This whole discussion reminds me of Crash Davis trying to educate Nuke LaLoosh. But different. LaLoosh had talent.
Sorry, but you just don't have the analytical ability to digest the big picture that some players do better under pressure (clutch) with RISP than others who do better with no stress/pressure (no runners on). Got it, idiot?
Just to clarify, can you tell us how to know in advance which players will do better under pressure with RISP, given that it changes completely month to month and year to year? Is it that players are super-emotional and their ability to deal with pressure changes by month? Maybe they eat certain foods that make them super-pressure-sensitive for a month?
I regret doing this, but... Why do people assume that the same player will have the same results in a different role?
Let me simplify: your lead off batter shouldn't be leading the team in HRs and almost leading in RBIs! This is a managerial flaw! The stats show who has high RISP and who has low RISP. http://www.espn.com/mlb/player/splits/_/id/36006/yuli-gurriel
Yes, and next month, they will show something completely different. So my question, to repeat, is how do you know who will handle pressure well tomorrow? I don't care who handled it well yesterday - the stats show that's completely irrelevant to who will do it well tomorrow. You seem very good at making yesterday's lineup, which is a completely pointless thing to do.
The game (specifically AL lineups) is changing to where it is much more common/acceptable to not bat your typical table setting (high contact/avg and good speed) guy first. Just look at the Cubs. Schwarber is another guy that hits for power and drives in runs but isn't anywhere close to your formerly prototypical leadoff hitter. Also, look at Springer's career success batting leadoff compared to batting 3rd or 4th. It's a night and day difference. It just doesn't make sense to make a change when the lineup that includes Springer at 1 and Altuve at 3 is absolutely dynamic and firing on all cylinders.
I understand what coach flip is saying. In the 80's and before his way of analyzing this would be common. If you grew up or were watching baseball anytime up through 1990 or so, you know this is true. Cut Flip some slack, he's not absolutely wrong. However, analytics since then have gotten better. Many many power hitters bat 1st and 2nd. Table setters 9th. Its quite normal and definitely has its advantages. Major, past stats are used to predict future stats. Flip isn't wrong in assuming you would want to have your proven hitters up the most when men are on base. The thing that i don't believe is that you can assume that someone who hit a double batting 3rd would also have done it if he were 2 spots up. It's different pitches for different situations. Assuming a player puts up the same OPS and BA w/risp batting 1st as he would 3rd is not logical. Different situations bring different pitches and different outcomes. I believe Hinch has the batting order right for the most part. There are a couple things i would like to try if i were him but you really can't argue with the batting order yet.
And the past stats that I posted showed that Altuve produced better as a #3 (over #1) and Springer better as a #1 (over#3). Coach Flip chose to ignore that and simply pointed out their stats this year even though neither of them have been in the roles he wants them to be in. As of this moment in time, we have absolutely no idea how well the Astros would be doing with Coach Flip's lineup suggestions (wonder how Correa at #8 would be working out). We have factual evidence that the Astros are the 2nd highest scoring team (runs per game) in the AL. They are among the league leaders in a number of offensive categories, but since Coach Flip channeled "Use Wheeler in game 6 against the Cardinals with a 5-1 lead in the 9th instead of Lidge" he thinks Hinch doesn't know how to manage.
At least you are learning how to use the QUOTE function. Last year Altuve had an OPS over 1.000 with RISP, mostly as the #3 hitter. You used Altuve's stats from Wednesday's game to try and prove the Astros would have scored more runs. It is an impossible task to prove, but you seem to think players will produce exactly the same way in whatever role they are put in. Using that premise, I proved the Astros would have only been guaranteed one run rather than the 3 they actually scored. Face it, you came into the BBS May 1 with ridiculous lineup changes. Since then the Astros have averaged 6.18 runs per game and have gone 13-3 with Hinch managing the same way he has managed all year. And I'm the idiot? #billgatesmoney #coachflipsgotnothingonmisscleo #imakethingshappen
The stats are after a month of baseball, and stats haven't changed much since May 1st. Altuve still sucks with runners on, and Springer does well with runners on. Springer is average with none on, and Altuve does better with none on. Tweak it first then tweak it again if necessary. When? Great managers have a good feel for the game, and know when to tweak it.
You wanted a 'tweak' on 05/01 which included moving Correa to 8th so he would relax. By not tweaking and leaving Correa alone, here is his May slash line: .386/.471/.649/1.120 Springer was getting on base at a dismal .295 pace in April. By not tweaking and leaving Springer alone, here is his OBP for May: .385 Altuve, had an excellent .402 OBP in April...pretty darned good. His May OBP (when you want him to lead off) is .362. Meanwhile, his OPS is .927 in May (and you want your guys in the 3-4-5 spots to have that good OPS because it means they are driving the ball). Perhaps....just perhaps...Hinch knew these guys would rise to their expected numbers and didn't panic or tweak.
Thanks for clarifying. It crossed my mind that maybe Hinch is a genius if he has table setters in 8th-9th spot for Springer. I still think Springer may get more 2-run and 3-run HRs over solo shots if he batted 3rd.
And, again, it is just so odd that when we have actual factual data, you want to tweak things while not knowing how the tweaks will work. The lineup is working just fine. Could it be better, perhaps, but in the same vein, could it be worse with tweaks, perhaps. Last year, Boston averaged 5.42 runs per game to lead the AL with Cleveland well behind in second at 4.82. In 1999 Cleveland scored 1009 runs (6.2/game). Prior to that, the last team to score 1000+ runs was in 1950. The Astros May pace put them at 990+ over the course of the season, yet you want to tweak the lineup. Again, you want to change something that has been proven to work very well. I can't stress that enough. You want to make changes to a team during a month where they are producing at a phenomenal pace. And I'm the idiot.
Last year is last year. Jake was average last year. This year, he's a beast. My lineups were not ridiculous.
How many LOBs does Altuve have this year? How about Springer? You care about OPS, historical stats, overall batting averages, etc I care more about this year's situational averages and run production. I think Altuve is batting around 200 at home, but 400 on the road. What do you do about that?
Bats came alive in May, not April. There's always room for improvement and records are meant to be broken.
Correct...the bats improved in May, THE EXACT MONTH YOU JOINED THIS BOARD AND WANTED CHANGES THAT WERE SUBSEQUENTLY NEVER MADE. Yet, THE BATS IMPROVED. Again, I cannot stress this enough. They are producing at a phenomenal rate AND YOU WANT TO MAKE CHANGES. You have no idea what will happen with the changes. We have actual data to back up the current method and the actual data is very, very good.
Kinda like stubborn Hinch stuck it out last season with Gomer thinking his numbers would rise while the BBS was screaming to release him!
