As much as most of us root for Crush... He's not helping on offense...

[Herman]

Do you ever bother to look at the numbers this is just false. April March .883 OPS. May .555. So he has been slumping a month exactly the same as Jones at .566 ops for May.

The difference is that we can be confident that Jones will snap out it and end up having a solid year

[El Gordo]

The difference is that we can be confident that Jones will snap out it and end up having a solid year

If I go by past patterns over 4-5 years, then I would say Jones will come out of it, start hitting the other way and get hot again. Davis will struggle a bit longer, come out of it and hit some HR in bunches. But since it is baseball I am reluctant to say I am confident about anything.

[SteveO]

Why would any MLB pitcher give Adam Jones anything decent to hit at this point? He has zippo protection and he is not exactly patient. Make him hit junk. So long as the rest of the lineup is scuffling and Adam has no protection in the lineup, he is gonna struggle.

[El Gordo]

Why would any MLB pitcher give Adam Jones anything decent to hit at this point? He has zippo protection and he is not exactly patient. Make him hit junk. So long as the rest of the lineup is scuffling and Adam has no protection in the lineup, he is gonna struggle.

As long as he chases bad pitches and tries to pull every thing, he will continue to struggle. Protection's got nothin' to do with it. We've seen this before.

[DrungoHazewood]

He is not dropping him down in the order because that would be a reaction to the past, and the SSS past is not a good predictor of what is going to happen tonight. His wOBA for the year is higher than last years. We know he is streaky. We know he can bust out at any moment. Why are we overreacting to every slump a streaky hitter has?

Maybe because he's hit .210/.310/.444 since August 1st, 2013? And .200/.298/.411 since April 1st, 2014? For going on two years a .800-something OPS for a month has been the outlier, not the norm.

[DrungoHazewood]

As long as he chases bad pitches and tries to pull every thing, he will continue to struggle. Protection's got nothin' to do with it. We've seen this before.

Protection is a myth. Last year Jones predominantly hit in front of Cruz and OPS'd .780 something. This April he hit in front of Delmon Young and put up a line like Rogers Hornsby.

[JohnnyEutaw]

And... he may not come around.

There is a lot of faith being put into Chris and I can understand that, but he is just not helping bring in runs enough.

I am not sure why Buck isn't, at least, dropping him down in the order for now... Can't win on luck. He's swinging through big spots.

Gotta show some faith in these guys who have done it before. If it continues, drop him in the order. He needs to continue tto start, however, as there are just not many guys out there who you can depend on to bang 30+ homers in a year.

I think we put Jones at cleanup and Paredes at No. 3 if Davis continues this. Anyone from Hardy to Snider to Pearce can hit second. But Buck knows a lot more about it than all of us combined. I'm sure he'll make the right move at the right time.

[Redskins Rick]

Gotta show some faith in these guys who have done it before. If it continues, drop him in the order. He needs to continue tto start, however, as there are just not many guys out there who you can depend on to bang 30+ homers in a year.

I think we put Jones at cleanup and Paredes at No. 3 if Davis continues this. Anyone from Hardy to Snider to Pearce can hit second. But Buck knows a lot more about it than all of us combined. I'm sure he'll make the right move at the right time.

Did you look at the lineup today?

Snider is batting 2nd, Paredes at 3rd, AJ at Cleanup and Davis at 5th.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Momentum is a big part of sports and it is not measurable from a statistical perspective. That's why I can't stand saber-metrics and statistical based arguments and I don't like when people use it as the foundation of their argument. Stats are important but they often times do not illustrate what is actually happening.

I understand the concept that 1=1. A strikeout is the same as a pop out etc. I get it. However, like it says in the article, a strikeout eliminates the possibility of a productive out. Not putting the ball in play also eliminates the possibility for the ball to find a hole. Chris Davis also has pretty good speed so it isn't like he needs to be a boom or bust guy like Adam Dunn.

Strike outs also hurt momentum and can be contagious. You might disregard that because it cannot be statistically measured, but it's true that some things in sports can become contagious. Chris Davis came up with 1st and 2nd and no outs last night and struck out on 3 pitches. 2 of those pitches weren't even close to being strikes. The defense is literally giving Chris Davis an entire side of the field and he still can't put the ball in play and advance the runners. It's painful to watch.

The article is pretty clear. Strikeouts are negligible with other outs on aggregate, this mainly taking double plays into account.

If your point is going to be that factors like momentum and chemistry override or negate overwhelming and compelling statistical evidence and the generic "stats don't account for everything", and that's all you need to say about it, I think there are going to be more than a few people who are going to have continuing issues with you about that. So don't don't take stuff personal bout being picked on and lets not make stuff up about being "called a troll" for just "merely offering suggestions".

There is also the argument that strike outs aren't a big deal if the player is still producing. The problem is, Chris Davis isn't producing.

Everybody understands this point Herman, so lets not pretend they don't. Everybody would accept good production along with a high strikeout rate also ... well except for you.

