PDA

View Full Version : What is the logic in benching Bruce for 2 days



GIDP
07-10-2009, 04:52 PM
He struggles against lefties right? They sat him against Moyer who doesnt exactly dominate lefties, and then they are sitting him against a right hander in Neive tonight.

Just to bring him back to starting against Santana? What is the logic behind this one? Anyone have any ideas on why Dusty would do this?

ochoa30
07-10-2009, 05:02 PM
I would just leave him out till the break. He can't hit anyone right now.

mroby85
07-10-2009, 05:18 PM
I think the logic is he's terrible, and not the best option to play right now.

Edd Roush
07-10-2009, 05:27 PM
I think the logic is he's terrible, and not the best option to play right now.


What an absolutely un-informed post. Jay Bruce is a 22-year old who is having difficulty at the plate for the first time in his life. To call him "terrible" is to trash him for his first slump ever.

Then, to call him not the best option to play right now, is just as ridiculous. You would rather see Willy Freaking Taveras in the line-up then Bruce?!?!?!

You know that's his competition. Not Johnny Gomes, not Drew Stubbs, Not Chris Heisey, but Willy Freaking Taveras.

Your post is one that I can't wait to quote a couple years from now when Jay Bruce gets settled in the major leagues and starts dumping on major league pitching.

mroby85
07-10-2009, 05:32 PM
What an absolutely un-informed post. Jay Bruce is a 22-year old who is having difficulty at the plate for the first time in his life. To call him "terrible" is to trash him for his first slump ever.

Then, to call him not the best option to play right now, is just as ridiculous. You would rather see Willy Freaking Taveras in the line-up then Bruce?!?!?!

You know that's his competition. Not Johnny Gomes, not Drew Stubbs, Not Chris Heisey, but Willy Freaking Taveras.

Your post is one that I can't wait to quote a couple years from now when Jay Bruce gets settled in the major leagues and starts dumping on major league pitching.

At no point in my post did I say he won't ever be good. However, how long do you continue to let a guy thats hitting .205 and can't get runners in from 3rd with less than 2 outs run out there. I never mentioned Willy Taveras first of all. They have other outfielders such as Gomes, and Nix. I'm not saying they should bench him all the time, but I don't really see how you can criticize someone for doing so. Also this is more than a slump it's for the most part been the entire season, and he hasn't been that great since the first month or so that he came up.

GIDP
07-10-2009, 05:35 PM
I dont care about benching him for a couple days. My question is why on earth did Dusty pick to bench him against 2 guys he might not struggle against just to bring him back against Santana?

Seems like some awful managing to me. Then again we should expect it.

Rockermann
07-10-2009, 05:46 PM
Why have Bruce come back tomorrow? As Dusty puts it, “Because left-handers hit Santana better than right-handers.”

TC81190
07-10-2009, 06:00 PM
I'd agree with whoever said bench him until the break, give him a long break to clear his head.

Mutaman
07-10-2009, 06:01 PM
Over the last two years, lefthanders have hit about 30 points higher against Santana than righthanders. Recently, it has not been unusual for managers to start left handed batters against him. Call it the Warren Spahn effect. Bruce faced him 6 times last year and had two hits.

GIDP
07-10-2009, 06:09 PM
Why have Bruce come back tomorrow? As Dusty puts it, “Because left-handers hit Santana better than right-handers.”
Oh yea I forgot Dusty doesnt care about sample sizes.

GIDP
07-10-2009, 06:12 PM
Over the last two years, lefthanders have hit about 30 points higher against Santana than righthanders. Recently, it has not been unusual for managers to start left handed batters against him. Call it the Warren Spahn effect. Bruce faced him 6 times last year and had two hits.

The point is he is benching him against not so good pitchers just to bring him back against one of the best lefties in the game.

JayBruce
07-10-2009, 06:21 PM
Dude needs to be in Louisville until August 1st. He sucks right now, and if he isn't careful, he's going to be Adam Dunn with a better glove.

rolenmvp
07-10-2009, 06:28 PM
btw, while We are at it...

Ryan church who kills us almost everytime we play was traded to atlanta for frency.

CincyRed44
07-10-2009, 06:58 PM
I'm likely gonna get blasted for this but oh well. Jay Bruce can not hit anything but a fastball out over the plate if it has any type of wrinkle he will just swing and miss or hit weak pop ups and slow grounders. His plate discipline is horrid, swinging at every thing does not make a quality hitter. His problem lies in pitch recognition he's thinking that major league pitches are going to just toss fastballs over the plate is skewed. If I was facing Bruce he'd never see anything near the plate and if it did it would have some kind of wrinkle on it. For lack of better terminology he's a horrible hitter, RIGHT NOW.

