PDA

View Full Version : Marty was on Lance's show today



BuckeyeRedleg
07-31-2006, 06:18 PM
In a nutshell...

Basically said EE has no business in there right now, because he can't be counted on. He is fine with Rich A. and Clayton playing everyday at 3B and SS and thinks it's funny that any fans would complain about it. Rich A. and Clayton have the experience and we can count on them down the stretch because they are "ready".

Also ripped on Lopez, for falling asleep out at SS and we are way better off without him.

Anyone else hear him? wow.

OnBaseMachine
07-31-2006, 06:21 PM
I think it's funny that Marty is fine with RA and Clayton at 3B and SS everyday. Shows how much he knows huh?

flyer85
07-31-2006, 06:31 PM
Of course he had no data to support his position but when you're an HOFer you don't need any.

Mr make the routine play Clayton has a .944 FP(which would seem to define making the routine play) whereas Lopez had .959 while with the Reds.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-31-2006, 06:34 PM
Is there a way Matt can archive that one so we can take a listen? I mean, Marty wasn't holding anything back.

Marc D
07-31-2006, 06:34 PM
In a nutshell...

Basically said EE has no business in there right now, because he can't be counted on. He is fine with Rich A. and Clayton playing everyday at 3B and SS and thinks it's funny that any fans would complain about it. Rich A. and Clayton have the experience and we can count on them down the stretch because they are "ready".

Also ripped on Lopez, for falling asleep out at SS and we are way better off without him.

Anyone else hear him? wow.


I am completely ok with being 180 degree opposite of Marty's opinion.

realreds1
07-31-2006, 06:34 PM
Seems like Marty's seen a playoff run a time or two before. Don't think you need a rookie who could commit as many throwing errors as he could hit home runs breaking the team's back in pressure situations.

wally post
07-31-2006, 06:36 PM
How about a rookie who wins the MVP of a play off series? He could do it. They would not!

OldXOhio
07-31-2006, 06:37 PM
Outside members of the BRM, Marty seems to consistently disparage a lot of former Reds who've been shown the door.

I don't know if the fact that the brass thinks we can "count on" Clayton because of his experience is sad or funny. I do know neither one is good.

dougdirt
07-31-2006, 06:37 PM
I heard it and wanted to just pound my head on the desk. Marty, while he didnt have much sway in what I thought before, now has even less pull. What kills me though, is people will eat this crap like its the word of God because Marty said it.

dsmith421
07-31-2006, 06:37 PM
Basically said EE has no business in there right now, because he can't be counted on.

Just out of curiosity, when is the last time Edwin made a mistake that hurt the ballclub?

I HATE this attitude, I really do. I hate the free ride the veterans get from the media and management.

Oh, and Marty, as big a lollygagger as Lipe was apparently, I never saw him fail to make a relay because he was blowing a freaking bubble.

guttle11
07-31-2006, 06:39 PM
I think it's funny that Marty is fine with RA and Clayton at 3B and SS everyday. Shows how much he knows huh?

Exactly. He knows that in a playoff race, you play with the knowns rather than the unknowns.

Edwin at third and Aurilia/Phillips at SS is an unknown. What's known is what they're doing, with is working just fine.

Sea Ray
07-31-2006, 06:40 PM
Fans don't like it but defense wins championships. The Boston Red Sox "took off" when they traded Nomar and put a better defense SS in there. Krivsky and Marty come from that same school...

BuckeyeRedleg
07-31-2006, 06:43 PM
Just out of curiosity, when is the last time Edwin made a mistake that hurt the ballclub?

I HATE this attitude, I really do. I hate the free ride the veterans get from the media and management.

Oh, and Marty, as big a lollygagger as Lipe was apparently, I never saw him fail to make a relay because he was blowing a freaking bubble.

Not only does the objective data compiled say different. My own subjective opinion says different than Marty. I can see with my own eyes that /Royce Clayton should not be out there.

I feel like I'm going crazy. Is he watching a different game than me? Someone help me here.

I guess I must defer to Marty, because he is the one in the Hall of Fame.

flyer85
07-31-2006, 06:44 PM
Fans don't like it but defense wins championships. ... if only the Reds and Royce Clayton actually had it.

oregonred
07-31-2006, 06:46 PM
Or the other night when he said Maj can't seem to handle being traded to a contender. "Reminds me of the kid Wayne Kirby in the 1970s"

Um, memo to Marty before you make more irresponsible and incorrect comments -- The Nats were leading the WC race and in the thick of the NL East race at this time last year and Majik was doing quite fine thank you very much...

July '05: 3.07 ERA (14.2 IP)
Aug '05: 1.80 ERA (15 IP)
Sept '05: 1.42 ERA (19 IP)

Of course we all know those 48.2 IP's of post AS Break ~2.01 ERA ball were all just luck...

Reds4Life
07-31-2006, 06:47 PM
Fans don't like it but defense wins championships. The Boston Red Sox "took off" when they traded Nomar and put a better defense SS in there. Krivsky and Marty come from that same school...

There is only one problem, Clayton ISN'T better defense.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-31-2006, 06:49 PM
And what would be difference over 162 games at 3b between RA and EE?

Defensively. Negligible.

Marc D
07-31-2006, 06:49 PM
Fans don't like it but defense wins championships. The Boston Red Sox "took off" when they traded Nomar and put a better defense SS in there. Krivsky and Marty come from that same school...

Whys JR still in CF then?

flyer85
07-31-2006, 06:49 PM
There is only one problem, Clayton ISN'T better defense.He makes the routine play, Marty says so. :laugh:

I thought I was listening to a parrot.

flyer85
07-31-2006, 06:50 PM
Whys JR still in CF then?or Dunn in LF?

OldXOhio
07-31-2006, 06:51 PM
What's known is what they're doing, with is working just fine.

Just curious, will it be fine if the team finishes 4-5 games over .500 and doesn't make the playoffs?

flyer85
07-31-2006, 06:54 PM
Just curious, will it be fine if the team finishes 4-5 games over .500 and doesn't make the playoffs?this year is the year when you can be abysmal and still make the playoffs. That is what the Reds are counting on. Other than the Dodgers none of the competition did anything to make themselves better.

Sea Ray
07-31-2006, 06:54 PM
Just out of curiosity, when is the last time Edwin made a mistake that hurt the ballclub?

I HATE this attitude, I really do. I hate the free ride the veterans get from the media and management.

Oh, and Marty, as big a lollygagger as Lipe was apparently, I never saw him fail to make a relay because he was blowing a freaking bubble.

