Anatomy of a struggling offense

[Tony-OH]

19 hours ago, spiritof66 said:

Some of this probably reflects random variation, but when you get team averages that low you have to wonder.

Ben McDonald and Palmer have commented at times this season that an Oriole player seemed to be taking Don Long's advice by being a little more selective, by reducing his swings and by hitting to the opposite field. While I've been watching must less recently, I haven't heard those comments or seen the evidence for them lately. 

That takes me to some questions I've never heard an answer to:

• Oriole pitchers who were regarded as ML talents coming into the season have not performed well, and the team is dead last in ERA by a wide margin. Does the pitching coach bear some responsibility for that?
• The Orioles are next-to-last in the league in scoring runs (while playing in a park that favors offense). Does the hitting coach bear some responsibility for that?
• The team has not executed fundamentals well or played smart baseball, and has under-performed expectations. Does the manager bear some responsibility for that?
• Many, if not most, of the Orioles players have done much worse than had been expected. Was the general manager off i his judgements of their individual talent, and if so does the GM bear some responsibility?
• Is there anyone in the above groups who will accept any measure of responsibility for this season's debacle? Is there anyone willing to say he's made mistakes and what he's learned from them?

There is, or used to be, an old adage in baseball, hauled out when the manager of a terrible team was fired even though it was generally understood that the team was lacking in overall ability, that you fire the manager because you have to do something and you can't fire all the players. The Orioles seem intent on testing that adage by keeping Hyde but firing most of the players over a two- or three-year period. 

Outside of Mullins, there has been very little improvements from any of our hitters and most have regressed. Same with the pitching. As you stated, this team has a lack of fundamentals and it shows up often.

So while I won't blame the coaching staff for the Orioles woes because there is a lack of talent on this roster, I certainly don't see any bright spots with the current group to include Hyde that makes me think they are part of a winning future coaching staff.

If there are two things this season has shown me its, Holt has no magic pixie dust to make pitchers better, and Elias/Sig's system does not have some magic pixie dust that allows them to find major league ready diamonds in the rough from other organizations. It remains to be seen whether their system for identifying players in the draft, international scene or with trades works or not.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

10 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Same with the pitching. As you stated, this team ha a lack of fundamentals and it shows up often.

 

This is the main issue I have with the team and coaching. I can understand the Orioles are undermanned and there is no way for them to be a .500 team. 

What I'm less forgiving of is the sloppy play and bad defense we see daily. You can play with good fundamentals even if the individual talent on the team isn't great. Is Hyde incapable of coaching up the talent or is the caliber of player on this team not capable of being coached up?

I'm unconvinced that Hyde will be the right manager for this team when the talent pool is upgraded because of the poor play we see from the team today. Even good to great players need a manager that will enforce a minimum level of conduct to prevent errors and poor fundamentals on the field. 

[Tony-OH]

1 minute ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

This is the main issue I have with the team and coaching. I can understand the Orioles are undermanned and there is no way for them to be a .500 team. 

What I'm less forgiving of is the sloppy play and bad defense we see daily. You can play with good fundamentals even if the individual talent on the team isn't great. Is Hyde incapable of coaching up the talent or is the caliber of player on this team not capable of being coached up?

I'm unconvinced that Hyde will be the right manager for this team when the talent pool is upgraded because of the poor play we see from the team today. Even good to great players need a manager that will enforce a minimum level of conduct to prevent errors and poor fundamentals on the field. 

I think Hyde is a good baseball and company guy. Saying that, I have not seen one of his teams look like it's particularly well skilled in the fundamentals, but I don't know whether it's the lack of quality players or a lack of consequences when players don't do things fundamentally sound. 

[Moose Milligan]

13 hours ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

Wasn't "clutch" hitting found to be dismissed as mostly an invention and a fantasy.  Great players almost always think they hit better in the clutch, they rarely do.  I think Eddie Murray was one of the rare players who actually hit better in the clutch.   If a player is trying harder in the clutch, is he trying less hard with the bases empty? 

Yes, it's a myth.  Even for Eddie.

Eddie's career slash line is .287/.359/.476 which adds up to an .836 OPS.   