I wasn't a proponent of sending him to Louisville for the longest time but I think a stint down on the farm could be just what the doctor ordered. He needs to regain confidence in his ability as a hitter using the entire field this would inter him to cutting down that humongous swing as well. As for the pitch recognition snafu well a shorter and quicker swing would allow him to have a better chance at hitting those off-speed offerings he so badly can't hit now. Yes, he needs to change his approach at the plate or he'll never live up to his lofty status prior to coming to Cincy. The major problem is he is unable to hit righties or lefties.

Watching Chase Utley hit over the last four games with his short, quick swing made me envious toward the Phillies wishing we had some of that on the Reds.

GIDP
07-10-2009, 06:59 PM
This isnt tells us how much Jay Bruce sucks thread.

Kingspoint
07-10-2009, 07:16 PM
"I'm letting him clear his head, much like Jimmy Rollins over here [with the Phillies] and Magglio Ordonez with the Tigers. I thought I'd give him today and [Friday] to clear himself and study," Baker said. "He'll study our guys, who's hitting and who's not and why. He'll study their guys like Chase Utley, Ryan Howard and different guys and see how they approach things and set up."

GIDP
07-10-2009, 07:26 PM
Baker just doesnt care

MJA
07-10-2009, 09:11 PM
I would just keep hitting him against Righties and when he is at home. It's pretty strange how his home average is similar to last years (2008: .287 vs 2009: .268) but then you see his away average absolutely plummet (2008: .221 vs 2009:.156).

The reason they need to keep hitting him against righties is because of how unnaturally low his batting average is. Right now Bruce is batting just as poorly against lefties as he did last year, but his batting average against righties has fallen 68 points from last year. It also looks like he is not being nearly as patient with righties as he is with lefties. He has 12 walks against lefties in 92 at-bats, compared to 18 walks against righties in 206 at-bats. Last year he had 1 walk per 12.54 at-bats against righties, this year it's only 11.44 at-bats. That may seem to be a relatively small difference, but look at his much he improved drawing walks from lefties. He had 1 walk per 12.45 at-bats in 2008 and has improved that number to 7.66 in 2009.

I think that if you put Bruce into situations where he statistically performs better–at home against righties–he should eventually start to hit better and gain more confidence to play against righties on the road.

I don't know Bruce's personality, but benching him could cause his confidence to tank and end up prolonging his slump.

bleedsred
07-11-2009, 01:50 AM
Bruce is 22 and struggling...making it worse could be having 2 hitting coaches...Dusty and Jacoby....

Captain Hook
07-11-2009, 02:58 AM
My thinking is that the Reds will make no big moves now or anytime this season.That leaves guys like Bruce as the Reds best chance to make a run this season.I think he is very capable of getting hot and making this offense one that can put up son runs.A lot of us might not like it but Bruce getting hot might be the only chance this team has this year.

lidspinner
07-11-2009, 01:34 PM
am I the only one that see's a old washed up version of KGJR at the plate? fastballs are hit far.....anyhting else is an out...hopefully his time on the bench is more about learning than it is about clearing his head.

GIDP
07-11-2009, 02:49 PM
Im just going to assume there is no real logic behind it.

kfm
07-11-2009, 03:14 PM
Charlie Manuel benches Jimmy Rollins for several days and he comes back hitting, Jim Leyland benches Magglio for a few days while he is struggling and Dusty benches Jay Bruce for a couple of days and he is an idiot. I love the logic on this board that is basically, no matter what Dusty does I hate him and he is an idiot.

FlyerFanatic
07-11-2009, 03:18 PM
Charlie Manuel benches Jimmy Rollins for several days and he comes back hitting, Jim Leyland benches Magglio for a few days while he is struggling and Dusty benches Jay Bruce for a couple of days and he is an idiot. I love the logic on this board that is basically, no matter what Dusty does I hate him and he is an idiot.

then again, i also love the people on this board who suffer from george grande syndrome. everything is sunshine and rainbows...the reds havent won over a decade? oh its ok, lets not talk negatively though, dont wanna hurt anyones feelings.

kfm
07-11-2009, 03:24 PM
then again, i also love the people on this board who suffer from george grande syndrome. everything is sunshine and rainbows...the reds havent won over a decade? oh its ok, lets not talk negatively though, dont wanna hurt anyones feelings.

You can say whatever negative thing you want, just base it on facts. I never realized that requiring actual consistency of thought and facts was such a bad thing. There are a lot of bad things to say about the reds like their offense is pathetic and they have a bunch of players who should be nothing more than backups, but those are facts unlike saying this is the worst team in the history of the world. So what does the last 10 years have to do with Jay Bruce being benched for two days?

