We agree on Francoeur (sorry Rocky). The guy is just awful any way you look at him. I could live with a high average - low power guy (which is what he was a couple years ago) or a high power - low average guy (Dunn, Reynolds, etc) but Frenchie is neither. He's a low-low everything guy.
I think he was saying that if an out absolutely has to be made you want to advance the runner. Honestly I think we are ALL saying the exact same thing in about 4 different ways.
I think the point Ray and Phunwin are making is that the term "productive out" is really an oxymoron. No out is ever productive (aside from the rare sac fly cases already discussed) because they decrease team X's percentage chance of scoring in a particular inning. The idea that you would prefer a runner on 3rd with 1 out is really irrelevant to the discussion.
Yes but we arent comparing an out to a hit. We are comparing an out to another out, and saying that one can be better than another. Making it productive for an out, not productive as in it takes the place of a hit.
Under that scenario, team X's percentage chance of scoring decreased that inning. Statistically, the percentage decrease may not be as great with a groundball to the right side as it would be with a K, but its still not a "productive" play.
Well the point I was making was if there was a runner on 2nd and 0 outs, and the batter made an out, I rather have that out move the runner along to third base then keep him at second. I think Alex understands, I believe we're all trying to say the same thing here. I'm getting confused and now I need a nap.
Of course anytime a batter comes up, he'd rather move a runner to third over striking out. That's obvious. And yes, if you must make an out, it's better to have the out mean something, even if it's just moving a runner over and increasing your chances of scoring one run in that inning by 10 or 15% (I don't know the exact number, but I believe it's in that range). That's not the problem. If you make an out, and it happens to be productive, great. It's one of life's happy accidents. If you treat it like found money, rather than a desired outcome, I'm okay with that. The problem, rather, is when managers send guys to the plate ASKING them to make "productive outs". When Tim McCarver spooges in his pants over how David Eckstein or Omar Vizquel is up there just trying to hit the ball to the right side of the infield in an effort to move the runner to third base, that's bad. That's this "situational hitting" nonsense. If you're at the plate trying to do anything other than get a hit or walk, you're probably hurting the team. Unless you're a pitcher and thus have practically no chance of reaching base, the sacrifice bunt/hit is a bad play. You're giving up an out solely to move the runner over one base, and doing so deliberately. That's a poor trade. And yet, traditional baseball people think it's a good thing. That's my problem with the exalted Productive Out.
That is EXACTLY what I was trying to say. Its never a good thing to make an out, you never look to make an out. I agree its idiotic looking to go up to the plate looking to make an out.
Bellhorn is a little different because IIRC he had a ridiculous avg. with RISP, which would tend to suggest he changed his approach with men on. There are always exceptions to any rule.
Let me ask you this, if you're going up against Santana, Halladay, Haren or a legit ace, would you rather your team play for a big inning (knowing you may not get many, if any, other chances to score) or try to scratch across one or two? Furthermore, what if you're a team like San Diego or Atlanta or the Mets who have virtually no power whatsoever? It's nice to have 4 or 5 guys in the lineup who can go deep at any time, but not every team does.
I don't know that the opposing pitcher has anything to do with it. You want to maximize your chances of scoring runs. Giving up an out just to move a runner from 2nd to 3rd won't accomplish that. To break that scenario down to its most simple element, getting a hit off Johan Santana is hard, right? A base hit will usually score a runner from second base unless he's really slow, or it's not hit very hard, right? So, given that, wouldn't you rather have 2 chances to get a hit off Santana than 1? I would postulate that more runs are surrendered by living in fear of the opposition than are gained by taking a different approach, i.e. playing "small ball", sacrificing, being excessive in giving would-be base stealers the green light, embracing the productive out, etc. And as long as I'm on my soapbox, the rash of intentional walks that were given to Barry Bonds in his heyday was another fine example of this ridiculous tendency for managers to out-think themselves and look like they matter. "Look at me, I'm important, I'm making decisions!" What, they haven't taken my soapbox away? Awesome. I also think that Jerome Holtzman did as much damage to the game as you can do and still be within the boundaries of the law. The "save" is a pointless statistic that inflated the salaries of a relatively unimportant group of players: relief pitchers, and caused managers to use them in a completely incorrect fashion. A good starting pitcher is worth far more than a great relief pitcher, and yet, salaries for relievers are insane. And the dawn of the save enforced the idea that a manager should save his best reliever for the 9th inning. This is asinine. If the Phillies have 2 men on in the 7th inning, with no outs, why on earth isn't Francisco Rodriguez entering the game for the Mets? Why wouldn't you want your best reliever in the game in that tight situation? Nope, in trots Bobby Parnell or Sean Green or whoever else has been deemed a "set-up man". No manager in baseball has the balls to do the sensible thing, because relievers are paid by their number of saves and will revolt accordingly. Screw you, Jerome Holtzman.
