05/22/2026 7:15p EDT Detroit Tigers at Baltimore Orioles

[casimir]

[Sports_Freak]

Don't bother looking at the Baltimore weather forecast.

[IdahoBert]

So it’ll rain the whole freaking day, even though this is one of those Apple TV games I could actually watch? A game between two cellar dwelling teams? I guess if anything qualifies as a “must win“ this game could or at least it should be considered a “might win“ sort of game.

[romad1]

Its bad here in Northern VA and i wouldn't pay to do anything outdoors in this crap.   

[kdog]

G

We are going down with the ship.

Edited 3 hours ago by kdog

[Sports_Freak]

Did they call tonight's game yet? This whole weekend may be a wash out.

[kdog]

 

[monkeytargets39]

Jahmai Jones batting third and Wenceel batting 6th.  I don’t blame the teams bad performance too much on Hinch, but he’s getting to the point where he deserves to be on the hot seat for this kind of stuff.

Edited 2 hours ago by monkeytargets39

[casimir]

11 minutes ago, monkeytargets39 said:

Jahmai Jones batting third and Wenceel batting 6th.  I don’t blame the teams bad performance too much on Hinch, but he’s getting to the point where he deserves to be on the hot seat for this kind of stuff.

I don’t know.  Jones is on the roster as the resident vs LHP specialist.  If you want to flip Greene and Jones, fine.  I guess I don’t have an issue with the top 4 as is.  I might go McGonigle, Jones, Greene, Dingler, or Jones, McGonigle, Greene, Dingler.

But I don’t know how you optimize the batting 5 hitters.  I guess Torkelson at 5 makes sense.  After that, I’m not sure how to argue one way or another.  Nobody is hitting, so I’m not sure what to do.

[gehringer_2]

26 minutes ago, monkeytargets39 said:

Jahmai Jones batting third and Wenceel batting 6th.  I don’t blame the teams bad performance too much on Hinch, but he’s getting to the point where he deserves to be on the hot seat for this kind of stuff.

This is what I mean about Hinch being a guy who doesn't want to be told about short term trends. Jones' OBP against LHP is less than 300 *this* season. Any rational approach to llne-up construction based on recent outcomes would not have him in the 3 spot,  but his OBP over the longer term of with last season was 398 - sure bat him 3rd against a LHP. You can have all the data and analytics you want, but at some point you still have to apply judgments about how to use the data that are beyond what the data can tell you about the player.

Edited 1 hour ago by gehringer_2

[Tiger337]

1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said:

This is what I mean about Hinch being a guy who doesn't want to be told about short term trends. Jones' OBP against LHP is less than 300 *this* season. Any rational approach to llne-up construction based on recent outcomes would not have him in the 3 spot,  but his OBP over the longer term of with last season was 398 - sure bat him 3rd against a LHP. You can have all the data and analytics you want, but at some point you still have to apply judgments about how to use the data that are beyond what the data can tell you.

At what point does short-term data become useful?  If a .300 hitter, goes in a slump for 3 days, do you start treating like a .250 hitter?  Is it one week?  A month?  What if you decide that it's time to make a change and then he goes back to being a .300 hitter again.  How long do you wait before you are sure he is now a .300 hitter again?  It seems a lot like trying to time the market!

[Zakk_Wylde]

I guess if the game gets rained out, we can't lose right?    This time will find a way!

[monkeytargets39]

15 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

At what point does short-term data become useful?  If a .300 hitter, goes in a slump for 3 days, do you start treating like a .250 hitter?  Is it one week?  A month?  What if you decide that it's time to make a change and then he goes back to being a .300 hitter again.  How long do you wait before you are sure he is now a .300 hitter again?  It seems a lot like trying to time the market!

Well in his rookie year, Keith hit .305 vs LHP in 84 ABs.  That was enough for us to only give him half that many ABs vs LHP the following year and basically none this year.  So we gave up completely on our 23/24 year old prospect hitting vs LHP despite some data suggesting that maybe he could be solid.

