texasdave
07-19-2007, 06:05 PM
Here is a post on today's game thread by Oneupper, a person whose posts I greatly respect. However, I have to take issue with this one.
On the lineup:
MacNarron insists in splitting Griff and Dunn with Phillips. It was and continues to be a bad idea.
At the heart of this post is the concept of 'protection'. I am on the fence on whether 'protection' exists or not, but for the sake of this discussion let's assume that it does.
His contention, if I am reading his post correctly, is that by splitting up Griffey and Dunn they have no protection and can therefore be pitched around. Essentially he posits that by doing this, Mackanin is allowing the other team to take the bats out of their hands. This forces Phillips and Hatteberg (among others) to win the game instead.
I would like to make several points:
1st) Mackanin has managed 13 games. He has 'split' the lineup in 9 of these. In these 9 games the Reds have averaged 5.4 runs. In the 4 'unsplit' games the Reds have averaged 5.0 runs. I am aware that these numbers are close and it is a very small sample size. But it is also seems to indicate that by 'splitting' Griffey and Dunn the Reds' offense has not suffered.
2nd) Only one of the two players - Griffey or Dunn - can be 'protected. They can not hit behind one another. There will always be one or the other that can be pitched around. And another player besides these two will always be in the position to have to step up.
3rd) Is any loss in 'protection' suffered by Griffey or Dunn by being split up offset by the additional 'protection' now offered to Phillips (or whomever else is placed between them? IOW, who needs to be 'protected' more - a seasoned veteran like Griffey, an extremely patient hitter like Dunn, or a youngster like Phillips?
4th)I see no advantage being transferred to the other team by constantly and consistently putting Griffey and/or Dunn on base by pitching around them. This seems to me to be a recipe for disaster for the opposing squad.
Of course this is in the very early stages of experiment and perhaps over the long run either the 'split' or 'unsplit' lineup will prove more beneficial. I have a sneaking suspicion that it really is not going to matter all that much.
PS I think it is somewhat unfair to address another person's post without them being able to respond. Therefore if Oneupper wants to respond to this he can PM me with his thoughts and I will post them on Sundeck.
On the lineup:
MacNarron insists in splitting Griff and Dunn with Phillips. It was and continues to be a bad idea.
At the heart of this post is the concept of 'protection'. I am on the fence on whether 'protection' exists or not, but for the sake of this discussion let's assume that it does.
His contention, if I am reading his post correctly, is that by splitting up Griffey and Dunn they have no protection and can therefore be pitched around. Essentially he posits that by doing this, Mackanin is allowing the other team to take the bats out of their hands. This forces Phillips and Hatteberg (among others) to win the game instead.
I would like to make several points:
1st) Mackanin has managed 13 games. He has 'split' the lineup in 9 of these. In these 9 games the Reds have averaged 5.4 runs. In the 4 'unsplit' games the Reds have averaged 5.0 runs. I am aware that these numbers are close and it is a very small sample size. But it is also seems to indicate that by 'splitting' Griffey and Dunn the Reds' offense has not suffered.
2nd) Only one of the two players - Griffey or Dunn - can be 'protected. They can not hit behind one another. There will always be one or the other that can be pitched around. And another player besides these two will always be in the position to have to step up.
3rd) Is any loss in 'protection' suffered by Griffey or Dunn by being split up offset by the additional 'protection' now offered to Phillips (or whomever else is placed between them? IOW, who needs to be 'protected' more - a seasoned veteran like Griffey, an extremely patient hitter like Dunn, or a youngster like Phillips?
4th)I see no advantage being transferred to the other team by constantly and consistently putting Griffey and/or Dunn on base by pitching around them. This seems to me to be a recipe for disaster for the opposing squad.
Of course this is in the very early stages of experiment and perhaps over the long run either the 'split' or 'unsplit' lineup will prove more beneficial. I have a sneaking suspicion that it really is not going to matter all that much.
PS I think it is somewhat unfair to address another person's post without them being able to respond. Therefore if Oneupper wants to respond to this he can PM me with his thoughts and I will post them on Sundeck.