2023 Ongoing Lineup Thread

[dystopia]

6 minutes ago, RarityFlaherty said:

That’s just not true. Pretty much every hitter is going to see the ball better from a pitcher pitching from the opposite hand. 

I mean, I wouldn’t expect him to put up an .830 OPS against LHP but I think he could put up solid enough numbers to justify being in the lineup and I think he should be given that opportunity. 
 

I don’t get what big deal is. If it doesn’t work out then just stop doing it. 

[Ripken]

1 minute ago, dystopia said:

If it doesn’t work out then just stop doing it. 

Which is exactly what they've done.  He doesn't hit LHP well so he isn't getting PAs against them.

[dystopia]

3 minutes ago, Ripken said:

Which is exactly what they've done.  He doesn't hit LHP well so he isn't getting PAs against them.

No they haven’t. He has 22 PAs against LHP this year. 

[DirtyBird]

Hey clowns - this ain't the Ryan O'Hearn thread

[Ripken]

18 minutes ago, dystopia said:

No they haven’t. He has 22 PAs against LHP this year. 

They're using the five years of MLB data before this season.

[dystopia]

Just now, Ripken said:

They're using the five years of MLB data before this season.

Right, back when he sucked against all pitching. Please go back through the last few pages. I’m not going through the same arguments again. 

[Ripken]

14 minutes ago, dystopia said:

Right, back when he sucked against all pitching. 

No, he didn't.  He was never great against RHP but those numbers were always way better than vs LHP.

 

[dystopia]

14 minutes ago, Ripken said:

No, he didn't.  He was never great against RHP but those numbers were always way better than vs LHP.

 

That's skewed by this year and 2018. He hasn't had an OPS over .678 against RHP since 2018. 

[Frobby]

I can barely even follow what the argument is anymore.  Is the gist that O’Hearn should be in the starting lineup every day, regardless of whether the pitcher is RH or LH?

Here’s how I see it: Hyde has managed this team to a .628 winning percentage.  His usage of O’Hearn has led to him having the best year of his major league career.  I am not about to second guess Hyde’s decisions on when to use O’Hearn.  When he doesn’t start, he’s been a valuable weapon off the bench.  

[dystopia]

32 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I can barely even follow what the argument is anymore.  Is the gist that O’Hearn should be in the starting lineup every day, regardless of whether the pitcher is RH or LH?

Here’s how I see it: Hyde has managed this team to a .628 winning percentage.  His usage of O’Hearn has led to him having the best year of his major league career.  I am not about to second guess Hyde’s decisions on when to use O’Hearn.  When he doesn’t start, he’s been a valuable weapon off the bench.  

That’s the gist of it, yeah. I really don’t get why so many are triggered at the idea of giving O’Hearn a shot against LHP this year. People just want to knee-jerk defend every decision Hyde and Elias makes. Don’t get me wrong, they deserve tremendous accolades for how they’ve managed the team this year, and Hyde should probably get MOY, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be questioned.  It’s funny how many posters who hammer John Angelos share so many of his qualities. 

[Aristotelian]

1 hour ago, dystopia said:

I mean, I wouldn’t expect him to put up an .830 OPS against LHP but I think he could put up solid enough numbers to justify being in the lineup and I think he should be given that opportunity. 
 

I don’t get what big deal is. If it doesn’t work out then just stop doing it. 

Who would he be replacing? Mountcastle is in heater mode. Hicks has .860 OPS vs LHP. Hays is hitting .771. He could outperform his career splits vs LHP by 200 points and not be better than them. I don't think it is a super big deal but as the one arguing against what the team is doing there should be a good reason for doing so. I would ask the question back to you, why is it such a big deal that we try this, given it is statistically unlikely to work and not filling a glaring need?

[Frobby]

15 minutes ago, dystopia said:

That’s the gist of it, yeah. I really don’t get why so many are triggered at the idea of giving O’Hearn a shot against LHP this year. People just want to knee-jerk defend every decision Hyde and Elias makes. Don’t get me wrong, they deserve tremendous accolades for how they’ve managed the team this year, and Hyde should probably get MOY, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be questioned.  It’s funny how many posters who hammer John Angelos share so many of his qualities. 

I’m not triggered at all by whether O’Hearn gets a start vs. LHP.  You’re the one who called the decision not to do it “idiotic” and said there was “no excuse” for not doing it.   That’s going beyond “questioning” Hyde’s lineup decisions.  

I want to be clear.   I don’t agree with every lineup decision Hyde makes.  But, I do believe he has a lot more relevant information at his disposal than I do (both statistical and analytic data, and information about how players are feeling physically and otherwise), that he’s generally more qualified to make these decisions than I am, and that his decisions have worked out incredibly well over 138 games so far.   So I’m never going to say his lineup decisions are idiotic or that there’s no excuse for them, whether I agree with him or not.  
 

[Can_of_corn]

23 minutes ago, dystopia said:

That’s the gist of it, yeah. I really don’t get why so many are triggered at the idea of giving O’Hearn a shot against LHP this year. People just want to knee-jerk defend every decision Hyde and Elias makes. Don’t get me wrong, they deserve tremendous accolades for how they’ve managed the team this year, and Hyde should probably get MOY, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be questioned.  It’s funny how many posters who hammer John Angelos share so many of his qualities. 

Oh, I'm knee jerk defending Hyde and Elias now?

I had no idea.

[dystopia]

Just now, Frobby said:

I’m not triggered at all by whether O’Hearn gets a start vs. LHP.  You’re the one who called the decision not to do it “idiotic” and said there was “no excuse” for not doing it.   That’s going beyond “questioning” Hyde’s lineup decisions.  

I want to be clear.   I don’t agree with every lineup decision Hyde makes.  But, I do believe he has a lot more relevant information at his disposal than I do (both statistical and analytic data, and information about how players are feeling physically and otherwise), that he’s generally more qualified to make these decisions than I am, and that his decisions have worked out incredibly well over 138 games so far.   So I’m never going to say his lineup decisions are idiotic or that there’s no excuse for them, whether I agree with him or not.  
 

I wasn’t thinking of you at all when I said that, just for the record. 

[dystopia]

5 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Who would he be replacing? Mountcastle is in heater mode. Hicks has .860 OPS vs LHP. Hays is hitting .771. He could outperform his career splits vs LHP by 200 points and not be better than them. I don't think it is a super big deal but as the one arguing against what the team is doing there should be a good reason for doing so. I would ask the question back to you, why is it such a big deal that we try this, given it is statistically unlikely to work and not filling a glaring need?

Okay that’s probably the best argument against it that I’ve seen.