SB Nation User Blog: WittyUserName

The intangible made tangible

WittyUserName — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:10:44 -0000

This is primarily in response to the epic thread where nobody left happy debating the idea of intangibles.

Why do people have to get so angry about this? I don't get it at all.

I am certainly not a sabermagician, and I am likely below average at traditional science and mathematics, but going off of the list that was provided in that post, I will try to provide methods of making the intangible tangible.

* Second efforts
    * Heart and Determination
    * Work ethic
    * Hustle
    * Being "clutch"
    * Ability to play thru pain
    * Mental toughness
    * Intelligence
    * Ability to be mentally "in the game"
    * Maturity / Immaturity
    * Team chemistry
    * Leadership
    * Comfort
    * Communication
    * Hot/Cold Streaks

Second Efforts
You can’t really measure why a player will choose to put in a secondary effort, the player himself can try to put it into words, but it can’t be numerically represented. However, the results of his secondary efforts surely can be quantified.

For example, following an error one can measure how many bases are taken by the batter runner, or any existing runners; or how often an out is recorded on the same play that an error occurred. So if, for example, the standard average is found to be, following an error, .1 outs are recorded on the same play, and 1.5 additional bases are taken by the runners; you can then determine whether or not the player who committed the error made up for his mistake above or below average. If following an error, Player A bears out an average of .32 outs recorded, and .8 additional bases taken, you can then have some statistical input as to any secondary effort Player A is giving following his own fielding error.

So if the league average is - .1 outs and 1.5 additional bases per error
And Player A has stats of - .32 outs and .8 additional bases per error

Then one could come up with a stat that measure his averages in comparison to the rest of the league, and assign Player A a ‘Second Effort’ statistic. Maybe one could say that Player A has a ‘Post Error Out Conversion Over Replacement’ (PEOCOR) of .31, and a ‘Post Error Bases Allowed Over Replacement’ (PEBAOR) of -.7

Heart and Determination & Work Ethic
I’m putting these together as they seem very much in the same vein. No, Heart, Determination, and Work Ethic are not things that can simply be represented by numbers. However, one can view the results by a player, and therefore come up with a statistical correlation.

Say, for example, that the average number of ground balls seen during fielding practice by an NL starting shortstop is 10, and the average number of swings during BP by NL starting shortstops is also 10. And say that Ryan Theriot averages 17.4 groundballs fielded during practice, and averages 23.8 swings during BP.

So the NL average for a starting shortstop would be – 10 GBs and 10 swings
And the averages for Ryan Theriot would be – 17.4 GBs and 23.8 swings

So a stat can be formulated that will measure the supposed work ethic, or determination, of Ryan Theriot. One could then say that Theriot has a ‘Fielding Work Ethic’ (FWE) of 1.74, and a ‘BP Work Ethic’ (BPWE) of 2.38. These numbers won’t tell you how Theriot feels about his work, but it will tell you what the results of his feelings are.

Hustle
A classic example of an intangible. One cannot quantify what it is that makes a player hustle. Why Pete Rose always seemed to give 110% isn’t something that can be statistically represented. However, again, the fruits of his hustling labor can be measured.

Say, for the sake of argument, that Reed Johnson’s fastest time of getting from the batter’s box to first base is 5 seconds. Then measure how fast he gets from the box to first base on average during a game. Say he averages a time of 5.5 seconds from the box to first.

One could then say that Reed Johnson has a ‘Hustle Percentage’ of .900

The same can be measured for going from first to second, first to third, first to home, second to third, second to home, and third to home (all on non homeruns most likely). You can then further analyze his ‘Hustle Percentage’ during singles, doubles, and triples, whether he was hitting them, or he was a runner already on base.

Then a way to measure the impact on the results of his Hustle Percentage of .900, you could then compare him with other players with similar fastest times (the original 5 seconds), and see how many extra infield hits Reed Johnson accrued, or look for a correlation of XBH in relation to a players Hustle Percentage (HP).

Again, this isn’t to say that it explains what it is that makes a player ‘give it his all’ or ‘leave it all out on the field’, but it is totally plausible to be able to quantify the results of his effort.

