Don't trade RLo.

[oriole_way]

No one answered my questions that I posted earlier. Maybe people just missed it when going through the thread, so I'll repost them again. I'm relatively new to to posting, so if this constitutes spam, let me know and I won't do it in the future.

Someone mentioned that it has been documented on many telecasts that Lopez has lost a few mph on his pitches.

1. Is that true? If so, any hypotheses why? He's only 30, hasn't had any serious arm issues and while he did rack up 209 innings last year, it's not an extraordinary workload. In his last start against Cleveland, I thought I heard that he was touching the low 90s with his fastball. Was that an anomaly? How hard did he throw in previous seasons?

2. This is probably moot since we likely won't demote him to the bullpen, but does anyone remember why he was so successful when in the pen a couple years ago? Was he able to throw a bit harder since he didn't have to pace himself?

Thanks in advance.

[RShack]

I agree he has pitched better with Javy behind the plate...so, what happens when Javy is gone?

Good question.

I think the job of the manager is to make sure the team is prepared for different things. That's why I think Sam should have followed thru w/ Javy at 1B, and w/ Jay there too as soon as Nick started improving. But he didn't. I think everyone should know their role, and I also think everyone should know that the team is important, so therefore we need to try different things. One thing that I'd do is tell Javy and Ramon and Rodrigo to spend some time together in an effort to make Ramon more Rodrigo-compatible. I'd also be asking to Leo to spend some time with the other SP's and Javy and Ramon to figure out who Javy should be catching if/when we have a Ramon/Rodrigo experiment. I don't know if any of that is happening or not. Based on how unprepared we are at 1B, I have no reason to assume it is, but I don't know.

[Hallas]

Stat guys are never gonna think anything good about Rodrigo. They're just not. He wins more games than the stats say he should. If you look at stats, you conclude he's a fairly rotten pitcher. The only way you can possibly think he's any good is to watch him pitch.

There's a whole bunch wrong with this paragraph. You have a penchant for not listening to other peoples' viewpoints, but nonetheless I'll give it a stab. Lets break it down.

Stat guys are never gonna think anything good about Rodrigo. They're just not. He wins more games than the stats say he should.

I hope this isn't true, considering he's on a pace for a 9-19 W/L record this year.

If you look at stats, you conclude he's a fairly rotten pitcher. The only way you can possibly think he's any good is to watch him pitch.

The thing is that the stats did not say a fairly rotten pitcher in the years that he was pitching well. He allowed his fair share of HRs, but it wasn't an astronomical rate like it is this year, and he at least had a reasonable strikeout rate, and he didn't walk too many batters. (K/9 between 6.2 and 6.4, BB/9 of 2.2) Last year, he was a below-average pitcher, and his declining K-rate was a huge indicator that he was primed for a serious dropoff. I thought he would have put up numbers similar to last year, but instead he's fallen off a cliff.

On the topic of visual scouting, from what I've seen of Lopez the past couple years, he just doesn't have the bite on his pitches that he had 3 years ago. His slider used to bite pretty hard, and it served as a decent strikeout pitch. These days, it hangs, and hitters sit on it to the tune of tape-measure HRs.

Lopez is on the wrong side of 30, his K rate is declining, and his performance this year has been atrocious, and it's probably cost us at least 3 games, possibly more. I'm not sure what Rodrigo Lopez you're looking at, but the one that I've seen (and the one with the ugly stat line) doesn't appear to have anything left to offer a major-league ballclub.

[Cokeman]

Good question.

I think the job of the manager is to make sure the team is prepared for different things. That's why I think Sam should have followed thru w/ Javy at 1B, and w/ Jay there too as soon as Nick started improving. But he didn't. I think everyone should know their role, and I also think everyone should know that the team is important, so therefore we need to try different things. One thing that I'd do is tell Javy and Ramon and Rodrigo to spend some time together in an effort to make Ramon more Rodrigo-compatible. I'd also be asking to Leo to spend some time with the other SP's and Javy and Ramon to figure out who Javy should be catching if/when we have a Ramon/Rodrigo experiment. I don't know if any of that is happening or not. Based on how unprepared we are at 1B, I have no reason to assume it is, but I don't know.