2 outs RISP for his career, his slash was .262/.391/.464 for an .855 OPS.

Late and close, .282/.371/.494 for a .865 OPS.

Tie game, .290/.369/.500 for a .869 OPS

His career clutch stats hover right around his career line.  Maybe in some areas a little better, maybe in some areas a little worse.  But the notion that players can raise their games and perform better in the clutch is a myth that sportswriters and fans love to discuss.  It makes their heroes seem even greater than they are.

Eddie was good in the clutch because he was already a good hitter to begin with.

Try it with a Yankee fan, you'll blow their minds.  I used to work with a Yankee fan who couldn't STFU about how clutch Derek Jeter was.  I showed him that Jeter's clutch stat lines were right in line with his career averages, that the notion that he raised his game in clutch situations wasn't true.  Jeter was great in clutch situations because he was already a really good hitter.  

He literally couldn't believe it.  Would not believe it, despite the stats right in front of him.   

[SteveA]

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

Yes, it's a myth.  Even for Eddie.

Eddie's career slash line is .287/.359/.476 which adds up to an .836 OPS.   

2 outs RISP for his career, his slash was .262/.391/.464 for an .855 OPS.

Late and close, .282/.371/.494 for a .865 OPS.

Tie game, .290/.369/.500 for a .869 OPS

His career clutch stats hover right around his career line.  Maybe in some areas a little better, maybe in some areas a little worse.  But the notion that players can raise their games and perform better in the clutch is a myth that sportswriters and fans love to discuss.  It makes their heroes seem even greater than they are.

Eddie was good in the clutch because he was already a good hitter to begin with.

Try it with a Yankee fan, you'll blow their minds.  I used to work with a Yankee fan who couldn't STFU about how clutch Derek Jeter was.  I showed him that Jeter's clutch stat lines were right in line with his career averages, that the notion that he raised his game in clutch situations wasn't true.  Jeter was great in clutch situations because he was already a really good hitter.  

He literally couldn't believe it.  Would not believe it, despite the stats right in front of him.   

So if the ability to hit in the clutch is a myth, then it should be a myth that some people are worse in such situations, right?

So if the Orioles are hitting 100 points lower and OPSing almost 200 points lower with RISP than our overall #s for the month of August, which is in its 4th week now, then logic would hold that you expect there to be a 3+ week period where we hit 100 points HIGHER and OPS 200 points HIGHER than our norm with runners in scoring position.   Let me know when it happens, I'm not holding my breath.

If there's no innate ability to be better in such situations, it stands to reason there's no innate ability to be worse, and numbers such as these are just random fluctuations and will over the long term be balanced by a long stretch where the team is absolutely great in the clutch.   Right?   

 

 

[Moose Milligan]

3 minutes ago, SteveA said:

So if the ability to hit in the clutch is a myth, then it should be a myth that some people are worse in such situations, right?

So if the Orioles are hitting 100 points lower and OPSing almost 200 points lower with RISP than our overall #s for the month of August, which is in its 4th week now, then logic would hold that you expect there to be a 3+ week period where we hit 100 points HIGHER and OPS 200 points HIGHER than our norm with runners in scoring position.   Let me know when it happens, I'm not holding my breath.

If there's no innate ability to be better in such situations, it stands to reason there's no innate ability to be worse, and numbers such as these are just random fluctuations and will over the long term be balanced by a long stretch where the team is absolutely great in the clutch.   Right?   

 

 

Yeah, but small sample size for the month of August.  You know as well as I do, teams as well as individual players go into slumps and funks...which is what this is.  You call this a long stretch, I call it a small sample size.

Is it inconceivable that a team of mostly bad players such as this one can slump all at once?  Is it inconceivable that a team of really bad players could also get hot at once?  IMO, it's more likely that a team full of already bad players could go cold like they have this month rather than get hot and hit at 100 points HIGHER and OPS 200 points HIGHER.  Who do you think these guys are?  

If you're convinced that clutch is a myth, find me a player who magically raised his game in clutch situations over the course of his career to the tune of hitting 100 points higher and OPSing 200 points higher.  Your metrics, not mine.

