DrungoHazewood

Plus Member
  • Content count

    21,912
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    63

DrungoHazewood last won the day on January 21

DrungoHazewood had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

19,347 Supreme Hangout Council Member

About DrungoHazewood

  • Rank
    Hangout Contributor
  • Birthday 6/19/1971

Personal Information

  • Location
    SoMd
  • Homepage
    http://
  • Interests
    Nate, Sam, Baseball, Soccer, Virginia Tech sports, Hiking, Cooking, Photography, Mad treks to the far corners of the globe
  • Occupation
    Electronics Engineer/Program Manager
  • Favorite Current Oriole
    Manny Machado
  • Favorite All Time Oriole
    Doug DeCinces
  1. I think you can do worse than Joseph. He's good defensively. But he is a 31-year-old with a career .229/.282/.364 slash line. I'm comfortable with him as the primary backup for as long as he doesn't get expensive and since he didn't debut until 28 that's pretty much his whole career. I'm less comfortable with him starting unless they're punting the season.
  2. Buffalo could support a MLB team if they fundamentally restructured the game. Like dividing up all the larger markets with other teams, and giving it about 25 years to mature. But right now there's no way. In Nielsen market size Buffalo is on par with Norfolk or Scranton, around 50th place. The current smallest market with a team is Cincinnati, at 36th place.
  3. He watched the Babe's last game? The Babe's 6th-to-last game was his three homer game in Pittsburgh where one of the homers apparently cleared the roof at Forbes Field. But that was 1935. I suppose he could have been five years old then and still remembers it, that would make him about 87 now. He clearly wasn't an usher back then, not unless he's still working at 102 or something.
  4. But what is right? Getting better for the future will have to involve 4-8 wins (after discounting heavily for the risk that prospects won't develop) a year for the next decade, or slightly less value with considerable cost savings.
  5. In a Trivial Pursuit kind of way. Or an Anthony Young kind of way. It was fun to see the zero RBI reflected in people who see performance outcomes as manifestation of character traits.
  6. I would guess there's been a decline over time. But maybe not as much as is commonly thought. It wouldn't surprise me if it's accelerated more recently.
  7. There is sporadic data, including quite a bit from the 1950s Dodgers. They averaged around 100 pitches a start but with wider variation.
  8. Saying it's a problem that pitchers can't carry their best stuff past 100 pitches is like saying that it's a problem that the sky is blue and wind sometimes blows. 50 or 75 years ago pitchers still just threw 100 pitches per start on average, and today's game is set up to have everyone go max effort almost all the time. If you want pitchers to have their best stuff very deep into games you have to fundamentally change the sport. You have to somehow incentivize or outright mandate teams to use pitchers in non-optimal ways. You could tell teams that they only have 9 pitchers on their gameday roster including the five starters. You could make every reliever after the 2nd one start all batters down 1-0 or 2-0. You change the game like that and pitchers will have to pitch more and they'll have to let off and pace in non-key moments. They will give up more runs unless you make some concurrent changes to the ball or the strike zone. With no restrictions on pitcher usage or number of pitchers allowed the optimal strategy with a 25-man rosters is something like a ~5 inning starter going all out, and a series of all-out relievers following.
  9. Just be careful to not assume that 30 RBI means more than he hit out of his mind well with runners on in a few PAs. Many poor decisions get made over misinterpreting odd occurrences. How many times have we seen many page threads saying some pretty good MLB player should be benched because Luis Hernandez was hot for two weeks? Treat Mancini the same as you did two months ago, just with another quarter of a season's worth of evidence. This is the same guy who drove in 54 runs in 125 games in Norfolk last year.
  10. It's philosophy. And it's expectations. Credit is given for things you've accomplished, he had a great game. But then we start getting into the talking heads' fictional narratives about him having magic powers to hit in the clutch. As long as everyone remembers that clutch basically always tends towards overall performances, and the usual SSS caveats we'll be okay.
  11. Better now but different. HR/G weren't as high in '87, but we didn't have a population where 95% of the players were swinging for the fences and were totally out of craps to give about striking out. Back to comps for a minute... Mike Morse. Somebody mentioned Trumbo and Sexson. Phil Nevin. Alfonso Soriano, if you could imagine him being slow.
  12. Sheets had the advantage of turning 27 the year they decided to preview the helium ball of the 1990s. Maybe he was hurt, too, or something else, but his ISO fell by over .100 points from '87-88 when AL runs went back down from 4.9 to 4.4.
  13. I'm not sure how to gauge the importance of K/BB numbers in young batters anymore. The league strikes out two-and-a-half times for every walk. The league strikes out 129 times per 600 PAs. As recently as 1976 the AL leader in Ks was Jim Rice with 126, now the average regular strikes out more than that. Is Mancini's roughly 4:1 ratio of K:BBs really that out of line?
  14. Edgar Martinez was a right handed baseball player with some defensive limitations. Good power but not light-pole power. Both born in the western hemisphere. Both had ridiculous slash lines at age 24 in the majors in less than 15 games. That's similar. Mancini is a lot more similar to Edgar than he is to Matt Hobgood.
  15. Yes, until Harper puts up consecutive high level seasons it's hard to put him on the same level as Manny. Manny has been worth 5.9 rWAR per 150 games. Harper 5.2.