Tiger337

1 minute ago, Edman85 said:

 

I just double checked his minor league numbers, and I kinda want to push back on this. He was young for his level almost the whole way up, and has put up some pretty good numbers in the minors the last two years, particularly on the OBP side. It was defensive problems that hampered his prospect stock, particularly a case of the yips last year.

I meant he has no MLB track record.  His minor league on base track record is good.  I hope he sustains it in the majors.  

2 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Nobody has ever said that. What we're saying is if a player is on a hot streak, the manager should open his eyes and hit him in front of the better hitter. Score runs. But don't be afraid and say maybe he'll cool off tomorrow...next week or in a few weeks. Adjust your batting order to maximize run production. Somebody should write a book and maybe Hinch will follow it. 😆

Fire AJ Hinch!

6 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

Well...

at a .950 OPS that makes him their 2nd best hitter.

Try again.

I get it.  His hot start proves that he is superstar!!!

Just now, 1984Echoes said:

Not a hot streak. He's always been an OBP guy.

 

I know what he has done in the minors.  He has no major league track record.  Again I am hopeful.  I am just not one to hyperventilate over prospects with less than two weeks in the majors.  

2 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

And yet...

Hinch has him batting 3rd.

Why, again?

Maybe because he is their 4th or 5th best hitter.  That's who bats third in the modern line-up.

Quote

This passage is from page 132 of 'The Book' by Tom Tango. I could paraphrase it, but I believe The Book says it best: "Your three best hitters should bat somewhere in the #1, #2, and #4 slots. Your fourth- and fifth-best hitters should occupy the #3 and #5 slots.

And I am not dismissing Perez at all.  I am hopeful about him.  I just think you are getting overly excited about a hot streak.  

1 minute ago, 1984Echoes said:

Which is the primary reason I want Greene AWAY from those hitters (batting 6-9th in our lineup) and having Canha & Perez in front of him.

Those 36 PA's over a season mean less to me than getting more guys on base for him.

My opinion.

Well if Perez is going to be an allstar, by all means, bat him second!  For now, I am happy with Greene batting second.  

And again, if their bottom 4 guys are going to suck all year, it's just not going to matter where anyone bats.  

1 minute ago, 1984Echoes said:

Not in the 1st inning.

But after that.. yeah, of course that happens.

But our bottom of the order is getting outs at roughly an 80% rate and Canha & Perez are getting out at roughly 62 and 63% rates... so there is marginally, less chance of that.

As per PA's... so Greene gets how many less PA's in a week in the 3 spot instead of the 1st spot...? 3 or 4, more or less.

So Greene has 6 empty bases HR's.

Which counts more in the run-scoring department: His PA's? Or men on base when he HR's?

I don't have the answer to that question...

I'm just asking...

Perez does not have any kind of track record, so I am not building an order around him.  I am fine with Canha leading off and Greene batting second.  Over the course of a season, Greene would lose about 36 PA by batting 3rd instead of first. 

It's fun to talk about batting orders, but Having Geene bat third instead of first is probably worth maybe 5 runs over the course of a season and I am not sure it would go in the direction you think.  In the end, batting orders are not that important especially when you've got 4 or 5 .450 OPS guys playing regularly.

7 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Wenceel did finish pretty strong last season - if he's actually making a breakthrough it would be completely out of the blue, but it's still not very likely he's a 900 OPS major leaguer!

Lots of guys finish strong in the minors and then can't sustain anything in the majors.  He is intriguing, but I am not ready to build my line-up around him!.  There was a lot of excitement about Baddoo and Meadows initially too. 

14 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

You just refuted yourself in the same post.

Obviously, he IS basing lineup decisions on short-term numbers.

Tell me again, why is Wenceel batting 3rd today?

And Tork 7th?

No, I didn't refute myself.  Tork has been struggling for over a month now making his long-term projections look worse. Austin Riley is off to a slow start as well, but you wouldn't move him down in the order because he has enough of a track record to suggest that he will start hitting soon.  Tork does not have a sustained track record, so it makes since to move him down after more than a month of not hitting. 

What if your best hitter is batting third and your first or second hitter makes the last out before he comes to bat?  

Just now, 1984Echoes said:

How about JUST guys who can actually get on base in front of him...

You know, like Canha and Perez instead of Meadows and Kelly/ Rogers.

I don't know how much Perez can get on base long term.  He has potential, but he wasn't doing it in AAA early this year so this could just be a hot streak.  Everybody got all excited about Meadows last season and now look at him.   

10 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

I get that...

But the bottom line to me is I want runners on in front of our best hitter.

I added to the above: Greene has 6 RBI's with no runners. 6 solo HR's

And 9 RBI's with runners on: 1 HR.

My bottom line sticks. With me. I want OBP guys in front of him in the #1 and 2 spots.

Personal preference.

Well, it would be nice if they had Greene in front of him!

1 minute ago, 1984Echoes said:

This:

 

Is more important to me than this:

Sometimes, stats need to be tossed because a team is not performing according to stats, but based on personnel.

Is Hinch so stat-inflexible that he cannot recognize that this team has a run-scoring problem?

