Cafardo: Showalter losing the clubhouse

[Sessh]

Of the top seven teams in the AL in steals, four of them were playoff teams. Only one (Cleveland) wasn't.

Of the top seven teams in the AL in SB%, the top four were playoff teams. Only one (Houston) was not.

Of the top seven teams in the NL in steals, two were playoff teams. I think its notable that the Brewers led the lNL in steals and were in it until the final game of the season.

Of the top seven teams in the NL in SB%, three teams (including the top 2) were playoff teams. The brewers were third.

There is a place for steals, but of course, it helps when the attempts are successful. The chance of being thrown out doesn't mean it's not worth doing, but that just means you have to pick your battles wisely. 

The main thing I disagree with on this "steals don't matter" argument is that you're basically saying that it makes no difference whether the team has a runner on first or a runner in scoring position and that is just nonsense. Whether the offense drives him in is another story, but it's definitely better to have a runner in scoring position on second base than it is to have a runner on first. A single likely scores the guy from second since he was fast enough to steal it in the first place, so it's the difference between scoring a run on a single vs not scoring a run on a single and needing another hit to score that run.

Being able to steal with a high success rate means more runners in scoring position which means more scoring chances for the team. It's the difference between needing a single to score a run vs needing a home run, a double or two singles.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

So you would rather they get the ball home fast instead of, I don't know, command their pitches?

All right.

That is what screwed up Arrieta and other Orioles prospects in the first place.  Not saying be like Ubaldo at holding runners, but don't screw with what makes a pitcher good with an over emphasis on TTTP.  

[Can_of_corn]

17 minutes ago, Sessh said:

Of the top seven teams in the AL in steals, four of them were playoff teams. Only one (Cleveland) wasn't.

Of the top seven teams in the AL in SB%, the top four were playoff teams. Only one (Houston) was not.

Of the top seven teams in the NL in steals, two were playoff teams. I think its notable that the Brewers led the lNL in steals and were in it until the final game of the season.

Of the top seven teams in the NL in SB%, three teams (including the top 2) were playoff teams. The brewers were third.

There is a place for steals, but of course, it helps when the attempts are successful. The chance of being thrown out doesn't mean it's not worth doing, but that just means you have to pick your battles wisely. 

The main thing I disagree with on this "steals don't matter" argument is that you're basically saying that it makes no difference whether the team has a runner on first or a runner in scoring position and that is just nonsense. Whether the offense drives him in is another story, but it's definitely better to have a runner in scoring position on second base than it is to have a runner on first. A single likely scores the guy from second since he was fast enough to steal it in the first place, so it's the difference between scoring a run on a single vs not scoring a run on a single and needing another hit to score that run.

Being able to steal with a high success rate means more runners in scoring position which means more scoring chances for the team. It's the difference between needing a single to score a run vs needing a home run, a double or two singles.

 

Hmm

How about we look at team OPB?

1. Astros
2. Indians
3. Yankees
4. Cubs
5. Rockies
6. Dodgers
7. Twins
8. Cardinals
9. Nats
10. Marlins
11. Red Sox
12. Diamondbacks

Hmm

All 10 playoff teams are in the top 12.

[Frobby]

I don't disagree with Can_of_corn that preventing steals is much less important than keeping runners off base in the first place.     I just think he overstates the extent that Buck's focus on the former prevents pitchers from focusing on the latter.   

[AZRon]

45 minutes ago, Sessh said:

....The main thing I disagree with on this "steals don't matter" argument is that you're basically saying that it makes no difference whether the team has a runner on first or a runner in scoring position and that is just nonsense. Whether the offense drives him in is another story, but it's definitely better to have a runner in scoring position on second base than it is to have a runner on first. A single likely scores the guy from second since he was fast enough to steal it in the first place, so it's the difference between scoring a run on a single vs not scoring a run on a single and needing another hit to score that run....

How about keeping runners from reaching base in the first place?

See if you notice a correlation between a team 's finish in the standings and the starting pitcher WHIP --  
Courtesy of ESPN

RK	TEAM		SB		CS	CS%	WHIP
1	LA Dodgers		37		18	32.73	1.15
2	Cleveland		31		33	51.56	1.17
3	Arizona		40		25	38.46	1.26
4	Washington		54		21	28.00	1.20
5	NY Yankees		30		16	34.78	1.24
6	Houston		46		11	19.30	1.26
7	Chicago Cubs		83		27	24.55	1.27
8	Boston		38		18	32.14	1.29
30	Baltimore		47		18	27.69	1.52
	MLB Average	50			21	30.75	1.36

 

[Sessh]

There's not even any need to post stats showing that low WHIP and high OBP are highly correlated with winning. It's literally a no-brainer that doesn't even need addressing. It doesn't change the fact that a runner on second is better than a runner on first and that many of these playoff teams also incorporate stolen bases into their strategy. If you're going to sit here and say that there is absolutely no value in having a runner in scoring position instead of having a runner on first base, then I think you're a bit too biased because that is also a no-brainer. We weren't talking about OBP and WHIP. The conversation was on stolen bases and how they don't mean anything and I'm saying they do because they create scoring chances.

Of course it's more important to keep guys off the bases in the first place, but when they do get on base, I'd rather them not get a free base. Hey, why even try to throw them out at all? It doesn't matter, right? I'm not saying I agree with Buck's obsession with TTTP over just pitching better because I don't, but I'll take a runner in scoring position over a runner on first base any day of the week. Eliminate the double play possibility and put a runner in scoring position that can score on a single. All I'm saying is there is value in stealing bases. You'd think I said it was THE most important thing. It's not even close, but anytime you can advance a runner for free, it helps especially when you don't have to rely on the other team to make a mistake to accomplish it.