Being "Clutch"
I was confused to see this item on the list, seeing as there are existing stats that measure this. Again it cannot be numerical ascertained why a player might be more ‘clutch’ than other, more mortal, men. But it can seen which players perform at a higher level in ‘clutch’ opportunities.

Examples:
BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, wOBA with RISP
BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, wOBA in 1 Run games
BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, wOBA in the 7th inning or later
BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, wOBA against a pitcher whom they have performed below career averages against in the past
BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, wOBA with an 0-2 count
BA, OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+, wOBA with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs
Percentage of times a player is successful in advancing the runner with nobody out.

ERA, ERA+, WHIP, OPP BA, OPP OPS, K/9, BB/9 with RISP
ERA, ERA+, WHIP, OPP BA, OPP OPS, K/9, BB/9 in 1 Run games
ERA, ERA+, WHIP, OPP BA, OPP OPS, K/9, BB/9 in the 7th inning or later
ERA, ERA+, WHIP, OPP BA, OPP OPS, K/9, BB/9 against a hitter whom has performed above their career averages against in the past
ERA, ERA+, WHIP, OPP BA, OPP OPS, K/9, BB/9 with a 3-0 count
ERA, ERA+, WHIP, OPP BA, OPP OPS, K/9, BB/9 with a 3-1 count
ERA, ERA+, WHIP, OPP BA, OPP OPS, K/9, BB/9 with a 3-2 count
ERA, ERA+, WHIP, OPP BA, OPP OPS, K/9, BB/9 with an 0-2 count
ERA, ERA+, WHIP, OPP BA, OPP OPS, K/9, BB/9 with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs
Percentage of times an opposing batter is successful in advancing the runner with nobody out.

Ability to Play Thru Pain & Mental Toughness & Ability to be Mentally "In The Game"
I’m grouping these together as they seem extremely closely related. This is where things get a little trickier, as collecting data requires assuming honesty from all related parties. But in the effort of obtaining accurate measurements, it is likely that relying on honesty is the only choice remaining.

After (or before) every game, a player can be surveyed to determine both his mental & emotional state, and his level of physical pain. A player can relay his emotions on a scale of 1-10, 1 being ‘cidal’ (of the ‘sui’ or ‘homi’ varieties), and 10 being ‘capable of cracking the moon with my swing’. And he can also relay his level of pain on a scale of 1-10 as well.

Now, I know some say that you have to take a person’s pain tolerance into account. But the scale would automatically do that. What may feel like a pain level of 2 to Derrek Lee, might be a 6 for me for example. But the amount of pain in relation to what we’re able to cope with, is what is important. It’s like a handicap, if Derrek has a higher pain tolerance than myself, a leg cramp is going to bother him that much less than it would me, despite the fact that if it weren’t for his inherent ability, we’d be in the same amount of pain.

So, if using an Emotional & Mental scale, the average is 5. It can then be calculated, and trends could be identified, of how a player’s performance is altered based his mental or emotional stress level. Say the average deviation from a player’s OPS during a ‘good’ mental and emotional state (say 7-10) is +15%, and the average deviation during a ‘bad’ state (1-3) is -25%, then one could determine such a player to have relatively weak mental strength in regards to allowing his thoughts and feelings affect his level of play. Whereas a player who shows minimal deviation from his average OPS regardless of his Emotional & Mental state, can be said to have very strong constitution in regards to keeping his head in the game.

The same conclusions can be drawn from the pain survey. If Derrek Lee see’s a dip of only -5% when he’s playing with a high level of pain (7-10), then one could likely conclude that Derrek Lee is able to perform at a relatively normal level even when in physical pain, and that it is worthwhile for him to stay in the lineup even if he’s banged up.

Intelligence
Again, I don’t know why this is listed as there is already such a thing as an Intelligence Quotient. However, I shall assume that this means baseball intelligence.

Now this is something that I don’t know if it can be objectively quantified based on analysis of play. I could say that we could count up the number of ‘boneheaded’ plays in relation to the league average, but ‘boneheaded’ is a completely subjective concept. However, it is very likely that it could be done, seeing as errors are often quite subjective as well, so if the Error is an acceptable stat, then it could very well be that a ‘Boneheaded Mistake’ (BM) stat could become accepted.

