Don't look now Braves fans

[MetEdDawg]

8 game winning streak, 2nd best record in the NL, 5th best record in baseball. Averaging 5 runs a game during the winning streak and only giving up 2.25 runs per game during that same time.

I know I know it's the regular season and during the playoffs we will shit the bed. But for right now we are 10 games over .500 and doing some pretty good stuff right now even without Gattis. I think the amazing thing is that BJ is actually producing some from the lead off spot. BA is up to .211 and he's getting on base, stealing bases, and scoring runs. I'm still not sold on him that spot long term, but right now you run with it for as long as you can.

Nice to see us doing this while the Nats are hot too.

[msstate7]

Really love what the bullpen is doing right now. Since walden came back, they've been outstanding. Shea Simmons is kimbrel 2.0

Fredi has been ripped for putting bj and Simmons 1 & 2, but they're getting it done.

Mike minor is the key. We need him to make a serious playoff run. If he regains his last year's 2nd half stature, we could be a very tough out.

[Dawg61]

Sorry to hijack your Braves thread. A's just landed Samardijza and Hammel.

[msstate7]

Sorry to hijack your Braves thread. A's just landed Samardijza and Hammel.

Yep. I like it. No NL team will get them

[War Machine Dawg]

I've been saying move Simba into the 2 hole for months. He and/or La Stella are the best two hitters we have for that spot, but I like La Stella further down in the order for RBI opportunities.

BJ has been solid in the leadoff spot. Likewise, I'm not sold on him there long term, but it's been a good move short term. Ride the hot hand.

For me, the most encouraging thing during this win streak isn't necessarily the wins themselves, even though they're obviously important. It's moreso HOW we're winning these games. We're manufacturing runs, using the running game, and not relying on the long ball to score runs. We've also seen the bullpen return to form. I just wish we coulda found a way to keep Juan Jaime up. Really like that dude, he's going to be a beast.

Any word on how Venters' rehab is progressing? We should be hearing that he's ready to start rehab games soon, assuming he's on track. If he can come back in August and have even half of what he had before, that'll be a nice boost to the pen, too.

I just wish we'd get rid of Harang while he's got some value. Maybe see if we can move him for a 4/5 type pitcher. Hell, throw Uggla into the deal if a team wants to take a chance on rehabbing him.

[War Machine Dawg]

Sorry to hijack your Braves thread. A's just landed Samardijza and Hammel.

That sucks, but the Braves apparently had no interest in Samardijza. Would've loved to find a way to land Hammel, though. He'd be a major upgrade over Harang. Looks like the Cubs got big value in return, too. Addison Reed is considered one of the top 3 prospects in all of MLB right now. They also got the A's 2013 first round pick and Dan Straily. The only questionable part is the Cubs are now log jammed at SS, unless someone moves. Castro is already there and their top prospect in the minors is also a SS. Makes you wonder if Castro's days are numbered and he's next to be dealt.

[msstate7]

I've been saying move Simba into the 2 hole for months. He and/or La Stella are the best two hitters we have for that spot, but I like La Stella further down in the order for RBI opportunities.

BJ has been solid in the leadoff spot. Likewise, I'm not sold on him there long term, but it's been a good move short term. Ride the hot hand.

For me, the most encouraging thing during this win streak isn't necessarily the wins themselves, even though they're obviously important. It's moreso HOW we're winning these games. We're manufacturing runs, using the running game, and not relying on the long ball to score runs. We've also seen the bullpen return to form. I just wish we coulda found a way to keep Juan Jaime up. Really like that dude, he's going to be a beast.

Any word on how Venters' rehab is progressing? We should be hearing that he's ready to start rehab games soon, assuming he's on track. If he can come back in August and have even half of what he had before, that'll be a nice boost to the pen, too.

I just wish we'd get rid of Harang while he's got some value. Maybe see if we can move him for a 4/5 type pitcher. Hell, throw Uggla into the deal if a team wants to take a chance on rehabbing him.

Here's last I read about jonny...

http://m.ajc.com/news/sports/baseball/venters-resumes-throwing-following-elbow-soreness/ngDc8/

To tell the truth, I'll be surprised if beachy or venters ever pitch for the braves again. I hope I'm wrong...

[KB21]

I've been saying move Simba into the 2 hole for months. He and/or La Stella are the best two hitters we have for that spot, but I like La Stella further down in the order for RBI opportunities.

BJ has been solid in the leadoff spot. Likewise, I'm not sold on him there long term, but it's been a good move short term. Ride the hot hand.

For me, the most encouraging thing during this win streak isn't necessarily the wins themselves, even though they're obviously important. It's moreso HOW we're winning these games. We're manufacturing runs, using the running game, and not relying on the long ball to score runs. We've also seen the bullpen return to form. I just wish we coulda found a way to keep Juan Jaime up. Really like that dude, he's going to be a beast.

Any word on how Venters' rehab is progressing? We should be hearing that he's ready to start rehab games soon, assuming he's on track. If he can come back in August and have even half of what he had before, that'll be a nice boost to the pen, too.

I just wish we'd get rid of Harang while he's got some value. Maybe see if we can move him for a 4/5 type pitcher. Hell, throw Uggla into the deal if a team wants to take a chance on rehabbing him.

BJ has a 10 game hitting streak and is hitting .240 during that span of time, but he still has a .279 OBP during that span as well. That's not going to cut it at leadoff over the long haul. The Braves are very lucky that the few times BJ does get on, Freddie is knocking him in.

Andrelton at least has a .364 OBP in the 10 games he has hit second.

[msstate7]

BJ has a 10 game hitting streak and is hitting .240 during that span of time, but he still has a .279 OBP during that span as well. That's not going to cut it at leadoff over the long haul. The Braves are very lucky that the few times BJ does get on, Freddie is knocking him in.

Andrelton at least has a .364 OBP in the 10 games he has hit second.

I'm seeing bj's last 10 game stats as this:

.268 avg .317 obp 8 r's 1 hr 3 RBI 3 sb's

[MetEdDawg]

I'm seeing bj's last 10 game stats as this:

.268 avg .317 obp 8 r's 1 hr 3 RBI 3 sb's

That's what I've got him at too during that stretch.

Here's the best thing about this right now. With him getting on, he's finally giving guys protection behind him. It may only be once a game he's getting on, but when he gets on base, he is now a threat to steal, which means whoever bats 2nd behind him has the opportunity to see some more fastballs. So now we are getting at least one more favorable at bat in our lineup per game.

That's why it's important for lead off to get on base and why it's important we keep Upton there now. You need as many favorable at bat/scoring situations as possible during the game. Him doing what he is now in the 8 hole doesn't help us at all. Chances of him scoring from the 8 hole go down drastically because the running game pretty much goes out with the pitcher at the plate. Also much less of a chance of a base hit behind him to advance him. I'm ok with this arrangement right now of him in the lead off even though he's got a lower OBP than needed for a lead off because it makes him getting on base extremely more productive than him getting on base from the 8 hole.

If he can keep this up when Gattis gets back, our lineup will become that much stronger.

[KB21]

I'm seeing bj's last 10 game stats as this:

.268 avg .317 obp 8 r's 1 hr 3 RBI 3 sb's

Not sure what source, but that is still not lead off quality.

[KB21]

That's what I've got him at too during that stretch.

Here's the best thing about this right now. With him getting on, he's finally giving guys protection behind him. It may only be once a game he's getting on, but when he gets on base, he is now a threat to steal, which means whoever bats 2nd behind him has the opportunity to see some more fastballs. So now we are getting at least one more favorable at bat in our lineup per game.

That's why it's important for lead off to get on base and why it's important we keep Upton there now. You need as many favorable at bat/scoring situations as possible during the game. Him doing what he is now in the 8 hole doesn't help us at all. Chances of him scoring from the 8 hole go down drastically because the running game pretty much goes out with the pitcher at the plate. Also much less of a chance of a base hit behind him to advance him. I'm ok with this arrangement right now of him in the lead off even though he's got a lower OBP than needed for a lead off because it makes him getting on base extremely more productive than him getting on base from the 8 hole.

If he can keep this up when Gattis gets back, our lineup will become that much stronger.

IMO, his ideal slot in the order is 6th. You get his base stealing threat in the 6 spot with singles hitters Johnson and Simmons behind him. You got to get your best hitters at the top of the line up though. Tommy La Stella is the best "get on base guy" this team has. He should be leading off. Freddie Freeman is the best hitter, period. He should hit second with Justin Upton, Evan Gattis when healthy, and Jason Heyward behind him.

[msstate7]

Not sure what source, but that is still not lead off quality.

http://atlanta.braves.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?player_id=425834#gameType='R'&sectionType=career&statType=1&season=2014&level='ALL'

Maybe it's not typical leadoff, but we're winning. Why change what's working?

[MetEdDawg]

IMO, his ideal slot in the order is 6th. You get his base stealing threat in the 6 spot with singles hitters Johnson and Simmons behind him. You got to get your best hitters at the top of the line up though. Tommy La Stella is the best "get on base guy" this team has. He should be leading off. Freddie Freeman is the best hitter, period. He should hit second with Justin Upton, Evan Gattis when healthy, and Jason Heyward behind him.

Normally you would be right, but BJ isn't hitting a high enough average to bat 6th. That's still a higher RBI spot in a lineup. I would much rather have a Chris Johnson hitting 6th that can go oppo with more consistency and is hitting in the .280 range to sit 6th. I would like La Stella hitting 7th or 8th for right now. He's still got some learning to do and although he can put together some quality at bats, I would only change him there if/when BJ stops hitting.

BJ is averaging scoring .8 runs a game during his 10 game hitting streak. His OBP may not be great but his run scoring efficiency relative to the number of times he gets on base per game during these 10 games is extremely high. He now has the most stolen bases on the team, so sitting him 6th or 7th again decreases his value there. Honestly there really isn't a great place for him but the main thing right now is keep him out of RBI situations. In order to do that with our lineup and most lineups you have to hit 1st or 8th. 8th limits him affecting the game with his base running, so 1st is the next logical choice.

[KB21]

Here is a good article about line up optimization.

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2009/3/17/795946/optimizing-your-lineup-by


Lead-Off

The old-school book says to put a speedy guy up top. Power isn't important, and OBP is nice, but comes second to speed.

The Book says OBP is king. The lead-off hitter comes to bat only 36% of the time with a runner on base, versus 44% of the time for the next lowest spot in the lineup, so why waste homeruns? The lead-off hitter also comes to the plate the most times per game, so why give away outs? As for speed, stealing bases is most valuable in front of singles hitters, and since the top of the order is going to be full of power hitters, they're not as important. The lead-off hitter is one of the best three hitters on the team, the guy without homerun power. Speed is nice, as this batter will have plenty of chances to run the bases with good hitters behind him.

IMO, Tommy La Stella vs BJ Upton as the leadoff guy is the classic sabermetric vs traditionalist argument. The case made for keeping Upton at the lead off spot is because his speed on the base paths "protects" the hitters behind him. The case for La Stella is that he is an on base machine. He has a BB% of almost 11%, and his ISO is .067. I'm not sure why someone would want him hitting lower in the line up for RBI opportunities. His Isolated on base ability is close to .100, which is only topped by Freddie Freeman on this team. The numbers show that the Braves have an increased run expectancy with La Stella leading off.


The Two Hole

The old-school book says to put a bat-control guy here. Not a great hitter, but someone who can move the lead-off hitter over for one of the next two hitters to drive in.

The Books says the #2 hitter comes to bat in situations about as important as the #3 hitter, but more often. That means the #2 hitter should be better than the #3 guy, and one of the best three hitters overall. And since he bats with the bases empty more often than the hitters behind him, he should be a high-OBP player. Doesn't sound like someone who should be sacrificing, does it?

Simmons vs Freeman. Simmons doesn't strike out a lot, so the assumption is that he is a good bat control guy. The problem with that is, he also doesn't walk a lot, and he is prone to trying to swing for the fences. He's not a good on base guy. Freddie is the best hitter on the team though, and of the remaining good hitters that Atlanta has, he's the best on base guy. You put him in the 2 hole with the big boppers behind him.

[KB21]

Normally you would be right, but BJ isn't hitting a high enough average to bat 6th. That's still a higher RBI spot in a lineup. I would much rather have a Chris Johnson hitting 6th that can go oppo with more consistency and is hitting in the .280 range to sit 6th. I would like La Stella hitting 7th or 8th for right now. He's still got some learning to do and although he can put together some quality at bats, I would only change him there if/when BJ stops hitting.

BJ is averaging scoring .8 runs a game during his 10 game hitting streak. His OBP may not be great but his run scoring efficiency relative to the number of times he gets on base per game during these 10 games is extremely high. He now has the most stolen bases on the team, so sitting him 6th or 7th again decreases his value there. Honestly there really isn't a great place for him but the main thing right now is keep him out of RBI situations. In order to do that with our lineup and most lineups you have to hit 1st or 8th. 8th limits him affecting the game with his base running, so 1st is the next logical choice.


Spots Six Through Nine

The old-school book says the rest of the lineup should be written in based on decreasing talent. Hitting ninth is an insult.

The Book basically agrees, with a caveat. Stolen bases are most valuable ahead of high-contact singles hitters, who are more likely to hit at the bottom of the lineup. So a base-stealing threat who doesn't deserve a spot higher in the lineup is optimized in the #6 hole, followed by the singles hitters.

That's BJ Upton. He doesn't deserve a spot higher in the line up, and he's a base stealing threat. That's probably his only plus offensive tool at this point. The 6 hitter isn't going to be getting many RBI opportunities with the 3, 4, and 5 hitters ahead of them cleaning things up.

Also, hitting a guy with an OBP less than .300 in the lead off spot is simply not a smart option at all.

[KB21]

http://atlanta.braves.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?player_id=425834#gameType='R'?ionType=c areer&statType=1&season=2014&level='ALL'

Maybe it's not typical leadoff, but we're winning. Why change what's working?

Because you want to maximize your chances of winning for the entire season, and keeping BJ Upton in the leadoff spot does not maximize those chances of winning.

[FISHDAWG]

I hear ya but look who the last several series have been against .... not exactly running a gauntlet there. What is encouraging is the Braves being a second half team ... at least right up until a dozen games left in the reg season. I'm hopeful, but not sure if they are strong enough to go very deep into the playoffs. Also, I'm not sure if a wildcard will come from that division - gonna have to win it

[MetEdDawg]

I just totally disagree with the philosophy that BJ Upton should hit 6th. To me that's absolutely nuts. The problem with the old school theory is that you would expect your 6 hole hitter to have a BA higher than .211 and a much higher OBP than what BJ has. In theory it makes sense, but how much are you going to increase his run scoring productivity in the 6 hole, which right now is what we need him to do? Also, with a .211 BA, how many extra RBI chances will he get with Freeman, Justin Upton, and maybe Gattis (when he comes back) or Chris Johnson in front of him? It's pretty hard to improve upon .8 runs scored per game, which is what he's averaging over his 10 game hitting streak. Extrapolate that over a season and he scores 130 runs a season. Have to roll with that.

Do you really think putting him in front of Chris Johnson and maybe a La Stella or Laird is better? Chris Johnson has a much higher strikeout rate in the 6 or 7 hole than Simmons in the 2 hole (almost 3:1 higher K rate). That's insanity to put BJ in front of that, even though I mentioned earlier he has a higher BA and a decent propensity to go oppo. To maximize BJ's on base scoring chances, you put him in front of a low strikeout/high rate of contact guy like Simmons in the 2 hole and a high BA guy like Freeman in the 3 hole. THAT'S how you maximize potential. The book is great when everything fits perfectly into a puzzle. But if you think we will maximize BJ Upton by putting him in a higher RBI spot in front of a Chris Johnson and Laird we may just have to agree to disagree.

La Stella has 2 SBs and cannot go 1st to 3rd like BJ can. It's an against the book situation that has to be treated that way. We need BJ to produce runs scored from the lead off spot. He's doing that at the present moment. If he continues to produces anywhere close to .8 runs a game from that slot he has to stay in the lead off spot.

Again, this is an odd situation and I know what the book says. Ideally BJ would hit 6th because he would be hitting .260 with a .330-.350 OBP with 15-20 SB and 60-80 RBI. Unfortunately he's not doing that right now and all data gathered during his time with the Braves says he would not do well in that spot. He's scoring runs and stealing bases, so we have to maximize our lineup to fit that. Put him in front of Simmons and Freeman and Justin Upton and there's a good chance he's gonna score when he gets on.

[FISHDAWG]

#moneyball

[msstate7]

I hear ya but look who the last several series have been against .... not exactly running a gauntlet there. What is encouraging is the Braves being a second half team ... at least right up until a dozen games left in the reg season. I'm hopeful, but not sure if they are strong enough to go very deep into the playoffs. Also, I'm not sure if a wildcard will come from that division - gonna have to win it

The week before bj took over as leadoff the braves were 2-5 including getting swept by the phillies.

Has the schedule been favorable? Yes, but good teams take advantage of stretches like this. The braves are 9-1 in last 10 and 11-3 in last 14 -- this is good no matter the opponents.

[msstate7]

I just totally disagree with the philosophy that BJ Upton should hit 6th. To me that's absolutely nuts. The problem with the old school theory is that you would expect your 6 hole hitter to have a BA higher than .211 and a much higher OBP than what BJ has. In theory it makes sense, but how much are you going to increase his run scoring productivity in the 6 hole, which right now is what we need him to do? Also, with a .211 BA, how many extra RBI chances will he get with Freeman, Justin Upton, and maybe Gattis (when he comes back) or Chris Johnson in front of him? It's pretty hard to improve upon .8 runs scored per game, which is what he's averaging over his 10 game hitting streak. Extrapolate that over a season and he scores 130 runs a season. Have to roll with that.

Do you really think putting him in front of Chris Johnson and maybe a La Stella or Laird is better? Chris Johnson has a much higher strikeout rate in the 6 or 7 hole than Simmons in the 2 hole (almost 3:1 higher K rate). That's insanity to put BJ in front of that, even though I mentioned earlier he has a higher BA and a decent propensity to go oppo. To maximize BJ's on base scoring chances, you put him in front of a low strikeout/high rate of contact guy like Simmons in the 2 hole and a high BA guy like Freeman in the 3 hole. THAT'S how you maximize potential. The book is great when everything fits perfectly into a puzzle. But if you think we will maximize BJ Upton by putting him in a higher RBI spot in front of a Chris Johnson and Laird we may just have to agree to disagree.

La Stella has 2 SBs and cannot go 1st to 3rd like BJ can. It's an against the book situation that has to be treated that way. We need BJ to produce runs scored from the lead off spot. He's doing that at the present moment. If he continues to produces anywhere close to .8 runs a game from that slot he has to stay in the lead off spot.

Again, this is an odd situation and I know what the book says. Ideally BJ would hit 6th because he would be hitting .260 with a .330-.350 OBP with 15-20 SB and 60-80 RBI. Unfortunately he's not doing that right now and all data gathered during his time with the Braves says he would not do well in that spot. He's scoring runs and stealing bases, so we have to maximize our lineup to fit that. Put him in front of Simmons and Freeman and Justin Upton and there's a good chance he's gonna score when he gets on.

The 1st to 3rd argument is a strong one. I've also seen bj score on short flyballs. Bj's running ability is getting Simmons and ff fastballs too.

[MetEdDawg]

The 1st to 3rd argument is a strong one. I've also seen bj score on short flyballs. Bj's running ability is getting Simmons and ff fastballs too.