FlyerFanatic
07-11-2009, 03:27 PM
You can say whatever negative thing you want, just base it on facts. I never realized that requiring actual consistency of thought and facts was such a bad thing. There are a lot of bad things to say about the reds like their offense is pathetic and they have a bunch of players who should be nothing more than backups, but those are facts unlike saying this is the worst team in the history of the world. So what does the last 10 years have to do what Jay Bruce being benched for two days?

i'm just stating a generalizaton much like you did with your last post ie: " i love the logic on this board that is basically, no matter what Dusty does I hate him and he is an idiot." just pointing out that theres 2 sides to that coin, and there are people who are the exact opposite.

what does dusty bakers entering the bigs at 19 have to do with being a good manager? (whoops wrong thread);)

kfm
07-11-2009, 03:37 PM
i'm just stating a generalizaton much like you did with your last post ie: " i love the logic on this board that is basically, no matter what Dusty does I hate him and he is an idiot." just pointing out that theres 2 sides to that coin, and there are people who are the exact opposite.

what does dusty bakers entering the bigs at 19 have to do with being a good manager? (whoops wrong thread);)

Like I said in the other thread, "It is not really relevant to the type of manager it (Dusty )is, just like the Reds losing for 10 years has nothing to do with Jay Bruce being benched for two days. That's what I mean about being consistent.

nmculbreth
07-11-2009, 03:49 PM
I don't understand the logic behind benching or demoting Bruce.

During the course of his minor league career he showned that he can destroy minor league pitching, the only way he is going to improve against major league pitching is by facing major league pitching. It may be a struggle in the short term but the long term benefits far outweigh the growing pains we're currently experiencing.

That being said I think it's important to point out that a good part of Bruce's struggles can be attributed to an absurdly low BABIP. He is currently hitting .201 on balls in play. To put that in perspective he is currently 16 points lower than the player with the second worst BABIP (Giambi) and a whopping 49 points worse than the player with the tenth worst BABIP (Uggla). Similarly he's currently 24 points below the worst full season BABIP rate registered in the past six years (Tony Batista's .225 in 2004).

I may be alone but I'm impressed with the strides Jay Bruce has made at the plate this season. He's seeing more pitches per AB, walking at a better rate and cutting down on strikeouts. Once his BABIP starts to normalize I expect big things in the second half of the season.

GIDP
07-11-2009, 04:09 PM
Charlie Manuel benches Jimmy Rollins for several days and he comes back hitting, Jim Leyland benches Magglio for a few days while he is struggling and Dusty benches Jay Bruce for a couple of days and he is an idiot. I love the logic on this board that is basically, no matter what Dusty does I hate him and he is an idiot.

He benched Jay Bruce against guys he is likely to have some success against just to bring him back to face Johan. I dont care if he's benched for the 2 days, its just seems weird that you are going to bench a guy for a mental break just to bring him back to face one of the best lefties in the game. It seems counter productive.

Dont blame me for noticing the stupidity of the games he picked to bench him.

Also its not like Bruce has the track record of a Rollins or a Mags.

kfm
07-11-2009, 04:53 PM
He benched Jay Bruce against guys he is likely to have some success against just to bring him back to face Johan. I dont care if he's benched for the 2 days, its just seems weird that you are going to bench a guy for a mental break just to bring him back to face one of the best lefties in the game. It seems counter productive.

Dont blame me for noticing the stupidity of the games he picked to bench him.

Also its not like Bruce has the track record of a Rollins or a Mags.

The lack of a track record is even more reason to bench him. If a good manager is justified in sitting two proven guys then how is that an argument for not benching a guy who does not have a proven track record. I really need you to explain that one to me. As far as benching him against guys he is likely to have success against, what crystal ball are you basing this on. The guy is hitting .205. He has been struggling against just about everyone. You may think this is a stupid move, but keep in mind, that is your opinion. However, if Dusty did not bench him which is what you are advocating, wouldn't he be playing tonight against Johan. So pick a point of view, either you don't want him benched at all, which I thought was your original point, or you want him benched for at least one more game.

kfm
07-11-2009, 05:08 PM
Just to bring some actual facts into this discussion to show how "stupid" this move was. Below in order is how lefties fare against Nieve, Moyer, and Santana.

.205 .289 .308 .597 (Nieve)

.244 .333 .411 .744 (Moyer)

.267 .316 .567 .882 (Santana)

GIDP
07-11-2009, 05:48 PM
Just to bring some actual facts into this discussion to show how "stupid" this move was. Below in order is how lefties fare against Nieve, Moyer, and Santana.

.205 .289 .308 .597 (Nieve)

.244 .333 .411 .744 (Moyer)

.267 .316 .567 .882 (Santana)

These numbers are just based off this years stats only. Then again I guess these guys just happened to all change over the winter. :rolleyes:

GIDP
07-11-2009, 05:51 PM
The lack of a track record is even more reason to bench him. If a good manager is justified in sitting two proven guys then how is that an argument for not benching a guy who does not have a proven track record. I really need you to explain that one to me. As far as benching him against guys he is likely to have success against, what crystal ball are you basing this on. The guy is hitting .205. He has been struggling against just about everyone. You may think this is a stupid move, but keep in mind, that is your opinion. However, if Dusty did not bench him which is what you are advocating, wouldn't he be playing tonight against Johan. So pick a point of view, either you don't want him benched at all, which I thought was your original point, or you want him benched for at least one more game.