But just the same as there are tests to measure one’s IQ, there can be an exam to measure baseball IQ. It could involve a written answer portion, a portion where a player stands in a batting cage and tries to identify what type of pitch is being thrown based on the rotation, and whether or not it will end up in the strike zone. A section of the test could be on the field, where it can be seen how a player responds in a rundown situation, or if he correctly breaks to cover the bag on a stolen base attempt or holds his position, etc.

Now, this idea is completely impractical, but it demonstrates that such a thing as baseball IQ can be measured if someone really wanted to go through the painstakingly ridiculous process of administering tests.

Maturity / Immaturity
To me, this feels like something that doesn’t need to be quantified. It is, in and of itself, truly intangible, as it is witnessing a player’s behavior. This is again something that can only be measured via survey, and not by the player himself. However, that does not mean we can’t poll every player and coach the player has shared a clubhouse with and get their opinion of the player’s maturity level. So using the 1-10 scale, it could likely be determined what a player’s ‘Perceived Maturity’ level is, but that’s probably as close as you can get.

Team chemistry & Leadership
This is the one I was looking forward to the most. We may never be able to completely describe why a player has an impact on those around him, but it can certainly be determined whether or not the play by his teammates is actually being affected.

This, once again, would rely heavily on the use of surveys. Say that every player in MLB was polled about every other player in MLB. And that on a scale of 1-10, they decided how ‘good of a clubhouse guy’ such a player is. And then that data was taken, and averages were drawn out to determine a player’s ‘Clubhouse Popularity Quotient'. In the interest of using current BCB rhetoric, I will use DeRosa and Bradley as examples.

Say for the sake of argument that DeRosa yielded a CPQ of 7.8, and Bradley was found to have a CPQ of 3.6. Now, we can take that information and see what kind of effect their presence in a clubhouse had on their teammates performance.

So we look at every single player that DeRosa has ever shared a clubhouse with. And over the course of their careers, all those players (position only) had an average OPS of .764. We can then look at the splits to see how they were effected by DeRosa’s presence in the locker room. So if when DeRosa was a current teammate, that OPS average rose to .798, and when he wasn’t a teammate, that OPS average dropped to .744, we can clearly see that, for whatever reason, when a player shared space with DeRosa, typically their performance got a boost.

So then this data can be used to formulate DeRosa’s ‘Offensive Performance Influence’ as being .034, to go along with his 7.8 CPQ

And say that the stats bared that Bradley had an ‘Offensive Performance Influence’ of -.008, to go along with his 3.6 CPQ.

So you can then try to identify trends with CPQ, seeing if players with a high CPQ tend to yield a higher OPI. And the CPQ can be further used to identify increases in teammates’ Fielding Work Ethic (FWE), BP Work Ethic (BPWE), Hustle Percentage (HP), or Post Error Out Conversion Over Replacement (PEOCOR) and Post Error Bases Allowed Over Replacement (PEBAOR). Thereby concluding exactly what sort of influence a player has on his teammates, and whether or not a popular player truly makes a big of a difference as we fans sometimes think.

Comfort
This seems entirely related to a player’s clubhouse presence. If a player is comfortable, certainly it will show by his teammates’ response to him. And if he isn’t, well what does it matter so long as he is still able to produce, and it doesn’t effect him enough to show up on his mental and emotional stress surveys.

Communication
This seems two fold.

1. Measuring a player’s communication with his teammates.

2. Measuring a player’s communication with his coaches.

The first seems like it would generally be covered, again, by his overall clubhouse presence. I’d imagine that if a player generally didn’t communicate with his teammates, he’d be given a neutral or negative Clubhouse Popularity Quotient.

The second is something that is harder to identify unless you wanted to cross the ludicrous boundary of ‘Words Spoken With Hitting Coach Over Replacement' (WSWHCOR) . So I think I’d acquiesce to the idea that good communication with the coaching staff is likely something that cannot be measured. However, one can calculate how often a player tells the coaching staff he is injured immediately as opposed to a player telling the staff he was injured months prior. But again, it would be so difficult to quantify.

Hot/Cold Streaks
This is another that I just don’t understand how it can be considered an intangible, seeing as hot and cold streaks are so easily identified.

