Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Sox Therapy > Discussion
Sox Therapy
— Where Thinking Red Sox Fans Obsess about the Sox

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Robert S. Posted: September 28, 2005 at 03:48 AM (#1648027)
Pedro Martinez.
   2. Joel W Posted: September 28, 2005 at 04:02 AM (#1648048)
The obvious move is of course to ride wake, but remember he is going to go on short rest, and remember that we were winning that game, and that Francona had no way of knowing the outcome of the upcoming game. The decision was bad to not choose either Paplebon or Timlin and go 8 w/ Wake, but at the same time, our bullpen sucks and that is not Francona's fault.

No, I don't feel comfortable w/ him managing the Red Sox this weekend or in the playoffs, but I don't know how much of that is him or the bullpen. Hey, at least the Yankees, Indians, and white sox all lost, but that is what would have made this win so big I know.
   3. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 28, 2005 at 04:03 AM (#1648049)
I dunno. I wasn't a big fan of Tito's choices today. I liked pulling Wake early - you win the game you can win, then you plan for the nightcap. I would've had someone else starting the 7th, the 8th and the 9th innings tonight, so that was a big issue. I was very surprised Trot played both ends of the DH.

But, really, the problems are simpler than that:

The starter tonight has an ERA around 6
The young guys in the pen have been very shaky
The R/L combo are much less effective against expanded rosters
The defense doesn't do any of them any favors

Tito had two good pitchers he could really count on, and he used them to win the first game. The rest of the pitchers did a poor job in the second game.

I'd really like to see Lenny Dinardo get a shot, and I don't understand why he doesn't. But that's just one guy, and I don't think he'd be better than a 4.25 ERA. That's useful, but it's not that good.
   4. Darren Posted: September 28, 2005 at 04:13 AM (#1648061)
The obvious move is of course to ride wake, but remember he is going to go on short rest, and remember that we were winning that game, and that Francona had no way of knowing the outcome of the upcoming game.

In one breath, you're thinking ahead 4 games and in the next you're saying that we can't plan for a game later the same day, because we don't know the outcome. Wake for another inning is as good or better choice than Paps. Saving Paps allows you to use him for as many as 2 Ip in game 2.

I liked pulling Wake early - you win the game you can win, then you plan for the nightcap.

I didn't see where Papelbon gave us a better chance to win than Wakefield. I saw the opposite.

The starter tonight has an ERA around 6
The young guys in the pen have been very shaky
The R/L combo are much less effective against expanded rosters
The defense doesn't do any of them any favors


As for the starter, shouldn't a 6 ERA make Tito give him a short leash? Have the young guys really gotten a chance to prove their shakiness? I don't think the R/L combo is any less effective against expanded rosters--you only deploy against guys who won't be PH for anyways. Agree that the defense is lousy, but it can be helped if you sit Millar after his AB in the 7th.
   5. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 28, 2005 at 11:32 AM (#1648174)
To try to be clearer, I'm not arguing that Francona has been doing a great job. I'm just saying that the problems with this team are much more the fault of the front office. I don't get so tough on Tito when he's not the guy in charge of the rehabs, in charge of the Pedro contract.

To the degree that it's Tito's fault that Petagine, Payton, Dinardo and now Hyzdu aren't getting any playing time, I find that a much larger problem. I tend to split that blame pretty evenly between the FO and Tito.

I'm not responding to every question you asked - most of them I basically agree with - but I don't agree with the premise behind questioning whether the young guys have proven their shakiness. It's not provable in a month or two. All we've got is observation, and none of the young guys have been consistently strong in their stuff out of the bullpen. When Hansen locates his slider and fastball in the same night, it'll be a first. When Papelbon comes to the mound knowing which breaking stuff he'll depend on, it'll be, well, a second, I think. When Manny D shows up with a breaking pitch, I'll jump for joy. I love these guys, and I think they'll be really helpful, but for now, they're shaky.
   6. villageidiom Posted: September 28, 2005 at 01:12 PM (#1648202)
On the pitching side, I thought the obvious move in game 1 was to ride Wakefield and save Papelbon for game 2, knowing that you’d need him with Schilling going.

Assuming you have to choose... Is it more important to ride Wake for 8 IP against Toronto on Tuesday, or for 8 IP vs. the Yankees on Saturday? If I had to choose, I'd pick the latter.

Now, perhaps we don't have to choose. Maybe we can expect Wake to go another 8 IP against a relentless lineup, with the season on the line, on three days' rest. And although he's a knuckleballer, and he's done this sort of thing before, and I wouldn't trust anyone else with that situation, I still don't think it's the best option.

