The Astros have a handicap elevator in the first base dugout?

this is almost as bad as dusty admitting that from where he sat in thew cubs dugout he couldnt see home plate

Morgan Ensberg’s Baseball IQ: Lidge vs. Pujols: I was in the wrong spot

Are you allowed to position Morgan Ensberg on the train tracks?

I read the headline and thought that Ensburg had made a wisecrack about how the Astros should have put an outfielder in the Crawford Boxes.

This seems like pretty interesting stuff. And he has a decent line at the end, albeit one that could use a tad of editing: Two batters later, Pujols makes history and there is no optical illusion involved there at all.

#4 No. What he's saying is that as the ball leaves the bat it checks whether all of the fielders are properly positioned. And if somebody is out of position the ball speeds up.

Elementary physics.

Seems like, at that point in the season, if you think your manager is placing you in the wrong spot, you should play in the right spot and yell to the catcher that Eckstein isn't going to pull. I mean, you don't get a do-over. Can we get Phil Garner's take on this? I'm not sure I buy the handicapped elevator angle.

Seems like, at that point in the season, if you think your manager is placing you in the wrong spot, you should play in the right spot and yell to the catcher that Eckstein isn't going to pull. I mean, you don't get a do-over. Can we get Phil Garner's take on this? I'm not sure I buy the handicapped elevator angle.

But if you RTFA:

Why didn’t you move closer to the hole then?

1. You do what the manager says. He has the spray charts in front of him. Managers use that information as a starting point and move players according to the pitcher’s plan against the batter.

2. With that said, I believe he is adjusting me according to Lidge’s plan against Eckstein.

So how do you know you were positioned wrong?

If a ball is hit where the chart says, then the positioning was wrong. Phil knew where Eckstein usually hits the ball and knew how Lidge would pitch Eckstein. Phil took those 2 points into consideration and moved me to the exact location on the chart that he wanted me.

i always liked mo ensberg, was sorry that his shoulder injury basically ended his career as a good hitter. and i REALLY like his blog. he certainly comes off as an honest, decent male human. his take on milton bradley is just awesome

that said,

when the WS rolled around, phil had been manager for 1 1/2 years. by then, he SHOULD have known all about the positioning problem at 3rd. so yes phil effed up, and no, i don't believe it had nevah happened before

and mo is wrong about a couple of things - at least when playing against the astros, the Pest never took strike 3 on an 0-2 count, he always tried to make contact. also, after lidge threw 2 FB, he then threw a slider - it was the slider that Pest hit (or at least, that is what it said on the screen at the Box) and if phil was calling pitches, he made a BIG mistake as Pest couldn't catch up to the heat

I understood that Eckstein was likely to take strike two instead of swinging away, not that he would take strike 3. He said in the next sentence

That means that Eckstein will be working with just 2 strikes

No, by that he means that Eckstein is going to take ONE strike - working with just 2 strikes [remaining].

I also like Ensberg's blog, even though it's probably of more interest to Astros' fans. He come across as very candid in answering questions from commenters. At one point in his blog, he calculates a simple probability example to compare the value of a walk vs. a HR. Not your usual fare from a baseball player. As I recall, he has an advanced degree in finance.

One of the things that this quote from Ensberg reveals is one of the weaknesses of zone rankings (of any sort) on defense. Phrased in zone terms, Ensberg says that the "zone" changes depending on the hitter, the ballpark, the pitcher, and the situation. (I imagine that almost all of you already knew this.) Garner had spray charts to determine where the zone ought to be for a third baseman behind Lidge, pitching to Eckstein late in a close game in Houston. So he moved Morgan to that zone (well, where he thought that zone was). A zone ranking should evaluate Ensberg's play, if any, using the zone Ensberg was actually in, rather than the normal zone, which is, I would assume, the average of all the individual zones at that position.

Zone ranking systems have developed a lot since John Dewan first started to pimp for them really hard, but as far as I know, none has every tried to do this - move the zone around for each plate appearance. I can see why: The amount of time it would take to look at tape to determine where everyone is playing would be hideous. And sometimes, the tape isn't going to show all the defenders in position before the pitch. But if you were willing to put in the time and effort (or had a platoon of scorers, like the old Project Scoresheet had), you could get much more accurate zone rankings by just looking at the tape while having at hand a play-by-play, so you know which defender(s) were actually involved in the play, and then checking out where they were placed, while ignoring the defenders who were not involved.

You could also start to tease the data to try to figure out whether there are zone choices so bad that they should never be used. I remember Bill James writing that Toby Harrah (if I remember right) would play off "zone" by playing close to the line with a small lead in late innings. Harrah's reasoning was that he was cutting down on the doubles, which place a runner in scoring position immediately, while accepting that he was gong to let more singles go by. You could check to see if Harrah was right or wrong about this, and it would be valuable info for third basemen to know.

Oh, and Petooter is right about the taking a strike thing. Eckstein, in that situation, is just trying to get on base. He's going to take balls out of the strike zone until you force him to protect the plate by throwing at least one strike. Then he has to swing at anything that looks like it's going to be a strike. With two strikes, Eck is going to choke way up on the bat and just try to slap the pitch where it's thrown. Given how hard Lidge threw at the time, Eck was very likely to hit a two-strike pitch on the ground to the first base side of the infield, and then run like hell. Baseball Chick is also right. In that situation, with two strikes, Eck is going to be sitting on anything OTHER than the fastball he can't hit. Therefore, throwing him anything other than that fastball is risky at best. - Brock Hanke

In fairness, Lidge's best pitch is supposed to be his slider. When he is throwing right, Lidge's slider is a nasty pitch which the hitter will either whiff or make weak contact. So, I don't know that he would necessarily view a slider as a risky choice.

tricky

that slider usually is not a strike unless it is swung at. and Pest is pretty good at not swinging at a pitch out of the zone. in other words, there was no reason to throw a slider to a guy who couldn't hit the FB

AND edmonds was next AND edmonds was a lefty - and leftys always hit lidge bettern rightys AND edmonds hit lidge decently

#13 - Guarding the lines with a lead late in the game had been an accepted strategy in baseball long before Toby Harrah arrived.

No, by that he means that Eckstein is going to take ONE strike - working with just 2 strikes [remaining].

Thanks. When I first read it, I thought it meant he would take everything possible until he was forced to protect the plate.

Yeah. awesome bit on MB.

Great, great blog. It's always awesome (and rare!) to get a truly fresh perspective on things.

Obviously, he's not going to agree with statheads on everything, but he clearly thinks about his opinions. I wish I had seen his blog sooner! I hope he gets enough good feedback and keeps writing. I imagine he'll be linked a lot here if he continues to maintain his blog and not in the "Haha, look at what Jeff Francoeur's Press Agent Wrote!" fashion.

Wow, thanks to bbchick for mentioning that Milton Bradley. This blog seems quite promising. It might already be the best one written by a recent major leaguer. Of course, the bar is low in that regard. Unless I'm forgetting someone.

Again, Frenchy's blog is probably the most professionally written...

I've been watching TV with the wife too much. When I saw "Tango" at the top of this blurb, I immediately thought of the buffoon with the hat on Ghost Hunters.