I'll help you get started:

Willie Mays:  Career .302/.384/.557 = .942 OPS

2 Outs, RISP:  .296/.428/.557 = .985

Late and close .306/.399/.551 = .949

Tie game .295/.380/.547 = .927

 

Hank Aaron:  Career .305/.374/.555 = .929

2 Outs RISP:  .306/.421/.554 = .975

Late and Close .318/.407/.576 = .983

Tie game .294/.377/.531 = .909

Growing up, I always thought Chipper Jones was the clutchiest guy alive.

.303/.401/.529 career OPS .930

2 Outs, RISP:  .266/.441/.465 = .907 OPS

Late and Close .294/.416/.489 = .905

Tie Game .294/.400/.499 = .899 OPS

 

I could go on and on all day.  Clutch doesn't exist, it's a myth.  Great hitters are great in the clutch because they're already great hitters.  And even if you did find one that was better by 100 points in batting average and 200 points in OPS, it'd be the outlier, the exception to the rule.  

 

 

[Frobby]

35 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I think Hyde is a good baseball and company guy. Saying that, I have not seen one of his teams look like it's particularly well skilled in the fundamentals, but I don't know whether it's the lack of quality players or a lack of consequences when players don't do things fundamentally sound. 

One factor is the high turnover, especially in the infield.  How many games have we played with the same 2B/SS combo?    It’s harder to turn a smooth DP when you’ve got different guys out there every night.   

Also, while we all notice when the team makes a fundamental mistake, do we really do it more than other teams?   For example, we are better than average at avoiding making outs on the bases, while being just slightly below average at taking extra bases.   Our fielding percentage is above average, though some (not all) advanced metrics grade us poorly.   Despite allowing a ton of runs, we are 3rd lowest in the AL in unearned runs allowed.   

There are really two areas where to me we are woefully deficient.   The first is turning DP’s, where we are last in the league.   I frequently see routine DP balls that only result in one out.   The second is blocking and framing pitches.   In both cases, I feel like it’s more the personnel (including the turnover I alluded to) than the coaching, but it’s hard to know.  
 

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

One factor is the high turnover, especially in the infield.  How many games have we played with the same 2B/SS combo?    It’s harder to turn a smooth DP when you’ve got different guys out there every night.   

Also, while we all notice when the team makes a fundamental mistake, do we really do it more than other teams?   For example, we are better than average at avoiding making outs on the bases, while being just slightly below average at taking extra bases.   Our fielding percentage is above average, though some (not all) advanced metrics grade us poorly.   Despite allowing a ton of runs, we are 3rd lowest in the AL in unearned runs allowed.   

There are really two areas where to me we are woefully deficient.   The first is turning DP’s, where we are last in the league.   I frequently see routine DP balls that only result in one out.   The second is blocking and framing pitches.   In both cases, I feel like it’s more the personnel (including the turnover I alluded to) than the coaching, but it’s hard to know.  
 

In regards to the catching, Hyde is the one that keeps giving the majority of the at bats to the Catcher who inferior defensively.

[Tony-OH]

9 minutes ago, Frobby said:

One factor is the high turnover, especially in the infield.  How many games have we played with the same 2B/SS combo?    It’s harder to turn a smooth DP when you’ve got different guys out there every night.   

Also, while we all notice when the team makes a fundamental mistake, do we really do it more than other teams?   For example, we are better than average at avoiding making outs on the bases, while being just slightly below average at taking extra bases.   Our fielding percentage is above average, though some (not all) advanced metrics grade us poorly.   Despite allowing a ton of runs, we are 3rd lowest in the AL in unearned runs allowed.   

There are really two areas where to me we are woefully deficient.   The first is turning DP’s, where we are last in the league.   I frequently see routine DP balls that only result in one out.   The second is blocking and framing pitches.   In both cases, I feel like it’s more the personnel (including the turnover I alluded to) than the coaching, but it’s hard to know.  
 

Good points all around Rick. I can't tell you whether the Orioles make more fundamental mistakes than other teams, but it does seem that they make more than their opponents. Too often you said bad cuts set up with outfielders not knowing who to throw to and simple pop ups around the infield seems to be a challenge. 