Whether he had to go specifically to Papelbon and Timlin to close it out, I don't know. They are the better relievers at this point, and it was a fairly high-leverage situation. I think we should be pretty satisfied with the usage.

As for Trot... I'd have let him play both halves. He'd get plenty of rest today when I'd sit him vs. Lilly, and I didn't think the field conditions were conducive to injury yesterday. I might have considered a defensive sub for health reasons, but Damon, not Trot, would have been my first choice.
   7. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 28, 2005 at 01:16 PM (#1648210)
Regarding Wakefield, I take a different perspective from vi. As I see it, 108 pitches is a perfectly reasonable time for the hook. I'd hate it if Wake had left a man or two on base and it had taken Li'l Papi a couple batters to get his #### together as it did in the start of the 8th. I'd trust that Wakefield was tired there.

As for Trot... I'd have let him play both halves.

But, Trot can't hit lefties. He never has. Adam Hyzdu, on the other hand, can hit lefties.

That one doesn't seem particularly complicated to me. What am I missing?
   8. Toby Posted: September 28, 2005 at 02:21 PM (#1648312)
Don't overanalyze. But more importantly, don't assume that good managing can result in the opposing team being shut out over innings 6 through 9.

Game 1 was a tight game, we used good pitchers in high-lev situations, we won.

Game 2, we were ahead 5-4 after 5. On average, the Blue Jays can be expected to score 2 runs over the final 4 innings against our pitching staff, giving them 6. (They in fact scored 3, giving them 7).

Our offense can be expected to score 2 or 3 runs over the final 4 innings, giving us 7 or 8.

The reason we lost Game 2 is not because we gave up 3 runs during innings 6 through 9, but because we scored zero runs during innings 6 through 9.

I don't see that as being in any way Tito's fault. YMMV.
   9. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 28, 2005 at 02:29 PM (#1648324)
Game 2, we were ahead 5-4 after 5.

Why use that as your endpoint? Why not, "we were ahead 5-2 after 4?" Or how about, "it was tied 0-0 before the game?"
   10. Toby Posted: September 28, 2005 at 02:32 PM (#1648334)
Biff,

I'm just using the endpont that everyone else in this thread seems to be using.
   11. chris p Posted: September 28, 2005 at 02:59 PM (#1648392)
FREE LENNY DINARDO!!!
   12. 1k5v3L Posted: September 28, 2005 at 03:03 PM (#1648401)
flags fly forever. or something like that.
   13. Nasty Nate Posted: September 28, 2005 at 03:04 PM (#1648405)
good lord this bullpen is scary.

You gotta use your best bullpen guys in the 3-1 game, I think. You cant assume game 2 is going to be close, with this team a blowout is likely enough.
   14. Josh Posted: September 28, 2005 at 03:20 PM (#1648442)
I thought GM 1 was managed fine -- a small difference of opinion (e.g., using Pap for two innings instead of one) does not a bad manager make.

My problems with game two really just concern the use of Hansen. I'd rather he be out there with no one on. This is his third -- third! -- major league game. He is approaching what, 80 innings thrown this year? He had a dead arm just a few weeks ago. I don't see him as anything close to a savior and I'd really rather he be introduced to the league in better situations. For example, even KRod's first introduction to coming in with men on happened with two outs, and in his third appearance.

Anyway, maybe even that is picking at nits.
   15. Joel W Posted: September 28, 2005 at 03:24 PM (#1648453)
So I looked up Wake over the last 4 years in on pitches 90-105. Well, I'm going to include his pitches 106 and on as well, cause somehow they've been ok. Anyway:

In about 378 PA Wake: struckout 57, walked 44, and gave up 14 HRs. Needless to say, not good. I think Wake tires a lot more than people think he does. But it also seems observable casually, he seems to be pushing the ball to the plate, it starts falling a lot earlier and he gets behind.

Which is to say that leaving Wake in could have quite possible cost us that game.

Though Darren, you are right, that I was using two very conflicting principles. Regardless, I'll stand by what I've just researched, which is that you get Wake out of the game right when Francona got him out. Or actually, it should have been sooner, but that's not the relevant point.

The blame I think, as our resident Beastie Boy MCA pointed out, lies with our front office and the crappy pen. I think Torre is relatively good w/ his bulpen, but what would he have done on the day of a doubleheader vis-a-vis his pen? I don't know, maybe the best option was to try to get 2 innings out of Timlin or Paplebon in the first game? In fact, I think that is the best strategy, use them each for 2 in each of the games.
   16. Joel W Posted: September 28, 2005 at 03:40 PM (#1648480)
I'm also looking over Timlin's numbers and he's a lot less scary than I thought him to be, despite recent blow ups and large amounts of use. The man has been really good this year, especially when he comes on w/ the bases empty. He's not a fireman, he is a "closer." I think we should feel OK putting him out there to start the 9th, and maybe even in games like yesterday to start the 8th and 9th.
   17. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: September 28, 2005 at 03:50 PM (#1648505)
Stop making Craig Hansen's life bad.
   18. Bob Loblaw Posted: September 28, 2005 at 03:55 PM (#1648521)
I thought it was common knowledge that Wakefield doesn't have the complete rubber arm that is generally associated with knucklers...