However, explaining how or why such streaks occur is likely far more difficult.

Using previously described stats and surveys, one could probably find some sort of correlation between a players mental and emotional state, his pain level, and/or any positive or negative clubhouse presences, and his level of play on the field.

For example, if a player or players on a team start a really hot streak directly following a trade, perhaps that newly acquired player has a high OPI.

Or maybe when Soriano goes on one of his cold streaks there is some correlation between his performance and his mood, or his BP Work Ethic.

But certainly there are times when streaks occur simply out of randomness, that’s why a player who hits .333 won’t always go 1 for 3 in a game, sometimes he’ll hit .120, and others he’ll with .540, that’s just the way it works.

So, I think that most of these 'intangibles' are actually measurable, but the practical application of the majority of these statistics is so absurdly ludicrous that they will likely never be employed. I don't like the sentiment that 'stats are everything, everything else is religion', but at the same time, a lot of what is perceived as immeasurable, is often quite the opposite.

I see the correlation between Koyie Hill starting games, and the subsequent team record, but if there isn't some sort of statistical analysis that shows that the pitchers performed better throwing to him than to Soto, or that the team OPS rose when Koyie started, then it can't really be assumed to be a direct correlation of cause and effect as much as it can be chalked up to simple coincidence. However, I would be one who would insist on riding out that coincidence until it appeared to 'lose it's magic' so to speak, but I wouldn't be one to assume that Koyie is superior to Geo as a result.

Can't we all just get along?

Run Differential

WittyUserName — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 14:43:24 -0000

I've been following the standings on MLB.com and have been quite intrigued by the run differential for teams, and the subsequent expected WIN-LOSS records for those teams. Strangely enough, some of teams with amazing records shouldn't, statistically speaking, be having those kinds of years

Here's the breakdown of the top teams in reference to run differential and expected WIN-LOSS:

1. Cubs +193 85-49 (Actual Record: 84-50, -1)

2. Red Sox +122 78-55 (Actual Record: 77-56, -1)

3. White Sox +108 77-56 (Actual Record: 76-57, -1)

4. Phillies +88 76-58 (Actual Record: 73-61, -3)

5. Rays +80 75-57 (Actual Record: 81-51, +6)

6. Mets +73 74-60 (Actual Record: 74-60)

7. Brewers +72 74-59 (Actual Record: 77-56, +3)

8. Jays +66 74-59 (Actual Record: 68-65, -6)

9. Twins +65 73-61 (Actual Record: 75-59, +2)

10. Angels +57 72-61 (Actual Record: 81-52, +9)

11. Cardinals +55 72-62 (Actual Record: 74-60, +2)

Now, obviously having a winning expected record guarantees nothing in reality. However, for the most part the expected records are really close to teams actual records, the only primary exceptions are the Jays, Rays, and Angels

Last season the D-Backs defied logic by winning despite a poor expected record and poor run differential, so having the Angels and Rays win wouldn't be such a shock, and by all accounts, they'd be contenders even if they weren't outplaying their differential. But what does that say about the teams? Obviously it shows that they are winning close games and losing some blowouts, but is there anything else to be read into this?

Does anybody else find these numbers interesting? Based on this, the Red Sox should have a 1.5 game lead over the Rays and a 3 game lead over the Jays. And the Phillies would lead the Mets by 2, as opposed to them trailing by 1. The Angels are clearly winning a ton of close games, and there is clear evidence to that as K-Rod is chasing the single-season saves record

Do people think this is telling of how teams might fair down the stretch, or how they'll perform in October? I think it tells the story of just how dominating the Cubs have been, and how I don't think they need to cower in fear of any opponent. I think it will be interesting to see if these numbers take their toll down the stretch, particularly in regard to the Rays, as the Angels have all but secured themselves that division.

Cause for optimism

WittyUserName — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:44:19 -0000

I know that things aren't great for all things Cubs at the moment, but I think a lot of people are overlooking things. I felt it appropriate to add, yet another, thread regarding the topic of optimism with this team.

Back at the end of May, I said this about the Brewers (I'm paraphrasing):

"The Brewers have a great offense, but like the Astros, are far too one dimensional of a team to sustain any sort of prolonged winning percentage in order to keep pace. Teams like this certainly get hot and have the bats carry them for a time, remember how the Astros were 'a surprise contender' early on? I can see the Brewers getting hot and pulling really close around the All Star Break, but will likely fade come August."