The bolded is the number 1 key here. When BJ gets on in the 6 or 7 hole, he gives higher % of fastballs to guys toward the end of the lineup with lower averages. If I want someone on my team getting a higher % of fastballs, it's my 2 and 3 hole hitter, not my 7 and 8 hole guys.

Add the higher RBI chances in the 6 hole with his lower BA and in my opinion you just really limit his effectiveness. .8 runs scored per game during his 10 game hitting streak is pretty impressive and it would be pretty hard to convince me to change his spot in the lineup while he's doing that.

[KB21]

I just totally disagree with the philosophy that BJ Upton should hit 6th. To me that's absolutely nuts. The problem with the old school theory is that you would expect your 6 hole hitter to have a BA higher than .211 and a much higher OBP than what BJ has. In theory it makes sense, but how much are you going to increase his run scoring productivity in the 6 hole, which right now is what we need him to do? Also, with a .211 BA, how many extra RBI chances will he get with Freeman, Justin Upton, and maybe Gattis (when he comes back) or Chris Johnson in front of him? It's pretty hard to improve upon .8 runs scored per game, which is what he's averaging over his 10 game hitting streak. Extrapolate that over a season and he scores 130 runs a season. Have to roll with that.

Do you really think putting him in front of Chris Johnson and maybe a La Stella or Laird is better? Chris Johnson has a much higher strikeout rate in the 6 or 7 hole than Simmons in the 2 hole (almost 3:1 higher K rate). That's insanity to put BJ in front of that, even though I mentioned earlier he has a higher BA and a decent propensity to go oppo. To maximize BJ's on base scoring chances, you put him in front of a low strikeout/high rate of contact guy like Simmons in the 2 hole and a high BA guy like Freeman in the 3 hole. THAT'S how you maximize potential. The book is great when everything fits perfectly into a puzzle. But if you think we will maximize BJ Upton by putting him in a higher RBI spot in front of a Chris Johnson and Laird we may just have to agree to disagree.

La Stella has 2 SBs and cannot go 1st to 3rd like BJ can. It's an against the book situation that has to be treated that way. We need BJ to produce runs scored from the lead off spot. He's doing that at the present moment. If he continues to produces anywhere close to .8 runs a game from that slot he has to stay in the lead off spot.

Again, this is an odd situation and I know what the book says. Ideally BJ would hit 6th because he would be hitting .260 with a .330-.350 OBP with 15-20 SB and 60-80 RBI. Unfortunately he's not doing that right now and all data gathered during his time with the Braves says he would not do well in that spot. He's scoring runs and stealing bases, so we have to maximize our lineup to fit that. Put him in front of Simmons and Freeman and Justin Upton and there's a good chance he's gonna score when he gets on.

The 6 hole is the only spot in the line up that makes sense for BJ. You put him in front of a singles hitter in Chris Johnson to maximize his speed on the bases. At the lead off spot, his lack of on base ability is going to catch up with the team. Right now, you are basing where you would hit him off a small sample size, and he still isn't ideal in that small sample size. Your lead off man has to get on base at a high clip. BJ has a .282 OBP. La Stella is .360. La Stella's ability to go from 1st to 3rd shouldn't even be a consideration, as the team's sluggers will be hitting behind him.

[MetEdDawg]

The 6 hole is the only spot in the line up that makes sense for BJ. You put him in front of a singles hitter in Chris Johnson to maximize his speed on the bases. At the lead off spot, his lack of on base ability is going to catch up with the team. Right now, you are basing where you would hit him off a small sample size, and he still isn't ideal in that small sample size. Your lead off man has to get on base at a high clip. BJ has a .282 OBP. La Stella is .360. La Stella's ability to go from 1st to 3rd shouldn't even be a consideration, as the team's sluggers will be hitting behind him.

I think we will have to agree to disagree. I understand what the sabermetrics say and I do not disagree that he should not be our permanent lead off hitter. But for right now he needs to be. I am not a fan of sabermetrics. I think there are times when it is good to use them, but I think they very often get us away from the eye test. The eye test says BJ Upton is scoring almost a run per game during his 10 game hitting streak, and he's doing from the spot in the lineup where run scoring is probably most important. It's not a coincidence we are scoring 5 runs a game during that time either.

He has a .211 BA and during his 10 game hitting streak has around a .250 BA with an OBP around .275. He's scored 8 runs during that time, stolen 3 bases, and has actually allowed us to increase the effectiveness of his skill set and has extended the effectiveness of our lineup.

The thing I think you are overlooking is that BJ's speed provides line up protection for Simmons and Freeman, the two guys on the team you really want to see fastballs because Simmons is low strikeout and Freeman is Freeman. Put La Stella there and sure maybe he gets on base more than BJ, but his lack of overall base stealing ability does not provide lineup protection for Simmons and Freeman. If he's not a liability to run, that means Simmons and Freeman are less likely to see fastballs. BJ in lead off and on base may give Simmons and Freeman each 1-4 fastballs more per game. That's a huge number when you figure in a game where you get 4 ABs you figure to see around 16-20 pitches. That's a 5 to 20% increase in fastballs seen. With La Stella in lead off you can almost pitch normally to Simmons and Freeman because he's not a threat to steal, so there really is no reason to adjust how you attack Simmons or Freeman at the plate.

[Pioneer Dawg]

I am not a fan of sabermetrics is pretty akin to I am not a fan of knowledge.

[msstate7]

I am not a fan of sabermetrics is pretty akin to I am not a fan of knowledge.

So, you would change the lineup right now despite an 8-game winning streak? If so, you're not a fan of just winning

[Pioneer Dawg]

So, you would change the lineup right now despite an 8-game winning streak? If so, you're not a fan of just winning

Is Upton leading off THE REASON they are winning. Remember who holds the modern win streak record....

[TheRef]

Is Upton leading off THE REASON they are winning. Remember who holds the modern win streak record....

How can you argue whether or not he IS the reason the Braves are leading? If the team's chemistry and mojo is working out for 8 games, why change that because the sabermetrics say that it won't work. Here's the thing, the team is comfortable. The team is winning. When that's the case, you keep going with what you have until you lose. At that point, you look at what you can change.

[msstate7]

Is Upton leading off THE REASON they are winning. Remember who holds the modern win streak record....

I'm not saying bj is the only reason, but he's certainly been important.

Yes, you're blasted a's hold the modern day win streak. I heard EOF finally came back yesterday. If he's fully healthy, you guys just got better in the pen

[Dawg61]

Pioneer has a different favorite team based on the standings that day. A's, Angels, Braves, Nationals, Dodgers, Astros, Marlins are all teams he's claimed to be a fan of and I'm probably forgetting a few. Tigers, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Cardinals?

[Todd4State]

Is Upton leading off THE REASON they are winning. Remember who holds the modern win streak record....

With no championships since 1989.

[msstate7]

Pioneer has a different favorite team based on the standings that day. A's, Angels, Braves, Nationals, Dodgers, Astros, Marlins are all teams he's claimed to be a fan of and I'm probably forgetting a few. Tigers, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Cardinals?

So you're saying pioneer is 5 games from becoming a braves' (48-38) fan instead of an a's (53-33)?

[msstate7]

With no championships since 1989.

Winning isn't as important as making sure you have the best lineup according to saber metrics

[Todd4State]

I think we will have to agree to disagree. I understand what the sabermetrics say and I do not disagree that he should not be our permanent lead off hitter. But for right now he needs to be. I am not a fan of sabermetrics. I think there are times when it is good to use them, but I think they very often get us away from the eye test. The eye test says BJ Upton is scoring almost a run per game during his 10 game hitting streak, and he's doing from the spot in the lineup where run scoring is probably most important. It's not a coincidence we are scoring 5 runs a game during that time either.

He has a .211 BA and during his 10 game hitting streak has around a .250 BA with an OBP around .275. He's scored 8 runs during that time, stolen 3 bases, and has actually allowed us to increase the effectiveness of his skill set and has extended the effectiveness of our lineup.

The thing I think you are overlooking is that BJ's speed provides line up protection for Simmons and Freeman, the two guys on the team you really want to see fastballs because Simmons is low strikeout and Freeman is Freeman. Put La Stella there and sure maybe he gets on base more than BJ, but his lack of overall base stealing ability does not provide lineup protection for Simmons and Freeman. If he's not a liability to run, that means Simmons and Freeman are less likely to see fastballs. BJ in lead off and on base may give Simmons and Freeman each 1-4 fastballs more per game. That's a huge number when you figure in a game where you get 4 ABs you figure to see around 16-20 pitches. That's a 5 to 20% increase in fastballs seen. With La Stella in lead off you can almost pitch normally to Simmons and Freeman because he's not a threat to steal, so there really is no reason to adjust how you attack Simmons or Freeman at the plate.

Hard to argue with this.

The thing about sabermetrics is a guy like Upton may actually be better in the lead off spot, but because he maybe hasn't been used there a lot, his numbers look bad and it makes it appear as if he shouldn't be where he actually should be in the lineup.

And even if sabermetrics is right about him, it's not like he has to stay hitting lead off the entire year. You just move him somewhere else. Not really that big of a deal.

[MetEdDawg]

I am not a fan of sabermetrics is pretty akin to I am not a fan of knowledge.

Yeah I can't believe baseball was ever played without sabermetrics. Since it's the be all end all as some think. How could managers ever do their job without BABIP or FIP or Pythagorean Expectation?

Give me a break. If you know anything about baseball, you can watch it without needing statistics in front of you to know what guys do or what tendencies they have. Right now you can watch BJ Upton get on base, get the guy behind him more FBs, and watch the Braves score more runs. Now is that the only reason why the Braves are scoring more runs right now? No. But saying it isn't a part or saying you should change things just because it won't work long term is dumb.

Baseball is full of ups and down where players peak, slump, get injured, etc. Some on here and many who play/watch/coach try to out think themselves because statistics say do this when this happens or make this change when this stat says this. How about what does common sense say do when your lead off guy, who has already shown he struggles in the 2 hole and the 6-8 hole, is averaging .8 runs per game in his last 10 games from the lead off spot?? It says keep his ass there.

Too many people try and sound smarter than they really are by spouting off some guys BABIP or some other bull shit stat to make their case. I would like to see someone make the case for why you would change what is working during an 8 game win streak? I'm not happy with how BJ has done for us overall since he got to Atlanta, but it's pretty damn hard to argue with what he's done lately. One hit per game may not seem like much, but when you score 80% of the time you get that one hit like he has during the last 10 games, common sense says keep it up until it runs dry. If it does, you find another solution like baseball managers have done since the game started. And you don't have to look at a guy's secondary average or his range score to do it.

[Todd4State]

Winning isn't as important as making sure you have the best lineup according to saber metrics

I know right? It's not always as cut and dried as what the stat sheet says.

The thing that people don't understand sometimes and see is what is going on behind the scenes with these players. All those little mechanical tweaks and things that these players work on with coaches- a manager is going to see and know that and that has some influence on the lineup as well. Sometimes a player that is struggling will make an adjustment and the manager will know about it, but the fans are like "what the hell is the manager doing? Look at the numbers!"- and then it somehow works out sometimes.

[MetEdDawg]

Hard to argue with this.

The thing about sabermetrics is a guy like Upton may actually be better in the lead off spot, but because he maybe hasn't been used there a lot, his numbers look bad and it makes it appear as if he shouldn't be where he actually should be in the lineup.

And even if sabermetrics is right about him, it's not like he has to stay hitting lead off the entire year. You just move him somewhere else. Not really that big of a deal.

Sweet Jesus thank you. People say "Oh God it won't work long term!! How stupid to keep him there!! Sabermetrics says it was stupid to begin with!! Once he cools off you will see what that team really is." Ummm, the manager makes a change. Like you said it's not that big of a deal. Fredi isn't afraid to make changes either, so I feel ok with the fact that if BJ goes 2 or 3 games without getting on base that he would make a change.

[TheRef]

Sweet Jesus thank you. People say "Oh God it won't work long term!! How stupid to keep him there!! Sabermetrics says it was stupid to begin with!! Once he cools off you will see what that team really is." Ummm, the manager makes a change. Like you said it's not that big of a deal. Fredi isn't afraid to make changes either, so I feel ok with the fact that if BJ goes 2 or 3 games without getting on base that he would make a change.

Exactly. BJ most likely won't be leading off all season, but by God why would you take him out of the leadoff slot now when we have been winning with him there?

[MetEdDawg]

Can't believe we haven't dropped BJ in the line up yet. Freaking lead off triples are highly unacceptable......

11 game hitting streak now and now 9 runs scored in his last 11 games.

[TheRef]

BJ with a leadoff triple to extend his career-high 11 game hitting streak.

[msstate7]

Bj makes it 11-game hit streak with leadoff triple

[msstate7]

BJ with a leadoff triple to extend his career-high 11 game hitting streak.

Beat me to it. Gonna need some offense today

[TheRef]

Beat me to it. Gonna need some offense today

Oh yeah...but ya know....Pioneer says that we should get BJ out of the lineup because SABERMETRICS ARE NEVER WRONG!!!!!11!1!1!!

[msstate7]

Bj and Simmons say the hell with sabermetrics. Simmons RBI single

[MetEdDawg]

But his BABIP sucks!!!!!!!**

[TheRef]

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/500x/52159004.jpg

[MetEdDawg]

So BJ has a triple, 2 runs scored with one being from first base, been on base twice, and has an RBI today. And we've scored another 6 runs so far and still adding. But BJ has little bearing as to why the Braves are doing well right now.....

[msstate7]

Bj then gets RBI on ss error and scores on Simmons double. Bj's speed coming into play

[shoeless joe]

Using metrics only is dumb...completely ignoring them is dumb also but I think a lot more can be accomplished using the eye test and plain ol baseball knowledge vs. metrics only.

BJ is a perfect example...fredi saw that BJ brought some things to the table that could benefit the team rite now as a lead off hitter. Will it last? We'll see...but rite now this decision has been better than a decision based on metrics.

[MetEdDawg]

This game is the epitome of why BJ needs to be hitting lead off right now as opposed to 6th ahead of Chris Johnson. BJ's been on base twice of his three at bats. He's been driven in both of those times by Simmons, but Freddie Freeman also has 2 hits on the day as well. BJ IS providing protection for those two guys.

But what has Chris Johnson done today? 2 strikeouts. He's got a 3 times higher K rate than Simmons and you are seeing what Simmons and Freeman are able to get from the pitcher when BJ is on. Didn't apply so much in the 1st AB because BJ was on 3rd, but it played a part the 2nd time BJ got on. Got to love what the offense is doing right now.

[FISHDAWG]

I agree ... it's nice not to miss Bourne anymore

[MetEdDawg]

Using metrics only is dumb...completely ignoring them is dumb also but I think a lot more can be accomplished using the eye test and plain ol baseball knowledge vs. metrics only.

BJ is a perfect example...fredi saw that BJ brought some things to the table that could benefit the team rite now as a lead off hitter. Will it last? We'll see...but rite now this decision has been better than a decision based on metrics.

Well said and this has been mine and a few others point. Metrics can be a useful tool, but stats don't tell you everything. The eye test works and people who know baseball can use it. BJ has done great these past 11 games. Hell he took a FB first pitch of the game (like a lead off hitter should) that anywhere else in the lineup he probably swings and misses at. That shows me he's adjusted well to being a lead off guy and that he's confident he will be able to do something with a pitch later in the at bat even if it isn't that great of a pitch.

10 runs scored during his 11 game hitting streak and his batting average is now up to .212. Slowly but surely he's getting things right. Hope it keeps up because he's been a huge catalyst for this offense these last 11 games.

[msstate7]

This game is the epitome of why BJ needs to be hitting lead off right now as opposed to 6th ahead of Chris Johnson. BJ's been on base twice of his three at bats. He's been driven in both of those times by Simmons, but Freddie Freeman also has 2 hits on the day as well. BJ IS providing protection for those two guys.

But what has Chris Johnson done today? 2 strikeouts. He's got a 3 times higher K rate than Simmons and you are seeing what Simmons and Freeman are able to get from the pitcher when BJ is on. Didn't apply so much in the 1st AB because BJ was on 3rd, but it played a part the 2nd time BJ got on. Got to love what the offense is doing right now.

This club's ability to manufacture runs has gotten so much better since bj went to leadoff. This team relied solely on the longball up until bj went to leadoff.

[MetEdDawg]

Good lord that was awful at bat. He's gonna be good for at least one of those a game still. But that was pretty horrible.

[msstate7]

Christian bethancourt has been great since his call up. Really wish we had a dh when gattis gets back. I like Christian better behind the plate

[msstate7]

Good lord that was awful at bat. He's gonna be good for at least one of those a game still. But that was pretty horrible.

Yeah that was bad

[MetEdDawg]

Christian bethancourt has been great since his call up. Really wish we had a dh when gattis gets back. I like Christian better behind the plate

When healthy this is more of an American League lineup. I'm with you, I would much rather Gattis DH and not have to catch, although Bethancourt still has a lot of learning to do.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Pioneer has a different favorite team based on the standings that day. A's, Angels, Braves, Nationals, Dodgers, Astros, Marlins are all teams he's claimed to be a fan of and I'm probably forgetting a few. Tigers, Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, Cardinals?

Haha very true. I am a "baseball" fan in the sense. Not really bandwagon though.

A's take precedence of course.
Dodgers- provide late night west coast options(late games)..Love watching Kershaw and Puig.. Vin Scully
Angels- same thing.. West coast option.. Trout
Not Braves
Not really Nats
Marlins- connections to the organization
Astros- Love what and how they are building. Saber oriented. Try new things in farm system.

Not like I'm jumping on the Sox and Yanks or anything. Rooting interest for fantasy comes into play often.

[msstate7]

Bj second straight game with multiple hits

[MetEdDawg]

Should have had an RBI too because I think La Stella should have been waived home. Got a chance for his 3rd run scored of the game if Freeman can come through here.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Bj second straight game with multiple hits

2 in a row. That's what I call a streak

[Dawg61]

Giants set a new record for futility, they became the fastest team to lose a 9.5 game lead in the last 114 years of baseball and they set the new record by a WEEK. It only took the Giants 22 days to lose a 9.5 game lead. Fastest team before that was 29 days.

[msstate7]

2 in a row. That's what I call a streak

Well and an 11-game hit streak.

[KB21]

Yeah I can't believe baseball was ever played without sabermetrics. Since it's the be all end all as some think. How could managers ever do their job without BABIP or FIP or Pythagorean Expectation?

Give me a break. If you know anything about baseball, you can watch it without needing statistics in front of you to know what guys do or what tendencies they have. Right now you can watch BJ Upton get on base, get the guy behind him more FBs, and watch the Braves score more runs. Now is that the only reason why the Braves are scoring more runs right now? No. But saying it isn't a part or saying you should change things just because it won't work long term is dumb.

Baseball is full of ups and down where players peak, slump, get injured, etc. Some on here and many who play/watch/coach try to out think themselves because statistics say do this when this happens or make this change when this stat says this. How about what does common sense say do when your lead off guy, who has already shown he struggles in the 2 hole and the 6-8 hole, is averaging .8 runs per game in his last 10 games from the lead off spot?? It says keep his ass there.

Too many people try and sound smarter than they really are by spouting off some guys BABIP or some other bull shit stat to make their case. I would like to see someone make the case for why you would change what is working during an 8 game win streak? I'm not happy with how BJ has done for us overall since he got to Atlanta, but it's pretty damn hard to argue with what he's done lately. One hit per game may not seem like much, but when you score 80% of the time you get that one hit like he has during the last 10 games, common sense says keep it up until it runs dry. If it does, you find another solution like baseball managers have done since the game started. And you don't have to look at a guy's secondary average or his range score to do it.

