Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
FWIW, Jocketty did say about whether Brandon knew he made mistakes that "I think he knows that now."
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
Most interesting to me were his comments about Chapman. Not sure Chapman in the rotation is a given.
Might be just as likely that Chapman is a reliever but pitches much more, not confined to one-inning, ninth-inning spots.
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
At no point during the Votto portion did I feel like Walt was choosing his words in deference to Votto. It's was mostly, yeah, we need him to change a little. And it seems to be on Price, that Price is tabbed to get that done.
Kind of feel bad for Price at the moment.
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kc61
Most interesting to me were his comments about Chapman. Not sure Chapman in the rotation is a given.
Might be just as likely that Chapman is a reliever but pitches much more, not confined to one-inning, ninth-inning spots.
That's right, it seemed to be about whether they needed Chapman to fill a rotation spot, so that's unsettled. Depends on trades obviously. And to reiterate for those who wanted Chapman more often during the 7th or 8th innings, that window appears to be open. Walt didn't like not using Chapman hardly at all down the stretch.
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PTjvs
I'm not saying this isn't true, but I am not sure it is. It could easily be that the true optimal Z-swing percentage (which certainly varies hitter by hitter) could be LOWER than the league average, and that swinging at too many borderline strikes (or just not the pitch you were looking for) results in easy outs.
jvs
Yea, I agree there's no easy answer.
A higher Z-swing percentage might also result in fouling off more pitches and less striking out looking.
Then there's the entire BABIP theory (which I don't buy into 100%).. Based on that theory (which says there's a strong element of luck whether a batted ball is a hit or not), then it seems the higher the Zswing, the better.
At some point though, the hitter has to swing at that strike that he feels might result in an easy out, or he's just going to be fed it every time (if it's called a strike).
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kc61
Most interesting to me were his comments about Chapman. Not sure Chapman in the rotation is a given.
Might be just as likely that Chapman is a reliever but pitches much more, not confined to one-inning, ninth-inning spots.
Here's another question.
Assume all pitchers are healthy in the spring.
Do you bump Cingrani to the pen (or minors) to make room for Chapman in the rotation?
This is simliar to the Leake dilemma last year.
Frankly, I don't. If everyone's healthy, I keep Chapman in the pen.
I don't think the team has the margin of error to experiment with Chapman next year. It's going to be harder to make the playoffs in 2014, IMO.
Highly likely we lose Choo/Arroyo. The other contenders will retool too.
There is some hope for better health by the Reds though.
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
REDREAD
I'm not sure what the optimal Z-swing is, but the fact that Joey is only 1 or 2 percent above average (which includes pitchers and backups) says there's room for improvement. Many of his teammates have higher rates than he does.
If Joey could increase his Z-swing percentage by 5 percent, at the expense of his O-swing percentage going up 2 percent.. I think that would be worth it.
Note, I realize that increasing the Z-swing is going to also probably increase the O-swing.
I guess I don't see the correlation between swinging at any pitch within the strike zone and increased run production. Considering the distinction is not made between "pitcher's strikes" and "cookies". If he were regularly passing up "cookies" then I would have more of a problem. I don't have a problem with his approach at all.
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
REDREAD
Yea, I agree there's no easy answer.
A higher Z-swing percentage might also result in fouling off more pitches and less striking out looking.
Then there's the entire BABIP theory (which I don't buy into 100%).. Based on that theory (which says there's a strong element of luck whether a batted ball is a hit or not), then it seems the higher the Zswing, the better.
At some point though, the hitter has to swing at that strike that he feels might result in an easy out, or he's just going to be fed it every time (if it's called a strike).
I think you have misunderstood the "luck" behind BABIP. If a player sees a significant rise or dip in BABIP for a season without a significant change in batted ball stats (Line Drive %, Infield Fly Ball %) then there is a good chance there was significant luck involved. Votto is a very high BABIP player for his career, that in it's self does not make Votto "lucky" on batted balls. It means he makes great contact.
When there are 2 strikes on you, it's fine to swing at a pitch that will be an easy out. Before 2 strikes, why not wait to see if you can get a decent pitch?
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
REDREAD
Here's another question.
Assume all pitchers are healthy in the spring.
Do you bump Cingrani to the pen (or minors) to make room for Chapman in the rotation?
This is simliar to the Leake dilemma last year.
Frankly, I don't. If everyone's healthy, I keep Chapman in the pen.
I don't think the team has the margin of error to experiment with Chapman next year. It's going to be harder to make the playoffs in 2014, IMO.
Highly likely we lose Choo/Arroyo. The other contenders will retool too.
There is some hope for better health by the Reds though.
No way do I bump Cingrani out of the rotation. Bird in the hand.
If everyone is healthy and Price wants to try Chapman in the rotation, I'd trade one of the veteran SP (likely Bailey or Leake) for an OF or MI upgrade.
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SidneySlicker
Ok let me rephrase that I have a problem paying Joey Votto a 200 million dollar contract if he's not going to be amongst the top of the league in BA/risp and rbi.
Which is a you problem not a Joey or Reds problem.
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
I get the sense from the interview that Jocketty is energized by having his guy in the manager's seat.
Clear to me that the heat is going to be on the offense. They want that grinding out ABs approach. Sounds like they feel too many ABs were given away.
Also clear to me that they will make a strong effort to re-sign Choo. Ownership is on board.
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
All I know is that I'm liking a whole lot less the things coming out of the front office's mouth lately than I am the players'.
There's clearly a good bit of tension in this organization right now. That may not be a bad thing, ultimately, but it could also be a harbinger of a lot stupid things.
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
cincrazy
Telling a man that OPSed over .900 that he has to do something differently to fit what the team desires is kind of silly.
Ain't that the truth. Smacks of passing the buck.
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
osuceltic
The Reds would say they paid Votto $200 million and then he stopped doing all those things that caused them to pay him all that money.
They should trade Votto to the Mariners.
Re: Walt interview (with Cunningham)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Falls City Beer
All I know is that I'm liking a whole lot less the things coming out of the front office's mouth lately than I am the players'.
There's clearly a good bit of tension in this organization right now. That may not be a bad thing, ultimately, but it could also be a harbinger of a lot stupid things.
I just hope they don't start making big decisions based upon trying to alter chemistry.