5/24 7:40 Tigers @ Twins

[1776]

9 hours ago, Jim Cowan said:

I agree and Gardenhire was an odd little man who, had he chosen a career in industry, might have risen all the way to payroll supervisor.  And yet he is not demonstratably worse as a baseball manager than his predecessor or his successor.

To repeat, but for a few well placed trash cans, Hinch would be just another name in the phone book.

[chasfh]

This all probably should have been expected, or at least not unexpected.

For years the rebuild put its eggs primarily in the right-handed starting pitching basket, because after all, we built a pennant winner primarily on right-handed pitching a decade ago, so heck, let’s try it again. We’re confident the fans will be on board and wait for as long as it’ll take.

In the meantime, the organization fell way behind the curve on the technologies the better organizations use, always a step or two behind playing catch-up, which affected their scouting, drafting, signing, trading and development (and perhaps training and medical).

The result is this gimpy collection of ragtag has-beens, never-wases, not-ready-yets, and AAAA lifers. There are two, maybe three, players on this team who, if fully healthy and on their established game, could start for a legitimate playoff-level team right now. But even when they’re hitting on all their cylinders, vast majority of these guys here are basically good enough to play on one of the worst teams in the majors, and not much more.

I’d be willing to put the lion’s share of the blame on Hinch if he were losing with a team that was seriously expected to contend. But outside of some slappy fans and media people who have to work in that city, most people had the team picked for fourth or fifth place, and well under .500.

So if it feels good, we can run Hinch out of town on a rail, bring Ron Gardenhire back, start shopping the veterans around for pennies on the dollar, take a flyer on free agents like Brett Gardner or Julio Teheran, and/or turn over the roster between Detroit and Toledo. Things may not get any better and they may well get worse, since we’d be relying on a group of mainly untried players to be at the top of their game to play up to a .333 level in the majors, instead of major league regulars slumping down to that level. But hey, at least something would be happening, right?

 

[romad1]

5 minutes ago, chasfh said:

This all probably should have been expected, or at least not unexpected.

For years the rebuild put its eggs primarily in the right-handed starting pitching basket, because after all, we built a pennant winner primarily on right-handed pitching a decade ago, so heck, let’s try it again. We’re confident the fans will be on board and wait for as long as it’ll take.

In the meantime, the organization fell way behind the curve on the technologies the better organizations use, always a step or two behind playing catch-up, which affected their scouting, drafting, signing, trading and development (and perhaps training and medical).

The result is this gimpy collection of ragtag has-beens, never-wases, not-ready-yets, and AAAA lifers. There are two, maybe three, players on this team who, if fully healthy and on their established game, could start for a legitimate playoff-level team right now. But even when they’re hitting on all their cylinders, vast majority of these guys here are basically good enough to play on one of the worst teams in the majors, and not much more.

I’d be willing to put the lion’s share of the blame on Hinch if he were losing with a team that was seriously expected to contend. But outside of some slappy fans and media people who have to work in that city, most people had the team picked for fourth or fifth place, and well under .500.

So if it feels good, we can run Hinch out of town on a rail, bring Ron Gardenhire back, start shopping the veterans around for pennies on the dollar, take a flyer on free agents like Brett Gardner or Julio Teheran, and/or turn over the roster between Detroit and Toledo. Things may not get any better and they may well get worse, since we’d be relying on a group of mainly untried players to be at the top of their game to play up to a .333 level in the majors, instead of major league regulars slumping down to that level. But hey, at least something would be happening, right?

 

So many assumptions failed for this team that was licking its chops to market to the fan base a bunch of players who have been total non-contributors. 

Imagine a team that had Grossman and Baddoo playing like 2021 with an Austin Meadows playing like a better Grossman hitting bombs and a Javy Baez who was catching everything hit his way and hitting for power with two cool new rookies including the best hitting prospect in a decade and a kid who was hitting everything in Spring Training.   Then you add in the rapidly maturing Casey Mize, Tarik Skubal with the vet Eduardo Rodriguez.   Tucker Barnhardt solidified everything because he was a hidden gem that Cinnci was willing to trade away for salary cap relief. 

[gehringer_2]

38 minutes ago, chasfh said:

instead of major league regulars slumping down to that level.

LOL, are you saying this describes the Castros? I have three current complaints with Hinch and/or Avila - W. Castro, abuse of Brieske and batting Grossman leadoff. If they were fixed would they be a better team? IDK, but at least they would be a more rationally managed team. The way I look at it, just because a team is losing doesn't give everyone a pass on doing dumb stuff that just helps perpetuate it. It's sort of like using losing as an excuse for waiving all accountability.

