Prev: Nats Ink Willy
Next: Gomes a red again
From: John Kasupski on 25 Feb 2010 05:19
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 10:21:58 -0800 (PST), RJA <agentvaughn(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>Rollins had a .349 OBP the year before. At least he has shown the
>ability to get on base some in the past. His OBP slipped due to his
>lower batting average last y>ear and Manuel was likely just hoping he
>would come out of that funk "any day now."

When last season began, Taveras was one year removed from having put up an OIBP
of .367 in 2007. Among guys with at least 100 plate appearances, that would've
placed him third on the team in 2009, behind Votto and Dickerson. Perhaps Baker
was just hoping he would come out of that funk "any day now."

>The bottom line here is that Baker doesn't make decisions
>based on logic or numbers, but rather on speed when choosing his
>leadoff guy.

Speed at the top of the order, power hitters in the middle of the order, bat
handlers at the bottom of the order? Sounds logical to me, like the same way
batting orders were assembled for a hundred years before performance enhancing
drugs produced artificially skewed numbers that resulted in a temporary change
in offensive philosophy.

>I think you're off point. If Taveras was going to play for whatever
>reason, then batting him 8th would have been appropriate. Those
>managers are doing something that Baker doesn't do. They used common
>sense and knew how to read a stat sheet.

I don't think I'm off point at all - the fact that not everybody buys the
stathead philosophy *is* the point. There's another school of thought which
observes that when a game ends, the winner is not the team that reached base the
most often, it is the team which scored the most runs, and therefore holds that
getting on base is only important if someone drives you in later...and that fast
guys at the top of the order get more doubles and triples, and allow you to use
the running game to advance runners with stolen bases or the hit and run, thus
making it easier for someone to drive them in than if they simply walk or single
and then stand around on first base.

So there is a logic to it. The stathead philosophy may generally eschew the
stolen base, but teams such as the Angels, White Sox, Rays, even Jack McKeon's
Marlins who have run to create runs have had some recent success with that
approach. Even in Oakland where they're highly OBP driven and the A's averaged a
pedestrian 55 steals a year from 1999 to 2008, last season the A's swiped 133
bags, the most since 1992 when they stole 143.

FWIW, I think you're going to see more rather than less of this in the future as
teams catch onto the fact that they test for PEDs now, and that the
chicks-dig-the-long-ball era that resulted from numbers that were skewed because
of better living through chemistry is a thing of the past.

JK

From: David Short on 25 Feb 2010 09:12
On 2/25/2010 5:19 AM, John Kasupski wrote:
> So there is a logic to it. The stathead philosophy may generally eschew the
> stolen base

Huh. Really?

Statheads would say "The stolen base is less important than getting on
base in the first place."

Traditional lovers of the game express the same thought with "You can't
steal first base."

I'm not sure I see the difference.

dfs
From: RJA on 26 Feb 2010 13:14
On Feb 25, 5:19 am, John Kasupski <w2...(a)spamfilter.verizon.net>
wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 10:21:58 -0800 (PST), RJA <agentvau...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >Rollins had a .349 OBP the year before.  At least he has shown the
> >ability to get on base some in the past. His OBP slipped due to his
> >lower batting average last y>ear and Manuel was likely just hoping he
> >would come out of that funk "any day now."
>
> When last season began, Taveras was one year removed from having put up an OIBP
> of .367 in 2007. Among guys with at least 100 plate appearances, that would've
> placed him third on the team in 2009, behind Votto and Dickerson. Perhaps Baker
> was just hoping he would come out of that funk "any day now."

Had he not done the same with Corey Patterson, you might have a
point. Looks to me like if you're fast, you're Dusty's leadoff
hitter. Also, if you're the shortstop, you bat 2nd.

> >The bottom line here is that Baker doesn't make decisions
> >based on logic or numbers, but rather on speed when choosing his
> >leadoff guy.
>
> Speed at the top of the order, power hitters in the middle of the order, bat
> handlers at the bottom of the order? Sounds logical to me, like the same way
> batting orders were assembled for a hundred years before performance enhancing
> drugs produced artificially skewed numbers that resulted in a temporary change
> in offensive philosophy.  

Thankfully we learned from those mistakes and don't have to repeat
them (unless Baker is your manager).

> >I think you're off point.  If Taveras was going to play for whatever
> >reason, then batting him 8th would have been appropriate.  Those
> >managers are doing something that Baker doesn't do.  They used common
> >sense and knew how to read a stat sheet.
>
> I don't think I'm off point at all - the fact that not everybody buys the
> stathead philosophy *is* the point. There's another school of thought which
> observes that when a game ends, the winner is not the team that reached base the
> most often, it is the team which scored the most runs, and therefore holds that
> getting on base is only important if someone drives you in later...and that fast
> guys at the top of the order get more doubles and triples, and allow you to use
> the running game to advance runners with stolen bases or the hit and run, thus
> making it easier for someone to drive them in than if they simply walk or single
> and then stand around on first base.

First of all, being fast doesn't mean you hit lots of doubles and
triples. Taveras had 18 doubles and a handful of triples in 2008.
Baker had to be corrected after telling a reporter that he had "30
something doubles and double digit triples," which was false. To
maximize this scoring thing, you want the guys who get on base ahead
of the guys who drive guys in. With all his speed and base stealing
ability, Taveras career high in runs scored is 83. He scored 64 runs
while stealing 68 bases in 2008 in a lineup with Todd Helton and Matt
Holliday behind him. He simply doesn't get on base enough. There are
plenty of guys who aren't stealing bases who are scoring more runs
just by reaching base.

> So there is a logic to it. The stathead philosophy may generally eschew the
> stolen base, but teams such as the Angels, White Sox, Rays, even Jack McKeon's
> Marlins who have run to create runs have had some recent success with that
> approach. Even in Oakland where they're highly OBP driven and the A's averaged a
> pedestrian 55 steals a year from 1999 to 2008, last season the A's swiped 133
> bags, the most since 1992 when they stole 143.

Nobody is saying that once you're on base that stealing a base doesn't
help, but you don't bat guys at the top just because they can steal a
base. They've gotta reach base enough for it to make sense. If
there's logic to this, then it's flawed logic.
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Nats Ink Willy
Next: Gomes a red again