He definitely does get tired. In fact, he fell apart in the eighth in his previous start, so I had no problem with pulling him after seven in game one.

In game two, you absolutely have to take Schilling out after six innings though. He'd already thrown about 100 pitches, not terribly effectively, and he's shown almost no ability to pitch deep into ballgames this year.

The Red Sox were lucky to escape that inning at 5-5, and maybe Bradford gives up a run anyway if he pitches that whole inning and it's a moot point, but you can't send Schilling back out there.

The other problems people have with game two just seem to be a reality of how bad this bullpen is. Once it got to second and third with one out in the eighth, I actually said to myself, "Do you go to Hansen here just because you need the strikeout and he can get it if he's on?"

In the ninth, I probably would have gone with Timlin again because he didn't throw that many pitches in game one and there's a big difference between going to the bottom down one and down two.
   19. 1k5v3L Posted: September 28, 2005 at 04:22 PM (#1648567)
Do Red Sox fans really feel comfortable with Curt starting on Sunday? That might be the clinching game for either team. Then again, what options do the Sox have... At least Moose looked like crap too.
   20. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 28, 2005 at 05:03 PM (#1648665)
Then again, what options do the Sox have.

Lenny DiNardo!
   21. Toby Posted: September 28, 2005 at 05:14 PM (#1648686)
levski,

no, but then, I didn't feel comfortable with Lowe starting game 7 of last year's ALCS, either.
   22. karlmagnus Posted: September 28, 2005 at 05:51 PM (#1648759)
I'd have DiNardo ready from the 4th inning onward, probably putting him in for the 6th. Schilling will get it up for the Yankees, as he did the other week, but it's not clear how long he'll last and a quick hook and move to DiNardo, in a must-win game, has to be the sensible option
   23. toc1918 Posted: September 28, 2005 at 06:19 PM (#1648819)
Can someone please tell me why Delcarmen and DiNardo are chained to the bullpen??? Can they pitch any worse than Harville,Bradford and Gonzalez??? Can they pitch as well as Hansen or Pablebon??? We won't have to worry about post-season rosters, if we don't use our personnel better.
   24. 1k5v3L Posted: September 28, 2005 at 06:21 PM (#1648823)
Toby, Lowe was still a better bet than Kevin Brown.

At least he was healthy.
   25. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: September 28, 2005 at 06:26 PM (#1648830)
Toby, Lowe Schilling was is still a better bet than
Kevin Brown Mike Mussina

At least was is healthy healthier .
   26. 1k5v3L Posted: September 28, 2005 at 06:54 PM (#1648907)
Having a case of writer's block today, RB?
   27. 1k5v3L Posted: September 28, 2005 at 07:03 PM (#1648928)
This is interesting (from Jim Callis's chat):

Dan (Pasadena): What happened with that Cuban 1B that the Red Sox signed? I understand that they're now trying to cut him loose...

SportsNation Jim Callis: (3:00 PM ET ) He turned out to be 30 and not 26. Who knew Cuban defectors lied about their age? I'm shocked.


[Abreu is 30? But Gammo said he wasn't fungible...]
   28. tfbg9 Posted: September 28, 2005 at 07:06 PM (#1648933)
Hey, on the plus side of things, Schill was sitting on 92-93. And that's on the "slow" gun, that picks up the ball after in crosses the plate-you can tell because it sometimes gives a 56 mph reading on foul balls.

Schill had APPARENTLY tired after the 6th. No question over here in tfgb9land, but we must remember that we're just a bunch a lifeless dweebs on the outside and looking in. Maybe Dinardo was physically unable to contibute last night or something. I always assume that there's something we don't know. For instance, the non-use of Foulke in the blowout the other day elicited howls from these quarters, yet afterwards we all found out that Keith was unable to go. It might be something like that, after all.

I have no explanation on the use of Harville. He walked Shea Hill-in-bred on 4 pitches.

I like that one: SHEA HILL-IN-BRED! I'm a genius!
   29. tfbg9 Posted: September 28, 2005 at 07:25 PM (#1648973)
Oh yeah, Hansen's heater was only at 93 last night. Tired arm?
   30. Josh Posted: September 28, 2005 at 07:31 PM (#1648983)
Abreu is 30?