It took me a long time to admit that Javy's days as an Oriole are numbered...and rightfully so. I would have liked to have seen Perlozzo continue having Javy work on getting comfortable at 1B, but that ship has sailed now.

And really, the only reason I see to continue the Lopez/Lopez battery is to attempt to keep RLo on track so his trade value doesn't sink any more than it already has.

Otherwise, I would only have Javy catch Ortiz for as long as he stays in the rotation. I want Bedard and Cabrera to continue working with Ramon for sure because that is the future. If Loewen and Penn join the rotation, I want them working with Ramon for the same reason. That would leave Benson working with Javy and I wouldn't have a real problem with that, I doubt it would make much difference to Benson or his performance either.

When Javy is gone, it would depend on whether we got a young decent back-up catcher, or another Osik type one-year disaster. But, mostly I want Hernandez working with our younger pitchers as much as possible.

[DrungoHazewood]

I believe that some of the folks who rely on stats and who don't think much of Rodrigo also watch him pitch. I'm *not* saying that anybody who doesn't like him doesn't watch baseball. But I do believe that some of the people who are blasting him usually don't even bother to watch the games, all they do is look at box scores and think they know what happened. I don't know how somebody can think they're a fan and not watch baseball games, that doesn't make any sense to me.

Ok. Here we are. We've finally boiled it down and gotten to the crux of the matter. It's not that the stats guys have carefully analyzed things and decided it's time for Rodrigo to go. No, no, no. It's that we haven't crawled out of the computer lab in the basement of the science building long enough to actually watch Rodrigo pitch. Our little propeller beanies have distracted us from seeing the real beauty of a pitcher who can occasionally pitch like he doesn't belong in the Frontier League.

Nice.

[Mashed Potatoes]

Ok. Here we are. We've finally boiled it down and gotten to the crux of the matter. It's not that the stats guys have carefully analyzed things and decided it's time for Rodrigo to go. No, no, no. It's that we haven't crawled out of the computer lab in the basement of the science building long enough to actually watch Rodrigo pitch. Our little propeller beanies have distracted us from seeing the real beauty of a pitcher who can occasionally pitch like he doesn't belong in the Frontier League.

Nice.

Damn stats SIG. When will you guys realize that statistics are an entity separate from the game itself. Calculated using numbers, formulas and other things foriegn to the great game being played on top of fresh grass, under sunlight, with wood, sweat, and heart.

I got into this with Sapper in a different thread(http://www.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30785&page=7&highlight=dualism), but what bugs me about certain people is they believe in this sort of baseball dualism. There's the game itself and instincts, and then there's statistics, and consider the two completely different categories.

Well how do you define statistics Rshack? Aren't they just different ways of analyzing observable effects, and sometimes using what you've calculated to then make predictions? If so, why do you think certain things can be gained from watching the game that stats don't cover? What exactly can't stats cover? If you can name something specific I think Drungo would be able to counter, because statistics are based on observations! There are different levels of specificity, and categories that aren't often explored, but that doesn't mean they can't be.

What I like about the stat SIG is that they have intuitions, and then take the extra step to see if their intuitions are valid. They watch the games just like everyone else, but put in the effort and time to break down what they saw in meaningful ways. The rest of us are basically lazy in comparison.

It's easy to say there are things that you can't really calculate, without saying what they actually are. Without some degree of specificity these vague elusive things are pretty meaningless anyway. Has Rodrigo pitched well in individual starts this year? Yes. Has he pitched well in some games where the defense and bad luck failed him? Yes. Has he pitched 5 great innings but one horrible one in certain games? Yes, and statistics agree with that. But they also look at his body of work as a whole, and the results aren't pretty. Even forgetting his horrendous start to the season, he's been an inconsistent and below avg. MLB pitcher. You say no stats will convince you otherwise about the value of Rlo. Well no vague unbacked claims will convince me otherwise.

This is somewhat of an attack, but all I really want is to hear why you think Rlo is valuable beyond that you watch the games, and that is what you believe. Because that doesn't really say anything, everyone watches the games and believes what they believe. Some beliefs have more objective measures of support than others though.