Edited May 25, 2022 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

3 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

LOL, are you saying this describes the Castros? I have three complaints with Hinch - W. Castro, abuse of Brieske and batting Grossman leadoff. If they were fixed would they be a better team? IDK, but at least they would be a more rationally managed team. The way I look at it, just because a team is losing doesn't give everyone a pass on doing dumb stuff that just helps perpetuate it. It's sort of like using losing as an excuse for waiving all accountability.

I don't know where you get this out of my post, but no. In no universe do they qualify as established major leaguers. Guess again.

Willi is playing left field because it's either him, who is hitting a little but is out of position there, or Eric Haase, who is not hitting at all and would be out of position there. Take your pick.

I suppose we could move Grossman off the top of the order and replace him with ... I don't know ... Schoop, maybe? Candelario? Hill? Javy? Tucker? Tork or Miggy? I know you don't want Willi there. Anyway, batting orders don't actually mean all that much in the big scheme of things, maybe five or so runs over the course of a season, but sure, I'm game. Let's try someone else there.

I'm not sure I take your unspoken point on Brieske.

My point is that Hinch was handed a roster of shit and I'm not sure what more he or anyone else, including Ron Gardenhire, could do with it. Like I said, it's not as though he is running a contender into the ground.

[romad1]

23 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

LOL, are you saying this describes the Castros? I have three current complaints with Hinch and/or Avila - W. Castro, abuse of Brieske and batting Grossman leadoff. If they were fixed would they be a better team? IDK, but at least they would be a more rationally managed team. The way I look at it, just because a team is losing doesn't give everyone a pass on doing dumb stuff that just helps perpetuate it. It's sort of like using losing as an excuse for waiving all accountability.

Yeah, it smells like people are trying to leave town because of some ownership or leadership issues.   Maybe not getting Carlos Correa really stung AJ Hinch and he just wants to blow it all up?  Maybe JV knew?   Speculation born of frustration only.   They need to string together a coherent month. 

[chasfh]

36 minutes ago, romad1 said:

So many assumptions failed for this team that was licking its chops to market to the fan base a bunch of players who have been total non-contributors. 

Imagine a team that had Grossman and Baddoo playing like 2021 with an Austin Meadows playing like a better Grossman hitting bombs and a Javy Baez who was catching everything hit his way and hitting for power with two cool new rookies including the best hitting prospect in a decade and a kid who was hitting everything in Spring Training.   Then you add in the rapidly maturing Casey Mize, Tarik Skubal with the vet Eduardo Rodriguez.   Tucker Barnhardt solidified everything because he was a hidden gem that Cinnci was willing to trade away for salary cap relief. 

Exactly. Imagine how good this team would be if everything was going exactly right. They might be within shouting distance of .500.

[Tiger337]

3 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I suppose we could move Grossman off the top of the order and replace him with ... I don't know ... Schoop, maybe? Candelario? Hill? Javy? Tucker? Tork or Miggy? I know you don't want Willi there. Anyway, batting orders don't actually mean all that much in the big scheme of things, maybe five or so runs over the course of a season, but sure, I'm game. Let's try someone else there.

 

Batting order can mean more than five runs over a season, but when none of them can hit anyway, I don't think it matters at all.  

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/how-significant-is-batting-order/#:~:text=Most sabermetric analyses of batting,order isn't very important.

[gehringer_2]

10 minutes ago, chasfh said:

My point is that Hinch was handed a roster of shit and I'm not sure what more he or anyone else, including Ron Gardenhire, could do with it. Like I said, it's not as though he is running a contender into the ground.

that's fair enough, all I'm asking for is for management not make things even worse by doing dumb stuff. If a guy has 100AB at a 250 OPB you don't leave him at lead-off, at that point it's just dumb. If you are playing really bad players in preference to guys you could be looking at that at least have some chance to help you, that's dumb. If you are grinding up a young prospect instead of leaving him where he could develop when you have all kind of arms that could be sharing the load, that's dumb. Aesthetically, I can accept losing easier than losing and being dumb.

We can argue whose responsibility the decisions are, that fine, I don't claim any insight into that, but dumb is dumb, and since the players know it as well as anyone, I can't believe it helps morale either.

Edited May 25, 2022 by gehringer_2

[Tiger337]

3 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Exactly. Imagine how good this team would be if everything was going exactly right. They might be within shouting distance of .500.

If everyone were healthy, they could be better than .500 but given their healthy choices I agree they wouldn't go above .500.   

[chasfh]

1 minute ago, Tiger337 said:

Batting order can mean more than five runs over a season, but when none of them can hit anyway, I don't think it matters at all.  

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/how-significant-is-batting-order/#:~:text=Most sabermetric analyses of batting,order isn't very important.