This was in the Globe a week ago and, I think, mentioned in a chatter or two. The Red Sox are seeking to void the deal. He also can't establish residency, which I imagine was b/c he was using fake papers with a fake age!
   31. villageidiom Posted: September 28, 2005 at 07:45 PM (#1649009)
But, Trot can't hit lefties. He never has. Adam Hyzdu, on the other hand, can hit lefties.

That one doesn't seem particularly complicated to me. What am I missing?


They both have around a .300 OBP vs. lefties over the last few years at the MLB level. Hyzdu's SLG vs. lefties is better, but still not enough for me to think I'm causing a significant downgrade to the team in one game by putting Trot in there.

Subjectively, though, I think Lilly vs. Trot is much more of a disaster than Chacin vs. Trot. And I think he gets better rest out of (2 on Tuesday + 0 on Wed) than from (1 on Tues and 1 on Wed). I'd sit him today, but wouldn't see a need for it in game 2 yesterday.
   32. 1k5v3L Posted: September 28, 2005 at 07:47 PM (#1649018)
Thanks, Josh.

Maybe he is a fake hitter too? In reality, he hits like Rey Sanchez.
   33. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 28, 2005 at 07:53 PM (#1649036)
vi -

That's a sample of about 100 AB for Hyzdu. We know from MGL's research that even full season platoon split stats for RHB do not shed light of their true split. There's no way 100 AB over four years means anything.

Adam Hyzdu, last I checked, looked like he had a projection (including MLE) in the 720 OPS range. That's looking like a useful 800 OPS vs lefties. Trot, on the other hand, has terrible stats and looks subjectively terrible.

I'm not worried about resting Trot. I'm worried about the fact that he can't hit lefties.
   34. tfbg9 Posted: September 28, 2005 at 08:12 PM (#1649070)
Trot's a little better lately at hitting lefties, now he hits 'em like Womack, instead of Guzman.
   35. Joel W Posted: September 28, 2005 at 08:18 PM (#1649078)
I've always thought Trot would be fine against lefties if he just opened up his stance a bit. Maybe I find this too simple, and that it would mess up his rhythm against righties, but it always seems like he just doesn't see the ball. If he opened up he could see the ball from the release point a bit better, especially against Mike Myers-type lefties.
   36. RobertMachemer Posted: September 28, 2005 at 09:32 PM (#1649317)
As a lefty hitter, it wasn't about seeing the ball (at least for me). Seeing it was usually easy (or at least just as easy as seeing it against righties). But while I was a great hitter against righties, lefties gave me the heebie-jeebies because the ball was always coming out of the wrong area. It always felt like the guy was throwing from behind me. I'm sure lefties in the majors are more used to hitting against lefties than that, but it was an awful, uncomfortable feeling and it made hitting against lefties VERY hard for me (whereas I mashed righties).
   37. Vance Law Revue Posted: September 28, 2005 at 09:39 PM (#1649338)
Oh yeah, Hansen's heater was only at 93 last night. Tired arm?

Let me refer you to post #28, re: A Slow Gun, as authored by notable tool tfbg9.

Pathetic.
   38. tfbg9 Posted: September 28, 2005 at 10:44 PM (#1649460)
VLR, AKA Johnny Come Lately: I am pretty sure that Hansen waa getting a bunch of 96 readings on the slow gun in TAM, but last night only got 93. If I'm mistaken, then my bad.
   39. Larry Bowa Posted: September 29, 2005 at 02:48 AM (#1650675)
So... When will the self-immolation thread be started?
   40. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 29, 2005 at 03:15 AM (#1650714)
There will be no self-immolating going on here.
   41. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 29, 2005 at 03:16 AM (#1650716)
It's simple. They must win tomorrow, and they must win (at least) 2 out of 3 against the Yankees.
   42. ericr Posted: September 29, 2005 at 03:23 AM (#1650730)
Or just sweep the Yanks: problem solved.
   43. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 29, 2005 at 03:25 AM (#1650732)
That'll work also.
   44. Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman Posted: September 29, 2005 at 08:34 AM (#1650902)
It's simple. They must win tomorrow, and they must win (at least) 2 out of 3 against the Yankees.

Nothing is simple this year , Biff.
   45. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 29, 2005 at 10:56 AM (#1650907)
I agree with Biff that all the Red Sox have to do is play inspired baseball, as well as they've played all year, and they'll make teh playoffs. Woo.

