Marlins (Tyler) vs Brewers (Myers): 7/28/24, 1:10pm

[82brewcrew82]

59 minutes ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

I'll be honest. When I first heard of the OPS stat many years ago and found out what it meant, I laughed. When critiquing a player as a hitter, I might want to look at his OBP. I might want to look at his slugging %. I'm probably in the minority but I think combining those two numbers into a 3rd is silly. I think it glosses over way too much detail. Two players can both have an .800 OPS, but be drastically different as to how they arrived at it. It's never been an important stat to me. 

To each their own, I guess.

What stat would you prefer?

[edfunderburk]

8 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

For sure. Crazy how he's been better in his 30s than he was in his 20s. 

Can’t wait to see his numbers once he gets into his 40s!

[edfunderburk]

2 hours ago, Bulldogboy said:

I'm hoping he was a bridge to Weeks next season. 

Funny - I have more confidence in Murphy than I do Weeks

i hope the day never comes when Rickie is manager in Milwaukee 

[wallus]

6 minutes ago, torts said:

Is weimer the new keston on here?  Asking for a friend

You mean because no one can spell his name properly?

[edfunderburk]

1 hour ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

I don't agree with all his moves but I see the logic behind most of them. I don't know if you're referring to Mitchell getting thrown out, but I definitely think you run there. I WAS questioning Junis not getting a 3rd inning, unless that makes the difference between him being available on Wednesday.

Some of the running on 1st & 3rd situations are IMO too aggressive, although that usually comes down to who's at the plate.

I agree with @nate82 about the Sanchez AB. I also would've let Mitchell hit, but I get it. Not all, but many of these decisions in-game aren't slam dunks. 60%-40%, 55%-45%, and hunches that are based on stuff we couldn't possibly know about.

As usual - you made valid points! 

[Jim French Stepstool]

14 minutes ago, 82brewcrew82 said:

What stat would you prefer?

To replace OPS? Nothing. I think OPS combines two stats that are drastically different when talking about a hitters' prowess & therefore the combined number is meaningless to me. I want more specific detail if looking at what a hitter brings to the table. Like I said, I have two numbers I can view. I don't need them combined into a third.

[yourout]

Just now, Jim French Stepstool said:

To replace OPS? Nothing. I think OPS combines two stats that are drastically different when talking about a hitters' prowess & therefore the combined number is meaningless to me. I want more specific detail if looking at what a hitter brings to the table.

For me a leadoff hitters most important number is his on base percentage. 

[82brewcrew82]

3 minutes ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

To replace OPS? Nothing. I think OPS combines two stats that are drastically different when talking about a hitters' prowess & therefore the combined number is meaningless to me. I want more specific detail if looking at what a hitter brings to the table.

What stat (or stats) would you use to quantify a given player as a good lead-off hitter, but I suspect you understood the question without that clarification.

[Jim French Stepstool]

25 minutes ago, yourout said:

For me a leadoff hitters most important number is his on base percentage. 

In a vacuum, I agree. The problem lies when you have a high OBP guy that you'd rather get up with runners on base. Like Yelich before the back started up again.

[Jim French Stepstool]

37 minutes ago, 82brewcrew82 said:

What stat (or stats) would you use to quantify a given player as a good lead-off hitter, but I suspect you understood the question without that clarification.

No, I didn't. That's why I originally answered the question with a question.

See above answer to @yourout. A high OBP guy might also be someone you want a little deeper in the order if he has a knack for driving in runs, so it isn't etched in stone. But it's a starting point. I also like to look at pitches per AB, and the innate ability to foul off tough pitches. Speed is a plus but you don't have to be a burner. Ability/willingness to draw walks. Being able to bunt a runner over if late & a close or tie score, especially since 2-hole hitters are often the best hitter on a team nowadays. For the same reason, ability to steer the ball to the right side if a RHH.

A lot of the above can't be quantified by stats. In a nutshell, I like someone who can be a 'pain in the ass' to a pitcher, make him earn his outs. Turang was terrific at that. The last 20 or whatever games he hasn't been. I think they're best served riding him out up there. You don't. That's what makes this board tick. I guess.

The above, is the perfect leadoff hitter constructed out of my lab. Not the only way to go. Paul Molitor was great at the job & doesn't fit that description much at all.

[Brian]

1 hour ago, 82brewcrew82 said:

6 for 56 coming into this game but yeah, this one game makes the difference.

It is 6 for 36 and it does make a difference. Because its called lying or manipulating.

That's like saying Babe Ruth only had 487 career home runs if you take away his 4 best years. Half this site are not even baseball fans anymore, just here to cause trouble. 

[yourout]

21 minutes ago, Brian said:

It is 6 for 36 and it does make a difference. Because its called lying or manipulating.