I don't know about the last time but he made three errors in a 4-1 loss to the Cubs in early April. Here's the highlights:


In the Cubs' third, Pierre was safe at first on an error by first baseman Scott Hatteberg, who dropped second baseman Womack's throw. One out later, Lee was safe on third baseman Edwin Encarnacion's throwing error. Pierre and Lee again were successful on a double steal, and Pierre scored on Encarnacion's second mistake of the inning when he booted Barrett's grounder.

Encarnacion also made a throwing error in the second, but he redeemed himself a little in the fourth. With two out and Adam Dunn at first, Encarnacion smacked an RBI double, the first hit off Maddux. Despite a westerly wind at 15 mph, Maddux contained the Reds.

"You feel fortunate to only give up one run on a day like this," Maddux said. "Any fly ball is going to go out. Luckily today, they didn't hit too many too high in the air."

Barrett, batting fourth for the first time since Aug. 27, 2005, because of an injury to third baseman Aramis

He has been horrible at 3B, especially throwing the ball. He's hurt us many times

TeamBoone
07-31-2006, 06:55 PM
Marty thinks he's such an expert... makes me ill.

Sea Ray
07-31-2006, 06:56 PM
Whys JR still in CF then?

I can give you 13 million reasons for every year left on his contract

Cyclone792
07-31-2006, 06:58 PM
He has been horrible at 3B, especially throwing the ball. He's hurt us many times

If Encarnacion and Aurilia maintain their career fielding percentages at third base, then playing Rich Aurilia over Edwin Encarnacion at third base would save us three runs with errors.

Three whole runs.

That doesn't even include the advantage Edwin has over Aurilia in range, an advantage that would not only negate those three runs, but overtake them. Nor does it include the advantage Edwin would have at the plate over Aurilia, but then again I wouldn't have much problem giving Aurilia some spot starts at first base and second base, with Freel also filling in at second base and in the outfield.

But if people want Rich Aurilia starting at third base over Edwin Encarnacion because of three runs, then so be it. Just let it be known that it's decisions such as these that cost the team value in runs, and ultimately, cost the team wins.

flyer85
07-31-2006, 06:58 PM
Marty thinks he's such an expert... makes me ill.He subscribes to "In HOFers you trust, we need no data."

Marc D
07-31-2006, 07:00 PM
I can give you 13 million reasons for every year left on his contract


He gets paid less to play corner outfield? I'm all for that.

If you mean high paid players can do whatever they want then I ask whats he going to do if you move him to RF, pull an operation shutdown?

flyer85
07-31-2006, 07:02 PM
At the start and the way he asked the question you could tell that even Lance, in full brown nosing mode, was having a tough time digesting Clayton as the SS. However, by the end he was chugging the Kool-Aid with willful abandon.

dougdirt
07-31-2006, 07:03 PM
If Encarnacion and Aurilia maintain their career fielding percentages at third base, then playing Rich Aurilia over Edwin Encarnacion at third base would save us three runs with errors.

Three whole runs.

That doesn't even include the advantage Edwin has over Aurilia in range, an advantage that would not only negate those three runs, but overtake them. Nor does it include the advantage Edwin would have at the plate over Aurilia, but then again I wouldn't have much problem giving Aurilia some spot starts at first base and second base, with Freel also filling in at second base and in the outfield.

But if people want Rich Aurilia starting at third base over Edwin Encarnacion because of three runs, then so be it. Just let it be known that it's decisions such as these that cost the team value in runs, and ultimately, cost the team wins.

Some people just dont seem to grasp the concept that an error is only 1/10th of the actual ability of a fielder. It boggles my mind at times the value people place on someone errors.

reds44
07-31-2006, 07:04 PM
I don't know about the last time but he made three errors in a 4-1 loss to the Cubs in early April. Here's the highlights:



He has been horrible at 3B, especially throwing the ball. He's hurt us many times
Edwin hasn't made an error in almost a month now.

The balls he gets to and the one's Rich doesn't get to probably offsets Edwin's errors.

CTA513
07-31-2006, 07:05 PM
Encarnacion probably needs to learn every position if he wants some playing time.

:eek:

BuckeyeRedleg
07-31-2006, 07:05 PM
At the start and the way he asked the question you could tell that even Lance, in full brown nosing mode, was having a tough time digesting Clayton as the SS. However, by the end he was chugging the Kool-Aid with willful abandon.

It was like in Marty performed the Jedi mind trick on him.

flyer85
07-31-2006, 07:06 PM
Encarnacion probably needs to learn every position if he wants some playing time.

:eek:Only one, he is a first baseman, it was spoken from on high.

Marc D
07-31-2006, 07:06 PM
It was like in Marty performed the Jedi mind trick on him.

Only works on the weak min....never mind.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-31-2006, 07:07 PM
Encarnacion probably needs to learn every position if he wants some playing time.

:eek:

Marty said his future should probably be at 1B.

flyer85
07-31-2006, 07:07 PM
It was like in Marty performed the Jedi mind trick on him."it only works on the weak minded"

reds44
07-31-2006, 07:08 PM
Marty said his future should probably be at 1B.
He also said in May that we need to trade Adam Dunn.

HA!

CTA513
07-31-2006, 07:08 PM
Marty said his future should probably be at 1B.

Hes not going to learn anything sitting on the bench.
Might as well send him to the minors were he can play every day.

:devil:

Sea Ray
07-31-2006, 07:09 PM
He gets paid less to play corner outfield? I'm all for that.

If you mean high paid players can do whatever they want then I ask whats he going to do if you move him to RF, pull an operation shutdown?

My point is he's a square peg in a round hole no matter where you put him. They'd move him if not for that contract.

I don't think this organization has the guts to move him to RF midseason. You bet he'd pout and take the focus of this team away from the pennant race.

flyer85
07-31-2006, 07:09 PM
Hes not going to learn anything sitting on the bench.
Might as well send him to the minors were he can play every day.

:devil:make sure he takes Denorfia with him

CTA513
07-31-2006, 07:15 PM
make sure he takes Denorfia with him

Wasnt he sent down or left in AAA because they didnt want to bring him up if he couldnt play everyday?
I wonder what they think hes doing now.

:ughmamoru

dsmith421
07-31-2006, 07:15 PM
He has been horrible at 3B, especially throwing the ball. He's hurt us many times

There is not a single young talented infielder that doesn't make a lot of mistakes early on. Smart organizations see it as part of the learning process and preach patience. Dumb, veteran-obsessed franchises bench them. Good thing Jerry Narron didn't coach the 1974 Phillies.