I think the opposing pitcher has to factor in somewhat. If I'm managing the Braves against Santana, I think I have put my team in the best position to score a run and play to our strength. Chances are we will not hit a homer off him, and given opposing hitters avg. against him with runners on base (I think its in the .100's), I have to try to move guys over and get them in any way possible. The chances of my team getting 3 or more hits in an inning against him are not good. Some teams are great at the Earl Weaver: Hit, walk, 3-Run Homer strategy. Philadelphia is one, the Dodgers are another. If you're not a team with serious homerun or extra base potential (like Atlanta) you have to find other ways to score. I can't tell you how many times Atlanta will end up with 10 or 11 hits in a game only to come away with 3 or 4 runs because they're all singles. Would we have scored more if we sat back and waited for a Homer or a double in the gap? Maybe. I think alot of offensive managerial decisions are based on what kind of pitching staff one has. The Braves have a pretty good one, so playing small ball and getting a few guaranteed runs might be our best strategy.
I agree that relief pitching is overrated but I wouldnt call it unimportant. I mean reading your post I dont think you believe its unimportant either. You just believe its stupid to have one guy in a set role. And for the most part I agree.
Actually no thats not asinine. He does spray the ball to all fields when he hits it. In the first two years I saw enough to argue that the last two years is not the player he will ultimately become/remain. Looking at a couple of the braves games I recorded from 05-07 (i usually record the mets games I go to) some of the same pitchers pitched him the same way then as they do now. The issue is deeper then the book being out on him. Its going to sound funny but its not unprecedented for a hometown player to put too much pressure on himself playing in his hometown. Between that and especially his relationship with Wren, getting far away from there will key his resurgence even if the stats argue otherwise. Its not just one month, that was just an example. He was 280/310 in April. So 2 of the 4 months this year hes done reasonably well. The stats are not as good as he is capable of or really desirable in a starting OF but he's shown he can do better. I'm an optimist; someone has two good seasons and two bad one's I will choose to see what caused the bad ones. There is always a reason for a player not performing to his maximum capability. A lot of times the same reasons that affect you or me in our jobs can affect a ball player. LOL so your belief that he is a lost cause will ultimately be proven wrong. Which is fine. Ill be here waiting for you to admit you were wrong Cora signed a 2 year deal worth 3 or 4M over 2 years. And they signed him because Castillo's knee injury last season caused him to miss time and they didnt want to not have an option. Cora also has demonstrated strong leadership qualities here and in Boston that the Mets felt were needed. Lastly Cora could fill in at SS where Jose Reyes hasn't had a decent backup...well in forever. The last 4 years Reyes has played at least 153 games and 159 or more in 3 of them. Its comparing apples to oranges. Bottom line is Church sucks. He clearly cannot handle New York anymore; just look at his home-road splits this year: Home .216/.297/.278 Road .326/.359/.444, with 13 of his 16 doubles coming on the road. For the Mets he was the answer to nothing except the trivia question: who will be the player to get hurt next on the mets? And again, where is the need to sign Ryan Church when you have a ton of 4th/5th OF types already with reed, tatis, evans and pagan? Why spend 4M a year when you already have 4 other players pretty similar to him? Unless those other 4 player were David Wright types or Jose Reyes types duplicating the same crappy player is a dumb idea. Francoeur has at least age on his side and the fact that he has had 1 more good year then Church ever had in parts of 8 years. For someone who was whining about Francoeur's strikeouts its funny how when I raised that argument with Phunwin about Dunn this offseason it was ok because he hit 40 dingers. I said it wasnt ok then and its not ok with francoeur. However, Francoeur has also shown he can hit for a good average even if that was a couple of years ago. Batting average is a far more important stat to me then OBP. I want players that hit the ball. Your not driving in many runs by walking. For a team that doesnt have trouble scoring runs a guy like Francoeur is unnecessary. For this team that needs an RBI guy, he is necessary. 