I'd also like to point out that the burial of Adam Hyzdu helped kill at least two rallies last night. Would either have grown into the gamebreaker I was waiting for before giving up and watching Lost, which was good but somewhat repetitive, and didn't answer the Desmond question at all? Hard to say. But there's little doubt in my mind that having someone in the lineup who could hit lefties would have improved the Red Sox chances of scoring runs against a lefty.
   46. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 29, 2005 at 11:02 AM (#1650908)
Would either have grown into the gamebreaker I was waiting for before giving up and watching Lost, which was good but somewhat repetitive, and didn't answer the Desmond question at all? Hard to say.

Lost is very good at not answering questions, that's for sure.
   47. Schilling's Sprained Ankiel Posted: September 29, 2005 at 12:29 PM (#1650925)
Two observations:
1. DiNardo was pretty damn good in relief (I'm not surprised); and
2. KFF still sucks.

I just keep telling myself, it's always darkest before the dawn (which, I admit, is a bit overwrought for the situation, but so is McNally's "no good thing ever dies." Have I become my enemy?)
DB
   48. villageidiom Posted: September 29, 2005 at 12:51 PM (#1650931)
Adam Hyzdu, last I checked, looked like he had a projection (including MLE) in the 720 OPS range.

What's his MLE OBP, though... Around .300, right? And, given that I've been told to dismiss the only splits I have, is there any reason I should assume his MLE OBP vs. lefties should be higher than .300?

Again, Hyzdu's power numbers vs. lefties are better than Trot's; I'm simply trying to make the point that - against lefties - Trot isn't making more outs than Hyzdu would.

Of course, my argument for letting Trot play 2 on Tuesday was that he'd get Wednesday off. And he didn't. So I'm with you on the Hyzdu Freedom Campaign. While I'm OK with giving Trot some opportunities vs. LHP, I certainly don't think he should get all the opportunities.
   49. Joel W Posted: September 29, 2005 at 12:59 PM (#1650941)
I think the DiNardo freedom train got a bit of steam last night, maybe that'll carry over to the playoffs (see, i'm being optimistic there). A win tonight by the Sox and Cleveland, but a loss by the White Sox would make our chances a bit better methinks regardless of what the Yankees do.
   50. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 29, 2005 at 01:24 PM (#1650965)
A win tonight by the Sox and Cleveland, but a loss by the White Sox would make our chances a bit better methinks regardless of what the Yankees do.

Why not a Cleveland loss?
   51. Marc Sully's not booin'. He's Youkin'. Posted: September 29, 2005 at 01:39 PM (#1650988)
just keep telling myself, it's always darkest before the dawn

To paraphrase one of my favorite despair.com bits, it's also darkest before it goes pitch black.
   52. Joel W Posted: September 29, 2005 at 02:22 PM (#1651020)
I feel as though a Cleveland Loss tonight basically means Chicago will rest its starters this weekend. If Cleveland is two back or even three back, Chicago has to play.
   53. Buster Olney the Lonely Posted: September 29, 2005 at 02:39 PM (#1651032)
Clement vs the Jays this year in three starts:

17.2IP 8.66ERA 20H 17R 17ER

8.15K/9 5.09BB/9 1.60K/BB .282BAA

Can DiNardo pitch again tonight?
   54. Joel W Posted: September 29, 2005 at 03:16 PM (#1651091)
he's been a bit unlucky, the walks are too high, but 1 HR in 17 innings along w/ those numbers shouldn't be 17 runs.

Look Clement can pitch well, I still really hate the way Varitek catches him. Why, oh why, don't we have a better game plan w/ Clement? He did it w/ Lowe last year, and I'm sick of it, and I'm sick of nobody noticing. Get up 0-2 and 1-2 on hitters, move to the corner, take two pitches when they move out of the zone, and then you have to put it over the plate.

LET THE MAN THROW OVER THE PLATE. He has great movement, just sit on the plate and let him throw. Am I wrong about this? Varitek it seems thinks too much when he has pitchers w/ great movement. With a guy like Schilling or Arroyo, he's great, they need location and knowledge of the hitters to be effective.

Not with Clement or Lowe. When you're up on a hitter, throw the ball with movement through the zone, they'll have to swing. Sometimes they'll get hits, sometimes they'll strike out, sometimes they'll ground out. But they won't walk.

And breathe.
   55. Joel W Posted: September 29, 2005 at 03:33 PM (#1651132)
by the way, that rant got me thinking: we know about how much noise there is in seeing if catcher's have abilities at calling games, to the extent that if there's a skill (which there likely is) then we still might not be able to tell. Which makes me wonder: maybe if we separated catchers into certain types of pitchers (it could be subjective "movement" pitchers based on scouting reports or objective "GB/FB" pitchers), if we'd see certain catchers being better at catching certain players. We think we saw it w/ Belli catching Wake this year, I'm reluctant, but it seems like a worthwhile hypothesis.
   56. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 29, 2005 at 03:46 PM (#1651167)
What's his MLE OBP, though... Around .300, right? And, given that I've been told to dismiss the only splits I have, is there any reason I should assume his MLE OBP vs. lefties should be higher than .300?

