Brandon Hyde 2024

[RZNJ]

3 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Both Crawford and Akin have traditional splits if you look out farther than this year. Sure, Akin has crap numbers in similar situations but Baker has crap numbers, period. In AAA. 

Do you pitch Julio Rodriguez and Randy Arozarena the same way when they’re slumping as you do when they’re hot?    Recent trends sometimes usurp career numbers.   If you’re a LHP are you a little more careful with Rutschman as a RH hitter because of how well he’s hitting them this year?   Seems like common sense to me.

[Aristotelian]

One more thing... There is no way Akin is going to come in to pitch to Garver. Regardless of Akin's splits, Garver is a lefty masher and that would just play into his strengths (as we saw). So if Baker is staying in, it is for at least two extra batters. That is not happening with him already at 24p and five batters faced.

[Aristotelian]

3 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Do you pitch Julio Rodriguez and Randy Arozarena the same way when they’re slumping as you do when they’re hot?    Recent trends sometimes usurp career numbers.   If you’re a LHP are you a little more careful with Rutschman as a RH hitter because of how well he’s hitting them this year?   Seems like common sense to me.

We aren't talking about Adley. We are talking about Crawford and Akin who have historically normal splits and this year have slightly skewed reverse splits. I am not saying Akin was the obviously right move, just that he wasn't the obviously wrong move. 

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

We aren't talking about Adley. We are talking about Crawford and Akin who have historically normal splits and this year have slightly skewed reverse splits. I am not saying Akin was the obviously right move, just that he wasn't the obviously wrong move. 

J.P. Crawford is hitting .177 against RHP and .293 against LHP this year.   That’s not “slightly skewed”.    

[HowAboutThat]

15 hours ago, Chelsea_Phil said:

Vance, as this is your fourth post, I guess you deserve a pass, but I cannot help it.  So who do you want to trade away for those "decent arms"?   Please, think before you post.

@VanceWilder’s complaint is that Mike hasn’t addressed the problem, which is true. I’m sure Mike is calling folks but he’s unwilling to pay the price. Who is traded is really moot. Someone needs to be brought on board, and that hasn’t happened yet.

[HowAboutThat]

3 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Thank God. Who wants a manager who gets an itch on his is nose or some advice from a fortune cookie and uses that to make decisions instead of real, hard information?

This is actually a really fascinating question. Stats give you information, but they don’t give you all the information. “intuition” or “gut feeling” is the collection of uncollated data that every experienced manager has.

There are always variables that cannot be calculated and the complaint here is that Hyde apparently ignores them.

About last night, I would’ve been happy for Burnes to open the inning. Hyde knows how bad the bullpen is, so it is really on him for not delaying as long as possible( IF Burnes said he was done that’s another thing.)

My complaint about Hyde has always been that he leaves his starter in too long, doesn’t get a reliever up until the starter is in trouble, and doesn’t pull him until after he’s loaded the bases, and then it’s too late.

This was entirely different. 15 pitches an inning is entirely manageable.

But to be fair, Hyde doesn’t have a good bullpen buffet from which to choose.

I just checked and Austin Voth has .2 WAR in 35 innings and Bryan Baker has negative -.02 WAR in 10 innings, a 5.91 ERA, and he’s given up 11 hits in those ten innings.

I don’t understand the judgement in dumping Voth and keeping Baumann and Baker

I also don’t understand Mike not moving more quickly to address this need. The price isn’t going down, so he’s either going to grit his teeth, say his prayers and do nothing, or he’s going to have to pay the going price.

OR he’s going to find Fuji 2.0, and we will all scream.

 

[glenn__davis]

4 minutes ago, Philip said:

 

I just checked and Austin Voth has .2 WAR in 35 innings and Bryan Baker has negative -.02 WAR in 10 innings, a 5.91 ERA, and he’s given up 11 hits in those ten innings.

I don’t understand the judgement in dumping Voth and keeping Baumann and Baker

I also don’t understand Mike not moving more quickly to address this need. The price isn’t going down, so he’s either going to grit his teeth, say his prayers and do nothing, or he’s going to have to pay the going price.

OR he’s going to find Fuji 2.0, and we will all scream.

 

Bullpen arms are extremely volatile.  Every single exec, even the best ones, are occasionally going to make the wrong call when it comes to bullpen arms.

Voth is a great example.  Terrible as a starter for WAS.  Came to us and was OK in 2022 as a reliever.  Terrible in 2023.  Now OK in 2024 with Seattle.  I'm not losing any sleep over the decision to get rid of Austin Voth and I assure you Mike Elias isn't either.  