At this stage I feel like Edwin's best shot at achieving his potential is getting traded to a team that will appreciate what he brings to the table, instead of constantly crapping on his head about his shortcomings (and then doing NOTHING to help turn those things around).

Marc D
07-31-2006, 07:17 PM
My point is he's a square peg in a round hole no matter where you put him. They'd move him if not for that contract.

I don't think this organization has the guts to move him to RF midseason. You bet he'd pout and take the focus of this team away from the pennant race.

Agree 100% on all that. But it further illustrates the gap between how much the brains of this team talk defense and how much they walk it.

We have 2 guys playing RF that are better CF than Griffey, a guy playing 2B thats our best SS, an absolute black hole at SS, a guy at 3B who plays a passable 2B and one of our best 8 players riding the pine nearly every night because the brass lacks the brains or conviction to do anything about any of it.

KronoRed
07-31-2006, 07:58 PM
Some people just dont seem to grasp the concept that an error is only 1/10th of the actual ability of a fielder. It boggles my mind at times the value people place on someone errors.
Agreed.

I guess if EE "hustled" it would be ok:rolleyes:

deltachi8
07-31-2006, 08:47 PM
Marty said his future should probably be at 1B.

What a shame that would be. EE has gold glove written all over him at 3b some day.

deltachi8
07-31-2006, 08:48 PM
Good thing Jerry Narron didn't coach the 1974 Phillies.



You, sir are right on with that.

guttle11
07-31-2006, 08:53 PM
this year is the year when you can be abysmal and still make the playoffs. That is what the Reds are counting on. Other than the Dodgers none of the competition did anything to make themselves better.


So is Bray better than Hammond? Is Cormier better than Mercker? Is Guardado a better closer than Coffey?

The Reds made their pitching better. They got better.

alloverjr
07-31-2006, 09:00 PM
Agree 100% on all that. But it further illustrates the gap between how much the brains of this team talk defense and how much they walk it.

We have 2 guys playing RF that are better CF than Griffey, a guy playing 2B thats our best SS, an absolute black hole at SS, a guy at 3B who plays a passable 2B and one of our best 8 players riding the pine nearly every night because the brass lacks the brains or conviction to do anything about any of it.

It's stunning beliefs like these shared by Wayne/Jerry/Marty that make me not care if they make the playoffs. In fact, I think I'd feel better if all of this blew up in their face and they lost out by a game due to an error by Clayton. I would actually relish that more. Maybe they would learn from their insanity and do better come next year.

redsrule2500
07-31-2006, 09:06 PM
You guys aren't always right you know.

I agree with Marty more than most of you on the boards, but I guess that makes me wrong?

CTA513
07-31-2006, 09:19 PM
You guys aren't always right you know.

I agree with Marty more than most of you on the boards, but I guess that makes me wrong?

:thumbup:

flyer85
07-31-2006, 09:33 PM
You guys aren't always right you know.

I agree with Marty more than most of you on the boards, but I guess that makes me wrong?"In God we trust, all others must have data"

guttle11
07-31-2006, 09:37 PM
"In God we trust, all others must have data"

I've really had enough of this condesending attitude from some people.

Prove to me that Clayton being out of the lineup would lead to more wins for the Reds.Where your data for that?

Oh wait, there isn't any. Stop posing opinion as fact.

pahster
07-31-2006, 09:42 PM
Clayton
Avg/OBP/Slg - .268/.318/.342

Owch.

Just for giggles...

Encarnacion
Avg/OBP/Slg - .286/.378/.488

flyer85
07-31-2006, 09:44 PM
Prove to me that Clayton being out of the lineup would lead to more wins for the Reds.Where your data for that? Stats courtesy of Baseball Prospectus.

FRAA -6
BRAA -10

Anything else?

Ignorance is not an argument.

guttle11
07-31-2006, 09:46 PM
Clayton
Avg/OBP/Slg - .268/.318/.342

Owch.

Just for giggles...

Encarnacion
Avg/OBP/Slg - .286/.378/.488

That's all well and good, but it doesn't show how many more games the Reds would win if Edwin played over Clayton. You can't find that.

I would love to see Edwin play everyday, but I'd love for the Reds to make the playoffs even more. As long as the team keeps winning with what they've been sending out there everyday, I have no problem with it. I welcome Clayton playing everyday if the Reds are winning, and so should every Reds fan. I just don't understand this Anti-Narron stuff. The team is in the playoffs as of now.

Until I see any reason to not do so, in Jerry I trust.

guttle11
07-31-2006, 09:47 PM
Stats courtesy of Baseball Prospectus.

FRAA -6
BRAA -10

Anything else?

Ignorance is not an argument.

To be honest, I don't even know what that stat is.

pahster
07-31-2006, 09:51 PM
That's all well and good, but it doesn't show how many more games the Reds would win if Edwin played over Clayton. You can't find that.

I would love to see Edwin play everyday, but I'd love for the Reds to make the playoffs even more. As long as the team keeps winning with what they've been sending out there everyday, I have no problem with it. I welcome Clayton playing everyday if the Reds are winning, and so should every Reds fan. I just don't understand this Anti-Narron stuff. The team is in the playoffs as of now.

Until I see any reason to not do so, in Jerry I trust.

I think its safe to infer that by removing Clayton's anemic offense and suspect defense and replacing it with Encarnacion's, the Reds will give themselves a better chance to win every day. Phillips would have to move over to SS, and I don't see that as a problem since he's played the position his whole life.

flyer85
07-31-2006, 09:52 PM
EE has a WARP3 of +2.5
RA has a WARP3 of +3.5
RC has a WARP3 of +0.2

Wins Above Replacement

flyer85
07-31-2006, 09:52 PM
To be honest, I don't even know what that stat is.My point exactly

Lots of statistical work has been done to break down performance (offensive and defensive) into runs and wins above average/replacement level players

guttle11
07-31-2006, 09:58 PM
My point exactly

Lots of statistical work has been done to break down performance (offensive and defensive) into runs and wins above average/replacement level players


That's my point exactly.

Lots of statistical work has been done to show that over the course of so many games, one player COULD provide this many wins more than another. COULD.

I'm saying go off of the only fact that is completely concrete and indisputable, team wins/losses. The Reds are winning more than they lose, and often enough to be in prime playoff position. I can't fathom changing that because of a COULD.

flyer85
07-31-2006, 10:03 PM
That's my point exactly.

