Markakis

[Moose Milligan]

I love watching Nick hit when he's on fire.

"When" is the key word of that sentence. His month and a half long slumps are growing incredibly old. I was hoping that this year would start off differently and I thought it was after two homers in the opening series but he's quickly gone back into his shell. Or whatever it is.

I agree with the above poster that said he should be a superstar right now. He should be hitting .300 every year with 20+ homers and a .380+ on base percentage.

[markdublya]

I love watching Nick hit when he's on fire.

"When" is the key word of that sentence. His month and a half long slumps are growing incredibly old. I was hoping that this year would start off differently and I thought it was after two homers in the opening series but he's quickly gone back into his shell. Or whatever it is.

I agree with the above poster that said he should be a superstar right now. He should be hitting .300 every year with 20+ homers and a .380+ on base percentage.

Right. I like Nick a lot, an all-around solid ballplayer that plays hard and does a lot of things well....but simply put - he hasn't become who we'd hoped. In many ways, he continues to regress, not progress.

[Il BuonO]

Your #3 hitter should be your 5th best hitter (using avoiding outs as the defining metric).

Honestly I am continually amazed that a board with such a high baseball IQ keeps getting caught up in lineup position discussions.

The proper lineup (according to The Book is #1, #4, #2, #5, #3, #6, #7, #8, #9. Using a random batting order instead of that one impacts runs less Jose Molina's ability to frame a pitch.

What book is that? So, Hamilton batting third for Texas is wrong. I'm amazed that people who think you manage by a book think it's odd that on a discussion board people have discussions about lineups.

[Frobby]

Frobby. lets face it. Nick Markakis is a very fine defensive outfielder with a great work ethic and a pretty good, but not great,bat.

He continues to live off the numbers he achieved a few years ago, but his power drop off and annual slumps(multiple) are getting old.

I LOVE this player, but I'm beginning to fall out of love.A rightfielder has to deliver more than he has in the last couple of years.Its just

that simple.

I am not going to quarrel with all of this, but I will say again, as I have said many times, that Nick is no more slump-prone than most players. There is something about Nick that makes Orioles fans feel like he should never go into a slump, but that simply isn't the case.

Here's a post I did last August comparing Nick's slumps to those of Nick Swisher, Dan Uggla, and Raul Ibanez, all of whom have a career OPS very close to Nick's. There is no real difference in how slump-prone the four players were. http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/113424-Am-I-the-only-one-Nick-Markakis-drives-crazy?p=2530681#post2530681

Players aren't metronomes. They are streaky by nature. Look at the monthly swings of all of our starters last year:

Markakis --.561/.708/.830/.805/.776/.845 -----.756 total

Jones -----.674/.853/.858/.876/.710/.676 -----.785 total

Hardy -----.694/.685/1.094/.626/.890/.700 ----.801 total

Reynolds --.566/.783/1.112/.783/.814/.785 ----.806 total

Wieters ---.826/.678/.665/.685/.951/.867 -----.778 total

Guerrero --.673/.755/.620/.894/.602/.894 -----.733 total

Andino ----.847/.585/.564/.737/.617/.729 -----.671 total

At the end of the year, Nick's numbers will be whatever they are, and I will judge him accordingly. But his "annual slumps" are a part of being a baseball player.

[Can_of_corn]

What book is that? So, Hamilton batting third for Texas is wrong. I'm amazed that people who think you manage by a book think it's odd that on a discussion board people have discussions about lineups.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Book-Playing-Percentages-Baseball/dp/1597971294/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1336492996&sr=8-4

The Book is the title.

It is also common sense. What two spots in the lineup are assured of batting in a higher then usual leverage situation their first time up? First and fourth, therefor your two players best at avoiding outs should be put into those slots.

You should also note that I stated how little impact lineup order has. That is the main takeaway from any work on lineups I have seen, that they don't make much difference.

Moving Nick up or down in the order should only have an impact if he has some sort of mental hookup that is lineup dependent and I don't think many folks get to the majors with legitimate issues of that sort.

Adjusting the lineup is rearranging deck chairs.

[Il BuonO]

I've heard you say this before, are you discounting the fact that mentally it won't have an effect on players? Or should a player who everybody on the team knows is batting in the low .100's be batting leadoff?

I'm not saying the theory is wrong, but how does it affect the team to have guys in the order who can't do the job?

[Frobby]

What does he look like when he's on fire? I don't remember.

Over the 2010 and 2011 seasons, Nick's best OPS was .845 last September, and a couple of .840 months in 2010. Is that on fire? How long of a time constitutes on fire? A week? Two weeks? Someone let me know the next time there's a fire so I don't miss it.