That's like saying Babe Ruth only had 487 career home runs if you take away his 4 best years. Half this site are not even baseball fans anymore, just here to cause trouble. 

 

[82brewcrew82]

25 minutes ago, Brian said:

It is 6 for 36 and it does make a difference. Because its called lying or manipulating.

That's like saying Babe Ruth only had 487 career home runs if you take away his 4 best years. Half this site are not even baseball fans anymore, just here to cause trouble. 

That was in response to you citing a single game so right back at ya.  As someone else posted, he hasn't been good for a long time, but you go ahead and tell me how to be a fan.

[82brewcrew82]

50 minutes ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

No, I didn't. That's why I originally answered the question with a question.

See above answer to @yourout. A high OBP guy might also be someone you want a little deeper in the order if he has a knack for driving in runs, so it isn't etched in stone. But it's a starting point. I also like to look at pitches per AB, and the innate ability to foul off tough pitches. Speed is a plus but you don't have to be a burner. Ability/willingness to draw walks. Being able to bunt a runner over if late & a close or tie score, especially since 2-hole hitters are often the best hitter on a team nowadays. For the same reason, ability to steer the ball to the right side if a RHH.

A lot of the above can't be quantified by stats. In a nutshell, I like someone who can be a 'pain in the ass' to a pitcher, make him earn his outs. Turang was terrific at that. The last 20 or whatever games he hasn't been. I think they're best served riding him out up there. You don't. That's what makes this board tick. I guess.

The above, is the perfect leadoff hitter constructed out of my lab. Not the only way to go. Paul Molitor was great at the job & doesn't fit that description much at all.

That's fair as long as we agree that, at least in part, your evaluation is subjective.  A rudimentary look at things like OPB says Turang is in the lower half of the league (relative to lead-off hitters) and most lead-off hitters with a lower OBP than his make up for it with a much better ability to produce runs.  Very few produce a lower wxOBA than Turang.  If he can't get out of this tailspin (which, as someone else noted, is far more than 20 games), it looks bleak.

The reality is that teams deploy all kinds of different hitters in the lead-off spots with all kinds of different profiles and skill sets and most teams use multiple hitters.  Very few hit lead-off as regularly as Turang does and most that do are all-stars.  Which is kind of the point.  Teams use really good players in the lead-off spot more often than not and usually on of their better hitters.

There may not be a ton of options but there are options.  Even if there were not, if every hitter is slumping why not shake it up and see what happens?  Whats the worst that can happen?  Turang hasn't proven nearly enough to just say "let him ride it out".

[areacodes]

1 hour ago, edfunderburk said:

Funny - I have more confidence in Murphy than I do Weeks

i hope the day never comes when Rickie is manager in Milwaukee 

What gives you pause about Weeks’ future as a manager?

[Jim French Stepstool]

9 minutes ago, 82brewcrew82 said:

That's fair as long as we agree that, at least in part, your evaluation is subjective.  A rudimentary look at things like OPB says Turang is in the lower half of the league (relative to lead-off hitters) and most lead-off hitters with a lower OBP than his make up for it with a much better ability to produce runs.  Very few produce a lower wxOBA than Turang.  If he can't get out of this tailspin (which, as someone else noted, is far more than 20 games), it looks bleak.

The reality is that teams deploy all kinds of different hitters in the lead-off spots with all kinds of different profiles and skill sets and most teams use multiple hitters.  Very few hit lead-off as regularly as Turang does and most that do are all-stars.  Which is kind of the point.  Teams use really good players in the lead-off spot more often than not and usually on of their better hitters.

There may not be a ton of options but there are options.  Even if there were not, if every hitter is slumping why not shake it up and see what happens?  Whats the worst that can happen?  Turang hasn't proven nearly enough to just say "let him ride it out".

Sorry but I don't see better options than keeping him there. He's shown me (and the team, apparently) enough earlier in the season to warrant it. Maybe if Ortiz' approach hadn't fallen off a cliff---maybe if there were enough baserunners out of the bottom third of the order to give Chourio opportunities w/baserunners---Maybe if Tyler Black could field a position---or WE were the ones that acquired Chisolm----

Yes, if this continues, it would suck. And if it doesn't, then something else. Sure, there's some subjectivity. With the lack of experienced options there kinda has to be. And maybe the leash, and the patience they show, is a little extended by the position the team is in right now in the NL. If ever there's an organization that's in perpetual 'stay the course' mode, it's this one. Big picture, it's served them well.

But many of your points are valid. Well done.

[Brian]

37 minutes ago, 82brewcrew82 said:

That was in response to you citing a single game so right back at ya.  As someone else posted, he hasn't been good for a long time, but you go ahead and tell me how to be a fan.