I'd also like to thank you for the response. It's obvious that you don't want here statistical based arguments or at least prefer to selectively ignore the ones you don't want to hear. That makes dialogue easier.

[Herman]

The article is pretty clear. Strikeouts are negligible with other outs on aggregate, this mainly taking double plays into account.

If your point is going to be that factors like momentum and chemistry override or negate overwhelming and compelling statistical evidence and the generic "stats don't account for everything", and that's all you need to say about it, I think there are going to be more than a few people who are going to have continuing issues with you about that. So don't don't take stuff personal bout being picked on and lets not make stuff up about being "called a troll" for just "merely offering suggestions".

Everybody understands this point Herman, so lets not pretend they don't. Everybody would accept good production along with a high strikeout rate also ... well except for you.

I'd also like to thank you for the response. It's obvious that you don't want here statistical based arguments or at least prefer to selectively ignore the ones you don't want to hear. That makes dialogue easier.

Before the season started the saber-metric/stat guys said that this team would be fine. Just wanted to get that out of the way.

...but stats don't account for everything! Stats and saber-metrics should be used as a barometer. Instead they have evolved to the point where people stop accounting for variables that can't be qualified and stop using their own two eyes when making an evaluation. That's my problem with people like you who talk down to people like me - you say things like "overwhelming and compelling statistical evidence" when the fact of the matter is that not everything is quantifiable and stats can be deceptive. Stats are not the definitive answer and that's what makes it difficult to debate with people like you. You're wrong, I don't mind using stats in an argument. However, like I said before stats are a barometer and they are not definitive.

http://grantland.com/features/the-math-problem/

To paraphrase:

But sabermetrics comes with an important drawback. Because it translates sports into a list of statistics, the tool can also lead coaches and executives to neglect those variables that can’t be quantified. They become so obsessed with the power of base runs that they undervalue the importance of not being an asshole, or having playoff experience, or listening to the coach. Such variables are the sporting equivalent of a nice dashboard. They can’t be quantified, but they still count.

Here’s my problem with sabermetrics — it’s a useful tool that feels like the answer. If we were smarter creatures, of course, we wouldn’t get seduced by the numbers. We’d remember that not everything that matters can be measured, and that success in sports (not to mention car shopping) is shaped by a long list of intangibles. In fact, we’d use the successes of sabermetrics to focus even more on what can’t be quantified, since our new statistical tools take care of the stats for us. We are finally free to think about how those front seats feel.

But that’s not what happens. Instead, coaches and fans use the numbers as an excuse to ignore everything else, which is why our obsession with sabermetrics can lead to such shortsighted personnel decisions. After all, there is no way to quantify the fierce attitude of a team that feels slighted, or the way even the best players can be undone by the burden of expectations

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/05/17/baseball-fans-care-about-new-breed-stats/5C3wVETWOubtGjE78Og2RP/story.html#

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/05/24/ready-battle-over-war/AMILX82IknXowRomh2cw8M/story.html

http://baseballhotcorner.com/the-jack-morris-debate-the-biggest-flaw-of-the-sabermetrics-community/

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/sabermetrics-moneyball-stat-geeks-are-ruining-sports-092211

[DrungoHazewood]

Before the season started the saber-metric/stat guys said that this team would be fine. Just wanted to get that out of the way.

...but stats don't account for everything! Stats and saber-metrics should be used as a barometer. Instead they have evolved to the point where people stop accounting for variables that can't be qualified and stop using their own two eyes when making an evaluation. That's my problem with people like you who talk down to people like me - you say things like "overwhelming and compelling statistical evidence" when the fact of the matter is that not everything is quantifiable and stats can be deceptive. Stats are not the definitive answer and that's what makes it difficult to debate with people like you. You're wrong, I don't mind using stats in an argument. However, like I said before stats are a barometer and they are not definitive.

http://grantland.com/features/the-math-problem/

To paraphrase:

But sabermetrics comes with an important drawback. Because it translates sports into a list of statistics, the tool can also lead coaches and executives to neglect those variables that can’t be quantified. They become so obsessed with the power of base runs that they undervalue the importance of not being an asshole, or having playoff experience, or listening to the coach. Such variables are the sporting equivalent of a nice dashboard. They can’t be quantified, but they still count.

Here’s my problem with sabermetrics — it’s a useful tool that feels like the answer. If we were smarter creatures, of course, we wouldn’t get seduced by the numbers. We’d remember that not everything that matters can be measured, and that success in sports (not to mention car shopping) is shaped by a long list of intangibles. In fact, we’d use the successes of sabermetrics to focus even more on what can’t be quantified, since our new statistical tools take care of the stats for us. We are finally free to think about how those front seats feel.