[RShack]

I believe that some of the folks who rely on stats and who don't think much of Rodrigo also watch him pitch. I'm *not* saying that anybody who doesn't like him doesn't watch baseball. But I do believe that some of the people who are blasting him usually don't even bother to watch the games, all they do is look at box scores and think they know what happened. I don't know how somebody can think they're a fan and not watch baseball games, that doesn't make any sense to me.

Ok. Here we are. We've finally boiled it down and gotten to the crux of the matter. It's not that the stats guys have carefully analyzed things and decided it's time for Rodrigo to go. No, no, no. It's that we haven't crawled out of the computer lab in the basement of the science building long enough to actually watch Rodrigo pitch. Our little propeller beanies have distracted us from seeing the real beauty of a pitcher who can occasionally pitch like he doesn't belong in the Frontier League.

Nice.

No, you have boiled it down to something you can get all insulted and indignant about, simply by choosing what you wanted to highlight. Let's take my exact same post, and just choose to highlight something else, shall we? Like this...

I believe that some of the folks who rely on stats and who don't think much of Rodrigo also watch him pitch. I'm *not* saying that anybody who doesn't like him doesn't watch baseball. But I do believe that some of the people who are blasting him usually don't even bother to watch the games, all they do is look at box scores and think they know what happened. I don't know how somebody can think they're a fan and not watch baseball games, that doesn't make any sense to me.

There, how about that? I have no idea whether you watch games or not. But I know there are some people here who post a lot who don't because they say they don't.

So, exactly what is your problem with what I said? You get mad because it doesn't make sense to me that somebody who's a fan doesn't watch the games? That's an outrageous, anger-inciting thing to say? Get real...

[DrungoHazewood]

No, you have boiled it down to something you can get all insulted and indignant about, simply by choosing what you wanted to highlight. Let's take my exact same post, and just choose to highlight something else, shall we? Like this...

There, how about that? I have no idea whether you watch games or not. But I know there are some people here who post a lot who don't because they say they don't.

So, exactly what is your problem with what I said? You get mad because it doesn't make sense to me that somebody who's a fan doesn't watch the games? That's an outrageous, anger-inciting thing to say? Get real...

Here you go: "But I do believe that some of the people who are blasting him usually don't even bother to watch the games, all they do is look at box scores and think they know what happened."

That's what you said, that's what I reacted to. You stated that some part of the criticism of Rodrigo is rooted in not watching his games. To me that's saying that whoever these "some of the people" you refer to are essentially accountants going over baseball spreadsheets, with no real knowledge of the game. And I say that's bull.

[rp0806]

No, you have boiled it down to something you can get all insulted and indignant about, simply by choosing what you wanted to highlight. Let's take my exact same post, and just choose to highlight something else, shall we? Like this...

You're not being intellectually honest. You made it very clear that you think many of the people criticizing Lopez don't watch games, and the implication is that they've got their nose buried in a computer. This isn't a particularly original argument. People have probably been saying this about fans who use stats since the 19th century. It's idiotic. Everyone uses and pays attention to stats. In fact, you cited Lopez's last 9 starts just yesterday as evidence of his abilities. You want to use stats the way you like, but then turn around and blast others for doing the same thing. Stats are just evidence. They dont' replace watching games, but they supplement it. People who use more advanced stats like OPS+ are just trying to be more objective about things. Truth instead of truthiness. There's nothing wrong with that. Attacking the use of stats is almost like an ad hominem attack. It doesn't address the real arguments or evidence -- it's just a pointless distraction.

[RShack]

Here you go: "But I do believe that some of the people who are blasting him usually don't even bother to watch the games, all they do is look at box scores and think they know what happened."

That's what you said, that's what I reacted to. You stated that some part of the criticism of Rodrigo is rooted in not watching his games. To me that's saying that whoever these "some of the people" you refer to are essentially accountants going over baseball spreadsheets, with no real knowledge of the game. And I say that's bull.

I said exactly what I meant: that some people who blast Rodrigo don't watch many games, are poorly informed on how he pitches, and say unfounded things about him. That's what I said, that's what I meant, and that's what I believe.