Lots of statistical work has been done to show that over the course of so many games, one player COULD provide this many wins more than another. COULD.
this isn't could, this is what has happened to this point of the season. Putting EE at 3rd, moving Aurulia to 2nd and Phillips to SS would be worth 1-2 wins over the remainder of the season given players producing at the same that they have to this point(which doesn't take into account the defensive improvement of EE since June 1).

Where's your evidence that playing Clayton everyday over the remainder will benefit the Reds? Or is it a subjective feeling unsupported by any data or in this case, in direct conflict with objective data related to performance to this point in the season.

flyer85
07-31-2006, 10:05 PM
I'm saying go off of the only fact that is completely concrete and indisputable, team wins/losses. and yet you have no idea how the individual performance of Clayton (or any Reds player) directly affects the won/loss total. When someone presents you with such data you dismiss it out of hand. Sounds like an open mind to me.

guttle11
07-31-2006, 10:08 PM
Where's your evidence that playing Clayton everyday over the remainder will benefit the Reds? Or is it a subjective feeling unsupported by any data or in this case, in direct conflict with objective data related to performance to this point in the season.

Oh goodness, here we go.

1.) I never said Clayton would benefit the Reds more than anyone else, or at all. All I've said is that you don't fix what isn't broken.

2.) There is only one objective stat in baseball, and that is team wins and losses.

Could it be that you are using this supposed "objective" data to show why your guy should play everyday, while almost completely ignoring the only true fact, the W/L record of the team?

guttle11
07-31-2006, 10:11 PM
and yet you have no idea how the individual performance of Clayton (or any Reds player) directly affects the won/loss total. When someone presents you with such data you dismiss it out of hand. Sounds like an open mind to me.


I'm not using any data at all, and I don't need it for my point. My point isn't that Clayton is better or that Edwin isn't good. My point is that you don't fix what isn't broken. I'm saying you can't prove with 100% certainty that one player would provide more wins than another player based on past performance. It simply can't be done, unless you can see into the future.

WMR
07-31-2006, 10:15 PM
Wow Marty spewing more misinformation and stupid opinions, what a surprise.

Please retire Marty. The golf courses need you.

pahster
07-31-2006, 10:16 PM
I'm not using any data at all, and I don't need it for my point. My point isn't that Clayton is better or that Edwin isn't good. My point is that you don't fix what isn't broken. I'm saying you can't prove with 100% certainty that one player would provide more wins than another player based on past performance. It simply can't be done, unless you can see into the future.

That's why probability must be used. It is highly probable that Clayton will, over the course of the rest of the season, continue to do what he's done for his entire career; be a black hole offensively. It is also very probable that he will continue playing a poor defensive SS as he has during the later (and current) portion of his career.

The shortstop position is broken. Despite this, the Reds are winning. It can be easily fixed.

flyer85
07-31-2006, 10:17 PM
2.) There is only one objective stat in baseball, and that is team wins and losses.
Your argument is a complete Red Herring.

Baseball is a game of individual performance and that performance can easily be quantified and the amount of contribution of each individual in relation to the winning and losing can be discovered. If that individual contribution in relation to winning and losing could not be known then there is no need to "improve" the team because the end result of adding certain players and subtracting others could not be known. Each transaction would simply be a roll of the dice whose outcome would be unpredictable.

flyer85
07-31-2006, 10:22 PM
I'm not using any data at all, and I don't need it for my point. which makes it entirely subjective and unable to be proved or disproved. It is simply how you "feel".

flyer85
07-31-2006, 10:34 PM
Marty's argument would have carried some weight with me if he had said.

"Clayton has been outstanding since he was acquired, he has been solid and that is shown by his lack of errors, in addition his FLD% is much higher than the what the departed Lopez gave the Reds".

Of course Marty didn't make an appeal to the data because it not only doesn't support the Clayton Upgrade Theory, instead it is direct conflict with the theory. So then all we are left with is his appeal to authority. That just isn't good enough for me. If it is good enough for someone else then good for them.

OldXOhio
07-31-2006, 10:39 PM
this year is the year when you can be abysmal and still make the playoffs. That is what the Reds are counting on. Other than the Dodgers none of the competition did anything to make themselves better.

It seems the focus is solely on the WC, yet the team is only 3.5 back in the Central to a very average Cardinals team. That thought really bothers me.

flyer85
07-31-2006, 10:44 PM
It seems the focus is solely on the WC, yet the team is only 3.5 back in the Central to a very average Cardinals team. That thought really bothers me.
you win as many as you can and see where you end up.

edabbs44
07-31-2006, 10:50 PM
make sure he takes Denorfia with him
Remember this quote, after the Bowden Bludgeoning?


The bottom line is this: Reds general manager Wayne Krivsky has confidence in Denorfia's ability to play at this level.

"It's his time," Krivsky said. "We think he's ready."

THEN WHY DOESN'T HE PLAY??????

TeamBoone
07-31-2006, 11:34 PM
That's all well and good, but it doesn't show how many more games the Reds would win if Edwin played over Clayton. You can't find that.

I would love to see Edwin play everyday, but I'd love for the Reds to make the playoffs even more. As long as the team keeps winning with what they've been sending out there everyday, I have no problem with it. I welcome Clayton playing everyday if the Reds are winning, and so should every Reds fan. I just don't understand this Anti-Narron stuff. The team is in the playoffs as of now.

Until I see any reason to not do so, in Jerry I trust.

And therein lies the problem.... the Reds lost the last series they played and they might not have if the best eight players were fielded in those two games they lost.

Also, in another post you stated "you don't fix what isn't broken". That couldn't be more wrong. You must maintain what isn't broken and in addition, Krivsky apparently thinks he must try to make it better... now, if only JN would do his part.

reds44
07-31-2006, 11:38 PM
And therein lies the problem.... the Reds lost the last series they played and they might not have if the best eight players were fielded in those two games they lost.
They most likely would have been swept if it wasn't for Edwin's defensive play in game 1.

WMR
07-31-2006, 11:41 PM
Free Edwin.

deltachi8
07-31-2006, 11:44 PM
"If it ain't broke don't fix it" is one of my least favorite phrases or philosphies anywhere. I'd rather look to always make it better and just "not broke."

WMR
07-31-2006, 11:48 PM
Hmmm... "not broke" as in Bob Castellini?

SteelSD
08-01-2006, 01:30 AM
"If it ain't broke don't fix it" is one of my least favorite phrases or philosphies anywhere. I'd rather look to always make it better and just "not broke."