But that’s not what happens. Instead, coaches and fans use the numbers as an excuse to ignore everything else, which is why our obsession with sabermetrics can lead to such shortsighted personnel decisions. After all, there is no way to quantify the fierce attitude of a team that feels slighted, or the way even the best players can be undone by the burden of expectations

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/05/17/baseball-fans-care-about-new-breed-stats/5C3wVETWOubtGjE78Og2RP/story.html#

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/05/24/ready-battle-over-war/AMILX82IknXowRomh2cw8M/story.html

http://baseballhotcorner.com/the-jack-morris-debate-the-biggest-flaw-of-the-sabermetrics-community/

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/sabermetrics-moneyball-stat-geeks-are-ruining-sports-092211

Yes, I get that some people "get seduced by the numbers" and fail to account for the heart, grit, character, and chemistry of people who can't really play baseball at a major league level.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Before the season started the saber-metric/stat guys said that this team would be fine. Just wanted to get that out of the way..

Yeah, this is total nonsense and yet another strawman. I thought the team could finish anywhere from first to last and the division was up for grabs. I thought the team had a chance to be competitive. I still do. I'm petty sure a lot of other people thought (and maybe still think) along the same lines. But you know what, sometimes plans just don't work.

So, yeah, it's really easy for you to come on here now while the team is stinking and pronounce the "sabremetric" guys as dummies and "hey look at me, I was right about us sucking".

..but stats don't account for everything!

No, stats, no matter how compelling, should be selectively dismissed and ridiculed by guys like Herman who have nothing more intelligent to say than "stats don't account for everything. Take momentum for example" and "I don't care about production if the strikeouts are too high".

Do you honestly believe that major league teams have not pumped tons of resources into analytics over the past 15-20 years? They don't have the capabilty to balance analytics, scouting and other factors?

[islandecho]

Before the season started the saber-metric/stat guys said that this team would be fine. Just wanted to get that out of the way.

...but stats don't account for everything! Stats and saber-metrics should be used as a barometer. Instead they have evolved to the point where people stop accounting for variables that can't be qualified and stop using their own two eyes when making an evaluation. That's my problem with people like you who talk down to people like me - you say things like "overwhelming and compelling statistical evidence" when the fact of the matter is that not everything is quantifiable and stats can be deceptive. Stats are not the definitive answer and that's what makes it difficult to debate with people like you. You're wrong, I don't mind using stats in an argument. However, like I said before stats are a barometer and they are not definitive.

http://grantland.com/features/the-math-problem/

To paraphrase:

But sabermetrics comes with an important drawback. Because it translates sports into a list of statistics, the tool can also lead coaches and executives to neglect those variables that can?t be quantified. They become so obsessed with the power of base runs that they undervalue the importance of not being an asshole, or having playoff experience, or listening to the coach. Such variables are the sporting equivalent of a nice dashboard. They can?t be quantified, but they still count.

Here?s my problem with sabermetrics ? it?s a useful tool that feels like the answer. If we were smarter creatures, of course, we wouldn?t get seduced by the numbers. We?d remember that not everything that matters can be measured, and that success in sports (not to mention car shopping) is shaped by a long list of intangibles. In fact, we?d use the successes of sabermetrics to focus even more on what can?t be quantified, since our new statistical tools take care of the stats for us. We are finally free to think about how those front seats feel.

But that?s not what happens. Instead, coaches and fans use the numbers as an excuse to ignore everything else, which is why our obsession with sabermetrics can lead to such shortsighted personnel decisions. After all, there is no way to quantify the fierce attitude of a team that feels slighted, or the way even the best players can be undone by the burden of expectations

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/05/17/baseball-fans-care-about-new-breed-stats/5C3wVETWOubtGjE78Og2RP/story.html#

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/05/24/ready-battle-over-war/AMILX82IknXowRomh2cw8M/story.html

http://baseballhotcorner.com/the-jack-morris-debate-the-biggest-flaw-of-the-sabermetrics-community/

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/sabermetrics-moneyball-stat-geeks-are-ruining-sports-092211

Herman...9 times out of 10, the guys who use stats to back up every argument they ever have have never played a sport with any proficiency of any kind.

[El Gordo]

Yes, I get that some people "get seduced by the numbers" and fail to account for the heart, grit, character, and chemistry of people who can't really play baseball at a major league level.

I'm reading the Billy Martin bio. Nobody paid more attention to the intangibles than Billy. He knew all the opposing players, the managers and the umpires, where their buttons were and knew how to push them A lot of what he did would make the numbers guys blanche but it often worked. But in reality he wasn't much different than his rival Earl who was a fore runner to numbers crunching, but also a brilliant button pusher. I think it foolish to ignore the value of both.

[DrungoHazewood]

Herman...9 times out of 10, the guys who use stats to back up every argument they ever have have never played a sport with any proficiency of any kind.

Wow! You actually pulled out the "you never played the game so you can't know anything about it" card. That's awesome, straight out of a bad B movie. I thought that only existed in cigar-smoke filled rooms of 82-year-old scouts.