It tells me that it is a very small sample size and to look at his career numbers, where he is a career .323 OBP from the leadoff spot, which will not cut it as a lead off hitter. His history also tells me that he is currently regressing towards his mean. He's had a very long stretch of being horrible that he is at least getting to the point where he is not so horrible, but he's still not a lead off hitter. His inability to get on base consistently will catch up with the team, and when that happens, I have little doubts that Fredi will not do what he should do and put Tommy La Stella in the lead off spot. Tommy had 5 at bats today. He's on base 4 times in those 5 at bats.

The run expectancy of the line up that Freddie has put out there with a healthy Evan Gattis with Upton leading off is 4.032 runs a game. With La Stella leading off, Upton hitting 6th, and Simmons hitting 8th, the Braves run expectancy is almost .3 runs higher at 4.3 runs per game.

[KB21]

Sweet Jesus thank you. People say "Oh God it won't work long term!! How stupid to keep him there!! Sabermetrics says it was stupid to begin with!! Once he cools off you will see what that team really is." Ummm, the manager makes a change. Like you said it's not that big of a deal. Fredi isn't afraid to make changes either, so I feel ok with the fact that if BJ goes 2 or 3 games without getting on base that he would make a change.

Have you seen how slow Fredi is to make the necessary changes, and even when he changes, he does something that is completely nonsensical like putting his worst two on base players at the top of the line up.

[KB21]

You're eyes fool you, and people who use the eye test tend to see what they want to see, IMO.

The numbers do not lie. The number that correlates most strongly with runs scored is on base percentage, not how fast you can run when you are on base. The idea that the lead off hitter has to be a speed guy has been debunked by the numbers.

[TheRef]

You're eyes fool you, and people who use the eye test tend to see what they want to see, IMO.

The numbers do not lie. The number that correlates most strongly with runs scored is on base percentage, not how fast you can run when you are on base. The idea that the lead off hitter has to be a speed guy has been debunked by the numbers.

It's worked for nine straight wins so obviously SOMETHING is working.

[Todd4State]

It tells me that it is a very small sample size and to look at his career numbers, where he is a career .323 OBP from the leadoff spot, which will not cut it as a lead off hitter. His history also tells me that he is currently regressing towards his mean. He's had a very long stretch of being horrible that he is at least getting to the point where he is not so horrible, but he's still not a lead off hitter. His inability to get on base consistently will catch up with the team, and when that happens, I have little doubts that Fredi will not do what he should do and put Tommy La Stella in the lead off spot. Tommy had 5 at bats today. He's on base 4 times in those 5 at bats.

The run expectancy of the line up that Freddie has put out there with a healthy Evan Gattis with Upton leading off is 4.032 runs a game. With La Stella leading off, Upton hitting 6th, and Simmons hitting 8th, the Braves run expectancy is almost .3 runs higher at 4.3 runs per game.

So, that's like a run every 3 games or so? That's almost a negligible amount.

[MetEdDawg]

The run expectancy of the line up that Freddie has put out there with a healthy Evan Gattis with Upton leading off is 4.032 runs a game. With La Stella leading off, Upton hitting 6th, and Simmons hitting 8th, the Braves run expectancy is almost .3 runs higher at 4.3 runs per game.

I have a new statistic that I just created. It's called run actuality. The Braves have actually scored 5.45 runs per game during BJ's time in the lead off spot and WITHOUT Gattis. So run expectancy doesn't mean squat right now. Will it at some point? Possibly. But right now it doesn't.

The problem you statistics folks have is that you have the inability to step away from what should be happening or what is expected to happen and you can't look at the short term and what is ACTUALLY going on right now. Screw his career numbers and screw his career OBP. What RIGHT NOW tells me is that BJ has scored 10 runs during his 11 game hitting streak from the lead off spot. He's stealing bases, he's getting on base at a higher rate, and he's doing things to help the team, which before he was doing very little of. He's doing things at a productive level and the team is scoring runs because of it. That is indisputable. But you are telling me that I should look at run expectancy and change my line up during a 9 game winning streak??

No one is disputing that BJ is probably not an ideal lead off hitter the rest of the season, although he does have experience there and a level of comfort there. But right now he is productive from that spot in a way that he hasn't been productive in any other spot during his tenure with us. Fredi has used like 6 different lead off men this year, so I feel pretty confident he will change if BJ starts to regress, which is currently not happening yet. But if BJ has a total mentality change and decides to 100% embrace the role of a lead off guy, I think it's possible he could be successful there. He's not there right now, but I think he could get there.

[KB21]

So, that's like a run every 3 games or so? That's almost a negligible amount.

Over the coarse of an entire seasons, that .3 runs comes out to be 49 runs.

[KB21]

I have a new statistic that I just created. It's called run actuality. The Braves have actually scored 5.45 runs per game during BJ's time in the lead off spot and WITHOUT Gattis. So run expectancy doesn't mean squat right now. Will it at some point? Possibly. But right now it doesn't.

The problem you statistics folks have is that you have the inability to step away from what should be happening or what is expected to happen and you can't look at the short term and what is ACTUALLY going on right now. Screw his career numbers and screw his career OBP. What RIGHT NOW tells me is that BJ has scored 10 runs during his 11 game hitting streak from the lead off spot. He's stealing bases, he's getting on base at a higher rate, and he's doing things to help the team, which before he was doing very little of. He's doing things at a productive level and the team is scoring runs because of it. That is indisputable. But you are telling me that I should look at run expectancy and change my line up during a 9 game winning streak??

No one is disputing that BJ is probably not a lead off hitter long term, although he does have experience there and a level of comfort there. But right now he is productive from that spot in a way that he hasn't been productive in any other spot during his tenure with us. Fredi has used like 6 different lead off men this year, so I feel pretty confident he will change if BJ starts to regress, which is currently not happening yet. But if BJ has a total mentality change and decides to 100% embrace the role of a lead off guy, I think it's possible he could be successful there. He's not there right now, but I think he could get there.

Dan Uggla still holds a roster spot, making the Braves play with a 24 man roster while Phil Gosselin is tearing AAA up. Fredi is slow to make the moves he needs to make.

Jordan Schafer still has a roster spot while Todd Cunningham is a better hitter than both Jordan and BJ Upton at this point, but he's still in AAA because Fredi is slow to make a move.

How long did it take to get La Stella in the line up consistently? He should have been the starting 2B on opening day.

[Pioneer Dawg]

So, that's like a run every 3 games or so? That's almost a negligible amount.

I expect better than this from the baseball expert.

[MetEdDawg]

Making moves between triple A and the majors is entirely different and has significantly more factors in play than making day to day lineup changes.

And saying for certain that Cunningham is a better hitter than Upton right now when Cunningham has a .178 BA in 73 career major league Spring Training at bats over 4 years tells and 2 hits over 8 career at bats for the Braves during the regular season me all I need to know about your objectivity and knowledge on the situation. That's a joke at best.

[Pioneer Dawg]

So in his last 11 starts Tommy Milone is 6-0 with 8 quality starts and an ERA of 2.65... Just optioned to AAA by Billy Beane after the trade. THATS how you don't just stick with what's working now and THATS why the A's have the best chance to win the WS under Beane this year while the Braves will collapse. You people loving BJ leading off now will have to wait even longer to see him replaced when he goes back to normal BJ because "remember the streak with him leading off, let's see if that comes back" will keep him at lead off while he struggles.

[Dawg61]

You're eyes fool you, and people who use the eye test tend to see what they want to see, IMO.

The numbers do not lie. The number that correlates most strongly with runs scored is on base percentage, not how fast you can run when you are on base. The idea that the lead off hitter has to be a speed guy has been debunked by the numbers.

I haven't watched the Reds but maybe twenty games this year and Billy Hamilton has created more runs himself than I can count. Speed absolutely matters. A walk for him turns into a triple very quickly and it's no coincidence that Todd Frazier has suddenly become arguably the best 2 hole hitter in the NL. Frazier gets pumped fastballs so the catcher can have just a slight bit of chance to throw out Hamilton and Frazier ain't been missing many. I saw Hamilton tag up and score on a popup on the edge of the grass where the 2b plays. I had to watch it three times I couldn't believe what I just saw. Try to explain how speed doesn't matter when you are on base after watching this.


http://youtu.be/apmxSKghfjQ

[KB21]

So in his last 11 starts Tommy Milone is 6-0 with 8 quality starts and an ERA of 2.65... Just optioned to AAA by Billy Beane after the trade. THATS how you don't just stick with what's working now and THATS why the A's have the best chance to win the WS under Beane this year while the Braves will collapse. You people loving BJ leading off now will have to wait even longer to see him replaced when he goes back to normal BJ because "remember the streak with him leading off, let's see if that comes back" will keep him at lead off while he struggles.

Unfortunately, this is likely what will happen. The Frediot will keep him there until the wheels fall off instead of making the proper move to prevent the wheels from falling off. It is just completely nonsensical to have BJ leading off and Tommy La Stella hitting 7th in the line up.

La Stella currently has a 0.7 WAR in 137 total plate appearances. BJ Upton has a 0.6 WAR in 200 more plate appearances.

[Dawg61]

So in his last 11 starts Tommy Milone is 6-0 with 8 quality starts and an ERA of 2.65... Just optioned to AAA by Billy Beane after the trade. THATS how you don't just stick with what's working now and THATS why the A's have the best chance to win the WS under Beane this year while the Braves will collapse. You people loving BJ leading off now will have to wait even longer to see him replaced when he goes back to normal BJ because "remember the streak with him leading off, let's see if that comes back" will keep him at lead off while he struggles.

A's going for it all this year after trading away their 2012 first round pick and 2013 first round pick. Russell is rated as high as the #3 overall prospect. I love the trade for the A's this year but a little confused by it when Samardijza wants to get his money cause the A's won't be giving him 160 million so they've basically given up two #1s for a shot to win the WS this year or next. Doubt they sign Hammel to an extension either but that might not matter. They look like the lead horse in the AL right now.

[MetEdDawg]

So in his last 11 starts Tommy Milone is 6-0 with 8 quality starts and an ERA of 2.65... Just optioned to AAA by Billy Beane after the trade. THATS how you don't just stick with what's working now and THATS why the A's have the best chance to win the WS under Beane this year while the Braves will collapse. You people loving BJ leading off now will have to wait even longer to see him replaced when he goes back to normal BJ because "remember the streak with him leading off, let's see if that comes back" will keep him at lead off while he struggles.

The problem folks like you aren't getting is that last year wasn't anywhere close to the normal BJ. This year is much closer to the normal BJ and it's still way below his norm. He's a career .245 hitter that scores in the mid 80s runs per year and can steal a lot of bases. Never high RBI, but does have a high strikeout rate which sucks. So he's still not where he should be.

What happens if he hits .235 this year which would still be his 2nd lowest BA of his career? He's at .214 right now. Is that impossible? Is it possible he's turned a corner? We keep him in the lineup and over the next 2 1/2 months he might could raise his BA 20 points? Means he's getting things done and will be averaging at least one hit a game. You do that in front of Simmons, Freeman, Upton, and Gattis and I think I will be ok with that.

Obviously this isn't going to continue at the pace it's going right now. But if BJ is able to cut his strikeouts down, shorten his swing, and be less reckless early in the count, he could do what I stated above. He's beginning to do some of that already and it's paying off. It's a wait and see thing, but I just understand some of you so opposed to us keeping BJ at lead off when it is clearly helping the team right now. As a baseball person, you should be able to see that what he is doing RIGHT NOW is helping the team score more runs.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Speed matters of course but not as much as on base in the lead off spot. More important than speed is actual base running ability. Adam Jones is known as a very good baserunner without racking up the SB that others do. SB% > number of bags stolen.. See Yasiel Puig

[KB21]

I haven't watched the Reds but maybe twenty games this year and Billy Hamilton has created more runs himself than I can count. Speed absolutely matters. A walk for him turns into a triple very quickly and it's no coincidence that Todd Frazier has suddenly become arguably the best 2 hole hitter in the NL. Frazier gets pumped fastballs so the catcher can have just a slight bit of chance to throw out Hamilton and Frazier ain't been missing many. I saw Hamilton tag up and score on a popup on the edge of the grass where the 2b plays. I had to watch it three times I couldn't believe what I just saw. Try to explain how speed doesn't matter when you are on base after watching this.


http://youtu.be/apmxSKghfjQ

This is why we have numbers. The bolded part is not true. Frazier has been thrown a fastball 52.8% of the time, up a whopping 0.8% from last year when he saw a fastball 52% of the time. Contrary to the traditional though, having speed on the bases does not increase the amount of fastballs thrown to hitters behind the speed guy.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Never ever ever ever ever tell me about runs scored or RBI when talking about "norms". Those are results, NOT statistics. Like pitcher W-L record.

[KB21]

The problem folks like you aren't getting is that last year wasn't anywhere close to the normal BJ. This year is much closer to the normal BJ and it's still way below his norm. He's a career .245 hitter that scores in the mid 80s runs per year and can steal a lot of bases. Never high RBI, but does have a high strikeout rate which sucks. So he's still not where he should be.

What happens if he hits .235 this year which would still be his 2nd lowest BA of his career? He's at .214 right now. Is that impossible? Is it possible he's turned a corner? We keep him in the lineup and over the next 2 1/2 months he might could raise his BA 20 points? Means he's getting things done and will be averaging at least one hit a game. You do that in front of Simmons, Freeman, Upton, and Gattis and I think I will be ok with that.

Obviously this isn't going to continue at the pace it's going right now. But if BJ is able to cut his strikeouts down, shorten his swing, and be less reckless early in the count, he could do what I stated above. He's beginning to do some of that already and it's paying off. It's a wait and see thing, but I just understand some of you so opposed to us keeping BJ at lead off when it is clearly helping the team right now. As a baseball person, you should be able to see that what he is doing RIGHT NOW is helping the team score more runs.

I don't care if he hits .290, if he is still a sub .300 OBP guy, he is a liability.

[MetEdDawg]

Speed matters of course but not as much as on base in the lead off spot. More important than speed is actual base running ability. Adam Jones is known as a very good baserunner without racking up the SB that others do. SB% > number of bags stolen.. See Yasiel Puig

Percentages are very misleading. Tell me who the better base stealer is: A guy with a 100% SB% or a guy with a 82.3% SB %. The first guy is Brian McCann from 2012, who attempted all of 3 SB that year. The second one is BJ Upton, who is 14/17 on the year for 2014. But since McCann had a higher SB % that means he's got a higher propensity to be successful at stealing bases in certain situations? Laughable. It's all about sample size and % doesn't tell you anything about sample size. Brian McCann had a 100% SB % in 2012. But is he a better base stealer than BJ Upton? Absolutely not.

It's like asking what the relative humidity is outside. Well it's 85%. What does that tell me? Nothing because I don't even know how hot it is. 85% relative humidity in 90 degree weather is a hell of a lot different than it is in 40 weather. That's why percentages are very misleading. You almost never have the full picture.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Percentages are very misleading. Tell me who the better base stealer is: A guy with a 100% SB% or a guy with a 82.3% SB %. The first guy is Brian McCann from 2012, who attempted all of 3 SB that year. The second one is BJ Upton, who is 14/17 on the year for 2014. But since McCann had a higher SB % that means he's got a higher propensity to be successful at stealing bases in certain situations? Laughable. It's all about sample size and % doesn't tell you anything about sample size. Brian McCann had a 100% SB % in 2012. But is he a better base stealer than BJ Upton? Absolutely not.

It's like asking what the relative humidity is outside. Well it's 85%. What does that tell me? Nothing because I don't even know how hot it is. 85% relative humidity in 90 degree weather is a hell of a lot different than it is in 40 weather. That's why percentages are very misleading. You almost never have the full picture.

You have to look at it without being ignorant.

[MetEdDawg]

Never ever ever ever ever tell me about runs scored or RBI when talking about "norms". Those are results, NOT statistics. Like pitcher W-L record.

They are statistics. Now they are dependent upon how others on your team do which is different than sabermetrics which is typically more individual driven, but they also explain how a person performs over the course of a given period of time. Then you take the average of them all and you can figure out what they can be expected to do. That's the absolute definition of a statistic. You may not like that, but it is a statistic.

You 100% all in on sabermetric folks have redefined what you think are the "real" statistics to make the rest of the baseball world who trust their eyes and their gut and their observational skills feel like they don't know anything. I'm way too informed to allow that crap as are most others on here. Statistics don't take into account extra work in the cage, corrective eye surgery, injuries that may or may not be disclosed, mental changes by changing a person's position in a line up. Until they come up with statistics for those things, the eye test and the gut will still be viable tools in baseball.

[MetEdDawg]

You have to look at it without being ignorant.

Not ignorant, just proving you wrong. Saying SB% is greater than number of stolen bases is absolutely ridiculous. Obviously Brian McCann isn't a better base stealer than BJ Upton, but under your thinking that it is, he could be just looking at the way one statistic is displayed.

What if La Stella goes 0-15 over the course of 4 games in the lead off spot for the Braves. He would still have a higher OBP and BA than Upton. Is he still the better option in lead off?

I would love for you to find me an example as grossly horrible as the one I gave you towards the argument that # SB > SB %. You won't be able to.

The problem is this fight will never be resolved. Sabermetric people will always find some statistic or some historical post to say why something in the short term won't work in the long term, even though what's working in the short term is beneficial for the team. Eye test and gamers will look at the short term and adjust on a day to day or series by series basis. Probably lose extra games in the process due to their inability to step away from the situation and look at what guys have typically done over their career.

[KB21]

They are statistics. Now they are dependent upon how others on your team do which is different than sabermetrics which is typically more individual driven, but they also explain how a person performs over the course of a given period of time. Then you take the average of them all and you can figure out what they can be expected to do. That's the absolute definition of a statistic. You may not like that, but it is a statistic.

You 100% all in on sabermetric folks have redefined what you think are the "real" statistics to make the rest of the baseball world who trust their eyes and their gut and their observational skills feel like they don't know anything. I'm way too informed to allow that crap as are most others on here. Statistics don't take into account extra work in the cage, corrective eye surgery, injuries that may or may not be disclosed, mental changes by changing a person's position in a line up. Until they come up with statistics for those things, the eye test and the gut will still be viable tools in baseball.

So tell me this. BJ continues his .275 OBP average over the coarse of the next few weeks. However, Freddie Freeman goes into a slump and it takes Evan Gattis a while to get going once he comes off the DL. As a result, BJ Upton isn't scoring runs at as high of a clip. He's doing the same thing he is currently doing from the lead off position, which is getting on base rarely, but the guys behind him isn't knocking him in. Is BJ now less effective as a player since he is scoring runs at a lower rate even though he's doing everything else the same as he was?

[Dawg61]

This is why we have numbers. The bolded part is not true. Frazier has been thrown a fastball 52.8% of the time, up a whopping 0.8% from last year when he saw a fastball 52% of the time. Contrary to the traditional though, having speed on the bases does not increase the amount of fastballs thrown to hitters behind the speed guy.

Well something is helping Frazier this year and that something is Billy Hamilton being on base in front of him is my guess. Maybe they can't afford to have both of them on in front of Votto, Meso and Bruce. Idk but Frazier is out of his skull this year.

[MetEdDawg]

So tell me this. BJ continues his .275 OBP average over the coarse of the next few weeks. However, Freddie Freeman goes into a slump and it takes Evan Gattis a while to get going once he comes off the DL. As a result, BJ Upton isn't scoring runs at as high of a clip. He's doing the same thing he is currently doing from the lead off position, which is getting on base rarely, but the guys behind him isn't knocking him in. Is BJ now less effective as a player since he is scoring runs at a lower rate even though he's doing everything else the same as he was?