The best assumption is a normal split. A normal split means, for an RHB, an increase in both OBP and SLG against a left-handed pitcher. So, yes, there is a very good reason to project Hyzdu to a significantly better OBP.
   57. Josh Posted: September 29, 2005 at 04:00 PM (#1651212)
What's his MLE OBP, though... Around .300, right? And, given that I've been told to dismiss the only splits I have, is there any reason I should assume his MLE OBP vs. lefties should be higher than .300?

The best assumption is a normal split. A normal split means, for an RHB, an increase in both OBP and SLG against a left-handed pitcher. So, yes, there is a very good reason to project Hyzdu to a significantly better OBP.

The projected split is, iirc, 1.08:1, right? So, assuming lefties are about 30% of the ABs in normal season, that is about a 315/290 split to get a OBP of 300, right?
   58. 1k5v3L Posted: September 29, 2005 at 04:08 PM (#1651234)
So, Clement gets a chance to prove that he was a better free agent signing than Russ Ortiz? OK, he was, but if the Jays rip him a new a-hole tonight, I am sure Sox fans won't care that Clement's ERA was about... oh, whatever... lower than Ortiz's in 05.
   59. villageidiom Posted: September 29, 2005 at 05:36 PM (#1651468)
The best assumption is a normal split. A normal split means, for an RHB, an increase in both OBP and SLG against a left-handed pitcher. So, yes, there is a very good reason to project Hyzdu to a significantly better OBP.

The projected split is, iirc, 1.08:1, right? So, assuming lefties are about 30% of the ABs in normal season, that is about a 315/290 split to get a OBP of 300, right?


Right.

And Trot's OBP vs. LHP in his MLB career is .308.

So, Mikael, why are you throwing words like "significantly" around?
   60. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 29, 2005 at 06:16 PM (#1651564)
You are correct that if Hyzdu's MLE OBP is in the range of .300, there isn't a significant difference in the OBP projection vs. LHP. I shouldn't have made that specific argument.

I thought - and I need to look this up - but I thought Hyzdu's MLE OBP was much more in the .330 range, with relatively low power - sub-400.

Either way, I see little reason to restrict our discussion to OBP. Isn't a significant difference is SLG an important thing? Why are we dividing offensive value into components instead of looking at a comprehensive picture? Does it matter if Hyzdu is +5 or +10 in SLG rather than OBP?

I argue that based on statistics and observation, Adam Hyzdu should take the majority of starts against LHP.
   61. GGC don't think it can get longer than a novella Posted: September 29, 2005 at 06:42 PM (#1651632)
Mike Stanton is on the Sox now?

That's what ESPN radio is reporting.
   62. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 29, 2005 at 10:24 PM (#1652207)
I argue that based on statistics and observation, Adam Hyzdu should take the majority of starts against LHP.

Well, he didn't get the start tonight, again.
   63. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 30, 2005 at 02:33 AM (#1653198)
It's simple. They must win tomorrow, and they must win (at least) 2 out of 3 against the Yankees.

All according to plan...
   64. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 30, 2005 at 02:56 AM (#1653258)
Oh yeah...

As much as we slag on the guy, Tito deserves credit for leaving in Papelbon to finish the game tonight, and even for bringing him in when we were down by one run. Ace reliever!
   65. Darren Posted: September 30, 2005 at 03:20 AM (#1653297)
I guess if you want to give him credit for doing something obvious. Of course, in the same game, he started Nixon against a lefty again.

I figured out Hyzdu's MLE for the year and it was something like .320 OBP/.400 SLG. Coming into the year, he was projected by ZIPS to hit .360/.480.

I tried using the new ZIPsPlus thing, which said that he should be expected to put up .314/.500 for the rest of the year, which seem wrong to me. Also, if I changed the number of games left, it changed his projection drastically.

Regardless of the details, there's no reason to believe that Nixon will out hit Hyzdu against a lefty, and there's plenty of reason to think Hyzdu will be better. Of course, there's also plenty of reason to think Petagine could outhit Millar and Olerud, but when has reason entered to Tito's thinking.

Exciting game tonight. Hope we will tomorrow because Saturday will be big Unit vs. Trot.
   66. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 30, 2005 at 03:25 AM (#1653304)
A moment of fanboyism.

