Pickles
-
Posts
5797 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Pickles
-
-
9 minutes ago, RZNJ said:
Not trying to be argumentative but do you think that Cowser is so mentally weak that he would decide not to swing before the pitch with 2 strikes on him?
He got beat with a fastball for strike two. Probably looking for another one and frozen on the breaking pitch.
Mentally weak? Why are you making this some emotional thing?
-
2 minutes ago, Malike said:
Swing was so bad against Smith the Royals guys said he made up his mind to swing before the pitch was even thrown. He definitely got schooled by a crafty lefty. It happens.
He made up his mind to swing before the 0-0 pitch, and he made up his mind to not swing before the 2 strike pitch.
-
5 minutes ago, Mooreisbetter27 said:
Right handed on Friday. Really hope he gets the start somewhere.
I hope he gets that start too.
-
33 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
Couldn’t make contact on the lefty in the ninth but he did make him work a little bit and while he looked awful on the first pitch, he hung in there for the at bat.
I think he was guessing on the called 3rd strike and froze on that pitch.
Got the base hit earlier. He needs to play vs more lefties so that he can see more and more of them.
This is where I point out he had two ABs and swung at two first pitches, which were both breaking balls, low and away, and well outside the strike zone, the second bouncing in the dirt.
Those are the kind of bad decisions I am talking about.
-
38 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:
Cowser's route has nothing to do with catch probability.
No, but has to do with the probability he is going to make the catch.
-
1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:
But the thing is, to do this, players will have to go. Unless we have injuries, you aren’t sending guys to the minors that we have..unless we DFA them and they clear waivers.
Kemp is not long for the roster one way or another. There will be injuries.
Between injuries and non-performance I expect to need 2-3 bodies this season.
It's possible they DFA a guy like O'Hearn. I wouldn't expect them to cut much deeper than that, just reallocate playing time.
-
1 minute ago, Frobby said:
Not really. I’m not a member. A while back, I’d sent Tom Tango (who’s a registered member here) a PM asking a question about why catch probability isn’t shown on the GameCast feed, and he responded to me with a link to a tweet on that subject. I went to look at it today and ended up scrolling through various other things Tango had posted.
By the way, Elon Musk has set up “X” to be virtually unusable for non-members, as posts don’t appear in any chronological order when a non-member visits a member’s page. So I might see a tweet from Tango from 2017 right next to one from 2023. If he thinks that’s going to encourage me to join to avoid that problem, he’s 100% wrong. It just further alienates me.
I didn't even know you could view twitter as a non-member. Whenever I visit the homepage, it asks me to make an account. Though I do seem to be able to view Twitter links that people post.
Just a friendly suggestion: 2024 might not be the year to join Twitter.
-
11 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
Yes but we have so much talent in the minors that if guys are sucking for 4-6 weeks, you may have to pull the plug on them quicker than normal.
I"ve seen little to suggest this org won't make quick adjustments.
Yes, are they going to give a guy like O'Hearn some rope after his performance and contributions last year?
Sure. But if he's hitting .220 in May, he will be losing at-bats.
I think a great example is Mullins in 2022. He was coming off his breakout 30-30 season; he was about the brightest light in a dreadful period.
And they didn't hesitate to both move him down in the order and to curtail his playing time against lefties when he struggled in 2022.
-
Has Frobby started to use Twitter? That's two tweets posted today. I fear for your mental health.
To the thread, I was actually just thinking about this last night. I hate to pull up baseball reference home page right now because there's nothing to look at besides a bunch of numbers that have very little meaning.
I'll start to put some weight into the numbers after about a month.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, OriolesMagic83 said:
It has been established that people look exactly like their avatar. For example, I look like a capital O. I thought people would be more senstivie knowing that you are going thru life looking like that.
Is that why everyone here keeps calling me a giant dick?
-
4 minutes ago, OriolesMagic83 said:
Yes, but does Pickles have fake eyelashes and one leg cut off on his pants. Inquiring minds want to know.
Well, my avatar has caused great offense around here at times.
-
5 minutes ago, Frobby said:
Well, you can get film of any play, as @Tony-OHexplained to me a couple of days ago. Using a laptop, go to the GameCast for the game, click on the Film Room button that’s just underneath the score of the game on the RH side, and film of every single play is there in reverse chronological order.
if you want the whole game, MLB.TV has condensed versions of all the games with the time between pitches/innings removed. I’m not a subscriber, but that’s what I’m told.
Well, I have MLB.tv, but the condensed games there are just the broadcast television cameras.
What I'm referring to is on NFL.com you can get game file that doesn't just recreate the broadcast cameras, but is actually filmed from the bird's eye view and allows you to see all 22 players at once, thus why it's called All-22 film, as opposed to the tv broadcast where you can't see the defensive secondary. It really reveals just how much you miss from the TV broadcast.
I'm almost positive it doesn't exist, but I would like game film that you could review that would show the entire defensive alignment at the moment of contact; I.e. you could actually see the jump he OFers are getting. I think it would put this data into perspective.
-
1 minute ago, Frobby said:
Per Statcast (and I’m just the messenger), Cowser needed to run 84 feet in 5.1 seconds, whereas Santander needed to travel 68 feet in 4.9 seconds. So, Cowser had 16 more feet to travel and only an extra 0.2 seconds to do it. Nobody runs 80 ft/sec, so the only logical explanation is that Cowser got a way better jump than Santander did. I agree that Cowser’s route was not that direct, but Statcast uses distance needed, not distance actually covered.
This is all interesting stuff to contemplate. I wish we could get film of the games like you can get the All-22 film of NFL broadcasts. It really opens up so much.
