a $6.25 million MLB contract. Which, again, was done by the general manager, not the field manager. >Are these trick questions John? Ummmm...well, they're not intended to be. Taveras was signed by the GM to a MLB contract and started the season in the majors. Gomes was signed by the GM to a minor league contract and started the season in the minors. Seems perfectly straightforward and logical to me. What I don't get is why I seem to be the only person in this newsgroup who seems to understand that, and why it's the field manager's fault that the general manager signed these guys to the contracts that they were signed to. I agree that the Reds might have been a lot better off without Taveras last year, but Dusty did not sign Taveras. If you want to place blame for that, then at least place it where it belongs. Again, Baker played the hand Jocketty dealt him. Yes, the Reds probably would have been much better off if Dusty had simply penciled in Shane Victorino as his CF and leadoff man instead of Taveras. For that matter, they would have been even better off if he'd run David Wright out there instead of EE at 3B; they'd have been above .500 for sure if he'd just quit playing around with all those different guys in LF and handed the job to Carl Crawford, and if he had simply put Cliff Lee or C.C. Sabathia out there on the mound instead of wasting all that time with Owings in the rotation, they'd have been a drop-dead cinch to make the playoffs. Oh, wait...Victorino, Wright, Crawford, Lee, and Sabathia weren't on the Reds' 25-man roster...well that makes Baker an idiot then. That's basically what I hear being said, David, and it doesn't wash. Baker did damn well last season considering what he had to work with. Before everybody started getting hurt in July, he had that team within easy striking distance of first place in the division. From August 22 on, they had the best record in MLB. What happened in between with 15 guys or whatever going on the DL was something beyond the control of Dusty or any other field manager in baseball. But his contract's up at the end of this year, and he's not WJ's guy...so hang in there, you may get your wish after all. JK
From: Kommienezuspadt on 22 Feb 2010 06:42 "John Kasupski" <w2pio(a)spamfilter.verizon.net> wrote in message news:kg14o5dbf971emfkct4a415nkfmltl95fe(a)4ax.com... > On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 07:32:00 -0500, "Kommienezuspadt" > <NoSpam(a)NoThanks.net> > wrote: > >> >>"John Kasupski" <w2pio(a)spamfilter.verizon.net> wrote in message >>news:j9k1o55feo210kgmbnm634eh858agj9ucv(a)4ax.com... >>> On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 22:20:52 -0500, "Kommienezuspadt" >>> <nospam(a)nothanks.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>Now -- would he have been enough to move them up in the standings? I >>>>guess >>>>we'll not know that but I like to think he would have been an OBP >>>>improvement over Cabrera at the #2 spot or Stubbs in the #1 spot which >>>>I'm >>>>guessing is what we're going to see unless Dusty writes the catcher in >>>>the >>>>#2 hole because he can handle bat & won't clog the bases or some other >>>>such >>>>nonsense. >>> >>> I fail to see how hitting Hernandez or Hanigan in the #2 hole would >>> help, >>> seeing >>> as how they both put up 84 OPS+ last year. >>> >>> And by traditional baseball standards, it *would* clog the bases. You >>> can >>> call >>> that nonsense if you wish, but Jocketty is not a stathead GM and Baker >>> is >>> not a >>> stathead manager. If that's what you want to see, have fun watching the >>> Oakland >>> AAAA's (the AL version of the Pirates) confound the "experts" by >>> finishing >>> in >>> the AL West cellar again despite being picked by PECOTA to win the >>> division. >>> >>> JK >>> >> >>I was just quoting some Dusty nonsense. I fail to see where I suggested >>hitting the catcher in the 2 hole was a good idea. > > You also fail to see my point, which is that you (and others here) are > expecting > the Reds' manager and general manager to conduct the affairs of the team > in a > manner that is consistent with what sabermetrics would suggest are good > practices - which is an unrealistic expectation, since Walt Jocketty is > not a > saber-inclined GM and Dusty Baker is not a saber-inclined field manager. > No -- what I saw was you putting words into my post that I did not say. I know Dusty is not a numbers guy -- I don't think it takes a genius to figure that one out but it still doesn't change the need for a leadoff hitter to reach base. >>see here --- >>"On-base percentage is great if you can score runs and do something with >>that on-base percentage," Baker said. "Clogging up the bases isn't that >>great to me. The problem we have to address more than anything is the home >>run problem." >> >>(Emphasis added.) In March 2004, Baker said, "I think walks are overrated >>unless you can run. If you get a walk and put the pitcher in a stretch, >>that >>helps, but the guy who walks and can't run, most of the time he's clogging >>up the bases for somebody who can run." > > Viewed from the standpoint of saber, this may indeed be "nonsense" - > but, > again, Dusty is not a stathead manager. Viewed from a standpoint of > traditional > baseball, it is not nonsense - and is in fact accurate from that point of > view. > >>=== And I do think I recall Dusty hitting Red's catchers in the 2 hole >>last >>year. > > http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CIN/2009-batting-orders.shtml > > Hanigan batted second once, on August 2 against the Rockies. The lineup > for that > game was Sutton (LF), Hanigan (C), Votto (1B), Phillips (2B), Rolen (3B), > Gomes > (RF), Nix (CF), Gonzalez (SS), Arroyo (P). That was the only time all year > when > the catcher hit in the 2 hole, unless it happened in another game either > as the > result of a double switch or because the backup catcher was used as a > pinch-hitter for whoever started in the #2 slot. > > JK > OK --- faulty memory ---
