Jump to content
Cancer

2018 Baseball Thread (MLB and whatever)

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

I doubt Manny Mota types ever make even AAA today.  Or ok, maybe makes AAA, but not a snowball's chance of more.  No pop.  Just under 3800 ABs in his career...31 home runs.  Not that many doubles either...only 125.  Granted it was the pitching-heavy era, but singles hitters who aren't consistent Gold Glove candidates don't make it.  Defensively, most of his starts were in left;  that's almost a dump spot nowadays for another 30 HR, 150 SO bat that hopefully won't make TOO many errors.

 

Christopher:

 

 

But it's not, 95% of the time.  5th inning or later...yes, you pull him if you're down, barring fairly narrow situations.  Who you gonna let pitch a third time through the lineup in the first place?  

 

Yeah, Mota got semi-regular time early in his career with the Pirates (sort of platooning with one of the Alou brothers, Matty Alou, another speedy, high-BA, low-BB, speedster who wouldn't make it today-that Alou was probably most comparable in recent times to Ben Revere, who is nowhere to be found anymore).  But, by the time Mota got to LA, he got turned into a PH-specialist who would only play LF a handful of times a year.  (he did usually drive in a lot of runs as a PH, so without looking things up, he probably was a "PH-specialists" the Dodgers generally used more when men were on base, to flick a single the other way, and keep things moving.

 

Although they were many different types of PH-specialist,  most were linedrive singles hitters like Mota, or perhaps linedrive hitters with occasional power like Smoky Burgess.  But, you would have the occasional Jerry Lynch, who hit for a decent amount of power.  (of course, in the real old days when decent hitting pitchers were a bit more common, you had the occasional regularly PH pitcher.  If I remember one Red Lucas was that, and was the all-time PH leader, until Mota and Burgess came along.  And HOF Yankee Red Ruffing was pretty successful at it. Another pitcher Wes Ferrell was too,  who ironically hit twice as many career HRs, as his HOF catcher brother Rick.  Wes Ferrell was briefly tried as an outfielder at the end of one year, when his arm was hurt) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

 

Until the last few years?  Your ace.  Especially now that the batters refuse to adjust to the count or the game situation and just are fixated on launch angle and exit velocity.

 

Nolan Ryan threw a no-hitter with over 200 pitches.

 

Didn't think his no-hitter did that, but he did have an 11-inning CG that was supposedly 212 pitches.  ANd I remember counting, one of Fernando Valenzuela's games as a kid on TV that was 150-160 pitches  (mainly because at the start of the Game of the Week, they mentioned something about him throwing 161 pitches a couple weeks previous or something).

 

But, the home run obsession is driving me crazy.  I know HRs can make for some failings but, no way is .205/30 HRs is better that some hypothetical poor man's Tony Gwynn who might hit .310/5 HRs, especially considering the former is also striking out at least 100 times more.  In today's game Mark Reynolds (when he was playing 3B with Arizona) would win the job over HOFers George Kell or Pie Traynor, even though the 2 latter ones would be a significant upgrade over Reynolds in every single facet of the game other than HRs.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, unclevlad said:

I doubt Manny Mota types ever make even AAA today.  Or ok, maybe makes AAA, but not a snowball's chance of more.  No pop.  Just under 3800 ABs in his career...31 home runs.  Not that many doubles either...only 125.  Granted it was the pitching-heavy era, but singles hitters who aren't consistent Gold Glove candidates don't make it.  Defensively, most of his starts were in left;  that's almost a dump spot nowadays for another 30 HR, 150 SO bat that hopefully won't make TOO many errors.

 

Christopher:

 

 

But it's not, 95% of the time.  5th inning or later...yes, you pull him if you're down, barring fairly narrow situations.  Who you gonna let pitch a third time through the lineup in the first place?  

 

One reason the opener idea has gotten a bit of a hold, 90% of the starters are essentially going through the order 2 and a half times.  If your guys is only going to face half the hitters a 3rd time, it might as well be the lower pressure of the latter part of the order.  (they would the cleanup hitter if the opener had a 1-2-3, but otherwise it'll start where the lineup gets progressively weaker)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

 

Until the last few years?  Your ace.  Especially now that the batters refuse to adjust to the count or the game situation and just are fixated on launch angle and exit velocity.

