2015 Chemistry

[MagicBird]

Wins tend to improve the "chemistry"

[ACDC27]

Wins tend to improve the "chemistry"

I agree with you on that.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Point is they don't seem like Buck guys to me, some guys you like cheering for I.e Pearce even thou he's not hitting he's a try hard guy, who you want to root for. Caleb Joseph is another one of those guys, don't get that feeling when I watch Snider, or Deaza and a couple other guys on this years team.

So, you thought De Aza was a tool when he put up an .877 OPS for us last year in 20 games and performed well in the offseason. I don't remember.

[Il BuonO]

For as much as Snider seems like a Buck type player (@LunchBoxHero), it certainly doesn't garner him any more playing time even with better production and defense than the other usual suspects.

[Frobby]

I know that some statheads discount team chemistry. I don't. I have no doubt that John Lackey's attitude hurt the 2012 Red Sox or that R.A. Dickey's personality has been a drag in Toronto for the last couple of seasons, or that Willie Stargell's personality was instrumental in helping the 1979 Pirates.

I just have no idea how anyone can possibly observe team chemistry from a distance. Unless we hear something from someone with credible access to what's going on inside the clubhouse, how can we say anything about this team's chemistry?

I agree with this. It's very difficult to assess this without being on the inside. It's also easier to have good chemistry when you're winning.

[DrungoHazewood]

I know that some statheads discount team chemistry. I don't. I have no doubt that John Lackey's attitude hurt the 2012 Red Sox or that R.A. Dickey's personality has been a drag in Toronto for the last couple of seasons, or that Willie Stargell's personality was instrumental in helping the 1979 Pirates.

I just have no idea how anyone can possibly observe team chemistry from a distance. Unless we hear something from someone with credible access to what's going on inside the clubhouse, how can we say anything about this team's chemistry?

You understand that the bolded passage is essentially cut-and-pasted from The Stathead's Guide to Everything. Nobody, not even a nuclear physicist/baseball fan locked away in his mom's basement wearing a propeller beanie, thinks that a group of 25 guys don't impact each other via personality and stuff. But there is essentially no way of knowing the impact of that interaction. I'd say you don't even know the impact if you're actually one of those players.

"Statheads" almost always say something like "I have no idea if chemistry is impacting this, and no way of telling if the supposed impact is good or bad."

The non-statheads simply say "obviously anyone who's played the game knows this team has awesome/bad chemistry that clearly makes them play better/worse." Basically saying "I have no proof, I really have no idea, but it sounds good and nobody can disprove me so let's roll with it."

[DrungoHazewood]

It's also easier to have good chemistry when you're winning.

I would say that almost all of the time the things called good chemistry are in fact the good feelings a team gets from winning. And bad chemistry is a natural outcome of losing - you're always in a bad mood, you and your teammates and friends are always in jeopardy of being sent down, released, or traded, the manager and coaches usually know their jobs are on the line, and the media scrutiny is overwhelmingly negative.

[ACDC27]

So, you thought De Aza was a tool when he put up an .877 OPS for us last year in 20 games and performed well in the offseason. I don't remember.

You seem like your trying to be a bully, not going to play your games.

I wasn't a fan of Deaza last year, do I hope he helps the team sure but was just stating things I observed as a fan.

Point of this board right?

[CA-ORIOLE]

You seem like your trying to be a bully, not going to play your games.

I wasn't a fan of Deaza last year, do I hope he helps the team sure but was just stating things I observed as a fan.

Point of this board right?

Yeah, I'm done. I think calling the players you mentioned "tools" is a pretty piss poor and inexcusable choice of words. Was I trying to emphasize that to you and being a jerk (tool) about it. Yes, I was . Do I care what you think about me for that? Not really.