No he's not less effective. His teammates are being less effective and anyone who knows anything about baseball could see that. That still doesn't negate the fact that runs are a statistic. Does it negatively affect BJ's runs scored even though he's not directly involved with the decrease in runs scored? Absolutely. But that doesn't necessitate change on BJ's part. That's why most managers wouldn't make a change with BJ but to Freeman. Day off, change his spot in the line up, something like that. It was pretty easy to tell that Freeman was sucking it up when his BA dropped almost 25 points in 2 weeks back in early June. We struggled then and didn't score runs.

But until that happens there's no need to adjust anything. What you said is going to happen at some point and it could be tomorrow and last a week. BJ may not get on again the next week or Freeman may go 0 fer with BJ on base and our runs/game goes down the toilet. We all know that right now BJ isn't a lead off hitter. You ideally want a higher OBP, a higher BA, and a better contact bat. But why change right now when what he's doing is helping the team the way it is? Might it screw us a few games if he slumps and Fredi doesn't adjust? Probably. But you don't mess with something that's working like it is right now.

[KB21]

Well something is helping Frazier this year and that something is Billy Hamilton being on base in front of him is my guess. Maybe they can't afford to have both of them on in front of Votto, Meso and Bruce. Idk but Frazier is out of his skull this year.

That something is BABIP. He has a .330 BABIP this year, where it was .269 a year ago. He's more lucky this year. All his other peripherals are around the same. The guy has always been a good hitter, but Dusty Baker would never give him the opportunity he deserved. Todd had a .225 ISO and a 121 wRC+ in his first full MLB season.

[msstate7]

Dan Uggla still holds a roster spot, making the Braves play with a 24 man roster while Phil Gosselin is tearing AAA up. Fredi is slow to make the moves he needs to make.

Jordan Schafer still has a roster spot while Todd Cunningham is a better hitter than both Jordan and BJ Upton at this point, but he's still in AAA because Fredi is slow to make a move.

How long did it take to get La Stella in the line up consistently? He should have been the starting 2B on opening day.

Do you actually think fredi is the one making the decision to hold on to uggla?

[KB21]

No he's not less effective. His teammates are being less effective and anyone who knows anything about baseball could see that. That still doesn't negate the fact that runs are a statistic. Does it negatively affect BJ's runs scored even though he's not directly involved with the decrease in runs scored? Absolutely. But that doesn't necessitate change on BJ's part. That's why most managers wouldn't make a change with BJ but to Freeman. Day off, change his spot in the line up, something like that. It was pretty easy to tell that Freeman was sucking it up when his BA dropped almost 25 points in 2 weeks back in early June. We struggled then and didn't score runs.

But until that happens there's no need to adjust anything. What you said is going to happen at some point and it could be tomorrow and last a week. BJ may not get on again the next week or Freeman may go 0 fer with BJ on base and our runs/game goes down the toilet. We all know that right now BJ isn't a lead off hitter. You ideally want a higher OBP, a higher BA, and a better contact bat. But why change right now when what he's doing is helping the team the way it is? Might it screw us a few games if he slumps and Fredi doesn't adjust? Probably. But you don't mess with something that's working like it is right now.

My point is, going with the hot hand is a foolish decision the large majority of the time. If you want to optimize things and put yourself into a position to have sustained success, you make the change that needs to be made. If you wait, like Fredi typically does, then you may just cost the team a playoff spot.

It's really not a novel concept to put your best on base guy in the lead off spot, because him getting on base is the most important aspect of his job.

[KB21]

Do you actually think fredi is the one making the decision to hold on to uggla?

Does he make the final decision? No. Does he have input on the decision? As my son said at supper tonight, "you betcha".

[msstate7]

Does he make the final decision? No. Does he have input on the decision? As my son said at supper tonight, "you betcha".

Uggla still being a brave is on wren/liberty. How many at bats has fredi given uggla? Since 6/11, FG has let uggla hit 11 times. No way this is fredi's decision

[Pioneer Dawg]

Frazier has gotten much better with his plate discipline. Time with Votto well spent. Not swinging at balls has improved his game.

As to Upton he's actually swinging at more balls out of the zone this year as opposed to last. Check his plate discipline numbers of old compared to now and you will see why he won't be retuning to old BJ. Contact% still drastically down from old BJ. His contact rate is on balls in the zone is down 10% from his 2011 good year. Line drive % is down from last years debacle.

[Todd4State]

You have to look at it without being ignorant.

What Pioneer says when he loses an argument. Again.

[Dawg61]

There's a reason why every manager from college to MLB pinch runs later in the game when they don't have speed on base. Just getting on base isn't enough. I'd take BJ Upton on 1st base 3 out of 10 times over a slow guy 4 out of 10 times because BJ can stay out of double plays better, steal a base better, go from 1st to 3rd better, tag up and move to the next base better, score from 2nd on a hit better, tag up and score better and score on a squeeze/sacrifice better to make up for that 1 less time he's on base. The other 3 times he's a better scoring player than the slow guy. After saying all of that I do think the Braves need to go get a leadoff hitter and another SP. BJ is not the answer for the entire season and when it comes time for the playoffs or the final push for the playoffs the Braves need a more reliable player at the top imo.

[Todd4State]

Does he make the final decision? No. Does he have input on the decision? As my son said at supper tonight, "you betcha".

Most of what you are talking about falls on the GM. It's not as cut and dried as this guy sucks, this guy looks better- even though that's what is should be about. There are salary implications on both the veteran and the minor league player because once you call up the minor league guy his clock starts. And the minor league guy is someone that has zero or very little MLB experience so, the odds are you aren't going to get all that much more production than a guy that you are already paying a couple of million dollars to at the MLB level is risky at best. Plus, you have to consider whether a guy is on the 40 man roster or not and then you have to make corresponding moves, which may mean releasing a guy that your team may not want to put out there.

[Pioneer Dawg]

What Pioneer says when he loses an argument. Again.

1. You yourself have talked about the rate needed to be considered effective at stealing bases which is what I'm saying. But keep that "cred" up Toddy boy. Cool points all around.

2. 49 extra runs when the playoffs come down to a very small number of games separating teams MIGHT just come in handy. That was one of the more asinine posts I've seen. But then again people opposing me in these arguments routinely spout idiotic things.

[KB21]

There's a reason why every manager from college to MLB pinch runs later in the game when they don't have speed on base. Just getting on base isn't enough. I'd take BJ Upton on 1st base 3 out of 10 times over a slow guy 4 out of 10 times because BJ can stay out of double plays better, steal a base better, go from 1st to 3rd better, tag up and move to the next base better, score from 2nd on a hit better, tag up and score better and score on a squeeze/sacrifice better to make up for that 1 less time he's on base. The other 3 times he's a better scoring player than the slow guy. After saying all of that I do think the Braves need to go get a leadoff hitter and another SP. BJ is not the answer for the entire season and when it comes time for the playoffs or the final push for the playoffs the Braves need a more reliable player at the top imo.

Show me the numbers that prove having speed creates more runs scored than getting on base does? The threat of a stolen base or more speed to go from 1st to 3rd means very little when the players hitting behind you hit a lot of extra base hits.

Here's what you will get if you continue to hit BJ Upton #1 and Andrelton Simmons #2. Freddie Freeman batting with no one on base. I'd much rather have Freddie Freeman hitting with a runner on base 40% of the time than him hitting with a runner on base less than 30% of the time.

[Pioneer Dawg]

What does pinch running have to do with getting on base? Your scenario fits exactly what we are saying Dawg61. There's a reason that guy that's PR isn't starting and the guy that actually got on base is.... Yeah speed is better once you get on base but it's more important to get there first. So when you need speed and only speed AKA late in the game you put it in AFTER the better hitter has gotten on.

[msstate7]

Show me the numbers that prove having speed creates more runs scored than getting on base does? The threat of a stolen base or more speed to go from 1st to 3rd means very little when the players hitting behind you hit a lot of extra base hits.

Here's what you will get if you continue to hit BJ Upton #1 and Andrelton Simmons #2. Freddie Freeman batting with no one on base. I'd much rather have Freddie Freeman hitting with a runner on base 40% of the time than him hitting with a runner on base less than 30% of the time.

Just curious why you think Simmons obp won't continue to go up. Hasn't Simmons batted 8th pretty much his whole career? Wouldn't you say hitting 8th in the nl is the toughest slot?

[KB21]

What does pinch running have to do with getting on base? Your scenario fits exactly what we are saying Dawg61. There's a reason that guy that's PR isn't starting and the guy that actually got on base is....

When Fredi is making the decision to pinch run someone, you know what it does? It gets Evan Gattis's bat out of the line up for the rest of an extra inning game. The only thing more foolish than Fredi's decision to pinch run Jordan Schafer for Evan Gattis in extra innings against the Angels when that run meant nothing is batting BJ Upton in the lead off spot. The only thing Fredi did when he made that decision is take Gattis's bat out of the line up for the rest of the game.

[KB21]

Just curious why you think Simmons obp won't continue to go up. Hasn't Simmons batted 8th pretty much his whole career? Wouldn't you say hitting 8th in the nl is the toughest slot?

Because he is a hacker. He lacks patience at the plate. He has not learned to take a walk. He's the best defensive short stop in baseball, maybe ever, but he is a hacker at the plate.

[Todd4State]

1. You yourself have talked about the rate needed to be considered effective at stealing bases which is what I'm saying. But keep that "cred" up Toddy boy. Cool points all around.

2. 49 extra runs when the playoffs come down to a very small number of games separating teams MIGHT just come in handy. That was one of the more asinine posts I've seen. But then again people opposing me in these arguments routinely spout idiotic things.

Awwwww......did I hurt your wittle insecure feelings again?

You talking about someone trying to get "cool" points is laughable considering you lead the board in "hey, look at me! Look at all the things I was right about!!!" threads started by someone.

1. I do talk about stolen base percentages, but I also talk about them in the proper context. Something you routinely fail to do when talking about statistics.

2. We'll see how Upton finishes things out. If he continues to perform like he has he can certainly change his numbers.

[msstate7]

Because he is a hacker. He lacks patience at the plate. He has not learned to take a walk. He's the best defensive short stop in baseball, maybe ever, but he is a hacker at the plate.

Well as an 8th place hitter wouldn't you want someone who hacks? You don't wanna walk with runners on hitting 8th esp with 2 outs. I'm not sold on Simmons hitting 2nd either, but he could have a different approach hitting 2nd. Maybe we'll see a different approach from Simmons in the 2-hole. He won a batting title in the minors so he has hitting ability

[Dawg61]

What does pinch running have to do with getting on base? Your scenario fits exactly what we are saying Dawg61. There's a reason that guy that's PR isn't starting and the guy that actually got on base is.... Yeah speed is better once you get on base but it's more important to get there first. So when you need speed and only speed AKA late in the game you put it in AFTER the better hitter has gotten on.

Pinch running is a glimpse into every manager ever that they value speed on the basepaths. KB21 said it makes no difference that it only matters to get on base. My argument is that the great speed more than makes up the difference once they both get on then the increased OBP the slower guy has. I am NOT saying the Braves should use BJ as the leadoff hitter the entire year because he sucks. I'm just arguing against the theory that OBP is all that matters. I'll take Billy Hamilton's .300 OBP over La'Stella's .400 OBP all day every day.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Awwwww......did I hurt your wittle insecure feelings again?

You talking about someone trying to get "cool" points is laughable considering you lead the board in "hey, look at me! Look at all the things I was right about!!!" threads started by someone.

1. I do talk about stolen base percentages, but I also talk about them in the proper context. Something you routinely fail to do when talking about statistics.

2. We'll see how Upton finishes things out. If he continues to perform like he has he can certainly change his numbers.

You didn't address your statement on 49 extra runs being "negligible". I would like an explanation on how you came to that conclusion.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Pinch running is a glimpse into every manager ever that they value speed on the basepaths. KB21 said it makes no difference that it only matters to get on base. My argument is that the great speed more than makes up the difference once they both get on then the increased OBP the slower guy has. I am NOT saying the Braves should use BJ as the leadoff hitter the entire year because he sucks. I'm just arguing against the theory that OBP is all that matters. I'll take Billy Hamilton's .300 OBP over La'Stella's .400 OBP all day every day.

You're missing the point I'm making. If EVERY MANAGER values speed above getting on base then there wouldn't be that need to PR because the speed would be STARTING. Every manager seems to agree with us. Obviously speed is preferable once on base all things equal, but it's not worth .100 points of OBP.

[Todd4State]

Show me the numbers that prove having speed creates more runs scored than getting on base does? The threat of a stolen base or more speed to go from 1st to 3rd means very little when the players hitting behind you hit a lot of extra base hits.

Here's what you will get if you continue to hit BJ Upton #1 and Andrelton Simmons #2. Freddie Freeman batting with no one on base. I'd much rather have Freddie Freeman hitting with a runner on base 40% of the time than him hitting with a runner on base less than 30% of the time.

On MLB Network, they were talking about the hitting/offense crisis in baseball right now, and one of the things that they talked about was speed as a way to create more runs/offense. Very interesting discussion. They talked about how speed can change the momentum of a game and it changes the way a pitcher attacks the hitter and pitches. All of the ex-MLB players agreed on this.

If you are a good baserunner, as good baserunning doesn't necessarily mean the fastest, and you can steal bases for your team, you can increase the chances of scoring for your team. A runner on second with no one out has a better chance of scoring than a runner on first with no one out. If you want stats that back it up, look at the run expectancy tables. If you have a guy that can take an extra base on a single and get to third from first rather than just to second, you open up a lot more scoring options as well because then wild pitches, balks, and if there are less than two outs a sac fly comes into play.

[Todd4State]

You didn't address your statement on 49 extra runs being "negligible". I would like an explanation on how you came to that conclusion.

0.3 runs a game = less than 1 run a game. Less than 1 run a game = basically the same since you don't score runs in percentages.

[KB21]

Pinch running is a glimpse into every manager ever that they value speed on the basepaths. KB21 said it makes no difference that it only matters to get on base. My argument is that the great speed more than makes up the difference once they both get on then the increased OBP the slower guy has. I am NOT saying the Braves should use BJ as the leadoff hitter the entire year because he sucks. I'm just arguing against the theory that OBP is all that matters. I'll take Billy Hamilton's .300 OBP over La'Stella's .400 OBP all day every day.

And I will win a lot more games with La Stella leading off than you will with Billy Hamilton leading off, particularly since Hamilton's stolen base percentage is barely at the break even mark at 74.4% (75% being the break even mark).

[Dawg61]

Show me the numbers that prove having speed creates more runs scored than getting on base does?

Show you the numbers that prove it is better to have a fast runner on 1st over a slow player? Is that what you are asking me? Seriously? So speed has no value whatsoever on offense now? Ok genius

[Todd4State]

You're missing the point I'm making. If EVERY MANAGER values speed above getting on base then there wouldn't be that need to PR because the speed would be STARTING. Every manager seems to agree with us. Obviously speed is preferable once on base all things equal, but it's not worth .100 points of OBP.

There aren't a lot Rickey Henderson's, or even Vince Coleman's out there right now. What's Shafer hitting? .182?

But I do think you are going to start to see some more Billy Hamilton's in the future with the way offense is going.

[Pioneer Dawg]

2004 ALCS GAME 4

Most famous stolen base I can remember. 9th inning Kevin Millar (very slow.. 7 career SB.. .383 OBP) leads off the inning with a BB. Dave Roberts (very fast..243 career SB.. .337 OBP) pinch runs and steals 2nd leading the Red Sox on a historic comeback. You would have let Roberts lead the inning off 61?

[KB21]

On MLB Network, they were talking about the hitting/offense crisis in baseball right now, and one of the things that they talked about was speed as a way to create more runs/offense. Very interesting discussion. They talked about how speed can change the momentum of a game and it changes the way a pitcher attacks the hitter and pitches. All of the ex-MLB players agreed on this.

If you are a good baserunner, as good baserunning doesn't necessarily mean the fastest, and you can steal bases for your team, you can increase the chances of scoring for your team. A runner on second with no one out has a better chance of scoring than a runner on first with no one out. If you want stats that back it up, look at the run expectancy tables. If you have a guy that can take an extra base on a single and get to third from first rather than just to second, you open up a lot more scoring options as well because then wild pitches, balks, and if there are less than two outs a sac fly comes into play.

Speed has very little to do with that though. Speed does not equal good base running. Jordan Schafer has great speed, but he's a horrible base runner.

The thing with BJ is that he is actually a very good base runner. He just isn't on base enough to utilize that tool.

[Pioneer Dawg]

0.3 runs a game = less than 1 run a game. Less than 1 run a game = basically the same since you don't score runs in percentages.

Folks when I talk about a lack of logic when opposing me in these debates this is what I'm referring to.

[KB21]

Show you the numbers that prove it is better to have a fast runner on 1st over a slow player? Is that what you are asking me? Seriously? So speed has no value whatsoever on offense now? Ok genius

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/2/20/5425744/stolen-bases-lack-value

Overall, there is very little value to the stolen base, as there is more risk that you run into an out. There is clearly not as much value in a stolen base as there is in getting on base in the first place.

[Dawg61]

And I will win a lot more games with La Stella leading off than you will with Billy Hamilton leading off, particularly since Hamilton's stolen base percentage is barely at the break even mark at 74.4% (75% being the break even mark).

Does that percentage factor in being picked off? Btw BJ Upton and his shit OBP has 41 Runs scored and La'Stella and his .360 OBP has 11 runs scored. Billy Hamilton 41 Runs and 34 SB, Todd Frazier 53 Runs and 13 SB, La Stella 11 Runs (9 before today) and 2 SB. And yes we all know La'Stella has a lot less ABs. Before today he only had 9 runs scored. 9!!

[Dawg61]

2004 ALCS GAME 4

Most famous stolen base I can remember. 9th inning Kevin Millar (very slow.. 7 career SB.. .383 OBP) leads off the inning with a BB. Dave Roberts (very fast..243 career SB.. .337 OBP) pinch runs and steals 2nd leading the Red Sox on a historic comeback. You would have let Roberts lead the inning off 61?

I'm not talking about guys that are only on rosters to be pinch runners. Obviously I'm talking about two players that are both good enough to be starters. You are twisting the pinch runner comment in your head. The point I am trying to make and you agreed with yourself is that once the two players are on first base the speed player becomes more valuable than the slow player. I brought up the PR because it proves that the manager values speed. To not value speed is just sabermetrics being ruhhhhtarded again.

[Todd4State]

Speed has very little to do with that though. Speed does not equal good base running. Jordan Schafer has great speed, but he's a horrible base runner.

The thing with BJ is that he is actually a very good base runner. He just isn't on base enough to utilize that tool.

That's what I said in the second paragraph. There's a fundamental break down of base running at all levels of baseball- and it hurts offense. Among other things- like guys striking out too much and taking pitches instead of being aggressive.

[Todd4State]

Folks when I talk about a lack of logic when opposing me in these debates this is what I'm referring to.

Still waiting on Daniel Garner to stop striking out because you said so.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Does that percentage factor in being picked off? Btw BJ Upton and his shit OBP has 41 Runs scored and La'Stella and his .360 OBP has 11 runs scored. Billy Hamilton 41 Runs and 34 SB, Todd Frazier 53 Runs and 13 SB, La Stella 11 Runs (9 before today) and 2 SB. And yes we all know La'Stella has a lot less ABs. Before today he only had 9 runs scored. 9!!

