5/23 6:40PM Blue Jays @ Tigers

[gehringer_2]

51 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

But four blowouts should not override the quarter season of decent ball that came before it unless it is indicative of future failures. If the blowouts are caused by the beginning of a breakdown of an overworked pitching staff (particularly the bullpen) for example, then they should act on it.  If they make changes just to appease fans,it could make things worse long term.   

there is another issue I've wondered about, and have even heard a couple of analysts question, and this is whether the constant effort to gain platoon advantage in the short term doesn't eventually hurt a team long term by increasing their players' platoon splits. You would end up with a team that is easier to shut down with a pitching change given that rosters are too short to replace that many players and with starters going fewer innings you are likely to face more than one pitching change anyway. It would be a good study to look at how the platoon split for hitters shifts as they face higher and lower percentage of opposite side pitchers over their careers or even per season.

Even with all the platooning a huge number of high leverage ABs still fall to guys having to face same side pitchers.

Edited May 24 by gehringer_2

[Tiger337]

7 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

there is another issue I've wondered about, and have even heard a couple of analysts question, and this is whether the constant effort to gain platoon advantage in the short term doesn't eventually hurt a team long term by increasing their players' platoon splits. You would end up with a team that is easier to shut down with a pitching change given that rosters are too short to replace that many players and with starters going fewer innings you are likely to face more than one pitching change anyway. It would be a good study to look at how the platoon split for hitters shifts as they face higher and lower percentage of opposite side pitchers over their careers or even per season.

Even with all the platooning a huge number of high leverage ABs still fall to guys having to face same side pitchers.

There is also a theory if you do "too much platooning" that the opposing pitcher will get into a rhythm where he can learn how to pitch to the opposite handed hitters well enough and mininize the damage.  However, if you stick one or two same handed batters in there, the pitcher has to pitch differently to them and he gets out of his rhythm.  In other words, you make the rest of the line-up better, by sacrificing a same handed batter or two.  Some preliminary research on this showed that there might be something to it.    

[Tigermojo]

16 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

There is also a theory if you do "too much platooning" that the opposing pitcher will get into a rhythm where he can learn how to pitch to the opposite handed hitters well enough and mininize the damage.  However, if you stick one or two same handed batters in there, the pitcher has to pitch differently to them and he gets out of his rhythm.  In other words, you make the rest of the line-up better, by sacrificing a same handed batter or two.  Some preliminary research on this showed that there might be something to it.    

Dan Petry was talking about that Wednesday against Ragans. He's primarily changeup to righties and slider to lefties. He has to have his wrist a certain way for each pitch and Dan speculated it might affect his control.

[gehringer_2]

25 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

There is also a theory if you do "too much platooning" that the opposing pitcher will get into a rhythm where he can learn how to pitch to the opposite handed hitters well enough and mininize the damage.  However, if you stick one or two same handed batters in there, the pitcher has to pitch differently to them and he gets out of his rhythm.  In other words, you make the rest of the line-up better, by sacrificing a same handed batter or two.  Some preliminary research on this showed that there might be something to it.    

I absolutely think this is true  - but the degree does depend on the pitcher and how he gets people out. Take Skubal: he relies mostly on change of speed and throws FB/Change to hitters from both sides. He doesn't have to change what he does much depending on the batter. Or a lefty with a really good slider who can throw it to right and left hand batters effectively (like a yound Liriano).  On the other side take your gargen variety RH sinker/slider pitcher  - he likely throws two seam FB/Slider to righties and maybe 4seamFB/Change to the lefties so he does have to keep moving back and forth between different pitch sets (EDIT: I see TM just noted Petry say this). He may walk or get behind more guys facing batters from both sides whereas If you let him get into a grove with two, it's going to be to his advantage.

Edited May 24 by gehringer_2

[Shinzaki]

Broadly speaking...really talented players excel...less talented players don't excel as consistently.

[kdog]

Here is the Reds manager after an 8 game losing streak.

Quote

“This is a results-oriented business, it’s not the ‘Try League,’ you know? You have to get it done,” Maile said. “And within that there’s a lot of process stuff that we’re sticking to and we will because we’re adults and we’re big leaguers and that’s what we’re paid to do. But that’s not to say it’s easy. It’s incredibly difficult right now.”