The Greatest Hero in American History. I'm watching him on postgame now.

What's he been worth? I'm figuring 17 wins above replacement. Maybe 60, though.
   67. Darren Posted: September 30, 2005 at 03:27 AM (#1653306)
You know, the Red Sox made what I thought was a really nice gamble by getting Miller as the 6th starter for this team. Reasonable price, has a chance to be very good--it's something you need with an aging staff.

Well, I guess I was wrong. I guess the Red Sox should have just promoted some 33 year old who stunk at AAA, and then had the Rockies hand them a decent starter for nothing (probably the same as we paid for Stanton).

Chacon and Small are a combined 17-3, 150ish IP, sub-3.00 ERA. Small doesn't even belong on a major league roster. It's been a truly amazing run of luck for the yanks.
   68. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 30, 2005 at 03:34 AM (#1653312)
Completely agree, Darren, those guys are ####### killing me. I watch Wang, and I can see the case that he's actually a pretty good pitcher. Heavy ball, good movement. I can buy his HR rate to some degree.

Small and Chacon are not good pitchers. They're not. I just get indignant.
   69. Jim Furtado Posted: September 30, 2005 at 03:37 AM (#1653318)
Just testing.
   70. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 30, 2005 at 03:38 AM (#1653322)
Hi, Jim.

What did you think of the game tonight?
   71. Darren Posted: September 30, 2005 at 03:49 AM (#1653328)
Ahhh. Jim's just been testing us to see how we'd react to some completely insane performances by shitty Yankee pitchers.

I watch Wang, and I can see the case that he's actually a pretty good pitcher.

I dunno. His Ks are terrible. Maybe he's THE pitcher who can succeed with a K rate under 4/9 IP, but somehow I doubt. Especially considering he was thought to be done earlier in the year.

The thing that kills me about these guys is that they're succeeding despite allowing balls in play in front of a terrible defense. I was sure the bottom would fall out sooner or later, but it just never did.
   72. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: September 30, 2005 at 03:53 AM (#1653333)
With Wang, I think he's actually going to start striking out more guys. He works in the 92-94 range with sick movement on the sinker, and his curve is competent. I don't honestly understand why he doesn't get more swings and misses.


The thing that kills me about these guys is that they're succeeding despite allowing balls in play in front of a terrible defense. I was sure the bottom would fall out sooner or later, but it just never did.


No justice in this world. No justice. Aaron frickin' Small.
   73. Darren Posted: September 30, 2005 at 03:54 AM (#1653334)
While we're at it, remember that game where Sheffield was called safe on a DP in the 9th, even though he was out and the Yanks won? Remember when the Royals took a 5 run lead into the 9th, only to watch it disappear, with Camp on the mound? Remember that last game in the last Sox/Yanks series, when Damon hit that ball 2 inches foul down the RF line? Remember that one time at band camp...
   74. Darren Posted: September 30, 2005 at 04:01 AM (#1653343)
Meanwhile, absolutely none of the Sox reasonably smart gambles pay off. It's like we're cursed or something.
   75. Darren Posted: September 30, 2005 at 04:03 AM (#1653345)
Looking back on it now, maybe our biggest mistake this year was giving up Payton so quickly. He really should have been suspended if his behavior was bad. Then after X games, you reinstate him and he's still on your team.
   76. Darren Posted: September 30, 2005 at 04:09 AM (#1653355)
With Wang, I think he's actually going to start striking out more guys. He works in the 92-94 range with sick movement on the sinker, and his curve is competent.

True, but you see the same sort of thing in guys like Daniel Cabrera and Ervin Santana, both of whom actually do strike guys out, but haven't gotten nearly the results that Wango has. If Wang was doing all this with a high-4.00s ERA, it wouldn't be as ridiculous.
   77. Joel W Posted: September 30, 2005 at 04:23 AM (#1653368)
the small/chacon thing is awful. There was the Leiter game against the Sox, i just don't get it and it ####### blows my mind.

Darren, I know it seems obvious to just leave Papelbon in, but not many managers do that, I think it's pretty good.

As frustrating as this team has been, they're really not all that good and they've got a shot at a playoff birth. Also, it would be really nice if there's a playoff for the red sox to take a big f'ing deuce on chacon (it'd be chacon, right). I mean monstrous in the first inning, like Florida 2003 big, and have it all be for naught for the yanks.
   78. IronChef Chris Wok Posted: September 30, 2005 at 04:31 AM (#1653372)
I dunno. His Ks are terrible. Maybe he's THE pitcher who can succeed with a K rate under 4/9 IP, but somehow I doubt. Especially considering he was thought to be done earlier in the year.


