60 Game Sample Size and the Big Picture

[CaiGuy]

First of all, the Reds have stunk. I am not chalking it up to bad luck or making excuses. They have played poorly and their record reflects that.

But baseball is a variable sport with lots of randomness, and the season is meant to be a long season. After 162 games, it events out, and the best teams rise to the top.

While the Reds are by no means eliminated, they appear to be on the outside-looking-in when in comes to 2020. Maybe they sneak into the expanded playoffs, but the performance has been disappointing to say the least. So this leads for natural calls for change. Fire the manager. Fire everyone. Force out the GM. Everyone to the Bench. Everyone else to Prasco. Call up all of the prospects.

But should big picture decisions be made on a 60 game sample in the strangest conditions possible? To put it into prospective, the 2019 World Champs had a 19-31 record after 50 games. That's a 0.380 win %. That's sub-Reds. Should they have blown it up? Should they have fired everyone? Obviously they had the talent, and it evened out over 162 games and then the playoffs are its anyones game once you get there.

Not saying the Reds have the talent that the Nationals did. But it is pretty clear that the team should be better than this when you look at the names on paper. And the team is constructed someone similar to the 2019 Nationals if you squint.

Is it a sample size thing? Luck? Poor coaching or conditioning? Is the team not as good in reality as it looked on paper?

How would you factor in the small sample-size and circumstances when making big picture decisions for the team for 2021 and beyond?

[Strikes Out Looking]

Giving up tons of runs in the first inning, lousy bullpen, and consistently trying for a 3-true outcome offense will put you where the Reds are in the standings - 60 game or 162 game season.

[MikeS21]

I agree, CaiGuy. There is absolutely no sense in thinking that 2020 is remotely an accurate representation of "normal" baseball. The shortened season is more of a glorified spring training, where NO team is using players in a "normal" fashion. Universal DH ... 7-inning doubleheaders where teams routinely use 7-8 pitcher rotations ... managers micro-managing games like they are the 7th Game of the World Series ... AAAA players rotating in and out ... weird roster rules with strange IL idiosyncrasies.

It is silly to pretend that there is anything "normal" about this season.

[Kc61]

First of all, the Reds have stunk. I am not chalking it up to bad luck or making excuses. They have played poorly and their record reflects that.

But baseball is a variable sport with lots of randomness, and the season is meant to be a long season. After 162 games, it events out, and the best teams rise to the top.

While the Reds are by no means eliminated, they appear to be on the outside-looking-in when in comes to 2020. Maybe they sneak into the expanded playoffs, but the performance has been disappointing to say the least. So this leads for natural calls for change. Fire the manager. Fire everyone. Force out the GM. Everyone to the Bench. Everyone else to Prasco. Call up all of the prospects.

But should big picture decisions be made on a 60 game sample in the strangest conditions possible? To put it into prospective, the 2019 World Champs had a 19-31 record after 50 games. That's a 0.380 win %. That's sub-Reds. Should they have blown it up? Should they have fired everyone? Obviously they had the talent, and it evened out over 162 games and then the playoffs are its anyones game once you get there.

Not saying the Reds have the talent that the Nationals did. But it is pretty clear that the team should be better than this when you look at the names on paper. And the team is constructed someone similar to the 2019 Nationals if you squint.

Is it a sample size thing? Luck? Poor coaching or conditioning? Is the team not as good in reality as it looked on paper?

How would you factor in the small sample-size and circumstances when making big picture decisions for the team for 2021 and beyond?

There is no simple or obvious answer. The job of the front office is to synthesize all the information and decide on general needs and specific changes. That doesn’t change by the unusual season, except the information is limited by the circumstances.

For the Reds, a perpetual loser recently, the most important thing is to have objective decision makers who understand winning baseball in this era. Reds stil have a fair amount of clay (talent) - they need the right people to mold it into a better future team.

[westofyou]

This is where I live

Baseball is not a small sample game, this is not a normal season, I don't expect normalcy in the numbers at all, I'm just happy there is some baseball to divert my attention. I am just going to ride it and enjoy what is out there. When the Reds do bad I move on and watch other games, I am a baseball fan first then a Reds fan. I refuse to let the Reds ruin baseball for me, I suggest some other should take that approach as well. It's liberating.

When life gives you lemons make lemonade.

[Kc61]

I agree, CaiGuy. There is absolutely no sense in thinking that 2020 is remotely an accurate representation of "normal" baseball. The shortened season is more of a glorified spring training, where NO team is using players in a "normal" fashion. Universal DH ... 7-inning doubleheaders where teams routinely use 7-8 pitcher rotations ... managers micro-managing games like they are the 7th Game of the World Series ... AAAA players rotating in and out ... weird roster rules with strange IL idiosyncrasies.

