Jump to content

Gunnar’s wrist


Explosivo

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, owknows said:

round

If the ball isn’t smushed to an oval off the bat then we might have problems!

In my experience when solid/productive players aren’t producing, there is typically an underlying nagging physical issue.  Doesn’t mean injury, just means he’s not playing at 100%.  When you aren’t 100% you try and compensate and your mechanics and timing go out the window. If he and the brass think he’s well enough to play, then I don’t see any issues and imagine he will be fine soon.  If he starts getting multiple days and misses more time, that may point to a short stint on IL to get back to 100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, spiritof66 said:

The informed, intelligent thing to say would have been something like, "Gunnar has shown us what kind of hitter he is over hundreds of at bats. Yeah, he's gotten off to a slow start in the equivalent of about half a dozen games. So what? The guy can flat-out hit, and he will hit." Instead, Hyde made up (or passed along what others have made up) that there's something called a "typical young person spring." I'm pretty sure there's no such thing, and even if there were Gunnar's first 21 ABs couldn't reasonably be said to be typical of it. That sounds like the kind of nonsense a manager would have spouted in 1923 or 1953, not 2023. Most of MLB has moved beyond that kind of fact-less generalization. I hope that's not typical of the way Hyde looks at things, and I don't think it is. 

I think you are reading way too hard into an innocuous comment by Hyde during an innocuous spring training interview. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

I think you are reading way too hard into an innocuous comment by Hyde during an innocuous spring training interview. 

Maybe so. It just struck me, and still does, that Hyde's statement about what a "typical" young player does in spring training, without analysis of what young players actually do in spring training, is an example of the kind of explanation based on conventional wisdom -- albeit a trivial example --  that you no longer hear from sophisticated baseball people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, spiritof66 said:

Maybe so. It just struck me, and still does, that Hyde's statement about what a "typical" young player does in spring training, without analysis of what young players actually do in spring training, is an example of the kind of explanation based on conventional wisdom -- albeit a trivial example --  that you no longer hear from sophisticated baseball people. 

It's just Hyde's style. It's his way of waving off Gunnar's struggles as something everyone goes through in spring training. That part is true. The "young person" part is just an off the cuff comment designed at giving the player more breathing room from the media. It's also a way of, if Gunnar reads the interview later, letting the player know it's all good and to relax. It's a way to let it be known that the player is not under any added pressure or expectation. 

Managing in baseball is about managing humans. Hyde knows the data and the modern way the game is played. But that doesn't mean he has to talk like that all the time. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, spiritof66 said:

Maybe so. It just struck me, and still does, that Hyde's statement about what a "typical" young player does in spring training, without analysis of what young players actually do in spring training, is an example of the kind of explanation based on conventional wisdom -- albeit a trivial example --  that you no longer hear from sophisticated baseball people. 

You expect him to provide examples of this when he is asked a random question and give you analysis of what is going on and why he feels he’s pressing?  
 

Show me one interview like this where a manager has ever done that.  It’s always cliches and Bs answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • dWAR is just the run value for defense added with the defensive adjustment.  Corner OF spots have a -7.5 run adjustment, while CF has a +2.5 adjustment over 150 games.    Since Cowser played both CF and the corners they pro-rate his time at each to calculate his defensive adjustment. 
    • Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.
    • Wait a second here, the reason he's -0.1 in bb-ref dwar is because they're using drs to track his defensive run value.  He's worth 6.6 runs in defense according to fangraphs, which includes adjustments for position, which would give him a fangraphs defensive war of +0.7.
    • A little funny to have provided descriptions of the hits (“weak” single; “500 foot” HR). FIP doesn’t care about any of that either, so it’s kind of an odd thing to add in an effort to make ERA look bad.  Come in, strike out the first hitter, then give up three 108 MPH rocket doubles off the wall. FIP thinks you were absolutely outstanding, and it’s a shame your pathetic defense and/or sheer bad luck let you down. Next time you’ll (probably) get the outcomes you deserve. They’re both flawed. So is xFIP. So is SIERA. So is RA/9. So is WPA. So is xERA. None of them are perfect measures of how a pitcher’s actual performance was, because there’s way too much context and too many variables for any one metric to really encompass.  But when I’m thinking about awards, for me at least, it ends up having to be about the actual outcomes. I don’t really care what a hitter’s xWOBA is when I’m thinking about MVP, and the same is true for pitchers. Did you get the outs? Did the runs score? That’s the “value” that translates to the scoreboard and, ultimately, to the standings. So I think the B-R side of it is more sensible for awards.  I definitely take into account the types of factors that you (and other pitching fWAR advocates) reference as flaws. So if a guy plays in front of a particular bad defense or had a particularly high percentage of inherited runners score, I’d absolutely adjust my take to incorporate that info. And I also 100% go to Fangraphs first when I’m trying to figure out which pitchers we should acquire (i.e., for forward looking purposes).  But I just can’t bring myself say that my Cy Young is just whichever guy had the best ratio of Ks to BBs to HRs over a threshold number of innings. As @Frobby said, it just distills out too much of what actually happened.
    • We were all a lot younger in 2005.  No one wanted to believe Canseco cause he’s a smarmy guy. Like I said, he was the only one telling the truth. It wasn’t a leap of faith to see McGwire up there and Sosa up there and think “yeah, those guys were juicing” but then suddenly look at Raffy and think he was completely innocent.  It’s a sad story. The guy should be in Hall of Fame yet 500 homers and 3,000 hits are gone like a fart in the wind cause his legacy is wagging his finger and thinking he couldn’t get caught.  Don’t fly too close to the sun.  
    • I think if we get the fun sprinkler loving Gunnar that was in the dugout yesterday, I don’t think we have to worry about him pressing. He seemed loose and feeling good with the other guys he was with, like Kremer.
    • I was a lot younger back then, but that betrayal hit really hard because he had been painting himself as literally holier than thou, and shook his finger to a congressional committee and then barely 2 weeks later failed the test.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...