 

We’ve replaced a bunch of those ABs with a journeyman minor leaguer who he got for next to nothing.  He only got 100 or so ABs vs LHP last year and did great—but now he’s got 48 this year with 16 Ks and is hitting under .200 and that’s supposed to be his calling card.  Wouldn’t the long term data suggest that Jones just isn’t a good player seeing that none of the other 29 teams in the majors ever gave him any real MLB at bats?  

 

If it’s just gonna be about long term data and trends, be consistent player to player with it.  

[gehringer_2]

45 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

At what point does short-term data become useful?  If a .300 hitter, goes in a slump for 3 days, do you start treating like a .250 hitter?  Is it one week?  A month?  What if you decide that it's time to make a change and then he goes back to being a .300 hitter again.  How long do you wait before you are sure he is now a .300 hitter again?  It seems a lot like trying to time the market!

Right - at some point you just have to decide what you believe. I'm sure there are guys out there on team analytic staffs doing exactly what you are talking about, trying to figure out what term is optimum to get the best predictor for particular outcomes, The problem is that like Soylent Green - IT'S PEOPLE! and they tend to confound whatever you do to try to predict them.

My personal observation would be to always down weight previous seasons at least when you see guys do things in the off season that result in them coming back as very different players - for instance Riley two seasons ago and Keith this season -- and pitchers in general because they always seem to vary from year to year just because almost no pitcher can stay 100% healthy season to season -they almost always have something not quite right. Other than that a manager just has to figure it out as best he can!

In Hinch's case I think you can make the argument form watching him that he likes to take the longer view. Is he right? IDK - It's not working now, but that doesn't mean it's his choices that are the reason.

Edited 55 minutes ago by gehringer_2

[gehringer_2]

23 minutes ago, monkeytargets39 said:

Well in his rookie year, Keith hit .305 vs LHP in 84 ABs.  That was enough for us to only give him half that many ABs vs LHP the following year and basically none this year.  So we gave up completely on our 23/24 year old prospect hitting vs LHP despite some data suggesting that maybe he could be solid.

 

We’ve replaced a bunch of those ABs with a journeyman minor leaguer who he got for next to nothing.  He only got 100 or so ABs vs LHP last year and did great—but now he’s got 48 this year with 16 Ks and is hitting under .200 and that’s supposed to be his calling card.  Wouldn’t the long term data suggest that Jones just isn’t a good player seeing that none of the other 29 teams in the majors ever gave him any real MLB at bats?  

 

If it’s just gonna be about long term data and trends, be consistent player to player with it.  

I can't argue that from where we sit, the decision that young Riley was an everyday player and young Colt is not seems pretty arbitrary. I suppose it was at least partly because Riley graded very well in the field the first couple of years - though that's seems to be over now.

Edited 48 minutes ago by gehringer_2

[Tiger337]

10 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

In Hinch's case I think you can make the argument form watching him that he likes to take the longer view. Is he right? IDK - It's not working now, but that doesn't mean it's his choices that are the reason.

I don't know.  Given that he has a new batting order every day and moves players around to different positions, you could also say that he takes the short view.  

[gehringer_2]

6 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I don't know.  Given that he has a new batting order every day and moves players around to different positions, you could also say that he takes the short view.  

LOL - touche! 

Moving guys around a lot is maybe one where I think there is some consensus around here that there is at least some defensive cost involved, but how do you quantify it and decide if it's a net plus or not? Again it's coming down to someone's (mostly Hinch's) judgment because it's just too multivariate a problem with too shallow case data to generate useful analytical guidance.

Edited 38 minutes ago by gehringer_2

[monkeytargets39]

11 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I can't argue that from where we sit, the decision that young Riley was an everyday player and young Colt is not seems pretty arbitrary. I suppose it was at least partly because Riley graded very well in the field the first couple of years - though that's seems to be over now.

There was clearly enough optimism to extend Keith before his first MLB game….so why has that shifted after age 22/23 of being an above replacement level player?  
 

It’s stupid, but I think it’s where they were drafted.  Riley, Tork and Mize being top 5 picks and not panning out represents top to bottom organizational failures.  A guy like Keith not panning out can be written off easier.