From: David Short on 22 Feb 2010 09:51 On 2/22/2010 12:09 AM, John Kasupski wrote: > On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 11:00:47 -0500, "David Short" > <David.No.Short(a)Spam.Wright.Please.Edu> wrote: > >> You do understant the those numbers you posted give Gomes a slugging >> percentage of 931. > > Not even close, but you corrected this in a subsequent post. > >> Any other questions? > > Yes...why is it such a big surprise that Taveras stayed on the 25-man while > Gomes was sent to the minor leagues? Gomes was signed to a minor league contract > to begin with. Taveras was signed to a $6.25 million MLB contract. > > Which, again, was done by the general manager, not the field manager. > >> Are these trick questions John? > > Ummmm...well, they're not intended to be. Taveras was signed by the GM to a MLB > contract and started the season in the majors. Gomes was signed by the GM to a > minor league contract and started the season in the minors. Seems perfectly > straightforward and logical to me. What I don't get is why I seem to be the only > person in this newsgroup who seems to understand that, and why it's the field > manager's fault that the general manager signed these guys to the contracts that > they were signed to. You do understand that you are arguing about two independent decisions as if they are related. Lets talk about the first one. Taveras didnt' keep Gomes off the 25 man roster. They went into camp without a regular left fielder. Dusty Baker looked at how Gomes hit in spring training and decided he would rather break camp with Jerry Hairston, Darnell McDonald, Nix, Dickerson, Bruce AND Taveras over the one who could hit. Where's Walt's mysterious hand? Did Walt make Dusty keep Nix and McDonald instead of Gomes? You're telling me that Dusty doesn't have the juice to pick the 25th guy on his own roster? Now....lets go back to Taveras. Two points I would like to make. I do not believe for one second that a major league GM signs somebody to a multiyear contract without a checkoff approval from the manager. Organizations don't work that way. I don't bring in a new faculty member without asking those who will work with him what they think and believe me I pay attention to their opinions. A major league GM knows that. Or was Cory Patterson Walt's idea too? That nonsense aside, we make mistakes. Everybody does. Adults correct for them as best they can instead of throwing up their hands and saying "what can I do." Seeing that Taveras couldn't really play center, Dusty could have played Dickerson or Bruce or Nix there. Seeing that Taveras didn't have enough thwack that pitchers needed to pitch to him, he didn't have to keep penciling Taveras' name in the leadoff slot. That's Dusty's primary job is to allocate playing time. Isn't it John? If the manager is just the GM's pawn, what does he do in your world? > I agree that the Reds might have been a lot better off without Taveras last > year, but Dusty did not sign Taveras. If you want to place blame for that, then > at least place it where it belongs. Again, Baker played the hand Jocketty dealt > him. Yes, the Reds probably would have been much better off if Dusty had simply > penciled in Shane Victorino as his CF and leadoff man instead of Taveras. For > that matter, they would have been even better off if he'd run David Wright out > there instead of EE at 3B; they'd have been above .500 for sure if he'd just > quit playing around with all those different guys in LF and handed the job to > Carl Crawford, and if he had simply put Cliff Lee or C.C. Sabathia out there on > the mound instead of wasting all that time with Owings in the rotation, they'd > have been a drop-dead cinch to make the playoffs. > > Oh, wait...Victorino, Wright, Crawford, Lee, and Sabathia weren't on the Reds' > 25-man roster...well that makes Baker an idiot then. That's basically what I > hear being said, David, and it doesn't wash. Baker did damn well last season > considering what he had to work with. Before everybody started getting hurt in > July, he had that team within easy striking distance of first place in the > division. From August 22 on, they had the best record in MLB. What happened in > between with 15 guys or whatever going on the DL was something beyond the > control of Dusty or any other field manager in baseball. wow. Glad to get that bit out of your system? > But his contract's up at the end of this year, and he's not WJ's guy...so hang > in there, you may get your wish after all. .....I'm not sure what you've been reading from who. I actually admire the job that Baker has done, but don't let a little thing like reality get in your way. I do think he'll be released if the reds crash and burn this year. dfs
From: RJA on 22 Feb 2010 12:24
On Feb 21, 1:21 am, John Kasupski <w2...(a)spamfilter.verizon.net> wrote: > On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 21:40:07 -0500, "David Short" > > <David.No.Sh...(a)Spam.Wright.Please.Edu> wrote: > >The intertube says Damon went for 8 million. While his OBP would have been a > >good thing for this team and the park would have kept the illusion of power, > >I'm not convinced that 8 million for Damon would be better than letting the > >8 midgets duke it out and then playing the hot hand this year instead of > >sending him to AAA. > > http://espn.go.com/mlb/springStats/_/team/cin > > That's a link to the Reds' 2009 ST batting stats. Would you mind looking at > those and then telling me who was the outfielder with the hot hand who got sent > to AAA? > > >Yeah, Dusty. I'm looking at you. > > Inquiry: How come nobody was saying "I'm looking at you, Jerry Narron" when Jay > Bruce stayed in the minors while guys like Dewayne Wise, Jason Ellison and Buck > Coats stunk up the Reds' outfield? Jerry Narron has been gone since the first half of 07. At that time, Bruce was what, 19 or 20? That's probably why. Baker did play the likes of Patterson and Taveras over the likes of better options while they were healthy (Freel, Hopper, Dickerson, etc.) |