Is this Rickard's slump or just emerging to ...?

[DrungoHazewood]

Religion.

True. But that's not something where facts are available to be cited. As far as I can tell baseball (and politics) exist within the observable universe.

[Camden_yardbird]

Your opinion in micro sense may be just as predictive as analytics. Your "feel" or "precognition" may be just as effective at divining the winner of Sunday's football game. But over time, and with alarming accuracy, the predictive statistics bear out in ways that justify or reject the expenditure of millions of dollars. And for that many folks have learned to pay some attention to them. Not all of them are accurate. Not all of them work over a small sample size. But over the course of a contract or a career, they do reflect what actually occurs. Not what we might hope will.

I don't think most people understand the time it take for many or the advanced statics to normalize. With regard to Rickard, we are still months if not in some cases years away from establishing a normalized baseline.

http://www.fangraphs.com/library/principles/sample-size/

[Can_of_corn]

I don't think most people understand the time it take for many or the advanced statics to normalize. With regard to Rickard, we are still months if not in some cases years away from establishing a normalized baseline.

http://www.fangraphs.com/library/principles/sample-size/

I'm not sure why folks wouldn't understand it. Anytime anyone uses a SSS to make any sort of point whatsoever folks come out of the woodwork to shout them down. Even if it is a point that can be supported with a SSS or the poster specifically mentions it is a SSS..

[TheWall]

Oddly enough some of us can enjoy the game on multiple levels simultaneously.

Reading through this and I just wanted to say that I think this hits the nail on the head.

[weams]

My issue isn't that the advanced stats are a bad thing. Everything helpful is good. But they aren't the "end all, be all." Someone posting how they think Rikard is a joy to watch shouldn't be met with a thousand stats pointing out how that can't possibly be true because, " UZR"

I do agree. A joy to watch is something to be cherished.

[DrungoHazewood]

I'm not sure why folks wouldn't understand it. Anytime anyone uses a SSS to make any sort of point whatsoever folks come out of the woodwork to shout them down. Even if it is a point that can be supported with a SSS or the poster specifically mentions it is a SSS..

I think there are many people who just turn off whenever the discussion turns analytical.

[Can_of_corn]

I think there are many people who just turn off whenever the discussion turns analytical.

The question I have is why do they turn off...then respond a half a dozen more times to the thread in question?

[DrungoHazewood]

The question I have is why do they turn off...then respond a half a dozen more times to the thread in question?

I'm sure even you and I both have any number of strongly held opinions we occasionally talk about that have little rational basis.

[CaptainRedbeard]

Rickard's season offensive numbers now look like about what I would expect out of him.

6.6 BB%

18.0 K%

.125 ISO

.326 BABIP

104 wRC+

Really good to see that walk rate come up. I previously posted that's what I was concerned about. He's also stopped chasing out of the zone so much (27.2 O-Swing%) and is being more aggressive in the zone (53.5 Z-Swing%).

The defense and baserunning numbers are bad, but I think he has the tools to improve on those a lot. Overall he's looking like a 1-2 WAR player as a regular if he can fix those. I'd still like to see Kim more vs RHP and don't really like Rickard leading off, but I like the improvements he's making at the plate.

[foxfield]

I have thoroughly enjoyed this thread. Sometimes the discussion gets a little warm, but this is a great debate on watching analytics like a fresh new painting. We have a brand new canvas being painted right before our eyes and we get the opinions of eyes and the meaning of stats rolled out all together.

My eyes say that Rickard has had pitchers make an adjustment to his hot start and he has begun to adjust back. My eyes say he should stabilize defensively but I still am not convinced he can hold the position everyday. As for base running I think as he gets more comfortable he will improve there as well. But I think with the power of this team uses that speed more going from 1st to 3rd more than straight stealing.

All of that is opinion. I'm glad we have him and I hope the stats justify holding on. The folks here that continue to raise caution based on analytics however are justified to continue to raise that caution.

As the canvas of Joey Rickard contains more data, the picture of what type of player he is will become more clear to all of us. I really do not think anyone disagrees with that.

Carry on!

[OFFNY]

Earl Weaver on "team speed".

[video=youtube;HR8L_OW7kbY]

Weaver often talked big about downplaying team speed, stolen bases, and sacrifice bunts, but the reality of his managing style (and his teams) was considerably different.

He did not eschew stolen bases and team speed anywhere near what his image would seem to imply.

For example, Reggie Jackson was one of the greatest power hitters of all-time. In 1976, while playing for Weaver, he set a career-high for stolen bases with 28 ...... even though he missed the first month of the season.

Certainly Weaver could not have been that dismissive of stolen bases and team speed if he were allowing an all-time great power hitter set a career-high for stolen bases while playing only 5 months of the season.

In even more detail:

How many times do we hear broadcasters, former Orioles, and even Weaver himself talk about how he waited for the 3 run homer, hated bunting, and didn't like to steal bases. As a lifelong Oriole fan, I remember the 1973-74 Orioles who both made the playoffs. Niether team had a lot of power. They had Bumbry, Blair, Grich, Baylor, Coggins, Retenmund, Belanger, and so forth. This was before Grich and Baylor blossomed into power hitters too. These teams didn't beat you with power. They beat your with pitching, defense, and SPEED. So here I am, not for the first time, to beat Weaver's drum, even if he won't do it himself, to say that Weaver managed according to his talent and was much more a manager than people give him credit for.