If you want to lump yourself in with people who don't watch games, who aren't well-informed, and who think that a simple box score tells them all that matters about baseball, that's up to you. You can lump yourself in with whoever you like. But that's your choice. If you wanna make a choice, and then have a fit about it, fine. Just don't put *your* words in my mouth and then get indignant at me because of a story you made up.

[Frobby]

The thing I find puzzling about Rodrigo is his lack of consistency the last 2 years. He has had a number of pretty good starts this year, and quite a few last year. But other days he just plain stinks. Every pitcher is entitled to 4-5 clunkers a year, but with Rodrigo since 2005 it's more like 10 a year.

Pitching really is maddening. There are so few guys who are consistent year after year, no matter whether they are consistently great or consistently pretty good. That's why when you actually get someone who is consistently good, it's imperative to hold on to him.

[RShack]

Here you go: "But I do believe that some of the people who are blasting him usually don't even bother to watch the games, all they do is look at box scores and think they know what happened."

That's what you said, that's what I reacted to. You stated that some part of the criticism of Rodrigo is rooted in not watching his games. To me that's saying that whoever these "some of the people" you refer to are essentially accountants going over baseball spreadsheets, with no real knowledge of the game. And I say that's bull.

I said exactly what I meant: that some people who blast Rodrigo don't watch many games, are poorly informed on how he pitches, and say unfounded things about him. That's what I said, that's what I meant, and that's what I believe.

If you want to lump yourself in with people who don't watch games, who aren't well-informed, and who think that glancing at a simple box score tells them all that matters about baseball, that's up to you, not me. You can lump yourself in with whoever you like. But that's your choice. If you wanna make a choice, and then have a fit about it, fine. Just don't put *your* words in my mouth and then get indignant at me because of a story *you* made up.

[DrungoHazewood]

I said exactly what I meant: that some people who blast Rodrigo don't watch many games, are poorly informed on how he pitches, and say unfounded things about him. That's what I said, that's what I meant, and that's what I believe.

If you want to lump yourself in with people who don't watch games, who aren't well-informed, and who think that a simple box score tells them all that matters about baseball, that's up to you. You can lump yourself in with whoever you like. But that's your choice. If you wanna make a choice, and then have a fit about it, fine. Just don't put *your* words in my mouth and then get indignant at me because of a story you made up.

I had a response typed up, but I thought better of it. Decided it would be better to bow out than pull a Zidane.

[Tony-OH]

Stat guys are never gonna think anything good about Rodrigo. They're just not. He wins more games than the stats say he should. If you look at stats, you conclude he's a fairly rotten pitcher. The only way you can possibly think he's any good is to watch him pitch. If you do that, then what you see is that he has a few bad games, some ok-games, a some really, really good games.

Personally, I'm not all that worried about his couple bad starts since May. You lose by 1, or you lose by 6, you still lose. I like it that, since his Ramon experiment ended, he has given the team a good chance to win a whole lot more than he hasn't. Plus, he's pitched a couple of real gems too.

I like giving Loewen and Penn some starts up here. I also like having Rodrigo around as Plan B. All the stats in the world aren't gonna change my mind about that, simply because I've seen him pitch very well lately.

I believe that some of the folks who rely on stats and who don't think much of Rodrigo also watch him pitch. I'm *not* saying that anybody who doesn't like him doesn't watch baseball. But I do believe that some of the people who are blasting him usually don't even bother to watch the games, all they do is look at box scores and think they know what happened. I don't know how somebody can think they're a fan and not watch baseball games, that doesn't make any sense to me.

Funny, I actually DO watch the games (some would even say scout) and I don't think Rodrigo's stuff is consistent to pitch effectively out of the rotation. I use stats to back up what my eyes and experience tell me and if they don't, I look at the situation even closer to see if I'm missing something or if the stats are not telling the whole story.

I'm not sure why you seem to be intent on antagonizing a lot of folks around here with your general statements, but your implied slaps at people who don't agree with your rosey views is getting very, very old.

I actually find it amazing that you've actually annoyed 1970 and drungo to the point they won't even respond to you anymore. When two of the most respected posters for knowledge and ability to handle disagreements in a level headed manner get this annoyed with one poster, it might be time to re-evaluate the way you do things.