Defensively we may not make a ton of errors, but like you said, those lack of double plays certainly hurt and our catching has been brutally bad defensively this year, particularly in framing where Severino, Sisco and Wynns have combined for an amazing -14 runs added back there.

[Frobby]

7 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

In regards to the catching, Hyde is the one that keeps giving the majority of the at bats to the Catcher who inferior defensively.

Wynns is a terrible hitter, and IMO he’s no Wieters behind the plate either.  Fangraphs has him at -3.4 framing runs in 232 innings, about on par with Severino’s -8.5 in 669 innings.   Granted, he’s the better pitch blocker by far.  

Wynns has this annoying thing he does where he starts in a normal crouch, and then as the pitcher is into his windup he kind of brings his knees together and then drops to one knee.  It may be a good technique for blocking pitches but if I were the pitcher it would distract the hell out of me and make it hard to hit my target.   
 

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

50 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Yeah, but small sample size for the month of August.  You know as well as I do, teams as well as individual players go into slumps and funks...which is what this is.  You call this a long stretch, I call it a small sample size.

Is it inconceivable that a team of mostly bad players such as this one can slump all at once?  Is it inconceivable that a team of really bad players could also get hot at once?  IMO, it's more likely that a team full of already bad players could go cold like they have this month rather than get hot and hit at 100 points HIGHER and OPS 200 points HIGHER.  Who do you think these guys are?  

If you're convinced that clutch is a myth, find me a player who magically raised his game in clutch situations over the course of his career to the tune of hitting 100 points higher and OPSing 200 points higher.  Your metrics, not mine.

I'll help you get started:

Willie Mays:  Career .302/.384/.557 = .942 OPS

2 Outs, RISP:  .296/.428/.557 = .985

Late and close .306/.399/.551 = .949

Tie game .295/.380/.547 = .927

 

Hank Aaron:  Career .305/.374/.555 = .929

2 Outs RISP:  .306/.421/.554 = .975

Late and Close .318/.407/.576 = .983

Tie game .294/.377/.531 = .909

Growing up, I always thought Chipper Jones was the clutchiest guy alive.

.303/.401/.529 career OPS .930

2 Outs, RISP:  .266/.441/.465 = .907 OPS

Late and Close .294/.416/.489 = .905

Tie Game .294/.400/.499 = .899 OPS

 

I could go on and on all day.  Clutch doesn't exist, it's a myth.  Great hitters are great in the clutch because they're already great hitters.  And even if you did find one that was better by 100 points in batting average and 200 points in OPS, it'd be the outlier, the exception to the rule.  

 

 

The one that kills me is how many baseball announcers praise Derek Jeter for being a clutch player in the playoffs and slamming Alex Rodriguez for not being great in the postseason.

Except this is their career OPS:

Jeter: Regular Season OPS: .817; Playoffs OPS: .838

Rodriguez: Regular Season OPS: .930; Playoffs OPS: .822

They virtually have the same value as a hitter in the playoffs, but because Rodriguez playoff OPS was 100 points lower than his career OPS, he gets slammed for not being "clutch".

And Jeter gets the added benefit of being a Yankee for the 1996 to 2000 pennant run, but if you swap Jeter for A-Rod during that time the Yankees are going to win the same amount of World Series. The Yankees were a great team, but some baseball people would have you believe it was because Jeter had clutch superpowers in the postseason. 

And it pains me to write this because I am no fan of Alex Rodriguez much less Jeter. 

[Just Regular]

1 hour ago, SteveA said:

So if the ability to hit in the clutch is a myth, then it should be a myth that some people are worse in such situations, right?

So if the Orioles are hitting 100 points lower and OPSing almost 200 points lower with RISP than our overall #s for the month of August, which is in its 4th week now, then logic would hold that you expect there to be a 3+ week period where we hit 100 points HIGHER and OPS 200 points HIGHER than our norm with runners in scoring position.   Let me know when it happens, I'm not holding my breath.

If there's no innate ability to be better in such situations, it stands to reason there's no innate ability to be worse, and numbers such as these are just random fluctuations and will over the long term be balanced by a long stretch where the team is absolutely great in the clutch.   Right?   