Now, obviously the Brewers have tilted the scales a bit by adding Sabathia, and thereby giving them a much more dynamic team. It seems that the Brewers are trying to cheat the math a bit and avoid the eventual slump they'd hit by bolstering the rotation before that time comes. Their chances are good, but they are still a hit first, pitch second, team, and with, still, a shoddy bullpen, it won't necessarily be difficult for them to win, but it's hard to imagine them to keep on winning at the pace they've been winning at.

Are the Cubs in a slump right now? You bet. You know the good news? Apparently, the Cubs slumping are a .500 team! That is, without a doubt, PHENOMENAL! Since Soriano got hit in the hand, per Al's thread, the Cubs are 17-17. What do you hope for when a star player goes down if not 'Boy, I just hope that they can play .500 ball till he comes back'? And I know that stats can be deceiving, and that they've been worse lately. But looking at their last 10 games, guess what, they're 5-5.

This team, at it's worst, is still a .500 team.

Early on in the season, everything was coming up Cubs. Since Soriano went down, think of the things the team has had to endure:

Soriano out

Ramirez slumping, not once, but twice!

Lee leading MLB (I think) with 20 DPs

Fukdome being awful

Zambrano on the DL

Johnson on the DL

Eyre on the DL

Marmol imploding AND exploding

Howry being just bad

DeRosa in the OF with less than stellar defense

Wood being unavailable with a blister

The two little players that could, and the over-the-hill slugger being the only offensive threats in the lineup.

All that, and this team is STILL in first place by the same amount as they were when Soriano went down. Granted the Brewers have gained ground, but so what? We've been cold and they've been hot. I'm looking forward to August and, hopefully, a revitalized team.

I'm not going to say "Step away from the ledge", because part of me is there too. I could've sworn that Johnson was throwing 88 MPH because he certainly sent this offense back to 2006 for a night. But it's a slump, it happens.

The highs of the season wouldn't be so great if there were never any lows.

Do people think that we're good enough?

WittyUserName — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:17:16 -0000

As the roster stands right now (spots to be won in ST aside), do people think that the Cubs in 2008 will be legitimate World Series contenders?

Personally, I feel that they are in a slightly better boat than they were at the end of 2007. They've added depth to the pen and rotation. They've signed a legit RF and have been able to upgrade at C in house.

Could the current roster win the World Series? Sure, but I think a lot has to go right. There are a lot of 'ifs':

If Pie turns the corner
If Lilly doesn't regress
If Soto is as good as advertised
If Fukudome is as good as advertised
If Zambrano has a good year
If Hill has a good year
If Lieber is healthy
If Theriot gets better
If Cedeño turns the corner
If Soriano's leg problems don't come back

Personally, I think that Soto and Fukudome will be fine, and while I doubt Lilly will have a 2008 as good as 2007, I'm sure he'll be fine. But there are still some things that seem to be left up to fate.

I feel that our bullpen is great, our offense is fine, and our rotation is fine. And while I totally expect the 2008 Cubs to be good and make it to October, they don't seem, to me at least, to be a team that can dominate in the playoffs.

Do people feel differently? Do people think we need a new 2B whose name I won't mention since Al is sick of reading/hearing it. Do people think that we need a another top of the rotation Starting Pitcher?

I'm not meaning to start a debate about specific trades, although that would certainly be welcome. But simply how do people feel about the current roster and their chance at ending the streak in it's centennial year?

Poll

Is the current 2008 roster good enough?

Yes

26 votes

No

40 votes

Lou will get the pieces working together

43 votes

Trade the farm

15 votes

So long as I can drink at the games...

5 votes

129 votes | Poll has closed

Game of Shadows Movie

WittyUserName — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:19:21 -0000

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/baseball/mlb/11/29/bc.bbn.bondsmovie.ap/index.html

HBO Films is planning on producing a film based on the book 'Game of Shadows'. It is to be directed by Ron Shelton (of Bull Durham fame) and written by Shelton and his writing partner John Norville.