 

Nolan Ryan threw a no-hitter with over 200 pitches.

 

We're not talking 2005, we're talking 2018.  I'm saying in baseball, as it's playing the last 6-8 years in particular (but a trend for 15-20)...only a handful of pitchers don't get pulled today.  And that's how we have to frame the context.  Sandy Koufax started 43 and 41 games in 65-66, completing 27 each season and going well over 300 innings.  In 2018, Scherzer led MLB with...220.  No pitcher in baseball has exceeded 235 in the last 4 years.  Since 2005, 250's been reached just *twice*.

 

Heck, you can actually see a radical dropoff in the last 2 years.  2016, NL and AL leaders were about the same, at ~230.  2017, drops to 207 NL, 214 AL.  2018 it only recovers to 220 and 215.  

Here's a chart I made up.  Data is the innings pitched leader in the AL and NL from '95 forward.

image.png.a4e53586195ef9c8a620cd04afd37ef1.png

 

And these are your aces...or at least the ones who stay mostly healthy.  

(https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/IP_leagues.shtml ... gotta love em)

 

Hey, I don't like where baseball's going either, but decent starting pitching gets SERIOUSLY expensive fast.  28 starters made $13M or more this season.  And the lost time from injuries!  Found this:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_baseball_players_who_underwent_Tommy_John_surgery

 

It's FRIGHTENING to see the increase in numbers.  This isn't just pitchers, it's everyone, but 10 in 2013, then 21,  28,  only 14 in 2016, 21, and 25 this year.  Note, those were the years where the surgery was performed.  There were also some players who had to have it *twice* and I may have missed the second one.  And we know how long the recovery takes, so...there's a lot of lost time there.

 

But probably first and foremost, it's the metrics.  Most pitchers' batting average against *jumps* on the 3rd time through the order, so the wisdom has become, crank of the parade of HEAT! from the bullpen.  What good team doesn't have its bullpen set up for 7th, 8th, 9th?  Maybe the Red Sox, but they just bludgeoned you so it wasn't as big a deal.

 

But that's baseball today.  5 inning starts from probably half the starters out there...that's OK.  Hitters who never adjust.  3 true outcomes as the holy mantra.  Games too boring to watch, just catch the highlights.  Fiddly-ass, terrible replay rules (oh, his hand lifted up off the base for 1/4 of a second...OUT!)  The play's only gonna probably get worse, tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The argument that "this is how the game is played now so it should always be played that way" is absurd.  Its played that way now because that's what people choose to be, not because baseball inevitably and must be that way.  The truth is there are some idiotic, awful trends right now in baseball but the teams that largely defy those tend to do well and eventually this will pass like any other stupid trend in the game's past.  And its certainly no argument for the DH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who made that argument?  Not me.  I said the game being played now is not the game of even 15 years ago, and completely different from 30.  You brought up Ryan;  when's the last time any pitcher was left in to throw a 200 pitch game?  Nor did I ever even suggest it's how the game should be played;  I'm stating how it *is* played today.

 

Who's bucking all the trends, and which trends?  Sox?  Not in pitching.  No Sox starter threw 200 innings;  only Porcello broke 180.  4 different relievers had 60+ appearances and innings pitched...so we're not talking specialists.  All four are high strikeout pitchers...only Joe Kelly had a strikeouts per 9 innings rate of less than 11.  Sox hitters aren't so much breaking the trend, as knowing when the trend is moronic.  Pure metrics-based decision making has flaws.  Some because the metrics are flawed or incomplete;  others because they're misused or even misunderstood.  Approach A may be correct 90% of the time, and thus define the trend...but there's 10% of the time when it's not.  That's not defying the data, it's delving deeper into it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My brother laments often that their are probably dozens of guys in the minors who are built like David Eckstein or Jose Altuve, but because they hit 300 instead of 40 HRs in the minors, never get a sniff.

