Jump to content

Frobby

Plus Member
  • Content Count

    55,755
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    468

Posts posted by Frobby


  1. The other thing you'd have to consider is likely distribution of fly balls. Maybe it's more important that LF is bigger than RF at OPACY, but I'd like to know where all the fly balls were hit off of current O's pitchers last year. If a majority went to right I'd be inclined to keep Markakis there. In any case they play half their games somewhere that's not Baltimore.

    I can't tell you how many balls were hit to LF vs. RF, but I can tell you that our LF's made 360 putouts and our RF's made 392. That may suggest that a few more were hit to RF than LF. Of course, if Markakis had been in LF and Conine in RF, instead of the other way around, maybe there would have been more putouts in LF.


  2. Left field, particularly at Oriole Park, is a whole different bag than right field. It's a shorter throw, but it's more ground to cover. If the team were compelled to move Nick Markakis over to left and put Gibbons back in right, I don't know if there would be any fallout from that, but I'd be all for it.

    I agree 100%. The idea that Nick hit better because he was moved to RF is absurd. With the current array of OF's we have, Nick is far more valuable to us in LF than RF (at least at OPACY).


  3. I'm not trying to defend Wedge. I really have no opinion on him, although I like what the Indians have tried to do the last two years in regards to platoons. I thought I remember reading that there was a certain randomness from year to year as far as record in 1 run games but I'm not sure. Either way, I don't see how it reflects in any way on his willingness to use platoons.

    I don't watch Cleveland play and I doubt I would recognize Wedge if he passed me on the street. I have no idea whether Cleveland's bad record last year despite the run differential is in any way his fault. But that is a very extreme difference, the biggest in the majors last year by far. No other team departed by its pythagorean record by more than 6 games, except Oakland (+8). So it can't be ruled out.

    And I don't think it has anything to do with how Wedge uses platoons. I was only making a somewhat flip response to Drungo's "what would Eric Wedge do" crack. All in fun.


  4. Are you trying to say that Wedge cost his team like 15-20 wins or something?

    That seems unlikely. But Cleveland's pythagorean record was 89-73 and their actuall record was 78-84. That's an 11-game gap. Some of that is pure chance, but at least some of it could be due to poor decisions in close games. Cleveland was 29-40 in games decided by 1-2 runs, 49-44 in other games.


  5. Did you catch this quote from Clay Davenport, in Drungo's thread?

    "We ran a chart in the Cleveland chapter in Baseball Prospectus 2007 highlighting how bad the Indians were in transition innings, when the pen takes over from the starter within an inning. They were next to last–-ahead of only the Orioles, whose relievers had a 19.9 WHIP when taking over for starter. No, I did not accidentally add a “1” to that, it really is nineteen point nine."

    I don't know this to be a fact, but logic tells me that, given a certain roster of ostensibly ML-quality pitchers, it'd take a nearly superhuman effort on the part of a manager to get his bullpen to perform that badly. What I mean is: if you simply rotate pitchers in and out based solely on whether their arm is tired or not, a bullpen managed by a computer could produce a league-average bullpen.

    To put it a third, perhaps clearer, way, I think the talent level of his bullpen was a bigger problem than how he used it.

    OK, but the Orioles bullpen performance in this regard was even worse, so why didn't they have a huge discrepancy between their run differential and their win total like Cleveland did?


  6. I know I would certainly like to be hearing those kind of quotes from our manager.

    From an organization that was built successfully on the platoon, it's amazing how this organization continues to keep over exposing players instead of using their strengths.

    Here is what I don't get: Mike Flanagan is, by all accounts, a very intelligent guy. He played for 10+ years on teams that thrived on good platoons. So why isn't he imposing this on his manager, or picking a manager who gets it?


  7. The sadness part.

    I think my go-to response/quote/answer thingy to Sam Perlozzo questions is now going to be WWEWD. You know, what would Eric Wedge do?

    Well, before you get too excited about Eric Wedge, ask yourself this:

    How did the Indians outscore their opponents by 88 runs and yet finish 6 games under .500?

    Whenever I see a discrepancy that large I tend to think the manager had something to do with it.


  8. You're right that Oriole Park is a good homerun park(although overall it played relatively neutral), but Payton's numbers were better at home than away, and they weren't good for a left fielder anywhere. You could look at his numbers at Camden Yards, but they'll decieve you - it's over 12 plate appearances and against Orioles pitching.

    His .296 AVG is not really likely to be repeated. He's more likely to hit .270 and post a .300-ish OBP. For the record, Mark Belanger's career OBP is .300. His power numbers could actually take a hit considering how severely Oriole Park depressed doubles and triples last year - he's might pop a couple here and there, but he's not a home run hitter. He's a put-the-bat-on-the-ball kind of guy, and that means he'll have to push a lot of singles past a diving Jeter to have value.

    And while he played the last few years on a team that eschews the stolen base, his percentages aren't good, so his legs are not going to make up the difference like Brian Roberts's do.