 

 

Rarely in baseball history has Palmer's point about solo HR not beating you been truer than for Orioles opponents this month.

Is every game A Lot to A Little?   Are low leverage relievers filling up the zone?   In the occasional close game, are better relievers tougher?

We need one of those Spring Training things to measure opponent quality.

https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=5&season=2021&month=8&season1=2021&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&startdate=2021-01-01&enddate=2021-12-31&sort=8,d

BAL batters getting 3rd most Zone% strikes this month despite also running regular (very bad) swing decisions, which in more competitive times I believe would translate to pitchers using more chase pitches.   If they needed to.

The Royals are as bad at swing decisions this month, and seeing the fewest strikes by a lot.  It looks like teams consider the Rangers Orioles bad.

It is full psychobabble, but I somewhat feel Mullins/RMC/Santander/Mancini/Urias/Jones/Hays would get more development value if they let Rutschman and Rodriguez on to the team.   I get we need to protect their April 2022 opportunity to play, and protect all the Zach Pops we can, but isn't that what options are for...Strasburg and Harper have options left.    

Could make a heckuva Fantastic Fans night this weekend...

[SteveA]

1 hour ago, Moose Milligan said:

Yeah, but small sample size for the month of August.  You know as well as I do, teams as well as individual players go into slumps and funks...which is what this is.  You call this a long stretch, I call it a small sample size.

Is it inconceivable that a team of mostly bad players such as this one can slump all at once?  Is it inconceivable that a team of really bad players could also get hot at once?  IMO, it's more likely that a team full of already bad players could go cold like they have this month rather than get hot and hit at 100 points HIGHER and OPS 200 points HIGHER.  Who do you think these guys are?  

If you're convinced that clutch is a myth, find me a player who magically raised his game in clutch situations over the course of his career to the tune of hitting 100 points higher and OPSing 200 points higher.  Your metrics, not mine.

I'll help you get started:

Willie Mays:  Career .302/.384/.557 = .942 OPS

2 Outs, RISP:  .296/.428/.557 = .985

Late and close .306/.399/.551 = .949

Tie game .295/.380/.547 = .927

 

Hank Aaron:  Career .305/.374/.555 = .929

2 Outs RISP:  .306/.421/.554 = .975

Late and Close .318/.407/.576 = .983

Tie game .294/.377/.531 = .909

Growing up, I always thought Chipper Jones was the clutchiest guy alive.

.303/.401/.529 career OPS .930

2 Outs, RISP:  .266/.441/.465 = .907 OPS

Late and Close .294/.416/.489 = .905

Tie Game .294/.400/.499 = .899 OPS

 

I could go on and on all day.  Clutch doesn't exist, it's a myth.  Great hitters are great in the clutch because they're already great hitters.  And even if you did find one that was better by 100 points in batting average and 200 points in OPS, it'd be the outlier, the exception to the rule.  

 

 

I'm agreeing with you. 

But the logical conclusion of clutch not being a myth is that at some point the Orioles should overperform in RISP for as much of a sample size as they have underperformed their overall numbers in August.

I'm waiting, it will be lots of fun when it happens.

[Il BuonO]

2 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

I think Hyde is a good baseball and company guy. Saying that, I have not seen one of his teams look like it's particularly well skilled in the fundamentals, but I don't know whether it's the lack of quality players or a lack of consequences when players don't do things fundamentally sound. 

I’ve speculated Buck Britton is being groomed. Seems to get a lot of good notice. 

My former HS teammate coached him and Zack in CA. So, if he does get a ML managing job I’ll never hear the end of it.

[SteveA]

1 hour ago, Tony-OH said:

Good points all around Rick. I can't tell you whether the Orioles make more fundamental mistakes than other teams, but it does seem that they make more than their opponents. Too often you said bad cuts set up with outfielders not knowing who to throw to and simple pop ups around the infield seems to be a challenge. 

Defensively we may not make a ton of errors, but like you said, those lack of double plays certainly hurt and our catching has been brutally bad defensively this year, particularly in framing where Severino, Sisco and Wynns have combined for an amazing -14 runs added back there.

You've watched a lot more minors than most of us.   How have the fundamentals been in the various Orioles farm teams?