Five to fifteen, according to the uncited meta-conclusion in the article you share.

I believe the conclusions of such analyses are predicated on comparing the most optimized batting order with the most backwards, upside-down batting order imaginable, no? The latter of which is obviously never even in consideration. So I'd guess that when we're talking about changing one batting order position, like swapping Grossman and Schoop in the order, we're probably not even talking about as many as five runs during a season.

[romad1]

15 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Exactly. Imagine how good this team would be if everything was going exactly right. They might be within shouting distance of .500.

People would be delighted with that team because it would mean going to a home game gave you a puncher's chance of seeing a win.   Instead of constant shutout losses in which the D gives up the runs because of some bedwetting mistake. 

Edited May 25, 2022 by romad1

[gehringer_2]

2 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Five to fifteen, according to the uncited meta-conclusion in the article you share.

I believe the conclusions of such analyses are predicated on comparing the most optimized batting order with the most backwards, upside-down batting order imaginable, no? The latter of which is obviously never even in consideration. So I'd guess that when we're talking about changing one batting order position, like swapping Grossman and Schoop in the order, we're probably not even talking about as many as five runs during a season.

True, but it's also true that the marginal value of most decisions is small, that doesn't mean it still isn't dumb to ignore it. Weird to see a couple of sabers arguing that we after measure and analyze every piece of quantitative data we just turn around and give management a pass on ignoring it. In favor of what? The 'gut feeling' Robbie is going to hit today? 

[Tiger337]

5 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Five to fifteen, according to the uncited meta-conclusion in the article you share.

I believe the conclusions of such analyses are predicated on comparing the most optimized batting order with the most backwards, upside-down batting order imaginable, no? The latter of which is obviously never even in consideration. So I'd guess that when we're talking about changing one batting order position, like swapping Grossman and Schoop in the order, we're probably not even talking about as many as five runs during a season.

Yes, I agree batting order doesn't mean much and I think it means less when nobody can hit anway.  Swapping Grossman and Schoop right now is meaningless, although if they are both hitting having Grossman bat higher is probably slightly more beneficial.   

[chasfh]

6 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

If everyone were healthy, they could be better than .500 but given their healthy choices I agree they wouldn't go above .500.   

OK, if everyone were healthy, and if numerous starters were meeting or exceeding their projections and their peripherals, and the team was Pythagorean-positive—as with last year—yes, I agree given the same this year,  they could be .500 or better.

[chasfh]

3 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

True, but it's also true that the marginal value of most decisions is small, that doesn't mean it still isn't dumb to ignore it. Weird to see a couple of sabers arguing that we after measure and analyze every piece of quantitative data we just turn around and give management a pass on ignoring it. In favor of what? The 'gut feeling' Robbie is going to hit today? 

What batting order you want to see? Please list it out.

[Tiger337]

Just now, chasfh said:

OK, if everyone were healthy, and if numerous starters were meeting or exceeding their projections and their peripherals, and the team was Pythagorean-positive—as with last year—yes, I agree given the same this year,  they could be .500 or better.

I think they needed Torkelson, Green, Mize and Manning to all make significant contributions in order to be the team they were hyped to be this year.  This was a long short even before the injuries.  Too many fans were thinking that their May through September record last year was the baseline going into the year and that they were going to add another 10-15 wins with the free agent acquisitions and young talent.  It was mostly wishful thinking. 

[gehringer_2]

7 minutes ago, chasfh said:

What batting order you want to see? Please list it out.

I posted a top six upthread, or maybe in another thread. Grossman wasn't in it.  

For me it also goes to the morale issue on the team. I believe you made an argument up thread more or less against the idea of motion for the sake of motion. While that's true enough, I'm not sure I agree with that under all circumstances when you approach from the human factors perspective. Both from a morale and accountability standpoint, I think sometimes doing something just to show you are doing something does come into play simply because you have to demonstrate that the status quo is not becoming acceptable. It's an arguable point where that is, but IMO the Tigers are there.

Edited May 25, 2022 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

36 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

that's fair enough, all I'm asking for is for management not make things even worse by doing dumb stuff. If a guy has 100AB at a 250 OPB you don't leave him at lead-off, at that point it's just dumb. If you are playing really bad players in preference to guys you could be looking at that at least have some chance to help you, that's dumb. If you are grinding up a young prospect instead of leaving him where he could develop when you have all kind of arms that could be sharing the load, that's dumb. Aesthetically, I can accept losing easier than losing and being dumb.

We can argue whose responsibility the decisions are, that fine, I don't claim any insight into that, but dumb is dumb, and since the players know it as well as anyone, I can't believe it helps morale either.