Writing is set to commence once the writer's strike comes to an end.

I think this is very interesting to say the least. It also seems interesting that a man who seems to covet baseball is going to be charged with handling one of it's biggest black-eyes.

Discuss.

EPat in CF, anyone think I'm nuts?

WittyUserName — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:33:07 -0000

My thoughts for 2008

In my opinion, the Cubs need to address the following needs for the 2008 season.

A Right Fielder (preferably a lefty who is a legit #5 hitter)
A #2 or #3 starter (another #4 wouldn't be so bad)
A Short Stop
A Center Fielder

I ranked these in order of importance.

If I could make a few realistic signings, I think my opening day roster would be:

Soriano LF (R)
E. Patterson CF (L)
Lee 1B (R)
Ramirez 3B (R)
Fukudome RF (L)
Soto C (R)
DeRosa 2B (R)
Cedeño SS (R)
Zambrano P (L)

Bench:
OF Jones (L)
OF Murton (R)
IF Theriot (R)
IF/OF Ward (L)
C Blanco (R)

Bullpen:
RHP Dempster
RHP Marmol
RHP Wood
RHP Howry
LHP Eyre
LHP Marshall
RHP Wuertz

Rotation:

Zambrano
Lilly
Kuroda
Hill
Marquis

I think that Fukudome and Kuroda really give us exactly what we need. I think we desperately need improved lineup balance. It got to the point in 07 that a diminished Floyd was batting cleanup just to avoid having 4 right handers in a row. Fukudome is a lefty, and if he's close to as good as we're hoping, he should make a solid #5 hitter.

Then Kuroda. I'm skeptical about both potential Japanese talents, as you never quite know how things are going to transfer. But even if Kuroda turns into a decent #4, that's still a pretty respectable rotation, and I feel much more comfortable with Marquis as the 5th guy than the 3rd guy. Plus, I want to see if Marshall can be good in the pen, because he'd be a great long man / loogy. And he's always around as an insurance policy SP. I'm just not wild about 3 SPs who are southpaws, especially when their stuff is at least comparable.

Then there's CF. Most people are expecting EPat to be traded, I wouldn't be surprised. But among our in house CF options (Jones, Pie, EPat) I think that Patterson fills the lineup needs the most by far. They are all lefties, but I think the Cubs need one of them to be the #2 hitter, and Pie and Jones pale in comparison as a top of the order hitter next to Patterson. His ceiling may be lower than Pie, but Patterson appears to have just about reached it. I'd gladly take a .280 AVG with 10 HR and some SBs out of the 2 slot. He's a better base-stealer with a higher OBP than Jones, and he certainly seems more equipped than Pie to hit MLB pitching.

I also am not a huge fan of Jones as an everyday player. But as a 4th OF, I think he could be one of the best there is.

But wait... isn't Theriot the #2 hitter? I don't think Theriot is a starting SS. He's a good player, and I like him as much as anyone, but a guy with a .266 AVG, a mediocre OBP, no power, and OK defense isn't a starter unless you don't really have a better option. He's a GREAT backup SS/2B, but he's no starter. I think that Cedeño MAY have turned a corner, and he's earned one LAST shot at trying to be a MLB SS. Cedeño has a legit upside, whereas I think Theriot has a ceiling of .275 AVG, .350 OBP and 35 SBs accompanied by OK defense, which is again fine, but he'll be 28 when the season starts, he's not gonna develop other parts of his game now.

People have thoughts on this lineup, and Patterson and Cedeño in particular? I think I'm on the 'don't sign ARod bandwagon'. I don't think he can play a great SS anymore, and it seems like the clubhouse has a pretty good chemistry to it, I'd hate to disrupt it with a monster guy like ARod.

Again, I made my Patterson decision largely because I feel that good teams have lineup balance, and we've been far too right handed for a while now. We need a good top of the order lefty in CF. On that thought, I wouldn't be opposed to a one year stop-gap of Kenny Lofton playing CF and hitting 2nd, he'd be fine with me as well.

Strategy Threads

WittyUserName — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:58:17 -0000

What would you do?

I occasionally look around the message board at cubs.com, mostly for rumors or what not. But I stumbled across a thread where fans were criticizing the Reds for walking Ward to get to DeRosa in the 9th.