Top 15 in the MLB in runs scored have on average just 5.86 SB. Tulo the leader has 1 SB.... Lowest OBP of the group is Donaldson at .324 but he's no speed guy (3 SB). How can these guys be scoring all these runs???

[Todd4State]

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/2/20/5425744/stolen-bases-lack-value

Overall, there is very little value to the stolen base, as there is more risk that you run into an out. There is clearly not as much value in a stolen base as there is in getting on base in the first place.

Here's my question- is that because there is actually very little value in a stolen base or is it because there is more risk because players aren't as good at it as they should be? And I can't load the article for some reason, but I'm guessing that's the gist of it and I have read things similar.

I think studies like that hurt offense because players/people read it and they think, "well I'm not going to do that then" and it just makes it more difficult to score runs because if you can steal bases and use your speed on the bases well in all aspects of base running, you can become a weapon.

Because you can't tell me that you would rather have a guy on first and no one out than a guy on second and no one out.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Still waiting on Daniel Garner to stop striking out because you said so.

He is dumbass. He's at his normal K rate just like I said.

[War Machine Dawg]

On MLB Network, they were talking about the hitting/offense crisis in baseball right now, and one of the things that they talked about was speed as a way to create more runs/offense. Very interesting discussion. They talked about how speed can change the momentum of a game and it changes the way a pitcher attacks the hitter and pitches. All of the ex-MLB players agreed on this.

If you are a good baserunner, as good baserunning doesn't necessarily mean the fastest, and you can steal bases for your team, you can increase the chances of scoring for your team. A runner on second with no one out has a better chance of scoring than a runner on first with no one out. If you want stats that back it up, look at the run expectancy tables. If you have a guy that can take an extra base on a single and get to third from first rather than just to second, you open up a lot more scoring options as well because then wild pitches, balks, and if there are less than two outs a sac fly comes into play.

If they want offensive production, legalize and regulate HGH usage. It's a natural human hormone, unlike steroids. I've got no problem with players using it. It's no coincidence that offensive numbers have taken a steep dive as steroid testing has become more strict. Six years ago, you couldn't see the field as a .240 hitter. Now, .240 hitters aren't a huge drain on the offense. Plus, you've got all these feast or famine HR hitters in baseball now who either rip it or K. There's no in-between anymore, no one who chokes up and/or shortens their swing with a 2 strike count. The offensive approach has really changed in the last 15-20 years.

I've been advocating a return to speedy contact hitters to help out, too. I thought it was common sense, now that most of the steroid usage has been stopped, that speed and the ability to manufacture runs would be at a premium. But apparently scouts are still trying to get 7-9 Adam Dunns in the lineup.

[Todd4State]

Top 15 in the MLB in runs scored have on average just 5.86 SB. Tulo the leader has 1 SB.... Lowest OBP of the group is Donaldson at .324 but he's no speed guy (3 SB). How can these guys be scoring all these runs???

Runs in MLB have declined six of the past seven years. Lack of speed is one reason why. Defensive shifts have hurt as well, as have taken steroids mostly out of the game. If those leaders could steal more bases, their runs scored would go up. Guaranteed.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Todd he argument isn't would you rather have a guy on 1st or 2nd with no outs. You simpletons really can't grasp this? I you are GUARANTEED to steal the base then yes that is the easy choice. For the thinking, we have to involve the risk reward of the chance of an out when stealing 2nd.

[Dawg61]

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/2/20/5425744/stolen-bases-lack-value

Overall, there is very little value to the stolen base, as there is more risk that you run into an out. There is clearly not as much value in a stolen base as there is in getting on base in the first place.

Haha ok Brian Kenny

http://cdn.bloguin.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/94/2013/08/briankennysuperhero.png

[KB21]

Does that percentage factor in being picked off? Btw BJ Upton and his shit OBP has 41 Runs scored and La'Stella and his .360 OBP has 11 runs scored. Billy Hamilton 41 Runs and 34 SB, Todd Frazier 53 Runs and 13 SB, La Stella 11 Runs (9 before today) and 2 SB. And yes we all know La'Stella has a lot less ABs. Before today he only had 9 runs scored. 9!!

And then we realize that Tommy La Stella has had Gerald Laird and the pitcher hitting behind him for the most part and not Freddie Freeman/Justin Upton/Evan Gattis.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Runs in MLB have declined six of the past seven years. Lack of speed is one reason why. Defensive shifts have hurt as well, as have taken steroids mostly out of the game. If those leaders could steal more bases, their runs scored would go up. Guaranteed.

If Mark McGwire could steal a base he'd score less runs because he would have to be in a shape where he couldn't do the things that actually score runs like drop bombs into Big Mac land.

[KB21]

Here's my question- is that because there is actually very little value in a stolen base or is it because there is more risk because players aren't as good at it as they should be? And I can't load the article for some reason, but I'm guessing that's the gist of it and I have read things similar.

I think studies like that hurt offense because players/people read it and they think, "well I'm not going to do that then" and it just makes it more difficult to score runs because if you can steal bases and use your speed on the bases well in all aspects of base running, you can become a weapon.

Because you can't tell me that you would rather have a guy on first and no one out than a guy on second and no one out.

I'd rather have that guy at 2nd because he hit a double, not because I expect him to steal a base at greater than 75% success rate.

[msstate7]

And then we realize that Tommy La Stella has had Gerald Laird and the pitcher hitting behind him for the most part and not Freddie Freeman/Justin Upton/Evan Gattis.

When lastella was at leadoff, what was his avg? I realize it was a very small sample, but he was terrible. Lastella has been very good hitting 7th though. Why change what's working? If bj flounders, I'd be in favor of giving lastella another shot. I wouldn't change a thing right now. No need to fix what isn't broken...

[msstate7]

If Mark McGwire could steal a base he'd score less runs because he would have to be in a shape where he couldn't do the things that actually score runs like drop bombs into Big Mac land.

Yeah bc you can only do one or the other. Just ask mike trout...

[Todd4State]

If they want offensive production, legalize and regulate HGH usage. It's a natural human hormone, unlike steroids. I've got no problem with players using it. It's no coincidence that offensive numbers have taken a steep dive as steroid testing has become more strict. Six years ago, you couldn't see the field as a .240 hitter. Now, .240 hitters aren't a huge drain on the offense. Plus, you've got all this feast or famine HR hitters in baseball now who either rip it or K. There's no in-between anymore, no one who chokes up and/or shortens their swing with a 2 strike count. The offensive approach has really changed in the last 15-20 years.

I've been advocating a return to speedy contact hitters to help out, too. I thought it was common sense now that most of the steroid usage has been stopped that speed and the ability to manufacture runs would be at a premium. But apparently scouts are still trying to get 7-9 Adam Dunns in the lineup.

I 100% agree with you on that. The pitching is better nowadays- you have more guys that are throwing harder and with more movement. And at the same time, the hitters have gotten worse from a fundamental standpoint. You see guys with a 1-2 count still trying to swing for the fences, you see these massive defensive shifts and guys who hit 20 home runs not even trying to go opposite field even though there is literally no one on one side of the field.

And I do think that this take and make the pitcher work all the time and not be aggressive approach- these pitchers are feasting on these hitters.

But part of it is because of Moneyball. This "bunting and stealing bases is bad" idea has gone on for awhile, but now the era has changed and the offense hasn't changed with it yet. And the same thing about working walks- that's Moneyball too.

The basic fundamentals aren't there for hitting or baserunning in general. Not very many guys even try to use the whole field- which would stop shifting, they're afraid to swing at the first pitch, they don't work on baserunning or bunting like they should and try to take advantage of speed.

[KB21]

IMO, offense is down because there are too many managers like Fredi Gonzalez that do not pay attention to the numbers and value things like BA, stolen bases, and RBI over OBP, BABIP, and ISO.

The top two run scoring teams in baseball are Oakland and Colorado. They are also two of the top three teams in baseball relative to OBP. They are middle of the pack in stolen bases.

[KB21]

When lastella was at leadoff, what was his avg? I realize it was a very small sample, but he was terrible. Lastella has been very good hitting 7th though. Why change what's working? If bj flounders, I'd be in favor of giving lastella another shot. I wouldn't change a thing right now. No need to fix what isn't broken...

It is broken though. La Stella was moved to the lead off spot after teams had adjusted to him. He slumped, and then he adjusted to what they were doing. Where you hit in the line up has no effect on your performance, but where you hit each player in the line up does have an effect on team performance. If La Stella has a .400 OBP hitting 7th, there is no reason to think he would not have the same leading off if he was given the opportunity to do that on a regular basis.

When your lead off guy has a .275 OBP, things are broke.

[Todd4State]

Todd he argument isn't would you rather have a guy on 1st or 2nd with no outs. You simpletons really can't grasp this? I you are GUARANTEED to steal the base then yes that is the easy choice. For the thinking, we have to involve the risk reward of the chance of an out when stealing 2nd.

I understand the risk reward, but you're also not always going to hit a double. So IF you have a guy on first that has speed, you just want him to stay there? So for the "thinking" I ask, why is having speed a bad thing? And if you have it, why not use it? Because you might get thrown out?

That extra dimension to your game makes you a better and more valuable player.

[KB21]

I 100% agree with you on that. The pitching is better nowadays- you have more guys that are throwing harder and with more movement. And at the same time, the hitters have gotten worse from a fundamental standpoint. You see guys with a 1-2 count still trying to swing for the fences, you see these massive defensive shifts and guys who hit 20 home runs not even trying to go opposite field even though there is literally no one on one side of the field.

And I do think that this take and make the pitcher work all the time and not be aggressive approach- these pitchers are feasting on these hitters.

But part of it is because of Moneyball. This "bunting and stealing bases is bad" idea has gone on for awhile, but now the era has changed and the offense hasn't changed with it yet. And the same thing about working walks- that's Moneyball too.

The basic fundamentals aren't there for hitting or baserunning in general. Not very many guys even try to use the whole field- which would stop shifting, they're afraid to swing at the first pitch, they don't work on baserunning or bunting like they should and try to take advantage of speed.

Moneyball is not the reason offense is down. If anything, moneyball is the reason teams like Oakland and Colorado score a lot of runs.

[Todd4State]

If Mark McGwire could steal a base he'd score less runs because he would have to be in a shape where he couldn't do the things that actually score runs like drop bombs into Big Mac land.

Yeah- Yasiel Puig agrees that you have to be a big guy to run. If McGwire could run like Puig, he would have been even more dangerous because a lot of the time they walked him with no one on base, he would have ended up on second, which means that they would have been more likely to pitch to him.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Yeah bc you can only do one or the other. Just ask mike trout...

I like looking at the norms not exceptions. Top 10 in HR avg 3.3 SB.. Leader Jose Abreu has 0..... Top ten in SB avg 3.0 HR.. Leader Dee Gordon has 2 HR.

[msstate7]

IMO, offense is down because there are too many managers like Fredi Gonzalez that do not pay attention to the numbers and value things like BA, stolen bases, and RBI over OBP, BABIP, and ISO.

The top two run scoring teams in baseball are Oakland and Colorado. They are also two of the top three teams in baseball relative to OBP. They are middle of the pack in stolen bases.

Toronto 4th -- leadoff Reyes .312 obp
Detroit 6th -- leadoff Jackson .307 obp

[Todd4State]

I'd rather have that guy at 2nd because he hit a double, not because I expect him to steal a base at greater than 75% success rate.

Of course you would. I bet you would rather him hit a home run. But what if he's only on first base? You just want him to stay there assuming he has the ability to steal a base? Why not turn that single into a double?

[Todd4State]

Moneyball is not the reason offense is down. If anything, moneyball is the reason teams like Oakland and Colorado score a lot of runs.

I don't think it is in and of itself is THE reason- but I do think that it is a factor. I think Colorado would score a lot of runs no matter what they do.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Yeah- Yasiel Puig agrees that you have to be a big guy to run. If McGwire could run like Puig, he would have been even more dangerous because a lot of the time they walked him with no one on base, he would have ended up on second, which means that they would have been more likely to pitch to him.

Yasiel Puig isn't allowed to steal anymore because he has a success rate of 50%. In SEC play in 2012 I believe we were 7-21 in stolen bases. That was very bad for our offense along with the 26 man on 1st, no out bunts.

[msstate7]

It is broken though. La Stella was moved to the lead off spot after teams had adjusted to him. He slumped, and then he adjusted to what they were doing. Where you hit in the line up has no effect on your performance, but where you hit each player in the line up does have an effect on team performance. If La Stella has a .400 OBP hitting 7th, there is no reason to think he would not have the same leading off if he was given the opportunity to do that on a regular basis.

When your lead off guy has a .275 OBP, things are broke.

I'm sure every team would love to have a "broken" lineup if it led to 9 game winning streak and 11-1 after making this dumb decision

[KB21]

I understand the risk reward, but you're also not always going to hit a double. So IF you have a guy on first that has speed, you just want him to stay there? So for the "thinking" I ask, why is having speed a bad thing? And if you have it, why not use it? Because you might get thrown out?

That extra dimension to your game makes you a better and more valuable player.

No one is saying that speed is a bad thing. You don't substitute speed for on base ability though.

Would you rather have Billy Hamilton or Matt Carpenter leading off for the Cardinals?

[Pioneer Dawg]

Toronto 4th -- leadoff Reyes .312 obp
Detroit 6th -- leadoff Jackson .307 obp

Cardinals Matt Carpenter
Rangers Shin Soo Choo
Athletics - often their catcher John Jaso

The ELITE base stealers that can get on ARE a weapon. That's the point. You have to use the numbers to determine which one is the most beneficial. USE THE NUMBERS. OBP, MATCHUPS, SB% all factor into a formula.

A .350 guy with 4 SB isn't as valuable as a .345 guy with 25 SB. Teams like Oakland, Houston, Boston, etc. employ people MUCH smarter than any of us to find that formula. It's ALL about the numbers on this.

[Todd4State]

IMO, offense is down because there are too many managers like Fredi Gonzalez that do not pay attention to the numbers and value things like BA, stolen bases, and RBI over OBP, BABIP, and ISO.

The top two run scoring teams in baseball are Oakland and Colorado. They are also two of the top three teams in baseball relative to OBP. They are middle of the pack in stolen bases.

The Dodgers have the most stolen bases in baseball and their OBP is right behind those two teams. at .330 A's and Rockies are at .331 and .332.

Or maybe the A's are just good? It's not like they are the only team doing Moneyball right now.

[Dawg61]

Top 15 in the MLB in runs scored have on average just 5.86 SB. Tulo the leader has 1 SB.... Lowest OBP of the group is Donaldson at .324 but he's no speed guy (3 SB). How can these guys be scoring all these runs???

Talk about skewing the numbers. Good gawd that's a crime what you just did. Tulo's 1 SB just made Dozier go from 15 actual steals to 8 when you add in Tulo and "average them" Of the top 50 run scores in MLB 21 of them are also in the top 50 in steals.

[Pioneer Dawg]

The Dodgers have the most stolen bases in baseball and their OBP is right behind those two teams. at .330 A's and Rockies are at .331 and .332.

Or maybe the A's are just good? It's not like they are the only team doing Moneyball right now.

The A's are the best team in baseball.

Reds have 2nd most stolen bases... 26th in OBP... 24th in runs..

[Pioneer Dawg]

Talk about skewing the numbers. Good gawd that's a crime what you just did. Tulo's 1 SB just made Dozier go from 15 actual steals to 8 when you add in Tulo and "average them" Of the top 50 run scores in MLB 21 of them are also in the top 50 in steals.

How many are top 50 in OBP

Make sure we have a good minimum plate appearances here. 3-4 with a .750 OBP and 1 run don't count.

[Todd4State]

No one is saying that speed is a bad thing. You don't substitute speed for on base ability though.

Would you rather have Billy Hamilton or Matt Carpenter leading off for the Cardinals?

Well, it seems like that's what you are saying. Maybe I was thrown off by the "little value in a stolen base" discussion. At the very least it has been downplayed.

I really like Hamilton a lot- especially his upside. He's going to get better and better- and that includes his base running. I think having both Hamilton and Caprenter in the lineup would be potentially lethal.

[msstate7]

The A's are the best team in baseball.

Reds have 2nd most stolen bases... 26th in OBP... 24th in runs..

Milwaukee has 2nd best record. They're 5th in sb's. They're 15th in obp

[Dawg61]

I like looking at the norms not exceptions. Top 10 in HR avg 3.3 SB.. Leader Jose Abreu has 0..... Top ten in SB avg 3.0 HR.. Leader Dee Gordon has 2 HR.

Are you seriously adding up the total SB for the ten HR leaders and dividing it by 10 and then telling us the avg SB for each guy? Haha

[Todd4State]

Yasiel Puig isn't allowed to steal anymore because he has a success rate of 50%. In SEC play in 2012 I believe we were 7-21 in stolen bases. That was very bad for our offense along with the 26 man on 1st, no out bunts.

I would hope that Mark McGwire wouldn't be an idiot on he bases like Puig, who is out of control at times.

Yeah, it sucked winning the SEC Tournament that year.

[Todd4State]

Milwaukee has 2nd best record. They're 5th in sb's. They're 15th in obp

So, in other words, there's very little correlation to SB's, OBP, and wins?

[Pioneer Dawg]

Milwaukee has 2nd best record. They're 5th in sb's. They're 15th in obp

You do play defense and pitch as well

We can do this shit all day. Runs scored as an INDIVIDUAL don't really matter a hill of beans to SB or lesser extent OBP because runs scored is factored by other people.

As a TEAM obviously OBP leads to more runs not SB. The formula is known to those in front offices. Elite SB guys can overcome value of higher OBP guys BUT slugging appears to drop very much as stolen base numbers go up. OBP guys hit 1st because of the boppers behind them. Fast guys hit in front of singles hitters because they can steal and score on a single. Fast guys that also get on base good get to have their cake and eat it too.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Are you seriously adding up the total SB for the ten HR leaders and dividing it by 10 and then telling us the avg SB for each guy? Haha

Uhh yeah... For the elite in each group. Not much crossover. I could be a dunce and find ONE example against the rule but that would be unscientific.

[Dawg61]

No one is saying that speed is a bad thing. You don't substitute speed for on base ability though.

Would you rather have Billy Hamilton or Matt Carpenter leading off for the Cardinals?

Once Billy Hamilton learns to walk more he will quickly surpass Carpenter and Carpenter is a top 5 leadoff hitter imo. In 40 less ABs BH has 14 less runs, 1 more HR, 2 less RBI, 32 more SB but 32 less BB. When Billy puts on 15-20 lbs of muscle and walks more I think he has the potential to be a top 10 player in MLB.

[Pioneer Dawg]

So, in other words, there's very little correlation to SB's, OBP, and wins?

Because of your one example? Clearly there is a STRONGER correlation with OBP and offensive success (runs) than SB's...

Rate of correlation. It's what I live by. You CANT comprehend because you think a team that averages 4.0 runs and 4.9 runs a game is the same thing.

WINS come from offense defense and pitching. You have to maximize the correlations to maximize wins.

[Todd4State]

You do play defense and pitch as well

We can do this shit all day. Runs scored as an INDIVIDUAL don't really matter a hill of beans to SB or lesser extent OBP because runs scored is factored by other people.

As a TEAM obviously OBP leads to more runs not SB. The formula is known to those in front offices. Elite SB guys can overcome value of higher OBP guys BUT slugging appears to drop very much as stolen base numbers go up. OBP guys hit 1st because of the boppers behind them. Fast guys hit in front of singles hitters because they can steal and score on a single. Fast guys that also get on base good get to have their cake and eat it too.