I'm not sure where you're getting 100 AB at .250 OBP. Grossman has a .294 OBP in his last 100 or so at bats (i.e., since April 22), which is better than everyone on the team not named Castro or Miggy.

That said, Robbie's performance has been nothing short of horrific the last two weeks—like, nearly major league-worst horrific (arguably better than only ... wait for it ... Nick Castellanos!). So sure, let's move Robbie out of the top of the order and put someone else there. I'm fine with that. Please tell me who you think should be top of the order instead.

No matter whom you pick, you do know that Robbie can't come out of the lineup, right? Because of the why this team has been rostered, there is literally no one who can replace him outside of Eric Haase or Harold Castro—and either way, you still have Willi in left.

But yeah, let's blame Hinch for us being 14-28.

 

Edited May 25, 2022 by chasfh

[Stanley70]

What i am concerned about is aside from Greene and Tork, whom have achieved nothing to date, how many long term pieces do we have? Baez and Meadows should be two more. The rest you have to question. And there aren't any prospects in minors that look like they can be productive regulars in the next year or two either.

If Candelario doesn't work out it shouldn't be a big deal. But it will be if we also need a second baseman, right fielder, catcher and a DH. It will be tough to fill all of those positions for next year and compete. 

[gehringer_2]

38 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Robbie can't come out of the lineup, right?

correct, you are stuck with Grossman in the field full time at least until we get back Reyes or Meadows, at which time a more occasional day would be in order until he (hopefully) pulls out of his funk. But you don't need to maximize his AB when he is struggling. 

OK - here are our starters' OBP for May (get yourself a stiff drink before reading.....)

Grossman: 233 (180 the last two weeks)

Cabrera: 346

Daz: 300 (only 10 AB!)

Harold: 216

Hill: 189

Jeimer: 260

Javy: 200

Schoop: 260 (275 last two weeks)

Torkelson: 279 (342 last two weeks)

Barnhart: 222 (200 last two weeks)

Willi: 313 (1 for his last 22 and that was a swinging bunt)

    Willi was basically on fire for 14 games from April 28 to May 16 (34 ab) when he OBP'd at 432. He's was cold before that and has gone cold again since with an OBP of 226. That is his more normal career condition. Number don't lie but a fluke is a fluke. Willi had a similar hot streak in the Covid season (100ab), he doesn't sustain them - and he can't field....

But, putting Willi aside;  You absolutely have no lead off hitter - Could try Daz there for a couple of games but I admit that's not likely a winner, after that I might go Jeimer (has some history of walking + SH, then Schoop, Cabrera, Torkelson, then probably Robbie and Javy. In fact it might even help to get to Jeimer thinking OBP and opposite field a little more, he's getting beat inside a lot as a LHB on the big swing.

 

[buddha]

grossman takes a lot of pitches and historically got on base at a decent clip.  for this team he is the natural person to batting leadoff.

[gehringer_2]

24 minutes ago, buddha said:

grossman takes a lot of pitches and historically got on base at a decent clip.  for this team he is the natural person to batting leadoff.

I would stress 'historically'. People are not the same from year to year, let alone month to month. Absolutely, you stick with a guy based on his history up to a point, but at some point you have to accept that the numbers are telling you he is not the same guy, at which point facts about who he was are immaterial. Something changed - health, mental outlook, mechanics, whatever.  It's a judgment call but for me after about 100-150 AB you don't owe guys too much based on their career history. That's not to say they won't come back, but at some point you have to make them show that they have found what they lost. You look at peripherals too of course. Robbie has lost his ability to walk recently, and that is more than bad BaBIP luck.

Edited May 25, 2022 by gehringer_2

[RandyMarsh]

Since 2016 every year Grossman had an obp of .337 or higher with many of those years being .360 or higher so even though he struggled this year he had a 7 year stretch of getting on base at a solid to plus rate. Ill put more stock in that then a bad 4 or 5 week stretch to start this year. 

[Tiger337]

3 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I would stress 'historically'. People are not the same from year to year, let alone month to month. Absolutely, you stick with a guy based on his history up to a point, but at some point you have to accept that the numbers are telling you he is not the same guy, at which point facts about who he was are immaterial. Something changed - health, mental outlook, mechanics, whatever.  It's a judgment call but for me after about 100-150 AB you don't owe guys too much based on their career history. That's not to say they won't come back, but at some point you have to make them show that they have found what they lost.

I think these kinds of slumps are often caused by minor injuries that we don't know about.  It depends on who it is though.  If Mike Trout has a bad year, they are going to stay with him all year.  If it's Javier Baez and you know he's extremely streaky anyway you stay with him.  If it's someone with no track record, you remove him immediately.  If it's Grossman who has been pretty good but not great and has reached an age where many players go into decline, it's a judgement call.