Most people argued that they were probably going for matchups (Lefty / Righty), and many felt that the Reds should've walked the bases loaded to setup the force at home.

My thoughts were:

"I'm sure that this is something along the lines of the what the Reds were thinking:

"We need a double play to get out of this thing. Of the next 3 batters, who is most likely to hit into a DP? Probably Jacque Jones. So we need to walk either Ward or DeRosa for the double play to be set-up for Jones. Between Ward and DeRosa, Ward strikes out less and is more likely to lift one deep enough for a sac fly. Therefore, we have to try to get a weak grounder, pop-up, or strikeout from DeRosa to have any chance."

I don't agree with walking both Ward and DeRosa at all. Then it's bases loaded with 0 outs, and your no longer looking for a double play, but a force out at home. So Say Jones nubs one to 2nd, the throw goes home and nails Fuld, bases are juiced with 1 out. Then you just gave the Cubs an extra batter, if not two extra batters (one to try to get a sac fly, and a second to try for a hit in case of a non DP out). Giving the opponent extra outs to work with is never good (as everyone would agree), but it doesn't just pertain to defensive gaffes, it also has to do with strategy laden situations such as this one.

On the surface, of course you don't walk to get to a guy who is 9 for his last 9 against you. But using the larger sample sizes of both season and career numbers, Ward was much more likely to drive in Fuld than DeRosa was, at least in terms of a sac-fly. It was a 'pick your poison' scenario, it was bad for the Reds either way."

Thoughts on that scenario?

But more than just this particular scenario, I haven't really noticed many strategy heavy discussions about 'what would you do' relating to a recent baseball scenario.

Would others be interested in such discussions / threads?

My 2007 two cents

WittyUserName — Thu, 21 Sep 2006 22:38:11 -0000

Lengthy, but I'm trying to be elaborate

First I'll list my line-up, question marks and all, then I'll try to explain.

1-Torri Hunter CF / Theriot 2B / Lugo SS/2B
2- Murton LF/RF
3- D. Lee 1B (hoping family things are ok, obviously more important)
4- Ramirez 3B
5- Barret LF/RF
6- Torri Hunter CF / Vernon Wells CF
7- Bengie Molina C
8- Izturis SS / Theriot 2B

Rotation:

Zambrano
FA
Hill
Prior / FA / Rookie
Miller / FA / Rookie

Pen:
Closer- Dempster / Wood
SU- Eyre
SU- Howry / Wood
Lefty Specialist- Ohman / Marshall
Long Relief - Wuertz / Marshall

Thats 7 relievers, obvisouly will probably be cut to six depending on who works out between Ohman, Wuertz, and Marshall in ST. And assuming Wood is able to pitch next year.

Ok, so a lot of '/'s in my lineup. Thats because there are so many options and ways things can end up this off season, and the cubs are not the only ones looking for help (obviously)

Leadoff/CF:
I do not hate pierre, but it's possible he'll want a lot of money, and I've seen better guys leadoff, he's fast as (metaphor), but with an OBP of .330-.340, I'm not ecstacic, especially with his low run production (obviously not his job exactly, but everyone, pitcher excluded, should be at least decent at knocking people in, especially in the majors and for that kinda cash)

Torri Hunter or Julio Lugo or Theriot are great leadoff options. Personally, I'd probably put Hunter deeper in the order, probably 6th, but he can lead off if our Middle Infielders aren't options.

Also in CF both Hunter and Wells are solid hitters and good defensive assets, I'd consider both upgrades over Pierre even though I greatly Respect his hustle and heart.

RF
I'm sorry, but if I were a manager, or a GM, Jacque Jones would NOT be on my roster. He is an above average hitter against right handed pitching... thats it, he is NOT an all around baseball player. I'm sorry, but a defensive liablity that will allow virtually EVERYONE to go first to third on base hits to right is not good.

He's seems like a nice guy, and I'm sure he tries really hard, but he's just not an all around baseball player.

Now Barret is a defensive liablity but an offensive powerhouse. If able to play 150+ games he could probably hit more like 25-30hr and drive in more runs. It would also extend his career to move him out of the crouch, and to be honest, some of his defense HAS cost us games. I recall a passed ball 3rd strike for out number 3 with Z throwing. Which set up a 2 out 2 run blast and a loss. I would also like a catcher who can throw out a base runner.