Other problem going on now, maybe for awhile, is that the difference in the pitching level in the AAA to the pro level is so huge now, that you hardly get a feeling for how someone will do unless they are a superstar. How many 320+ hitters in minors come up and can't hit 250 in the pros, especially in this age of specialized pitchers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gap between AAA and MLB pitching has been there for a long time.  Back in the day when I was in Colorado, we had the Denver Bears.  First baseman was Randy Bass.  He won the American Association MVP award in 1980...37 HRs, hit .330.  Only played a total of 130 games and only hit .212 in the majors.  That sort of thing was common enough to even spawn the term "a AAAA hitter"....great in AAA but torn apart by MLB pitching.  Back then it was the curve ball, most often.  Now, I suspect it's holes in the swing versus the fastball.  OR, just not able to catch up to 95+ enough.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Philly was finally dumb enough to give Harper what he wanted.

 

Pitch clocks got talked about, but will be on hold it seems.  (never in favor. from what I have seen this spring in games don't like it.  It starts when the pitcher gets the ball, except I've seen it count down even when hitter out of box.  Hitter must be in box before it starts in my book)

 

DH in NL was talked.  I prefer the DH.  But, I don't really care one way or the other.  I do find the so-called NL strategy to be overrated.  I figured out the double-switch by age 10.  And what happens to the pitcher in the batting order is relatively by the book.  I feel it is more quantity over quality.

 

3-batter requirement for pitchers.  Hate it, and hate it.  I hate the large bullpens and frequent pitching changes.  But, this lopsides the scales to the hitters.  Causing more problems than it solves.  Before I can be on board, Pinch hitting would have to be limited in that 3-batter window (I would allow only the first batter faced can be lifted for a pinch hitter, the following 2 can only be lifted due to injury or the spot occupied by a pitcher*)

 

 

*And my idea would cause even more problems.  Not that the powers that be would even consider my addition.  They want offense.  To be brutally honest, Manfred is an idiot.  Who seems to want 19-16 scores, but the same games somehow  last only 42 minutes.   I guess I prefer as a commissioner over Goodell, but it that really saying anything positive for Manfred?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you let marketing and money guys take over, the product goes to s**t.  Doesn't matter if it's a hardware product, a service, or some form of entertainment (like sports).

 

Kill the owners and the mindless marketroids, and then decide what the problems really are (chances are step 1 will already have fixed them), and then what should be done to correct those, and understand the other consequences of the corrective action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2018 at 12:59 PM, unclevlad said:

The gap between AAA and MLB pitching has been there for a long time.  Back in the day when I was in Colorado, we had the Denver Bears.  First baseman was Randy Bass.  He won the American Association MVP award in 1980...37 HRs, hit .330.  

 

That 1980 Denver Bears team also featured Tim Wallach and Tim Raines. They were fun to watch. Seeing Tim Raines on first base, it seemed like he had telepathy. He seemed to know when the pitcher was going to throw to first, and when he was actually going to pitch. And by the time the pitch was on the way, Raines was halfway to second.

 

Good times!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Badger said:

Well, Philly was finally dumb enough to give Harper what he wanted.

 

Pitch clocks got talked about, but will be on hold it seems.  (never in favor. from what I have seen this spring in games don't like it.  It starts when the pitcher gets the ball, except I've seen it count down even when hitter out of box.  Hitter must be in box before it starts in my book)

 

DH in NL was talked.  I prefer the DH.  But, I don't really care one way or the other.  I do find the so-called NL strategy to be overrated.  I figured out the double-switch by age 10.  And what happens to the pitcher in the batting order is relatively by the book.  I feel it is more quantity over quality.

 

3-batter requirement for pitchers.  Hate it, and hate it.  I hate the large bullpens and frequent pitching changes.  But, this lopsides the scales to the hitters.  Causing more problems than it solves.  Before I can be on board, Pinch hitting would have to be limited in that 3-batter window (I would allow only the first batter faced can be lifted for a pinch hitter, the following 2 can only be lifted due to injury or the spot occupied by a pitcher*)

 

 

*And my idea would cause even more problems.  Not that the powers that be would even consider my addition.  They want offense.  To be brutally honest, Manfred is an idiot.  Who seems to want 19-16 scores, but the same games somehow  last only 42 minutes.   I guess I prefer as a commissioner over Goodell, but it that really saying anything positive for Manfred?

 

Pretty much agree with you.

