Is it possible that our organization's emphasis on new technologies, data driven analysis, etc has perhaps gone a little too far...

[SteveA]

... in terms of ignoring old school fundamentals?   Before you jump on me, bear with me here...

I realize there are so many, many areas over the year where, starting with Sabermetrics 30+ years ago, conventional baseball wisdom has been turned upside down by people who have analyzed the game.   From Bill James to Billy Beane, through emphasis on OB% and OPS as more important than BA, to the realization that pitcher's can't exercise any control over where a batted ball will go, to the launch angle revolution, to new concepts like shaping pitches, to pitcher specialization, and so on.

And clearly our organization is run by folks who are at or near the forefront of the introduction of data analysis, technology, and other modern innovations into the the game.   And  gooodness knows they have done a great job turning this organization into a winner.

Whenever Elias is asked the "big" philosophical questions about such things, he talks about how scouting is still very important and that we would be surprised how much he values scouts input.   But that is usually framed in terms of player acquisition.

But hat about instruction and development?

Is it possible that by moving to the forefront of modern baseball thought, we are losing some value that was provided by traditional, "old school" instruction?

I am not saying that we should NOT be doing what we are doing in terms of launch angle, pitch shaping, analysis of pitch value and getting pitchers to throw pitches that work more than ones that don't.   It would be idiotic NOT to take advantage of the new technologies and new analysis that is being done and try to create the optimal outcomes.   I am in no way saying we shouldn't be at the forefront of that.   But if we have hired, almost exclusively, instructors throughout the organization who think that way, are we losing some value that comes from some of the tried and true, old school wisdom? 

Some examples:

    1) I understand that good launch angle and exit velo leads to a set of outcomes that will score more runs.   So I fully understand that it should be preached to the hitters from the top of the organization to the bottom, and  should be the primary philosophy of our hitting coaches.   The ship has sailed on ever going back to a league full of Charlie Lau / Walt Hriniak disciples.   But the "old school" wisdom is that to get out of a hitting slump, sometimes you need to shorten your swing and just try to make some solid contact.   I'm not saying that players should be taught or developed to do that all the time.   But for 100+ years that has been the wisdom that you should try to use to get out of a slump.   Once you've got your feel back you can then go back to your normal game.   But if we have coaches who are constantly preaching just one philosophy... and who probably wouldn't be happy if their players tried shortening their swing... have we lost some wisdom that might help us right now, in the moment?

   2)  Ben McDonald will talk about traditional ways of pitching guys.    Working different combinations of pitches to guys, inside/out, etc.    Is it possible that our pitching development emphasizes different things (using pitches based on their effectiveness, pitch shaping, etc) to such an extent that some of the traditional ways of pitch sequencing are suffering?   I know Tony will often complain in the game threads about the Orioles' pitch calling and how the sequences of pitches called don't make sense.   Or is the entire concept of thinking like Greg Maddux about how you are going to set up a batter to get him out, or pitch to him on this at bat so it will be easier to get him out on the next at bat, disappearing in the age of over-specialization of pitchers?

   3) Defensive fundamentals seem to be lacking on our team.   There hasn't been much change in that area in baseball for a long time.   But if we are hiring almost exclusively coaches who are immersed in data driven analysis, is it possible we don't have enough old school Cal Ripken Sr, Bobby Dickerson type guys who will do the hard work at every level of drilling these guys in the basics and hit them hundreds of ground balls and make sure they are planting their feet correctly and so forth?    Doesn't matter how much high tech military equipment they start using, the USMC still needs some hard working drill instructors doing pretty much the exact same damn thing they were doing 50 years ago.