And there's other broken stuff regardless of what the Reds have done with the pen. The Reds defense is still broken- particularly the left side of the infield and in Center. They've tried very hard to lower the Error rate, but their Defensive Efficiency (.689) hasn't really moved since the removal of Lopez and Encarnacion as often-used parts. For the season, the Reds have allowed 50 baserunners due to Errors. That's tied for the highest ROE (Reached on Error) total in baseball with Milwaukee and the Los Angeles Angels of Wherever. The Yankees come in 4th with 49 ROE.

What interests me is that the Yankees and Angels have posted .707 and .705 Defensive Efficiency ratings respectively while allowing a bunch of ROE this season. So let's break that down per AB against while removing both K and HR allowed from the mix (as neither are Error opportunity). Here's the data:

CIN: 57.04 AB per ROE (.689 DER)
NYY: 56.67 AB per ROE (.707 DER)
MIL: 54.64 AB per ROE (.684 DER)
ANA: 54.28 AB per ROE (.705 DER)

MLB-average AB/ROE using this method is 71.70 AB per ROE.

If "Hmn..." had degrees, I'd be in the excessive range right now because what this information is telling me is that the Reds have payed nothing but lip service to defense. Of the four most Error-prone teams in baseball, Cincinnati actually allows fewest Error-driven baserunners per BIP event. And yes, Milwaukee's defense stinks. But both the Yankees and Angels are examples of teams who've trumped Errors with range so far this season. Amazing how that tends to work if a team understands the concept.

Even more interesting is looking at the teams who are above 90.0 AB per ROE:

SDN: 103.37 AB per ROE (.713 DER)
OAK: 96.07 AB per ROE (.704 DER)
BOS: 114.71 AB per ROE (.696 DER)
MIN: 96.07 AB per ROE (.678 DER)

Detroit (.721 DER) is the best team in baseball at turning BIP into Outs. That being said, San Diego and Oakland are the least volatile defensive teams in baseball. Yeah. Oakland. Boston isn't far behind. Yeah. Boston. Minnesota? Those DER numbers are probably skewed by a team that started out with Tony Batista, Juan Castro, and Luis Castillo manning the Infield left-to-right. But considering that they're allegedly a "pitching-and-defense" team, it's also alarming that they started out the season with a couple of defensive puds on the left side of that infield while trying to man a rotation that relied heavily on low-K rate pitchers like Radke and Carlos Silva. But it appears that Terry Ryan may have learned. Krivsky hasn't.









And the pen, if not technically "broken", is still a tenuous proposition of volatile guys.

KronoRed
08-01-2006, 02:59 AM
Free Edwin.
Oh he's free...free to start once a week and PH now and then. ;)

Jpup
08-01-2006, 03:06 AM
Oh he's free...free to start once a week and PH now and then. ;)

he's not allowed to play.

Ltlabner
08-01-2006, 07:04 AM
this isn't could, this is what has happened to this point of the season. Putting EE at 3rd, moving Aurulia to 2nd and Phillips to SS would be worth 1-2 wins over the remainder of the season given players producing at the same that they have to this point(which doesn't take into account the defensive improvement of EE since June 1).

It may be that the FO is thinking that over time the above switch would be great, but in the short run, the remaining games of the season that the "learning" curve to switching might cost them a game or two, that could be critical in the strech run and negate the 1-2 wins of such a switch.

I know BP is a trained SS and RA has played 2B before, but there is still a certian discomfort of playing a new position. Getting used to timeing again, getting used to the DP combinations, etc.

I'm not saying that this is the right way to think about the situation, nor am I saying I agree with it. I'm just throwing out that maybe this is the fear if such a switch is made.

WebScorpion
08-01-2006, 09:23 AM
Yea, that Dan Driessen kid can sure hit...we need to find a place to play him on the field. Oh, I mean Ed Encarnacion. :ughmamoru

TRF
08-01-2006, 09:39 AM
One problem I see is one of the greatest SS of the last generation would be moved to LF by Marty after his second season. Barry Larkin had 29 errors in his first full season as the Reds SS.

EE has tremendous range. you don't waste that at 1B.

Royce Clayton is awful. He's awful offensively, he's awful defensively, and his age indicates he's only going to get worse.

Phillips at SS, EE at 3B and Freel/Aurillia at 2B actually does address the defense to a degree, and instantly improves the offense.

Here is another comparison. David Wright's first full season as the Mets 3B had him post a .911 OPS. This year should have been Edwin's first full season. His OPS is .867 and defensively his ZR and RF are greater. Yes he has some throwing issues. but inconsistent PT will not help those.

But Marty says if EE can go out there and prove to him he won't hurt the club defensively, then he can play. How the hell can he prove it from the bench? Offensively, EE is just about the third best player on the reds... Outstanding OBP, gap power, speed on the basepaths.

by all means sit him Jerry.

Hoosier Red
08-01-2006, 11:25 AM
To be fair to Mike Schmidt comparisons.
In 162 games Schmidt had 26 errors. At his rate over 162 games EE would come out to about 41 errors.
Also the Phillies were 80-82 on the year and finished 8 games back so perhaps there was a little more room to let Schmidt grow into the role.

One thing I've been wondering, does the fact that Edwin's errors are throwing errors factor into the equation at all.
Aurillia is a smart enough player that balls getting by him will generally only be base hits. (His lack of range forces him to guard the lines more than the middle of the field.)

Edwin's erroneous throws cost the team two bases. Does that matter?

Sea Ray
08-01-2006, 12:03 PM
Agree 100% on all that. But it further illustrates the gap between how much the brains of this team talk defense and how much they walk it.

We have 2 guys playing RF that are better CF than Griffey, a guy playing 2B thats our best SS, an absolute black hole at SS, a guy at 3B who plays a passable 2B and one of our best 8 players riding the pine nearly every night because the brass lacks the brains or conviction to do anything about any of it.

This isn't fantasy baseball here. You can't just juggle positions in August and have everything go smoothly. Griffey has very little if any experience in a corner OF position. Phillips hasn't been a SS for years. EE has very little experience anywhere but 3B. Juggling these guys is not going to help the defense this year.

pahster
08-01-2006, 12:50 PM
This isn't fantasy baseball here. You can't just juggle positions in August and have everything go smoothly. Griffey has very little if any experience in a corner OF position. Phillips hasn't been a SS for years. EE has very little experience anywhere but 3B. Juggling these guys is not going to help the defense this year.

Brandon Phillips played 112 games at SS in the minors last year.

flyer85
08-01-2006, 12:52 PM
Brandon Phillips played 112 games at SS in the minors last year.and throughout the majority of his minor league career. Switching to SS would be no problem at all. It doesn't mean the Reds feel he could play SS to their satisfaction by being able to make "the routine play".