On the Harper signing though, despite being a lot of money and a lot of years, it's actually only 14th in annual value, which means they might still have a little flexibility to sign someone else. (https://legacy.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/league-info/highest-paid-players/)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it does have that advantage, but 13 years is ridiculous.  Not too many 40 year old worth much historically  (at least not without "medicinal" help)

 

I really don't believe you should sign anyone to anything more than 7 years or so (and then only with the likes of a young superstar).  And really not more than 5.

 

 

And having watched a whole lot of Orioles and Nationals games over the years (feel my pain).  Harper is very good player, but he is overrated somewhat.

 

Note: Though they have IMO ripped his defensive metrics last season unfairly.  He played a lot more CF than he really ever had.  ANd it went like you would expect when a certified corner outfielder pretending to be a centerfielder.  I think that affected things somewhat.  (and defensive metrics tend to be wildly inconsistent to begin with, I think former 1B Paul Konerko in a 5 year span went from great to awful to great to awful to average or something)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree that the duration of Harper's deal is borderline absurd, I can see why the {Phillies made the investment. Last year's team was better than it had any right to be, despite not ending up in the postseason. Adding and building around Harper might give a young ballclub the push it needs to finally take flight. I would have hoped he had stayed with the Nats, but I can't fault his desire to get paid.

 

As far as salaries, I don't think the major leagues need a cap so much as a floor.  The sport has a long history of penurious owners not caring about the product on the field and avoiding paying players what they deserve. The modern way may be to accept being bad for a few years in order to build for a future of competing for the championship, but a few clubs like the Marlins aren't even trying. And that's bad for the game -- VERY bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not honestly have paid Harper that much but if you look at each individual year's contract its not as awful as it sounds, because its so long.  From Harper's point of view its great: he's got job security and guaranteed pay for over a decade.  From the Phillies, they have a very  high performing player who draws fans (if he can stay healthy).  and because the average pay (the pay per year) is low enough, it means they still have flexibility under the luxury tax cap to go get someone else who is a high ticket player like Mike Trout.  The Phillies were great last year, they should be even better this year, and if they can just pick up some pitching they can be world series favorites.

 

Quote

The modern way may be to accept being bad for a few years in order to build for a future of competing for the championship, but a few clubs like the Marlins aren't even trying. And that's bad for the game -- VERY bad.

 

Yeah the problem is that there are several clubs in each division who are going to  just stay at sub-.400 winning percentage and seem to not even care if they get better.  And that means great teams feast on them for great looking stats and their fans suffer.  The Padres, for example, are gonna be terrible for a long time now because they signed the worst contract in MLB history since the Mets gave Bonilla money to sit around and sip mai tais on a beach somewhere the rest of his life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really, supposedly there were 1,119 1-hitter outing last year.  That comes out to about 37 per team, about 3 times per 2 weeks.  (and some would have ended innings).  I imagine you'll still see plenty of those mid-inning changes.   

 

Edit: In any case, I absolutely hate the pitch clock idea, but it is 10,000 times better than this stupid idea.  I miss Bud Selig.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm actually fine with a pitch clock, they've had it in the minors for a couple of seasons now and nobody noticed.

 

The three-batter rule is supposed to be imposed in 2020, I'm hoping somebody comes to their senses before that.  It's a horrible idea to dictate on-field strategy.  That's the same reason I don't like the proposal to ban the shift.  Stop hitting into it and they won't do it.

 

I'm very happy to hear that the September roster expansion will be a lot more reasonable next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I would have been cool with a 30-man Sept roster, that seemed like the most reasonable number but 28 is doable.

 

I think fans will realize the stupidity of the 3-batter minimum, the first time their team loses a game, because a pinch hitter came in for the 2nd or 3rd batter and delivers a game deciding hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Pariah said:

 

Words I never thought I'd see in print. :jawdrop:

 

tells you what I think of Rob Manfred doesn't it.  when I heard the news I had to talk myself down from the idea "MLB and NFL need to trade commissioners".  I eventually got better. (Stupid is still easier to deal with than corrupt and stupid)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be brutally honest to both sides, I don't think fans will notice...….until it cost their team a game.

 

Edit: like I said it doesn't all that many pitcher outings  (but the one it will are disproportionately in close and late situations)

 

Since, one independent league is experimenting with it this year, it would have been nice to have that data first.  But, I guess that require patience.  And we've learned once Manfred gets an idea, he is going to go for it, and no advise is going to change that.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...