[OriolesMagic83]

3 hours ago, Sessh said:

Of the top seven teams in the AL in steals, four of them were playoff teams. Only one (Cleveland) wasn't.

Of the top seven teams in the AL in SB%, the top four were playoff teams. Only one (Houston) was not.

Of the top seven teams in the NL in steals, two were playoff teams. I think its notable that the Brewers led the lNL in steals and were in it until the final game of the season.

Of the top seven teams in the NL in SB%, three teams (including the top 2) were playoff teams. The brewers were third.

There is a place for steals, but of course, it helps when the attempts are successful. The chance of being thrown out doesn't mean it's not worth doing, but that just means you have to pick your battles wisely. 

 

None of the top 4 teams in the majors in steals went to the playoffs.  The Angels, Brewers, Rangers and Reds.  Admittedly, the Brewers were in the playoff race till the end.  I would say that high steal rate is more helpful than stealing a lot of bases with a poor steal rate.  The O's were predictably in last place by a wide margin.

[Beef Supreme]

16 hours ago, AZRon said:

How about keeping runners from reaching base in the first place?

See if you notice a correlation between a team 's finish in the standings and the starting pitcher WHIP --  
Courtesy of ESPN

RK	TEAM		SB		CS	CS%	WHIP
1	LA Dodgers		37		18	32.73	1.15
2	Cleveland		31		33	51.56	1.17
3	Arizona		40		25	38.46	1.26
4	Washington		54		21	28.00	1.20
5	NY Yankees		30		16	34.78	1.24
6	Houston		46		11	19.30	1.26
7	Chicago Cubs		83		27	24.55	1.27
8	Boston		38		18	32.14	1.29
30	Baltimore		47		18	27.69	1.52
	MLB Average	50			21	30.75	1.36

 

The Orioles finished in a three-way tie for the 20th best record in MLB. That translates to a +10 regarding the correlation between WHIP and winning percentage. Talk about exceeding expectations! And that clearly means one thing to me: 

Buck Showalter, Manager of the Year 2017, A.L.

[OFFNY]

19 hours ago, AZRon said:

o

 

How about keeping runners from reaching base in the first place?

 

See if you notice a correlation between a team 's finish in the standings and the starting pitcher WHIP --  
Courtesy of ESPN

RK	TEAM		SB		CS	CS%	WHIP
1	LA Dodgers		37		18	32.73	1.15
2	Cleveland		31		33	51.56	1.17
3	Arizona		40		25	38.46	1.26
4	Washington		54		21	28.00	1.20
5	NY Yankees		30		16	34.78	1.24
6	Houston		46		11	19.30	1.26
7	Chicago Cubs		83		27	24.55	1.27
8	Boston		38		18	32.14	1.29
30	Baltimore		47		18	27.69	1.52
	MLB Average	50			21	30.75	1.36

 

o

 

 

2 hours ago, Beef Supreme said:

 

The Orioles finished in a three-way tie for the 20th best record in MLB. That translates to a +10 regarding the correlation between WHIP and winning percentage. Talk about exceeding expectations! And that clearly means one thing to me: 

Buck Showalter, 2017 A.L. Manager of the Year 2017.

 

o

 

We actually have a thread for that, if you would like to check it out and respond to it.

 

 

 

o

[weams]

On 10/12/2017 at 8:18 PM, Frobby said:

I don't disagree with Can_of_corn that preventing steals is much less important than keeping runners off base in the first place.     I just think he overstates the extent that Buck's focus on the former prevents pitchers from focusing on the latter.   

I have to say these are my feelings as well. 

[sportsfan8703]

Back to the OP, kind of, how about Wade Davis coming on and getting 7 outs in an elimination game?  The 2016 version of Britton should have been put in the WC game, and should been counted on for 3+ outs. 

If there is any reason that Buck "lost" the clubhouse, this decision would be a he biggest reason I think. But I think the lost clubhouse stuff is nonsense because we started out the season on fire the first 35 games then came out with some life after the ASB. 

I think our players were just not interested in September. Most of this group has played meaningful baseball the last 5 years. Including the WBC hype before the season. Having to play those last 20 games looked like a chore for them. 

Plus I really think the Trumbo "don't hit me with a pie" thing was a wet blanket on our September push. Let's face it, stuff like that can piss teammates off. 

What about how it took Buck 100+ games to move Mancini in front of Davis and Trumbo?  He had way too long of a leash with them and the batting order. 

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, birdwatcher55 said:

Cafardo is a pretty in-tune guy so I have to give his comments a good deal of validity. Living in Boston, I see and read a lot of hacks every day in the local stations and newspapers, but he's not one of them.

As I said elsewhere (though I don't live in Boston), in my experience he's a pretty good reporter.     However, I do think that even the good reporters in Boston tend to make every little thing that happens into a big deal and blow it out of proportion, so I'm taking what he said here with a huge grain of salt until I see some actual evidence.

[mcgraw238]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

As I said elsewhere (though I don't live in Boston), in my experience he's a pretty good reporter.     However, I do think that even the good reporters in Boston tend to make every little thing that happens into a big deal and blow it out of proportion, so I'm taking what he said here with a huge grain of salt until I see some actual evidence.

I'm obviously speculating, but it would not surprise me if Duquette is one of the "sources" given the Boston connection and the continuing rumors of friction between Duquette and Buck.

[tntoriole]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

As I said elsewhere (though I don't live in Boston), in my experience he's a pretty good reporter.     However, I do think that even the good reporters in Boston tend to make every little thing that happens into a big deal and blow it out of proportion, so I'm taking what he said here with a huge grain of salt until I see some actual evidence.

There is a LOT of drama, drama, drama in the Boston media market.   A LOT.  

[wildcard]

Rcoh said today on Wall to Wall baseball that Buck did not lose the clubhouse.  Players are still supportive of Buck.