cool, wasn't mean to be an insult. hope you didn't take it that way. Agreed. But again, I think the people component is being ignored. Messing with something that's working can have repercussions that are unpredictable, and you can't always revert and get them back. You would risk tweaking a sound system to optimize for classical, because if it makes rock sound awful, you could just go back. Not always the case here. The question is how many losses would turn into wins. I believe the gains you're looking for will result in a very small # of losses turned to wins--if any. And you've acknowledged that this change may be wrong/bad, and it could very well turn wins into losses. If that's the case, you have to account for that risk! IMO, you're risking a scenario of 10 more losses in hoping for a scenario with 1 more win, or something on that order generally. Things do change over time. However, things change as we get more and deeper data/insights to make those changes. If you want to test/tweak things for the sake of learning, you do that in the minors (like the Astros with tandem rotations or the Rockets with 3 point barrages) or when you have garbage teams. You don't tweak elite teams with unknown consequences in hopes of minor gains when you have potential negatives.
All reward comes with risk. This team, as are all teams really, built on taking risk. Choosing one player over another in the draft. Making a certain trade or not. Inserting a new pitcher into the game. And so on. Some pay off. Some backfire. I realize most here dont agree with my risk assessment which basically is that moving Springer to the 4 or 5 comes with little risk. I see him as a competent enough player that he will produce similarly where ever he is in the lineup. Meanwhile, many of you seem to feel something could go terribly wrong by doing so. Maybe we can agree to disagree.
Having Springer leading off has been working and there's no reason to mess around with his place in the lineup. He's been on fire with RISP. Curious as to his avg with RISP when he's hit 5th in the lineup? The bottom of the order has been exceptional this yr, and having Springer coming up behind them with men on base is one of the main reasons he needs to stay where he is in the lineup. That said it's not so crazy to envision him hitting 5th in the lineup behind Altuve and CC (their two best hitters who have GOOD GOD GIVE THE GUY A FREAKIN BREAK!!!! Last I checked this is a FAN forum and he's just sharing his opinion. We get it you don't agree with him. Having Springer leading off is obviously working, and I agree there's no reason to mess with it. That said it's not so off base envisioning Springer hitting 5th given how he's hitting with RISP. Yes the bottom of the lineup has been tearing it up this yr, and it's nice having Springer come up with these guys on base. No idea how Springer has hit in the past with RISP in the 5 hole, but Correa and Altuve certainly are on base quite a bit as well. Again it makes no sense to mess with something that's working (and Hinch won't). That doesn't mean that jim1961 can't give his opinion on what he'd do if he was the Mgr. It's one of the things that makes baseball great!! He's not going to change his mind, and he shouldn't have to but you keep on trying to do so.
If baseball players were robots, this would have merit. But in reality, once you get a player out of sorts, it might actually become a long-term problem.
Of course we can all have opinions. Those opinions can also be changed as jim has written and I have acknowledged. I was questioning if based on the success of the team and some of the arguments he has encountered here have changed his opinion.
Players are different than robots in another way. They have the capacity to adapt. Even prosper when faced with change. On this note, it seems I have more faith in our roster than you do.
Gotcha. There has certainly been numerous things pointed out to him that he should definitely consider. Springer certainly isn't your prototypical lead off hitter, but the game is certainly changing...no doubt!! Love having his pop at the top of the order. There are certainly things Hinch will continue to tweak as the season goes along, but penciling in Springer at the top of the line up won't be one of them.
They certainly do - which is why managers often change things up with slumping players. But baseball is also about confidence - if the players are happy and performing well, and the offense is doing unbelievable things, there's not a lot of reason to tinker. The downside dramatically outweighs the upside. No, you clearly don't. You're the one that thought Springer was trending downward because of a 2 week slump. You're the one who inevitably believes this currently lineup will falter and thus the need to fix it. You have more faith in your own inner beliefs, regardless of data and evidence, than I do. You have more faith in the idea that a leadoff hitter needs to fit nicely into a certain box than I do. But you clearly don't have a lot of faith in the lineup without making changes to where everyone is playing.
Whats clear is that you like to miss-characterize what I mean and not understand or remember what I have actually said. Please, just stop.
On a side note....anyone else having a problem with a video ad loading at the bottom of these pages and having your browser jump down to it? I reported it on the feedback page.
I haven't been. Though yesterday I was having an auto-playing vid on this forum somewhere without a jump. Not today
I don't think we disagree on the fact that risks are constantly being taken. It's when you take which risks that matter. And as I wrote in a longer post, I don't think an elite team should take risks that are unnecessarily out of the box in order to experiment and see if they can eek out +1 run/week if things go great. If you were advocating for this on a mediocre or especially bad team--or if you were suggesting experimenting with SB's and baserunning in the 1 spot above all else in all our minor league systems for the next 3 months--I'd be on board.
You know, if Hinch ever moves Springer into the 4-6th spots on a ongoing basis, a lot of folks here will be eating crow for a long time.
If the team is still scoring runs at a top 10 pace, if George has been "hot" for a week at any time within the previous ~8-12 weeks, if there aren't significant injuries that cause lineup shuffling, and if the Astros don't trade for someone even better in the top spot...then yeah I will gladly eat crow if it happens. I think most of us disagree with making a change now given all of the above is true, but acknowledge that it is of course plausible depending on circumstances.
Hinch created a new trend around the league. You see more springer wanabees hitting lead off. Yaw ain't springer. You can't hit 473 nor can you shimmy! It was May 2015 when George was moving up to lead off. But of course some yankee or cubs manager will get the credit. conspiracies.