I think you replied to the wrong person. Because my point was you can't make a judgment by a single game. 

3 weeks ago Turang was batting .290 when we played the Dodgers but he has been downhill ever since. 

[brewcrewdue80]

There is baserunning aspect I'll want in .my lead-off hitter. I've said this before among OPS, there should be an addition(or subtraction) OPS/Run.

Turang finds his way on to first and steals 2nd/3rd base.  A walk/single nets a 1.000 OB/slg each. If Turang hits a double its 1.000 ob /2.000 slg.

That would increase the OP(Slg) side.  You would remove 1.000 of slg if caught out on the basepaths.  

Either way Turang has definitely been more addition on the basepaths than subtraction. My OPS-Run number can then paint Turang with higher OPS value than just that stat itself. Yelich would show off being a much better player via OPS than he already is. The point is it's tied to a number vs some baserunning stat off in a differently scored category.

 

Edit add. So Turang has 31SB and 5 caught stealing.  +26 overall. So taking the Total Bases figured for slg and adding 26 to it the number comes to round up to .440 heading in to today's game. Jumps him to .767 (OPS run) vs .695 OPS. And we know he was much higher not long ago.

[Jim French Stepstool]

6 minutes ago, brewcrewdue80 said:

There is baserunning aspect I'll want in .my lead-off hitter. I've said this before among OPS, there should be an addition(or subtraction) OPS/Run.

Turang finds his way on to first and steals 2nd/3rd base.  A walk/single nets a 1.000 OB/slg each. If Turang hits a double its 1.000 ob /2.000 slg.

That would increase the OP(Slg) side.  You would remove 1.000 of slg if caught out on the basepaths.  

Either way Turang has definitely been more addition on the basepaths than subtraction. My OPS-Run number can then paint Turang with higher OPS value than just that stat itself. Yelich would show off being a much better player via OPS than he already is. The point is it's tied to a number vs some baserunning stat off in a differently scored category.

Something like that would absolutely skyrocket an OPS for Yelich, you would think.

[nate82]

3 minutes ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

Something like that would absolutely skyrocket an OPS for Yelich, you would think.

Yelich doesn't steal all that much so no. 

[brewcrewdue80]

1 minute ago, nate82 said:

Yelich doesn't steal all that much so no. 

Yelich has 21 SBs with 1 CS.  28 vs 3 last season.  Think of the OPS run as a Pitchers Fip? I Dunno but it's not hard to figure out.  Now I imagine being picked off on the base a runner is on isn't counted as a caught stealing. So you'd remove 1 TB for those too.

[brewcrewdue80]

19 minutes ago, Jim French Stepstool said:

Something like that would absolutely skyrocket an OPS for Yelich, you would think.

Adding 20 TB brings his slg to .578 a .983/984OPS-run. 

[wiguy94]

1 hour ago, brewcrewdue80 said:

There is baserunning aspect I'll want in .my lead-off hitter. I've said this before among OPS, there should be an addition(or subtraction) OPS/Run.

Turang finds his way on to first and steals 2nd/3rd base.  A walk/single nets a 1.000 OB/slg each. If Turang hits a double its 1.000 ob /2.000 slg.

That would increase the OP(Slg) side.  You would remove 1.000 of slg if caught out on the basepaths.  

Either way Turang has definitely been more addition on the basepaths than subtraction. My OPS-Run number can then paint Turang with higher OPS value than just that stat itself. Yelich would show off being a much better player via OPS than he already is. The point is it's tied to a number vs some baserunning stat off in a differently scored category.

 

Edit add. So Turang has 31SB and 5 caught stealing.  +26 overall. So taking the Total Bases figured for slg and adding 26 to it the number comes to round up to .440 heading in to today's game. Jumps him to .767 (OPS run) vs .695 OPS. And we know he was much higher not long ago.

Interestingly enough I actually feel like Turang’s baserunning makes me want him less at leadoff. I don’t think he’s been nearly as aggressive stealing bases since he moved primarily to leadoff. Running with Contreras at the plate is a lot different than Perkins at the plate. You don’t want to run and force Contreras into looking at a hittable pitch. This is why I want Ortiz at leadoff but he’s been in a nasty slump. I think Turang in the bottom third gives him more of an opportunity to just wreak havoc on the bases.

[LouisEly]

6 hours ago, wiguy94 said:

I don’t think he’s been nearly as aggressive stealing bases since he moved primarily to leadoff.

Is that on Turang or is that a coaching call?  Seems like you think it's on Turang unless I'm misunderstanding you.

[wiguy94]

1 hour ago, LouisEly said:

Is that on Turang or is that a coaching call?  Seems like you think it's on Turang unless I'm misunderstanding you.

I don’t think it matters who it’s on. Less aggressive Turang on the bases is not a good thing.