REDREAD
08-01-2006, 01:06 PM
Or the other night when he said Maj can't seem to handle being traded to a contender. "Reminds me of the kid Wayne Kirby in the 1970s"
.

Yeah, I'm not Maj's biggest fan by any means, but Marty was out of line to pile on Maj over the air like that. Maj isn't a dominate reliever, but he will be ok with time. Having Marty rip Maj over the air isn't going to help Maj relax and deal with the pressure any better.

And yes, it's different to rip Maj on a message board than it is to rip him over the air.

flyer85
08-01-2006, 01:11 PM
Yeah, I'm not Maj's biggest fan by any means, but Marty was out of line to pile on Maj over the air like that. Maj isn't a dominate reliever, but he will be ok with time. Having Marty rip Maj over the air isn't going to help Maj relax and deal with the pressure any better.

And yes, it's different to rip Maj on a message board than it is to rip him over the air.Majewski's problem is the same as lot of relief pitchers. He lacks dominant stuff which makes him highly dependent on his defense and a dose of luck. His run of bad luck happened to coincide with his arriving in Cincy. He is what he is, which is a very average relief pitcher who is going through a tough streak.

If they wanted a potentially dominant reliever then that's what they should have acquired one, neither Majewski, Bray, Loshe, Cormier or Guardado is that.

REDREAD
08-01-2006, 01:26 PM
Majewski's problem is the same as lot of relief pitchers. He lacks dominant stuff which makes him highly dependent on his defense and a dose of luck. His run of bad luck happened to coincide with his arriving in Cincy. He is what he is, which is a very average relief pitcher who is going through a tough streak.

If they wanted a potentially dominant reliever then that's what they should have acquired one, neither Majewski, Bray, Loshe, Cormier or Guardado is that.

I agree with your points. I think eventually Maj will be an ok reliever. Not the dominate setup man that he was hyped up to be, but worth having on the roster.

But it has nothing to do with Marty's theory that "he just can't handle the pressure of a pennant race".

Sea Ray
08-01-2006, 02:07 PM
and throughout the majority of his minor league career. Switching to SS would be no problem at all. It doesn't mean the Reds feel he could play SS to their satisfaction by being able to make "the routine play".

Apparently the Indians didn't feel he could play SS adequately.

I hope he can. Putting him at SS would solve a difficult position for the longterm, but I don't think now is the time (for reasons mentioned by others on this thread including myself), but I would like to take a long hard look at this in the off season and tell him to come to Sarasota prepared to play SS for this team.

KittyDuran
08-01-2006, 02:12 PM
Apparently the Indians didn't feel he could play SS adequately.

I hope he can. Putting him at SS would solve a difficult position for the longterm, but I don't think now is the time (for reasons mentioned by others on this thread including myself), but I would like to take a long hard look at this in the off season and tell him to come to Sarasota prepared to play SS for this team.I agree... right now BP has a lot of confidence and a new outlook playing for the Reds - not to say changing positions, even a position that he has played before will break that - but why chance it?:confused:

Matt700wlw
08-01-2006, 02:25 PM
In a nutshell...

Basically said EE has no business in there right now, because he can't be counted on. He is fine with Rich A. and Clayton playing everyday at 3B and SS and thinks it's funny that any fans would complain about it. Rich A. and Clayton have the experience and we can count on them down the stretch because they are "ready".

Also ripped on Lopez, for falling asleep out at SS and we are way better off without him.

Anyone else hear him? wow.

I'm one of Marty's biggest supporters, and I stick up for him when people rip on him.

However, on this one, I disagree....EE's BAT needs to be in the lineup everyday, or as close to it as possible, and yes, his defense has improved.

Sea Ray
08-01-2006, 03:05 PM
I like Marty but he is way too quick to criticize these players. I'll bet he's despised in that clubhouse. One of his whipping boys of the early 90s was Paul O'Neill who turned out to have an outstanding career.

Yesterday while talking with Andy Furman on WLW he said "even I can hit Cory Lidle." Does that sound like it would come out of the mouth of any other broadcaster in the Hall of Fame? Can you imagine Vin Scully or Milo Hamilton saying something like that? Show a little class Marty.

flyer85
08-01-2006, 03:09 PM
I like Marty but he is way too quick to criticize these players. I'll bet he's despised in that clubhouse. One of his whipping boys of the early 90s was Paul O'Neill who turned out to have an outstanding career. He always used to refer to Paul as "Big" which was the derisive nickname given him by Sweet Lou.

reds44
08-01-2006, 03:18 PM
Apparently the Indians didn't feel he could play SS adequately.

Why do you say that? The reason he was moved to 2B is because they have Peralta playing SS.

Sea Ray
08-01-2006, 03:24 PM
Why do you say that? The reason he was moved to 2B is because they have Peralta playing SS.

Phillips was more hyped coming out of the minors than Peralta. I think it was a dissapointment to Indians brass that he couldn't beat out Peralta.

reds44
08-01-2006, 03:24 PM
Phillips was more hyped coming out of the minors than Peralta. I think it was a dissapointment to Indians brass that he couldn't beat out Peralta.
It was because of his bat not his glove.

dabvu2498
08-01-2006, 03:26 PM
It was because of his bat not his glove.
And yet, when he did play for the Indians, he played 2nd.

Matt700wlw
08-01-2006, 03:27 PM
You know what's surprising....Brandon Phillips has only played 1 major league games at SS....



....it surprised me as well

http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/phillbr01.shtml

reds44
08-01-2006, 03:29 PM
http://cleveland.indians.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/stats/individual_stats_player.jsp?c_id=cle&playerID=425509
http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/stats/mlb_individual_stats_player.jsp?playerID=408252&statType=1

When Phillips had his shot in 2003 the Indians had some guy named Vizquel playing SS. That is why he was playing 2B, After that they gave up on him and Peralta was their SS.

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/stats/player_locator_results.jsp?c_id=mlb&playerLocator=Vizquel

Yeah Omar was a pretty good defensive SS as you know.

Sea Ray
08-01-2006, 03:31 PM
It was because of his bat not his glove.

You need more bat to justify a starting spot as a 2B than a SS. I'd like to ask Tribe fans what really went on with this guy. Sure he didn't hit but why the position change?

reds44
08-01-2006, 03:33 PM
You need more bat to justify a starting spot as a 2B than a SS. I'd like to ask Tribe fans what really went on with this guy. Sure he didn't hit but why the position change?
He did a position change because of Omar Vizquel.