I dont care if you bench him for 2 games, but dusty benched him against 2 pitchers he could probably hit, just to bring him back against one hes more likely to struggle with.

My original point was pretty obvious you just cant seem to understand it for what ever reason.

kfm
07-11-2009, 06:59 PM
I dont care if you bench him for 2 games, but dusty benched him against 2 pitchers he could probably hit, just to bring him back against one hes more likely to struggle with.

My original point was pretty obvious you just cant seem to understand it for what ever reason.

Your point doesn't make any sense and that is what I am having difficulty with. I thought you would ignore the numbers because the numbers this year indicate that Bruce has a better chance as a left handed batter against Sanatana then he had against the guys he was not playing against. You choose to ignore this because you "feel" this is a stupid move. I "feel" that stats should play more into your comments than your feelings. Even when confronted with actual numbers you choose to ignore them, and just restate your position regardless of what the numbers actually tell you, but I am not surprised. Still waiting to hear where I can get one of those crystal balls.

kfm
07-11-2009, 07:01 PM
He struggles against lefties right? They sat him against Moyer who doesnt exactly dominate lefties, and then they are sitting him against a right hander in Neive tonight.

Just to bring him back to starting against Santana? What is the logic behind this one? Anyone have any ideas on why Dusty would do this?

Just to remind you what your original point was.

GIDP
07-11-2009, 07:38 PM
You are right we should always go with the small sample sizes over what someone has done for their career. What a joke.

GIDP
07-11-2009, 07:39 PM
Just to remind you what your original point was.

Thanks for quoting my original post as if my point some how changed.

kfm
07-11-2009, 07:56 PM
You are right we should always go with the small sample sizes over what someone has done for their career. What a joke.

I am not saying ignore what a guy has done over the course of their career in terms of assessing the type of player a person is. However, you are making it quite clear that what a guy does this year should have no value to a manager making a lineup, which I would say does not make much sense. Let me thumb this down a shade for you, players typically perform to their baseline over the course of an entire season. However, every once in a while a guy will out perform his norm or sometimes, like Harang last year, guys will have a season where he underperforms his norm. The key is not to change your overall view of a player based upon an outlier season, but at the same time to ignore what a player is currently doing when you have to deal with that player today would be foolish. But it sounds like you disagree. Oh well, to each his own.

GIDP
07-11-2009, 07:59 PM
We arent talking a full season like Harang. We are talking 90 some PA. You want to believe those numbers over a three year split? Come on dude.

kfm
07-11-2009, 10:21 PM
We arent talking a full season like Harang. We are talking 90 some PA. You want to believe those numbers over a three year split? Come on dude.

Feel free to respond to something I have actually written. We are talking more than half a season. Yes, at the moment I will deal with a player the way they have performed for more than half a season. This amazes me that this is that difficult for you to understand. For instance, David Ortiz was struggling earlier this year pretty severely. Should I treat him the way he has performed over the course of the last few years, or should I look at his current trends, while being cognizant that he will probably eventually turn things around. By your logic, teams should have been intentionally walking Big Papi when he was below .200. Brad lidge was outstanding last year, should I put him in the exact same spots this year when he is pitching as poorly has he has. I think most people can understand this, and deep down I know you do too. By the way, if you could not tell until the entire season was over that Harang was not performing as normal, I have some swam land that I would like to sell you.

kfm
07-11-2009, 10:48 PM
We arent talking a full season like Harang. We are talking 90 some PA. You want to believe those numbers over a three year split? Come on dude.

Just a few more stats for you on Johan Santana. To me the real gripe over Dusty tonight besides why was Tavares playing is why didn't he start more lefties. While no one hits Santana very well, lefties have consistently hit him better over the course of his career and especially this year, but we are supposed to ignore this year, because actually paying attention to how someone is performing today when you are playing them today would be foolish.

2005
.256 .288 .449 .737 (L)
.200 .240 .323 .562 (R)
2006
.254 .301 .432 .733 (L)
.206 .246 .342 .588 (R)
2007
.197 .275 .374 .649 (L)
.234 .271 .416 .687 (R)
2008
.247 .287 .389 .677 (lefties)
.227 .282 .352 .634 (righties)
2009
.267 .316 .567 .882 (L)
.221 .288 .329 .617 (R)

GIDP
07-11-2009, 11:21 PM
I think ive seen it all. Bruce is better off facing Sanata than Moyer or Neive. Glad to see you even remotely understood my point.