 

[gehringer_2]

There was or maybe still is a common layman's misinterpretation of quantum uncertainty that an observer influences an event. That isn't actually an accurate way of describing quantum uncertainty, but there is a similar thing that can happen in analytics driven baseball - which is that the application of the data to game play changes the game as it being played in the present tense, in part possibly invalidating or at least reducing the value of the data set you are working from. It's a bit similar to the complaint about the Federal Reserve. They work from collected data, but the economy has always moved past the data by the time it's gathered so people describe the fed trying the manage the money supply as like trying to drive a car only looking in the rear view mirror. Baseball analysts have to be careful not to fall in to the same kind of possible error.

To me there are two pieces of the data revolution is baseball. One is in the metrics - the ability to look inside batted ball data, pitch data, catch probability on fielding plays etc. And use of statistics to normalize out noise from ballpark effects etc that make comparisons between players better today. This stuff is all pretty unalloyed gold. The other half is the is the game play tendency data. I think you have to take this part always with some humility because the game play can certainly change out from under your data. Every team today knows what their own tendencies look like and they can also determine how much their opponent tries to play to tendencies, and then decide how much to deliberately play against their tendencies. The whole thing can get very very meta....

Edited May 24 by gehringer_2

[Tiger337]

11 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

There was or maybe still is a common layman's misinterpretation of quantum uncertainty that an observer influences an event. That isn't actually an accurate way of describing quantum uncertainty, but there is a similar thing that can happen in analytics driven baseball - which is that the application of the data to game play changes the game as it being played in the present tense, in part possibly invalidating or at least reducing the value of the data set you are working from. It's a bit similar to the complaint about the Federal Reserve. They work from collected data, but the economy has always moved past the data by the time it's gathered so people describe the fed trying the manage the money supply as like trying to drive a car only looking in the rear view mirror. Baseball analysts have to be careful not to fall in to the same kind of possible error.

To me there are two pieces of the data revolution is baseball. One is in the metrics - the ability to look inside batted ball data, pitch data, catch probability on fielding plays etc. And use of statistics to normalize out noise from ballpark effects etc that make comparisons between players better today. This stuff is all pretty unalloyed gold. The other half is the is the game play tendency data. I think you have to take this part always with some humility because the game play can certainly change out from under your data. Every team today knows what their own tendencies look like and they can also determine how much their opponent tries to play to tendencies, and then decide how much to deliberately play against their tendencies. The whole thing can get very very meta....

Every situation is different, but one year of data is still more predictive of future performance than the fan favorite - playing the hot hand or playing small sample splits.  The players and managers may know something that the data do not show, but it is unlikely that a fan knows

[gehringer_2]

21 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Every situation is different, but one year of data is still more predictive of future performance than the fan favorite - playing the hot hand or playing small sample splits.  The players and managers may know something that the data do not show, but it is unlikely that a fan knows

the key is to have your antenna up for what is going on. The last couple of years when the shift was still in play against KC was always instructive. Late and close KC would always start going oppo and catch the Tigers still shifted. It was pretty predictable but the Tigers never took it away. But I think its maybe a bigger issue is  with the way they come up with hitting recommendations. This notion of getting pitches to drive makes perfect sense, and if you look at league data for hitters most of them drive the middle in better. But once you telegraph to the pitcher that's all you are looking for, you just made his life easier and the stats you collected on the average batter in the average situation go out the window because he's not piching to you the way he might pitch to everyone else. And so you don't drive anything because he knows to just keep it away from you until 2 strikes. Sound like a familiar outcome? Your opposition are not automatons, they are perfectly capable of acting on the same data you have to confound you. The data can never get you out of having to play the real time cat-and-mouse game. And that's a good thing or it would be a very boring game.

Edited May 24 by gehringer_2

[Tiger337]

45 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

the key is to have your antenna up for what is going on. The last couple of years when the shift was still in play against KC was always instructive. Late and close KC would always start going oppo and catch the Tigers still shifted. It was pretty predictable but the Tigers never took it away. But I think its maybe a bigger issue is  with the way they come up with hitting recommendations. This notion of getting pitches to drive makes perfect sense, and if you look at league data for hitters most of them drive the middle in better. But once you telegraph to the pitcher that's all you are looking for, you just made his life easier and the stats you collected on the average batter in the average situation go out the window because he's not piching to you the way he might pitch to everyone else. And so you don't drive anything because he knows to just keep it away from you until 2 strikes. Sound like a familiar outcome? Your opposition are not automatons, they are perfectly capable of acting on the same data you have to confound you. The data can never get you out of having to play the real time cat-and-mouse game. And that's a good thing or it would be a very boring game.