When Phillips had his shot Vizquel was playing SS for them. He didn't hit and really never got another shot again.

westofyou
08-01-2006, 03:36 PM
You need more bat to justify a starting spot as a 2B than a SS. I'd like to ask Tribe fans what really went on with this guy. Sure he didn't hit but why the position change?

They wanted him to be the 2nd baseman and Peralta the SS, they also might have thought he could handle the switch better then Peralta. Once Omar left they played him at SS as "insurance" against Peralta's possible failure... which didn't occur. He played 106 games at SS last year in Buffalo.

ochre
08-01-2006, 04:00 PM
Fans don't like it but defense wins championships. The Boston Red Sox "took off" when they traded Nomar and put a better defense SS in there. Krivsky and Marty come from that same school...
took off? eh?

2005: Reg. Season | Playoffs | LDS
2004: Reg. Season | Playoffs | LDS | LCS | WS
2003: Reg. Season | Playoffs | LDS | LCS

So with Nomar in '03 they made it to the LCS, trading Nomar in '04 allowed them to take off in that miracle LCS that year? Ok. What happened in '05 then? They couldn't even make it out of the LDS. I'm all for Defense. Griffey in CF has caused the Reds tangible runs this year. As there were adequate options within the system, fix that before looking at more drastic moves and I could buy that it's a 'focusing on the defense' issue.

Marty has issues with young players that don't fit what he thinks they ought to be. Hell, it might just be with young players in general. If they want to put more butts in the seats, they need to be marketing and promoting the exciting young players they have, not tearing them down ad nauseum. Who wants to go see players that one has been told are crappy?

KronoRed
08-01-2006, 04:04 PM
I agree... right now BP has a lot of confidence and a new outlook playing for the Reds - not to say changing positions, even a position that he has played before will break that - but why chance it?:confused:
Aww..adorable avatar Kitty :D

But I mist disagree, I think he could slide over to SS and he'd be fine, it's not like putting him in the OF where he'd never been.

Heath
08-01-2006, 04:10 PM
Marty has issues with young players that don't fit what he thinks they ought to be. Hell, it might just be with young players in general. If they want to put more butts in the seats, they need to be marketing and promoting the exciting young players they have, not tearing them down ad nauseum. Who wants to go see players that one has been told are crappy?

WLW reported that while the Reds have a winning record, the Brewers outdraw them.


Reds Fans Staying Home

The team's success doesn't seem to be luring fans to GABP.
By 700WLW News
Tuesday, August 1, 2006

The Reds are on track for their first winning season since 2000, but despite their success, the team isn't packing the stands at Great American Ballpark. The ballpark holds just over 42,000 people and on average, more than 26,000 are showing up for each game. According to the Enquirer, that's an increase of about 1,500 fans from this time last year when the Reds were 47 and 58. It's unclear why people are staying at home. Some fans note the recent heat wave and the price of going to a game.

BRM
08-01-2006, 04:11 PM
WLW reported that while the Reds have a winning record, the Brewers outdraw them.

The Brewers announcing crew does a pretty good job of building up their young talent. Not saying that's why they outdraw the Reds, just something I've noticed.

dabvu2498
08-01-2006, 04:12 PM
took off? eh?

2005: Reg. Season | Playoffs | LDS
2004: Reg. Season | Playoffs | LDS | LCS | WS
2003: Reg. Season | Playoffs | LDS | LCS

So with Nomar in '03 they made it to the LCS, trading Nomar in '04 allowed them to take off in that miracle LCS that year? Ok. What happened in '05 then? They couldn't even make it out of the LDS.
To be fair, the argument he's trying to make applies to the 04 Red Sox pretty strongly, but only the 04 Red Sox. At the trade deadline (7/31/04) the Sox were 56-46 allowing 4.6 RPG, after the trade deadline they were 42-18, allowing 4.3 RPG. (It also helped that they increased their offense from 5.6 RPG to 6.2 RPG.) Something rattled their cages at the trade deadline, but I'm not sure it was defense.

westofyou
08-01-2006, 04:20 PM
It's unclear why people are staying at home.

No it isn't the Reds have burned the fanbase to the ground, it took 20 years of small minded managment and corporate vision that makes new Coke look like a good idea, that coupled with the fans need to measure everything against the past (with the 50's Reds it was the 39-40 reds, with the BRM it was the 50's team, with the 90's team it was the BRM, with this team it's Lou and the Nasty Boys) creates hurdles that are hard for a franchise with stubby legs to clear.

The Reds fans should all note that the baseball town called Cincinnati is the only franchise in MLB that claims its top attendance before the Blue Jays and Mariners ever took the field, and that's just plain sad.

Spitball
08-01-2006, 04:26 PM
took off? eh?

2005: Reg. Season | Playoffs | LDS
2004: Reg. Season | Playoffs | LDS | LCS | WS
2003: Reg. Season | Playoffs | LDS | LCS

So with Nomar in '03 they made it to the LCS, trading Nomar in '04 allowed them to take off in that miracle LCS that year? Ok. What happened in '05 then? They couldn't even make it out of the LDS.

See Rentaria-30 errors.

Sea Ray
08-01-2006, 04:38 PM
See Rentaria-30 errors.

You answered your own question. Defense is huge at SS and C. You'll sacrifice offense for defense if need be. Of course there are limits and maybe we differ on how much poor hitting we'll stomach for defense. If I'm a Houston Astro fan I'm tired of seeing Brad Ausmus in the everyday lineup.

I do think we overpaid in the Nats deal. I would have kept Kearns and if they insisted on keeping Maj so be it but I did grow tired of seeing Lopez struggle at SS with no improvement.

Bottomline: I can see why Kriv made the deal and I hope it works out well for our Reds, but I understand where you're coming from.

Sea Ray
08-01-2006, 04:41 PM
If they want to put more butts in the seats, they need to be marketing and promoting the exciting young players they have, not tearing them down ad nauseum. Who wants to go see players that one has been told are crappy?

That's an excellent point that I hadn't thought of. :clap: Good one

ochre
08-01-2006, 04:44 PM
My point in regards to the red sox breaking out is/was that they were at similar levels in wins and post season performance in the surrounding years. The difference in '04 was that they put the Yankees away after digging a massive hole in that LCS.

vaticanplum
08-01-2006, 04:54 PM
The point about hyping young players is very true. I cannot for the life of me figure out why they don't push them more. Not only would it help the team from a marketing standpoint, it plays into something that the relatively conservative city prides itself on -- homegrown talent, not spending outrageous amounts of money etc.