 

I don't know, I'm just asking if it's POSSIBLE that in embracing the latest (no doubt effective) methods of teaching and developing players, and making sure that our organization has a consistent teaching philosophy from top to bottom (which was absolutely needed) -- could we be losing sight of some basic longstanding principles that could still help our players play the game better even today?   Just because the data revolution of the last several decades has proven a lot of old conventional wisdom to be flat out wrong, does not necessarily mean that all old school conventional wisdom is useless and should be tossed out the window.    (And I am not necessarily saying we ARE tossing stuff out the window... I'm asking if it's possible).

[Spy Fox]

There could be some interesting stuff to talk about here, or individual cases where what you're saying is true, but I think the short answer is no. Analytics are going to be more accurate overall than the old-school axioms-- the axioms that are provably true are probably still coached.  

On point 1 we definitely have some players struggling to make adjustments and some of that may be that they're coached to hunt barrels at the expense of contact. The O's are built to maximize power and you can see that in their results (1st in SLG but 9th in AVG). Maybe a different approach could help some guys break out of a slump more easily, but it's hard to know because there are always struggling players no matter the coaching approach. Were the the Showalter O's missing old-school wisdom when they let Adam Jones continue whiffing on low and away sliders? 

Point 2 I probably buy the least because pitching analytics across MLB have been so generally effective in helping players maximize their game. Probably there are ways the O's could be using their data better. Not every decision and result will be perfect. But analytics is golden for pitchers. 

On point 3, is there any reason to think the O's are generally weak on defensive fundamentals compared to most teams? Gunnar had his recent error binge but that's all I can think of and that seemed more like a personal thing to me. 

[Frobby]

Yes, it's possible.   But we don't know the extent to which the "old school" stuff is still taught.   I wouldn't assume it is ignored or underemphasized.   But, perhaps it is.   Nobody was asking that question last year or the first 2.5 months of this season, though.   I doubt the approach was any different when we were playing .650 ball than it is now.

[Jim'sKid26]

In the spirit of the upcoming Boston series; David Ortiz said two things that are worth quoting in this tread:

1. "Baseball is a hard game to play; so no matter what uniform you wear, you have something in common with the guy in the other dugout: we all fail. The game is built that way."

2. "Listen, bro: If you can hit a baby doll head with a broomstick, you can hit an inside cutter. You don’t need a batting cage in the Dominican. You just have to love the game. And you need to be able to fight off your sister when she comes looking for her baby doll.” 

IMHO this game lends itself to over analysis. It's a kid's game. It's just that in the MLB everyone is making huge amounts of money to play it. They all have to justify their salaries. But in the end, it's still just a kid's game.

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, Jim'sKid26 said:

In the spirit of the upcoming Boston series; David Ortiz said two things that are worth quoting in this tread:

1. "Baseball is a hard game to play; so no matter what uniform you wear, you have something in common with the guy in the other dugout: we all fail. The game is built that way."

2. "Listen, bro: If you can hit a baby doll head with a broomstick, you can hit an inside cutter. You don’t need a batting cage in the Dominican. You just have to love the game. And you need to be able to fight off your sister when she comes looking for her baby doll.” 

IMHO this game lends itself to over analysis. It's a kid's game. It's just that in the MLB everyone is making huge amounts of money to play it. They all have to justify their salaries. But in the end, it's still just a kid's game.

I like David Ortiz just a little better now from reading those quotes, especially the second one.  But I still basically can't stand him.

[Chelsea_Phil]

I wish we went back to the dead ball era, so that homers become very difficult, and singles, doubles, stolen bases, etc, become valuable again.

[Can_of_corn]

The shortening the swing to bust a slump sounds like nonsense.  Tony always complains about the pitch calling.  I don't see why turning to advanced metrics would impact their ability to field the ball, positioning hasn't been an issue.

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I like David Ortiz just a little better now from reading those quotes, especially the second one.  But I still basically can't stand him.

I loved how he called Ohtani a pretty girl.

 

Classy.

Go back to cucking drug lords.

[wildcard]

I think one the best things that Elias brought to the team is having everyone on the same page.    The GM, Manager, Coaches both majors and minors leagues, the  players and the scouts.    That was  not where the O's were before Elias.   I think there is a real benefit to that.