I am not sure what you are are getting at.  Do you think Hinch is utilizing data too much amd not paying attention to the game?

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

I am not sure what you are are getting at.  Do you think Hinch is utilizing data too much amd not paying attention to the game?

I'm talking mostly generally here. As per Hinch - no - not so much in terms of game play - if you listen to Hinch he has said pretty much what I just wrote - that you have tendencies but as a manager he will overrule that guidance if he sees something that he thinks is tilting the game board. If I have a complaint it would go more to the way I hear guys like Torkelson (and Hinch) talk about what they are trying to do at the plate.

For my money - on offense, what I hope they do is analyze their own tendencies and then go out try to confound any other team using them against them. Probably in the long run the best thing is to try not to have any clear tendencies at all. The ebb and flow about 1st strike pitches now current is a great case study in the idea of see tendency/compensate/overcompensate/reverse tendency. So 1st came the idea to work counts to get to bullpens on the theory they are weaker. That assumption may not even be a good one any more but be that as it may,  in response the pitchers have said, "If you're aren't swinging, I'm just going to get ahead" and have thrown a much higher percentage of 1st pitch strikes than is actually a good idea. You never want to reach such a high strike percentage that a batter *knows* you are going to be in the zone  - well unless you are Justing Verlander at 25 with a virtually unhittable FB where you can just say "here it is if you can hit it". Most guys need to maintain some uncertainty in the batter's mind to be effective - so the ideal strike % on a given pitch is probably closer to 60% than the 70+% that some guys were throwing (and being lauded for). But then the batters finally wise up a realize all the cookies going by and suddenly the hot stat is the how high OPSes are for guys swinging at 1st pitch strikes. Soon pitchers won't be trying to throw 70% 1st pitch strikes.

So it sort of goes back to the driving by the rear view mirror paradigm. Using data is great but you have to stay current and you can't get caught being the last one doing the old thing when the new thing becomes where the comparative advantage is. And it's the new thing that is going to be hard to see from past data alone - but the data plus a little game sense and you have the tools to predict what may be next and get ahead of the competition - like that swinging at 1st pitches isn't such a bad idea......

Edited May 24 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

It seems like people are interpreting "control the strike zone" as meaning Harris and Hinch want their hitters to take as many pitches as humanly possible even if it gets them into 0-2 counts they have to fight their way out of, or even taking three pitches down the pipe and walking back to the dugout proud of their part in sticking to the strategy, but I don't think merely taking pitches without thinking is what Harris and Hinch are aiming for.

I think what they want is for hitters to focus on swinging on pitches that are in the strike zone to put them in play, versus swinging on balls well outside the strike zone and missing and expanding the zone for the pitcher. It's also about having to plan to attack the strike zone and sticking to the plan even after strike one.

If that's what it's about, if it's about attacking the zone and swinging at ball thrown within it, then why are so many guys watching strike one go down the pipe and then struggling to put the barrel on middle-middle? I think the main reasons out players are struggling with that at the big league level is not because the strategy is a steaming pile of freshly-dumped ****, but that they have habits ingrained through the years they're having trouble fighting through; or they have mental lapses and have trouble consistently putting the strategy into practice; or they get frustrated at times and forget the strategy in a bid to change everything with one swing; or they are simply not good hitters and won't be here for the long term anyway; or they are shortstops on the back half of their career who have checked out and can't be reached.

Controlling the zone is preached throughout the minors as well. That's why we see most of our farm teams toward the top in walks and OPS, and toward the bottom in strikeouts. Lakeland is a shining example of this, and is really the first team completely put together by the Harris regime. The teams toward the top of the system still have the remnants of the prior regime, with players whose habits are more ingrained and more difficult to iron out.