Then why is offense as a whole declining in MLB? And has for the past 6-7 years?

[Todd4State]

Because of your one example? Clearly there is a STRONGER correlation with OBP and offensive success (runs) than SB's...

Rate of correlation. It's what I live by. You CANT comprehend because you think a team that averages 4.0 runs and 4.9 runs a game is the same thing.

WINS come from offense defense and pitching. You have to maximize the correlations to maximize wins.

No. Because of the 5 examples on here. The A's, Rockies, Dodgers, Brewers, and Reds. You also aren't factoring in the fact that there aren't a lot of elite base stealers out there. You only have one side of the correlation because you don't know what the offensive numbers would be with more base stealers would be, so you only have one side of the story- without knowing the other side at all.

Of course, you CANT comprehend that because you don't have the numbers to show you better.

Again- offense is declining.

And if you read my original response correctly I said there was no correlation between SB, OBP, and wins. If you didn't have an agenda, you probably would have noticed.

[Todd4State]

Once Billy Hamilton learns to walk more he will quickly surpass Carpenter and Carpenter is a top 5 leadoff hitter imo. In 40 less ABs BH has 14 less runs, 1 more HR, 2 less RBI, 32 more SB but 32 less BB. When Billy puts on 15-20 lbs of muscle and walks more I think he has the potential to be a top 10 player in MLB.

Yeah- sabermetric people like to rip on Billy Hamilton but then totally discount that he is basically a rookie. They're like- oh shit, someone that can bunt for a hit.

[shoeless joe]

One question for the metric guys...

Will is telling me that .3 runs a game over a 162 game season are huge. Not gonna argue that. But then KB says Frazier seeing .8 % more fastballs isn't that much of a difference when he has way more than 162 at bats. I'm no math major but that is going to end up, over the course of the year, being a ton more fastballs.

This one example is where metrics folks lose some credibility...only looking at certain numbers and only using those numbers when they fit their agenda.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Offense has been down for a few reasons.

1. Power is down. If you haven't noticed we are moving farther away from the steroid era. Now will that mean more stolen bases and speed guys? Maybe maybe not ("maybe **** yourself"- The Departed). But if it does it will mean that it is the most efficient way to score the most runs.

2. Until last year stolen base totals kept climbing on up.

3. Pitchers are getting more efficient. Teams are rightly valuing the strikeout on the mound. Walks have been on steady decline lately.

4. Defensive shifts

[Pioneer Dawg]

One question for the metric guys...

Will is telling me that .3 runs a game over a 162 game season are huge. Not gonna argue that. But then KB says Frazier seeing .8 % more fastballs isn't that much of a difference when he has way more than 162 at bats. I'm no math major but that is going to end up, over the course of the year, being a ton more fastballs.

This one example is where metrics folks lose some credibility...only looking at certain numbers and only using those numbers when they fit their agenda.

Please let the stupidity end...

Just cause they are both sub 1 percentages you are comparing the two. It's not apples and oranges... Games played and pitches seen are apples and a school bus....

Just for shits and giggles I looked up Freddie freeman. He has a 1.9% difference in fastballs this year. 0.8% is MINUTE when talking pitch type.

.3 is the RUN TOTAL. .8 is a PERCENTAGE...

4.0 to 4.3 is a 7.5 PERCENT INCREASE.
50 to 50.8 is a 0.8 PERCENT INCREASE.

We have some stupid ****ing people that argue against us

[Todd4State]

Please let the stupidity end...

Just cause they are both sub 1 percentages you are comparing the two. It's not apples and oranges... Games played and pitches seen are apples and a school bus....

Just for shits and giggles I looked up Freddie freeman. He has a 1.9% difference in fastballs this year. 0.8% is MINUTE when talking pitch type.

.3 is the RUN TOTAL. .8 is a PERCENTAGE...

4.0 to 4.3 is a 7.5 PERCENT INCREASE.
50 to 50.8 is a 0.8 PERCENT INCREASE.

We have some stupid ****ing people that argue against us

He was asking a question, not "arguing" against you dumbass.

[Todd4State]

One question for the metric guys...

Will is telling me that .3 runs a game over a 162 game season are huge. Not gonna argue that. But then KB says Frazier seeing .8 % more fastballs isn't that much of a difference when he has way more than 162 at bats. I'm no math major but that is going to end up, over the course of the year, being a ton more fastballs.

This one example is where metrics folks lose some credibility...only looking at certain numbers and only using those numbers when they fit their agenda.

Yep. Use numbers unless they tell them that they are wrong. And then it's all about sample size, moving the goal post, etc.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Let's assume Frazier will see the same number of pitches this year as last.. 2297.

52% means he saw 1194 fastballs this year
52.8% means he'll see 1212 fastballs this season.

18 extra fastballs all year!!!

[shoeless joe]

Please let the stupidity end...

Just cause they are both sub 1 percentages you are comparing the two. It's not apples and oranges... Games played and pitches seen are apples and a school bus....

Just for shits and giggles I looked up Freddie freeman. He has a 1.9% difference in fastballs this year. 0.8% is MINUTE when talking pitch type.

.3 is the RUN TOTAL. .8 is a PERCENTAGE...

4.0 to 4.3 is a 7.5 PERCENT INCREASE.
50 to 50.8 is a 0.8 PERCENT INCREASE.

We have some stupid ****ing people that argue against us

I said that I did agree with the run totals being a fairly big deal. But there are about 500 less games played than at bats. So that .8 fastballs ends up being a ton. Just like the .3 runs ends up being more at the end of the year because there are more games to look at.

And again, I am not against metrics. I am against someone with a calculator trying to tell me these numbers are the be all and end all.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Yep. Use numbers unless they tell them that they are wrong. And then it's all about sample size, moving the goal post, etc.

Let the record show your side has claimed that 49 extra runs is negligible and 18 extra fastballs over a season is a "ton"

[shoeless joe]

Let's assume Frazier will see the same number of pitches this year as last.. 2297.

52% means he saw 1194 fastballs this year
52.8% means he'll see 1212 fastballs this season.

18 extra fastballs all year!!!

What if those 18 extra fastballs translate into 9 hits...and 9 RBI. Them they would be a pretty doggone big deal. Let's say he took all 18 of them. Then not so much.

it is all situational...

[shoeless joe]

Let the record show your side has claimed that 49 extra runs is negligible and 18 extra fastballs over a season is a "ton"

Problem is I'm not on anyone's "side". I agree the runs are a big deal. But I also think that speed influencing pitches is a big deal.

For the millionth time...stats are useful when applied in certain situations. Baseball knowledge is also useful but every single decision can't be made from a "gut feeling". Both approaches are correct in certain situations.

[Pioneer Dawg]

What if those 18 extra fastballs translate into 9 hits...and 9 RBI. Them they would be a pretty doggone big deal. Let's say he took all 18 of them. Then not so much.

it is all situational...

I'm not sure which is worse this or WinningIsRelentless (who made a 4 on the Math ACT) using the game YPC to determine overall YPC in this classic thread http://www.elitedawgs.com/showthread.php?6906-Sunday-Morning-QB-Flat-As-A-Pancake-Edition

[Todd4State]

Let the record show your side has claimed that 49 extra runs is negligible and 18 extra fastballs over a season is a "ton"

And let the record show that you have proclaimed that Jacob Lindgren would be a first round pick, that Fredi Gonzalez was stupid for hitting BJ Upton lead off even though it spurned a long win streak, and that Daniel Garner would hit SEC pitching despite striking out nearly every at bat, excuse me plate appearance, and have never played the game.

[Todd4State]

Problem is I'm not on anyone's "side". I agree the runs are a big deal. But I also think that speed influencing pitches is a big deal.

For the millionth time...stats are useful when applied in certain situations. Baseball knowledge is also useful but every single decision can't be made from a "gut feeling". Both approaches are correct in certain situations.

Yep. You have to be able to apply both to be honest with you. The stats and things like that are a guide, but you also have to know what your players can and can't do, what their strengths are and what they are doing that is "unseen" that isn't going to show up in the stats.

That's why KB21 is better at sabermetrics and stats than Pioneer is. He has the ability to see both sides and can present it appropriately without trying to skew something to fit his agenda.

[Dawg61]

Somehow this debate has morphed into how many fastballs Todd Frazier is seeing. That's just a portion of the reason why Frazier is suddenly an All-Star this year when last year he was not. How about how many hits he's gotten because the defense is worried about Hamilton and can't shift or how many hits he's gotten while Hamilton is attempting to steal leaving a huge hole on the 2b/1b side or how many pitches in the zone is he seeing with Hamilton on base or how much effect does Hamilton have by taking the pitchers concentration off the batter and worried about him stealing? None of these questions can be answered easily but you've got to make the assumption at this point that Billy Hamilton is having an effect on Todd Frazier AND Devin Mesoraco imo too. Todd Frazier in 2013 had 63 R 19 HR 73 RBI and 6 SB. This year he's got before the ASB 53 R 17 HR 47 RBI and 13 SB. Billy Hamilton is going to help Frazier make an extra 60-80 million dollars at this rate. And let's not forget who the Reds had leading off last year too. Shin-Soo Choo whose considered an elite leadoff hitter. Todd Frazier 2014 is destroying Todd Frazier 2013.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Todd Frazier hitting .298 with bases empty.. .274 with men on base.

Dawg61 you are a damn fine traditionalist but the two others here are giving your kind a bad image.

[MetEdDawg]

This is nuts guys. The point isn't that speed guys are more valuable overall, it's just that they provide something different for an offense. If you have a ton of guys with a high OBP, speed isn't as important. But if you have guys like BJ and Simmons who have lower OBP but are still capable baseball players, you try and put them in situations that will allow them to utilize what skill set they have to best help the team around them. Hitting them 7 and 8 doesn't do their skill set any good, especially when both of them are as hot as they are right now. Simmons and BJ have both increased their BAs over 10 points during this win streak and Simmons is in the middle of a 4 game multi hit streak.

Right now BJs best spot is lead off. Not because he's great at it, but because we are maximizing his efficiency, thus helping the team. I'm not looking over the course of a game. I'm looking for one at bat where BJ will possibly succeed at getting on base. That's what's most realistic, but that's also where we have our best chance to put up a crooked number. Why? We don't have a ton of high OBP guys so BJ gives us the best opportunity to manufacture something.

Him in the lead off, Simmons with a low K rate batting 2nd that can hit and run, go to the opposite side of the field on the ground, and put a ball in play with 2 strikes to protect Upton on a 2 strike steal. Then Freeman and Upton behind. So far over BJ's 11 game hit streak, that has worked 10 different times for a run scored average of .9 runs per game by BJ. You can't tell me sabermetrics guys that you can guarantee anyone else in the Braves lineup will produce that. So far no one else who has touched the lead off spot has come close to that except for a few games where Heyward was on fire from lead off.

Will it last? No one is arguing that it will. But for right dammit now it is working. You can throw every stat Tommy La Stella has at me, but none of them will guarantee that he will succeed at scoring runs for the team at the rate BJ is currently doing it. OBP this and BA that and blah blah blah. He might be too young for a lead off role right now. Why change just for the hell of changing during a win streak? That's where statistics and overanalysis can be dangerous to a team. You roll with what works on a team like ours that doesn't have a traditional lead off hitter. You make moves and push buttons and see what works. That can suck during playoffs as we've seen, but for right now it's sucking for the teams watching us put up 5.45 runs per game over our last 11.

[KB21]

What if those 18 extra fastballs translate into 9 hits...and 9 RBI. Them they would be a pretty doggone big deal. Let's say he took all 18 of them. Then not so much.

it is all situational...

No. It isn't situational. It's there in black and white. The reason stated for Todd Frazier's production this year is that he has a player with tremendous speed in front of him, and that speed helps increase the number of fastballs thrown to Todd Frazier. The term used was "Frazier gets pumped fastballs". The numbers show that the increase in fastballs thrown more than likely falls into year to year variance and is not because he has a speed player in front of him. Particularly when that speed player is on base only 30% of the time.

[msstate7]

No. It isn't situational. It's there in black and white. The reason stated for Todd Frazier's production this year is that he has a player with tremendous speed in front of him, and that speed helps increase the number of fastballs thrown to Todd Frazier. The term used was "Frazier gets pumped fastballs". The numbers show that the increase in fastballs thrown more than likely falls into year to year variance and is not because he has a speed player in front of him. Particularly when that speed player is on base only 30% of the time.

Do you think a batter has more of an advantage when a pitcher is worried about the runner at 1st?

[KB21]

Somehow this debate has morphed into how many fastballs Todd Frazier is seeing. That's just a portion of the reason why Frazier is suddenly an All-Star this year when last year he was not. How about how many hits he's gotten because the defense is worried about Hamilton and can't shift or how many hits he's gotten while Hamilton is attempting to steal leaving a huge hole on the 2b/1b side or how many pitches in the zone is he seeing with Hamilton on base or how much effect does Hamilton have by taking the pitchers concentration off the batter and worried about him stealing? None of these questions can be answered easily but you've got to make the assumption at this point that Billy Hamilton is having an effect on Todd Frazier AND Devin Mesoraco imo too. Todd Frazier in 2013 had 63 R 19 HR 73 RBI and 6 SB. This year he's got before the ASB 53 R 17 HR 47 RBI and 13 SB. Billy Hamilton is going to help Frazier make an extra 60-80 million dollars at this rate. And let's not forget who the Reds had leading off last year too. Shin-Soo Choo whose considered an elite leadoff hitter. Todd Frazier 2014 is destroying Todd Frazier 2013.

Todd Frazier's jump in hits has everything to do with his patient approach at the plate and very little to do with Billy Hamilton hitting in front of him. I know that with Hamilton being from Mississippi and all that we want him to be this outstanding player. He's not though. He's got outstanding speed, but his .309 OBP diminishes his overall value as a player. I absolutely would not hit him in the lead off spot if I were a manager. He would hit 6th in the order with singles hitters behind him, because the numbers show that stolen bases have more value when you have singles hitters behind the stolen base threat and less value when you are hitting sluggers behind him.

[msstate7]

In the most superstitious sport there is, I find it ridiculous you want fredi to change his lineup so drastically in the midst of the best stretch of baseball the braves have played all year.

Fredi addressing the team, "hey guys I've been doing some studying and sabermetrics says I should completely change the lineup..."

Then fredi becomes an idiot to his players.

[msstate7]

Todd Frazier's jump in hits has everything to do with his patient approach at the plate and very little to do with Billy Hamilton hitting in front of him. I know that with Hamilton being from Mississippi and all that we want him to be this outstanding player. He's not though. He's got outstanding speed, but his .309 OBP diminishes his overall value as a player. I absolutely would not hit him in the lead off spot if I were a manager. He would hit 6th in the order with singles hitters behind him, because the numbers show that stolen bases have more value when you have singles hitters behind the stolen base threat and less value when you are hitting sluggers behind him.

Ever thought Frazier's patient approach was to give Hamilton a chance to run? If so, Hamilton has influenced Frazier for the better

[KB21]

This is nuts guys. The point isn't that speed guys are more valuable overall, it's just that they provide something different for an offense. If you have a ton of guys with a high OBP, speed isn't as important. But if you have guys like BJ and Simmons who have lower OBP but are still capable baseball players, you try and put them in situations that will allow them to utilize what skill set they have to best help the team around them. Hitting them 7 and 8 doesn't do their skill set any good, especially when both of them are as hot as they are right now. Simmons and BJ have both increased their BAs over 10 points during this win streak and Simmons is in the middle of a 4 game multi hit streak.

Right now BJs best spot is lead off. Not because he's great at it, but because we are maximizing his efficiency, thus helping the team. I'm not looking over the course of a game. I'm looking for one at bat where BJ will possibly succeed at getting on base. That's what's most realistic, but that's also where we have our best chance to put up a crooked number. Why? We don't have a ton of high OBP guys so BJ gives us the best opportunity to manufacture something.

Him in the lead off, Simmons with a low K rate batting 2nd that can hit and run, go to the opposite side of the field on the ground, and put a ball in play with 2 strikes to protect Upton on a 2 strike steal. Then Freeman and Upton behind. So far over BJ's 11 game hit streak, that has worked 10 different times for a run scored average of .9 runs per game by BJ. You can't tell me sabermetrics guys that you can guarantee anyone else in the Braves lineup will produce that. So far no one else who has touched the lead off spot has come close to that except for a few games where Heyward was on fire from lead off.

Will it last? No one is arguing that it will. But for right dammit now it is working. You can throw every stat Tommy La Stella has at me, but none of them will guarantee that he will succeed at scoring runs for the team at the rate BJ is currently doing it. OBP this and BA that and blah blah blah. He might be too young for a lead off role right now. Why change just for the hell of changing during a win streak? That's where statistics and overanalysis can be dangerous to a team. You roll with what works on a team like ours that doesn't have a traditional lead off hitter. You make moves and push buttons and see what works. That can suck during playoffs as we've seen, but for right now it's sucking for the teams watching us put up 5.45 runs per game over our last 11.

As I have said before, the issue is that it is not working. If your lead off hitter has a .313 OBP like BJ's, he's not doing what he needs to do as a lead off hitter. We are winning, but it is in spite of Fredi's decision to put his worst two OBP hitters at the top of the order, just like the team has won in spite of Fredi since he has been the manager in Atlanta.

[KB21]

Do you think a batter has more of an advantage when a pitcher is worried about the runner at 1st?

No.

[KB21]

In the most superstitious sport there is, I find it ridiculous you want fredi to change his lineup so drastically in the midst of the best stretch of baseball the braves have played all year.

Fredi addressing the team, "hey guys I've been doing some studying and sabermetrics says I should completely change the lineup..."

Then fredi becomes an idiot to his players.

I've been saying ever since they brought him up that Tommy La Stella should be the team's lead off hitter. It's a move a smart manager would have made long ago.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Do you think a batter has more of an advantage when a pitcher is worried about the runner at 1st?

I think pitchers don't get "worried" about runners on 1st. Contrary to the easy opinion there is no jar of "focus" that means that if some thought goes into pitching with a man on 1st that automatically some percentage of "focus" will result in better outcomes for hitters because a pitcher is only "80% focused" on the hitter not 100%

Opponents average for the league with nobody on base is .247... With runners on base it's .248.

[msstate7]

I've been saying ever since they brought him up that Tommy La Stella should be the team's lead off hitter. It's a move a smart manager would have made long ago.

It was made. The team was 2-3. Lastella was 2-20 with 2 walks. Bj took over leadoff next day and the braves are 11-1 since. Bj has 11-game hit streak

[KB21]

I think pitchers don't get "worried" about runners on 1st. Contrary to the easy opinion there is no jar of "focus" that means that if some thought goes into pitching with a man on 1st that automatically some percentage of "focus" will result in better outcomes for hitters because a pitcher is only "80% focused" on the hitter not 100%

Opponents average for the league with nobody on base is .247... With runners on base it's .248.

There probably is, but pitchers who are more worried about the runner on 1st than the hitter rarely ever get out of AAA ball.

[msstate7]

I think pitchers don't get "worried" about runners on 1st. Contrary to the easy opinion there is no jar of "focus" that means that if some thought goes into pitching with a man on 1st that automatically some percentage of "focus" will result in better outcomes for hitters because a pitcher is only "80% focused" on the hitter not 100%

Opponents average for the league with nobody on base is .247... With runners on base it's .248.

Well those stats include all runners (slow and fast) on 1st. I know it doesn't exist, but I wish we had BA with SB threat on 1st.