I think the problems with the O's can be summed up in a few words.

1) Injuries.    2) Breaking in rookies.   3) Fatigue  4)Pitchers not holding runners

I think its a waste  of time to point out how many pitchers the O's have lost to a group on the OH.  Everyone knows.   And they know the pitching would be much better with all the O's pitchers healthy.

Losing Westburg hurt the team on both sides the ball.  Gunnar has play 142 of the 144 games. 140 of those were at SS.   If Mateo was healthy during the dog days of summer would Gunnar have gotten a few days at DH that helped him get some rest?    

You can say a lot of things about Hays but when he was in left the ball consistently and accurately was on target to 2nd base.   And the other team knew it and often did not run.  Cowser has a strong arm but the accuracy is a work in progress.   That is what happens when rookies are developed in the majors.    

Holliday has the same rookie problem.  It will get better but it does affect the team,

The offense is 2nd in the majors.   But what we are seeing in the 2nd half has a lot to do with fatigue.

Both  Burnes and Kimbrel concentrate more on getting the hitters out and little on holding the runners.   And the other team takes advantage.

For me looking at whether the current analytics based approach could use more old school in not really the point.    Any problems the O's have are more:

1) Injuries.    2) Breaking in rookies.   3) Fatigue  4) Pitchers not holding runners

Edited September 9 by wildcard

[SilverRocket]

In all the interviews with the front office folks, nothing makes me think they are tossing things out the window because of an organizational approach. Like Frobby said, approach hasn't change between the first half of the year and today, and I do not think the level of O's analytics is going to ignore obvious things like that. These are just not going to be things they haven't thought about before.

I do worry some about defensive fundamentals which have been lacking since the Bobby Dickerson days, though I think that has nothing to do with analytics (which is more about positioning) and more to do with the fact that Dickerson was very good at his job and whoever is doing that work now is not as good.

[now]

23 minutes ago, wildcard said:

1) Injuries.    2) Breaking in rookies.   3) Fatigue  4) Pitchers not holding runners

To me #3 is the item that doesn't belong here, since there's no reason to think the Orioles should suffer more from fatigue than any other team. If anything the roster age skewed toward youth/prime years should be in their favor. The one detail that might make a difference is having your franchise player be a catcher (Adley), or older player (Kimbrel), where fatigue could have more of an impact.

Injuries in general, probably yeah. Every team has them, but I imagine ours are objectively worse than most this year. 

Edited September 9 by now

[Can_of_corn]

13 minutes ago, now said:

To me #3 is the item that doesn't belong here, since there's no reason to think the Orioles should suffer more from fatigue than any other team. If anything the roster age skewed toward youth/prime years should be in their favor. The one detail that might make a difference is having your franchise player be a catcher (Adley), or older player (Kimbrel), where fatigue could have more of an impact.

Injuries in general, probably yeah. Every team has them, but I imagine ours are objectively worse than most this year. 

He's only played 92 games at catcher (88 starts).  I'm not one to equate a day at DH to a day off but he hasn't been overworked.

[Sports Guy]

I think most of the modern game has taken away too much of the “old school” stuff. 

[Jagwar]

Is the focus on analytics a key reason that our organization pitching depth seems so meh?

[Sanity Check]

1 hour ago, Chelsea_Phil said:

I wish we went back to the dead ball era, so that homers become very difficult, and singles, doubles, stolen bases, etc, become valuable again.

Aren't we kind of living the dead ball era in Birdland right now?  Homers ARE difficult to come by, and I am finding that any singles, doubles and stolen bases ARE valuable again.  Be careful what you wish for.

I was sure hoping that one Hangout "prophet" would be right when he suggested that just turning the calendar page to September would be the Orioles signal to turn it on and start playing well again.  Maybe that will happen on September 16th., but if I had my way, it would start on like, October 1.