05, 06, and 07 were fine. 08 sucked and 09 has been below par so far. Its a year and a half that he has been bad for much of. The vast majority of his career he's been fine. I should rename my post handle Gritty and Gutty just to tick you off then? In all seriousness, I do like that Francoeur plays hard but that factors very little in to my argument. Cox is a hell of a manager but he is not perfect, no one is. I could easily see a manager who at times could be impatient being frustrated with a player as talented as Francoeur under-performing. But let me ask you something and you will understand where Im coming from if you have ever had conflict with your boss at work: How did you feel about when it happened? Did you feel more pressure to perform? Like nothing you did was good enough? Maybe you felt like they were scrutinizing everything you did? I would argue this is probably how Francoeur feels with Frank Wren. The move with Francoeur has been rumored since last year after the demotion because Francoeur spoke his mind about the demotion and the Braves didn't like that. There is also evidence of trying too hard and the relationship with the atlanta hierarchy: ""Frenchy" has been struggling a lot lately in pressure situations. He of course adjusted his stance in the offseason, but said that often when the pressure is on, the new stance doesn't stick and he goes back to his bad habits." http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...hafer-and-gives-frenchy-reason-to-play-better "It was probably time for a fresh start," Wren said. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2009-07-10-mets-braves-trade_N.htm "Mets Report: It seemed like some ill will developed last season between Francoeur and the Braves when they sent him back to the minors for a few day. Is that accurate? Peter Hjort: Yes. That is accurate. Francoeur didn’t approve of the demotion. He also seemed upset that Frank Wren and Bobby Cox only gave him “a five minute meeting” to explain the demotion" http://metsreport.com/jeff-francoeur-qa-with-braves-blogger-peter-hjort/ I would also argue that whatever the braves are doing in their offseason program is not working and its not only Francoeur: Jeff Francoeur - Preseason 2008 - “Jeff Francoeur added 17 pounds over the offseason and came to camp at 239, and it’s obvious that he didn’t gain that weight sitting on the couch eating pizza. The young rightfielder is “ripped,” as the players say, noticeably more muscular in his shoulders, neck and legs.” [link] Season AVG OBP SLG OPS 2007 .293 .338 .444 .782 2008 .239 .294 .359 .653 Yunel Escobar - Preseason 2008 - “After adding 15 pounds of muscle, Escobar has sizzled at the plate in spring training…” [link] Season AVG OBP SLG OPS 2007 .326 .385 .451 .836 2008 .288 .366 .401 .767 http://bravesbaseblog.com/tag/jeff-francoeur/ "After the 2007 off-season he tried to bulk up in an attempt to hit for more power. That backfired and he not only lost the ability to hit for power, he lost the ability to hit at all. His horrendous stats tell half the story and the fact that his bat speed was completely shot in 2008 tells the other half." http://metsreport.com/jeff-francoeur-qa-with-braves-blogger-peter-hjort/ Well you are right about 1 things: I will be here to remind you of this conversation And if Im wrong...well you know Ill sound off on any player that isn't cutting it. Except Wright and Reyes...theyre exempt for the most part Im not Francoeur's supporter bro. That's pretty gross. Im wondering who comes up with this crap also. VORP? Baseball isnt a sci-fi movie. Get this useless crap out of here. Zone ratings...fine, people are lost on how to evaluate players defensively so something like this is necessary. But most of this stuff is nothing short of a manipulation of numbers to twist things in a manner that the creator of said stat sees them. We can still be friends Fink and I wont think any less of you for your silly beliefs in sabermetrics Ya right.