Another good stat would be scoring % once you get on base. This is a stat that bj would be rated pretty high at

[Pioneer Dawg]

Well those stats include all runners (slow and fast) on 1st. I know it doesn't exist, but I wish we had BA with SB threat on 1st.

Another good stat would be scoring % once you get on base. This is a stat that bj would be rated pretty high at

You have to take into account the number of outs when you actually get on base. Y'all are over complicating it to stretch what isn't there.

[KB21]

It was made. The team was 2-3. Lastella was 2-20 with 2 walks. Bj took over leadoff next day and the braves are 11-1 since. Bj has 11-game hit streak

So what you are saying is that your position in the line up effects how well you hit the ball? That is exactly what you are saying, because you think Tommy La Stella's above average on base skills will not play at the lead off spot based on 22 plate appearances.

What's interesting is that BJ Upton was 4 for 22 with 0 BBs in his first 22 plate appearances as a lead off hitter, the exact same OBP as Tommy La Stella. But, because the team was winning, the change back to Tommy wasn't made. It's nonsensical.

[KB21]

Well those stats include all runners (slow and fast) on 1st. I know it doesn't exist, but I wish we had BA with SB threat on 1st.

Another good stat would be scoring % once you get on base. This is a stat that bj would be rated pretty high at

It's also a stat that he has very little control over.

[MetEdDawg]

As I have said before, the issue is that it is not working. If your lead off hitter has a .313 OBP like BJ's, he's not doing what he needs to do as a lead off hitter. We are winning, but it is in spite of Fredi's decision to put his worst two OBP hitters at the top of the order, just like the team has won in spite of Fredi since he has been the manager in Atlanta.

This is where you statistics folks will never ever be right. It IS working. It may not be working because you think someone with an OBP higher than him would do better. But it IS working in that BJ Upton is producing RIGHT NOW relatively more from that spot than he was anywhere else in the line up and as of now we are scoring 2 more runs per game because of it.

So yes it is working. It doesn't matter if it's worst in the league. If I run a mile in 9 minutes and finish last, then run against those same people with a time of 8:45 but still finish last, did I do better? Yes I did. I may not have improved my overall position, but I still performed better. That is what BJ is doing and why you statistics folks always get this wrong. It is working right now because we are scoring more runs at this moment than at any point in the year and you can see that by how many times BJ is crossing the plate, especially early in the game. That is called working.

BJ was hitting below .204 before he was moved to the lead off spot with 31 runs scored in 71 games for a .44 runs/game total. He also had 92 strikeouts in those 71 games for an average of 1.3 per game. In his last 11 games he now has raised his BA 10 points, has scored 10 total runs for a .91 runs/game total over his last 11, and has lowered his K's/game to 1.2. But that's not working because he's still not your statistical definition of a lead off hitter?

The Braves were averaging 3.5 runs/game before BJ got into the lead off spot. Now they are averaging 5.45 runs/game. But tell me it's still not working because BJ should be producing more in your eyes. You see the big picture with statistics but have the inability to take the sample size and compare it to the whole and see what is truly going on. You statistics folks always have some answer as to how or why something should be changed and why certain managers are idiots or why smart managers would have made a move a long time ago. That's pure stupidity to say that some manager riding a 9 game winning streak is an idiot and should make a change because you or some statistic says so. You sabermetric folks need to get off your high horse and quit thinking your statistics make you right and validate why some manager is stupid or should make some change you think should be made.

[KB21]

This is where you statistics folks will never ever be right. It IS working. It may not be working because you think someone with an OBP higher than him would do better. But it IS working in that BJ Upton is producing RIGHT NOW relatively more from than spot than he was anywhere else in the line up AND more than anyone else on the team over that same stretch all year.

So yes it is working. It doesn't matter if it's worst in the league. If I run a mile in 9 minutes and finish last, then run against those same people with a time of 8:45 but still finish last, did I do better? Yes I did. I may not have improved my overall position, but I still performed better. That is what BJ is doing and why you statistics folks always get this wrong. It is working right now because we are scoring more runs at this moment than at any point in the year. That is called working.

BJ was hitting below .204 before he was moved to the lead off spot with 31 runs scored in 71 games for a .44 runs/game total. He also had 92 strikeouts in those 71 games for an average of 1.3 per game. In his last 11 games he now has raised his BA 10 points, has scored 10 total runs for a .91 runs/game total over his last 11, and has lowered his K's/game to 1.2. But that's not working because he's still not your statistical definition of a lead off hitter?

The Braves were averaging 3.5 runs/game before BJ got into the lead off spot. Now they are averaging 5.45 runs/game. But tell me it's still not working because BJ should be producing more in your eyes. You see the big picture with statistics but have the inability to take the sample size and compare it to the whole and see what is going on.

And we are back to BJ and his .313 OBP from the lead off spot being the reason the team is scoring more runs.

[MetEdDawg]

And we are back to BJ and his .313 OBP from the lead off spot being the reason the team is scoring more runs.

Well his .313 OBP is a hell of a lot higher than it was from the 8 hole or the 6 hole or the 2 hole or every other hole you can think of. You still haven't ever during this entire process made a rebuttal for .91 runs/game scored by BJ during this 11 game hitting streak from lead off. If you get that from your lead off, you are going to have a higher rate of success. We are having that right now and there is no statistic you can throw out there that will tell me someone else with lead off potential on the Braves could do it better, because it's all speculation.

You talk about small sample sizes and stuff like that and La Stella's comparables. How can you argue for La Stella at lead off with his small sample size batting lead off? How do you know his OBP will be higher long term than BJ? Because he statistics from the 7 or 8 hole tell you that? It's pure garbage. You can speculate that, but you can't say that for sure La Stella will do better long term in lead off than BJ. It might be more likely, but you can't sit here and say a smart manager would have made that move a long time ago.

Not to mention the fact you said Todd Cunningham is better right now than BJ when he has 8 career at bats in the majors over 4 years. You lose any credibility you had for that statement right there. Comparing AAA stats by a career minor leaguer to BJ Upton is laughable at best.

[msstate7]

So what you are saying is that your position in the line up effects how well you hit the ball? That is exactly what you are saying, because you think Tommy La Stella's above average on base skills will not play at the lead off spot based on 22 plate appearances.

What's interesting is that BJ Upton was 4 for 22 with 0 BBs in his first 22 plate appearances as a lead off hitter, the exact same OBP as Tommy La Stella. But, because the team was winning, the change back to Tommy wasn't made. It's nonsensical.
He was 5-22 (not much difference). In those 22 at bats, bj hit a hr, scored 4 times, and got a sb.

In lastella's 22 at bats, he hit 0 hr's, 0 runs, and 0 sb's

[MetEdDawg]

He was 5-22 (not much difference). In those 22 at bats, bj hit a hr, scored 4 times, and got a sb.

In lastella's 22 at bats, he hit 0 hr's, 0 runs, and 0 sb's

I can already see their rebuttal msstate7. But that's the teams fault and he had no control over that and you have to give him more time and you have to let it play out because his OBP says so!! Blah blah blah. This conversation is getting dumb now because statistics folks always think they can provide something to make themselves right. They don't like to be wrong. I'm ok with taking a game or two on the chin if BJ shuts down and sucks and we don't make the move.

I'm guessing KB and Pioneer haven't watched every single inning of the last 11 games. I have and I'm pretty cool with the way I think about our current situation and I'm extremely cool with Fredi keeping BJ there.

[KB21]

Well his .313 OBP is a hell of a lot higher than it was from the 8 hole or the 6 hole or the 2 hole or every other hole you can think of. You still haven't ever during this entire process made a rebuttal for .91 runs/game scored by BJ during this 11 game hitting streak from lead off. If you get that from your lead off, you are going to have a higher rate of success. We are having that right now and there is no statistic you can throw out there that will tell me someone else with lead off potential on the Braves could do it better, because it's all speculation.

You talk about small sample sizes and stuff like that and La Stella's comparables. How can you argue for La Stella at lead off with his small sample size batting lead off? How do you know his OBP will be higher long term than BJ? Because he statistics from the 7 or 8 hole tell you that? It's pure garbage. You can speculate that, but you can't say that for sure La Stella will do better long term in lead off than BJ. It might be more likely, but you can't sit here and say a smart manager would have made that move a long time ago.

Not to mention the fact you said Todd Cunningham is better right now than BJ when he has 8 career at bats in the majors over 4 years. You lose any credibility you had for that statement right there. Comparing AAA stats by a career minor leaguer to BJ Upton is laughable at best.

I know La Stella will be better long term as a lead off hitter because of his plate discipline. He has a career .407 OBP in the minors with a walk percentage over 10%. That plate discipline will play no matter where he is hitting in the line up, and the fact that he gets on base and isn't much of a slugger means he is tailor made for the lead off spot.

As far as Todd Cunningham goes, he strikes out less, walks more, and has better bat speed than BJ Upton has right now.

[KB21]

He was 5-22 (not much difference). In those 22 at bats, bj hit a hr, scored 4 times, and got a sb.

In lastella's 22 at bats, he hit 0 hr's, 0 runs, and 0 sb's

La Stella's OBP is 100 points higher than BJ's. That means over the long term, the team will score more runs consistently with La Stella leading off than with BJ Upton leading off.

[MetEdDawg]

La Stella's OBP is 100 points higher than BJ's. That means over the long term, the team will score more runs consistently with La Stella leading off than with BJ Upton leading off.

YOU DON'T KNOW THAT!! My goodness. You can assume that, but until you put his ass in that spot, which you know is completely different than hitting in the 7 or 8 hole, you can't for sure say that.

This makes no sense. You can try La Stella there and statistics say he SHOULD do better, but hitting lead off, just like hitting in the 3 hole, 7 hole, or any other hole has a totally different mentality to it. La Stella does have a small sample size at lead off, but you cannot guarantee me that long term he will have a higher OBP than BJ does right now just because his OBP is higher with him batting at the end of the lineup. That's nuts man. And saying we should put a rookie of 2 months into the lead off spot during a 9 game winning streak because of his hitting sample and OBP over that 2 months is beyond impractical. Maybe if BJ cools off, but you don't do it now.

Team chemistry is something your stats can't measure. Right now the team has it and you don't mess with that crap.

[KB21]

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=10170


Several analyses prior to this one have found little evidence to support the claim that a player’s performance in the recent past is much of a predictor of his performance in the present. There have been well-founded mathematical arguments that streaks are simply random variation over a small sample size. There have been studies looking comparing the performance of groups of players who were recently on hot streaks vs. those on cold streaks. But what if we put the supposition to a very rigorous methodological test, one with a good amount of statistical power to detect even a small effect of streakiness?

As always, if you want to avert your eyes at this point, skip to "The Results."


There is psychology at work here, but it’s not powering actual meaningful changes in performance. Instead, it’s powering the brain wanting to believe in the hot hand and then going back and reconstructing events so that they fit with the desired theory. It’s backward logic, and backward logic is dangerous.


It’s emotionally seductive to believe in the hot hand. Managers are human beings and are overly swayed by emotions. I look forward to the manager who can recognize those emotional responses and overcome them. Maybe he’s already out there. But I’m also looking forward to the time when commentators, announcers, and other folks who make their living talking about baseball will stop engaging in the folk psychology of "Well, this happens to me, this must be what’s happening to the players." There’s a lot of psychology that is present in the game. Just please use the real stuff.

What we have here is a case of the eyes fooling some. There is a lot of psychology behind this. It is possible that moving BJ to the lead off spot, from a psychological standpoint, has made him refocus and change his approach. I do believe though that he is on a "hot streak" for him, even though his numbers in this "hot streak" are not ideal for the lead off spot. Because of this, he is more than likely going to trend back down as his focus wanes. BJ is a free swinging player. He's going to swing at bad pitches. He's not going to draw many walks. He's not going to be a strong on base performer. That's what he is, and no hot streak will change that.

BJ's "hot streak" has convinced some that moving him to the lead off spot is what has spurred this, and they think there is some predictive ability with this small sample size. The feeling is that because he is leading off now, he will continue to hit like this. There is also illusion of control at play here, as those that applaud this move and support it are giving BJ a lot more control over the situation than he really has. The fact is, it is likely he would have had this hot streak regardless of where he was hitting in the line up. It is also likely that this hot streak will end soon, and we will be back to discussing whether we should put Evan Gattis in left field to keep his bat in the line up and move Jason Heyward to center field just to get BJ's bat out of the line up. Because of this, I'm not willing to support leaving him at the lead off spot no matter how well everyone else is hitting the ball behind him. I'd much rather go with the numbers and put my best on base guy at that top spot and trust that the overwhelming evidence that higher OBP leads to run creation will play out.

[KB21]

YOU DON'T KNOW THAT!! My goodness. You can assume that, but until you put his ass in that spot, which you know is completely different than hitting in the 7 or 8 hole, you can't for sure say that.

This makes no sense. You can try La Stella there and statistics say he SHOULD do better, but hitting lead off, just like hitting in the 3 hole, 7 hole, or any other hole has a totally different mentality to it. La Stella does have a small sample size at lead off, but you cannot guarantee me that long term he will have a higher OBP than BJ does right now just because his OBP is higher with him batting at the end of the lineup. That's nuts man. And saying we should put a rookie of 2 months into the lead off spot during a 9 game winning streak because of his hitting sample and OBP over that 2 months is beyond impractical. Maybe if BJ cools off, but you don't do it now.

Team chemistry is something your stats can't measure. Right now the team has it and you don't mess with that crap.

There is a mountain of evidence that shows the predictive value of a higher on base percentage leading to run creation is there. Do you really think Tommy La Stella, the most patient hitter in the line up not named Jason Heyward, is going to change his approach as a lead off guy, take less walks, and try to swing for the fences more? This guy is a less slugging version of Matt Carpenter, who is one of the top lead off hitters in baseball.

[MetEdDawg]

It's not about changing approach. It's about what a person is good at. The small sample size says that La Stella struggled there. Like I said it's a small sample size, but he did struggle. I would love to know your thoughts as to what Fredi should do if La Stella hits .200 with 40 or so ABs from the lead off spot with a .250 OBP over 10 or so games. Just keep him there? What do your stats say to do when someone doesn't do well in a spot? Keep them there until their OBP is worse than the last person who was in lead off, then put that person back in, then switch them if that person's OBP goes back lower than the first person? Your stats can't predict the mentality of a person in a new role. He might suck there.

If OBP from the lead off position were everything, the Braves wouldn't have the 2nd best record in the NL right now. Since it's not and since we are, I'm gonna let Fredi do his thing for right now. Hard to argue with the current results during a 9 game winning streak.

[BoomBoom]

There is a mountain of evidence that shows the predictive value of a higher on base percentage leading to run creation is there. Do you really think Tommy La Stella, the most patient hitter in the line up not named Jason Heyward, is going to change his approach as a lead off guy, take less walks, and try to swing for the fences more? This guy is a less slugging version of Matt Carpenter, who is one of the top lead off hitters in baseball.

how do you factor in rookies and where they hit in the lineup? do you consider that putting added pressure on a rookie by hitting him high in the lineup, rather than low, may have an adverse effect, or are you not considering that as a factor?

[KB21]

how do you factor in rookies and where they hit in the lineup? do you consider that putting added pressure on a rookie by hitting him high in the lineup, rather than low, may have an adverse effect, or are you not considering that as a factor?

I don't think that is a factor. If you can hit and have good patience at the plate, it shouldn't matter where you hit in the line up as far as your mental approach. I don't see Tommy La Stella becoming a BJ Upton type of hacker just because you "put more pressure" on him by putting him in the lead off spot. Tommy will always be a better, more effective hitter and a better lead off hitter.

[Todd4State]

I don't think that is a factor. If you can hit and have good patience at the plate, it shouldn't matter where you hit in the line up as far as your mental approach. I don't see Tommy La Stella becoming a BJ Upton type of hacker just because you "put more pressure" on him by putting him in the lead off spot. Tommy will always be a better, more effective hitter and a better lead off hitter.

It "shouldn't"- but you do have to factor in that we're dealing with human beings at some point and not just names on a piece of paper.

Long range, long term- LaStella is more than likely going to be a better lead off guy- but right now he's still a rookie who I was watching play in Pearl, Ms. last year.

[msstate7]

A few more games like this for bj and I'll be all for moving him down. Terrible performance...

[MetEdDawg]

A few more games like this for bj and I'll be all for moving him down. Terrible performance...

These are the types of days he hasn't been having in the lead off which is why he's been so productive. But you swing at the first pitch of the game and fly out to CF and you're telling me that you don't have the mental approach down yet and are setting yourself up for a bad day.

Here's the thing with all this. I'm not opposed to moving La Stella to lead off at some point. I was only opposed to doing it right now during the streak and changing things while we are on a roll. I've said from the beginning that right now BJ is not a great lead off guy but he's been doing well there. It's not a coincidence that he hasn't been on base today and we have 1 run scored.

Another day or two of BJ doing this and I'm all for trying La Stella there. I just don't like people using statistics to say that during a winning streak you should change things or your manager is an idiot.

[Pioneer Dawg]

So if BJ does good hitting 1st then go Fredi see its NOT all about numbers. But if BJ struggles ah well it's time to move him. Only the natural "manager instinct" can tell when it's going to be a 1-4 day or an 0-4 with 3 K's day.

[MetEdDawg]

I almost posted that it was going to be an 0 fer day for BJ after that first at bat. Guy on the mound that's 3-6 on the year with an almost 5 ERA and you fly out to middle CF on a first pitch FB right down Broadway as the lead off hitter??? I just don't get how that happens. Take the Julio Franco approach and almost act like you don't even care the pitcher is throwing the first pitch.

BJ could be so much better than he currently is, but he's really got a shitty plate approach. He's been doing better during what was his 11 game hitting streak. Better contact, going oppo a few times, using his speed, and scoring runs. But when you strike out 3 times and never put up a competitive at bat in any of the 3 it's hard to continue backing someone like that. I still think if he's getting 1 hit a game on average he is most effective in the lead off spot. The reason I had been defending him is because he had gotten away from some of the swinging at pitches diving towards his feet, or missing FBs in FB counts, or backwards K's when his ass is getting set up. But he did all of that multiple times today and it's hard to watch. I would have been ok with an 0-4 day with a strikeout and a couple ground outs and a fly out. But he wasn't even close today.

I have said that I don't want La Stella batting lead off yet. Well I at least want him moved up to the 6 hole right now ahead of Chris Johnson. He deserves at least that much for what he's been doing lately. But two or three more games of BJ doing what he did today and I say go with La Stella at lead off, which I will restate that I have NOT been opposed to at some point this year. Fredi will probably give BJ till the All Star break to see what he can do, but if he does two or three of these type games over the next week he needs to go to the 7 hole and stay there no matter what. I still think when he is at his best he needs to be in the lead off spot, but after watching La Stella over the past two weeks I'm changing my tune some about how ready I think he might be.

I thought maybe mid August we could see La Stella really find himself and see what he's capable of. I think he's pretty much there now, but if BJ sucks it up the next week I say just go with La Stella the rest of the way, let the rookie take some lumps and see what he can do when it's his spot for an extended period of time. Like I said, I'm not backing down from saying BJ helps the line up from the lead off position, but La Stella had another good day today and his bat has really improved since that June 16th to June 28th spell of going 4 for 46. I'm not convinced yet he's going to just lock it down and be all world and our offense will start going nuts, but his approach over the last two weeks has improved significantly and I do think he will be a viable option at lead off sooner rather than later.

[KB21]

Ho hum. La Stella on base twice again today. That's 6 times he has been on base in his last 9 plate appearances. It's really a shame that his on base ability is being wasted at the bottom of the line up.