 

Hinch knows they have a run scoring problem.  That is due to having ****ty hitters.  You can line them up anyway you want and they still are not going to score runs they way they have performed so far.  He is lining hitters up according to how he thinks they will perform long term based mostly (I assume) on statistical projections. He's not going to base his line-up on short-term cold or hot streaks which could end any day.  He didn't have Tork near the top of the order because he expected him to suck.  He probably had him there based on how he hit at the end of last season.  That wasn't working, so he moved him down after a period of time.  

Just now, gehringer_2 said:

Maybe you dive deeper into the def of "best hitter". If I have two 850 OPS guys and one has a 20% walk rate and and a low ISO and the other doesn't walk but has a high ISO, I don't think you treat them the same in the order.

If you have two .850 OPS guys as your best hitters over the course of a season, then they are approximately equally good hitters.  You'd probably put them batting #1 and #2 with the better on base guy leading off.  

1 minute ago, 1984Echoes said:

PS:

With no runners: .224/.366/.500 = .866

With runners on: .378/.455/.595 = 1.050

 

Small sample size. Line-ups should not depend on small sample sizes.  

2 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

Yes, because it's truly SMART to put .245 and .291 OBP guys in front of your BEST hitter instead of .380 and .368 OBP guys...

IMO, smart people need to stop being STUPID.

I don't know if Hinch will actually catch onto this and stop being stupid, but... apparently not.

I think he was referring to this:

"I prefer the traditional location for the best hitter in the lineup: #3 spot."

That has been shown statistically to be a less optimal choice that the best hitter batting first or second. It's certainly possible that some line-ups could benefit from the best hitter batting third depending on the team personnel, but having your best hitter third is not a great idea in general.  

26 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

Here's my crazy lineup, with crazy reasoning:

1. Canha - best on base guy to put in front of Greene.

2. Wenceel - Switch-hitter, second best on-base guy to put in front of Greene, AND he can avoid hitting into some DP's with his speed.

3. Greene - obviously

4/5th - Depending on pitcher: Lefties = Vierling, righties = Carpenter. 5th batter is the opposite guy.

6. Keith - challenge him.

7-8. whoever else plays, except:

9. Torkelson - this is actually a challenge for him as well as an elimination of pressure ("you're at the bottom so we don't care what you produce... just do your best..."). It's a demotion to the bottom which will be a huge ego-killer for him...

But the GOOD side of this challenge is that if he starts hitting like he's capable, and before there's a decision to move him back up in the lineup... Then he's getting ON-BASE at a much better clip (as he should be), AND that is in front of Canha-Perez-Greene... so he shouldn't feel totally lost or insulted in the 9th spot, if his bat becomes functional again. It actually extends the team offensively if he can find his bat again, from that spot. THAT's the challenge.

That looks like a 1970s line-up.  Canha is OK leading off, but if the whole point of him leading off is to get on base for Greene, why are you sticking Perez between Canha and Greene?  Just put Greene second.  If you think that Perez is going to turn into a good hitter with speed, then have him lead off and bat Greene second.   

29 minutes ago, TigerNation said:

I subscribe to the best hitter second theory.

That is the sabemetrically correct answer with a typical line-up.  

6 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

I never said he was good. I used to really dislike seeing him come into the game. Also, I was pleased when we released him. I saw him this year and his ERA, at the time, was low. I was astonished. 

I was not referring to you.  I don't ever remember anyone in particular.  I just remember people talking about him like he was a key piece in the bullpen.  Of course, they usually had bad bullpens when he was on the team.  

23 hours ago, Screwball said:

Candidate for idiot of the month in this current **** show

 

Have not seen you in a while Screwball. Welcome back! 

54 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Didn't he have, like, a really good ERA away from Detroit and then stink at home when he pitched for the Tigers?

No, he stunk at home and on the road:

5.55 home

5.15 away

People kept telling me he was good though!

3 hours ago, RandyMarsh said:

Scouring the box score and I noticed that Buck Farmer is STILL pitching in the big leagues with the Reds, out of curiosity I clicked on his profile and I was shocked to learn that he is only 33 years old. Jeez did we call him up when he was 16 or something? Feels like he has been around forever and should be alot older. 

He's getting better with age.  He finally got his career ERA under 5.00

13 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

The was a column in the NYT today about the Fed's efforts to unwind QE. It's going to take years to do without messing up markets. And it was pretty much a failure anyway. It bid up equity prices in a big way, and contributed hugely to the growth of house flipping and income disparity, so if that's all you measured success by the financial types can say it was roses....didn't do squat for the majority of the country.

Everything we do in this country is for the benefit of the wealthy.  Anybody who pays any attentiona at all should have figured that out by now.  The Democrats do some things here and there to keep the votes coming in but nothing substantial has been done about income disparity for decades.  

41 minutes ago, pfife said:

Agree, there are a lot of other things that were happening, the pandemic obviously 

but people don't remember that QE was still happening all throughout the trump presidency and that's extremely inflationary to do when it's not necessary.  He brought in tariffs (that Biden hasn't removed).  

Trump actually pressured the fed to keep QE and low rates.  No doubt inflationary.  

He was also totally on board with all the free Covid money.  He is no fiscal conservative.  Of course, he actually has no principles about anything, but one could argue that he behaved no more fiscally conservative than Obama.  

Tyler wouldn't be the first Nevin to be released by the Tigers at age 26 and then go on to a successful MLB career.