Milwaukee also doesn't have a football team that just came off a great season, as an example...my own family has switched entirely from baseball to football just in my lifetime. It breaks my heart. I have no one to talk to in Cincinnati about baseball anymore. Was this a result of poor management and losing seasons? Yes, but I don't think it's only that. The whole midwest has veered largely this way as far as I can tell, with baseball staying popular on the coasts. I have no idea why this is. I can posit theories, but they're just that.

dabvu2498
08-01-2006, 05:00 PM
My point in regards to the red sox breaking out is/was that they were at similar levels in wins and post season performance in the surrounding years. The difference in '04 was that they put the Yankees away after digging a massive hole in that LCS.
But in 04, when the Garciaparra trade occurred, they were struggling. If they had continued at the pace they were on, it was unlikely that they would have even made the playoffs.

ochre
08-01-2006, 05:11 PM
teams struggle all the time. It may have been that trade that righted the ship for them that year. Judging by the surrounding years, I'd say it's not conclusive.

Spitball
08-01-2006, 05:16 PM
You answered your own question. Defense is huge at SS and C. You'll sacrifice offense for defense if need be. Of course there are limits and maybe we differ on how much poor hitting we'll stomach for defense. If I'm a Houston Astro fan I'm tired of seeing Brad Ausmus in the everyday lineup.

I do think we overpaid in the Nats deal. I would have kept Kearns and if they insisted on keeping Maj so be it but I did grow tired of seeing Lopez struggle at SS with no improvement.

Bottomline: I can see why Kriv made the deal and I hope it works out well for our Reds, but I understand where you're coming from.

Huh?!? I answered my own question that I didn't even ask??? Whoa, I'm good.:thumbup:

Actually, I was answering Ochre's question.

ochre
08-01-2006, 05:16 PM
I'm not downplaying defense. I know it's important. I'd have liked to have seen the Reds address defense before any of these trades occured. They didn't; they haven't. That's why I buckle a bit at team officials crying out that things are being done for defensive reasons.

Cyclone792
08-01-2006, 05:16 PM
But in 04, when the Garciaparra trade occurred, they were struggling. If they had continued at the pace they were on, it was unlikely that they would have even made the playoffs.

I'm pretty sure that's a false assumption.

The combined batting lines of Cabrera and Mientkiewicz was only .269/.309/.418 for Boston. Surely that didn't help. Defensively, their DER and BABIP had only minimal improvements after the trade.

Boston busted out a 25-game stretch where they went 22-3 from mid August to mid September, and during that stretch they outscored their opponents 167-89. They were three games under their pythag heading into that streak, but during the streak they were three games over their pythag. Simple regression right there.

To put it simply, what happened was a severe statistical course correction over the ebb and flow of a baseball season. The Red Sox put together an 11-17 stretch early in the season, but the late season 25-game stretch evened out their earlier bad stretch.

ochre
08-01-2006, 05:16 PM
Huh?!? I answered my own question that I didn't even ask??? Whoa, I'm good.:thumbup:

Actually, I was answering Ochre's question.
and thank you for that :)

ochre
08-01-2006, 05:17 PM
I'm pretty sure that's a false assumption.

The combined batting lines of Cabrera and Mientkiewicz was only .269/.309/.418 for Boston. Surely that didn't help. Defensively, their DER and BABIP had only minimal improvements after the trade.

Boston busted out a 25-game stretch where they went 22-3 from mid August to mid September, and during that stretch they outscored their opponents 167-89. They were three games under their pythag heading into that streak, but during the streak they were three games over their pythag. Simple regression right there.

To put it simply, what happened was a severe statistical course correction over the ebb and flow of a baseball season. The Red Sox put together an 11-17 stretch early in the season, but the late season 25-game stretch evened out their earlier bad stretch.
which is the same thing I was saying, but he used fancy words and numbers :)

westofyou
08-01-2006, 05:29 PM
Boston busted out a 25-game stretch where they went 22-3 from mid August to mid September, and during that stretch they outscored their opponents 167-89. Their August team ERA was the only month below 4, and was almost a full run better then July, mostly because of less walks, less hits and less unearned runs.

The other side of the coin will tell you that the Boston pitchers challenged more batters in that month, and thus walked less and generated more good plays behind them to create outs.

Maybe they did? Maybe they didn't?

Maybe a bit of stat normalization and increased confidence in the defense by the pitchers?

Or maybe it was the 20 games that month against Detroit, Tampa and Toronto.. all sub .500 teams?

Cyclone792
08-01-2006, 05:54 PM
Their August team ERA was the only month below 4, and was almost a full run better then July, mostly because of less walks, less hits and less unearned runs.

The other side of the coin will tell you that the Boston pitchers challenged more batters in that month, and thus walked less and generated more good plays behind them to create outs.

Maybe they did? Maybe they didn't?

Maybe a bit of stat normalization and increased confidence in the defense by the pitchers?

Or maybe it was the 20 games that month against Detroit, Tampa and Toronto.. all sub .500 teams?

In the first 13 games, the Red Sox played Toronto six times, Chicago three times and Detroit four times, two weak team and one .500 team. In those 13 games, they went 12-1. Over the final 12 games, the Red Sox faced every AL West team and went 10-2. The 25-game stretch started off easy, but ended difficult.

Defensively, their BABIP allowed was 20 points better during the streak. But from mid Sept. to the end of the season, their BABIP was right back to their season average.

Interestingly, their team OPS was 36 points higher after the Nomar trade than before, but none of the increase can be attributed to the players acquired.

Walks are also crucial. So crucial that in Games 1-3 of the ALCS, the Yanks dominated in walks drawn/allowed. In Games 4-7, Boston won that category.

IslandRed
08-01-2006, 07:58 PM
The other side of the coin will tell you that the Boston pitchers challenged more batters in that month, and thus walked less and generated more good plays behind them to create outs.

Maybe they did? Maybe they didn't?

These discussions always remind me of the Bull Durham scene, "if you believe, blah blah blah, then you are." Over the long run, I believe in regression to the mean and all that. But the game is played by real people whose attitudes and mindsets matter, and in the short term, a deal that doesn't really improve the team on paper can have positive results in the standings. Think of it as the placebo effect as applied to baseball.

dsmith421
08-02-2006, 01:13 AM
I agree with Island to a point: I think the Garciaparra deal was a "boot up the rear" for the Red Sox, shook some guys out of their complacency, and excited the ballclub.

They were a damn good team before, though, and I don't think a lineup with that kind of firepower (Damon, Ortiz, Ramirez, Mueller, Nixon, Varitek, Bellhorn) could be kept down for long.