[HowAboutThat]

22 minutes ago, glenn__davis said:

Bullpen arms are extremely volatile.  Every single exec, even the best ones, are occasionally going to make the wrong call when it comes to bullpen arms.

Voth is a great example.  Terrible as a starter for WAS.  Came to us and was OK in 2022 as a reliever.  Terrible in 2023.  Now OK in 2024 with Seattle.  I'm not losing any sleep over the decision to get rid of Austin Voth and I assure you Mike Elias isn't either.  

I don’t disagree. I wish we’d kept Voth but relievers are a dime a dozen.

I do wish that Mike would develop a better algorithm for which guys to keep and which guys to dump, but I’m not really losing much sleep about the bullpen; we’re still 25 games over 500 and the bullpen isn't causing too much trouble.

 

[LookitsPuck]

5 hours ago, eddie83 said:

This is wrong. Going into yesterday he inherited 21 runners and 5 scored. Now it’s 24/8. 
 

You are looking at the number of inherited runners as a negative. 

This is not incorrect. I'm not saying he inherited runners in all 37 games. That's just the number of games he's pitched in. IRS is number of inherited runners that scored. Prior to yesterday's game, he pitched in 36 games and allowed 21 inherited runners to score. As I said yesterday, it is now 37 and 24.

From CBS, see below (ref: https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/stats/player/extended-pitching/al/regular/all-pos/qualifiers/?sortcol=irs&sortdir=descending)

Edited Friday at 16:13 by LookitsPuck

[LookitsPuck]

11 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

I thought Baker had a better chance of getting a strikeout. Even though he created that mess it looked like he could have worked out of it. 

Generally not in favor of bringing in guys for bases loaded situations unless they’re absolute nails and have an extremely high K rate. 

Akin’s K rate is higher this year but I still don’t believe he was the better option than Baker. 

This is where I was at. One hard hit ball, 2 walks. And that hard hit ball was to Julio. Yeah, Baker could have just as easily walked in a run, but I'm not sending in somebody new with a really poor history with runners on to face a guy with reverse splits (this year). As you said, Akin is anything but nails. Let him start the next inning.

[eddie83]

7 minutes ago, LookitsPuck said:

This is not incorrect. I'm not saying he inherited runners in all 37 games. That's just the number of games he's pitched in. From CBS, see below:

The last column is the number of runners inherited. Those are not the number of runners the RP allowed to score. 
 

Akin has inherited 24 runners, 8 have scored. Coming into yesterday he was at 21/5.  

[Aristotelian]

5 minutes ago, LookitsPuck said:

This is where I was at. One hard hit ball, 2 walks. And that hard hit ball was to Julio. Yeah, Baker could have just as easily walked in a run, but I'm not sending in somebody new with a really poor history with runners on to face a guy with reverse splits (this year). As you said, Akin is anything but nails. Let him start the next inning.

2 walks and a hard hit in 5 batters is good? 

If Baker gets out of it, they would not start the next inning with Akin facing the lefty masher Garver. Akin would probably sit down at that point and they would go to Webb or Tate. 

[LookitsPuck]

Just now, eddie83 said:

The last column is the number of runners inherited. Those are not the number of runners the RP allowed to score. 
 

Akin has inherited 24 runners, 8 have scored. Coming into yesterday he was at 21/5.  

This might be an issue with the way that CBS categorizes them. See their tooltip. Baseball Reference shows 24 runners as you said with 8 of them scoring. Think it's confusing to say "Inherited Runners Allowed to Score" instead of just "Inherited Runners". Have IR as one column and IRS as a different column (that's how Baseball Ref does it). 

My apologies.

[eddie83]

15 minutes ago, LookitsPuck said:

This is not incorrect. I'm not saying he inherited runners in all 37 games. That's just the number of games he's pitched in. IRS is number of inherited runners that scored. Prior to yesterday's game, he pitched in 36 games and allowed 21 inherited runners to score. As I said yesterday, it is now 37 and 24.

From CBS, see below (ref: https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/stats/player/extended-pitching/al/regular/all-pos/qualifiers/?sortcol=irs&sortdir=descending)

Your link does say inherited runners allowed to score but that’s not accurate. I don’t get why they have it incorrectly listed that way. 

[eddie83]

2 minutes ago, LookitsPuck said:

This might be an issue with the way that CBS categorizes them. See their tooltip. Baseball Reference shows 24 runners as you said with 8 of them scoring. Think it's confusing to say "Inherited Runners Allowed to Score" instead of just "Inherited Runners". Have IR as one column and IRS as a different column (that's how Baseball Ref does it). 

My apologies.

Yeah. Not your fault. Poor way they handle it. Don’t get it.