Well, he did have a stretch of 32 games from June 10 to July 17 where he hit .397/.430/.567. That's a pretty good fire. It just didn't happen to fall at the beginning to the end of a month.

[Moose Milligan]

Well, he did have a stretch of 32 games from June 10 to July 17 where he hit .397/.430/.567. That's a pretty good fire. It just didn't happen to fall at the beginning to the end of a month.

Good research. When Nick hits, he really does hit.

Frobby, my umbrage isn't with Nick slumping...I understand he's human...it just seems like they last for extended periods of time. As the highest paid player on the team and arguably the leader of the team, it's frustrating to watch that from him.

[Frobby]

Good research. When Nick hits, he really does hit.

Frobby, my umbrage isn't with Nick slumping...I understand he's human...it just seems like they last for extended periods of time. As the highest paid player on the team and arguably the leader of the team, it's frustrating to watch that from him.

Well, as I said, his slumps aren't particularly longer or deeper than other players whose career OPS is in Nick's ballpark. I think what it really boils down to is that Nick isn't as good as most of us thought he would be back in 2008. At that point, I think many of us (certainly including me) were thinking of him as a guy who was going to have a few .900+ OPS seasons and maybe win a batting title or two along the way while annually putting up 40+ doubles and 20+ homers. Most of us thought his 6/$66mm contract was a very good deal for the club when he signed it. It isn't turning out that way, or so it appears. My expectations have been lowered, but I still root hard for the guy, and I still expect that when the year is over we will say he was one of the best hitters on the club, even though he hasn't been through the first 29 games.

[Frobby]

You are amazing! Are you Greek? A relative? Good research.

It is pretty easy to do this on BB-ref. You just go to the player's game log, click on the first date of a hot streak and the last date, and BB-ref does the calculations. (Sorry if I am telling you something you already know, at least someone else reading this will learn something.)

[Moose Milligan]

Well, as I said, his slumps aren't particularly longer or deeper than other players whose career OPS is in Nick's ballpark. I think what it really boils down to is that Nick isn't as good as most of us thought he would be back in 2008. At that point, I think many of us (certainly including me) were thinking of him as a guy who was going to have a few .900+ OPS seasons and maybe win a batting title or two along the way while annually putting up 40+ doubles and 20+ homers. Most of us thought his 6/$66mm contract was a very good deal for the club when he signed it. It isn't turning out that way, or so it appears. My expectations have been lowered, but I still root hard for the guy, and I still expect that when the year is over we will say he was one of the best hitters on the club, even though he hasn't been through the first 29 games.

But we don't have to watch those other guys on a daily basis, do we?

Jokes aside, agreed on all points. As I said last week, it's hard to hate on a guy who averages 185 hits a year or so.

But yes, he's not the guy we thought he was going to be in 2008. Frustrating.

[Il BuonO]

http://www.amazon.com/The-Book-Playing-Percentages-Baseball/dp/1597971294/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1336492996&sr=8-4

The Book is the title.

It is also common sense. What two spots in the lineup are assured of batting in a higher then usual leverage situation their first time up? First and fourth, therefor your two players best at avoiding outs should be put into those slots.

You should also note that I stated how little impact lineup order has. That is the main takeaway from any work on lineups I have seen, that they don't make much difference.

Moving Nick up or down in the order should only have an impact if he has some sort of mental hookup that is lineup dependent and I don't think many folks get to the majors with legitimate issues of that sort.

Adjusting the lineup is rearranging deck chairs.

I guess that's been my biggest gripe with having Chavez bat lead off. IYO, according to The Book we would have either AJ, MW, or RA batting lead off? Wieters makes no sense to me because of his speed, or doesn't that come into play? What does the book say about this?

[Can_of_corn]

I guess that's been my biggest gripe with having Chavez bat lead off. IYO, according to The Book we would have either AJ, MW, or RA batting lead off? Wieters makes no sense to me because of his speed, or doesn't that come into play? What does the book say about this?

Speed is a nice thing to have but avoidance of outs is more important. Wade Boggs did very well batting leadoff with a weak speed tool. I personally would have Wieters fourth with AJ or RA leading off in Nolan's absence.

[Yardball85]

Goodness, Markakis. I feel like over 50% of his at-bats are routine grounders to second!

[Yardball85]

Its what happens every time he slumps..and he's in a horrible slump...again.

He doesn't even fly out ever. He has terrific power - I remember back in the late 2000s whenever he would hit a fly ball it would jump off his bat and either get in the gap or get outta here.

For whatever reason now, he just doesn't hit flyballs. It's incredible.