Ok that's fine, the problem is Francoeur doesn't hit. That's why he's batting .256 with a .358 SLG. Even so who cares if he hits to all fields if he isn't a good hitter? And in 2005 Pedro Martinez was still good and throwing 94 mph. My point is 2005 is a long time ago. So Francoeur was decent in 2005-2007, that's meaningless right now. Well he's been one of the worst baseball players in the game since then and he's going zero signs of snapping out of it. A couple of games you recorded are very small example sizes to base a player on. That's just a silly comment to make. A few games versus 5 years of his stats. Gee I wonder what's a better judge of a player. I can show you a couple of games where Jorge Julio and Angel Berroa looked like world beaters, still their stats say they suck. And yes I understand that sometimes hometown players put too much pressure on themselves but he does hit better at home than the road, not sure if that means anything or not, but you'd think that if he was putting pressure on himself he'd do better on the road? But I guess we'll see, if that is indeed true than New York is probably the worst place for him to go. No that's false. He's been crappy all 4 months this year and every month last year too. What months has he done reasonably well in? Having a .310 OBP is beyond terrible. His numbers are just brutual all over. This is part of the post where you realize that looking at the numbers Francoeur really does suck so you just type nonsense like stats are not as good as he is capable of. You have nothing to back it up with. The reason why Francoeur sucks now is because he swings at everything and pitchers know this and throw he pitches outside of the zone so he chases them and gets himself out. It's not that hard. So yes I'll say the book is out on him. And I understand baseball player's are people too and have problems like you and I but Francoeur has had problems for like over 2 years maybe he should talk to someone then. I bet it's girl problems that make him swing at the first 3 pitches thrown to him. Looking at the stats for the past 2 years he shouldn't even be in the major leagues, so yes I'll say he's a lost cause as there's nothing that shows me he could turn it around. I'm not sure how you can be so sure he can just turn it back on and be the player he was in 2005. That player doesn't exist anymore and again his numbers prove it. It's a lot easier for him to continue to play himself out of the league than for him to become good. You're making it seem like he can flip a switch and be an All Star. I don't remember whining about Francoeur's strike outs, I'm not sure I even mentioned it until you brought up Adam Dunn's name in response to Phunwin. And batting average is more important that OBP? Are you kidding? We're living in the 21st century now. But ok even if you think BA is more important (I still can't get over that you or anyone thinks that but whatever) Francoeur's career BA is .267. For a corner OFer with zero power, yeah not good. He's right now a 4th OFer at best and again I'll stress that he shouldn't be on a major league team right now with the way he's been producing the past few years. He hurts the team by playing. See this is something someone says who doesn't either take the time to learn new stats or measurements of a player's value. I like how you put it off as unimportant yet almost every MLB front office uses these types of tools to evaluate players now. You're still living in the stone age, especially if you find BA more important that OBP. It just shows your lack of grasp at the new age baseball measurements to evaluate players. Anyway Boik, I do like you, but I think you're lost in this arguement in a big big way. You have nothing to back up your statements that Francoeur can turn it around. You keep harping on the facts of what he did 2 years ago but ignoring what he's done the past 2 which matter more. And some of your reasons are just silly and pointless. Bottom line is Francoeur isn't a very good baseball player now, which is understatement, his numbers plain old suck across the board he doesn't do anything well offensively. And it doesn't look like he ever will be again. Can he? Yeah I guess it's possible but most likely no. If you want to back up your arguement with actual facts, instead of the i.e. 'he's got upside' nonsense, I'd be more than happy to keep this going but you're not. But hey at least it's keeping me entertained on this 4 day baseball vacation.
See, I could go the other way with you. You just keep bringing up the past few years and ignoring the previous few. No one here is saying Jeff is good right now, we all know he's been sucking. You just can't say what Francoeur did in the first 2 plus years was a fluke, and I'm not just talking about stats. In 2006 and 2007, Francoeur was at the very top of baseball in hitting with RISP and 2 outs. He was clutch as clutch gets. Something happened to him since then and to me it's just more complex than "the book is out on him". And of course I'm not saying he will revive himself and go back to the player he was in 05, 06, and 07, but I'm certainly going to see what he can do with a fresh start on a new club with new coaches.