Asians don't need strikeouts because we're inscrutable.
   79. Nasty Nate Posted: September 30, 2005 at 02:14 PM (#1653644)
I'm sure this has been covered before, but I have a question: If the Sox take 2 of 3 from NY, and Cleveland is 1-2 on the weekend, are the Sox the division champs (playing the Angels w/ homefield advantage) and the Yankees wildcard (playing at Chicago)??

Or is there a playoff to determine division leader?
   80. Joel W Posted: September 30, 2005 at 02:36 PM (#1653692)
No playoff, Yankees win the Division because of head to head record.

I hadn't realized we were 6-10 against them this year, god 8-8 would be nice and take the two losses against tampa or something.
   81. Joel W Posted: September 30, 2005 at 02:38 PM (#1653697)
speaking of that scenario, and this isn't a "which would you prefer" cause getting into the playoffs is the real key...but in that scenario, I think I prefer the wild card. Chicago just isn't as good as Anaheim. Especially with the quality of Anaheim's starting pitching this year. The only problem is that my best friend is a white sox fan who really despises the red sox (as I and his brother are huge Red Sox fans) and I think his head would explode during that series.
   82. Nasty Nate Posted: September 30, 2005 at 03:24 PM (#1653808)
Thanks. For some reason I thought the Sox were up or tied in the head-to-head battle this year. I would prefer the home series against anaheim. What's the last playoff series in which the Sox had homefield advantage besides the '04 world series? 86 ALCS?
   83. Nasty Nate Posted: September 30, 2005 at 03:26 PM (#1653814)
wait. they must have had it in 88 & 90 too if they had it in 86.
   84. Joel W Posted: September 30, 2005 at 05:48 PM (#1654171)
I thought the A's had it in 88 and 90?
   85. Answer Guy Posted: September 30, 2005 at 05:49 PM (#1654172)
the small/chacon thing is awful. There was the Leiter game against the Sox, i just don't get it and it #### blows my mind.

For Letier, part of it was without a doubt the lefty factor. Ortiz is much less effective against LHPs, Damon isn't as good against LHPs, and Trot should be (but usually isn't) benched against them. In previous seasons, Manny and Nomar offset all that, but Nomar's gone and Manny had IIRC a reverse platoon split this season. Millar was good against lefties but this year's he's sucked against everyone. There's still Varitek (switch hitter who's better from the right) but that's really it, at least in '05 - and he's really fallen off lately.
   86. Joel W Posted: September 30, 2005 at 06:18 PM (#1654230)
Ortiz has an .890 OPS against lefties, so it's not like he's bad. Millar has been bad against lefties this year, but if MGL is to be believed, which I think he is, that is a fluke, and his skill hasn't changed. That game was at home, where his OPS is .866, so he's probably pretty good against lefties in Fenway.

Look the Red Sox have a better OPS v. lefties this year than righties. That game sucked, he struck out 8, walked 3, and gave up 1 run. The sox swung at everything. It was painful to watch, and they've had performances like that from so many pitchers. G-Ross.
   87. Josh Posted: September 30, 2005 at 06:31 PM (#1654269)
Since June (*selective end point danger ahead*) Manny has a 288/388/649 line vs. lefties in about 130 PAs.
   88. villageidiom Posted: September 30, 2005 at 06:34 PM (#1654273)
Either way, I see little reason to restrict our discussion to OBP. Isn't a significant difference is SLG an important thing? Why are we dividing offensive value into components instead of looking at a comprehensive picture? Does it matter if Hyzdu is +5 or +10 in SLG rather than OBP?

1. I was making the point that Trot won't really make significantly more outs. Hence my focus on OBP.

2. I thought - and maybe I'm remembering this wrong - SLG MLE's are more fluky than OBP MLE's. This makes intuitive sense; the numerator of SLG varies much more than that of OBP, for a given number of PA's. (More variation) = (less certainty) = (need more PA's to achieve same level of certainty).

And if they're more fluky, I'm less inclined to believe the observed differences are real. It doesn't mean they're not real; it means that they're less reliable for decision-making purposes, because they're more likely not real than similar differences on OBP.

Now, that's on the objective side of the ledger. On the subjective side... I've seen for years that Trot's weak swings vs. LHP are going to keep his SLG low. But I don't have the same degree of observation on Hyzdu. I have a really small sample to draw from, and that sample is quite unremarkable.
   89. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: September 30, 2005 at 08:12 PM (#1654544)
For Letier, part of it was without a doubt the lefty factor.

I'm pretty sure the team OPS vs. RHP and vs. LHP are essentially equal.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Sebastian
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.7055 seconds
43 querie(s) executed