Halos Heaven

Also, Napoli was 3 more walks in 15 more ABs, it's not a huge difference.

Still dreaming

Naps is almost to that magical 1 K for every 3 AB’s mark. It’s funny but all the Naps defenders have disappeared.

aces666high - August 25, 2010 reply

or

they’re at work and won’t see this until later today.

feNOMINAL - August 25, 2010 reply

Jobs?

I guess anythings possible. I shall brace myself for their wrath.

aces666high - August 25, 2010 reply

No they haven't

I’m still here, and I will continue to defend Mike Napoli until he is no longer one of the best hitters on the team. Of all the under-performing players to be frustrated with, Napoli is at least above average. As it stands, he’s tied with Abreu for the second highest OPS on the team, and 2.1 WAR places him just behind Hunter as the most valuable position player on the team. Perhaps you would prefer more Jeff Mathis?

Naps defenders?

Uh, everyone is a big Naps fan now that 44FAN stated he is the ONLY Naps guy.

This doesn't make sense

Scioscia doesn’t value walks and OBP. — True, although perhaps it would be more fair to say that he doesn’t value them as much as he should.

Walks are bad. — Are you reiterating Scioscia’s position or inventing your own? Because I don’t think he thinks they’re bad, just less preferable than making contact.

OBP is antiquated. — In some circles, like those Mike Scioscia runs in, OBP is still a new-fangled Moneyball stat. So how is it antiquated? This doesn’t make sense either as a criticism of Scioscia or as an advocacy of OBP.

Striking out is much more preferable. — Preferable to what? Again, the new-fangled idea is that striking out a lot is not such a big deal so long as you can maintain a high OBP by drawing walks. Whose side are you arguing?

I believe you have fallen into the Sar-chasm.

If it is sarcasm, it's not consistent

The sarcastic statement would be “walks are bad, OBP is new-fangled, making contact is much more preferable.”

Scioscia prefers strikeouts...

if that’s not sarcasm, then I really do not know what is.

I prefer the manager to go apeshit.

A) It shows the umps that he cares, and that he is watching, and that he ain’t afraid to run up their grill when shade close calls against his team. Umps are human. Be a marshmallow manager and watch your team get rolled with all the close calls. With the Halos, losing the close calls at home happens WAAAY too often. I don’t think the umps really worry about all the complaints Sosh must have Reagins file with the league office.

B) It shows your players that he cares. A player getting screwed on a call is one thing. A player getting screwed on a call and being left on his own to suffer the indignity in front of tens of thousands – if not millions – is something else altogether. Players need to know that the manager has their back and will take a bullet for them, especially when they are wronged.

C) It shows the fans that he cares. Fans are paying the bills. (Apparently, even Pirate fans!) Fans pay the bills because they care. That team that is the object of their affection may suck, but fans can accept suckage as long as they believe that the sucky team is trying. Managers unwilling to go apeshit over an injustice are at risk of suspending that belief. If the manager doesn’t care, why should the fans?

So, yeah, Earl Weaver was one of my heros.

Stirrups - August 25, 2010 reply

I agree with you 100%

I deleted the part in my post where I criticized Scioscia for not arguing, but since I had already written he was insane, I didn’t want to pile on more.

I think we must be watching different games, Scioscia argues with umps quite a bit.

Scioscia is a gentleman in his disagreements with umps.

He doesn’t charge out of the dugout with a look of mega-death on his flushed face, threatening the ump and his family, kicking dirt, insinuating Braille learning abilities, throwing bases, going face-to-face spewing tobacco chaw, and generally channeling his inner Piniella of the 90’s.

I think the most Scioscia insinuates is the ump may not get a 2nd helping of post-game pasta. Even then, he’d probably relent once the game is over.

sothball - August 25, 2010 reply

There's a difference

He looks like a guy trying to convince his mom to lend him the car instead of a pissed off man who’s upset he’s getting screwed over.

You don't like his whiny Panda bear mug he gives when he doesn't like a strike-ball call?

Balls and Strikes - August 25, 2010 reply

Would you please consider reversing your call mr. umpire? No, well, thanks for you time.

Lol

but Sosh does argue. Just last night he came out an argued. IT wasn’t a psycho fest like Sweet Lou, but he gets his in. I love when coaches back up their players though. Like Joe MAddon getting thrown out last night defending Longoria, it shows the players you care.

angelskid2210 - August 25, 2010 reply

Yeah, he argues, but he doesn't ARGUE.

And I don’t mean bat-shit crazy arguing, but at least show some emotion. I n my opinion, Sosh doesn’t do that enough.

Scioscia is smart this way

He knows he’ll cross paths with the ump crews multiple times during the year, much less over several seasons. He doesn’t burn bridges. He makes his point in a reasonable manner 99% of the time. I think he gets the benefit of the doubt over time when it comes to snap judgment calls. I think Scioscia knows he’s going to be managing for a long, long time, and makes sure he maintains a good relationship with the umpiring crew.