[monkeytargets39]

17 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I don't know.  Given that he has a new batting order every day and moves players around to different positions, you could also say that he takes the short view.  

I guess if we win our next game and he rolls out the exact same lineup the next game, we will have an idea.  Haha

[Motor City Sonics]

6 guys in this starting lineup are hitting .200 or lower.   I'll forgive Lee because I don't think he was ready for MLB yet.    And I know there isn't much else on the bench with Veirling (.200), Rogers (.159 and short (.067).        But Keith hits .246/.299  vs. lefties in his career.    He's only 1 for 9 this year because Stanford Boy won't even let him see lefites.   But Keith vs. Lefties is better than most of thes right-handed hitters.   So stop babying him.  You are paying him like a major leaguer,  treat him like one.        Perez, Workman, Jones..........why are they even here.   Okay, maybe   Malgeri, Julks, Jung, DeJong and Max Anderson wouldn't be better, but they can't possibly be worse, can they?    Can we give it a shot and find out?   Can we shake this thing up?   Maybe some of these guys come out of their coma if they see other guys getting sent to go eat the Tony Packo's diet.      Jones is on the team because he's out of options.  That's their hangup and that absolutely shows you just how bad this team really is.     It is worse than 2003.  In 2003 we had no expectations.     Sometimes you need to change for the sake of change and I've never seen a clearer example of it with the Tigers.   And I've been paying attention since May 15, 1976.    This is just brutal roster management and the lineup and game decisions aren't much better.   

Jones .175 / .254

Perez .160 / .212

Torkelson .194 /.306

Lee .200 / .250

McKinstry  .193 / .253

Workman .179 /.179

Edited 23 minutes ago by Motor City Sonics

[Motor City Sonics]

Baltimore's record is barely better than ours and Baltimore's pitching is pretty bad (at least the starters).  If not now, then when? 

We're all waiting for Carpenter, Baez, Torres and Meadows to come back, but are any of them close?   

[Motor City Sonics]

Might as well roll Bernie Lomax out there.  At least he wouldn't swing at pitches nowhere near the strike zone. 

[monkeytargets39]

5 minutes ago, Motor City Sonics said:

Baltimore's record is barely better than ours and Baltimore's pitching is pretty bad (at least the starters).  If not now, then when? 

We're all waiting for Carpenter, Baez, Torres and Meadows to come back, but are any of them close?   

All of them are “completing rehab daily” 

Meadows is probably out at least until the all-star break I would assume.  Torres apparently isn’t swinging a bat yet but is doing defensive work somehow.  Dunno any details on Carp and Javy-but I wouldn’t expect Javy back for at least a few more weeks just because of the nature of the injury and he will probably need a week or more of rehab assignment time.

[casimir]

7 minutes ago, monkeytargets39 said:

There was clearly enough optimism to extend Keith before his first MLB game….so why has that shifted after age 22/23 of being an above replacement level player?  
 

It’s stupid, but I think it’s where they were drafted.  Riley, Tork and Mize being top 5 picks and not panning out represents top to bottom organizational failures.  A guy like Keith not panning out can be written off easier.

Agree, not sure why Keith was extended and is only a platoon player now.  I realize his lack of power is disappointing, but he’s sitting vs a LHP for Workman?  Come on.

At this point, I’d have McGonigle, Greene, Keith, Dingler, Torkleson, and Vierling in the lineup everyday.  Sink or swim with them. Not sure what else they can do at this point.  They could dump Jones and call up a Malgeri or Jelks or Navigato or whatever.  But whatever likely changes they could make are still not going to matter unless other parts of the lineup get themselves going.

[Tiger337]

24 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

LOL - touche! 

Moving guys around a lot is maybe one where I think there is some consensus around here that there is at least some defensive cost involved, but how do you quantify it and decide if it's a net plus or not? Again it's coming down to someone's (mostly Hinch's) judgment because it's just too multivariate a problem with too shallow case data to generate useful analytical guidance.

There is a lot more of that in baseball that there was 20 years and I can't really say if Hinch does it more than others.  I think a bit more than average, but I'm not sure.  I agree that the practice probably costs some runs defensively.