    If he hits as you forecast, I doubt Perlozzo will play him every day.


  9. Of course they won't lose every game Payton starts against righties.

    For him to start over Huff or Gibbons means you think their defensive differences are worth approximately 150 OPS points. Against righties Huff and Gibbons aren't very different than Miguel Tejada. Over 100 games that offensive difference is 15 or 20 runs.

    I know you don't like BP's fielding numbers, but according to them Payton is a few runs a year above average with the glove, Gibbons just a bit below average. Their defensive difference is less than 10 runs a year. I guess you could argue that understated things.

    Maybe playing Payton all year against most everyone isn't awful, maybe it'll only cost the team 10-15 runs. It could be this is just a little thing, lost in the noise.

    But this team seems hell-bent on doing a lot of little things wrong. 10 runs here, 5 there, no pinch hitters here, bad platoon splits there... and suddenly their choices have cost them a half-dozen wins.

    Aww, I was just chiding you for using hyperbole in your earlier post. I pretty much agree with everything you say here. And where did you get the idea that I don't like BP's fielding numbers? My main knock on them is that they don't explain how they come up with their Rate stats. BP explains what Rate represents, but not how it is derived.


  10. Simply put, unless Jay Payton is a left field version of Corey Patterson with the glove (and he ain't), he's costing the Orioles wins every time he starts against a right handed pitcher.

    Really? So if we play 113 games vs. RH starters, as we did last year, and Payton starts all those games, we're going to lose them all? Fire Perlozzo immediately, then!

    Seriously, isn't the rhetoric getting a bit thick here?

    I agree 100% with your point that Payton is not a good offensive option vs. RHP. I'd still expect him to get some starts in LF vs. RHP, because defensively he is by far the best option we've got. No, he's not Corey Patterson, but Gibbons, Huff, Millar and Knott are all likley to be significantly below average defensively in LF.

    Just how much will he play vs. RHP? It depends how he's hitting, how the others are hitting, how they all are fielding, and whether the team is winning. So count me as concerned, but not hysterical.


  11. He may hit lefties better this year than he has in the past, but its incredibly unlikely that he'll hit them better than he hits righties. Its also unlikely (also not as unlikely) that he hits lefties well enough to be an everyday player. It'd be much better to platoon him with someone who hits lefties well, like Knott or Dubois. Both of whom will likely hit better against LHP than Millar this season (and Gibbons, Huff and Patterson for that matter).

    I think you are going a bit far here. Millar has been a semi-regular for 8 seasons. In 3 of those years he had better splits vs. LHP; in one year he had exactly the same splits (OPS), and in another year he was 5 points worse vs. LHP than RHP. He was over .800 vs. LHP in 6 of those 8 years. Do I think he'll have an .800 OPS vs. LHP this year? No. Is it "incredibly unlikely" that he'll have an .800+ OPS vs. LHP, or that he'll be better vs. LHP than RHP? Hardly.


  12. I don't like these statements, but I am simply not going to worry about this stuff too much. Perlozzo can have whatever initial ideas he wants. The facts on the ground are going to determine who plays. He essentially has 10 quasi-full time players for 9 spots. All it takes is one injury to any of Payton, Huff, Gibbons, Mora or Millar and suddenly the healthy guys are playing pretty much every day. And if everyone's healthy but one guy is hitting .220 and the other is hitting .290, the guy who hits better will play more.


  13. Didn't someone say he was overthrowing, hence the missing up and the straightness of his fastball? I don't think I saw him break off that nice hook he's supposed to have, either.

    His curve was awful last September. He's capable of much better. And his eagerness to "make up for lost time" may have had something to do with it, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying that a temporary overagerness doesn't necessarily equate to lack of good mental makeup.


  14. Being rushed has more to do with their mental make-up than it does their physical talent. I think Penn's mental make-up was what caused him to have problems in his 2 stints in the majors.

    To me, Penn's mental makeup was quite impressive when he was called up in May 2005 at age 20. I happened to be on hand for his first major league start and was really impressed. And if you look at his game log from that year you'll see that he kept the team in just about every game he pitched, with a couple of exceptions. I thought it was a great performance for a 20-year old.

    Last year Penn was unimpressive to say the least, but I'm not going to ascribe that to his mental makeup. For whatever reason, his command wasn't sharp last September. I still have lot of confidence in this kid and I don't think his mental makeup will be an issue.


  15. Now we're back to the litany of young pitchers who made their way to Baltimore in a hurry in the 1960's. Some as teenagers (Palmer, McNally, Bunker, Pappas), others in their early 20's.

    With that said, I think the O's have moved them quickly enough. Bedard, Cabrera and Loewen each had less than a season of AA before reaching the majors. Penn moved very quickly from low-A to AA, and only appendicitis and some early arm issues kept him from spending more time in the majors last year. Olson and Liz each moved 2 levels last season. Britton was called up after just a few weeks in AA. And you already mentioned Hoey.