However, when he does go postal, it is clear that he REALLY thought the call was complete BS.

I don’t know if anyone here watched the Phillies game last night, but it went to the 34th inning or some such thing, and at one point Ryan Howard was called out after strenuously protesting a check-swing strike three (this is why Oswalt wound up in LF, since Ibanez was moved from LF to 1B). It was clear from the outset that the 3B ump was waiting for Howard to do something, anything which would give cause to eject him. Scioscia knows that the umps generally do a very good job but they’re also human beings and some of them carry long memories. I don’t think Earl Weaver or Lou Pinella made permanent enemies, but I do think they might not have received the benefit of the doubt on a close play when they went out and sought to embarrass the ump in front of the fans on an earlier play.

George Kaplan - August 25, 2010 reply

I cannot find RISP or RISP 2 stats at BB ref...

but I wonder if that is the “upgrade” in going with Juan Rivera over Mike Napoli?

At one point this summer, Juan was actually the team leader with RISP

I kid you not.

Commander_Nate - August 25, 2010 reply

Was he also the team leader in GIDP with RISP?

red floyd - August 25, 2010 reply

Yeah, but he's also likely the RBIwGIDP leader! :)

Speaking of baseball movies, has anyone ever seen "Long Gone" a movie about a minor league team

set in the fifties? I was a HBO movie. My good friend Martin Davidson directed it. He is better known for directing “The Lords of Flatbush” and “Eddie and the Cruisers” movies.

44FAN - August 25, 2010 reply

All three of those movies are very good.

How do you know him?

His wife Sandy is my business partner. I've known them over thirty years.

44FAN - August 25, 2010 reply

Long Gone is a classic!

That is one of my favorite baseball movies of all time!

dickyschofield - August 25, 2010 reply

Woody starting at SS today.

Fred Fredrix - August 25, 2010 reply

And Willits in CF batting 7th

Interesting

no pete?

Wally's World - August 25, 2010 reply

Nope

benched for that lame bunt attempt that Longoria knew was coming ...

(joking, but I’m PO’d about the bad play nonetheless).

yah that was purty lame

Wally's World - August 25, 2010 reply

Is that a towel I see?

raskul - August 25, 2010 reply

Juan Rivera more productive than Mike Napoli

Oh God, I’m seeing red. Obviously Mike Scioscia highly favors contact hitting over Mike Napoli’s all-or-nothing approach. He wants the ball put in play so that “thing can happen on the bases” or whatever. But here’s the crucial misunderstanding. The threat of a double play cancels out the possibility of moving base runners.

Suppose there’s a guy on first with no outs. Mike Napoli comes to the plate and strikes out. Now there’s a runner on first base with one out.

Juan Rivera has a better chance of putting the ball in play. He might move the runner over with a groundball or a deep fly out. Obviously it’s better to have a runner on second than first with one out. But the trouble is, Rivera is much more likely to ground into a double play than Napoli. That situation, no one on with two outs, is the worst possible outcome.

You actually have to do the math to prove it, but it works. All things being equal, there’s really no advantage to making more contact. Since things are not equal in this case, it makes sense to take the guy with higher OPS: Mike Napoli.

But if there's nobody out...

and runners on first and third … you want Rivera’s GIDP to drive in the run.

Not really

The only scenario in which trading two outs for one run is to your advantage is late in a close/tied game. But in that case, the play is at home, so it’s not really a double play situation. In all other situations, you’re much better off avoiding the DP and playing for more than one run.

Naps has grounded into more DPs than juancho and has K'd twice as much.

clover_black - August 25, 2010 reply

Yup

Naps has hit into 12 dps to Juan’s 8

dickyschofield - August 25, 2010 reply

but
didn’t Naps play more games then Juan? Someone check?

phoenix15 - August 25, 2010 reply

He has 15 more ABs than Juan this season, so he's played in a few more games.

Small sample

Napoli hits grounders about 36% of the time, Rivera does it 46% of the time. With a large enough sample, Rivera will hit into more double plays than Napoli. If you look at the career numbers, Rivera has 94 GIDP (2847 PA) and Napoli has only 28 (1695 PA).

Also, Napoli strikes out more than twice as much

Another reason his GIDP rate is much lower.

Small sample, short season...

In a time of “what can you do for me now” sosh is going with the lesser of two evils. Naps isn’t going to hit that 960 ops mark any time soon (i.e., ever again).

I really don’t care for either player, I find it difficult making a case for Juan to play baseball. But even debating this issue sheds some light on the value of mike napoli.

clover_black - August 25, 2010 reply

Well

Mike Scioscia has succumbed to the “gambler’s fallacy” in that case. Just because a coin toss has come up heads ten times in a row does not mean it’s any more or less likely to come up heads on the eleventh toss than it would on the first. But he would be far from the only person in baseball to hold such beliefs.