Barret seems athletic enough, and enough of a gamer to make the switch and be solid. I don't know if he or Murton would make the better RF, but both are fantastic baseball guys who hustle everytime out of the box, and can drive in a ton of runs, just what you want from your corner OFs... right?

BTW - Murton is great, anyone who says otherwise, I.... well I disagree, I'll leave it at that and let his numbers speak. The guy is young and a fantastic hitter with patience, don't you dare consider letting him get away.

3B
Ramirez is good, keep him

1B
Lee is amazing, if he goes, we either catch lightning with a prospect, or consider blowing up and starting over.

SS
I can live with Izturis at SS, a GG calibur Middle Infielder is always welcome and he can hit 8th for me. However, there have been some talks about Lugo, and while I hear he's a jerk (which is a deterrent for sure) there are worse ideas. Lugo can leadoff or hit 2nd, has some power and will steal his fair share of bases.

2B
I, like many, really like the look of Theriot, who should legally add a space in his last name. He plays really hard, works the count and is fast. He's solid defensively and all around looks good. In reality, we have too small a sample size to judge accuratly, the league probably doesn't have a good strategy against him yet, need to see how he adjusts to pitchers using a strategy against him other than good pitches.
He has earned an invite to ST with serious consideration for the starting job.
Again, this could be a spot filled by Lugo with Izturis at short. I could live with and be excited about either scenario, personally I'd rather not have a wife beater (rumor I'm pretty sure was about Lugo) on my roster, but this is overall a direction I'd approve of.

Catcher
As most people will agree, Barrett is not the best behind the dish. But again a rather large offensive asset. Toronto recently stated that they don't really plan on bringing back Molina, at least thats what I read on their site (I looked up Molina articles), he's a solid defensive catcher (he's a Molina after all) and while not a killer with the lumber, will contribute his fair share.

I understand that their will be others looking to pick up Molina, I'm really okay with a .270ish hitting solid defensive catcher. I'd take Blanco if I thought he could hit as well as he has this year, but I believe he's a bit old to be the everyday guy all year, and probably won't hit this well again for more than a small streak.

So if CF is Hunter or Wells and Infield is Izzy and Theriot:
1 Theriot
2 Murton
3 Lee
4 Ramirez
5 Barrett
6 Hunter or Wells
7 Molina
8 Izzy

Or if Lugo is SS
1 Lugo
2 Murton
3 Lee
4 Ramirez
5 Barrett
6 Hunter or Wells
7 Molina
8 Theriot

Theriot is 8 in this situation rather than 2, because he's the only one in the lineup likely to hit 5 hrs or even less. And with his phenominal OBP that would give the Pitcher spot a lot of bunt opportunities to move him over.

And if there's a 2B other than those in this equation I'm not sure where they'd hit (obviously)

I think everything regarding the pitching is pretty self explanatory, Spots can be taken by other young arms in the pen.

Z- Obviously the Ace

Hill - Could Potentially be the #2 Starter, but really should debut at 4 if we had a solid 3 in Prior or Miller, but too early to tell for sure on both of those. But Hill should make a fine #3 if he comes to ST with a developed change, and perhaps a work-in-progress 4th pitch.

FA- People throw around Zito and Schmidt. Schmidt would be great but will probably stay on the Coast. I'm not exactly sure who to slate here, so long as it's a tier 2 FA I can deal. If so, perhaps you see who amongst Prior, Miller, and Hill do the best in ST and put them at #2 and the FA at 3.

Prior/Miller/Young Arm - One would imagine that either Prior OR Miller will be ready by next season so they would definetly get a spot, and assuming one of them can't make it, which ever young arm in ST looks the most promising (whether it Marshall, Guzman, or Ryu - you know from Street Fight, they are the most likely condidates) can round out the 5th spot if need be.

So there it is, long winded and all. I know it's for the most part, drastically different from what many others would be planning on, however I think such a line up (once all the '?'s are answered that is) would be phenominal. Score a WHOLE LOT more runs than this current one, and would be pretty darn solid defensively.