Boik, Re: Escobar Yunel has been battling injuries all season. I don't think it's fair to point to the offseason workouts and say that's the reason his numbers are slightly down. I think whatever has happened with Jeff is more mental than anything else. The biggest thing Ive seen regarding his swing is that damn hitch. When he first came into the league, you KNEW not to throw anything middle in. He ate those pitches for breakfast. The approach to get him out was to throw off-speed stuff away or high fastballs (head high fastballs). After teams adjusted, surprisingly Frenchie changed his approach and started going the other way and actually hit for a nice average. Unfortunately last season he regressed and started to look completely lost at the plate. IMO, he can get better. It all hinges on him being able to cut down his swing. This year he has shown a propensity for being late on even an average fastball (90-92 MPH). I think playing in Citi Field might actually be better for him because he can stop thinking about Home Runs and focus on hitting line drives.
Because the past few years show more about how he is as a player now than the previous ones. The ones you bring up are 3 and 4 years ago. A lot happens since then, whether it's simply age, decline in skills, PEDs who knows. But he's been declining for 2 plus years now. I'd rather focus on that than his 'glory' days that were years ago. He doesn't belong in the major leagues with the way he's played the last few years. Actually I can and those first 2 plus years are looking more and more like a fluke than his past 2 plus years. He's been declining each year since 2007. And even in 2007 he didn't have a great year for a corner OF. He showed also zero power and eventhough his BA was high, his OBP and SLG were pathetic. And now it's looking more and more like Francoeur's 2005-2007 (especially his power numbers in 2006) to be a fluke. Meaningless stats that doesn't help with the arguement that he can turn it around. Who cares how he hit in 2006 and 2007 with RISP, which is a small sample size, that just explains how he had over 100 RBIs in those 2 years. He still put up a line of .260/.293/.449 in 2006 and .293/.338/.444 in 2007. For a corner OFer that's pretty bad. It's nice he was clutch as clutch gets but he belongs either on the bench or in the minor leagues now. You're right! Didn't you hear? He didn't like his GM or he's putting pressure on himself or he's trying a new batting stance and when the game is on the line he forgets about his tance or it's mental or his dog died whatever one of the numerous excuses I've heard on this board about him. Why can't people just accept that pitchers know to throw the ball 5 feet off the plate and the guy will swing at the pitches? It's really not that hard to grasp. He's a black hole in the batter's box. And judging that he hasn't made an adjustment shows you that the book is indeed out on him. That's fine and hey we'll see but the numbers point to him being out of a job soon. I just don't get why people don't understand a guy could just lose it just like that. Hey Jim Rice, a HOFer, did and lost his hitting skills very quickly and was done at age 34 or so. So why can't it happen to Francoeur or anyone else for that matter? It's happened before and will happen again to other players.
Ive done everything to back up my argument. If you don't like it or want to buy in to it that's on you; I dont really care whether you do or don't; either way but just remember who said it when Francoeur starts driving in 100 runs every year again in the near future. And I promise you I see enough in his swing to believe that will happen. Probably not this year, because the season is more then half done, but probably next year. You weren't whining about Dunn's strikeouts, that was from a discussion Phunwin and I had back in the offseason about Dunn. That's why it was said in response to what he said. And as far as my distaste for Sabermetrics I've forgotten more about this stuff then most people will ever learn in relation to baseball stats. I knew what VORP and OPS + and ERA + was 7-10 years ago before any of this junk was pushed into baseballs mainstream as an alternative way of thinking and analyzing stats. I was reading Bill James long before moneyball came out and still have some of his stuff from the mid 80's that wasn't even mainstream printed; it was done at some kinko's or something and the quality of the printing reflects it. That I still prefer the traditional way is a matter of preference not ignorance. The only thing ignorant is that you assume I don't want to or couldn't use such stats in my favor when the fact is I don't use those stats ever.
That's fine, I was getting tired of writing essays about how Francoeur anyway, haha. You have your stance and I have mine. Obviously there's no way you're going to change my mind and it's clear I won't change yours. I guess it's up to Frenchy to prove one of us wrong.
Without going into too much detail on him, I have to agree that Francoeur isn't going to ever be much more than he is now. Allegedly the Braves offered my Marlins Francoeur for Jeremy Hermida.....and we laughed at them. Which says a lot because Jeremy has his own problems.