So I can see how the strategy is not going to help us play into November so much this year, not because the strategy is ****ing asinine and everyone connected to it should be catapulted into the sun, but because we just don't have the horses in-house yet to effectively win rings with it. We might do marginally better with some members of this group as the season progresses and the coaches refine the approach, but we're probably not going to have a team epiphany and lead the league in runs from this day forward. Bottom line is, the strategy of controlling the strike zone from the batter's box is not going away, and I don't believe it should go away, anyway.

[gehringer_2]

36 minutes ago, chasfh said:

It seems like people are interpreting "control the strike zone" as meaning Harris and Hinch want their hitters to take

 

It's more than that - at least in Torkelson's case. My compliant is the Tiger approach as per the way Tork has described it more than once, gives the pitcher no credit for being able to command the strike zone. "Take a strike until you get a pitch you can drive up to strike two" then go to survival mode, is I think, a recipe for failure against any but the worst pitchers. I think the 1st strike - fine - but after strike one you have to shift to contact mode because strike two is too late. The Tigers take too many pitches that can be hit. Maybe not for HRs but that they could put in play in better shape than an emergency swing on strike two. I would even go further to say that every pregame approach to looking for a zone has to go right out the window once you see what a guy is actually throwing and what an  ump is calling. If you park yourself waiting for middle in and he is painting the outside, plus the ump is calling a ball's width on top of that to the outside, and you take a thigh high fastball on the outer third not understanding that you are just going to get something further away on the next pitch, all I can say is good luck to you.

I would like to the focus to move more toward covering the strike zone rather than looking for zones. Any one can do the latter, but a good development program and batting practice habits should be able to improve the former. And I still reject that more than one or two players on a roster are ever swinging at balls they know will not be strikes. That is the other place I think the mantra breaks down.

Now eventually, they will sign only players that fit that mold, that already have good pitch recognition, and for them the coaching in that direction will be superfluous but the staff will look like geniuses!

Anyway , it is what it is, the spitballing is mostly for entainment (at least in my case)...so YMMV.

Edited May 24 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

3 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

It's more than that - at least in Torkelson's case. My compliant is the Tiger approach as per the way Tork has described it more than once, gives the pitcher no credit for being able to command the strike zone. "Take a strike until you get a pitch you can drive up to strike two" then go to survival mode, is I think, a recipe for failure against any but the worst pitchers. I think the 1st strike - fine - but after strike one you have to shift to contact mode because strike two is too late. The Tigers take too many pitches that can be hit. Maybe not for HRs but that they could put in play in better shape than an emergency swing on strike two. I would even go further to say that every pregame approach to looking for a zone has to go right out the window once you see what a guy is actually throwing and what an  ump is calling. If you park yourself waiting for middle in and he is painting the outside, plus the ump is calling a ball's width on top of that to the outside, and you take a thigh high fastball on the outer third thinking not believing you are just going to get something further away on the next pitch, all I can say is good luck to you.

I would like to the focus to move more toward covering the strike zone rather than looking for zones. Any one can do the latter, but a good development program and batting practice habits should be able to improve the former. And I still reject that more than one or two players on a roster are ever swinging at balls they know will not be strikes. That is the other place I think the mantra breaks down.

Now eventually, they will sign only players that fit that mold, that already have good pitch recognition, and for them the coaching in that direction will be superfluous but the staff will look like geniuses!

Anyway , it is what it is, the spitballing is mostly for entainment (at least in my case)...so YMMV.

I don't know if Tork is the best guy to articulate the strategy. In any event, maybe they're taking too many pitches that are good to hit because they are not good hitters. It seems to be working at Lakeland. And I agree that eventually they will get the right players in at the big league level to execute the strategy properly. But don't worry, even after they do, it'll be totally OK if you still hate the staff! 🤣

[gehringer_2]

Just now, chasfh said:

I don't know if Tork is the best guy to articulate the strategy. In any event, maybe they're taking too many pitches that are good to hit because they are not good hitters. It seems to be working at Lakeland. And I agree that eventually they will get the right players in at the big league level to execute the strategy properly. But don't worry, even after they do, it'll be totally OK if you still hate the staff! 🤣

can I love half the staff?

[chasfh]

3 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

can I love half the staff?

You can love any staff you want. No judgment here! 👍🏽😉🤣