  16. It still depends on what you think Penn will be vs. What you think Baldelli would be. I would assume that having a 4th starter significantly better than that of most teams would net you a big advantage, but so would a game changer in CF. Do you think Baldelli will be that guy? Do you think Penn will be that guy?

    The picture on Baldelli is much clearer than the picture on Penn. If he's healthy, Baldelli is going to be at least average offensively for a CF, and potentially much better than that. And defensively he'll be solid, though not a gold glove candidate.

    Penn could be anything from a very solid no. 3 to a very shaky no. 5. Put a gun to my head and I'll peg him as having a Kris Benson-type career.

    Even up, I'd take Baldelli over Penn. But if I don't think I'd give up both Penn and Ray for him.


  17. It's kind of funny to me that there use to be discussions about trading Bedard or Cabrera or Loewen and I always said no, these guys are our backbone. They will make the difference for us. Now people don't want to trade them so much.

    Now I have to justify why not to trade Penn. Same discussion. Same answer. And in a year, people will stop suggesting it. Patience is a viture.

    You were hardly alone in suggesting that we hold on to our young pitchers. I'd say that has been the majority view around here, for the most part. And rightly so.

    But at the same time, you have to acknowledge that the team has lots of promising young pitchers and is woefully short on the young offensive talent. And so if you can trade your 4th-best young pitcher for a center fielder who is locked up for several years, you have to at least look at it.


  18. Penn is a long term pitcher for the O's in my view. 5.25 in 2007, 4.50 in 2008. under 4.00 in 2009. Do I think Guthrie, Burres or Bell project like that. No I don't. Why? Guthrie has shown a difficult time in adjusting at higher levels. So he does not project to be the pitcher that Penn can be. Burres and Bell do not have Penn's ceiling.

    A lively fastball is a great thing to have in a pitcher's arsenal. I think Penn's is significantly better than Olson's. I also think Penn is ready now. Olson needs a year at AAA.

    Looks like both will start the year at AAA, and we'll see how both perform. Penn and Olson are different style of pitchers. I have high hopes for both of them. I think they will both get 50+ innings in the majors this year when all is said and done. In Penn's case, maybe closer to 100 innings.

    Penn will pitch on Wednesday and I hope he has a stellar outing that will wipe away some of the negative vibes from his poor showing last September. There's no question in my mind that the kid will eventually be a solid major league starter. The only question is how soon. He's much better than he showed last September.


  19. For anyone curious about the rest of MLB, here's the list:
    New York Yankees         97Boston Red Sox           90.5Los Angeles Angels       89.5Los Angeles Dodgers      88.5Philadelphia Phillies    88.5New York Mets            88Detroit Tigers           87.5Chicago White Sox        86.5Toronto Blue Jays        86.5Chicago Cubs             85.5Cleveland Indians        84.5Oakland Athletics        84.5St Louis Cardinals       84.5San Diego Padres         84Minnesota Twins          83.5Atlanta Braves           81.5Milwaukee Brewers        81.5San Francisco Giants     81.5Texas Rangers            81.5Florida Marlins          78.5Houston Astros           78.5Arizona Diamondbacks     77.5Cincinnati Reds          76.5Seattle Mariners         75.5Colorado Rockies         74.5Baltimore Orioles        73.5Pittsburgh Pirates       71.5Kansas City Royals       67.5Tampa Bay Devil Rays     67Washington Nationals     66.5

    I like the under on NYY, LAD, and PHI, and the over on CLE, STL, MIN, MIL, BAL, PIT, and TB.

    If you add up all the teams on the list they are 12 games over .500. Bet the under on all of them and you should make out!


  20. ...I noted this trade was a stark possibility two weeks ago. Scroll down on this link:

    http://www.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40529&page=6

    I phrased it as such in the post - as opposed to something my 'source' had told me - due to the sensitivity of it at his/her request. Sounds like a pretty good job was done keeping it quiet until now.

    I'll continue to pass along tidbits as I hear them.

    Nice call, Dynamite.


  21. FIRST: Angelos should not be involved in this decision. It should be up to the front office.

    SECOND: The front office should do this deal. Getting LaRoche would be a huge plus. The difference between Roberts and Giles at 2b is pretty minimal, though I'd say Roberts is a little better both offensively and defensively The only big negative to this deal is that Giles only has a year to go on his deal, whereas Roberts has two years and is somewhat more likely to sign long term. That's a risk I take to get LaRoche.


  22. If you look at the homepage of that site, you will see that you can read coverage for any team in MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL not just SoCal.

    Don't dismiss before you look.

    I did look. Maybe I am missing your point. If you are suggesting that I should read every local article on every team to judge whether most of them are more analytical than Baltimore's, I don't have the time. I'm just speculating that the Angels get more coverage than a lot of teams in smaller markets, not just Baltimore. And when there is more competition for readers, there will be better quality analysis as a general rule.

×
×
  • Create New...