I seriously doubt he's going to be very effective at all for you guys. Not just because I'm a Marlins fan, but because his best days are LONG gone. You'll be lucky if he's a decent 5th starter.
And he's already on the DL. Its goingt o be sad watching him pitch. He was a shell of his former self last year; you saw glimpses of what he was at times. Its a sad day when you feel like Jamie Moyer will be a more effective pitcher then Pedro Martinez. I was actually hoping he would retire and go out on a somewhat high note striking out 10 in his final performance as a met.
I dont think the Marlins laughed because of the talent disparity (if they laughed at all), I think they turned it down because of $$$. No way a team like the Marlins are going to pay 3.4 Mill for Frenchie. And yes, Hermeida has issues with staying healthy.
Reports in the NY Times says the Mets may get the all star game in 2013. I hope they do to be honest...
Pedro is NOT on the DL because he is hurt. He is on the DL because he just had a footlong needle with dye injected into his shoulder to check for any damage, and he is not yet at 100% and in MLB pitching shape. He should be ready by the start of next month. Pedro is just holding things down until Halladay is signed. I know Pedro is not the pitcher he was, but we just need him at about 75% of what he was and someone to keep the ball in the park at the CBP. The Phillies have little to lose as it is just a $1 million to $1.5 million deal for the rest of 2009.
There's little to lose but there isnt much to gain there either. I question whether he really belongs on a MLB roster at this stage. I will be cheering for him though as he's one of my favorites.
I think Pedro was a good signing by the Phillies and I wish the Mets had made an effort to get him. I don't know that he's got a lot left in the tank, but the back of Philly's rotation is a minefield. He can't possibly do much worse than Jamie Moyer, Antonio Bastardo and Chan Ho Park, who have combined for 183 1/3 innings of really poor baseball (5.69 ERA). And please don't say "hey, Moyer's 9-6, he's doing fine!" His 9-6 record is testimony to the awesomeness of the Phillies' lineup; nothing more. Any pitcher giving up a home run roughly once every five innings has no business on a major league mound. As for the Mets, I can't imagine that Pedro would be worse than Tim Redding. The fact that Redding has made 9 starts despite an ERA above 7 tells me the Mets could have used Pedro. Throw in the fact that Livan Hernandez's magic seems to have worn off (he pitched way above his head for the first three months of the year), and it seems odd to me that they didn't even give Pedro a sniff.
Bottom 8, bags juiced, 2 out, one run lead. Francisco Rodriguez hasn't pitched in a week and the bullpen has once again done their level best to ensure that Johan Santana's fine outing ends up as a no decision, so naturally Jerry Manuel goes to the bullpen and gets...Brian Stokes. Unbelievable. It worked out, but holy ****, you've got to be kidding me. God, I miss Bobby Valentine. Come to think of it, Davey Johnson's not busy these days, is he?
The days of getting to a world series with quite possibly the worst OF ever for a WS team looking awfully good eh? I think I want to go to a game just to start a "Bring Back Bobby" chant. Havent heard one of those since the Art Howe epoch
It certainly helped that Bobby Cox decided to bring out Greg Norton and his .100 average to pinch hit. I was there for that game Saturday, the atmosphere was electric but when I saw Norton in the on deck circle it sucked the life out right of me. Sure enough he didn't let me down. Great job swinging through two pitches straight after jumping ahead 3-1. Why he didn't use Brooks Conrad to PH in that spot is beyond me.
I don't recall that happening but it's a possibility I guess. He stuck Cody Ross in to pinch run at one point but I don't remember if it was for Anderson. Someone pinch ran for Kotchman too but I'm thinking that was Diory Hernandez. Either way, I would have rather seen Derek Lowe or Javy Vasquez coming up for the pinch hit rather than Greg Norton. I'm not even sure I'm kidding. He has no business taking up a roster spot at this point. I don't know what happened to him but he's been terrible. Either way it was a fun game through the first eight innings. We had a blast and the Ted was packed. Right before Chipper's eighth inning AB I joked with some Mets fans nearby that if they boo loud enough Chipper would probably homer. That was right before his shot to left field.