It is silly to pretend that there is anything "normal" about this season.

And they should consider that this is an abnormal season in making future plans.

But Reds can’t ignore this season. It’s happening, it’s real, and it must play some role in coming up with the 2021 ball club.

[Tom Servo]

I do tend to think that over a longer season they'd play better and certain caveats need to be understood (this is probably not who Suarez is, Akiyama deserves more of a chance to prove himself, Senzel probably won't get the rona again, etc) but I also think you have to play the hand you're dealt and the way the team got off to yet another poor start and has underperformed through nearly 40 games (and realistically, probably heading towards 60 in that regard) should absolutely factor into decisions on how to proceed in 2021.

I find it staggering that in nearly 200 games now as Reds manager that Bell's Reds have only been over .500 the first game of each season. It says to me that there is an issue with coaching and/or conditioning, that the team doesn't show up ready to play good team baseball on a daily basis. Even the truly bad teams can outperform at times and go on winning streaks, but for the Reds a winning streak of 3 games seems to be the ceiling.

[RedsBrick]

This season is not an anomaly. Four winning seasons since 2000; their last being 2013 and only twice since that season have they cracked 70 wins.

I certainly applaud their off-season efforts and the dealings at the deadline. Here's hoping the moves will make a difference in the long run, but the reality is, it's just a culture of losing.

Please find someone to manage this team with the experience to do so. This next part is not intended to get side-tracked from the reality, but the last time this team had any success they were managed by someone with a proven record. Someone with experience. I was as frustrated with Baker as the next guy, but he knew his way around the bases.

[Mutaman]

This is where I live

Baseball is not a small sample game, this is not a normal season, I don't expect normalcy in the numbers at all, I'm just happy there is some baseball to divert my attention. I am just going to ride it and enjoy what is out there. When the Reds do bad I move on and watch other games, I am a baseball fan first then a Reds fan. I refuse to let the Reds ruin baseball for me, I suggest some other should take that approach as well. It's liberating.

When life gives you lemons make lemonade.

So the Speak no Evil crowd has moved from "Don't criticize the reds, give them a chance" to "Don't criticize the reds, go root for the Yankees".

[westofyou]

So the Speak no Evil crowd has moved from "Don't criticize the reds, give them a chance" to "Don't criticize the reds, go root for the Yankees".

Yes that's exactly what I said, astute observation you have made there.

Gimme a F'ing break, that's a pathetic take... I root for baseball myself

[Mutaman]

Yes that's exactly what I said, astute observation you have made there.

Gimme a F'ing break, that's a pathetic take... I root for baseball myself

I root for the Redlegs. And when the organization has demonstrated over 5 years of incompetence, I root for a change.

[adkindo]

Suggesting baseball should only be evaluated over a 160+ game season feels more like the excuses of a team that is 6 games under .500 after the halfway point. They play baseball in college and decide the best team without anything near 160 games....same for every other level. There can always be an argument that the larger the sample size of anything, the more accurate the results the sample will produce. At the same time, we were given 60 games to make our case....it is not like we came up short in a single elimination tournament...and we have failed.

[TexasRedsFan]

The short season is probably hardest on Shogo. Not only is he trying to jump straight into major league pitching, he has fewer games to do it, which may be putting extra pressure on him. If it were a normal 162, he could've gone to AAA for a bit to try to get on a roll and come back to the big club with more confidence.

There's no doubt that a 60-game season doesn't give you the time to go through rough patches like all teams do at least once every season. But it also shined a light on what continues to be a huge issue for this team - starting slow. Bell's teams have won opening day and then begun consistently losing for two years now. Price's teams typically started even worse. With more talent this year, that should concern the front office that the right field personnel for this team to be a contender are still not in place.

[podgejeff_]

My knee-jerk reaction of "fire people" really starts and ends with David Bell. I also think it's past time for Tucker Barnhart to be replaced by Tyler Stephenson. The Reds simply have a better record with Curt Casali behind the plate. They have generally lost two for every one game they win when Barnhart is back there.

But I also realistically question just how much a new manager changes the record. If it's really that easy to make one move and the team is much better, so be it.

Have we really been happy with a single manager throughout the last 15+ years?

[NeilHamburger]

I will admit this is an unusual year that is hard to judge. But, I also think both last years and so far this years teams have vastly underperformed their talent.

I've made my feelings known on Bell, so it's obvious what I think the first move should be this offseason. If this teams ends the year under .500 and out of the playoffs I don't see how you keep him.