-
8 minutes ago, Frobby said:
But they do have the catch probability on a ball O’Hearn hit on his defensive chart. Administrative error, I’m guessing.
I also think catch probability is a somewhat inaccurate measure. But, it’s way better than nothing. A description of the methodology can be found here. They do adjust for direction and proximity to a wall, in addition to using hang time and distance needed.
One thing catch probability has made me appreciate is that getting a good jump is extremely important. You see many catches that look pretty routine that have a relatively low catch probability, because the fielder got a good jump, whereas diving catches may not score well if the fielder got a slow start. For example, Cowser’s catch yesterday of the ball near where the wall juts in got a 60% catch probability, whereas Santander’s 1st inning catch in the RCF wall on Monday had a 90% catch probability.
That's fascinating to me, and I'm not sure I buy it.
Now you have to watch the replay because the live stream is not focused on the fielder for the first second or so, but Santander made a direct beeline to that ball on Monday. He's not fast, but he takes very good, direct routes and that was a great example of that.
Cowser's catch yesterday he does not take a direct route to the ball. He goes back first (which is the right thing to do, other than making a direct beeline to where the ball is going to land) and and then he went east-west to the ball. Not to take away anything from him, that was a fine catch, but I don't buy the 60% probability. I have little doubt Hays would have caught it, and Hays is not the rangiest LFer.
-
3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
But it’s more than semantics I think.
It’s being over the top. I think under the drama, you are saying things that are correct and like I said, had you just said results were better than the process, I don’t think anyone is really jumping on you.
But you went too far with it, so that’s the reaction you get.
Basically, you are Angel Reese crying at the podium after telling everyone to F off.
Again, I'm not the one who is "upset" or "crying."
I'm defending my original position, quite well, thank you very much.
I shouldn't have used the word "atrocious." Other than that, you basically agree with me.
-
Just now, Moose Milligan said:
Acting like it's so simple is hilarious and absurdly wrong. If you're this upset about this at bat and this decision, you must be outraged at every game you watch.
Who said I was upset?
I made a fairly milquetoast original post and had 5 people take great offense that I used the word "atrocious" instead of "poor" or "less than ideal."
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
I think if this how you stated things to begin with, no one would be complaining.
I think you are correct here. I wouldn’t be so definitive about it (ie wouldn’t use “decidedly”) but the result was better than the process. I think that’s definitely true and not sure how that can be argued against.
Again, if people want to dispute the semantics, ok, whatever.
-
10 minutes ago, Frobby said:
I'm sure the Orioles have given him feedback on his swing decision, good or bad. I do suspect he was trying to hit that ball down the left field line, as he did on his subsequent single. And that's a reasonable thing to do when the 3B is essentially playing in the SS spot.
I think we need to remember that a pitch reaches home plate in 0.4 seconds. The speed, spin, break and location all can vary. It's not like the batter has all day to make his swing decision and execute a swing. It's amazing to me that they can do it at all.
Hitting is extraordinarily difficult. That's beyond dispute.
-
35 minutes ago, RZNJ said:
It’s not simple. If you think your job is to hit the ball to RF do you just keep taking outside pitches for strikes or try to take an offspeed pitch and pull it. Maybe that’s what happened. Maybe not. One thing I’m sure of is that everything you have said in this thread isn’t nearly as simple as you make it out to be.
Right, but I'd be criticizing him if he'd swung at the first pitch he thought he could weakly ground to 2b to get the runner over. That's not good desicion making either, at least not in that game situation.
-
31 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
Let's watch him dig his heels in even more because he can't admit that he's wrong.
What am I wrong about? Be specific.
The only thing I've been "wrong" about is a silly semantic point.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Can_of_corn said:
And sometimes they don't make hard contact even on a pitch in the dead center of their sweet zone.
One at bat with poor exit velocity means almost nothing. That might be a pitch he can drive 90% of the time, we don't know yet.
So it's premature to say him swinging, at a strike, was a bad swing decision.
Not all strikes are equal.
We should all acknowledge this was a "pitcher's pitch."
And he was in a "hitter's count."
He didn't need to swing at all.
I'm sure part of their discussions about this involves the idea of not swinging at pitcher's pitches until the count dictates that you must.
-
5 minutes ago, RZNJ said:
Perhaps he was trying to do what Jim Palmer wanted and didn’t execute. When a player thinks they have to hit the ball to one side of the field it makes them a less effective hitter. They start trying to force things like taking an outer zone off speed pitch and trying to pull it. I’m not sure if that’s what happened or not. When I see the replay it looks like his swing was geared to LF but he was too early on the pitch and cued it off the end of the bat.
He was in a hitter's count (and yes 1-0 isn't as good as 2-0 and 3-0 but it's literally better than the other 6 possible iterations ((someone check my math))) and he swung at a pitcher's pitch, and he made very weak contact.
The results were great; the process decidedly less so.
It's as simple as that.
-
BTW, as an aside to all, I enjoy these discussions and debates infinitely more than all the off-season bs.
It's much better to have actual baseball to discuss.
-
1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:
So if Gunnar's swing had been incrementally different and he'd hit into an out you would still be happy with the swing decision?
Just because a player can drive a certain pitch doesn't mean it's a guarantee they will every time they try.
Like I said, I've seen hundred of guys miss cookies over the decades.
If he had hit the ball hard and at someone, I'd have been fine with it. Remember, I'm the one arguing process here, not results.
Colton Cowser 2024
in Orioles Talk
Posted
Hahahahahahahaha. Scared! Mentally weak! Crazy! Sticking!
Calm your female language down, son.
Dude swung at two terrible strike ones. You can project your freudian reasons upon it all you want; I'm not doing that.
I'm stating facts: He swung at two terrible strike ones.
These are bad hitting decisions.