I've had my opinion changed when people have presented the counter argument in a way I haven't though of.
Not really; you've dug your heels in on a rather antiquated POV and refused to budge. Most people, when they ask a question, don't have the answer.... My suggestion is, next time, make a statement: George Springer Should Not Lead Off. And then walk away as you obviously aren't open to considering (let alone adopting) any dissenting opinions.
He's hitting lefties a lot better this year. And we face righties, what, 75% of the time? But sure, there would be cases where we face a lefty and Reddick doesnt play that day.
I dont see those opposing my opinion budging, do you? It was raised as a question in the context of not knowing what other peoples opinions were, and thus, inviting people to express them. I would say I have succeeded completely to that end
I said, not often. Not never. And even when this happens, that person doesn't always/usually let the board know it.
So the quotes from Hinch (which would echo the organization's) and the success they have had this year don't sway your opinion? We know for a fact that the lineup as constructed has created the most runs and best record in baseball. Making a significant change like you propose would change that dynamic and we have no idea what would happen.
I would say the available evidence is overwhelmingly in their favor. They're on the much more solid ground. Yes, and fair enough.
Firstly, I do acknowledge the success this team has had. The offense has looked superb, especially lately. But as has been pointed out numerous times, the success of a team, no matter how good, waxes and wanes throughout the year. At right this moment, fault is hard to find. But if you go back to the Indians series(s), things looked different. Same team. Same lineups (basically). So my point is, no matter how good a team looks at a particular time, how they are performing isnt the litmus test to whether changes would make them better still. It wasnt long ago that Hinch made the comment that the offense wasnt hitting on all cylinders yet. That was what, two weeks ago? Same line up. Same BO. Look, there is no guarantee what I propose would help. There is no guarantee I am wrong either. These things play out over time. Not just during streaks, bad or good ones. One would have to have access to a alternate version of reality where changes were employed, and outcomes measured to know what the perfect BO might be.
You are absolutely correct. The vast majority of the time the success of a team waxes and wanes during the year. So, what teams tend to do is ride out the tough times without panicking, which is exactly what the Astros did and we have proof as to what happened. Springer started leading off at some point in 2015 and put up an OBP of .379 and an OPS of .830 and .362 and .816 in 2016. Nothing wrong with those number from a leadoff man and I assume you weren't advocating for him to move during 2015 and 2016. (I did a quick search and didn't find any posts from you regarding that). Based on a 14 game slump where his OBP dropped from .364 to a season low .280 you chose to question his lead off abilities.
But you would admit that the offense has been dynamic for the greater part of the season thus far... and if something is more of the norm, with the cold streaks being the outlier, is that really enough to suggest change? Believe me, this team and manager will adjust things when it's painfully obvious that it is not working. You seem to be advocating for change despite the fact that it is working, because of the occasional cold streak this team has had (which all teams will have...)
Yes. And what suggests change is a matter of opinion, mentality and subjective observation. I advocate change BEFORE its painfully obvious. This wont be a great analogy, for there may not be any audiophiles present here. But I will illustrate it anyway. I have spent the last 6 years converting and treating my main living room acoustics. There are a couple sites where via a mic and measurement software, I have posted the results of what I have measured. In the beginning, things were way off and in great need of improvement. Over time, I tinkered endlessly until things were looking good. In fact, folks in the industry, acoustic engineers, guys who build $200k sound studios, mastering guys, and so on told me at some point that I should just enjoy what I had. That the measurement data suggested that things were as good as I could expect. Hearing that from folks who knew vastly more than I did gave me pause. But I continued anyway. Since that point, I feel I have improved things further still. Noticeably so. So to understand why I think the way I think, the above experience is a way, if only a single example. No matter how good something is, it can still be better. For those interested, the above journey was documented here: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/817205-my-listening-room.html
I think you generally prefer the LHB to be 2nd, since he has a larger hole on the right side with a man on first. I can see an argument for Altuve to be 1st and Springer to be 4th.
What I don't get about your example is that measurement data suggested things were maxed, yet you continued. Why? Was there other data that suggested you should continue? Was it the "ear" test? Are you going to continue to tinker constantly? When do you stop? What if you irreversibly break things at some point, is that ok? Also, the reason this analogy doesn't work is that every incremental bump in audio quality is good. For the Astros, it's much better to maintain elite than it is to get infinitesimally more elite with risk of getting worse...because they just need to score more runs than the opponent. Winning 16-5 isn't better than 15-5. But audio quality of 9.96 is better than 9.95 when you are listening.
Here is my analogy. My router was working well. I had this one odd problem that was a nuisance more than an actual problem. I changed router settings. My nuisance was resolved. Other things got screwed up. Why have you stopped tinkering with the sound system? Can't it get even better?
No, not maxed. As good as some thought I could expect. In audio, there is no max. There are too many variables, not to mention the key one which is listener subjectivity. Yes. Never . I have broken things. So I revert back to the previous incarnation and start working forward again from there in a different direction. In audio, you can always go back. Nothing is irreversible. Audio quality (perception there of) cant be truncated to a single metric. There is no one place in the data that you can point to as a litmus test. In audio, when you change one thing acoustically, several other metrics move as well. So you have to take in a broad view when deciding if a change was actually an improvement or not.
In baseball, when you change one thing in the batting order, several other metrics move as well. So you have to take in a broad view when deciding if a change was actually an improvement or not. Your example...... so, why, again, do you want to endlessly tinker with a league-leading offense?
I haven't stopped completely. But I have certainly crossed the threshold of diminishing returns. In audio, beyond a certain point, when all the various measures are within well established norms or preferences, it becomes more about what you subjectively like. Warm, detailed, expansive (soundstage), dynamics, frequency response, and so on all comprise what we hear. But often times, one listener will hold certain factors as more important than others. A vinyl guys might sacrifice detail for warmth as an example. A digital guy might say groove noise, pops and clicks are unacceptable. Some like exaggerated bass. Some crispy highs. There is no end to what personal preference entails. So at the end of the day, there is no one sound that will across the board gain complete and unequivocal acceptance. This maybe true of batting orders as well.
Agreed. But you wont know how those metrics will move until you move them. Because two years ago, I was told that I had a league leading sound system and was able to make it better still