The 1973 Orioles LED the AL in stolen bases with 146 in 1973, 18 ahead of the 2nd place team. They were FOURTH in sac bunts, 9 behind the league leader and 8th in home runs.

In 1974 the Orioles were 3rd in stolen bases, 19 behind the league leader

They were THIRD in sacrifice bunts and 6th in home runs.

In 1975 the O's were 5th in stolen bases and tied for 4th in sac bunts and 7th in home runs.

In 1976 the O's were 4th in stolen bases and dropped to 9th in sac bunt and 3rd in home runs.

In 1977 the O's were 8th in stolen bases, 10th in sac bunts, and 5th in homers.

The Orioles' Stolen Bases Totals, by year:

1971 - 66 (4th of 12)

1972 - 78 (5th of 12) [strike Season: 154 Games Played]

1973 - 146 (1st of 12) LED THE LEAGUE !!! ) :eektf:

1974 - 145 (3rd of 12)

1975 - 104 (5th of 12)

1976 - 150 (4th of 12)

1977 - 90 (8th of 14)

1978 - 75 (11th of 14)

1979 - 99 (8th of 14)

1980 - 111 (6th of 14)

1981 - 41 (11th of 14) [strike Season: 105 Games Played]

1982 - 49 (12th of 14)

The Orioles' Sacrifice Bunt Totals, by Year:

1973 - 58 (4th of 12)

1974 - 72 (3rd of 12)

1975 - 73 (4th of 12)

1976 - 57 (9th of 12)

1977 - 48 (10th of 14)

1978 - 41 (13th of 14)

1979 - 42 (tied for last)

1980 - 42 (12th of 14)

1981 - 26 (14th of 14) [strike Season: 105 Games Played]

1982 - 57 (4th of 14)

Take that for what it's worth. The most interesting thing I found was the 57 sac bunts in his last year before retiring. A team that went down to the last game of the season before losing to the Brewers. In 4 of the 10 years listed, Earl Weaver was in the top 4 in the league in team sacrifice bunts. His team went to the playoffs in two of those years (73-74) and just missed in 1982. Weaver may have hated the bunt but it doesn't mean he didn't use it. He most certainly did. I just want to set the record straight. Weaver may have loved the 3 run homer. He may have waited for the 3 run homer. BUT he didn't always wait for the 3 run homer. He employed the hit and run (don't know how to look that up), the stolen base, and the SACRIFICE BUNT!!!!!!!!!!

[e16bball]

I'm not sure why folks wouldn't understand it. Anytime anyone uses a SSS to make any sort of point whatsoever folks come out of the woodwork to shout them down. Even if it is a point that can be supported with a SSS or the poster specifically mentions it is a SSS..

For what it's worth, I think the issue here is in how you define a "small sample." Everyone understands that a week's worth of games isn't enough to draw any reasonable conclusion. Where you run into some disagreement is when you're talking about more like 2-3 months' worth of games. Many folks are thinking that's almost half a season, that's got to be enough to judge who a player is, what he's capable of, and what to expect from him moving forward.

I don't think that's correct, but I do think it's somewhat reasonable/understandable that folks might believe that --- and disbelieve others telling them that they're being deceived when they put their faith in results compiled over months of games.

[DrungoHazewood]

For what it's worth, I think the issue here is in how you define a "small sample." Everyone understands that a week's worth of games isn't enough to draw any reasonable conclusion. Where you run into some disagreement is when you're talking about more like 2-3 months' worth of games. Many folks are thinking that's almost half a season, that's got to be enough to judge who a player is, what he's capable of, and what to expect from him moving forward.

I don't think that's correct, but I do think it's somewhat reasonable/understandable that folks might believe that --- and disbelieve others telling them that they're being deceived when they put their faith in results compiled over months of games.

I've told this before so forgive me if you've heard it. I was sitting next to someone in late May 2014 at OPACY. When he saw that Caleb Joseph was something like 1-for-25 he suggested that the GM be fired for letting this get so out of hand. He could understand giving a guy 10 or 12 PAs to adjust to the majors, but 25 was more than enough.

[weams]

For what it's worth, I think the issue here is in how you define a "small sample." Everyone understands that a week's worth of games isn't enough to draw any reasonable conclusion. Where you run into some disagreement is when you're talking about more like 2-3 months' worth of games. Many folks are thinking that's almost half a season, that's got to be enough to judge who a player is, what he's capable of, and what to expect from him moving forward.

I don't think that's correct, but I do think it's somewhat reasonable/understandable that folks might believe that --- and disbelieve others telling them that they're being deceived when they put their faith in results compiled over months of games.

Jimmy Paredes.

[NashLumber]

Weaver often talked big about downplaying team speed, stolen bases, and sacrifice bunts, but the reality of his managing style (and his teams) was considerably different.

He did not eschew stolen bases and team speed anywhere near what his image would seem to imply.

For example, Reggie Jackson was one of the greatest power hitters of all-time. In 1976, while playing for Weaver, he set a career-high for stolen bases with 28 ...... even though he missed the first month of the season.

Certainly Weaver could not have been that dismissive of stolen bases and team speed if he were allowing an all-time great power hitter set a career-high for stolen bases while playing only 5 months of the season.

In even more detail:

All very good AND appreciated. I will point out that the Earl Weaver's Manager's Corner video I posted was an attempt at levity in a contentious thread, not a rebuttal. I just thought it was funny to hear him once again talk about #%$# fleas on the base paths.

And Alice Sweet. Been wanting to use that as a band name for years.