[Todd4State]

Ho hum. La Stella on base twice again today. That's 6 times he has been on base in his last 9 plate appearances. It's really a shame that his on base ability is being wasted at the bottom of the line up.

The Braves only have 90 games left to get him up there. They better hurry up!

[KB21]

The Braves only have 90 games left to get him up there. They better hurry up!

Oh, I have absolutely no faith that Fredi Gonzalez will make the right move here. It will not surprise me to see him use Simmons as the lead off hitter when BJ falls back down. It also will not surprise me to see him just keep BJ at the top of the order no matter what he does. Fredi is that big of a doofus when it comes to making decisions. Look at how he still uses Avilan, even though he keeps getting killed.

[Pioneer Dawg]

The Braves only have 90 games left to get him up there. They better hurry up!

You seemingly again fail to understand the importance of maximizing every game because of playoff implications. 49 runs means nothing***

[KB21]

Todd Cunningham 2 for 3 with a double and a walk tonight.

[msstate7]

Todd Cunningham 2 for 3 with a double and a walk tonight.

Do you actually think the braves are going to cut bj? They won't even cut uggla. Now I'd love to cut Jordan in favor of Cunningham. I'd also like to see gosselin instead of uggla, but it won't happen.

[Dawg61]

You seemingly again fail to understand the importance of maximizing every game because of playoff implications. 49 runs means nothing***


Haha very true. I am a "baseball" fan in the sense. Not really bandwagon though.

A's take precedence of course.
Dodgers- provide late night west coast options(late games)..Love watching Kershaw and Puig.. Vin Scully
Angels- same thing.. West coast option.. Trout
Not Braves
Not really Nats
Marlins- connections to the organization
Astros- Love what and how they are building. Saber oriented. Try new things in farm system.

Not like I'm jumping on the Sox and Yanks or anything. Rooting interest for fantasy comes into play often.

Since you don't like the Braves you should be happy with BJ leading off all season long

[Todd4State]

You seemingly again fail to understand the importance of maximizing every game because of playoff implications. 49 runs means nothing***

And you again fail to understand baseball. Playing a guy while he is hot IS maximizing every game. I guess the Braves 9 game win streak means nothing.**

Let me help you try to understand- even though I know this will be above your head. Baseball is a game of streaks and highs and lows. The stats that are accumulated don't occur in an even distribution. IF they did, the sabermetric way would make sense every single time. But it is played out on the field- and things occur at random. If you play a guy who is hot who is getting his runs in a chunk (ie hot streak) you keep playing them. When he gets cold, then you stop or you move him. It really is that simple.

And you can't sit there and tell me that Upton's 0.3 less runs is why the Braves lost a game by 2. It's a total team effort and beating the hell out of one spot in the order is short sighted on your part at best.

It's no different than when we kept giving the ball to Perkins in the Egg Bowl in 2010 even though Ballard was the better RB. Perkins was hot, so we kept giving him the ball. What you are saying would be like saying that since Ballard is the better RB, we should have kept giving him the ball and ignored Perkins because at some point Perkins was going to stop being hot. Well, you take advantage of players that are hot when they are hot. Otherwise you waste them.

I know you want it to be simple because you don't know or understand a lot about the sport and it's just easier to punch numbers into a computer and go with whatever the printout says- but it's just not that cut and dried. To succeed you have to be able to think abstractly and not just read what's in black or white.

[Todd4State]

Since you don't like the Braves you should be happy with BJ leading off all season long

Pioneer has a lot of jealousy issues over me. I would not be surprised if at least half of his posts are aimed at trying to "take me down" for a lack of better words- or as he calls it "my agenda".

See the thread where he apparently archived some of my posts from about six months back in a lame attempt to discredit me.

[KB21]

Do you actually think the braves are going to cut bj? They won't even cut uggla. Now I'd love to cut Jordan in favor of Cunningham. I'd also like to see gosselin instead of uggla, but it won't happen.

I've been a big proponent of dropping Schafer to bring up Cunningham. Todd profiles as a 4th outfielder.

Another guy to keep an eye on is Kyle Wren, who is a player that is combining getting on base with tremendous speed on the base paths. He had a .365 OBP at high A Lynchburg and was 33 of 42 on stolen bases, and now at Mississippi, he has a .444 OBP with 3 stolen bases in 3 chances.

[KB21]

And you again fail to understand baseball. Playing a guy while he is hot IS maximizing every game. I guess the Braves 9 game win streak means nothing.**

Let me help you try to understand- even though I know this will be above your head. Baseball is a game of streaks and highs and lows. The stats that are accumulated don't occur in an even distribution. IF they did, the sabermetric way would make sense every single time. But it is played out on the field- and things occur at random. If you play a guy who is hot who is getting his runs in a chunk (ie hot streak) you keep playing them. When he gets cold, then you stop or you move him. It really is that simple.

And you can't sit there and tell me that Upton's 0.3 less runs is why the Braves lost a game by 2. It's a total team effort and beating the hell out of one spot in the order is short sighted on your part at best.

It's no different than when we kept giving the ball to Perkins in the Egg Bowl in 2010 even though Ballard was the better RB. Perkins was hot, so we kept giving him the ball. What you are saying would be like saying that since Ballard is the better RB, we should have kept giving him the ball and ignored Perkins because at some point Perkins was going to stop being hot. Well, you take advantage of players that are hot when they are hot. Otherwise you waste them.

I know you want it to be simple because you don't know or understand a lot about the sport and it's just easier to punch numbers into a computer and go with whatever the printout says- but it's just not that cut and dried. To succeed you have to be able to think abstractly and not just read what's in black or white.

That would be OK if managers/coaches actually stopped going with a guy who was on a hot streak that has cooled off, but in reality, it doesn't work that way. When we do not pay attention to the numbers, we convince ourselves that the hot streak is what the player will be going forward, and when he gets cold, we continue to play him to see if he can get hot again. It's human nature to do that when you decide that trusting your eyes is more important than trusting the data that is presented to you.

[msstate7]

I've been a big proponent of dropping Schafer to bring up Cunningham. Todd profiles as a 4th outfielder.

Another guy to keep an eye on is Kyle Wren, who is a player that is combining getting on base with tremendous speed on the base paths. He had a .365 OBP at high A Lynchburg and was 33 of 42 on stolen bases, and now at Mississippi, he has a .444 OBP with 3 stolen bases in 3 chances.

And of course, jose peraza at 2b. It'll be interesting next season if jose overtakes lastella

[Pioneer Dawg]

Pioneer has a lot of jealousy issues over me.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[KB21]

And of course, jose peraza at 2b. It'll be interesting next season if jose overtakes lastella

I'd move Peraza to 3B and dump Chris Johnson, but we had to give Chris that extension that made very little sense.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Since you don't like the Braves you should be happy with BJ leading off all season long

Not a dislike. Just indifference. Same with the Saints.

[msstate7]

I'd move Peraza to 3B and dump Chris Johnson, but we had to give Chris that extension that made very little sense.

From what I hear Jose projects as a gold glove type player at 2b. Not sure the braves would make this move. I'm happy with lastella's all around game though, so I wouldn't be opposed to peraza at 3b

[Pioneer Dawg]

Show me, Todd, where a player's HOT streak is a good predictor of his next game's performance . OF COURSE a season is not evenly distributed but the streaks aren't determined by a magical "hot" or "cold". Its the natural randomness that is baseball.

Here is the numbers showing that "hot" and "cold" streaks are not predictive of anything.

http://books.google.com/books?id=ssAPTAgCKb8C&pg=PT70&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false

You are the one who doesn't REALLY understand the game.. "49 runs over the course of a season is negligible" proved that. You WANT so badly for the game to fit your mold but the reality of the situation is so plain to see and that upsets you.

[KB21]

Show me, Todd, where a player's HOT streak is a good predictor of his next game's performance . OF COURSE a season is not evenly distributed but the streaks aren't determined by a magical "hot" or "cold". Its the natural randomness that is baseball.

Here is the numbers showing that "hot" and "cold" streaks are not predictive of anything.

http://books.google.com/books?id=ssAPTAgCKb8C&pg=PT70&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false

You are the one who doesn't REALLY understand the game.. "49 runs over the course of a season is negligible" proved that. You WANT so badly for the game to fit your mold but the reality of the situation is so plain to see and that upsets you.

The thing is, if you look at BJ's numbers that he has put up as a lead off hitter, it's not really a hot streak. It is considered to be a hot streak by some because he has been so bad for 500 some odd at bats over the past year plus. When you look at his career numbers, these last 12 games can actually be looked at as a case where he is regressing towards his mean.

Think about it this way. His triple slash numbers in the four years prior to coming to Atlanta:

2009 -- .241/.313/.373
2010 -- .237/.322/.424
2011 -- .243/.331/.439
2012 -- .246/.298/.454

During his "hot" streak -- .283/.313/.457

From an OBP and SLG standpoint, this is basically what he was prior to his first year in Atlanta. His average is higher, but his BB% is lower. The higher average coincides with a diminished K rate, but I anticipate both of these will trend toward his mean. His BABIP as a lead off hitter is .361 this year, and that will trend towards .300, which will cause his AVG to drop to his mean.

My concern is whether a new mean has been set. I think his ability to hit the fastball has declined, and as a result, he's not as patient as he typically has been. His BB% has been cut in half, and that is a concern.

Here's the thing though. Even at his mean, he's not good enough to be a lead off hitter, and it is likely that he would have regressed towards this mean regardless of where he was hitting in the line up.

[Pioneer Dawg]

Another thing is people are equating "hitting streak" to "hot streak". Hitting streaks are fun but pretty blah in terms of actual meaning.

Upton's last 14 days have been at a .309 wOBA clip. Not "hot" at all. La Stella has been at a .345 clip over the same time period.

Like KB said, BJ has been so awful that this short period of slightly below average (league wOBA is .312) is seen as something to celebrate.

[KB21]

Another thing is people are equating "hitting streak" to "hot streak". Hitting streaks are fun but pretty blah in terms of actual meaning.

Upton's last 14 days have been at a .309 wOBA clip. Not "hot" at all. La Stella has been at a .345 clip over the same time period.

Like KB said, BJ has been so awful that this short period of slightly below average (league wOBA is .312) is seen as something to celebrate.

Once again, more evidence that he is actually regressing towards his mean. His wOBA in the years I mentioned above are .306, .328, .333, and .323. This is a situation where he is still not good, but he is less bad than what he has been previously in Atlanta. The problem with this is that Fredi will not move him from this spot if he continues this, and this will ultimately cost the Braves runs over the rest of the year.

[Todd4State]

Show me, Todd, where a player's HOT streak is a good predictor of his next game's performance . OF COURSE a season is not evenly distributed but the streaks aren't determined by a magical "hot" or "cold". Its the natural randomness that is baseball.

Here is the numbers showing that "hot" and "cold" streaks are not predictive of anything.

http://books.google.com/books?id=ssAPTAgCKb8C&pg=PT70&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false

You are the one who doesn't REALLY understand the game.. "49 runs over the course of a season is negligible" proved that. You WANT so badly for the game to fit your mold but the reality of the situation is so plain to see and that upsets you.

So, what's Upton going to do tomorrow? You tell me right now based on whatever you want to use. You have 24 hours from the time I post this. You can say 0-4 and you might be right. You might not. And I want specifics- how many K's, hits, and walks.

We don't have the benefit of a crystal ball that tells us what someone is going to do tomorrow. There is nothing out there that can definitively tell us what a player is or isn't going to do. We can look at stats and have an educated guess- but it's only that. It's a guess.

All a manager has to go on is how that player is doing currently. They can see if a player is seeing and hitting the ball well. They can use stats as an adjunct to see if they hit a pitcher well or not. I don't know what I'm going to do tomorrow in my daily life. I guarantee you that if the manager did have something that would tell them that from day to day and that a player would go 0-4 they would definitely do it. All you really have is something that only tells us what to expect over the course of 162 games which is totally different from day to day. You see forest, but you aren't looking at the trees.

No one on here is saying that a guy going on a hot streak is "predictive" of a guy staying hot and it continuing throughout the entire year at all, or even tomorrow for that matter. What we're saying is you keep playing that guy as long as he is hot because no one- including you, Bill James, Tom Tango, Harold Reynolds, etc. knows when that is going to end. So, it makes the most sense to all of us with a brain to keep playing that guy while he is being productive.

All you did is basically wait around after 9 WINS to say "see I'm right". And I guarantee you that the Braves fans are happy about that.

If you want me to buy what you are selling- show me something that tells me what these guys are going to do tomorrow. Because you don't have it because it's not out there.

[Todd4State]

And really? A guy wrote a chapter in a book about how hot streaks will end at some point? LOL.

What's Chapter 3? You are more likely to get a hit if you use a bat?

[msstate7]

And really? A guy wrote a chapter in a book about how hot streaks will end at some point? LOL.

What's Chapter 3? You are more likely to get a hit if you use a bat?

I laughed

[KB21]

And really? A guy wrote a chapter in a book about how hot streaks will end at some point? LOL.

What's Chapter 3? You are more likely to get a hit if you use a bat?

The point of the chapter is that a hot streak is defined as a streak where a player produces numbers that are out of the ordinary and higher than what his career has been, whereas a cold streak is when a player produces numbers that are much lower than what his career norm is. The whole point of making decisions based upon streaks is that they are not sustainable, and you should be making your decisions based on what the player is the majority of the time.

[Todd4State]

That would be OK if managers/coaches actually stopped going with a guy who was on a hot streak that has cooled off, but in reality, it doesn't work that way. When we do not pay attention to the numbers, we convince ourselves that the hot streak is what the player will be going forward, and when he gets cold, we continue to play him to see if he can get hot again. It's human nature to do that when you decide that trusting your eyes is more important than trusting the data that is presented to you.

Do you really think that managers in MLB with analytics depts. don't look at stats and data?

[KB21]

Do you really think that managers in MLB with analytics depts. don't look at stats and data?

I'd say that a majority of managers in MLB intentionally do not pay attention to the data.

Remember the scene in Moneyball where Billy Beane goes to Art Howe and tells him that he should be playing Scott Hatteburg because of his superior OBP rather than Carlos Pena, who was a low contact, low OBP, high power guy back then? Art Howe's response was that he didn't care about hatteberg's OBP, and that Pena was the starting 1st baseman. IMO, that is the typical response from MLB managers when looking at the data. I think there are actually very few MLB managers that really pay attention to the data. Most manage on gut feeling, and the league's worst IMO is Kirk Gibson with Don Mattingly not far behind him.

[Todd4State]

The point of the chapter is that a hot streak is defined as a streak where a player produces numbers that are out of the ordinary and higher than what his career has been, whereas a cold streak is when a player produces numbers that are much lower than what his career norm is. The whole point of making decisions based upon streaks is that they are not sustainable, and you should be making your decisions based on what the player is the majority of the time.

Everybody understands that they are not sustainable. That shouldn't even be up for debate any more.

And of course you should base your lineup on what the player is "a majority of the time". But if you know a guy is on a hot streak, you might as well take advantage of it for that period of time that he is hot. I would have to believe that the team doing well falls into the exception category though.

[Pioneer Dawg]

So, what's Upton going to do tomorrow?

You don't know what he's going to do on a certain day and THATS THE POINT. We KNOW La Stella gives the BEST CHANCE of getting on an a given situation so you can extrapolate that out to putting him there. You gain the advantage at the margins and it maximizes your wins over a season. Miguel Cabrera COULD go 0-4 tomorrow but are you bat him 9th because that may happen? No. You don't know what BJ is going to do tomorrow either. I can tell you that he is MORE LIKELY to be a worse leadoff option than La Stella based on numbers, not the "gut"

Your lack of a logical understanding on baseball lineups is startling

[Pioneer Dawg]

But if you know a guy is on a hot streak, you might as well take advantage of it for that period of time that he is hot.

Did you not read the link or are you being willfully ignorant again? You cannot "take advantage of it" because there is no predictability to it. He is ALWAYS most likely to be his normal self the next day.

[Todd4State]

I'd say that a majority of managers in MLB intentionally do not pay attention to the data.

Remember the scene in Moneyball where Billy Beane goes to Art Howe and tells him that he should be playing Scott Hatteburg because of his superior OBP rather than Carlos Pena, who was a low contact, low OBP, high power guy back then? Art Howe's response was that he didn't care about hatteberg's OBP, and that Pena was the starting 1st baseman. IMO, that is the typical response from MLB managers when looking at the data. I think there are actually very few MLB managers that really pay attention to the data. Most manage on gut feeling, and the league's worst IMO is Kirk Gibson with Don Mattingly not far behind him.

So, you are basing your thought on that off of a movie that was made to glorify Billy Beane and made to basically make him look like a genius and you think that is reinforced by the worst manager in MLB? That would be about like me taking the movie Titanic as fact on the actual event.

See- here's part of the problem with sabermetrics. They're trying to make it out into this war that doesn't really exist. And so you have these stat sheet baseball fans like Pioneer that only see one side of it and don't see the big picture because it's all about "proving yourself right". And if it doesn't work out like the stat sheet says, just throw out "umm....small sample size."

Think about it for a second. If MLB managers didn't pay attention to the data, then teams are wasting millions of dollars on these analytic depts. Most team would say," well Manager Gibson doesn't use this, so let's just cut it." MLB uses sabermetrics- no doubt about it. Managers use it. Now, they may not use it like sabermeticians WANT them to use it. But they do use it.

That said there is no doubt a human element as well. It's not fantasy baseball. I believe that a lot of the things that sabermetrics people call "luck" more often than not has an explanation. But because they can't see what's going on behind the scenes in batting cage, in the film room, on the training table the only way that it can be explained is "luck". But I do think that most managers use a combination of both stats and gut feeling. Even with sabermetrics, you still have to know situations and possible scenarios and the only way to know and manage through that is to know baseball.

[Todd4State]

You don't know what he's going to do on a certain day and THATS THE POINT. We KNOW La Stella gives the BEST CHANCE of getting on an a given situation so you can extrapolate that out to putting him there. You gain the advantage at the margins and it maximizes your wins over a season. Miguel Cabrera COULD go 0-4 tomorrow but are you bat him 9th because that may happen? No. You don't know what BJ is going to do tomorrow either. I can tell you that he is MORE LIKELY to be a worse leadoff option than La Stella based on numbers, not the "gut"Your lack of a logical understanding on baseball lineups is startling

And how do you know LaStella isn't about to go cold?

Again, you are arguing that a manager is an idiot because he made a move that defies convention of the stat sheet and WON NINE GAMES IN A ROW. THAT in a nutshell is everything that is wrong with sabermetrics.

[Todd4State]

Did you not read the link or are you being willfully ignorant again? You cannot "take advantage of it" because there is no predictability to it. He is ALWAYS most likely to be his normal self the next day.

Do you know what Upton is working on in the cage? Do you know what's going on behind the scenes with these players? No. That's where that information comes in.

[KB21]

So, you are basing your thought on that off of a movie that was made to glorify Billy Beane and made to basically make him look like a genius and you think that is reinforced by the worst manager in MLB? That would be about like me taking the movie Titanic as fact on the actual event.

See- here's part of the problem with sabermetrics. They're trying to make it out into this war that doesn't really exist. And so you have these stat sheet baseball fans like Pioneer that only see one side of it and don't see the big picture because it's all about "proving yourself right". And if it doesn't work out like the stat sheet says, just throw out "umm....small sample size."

Think about it for a second. If MLB managers didn't pay attention to the data, then teams are wasting millions of dollars on these analytic depts. Most team would say," well Manager Gibson doesn't use this, so let's just cut it." MLB uses sabermetrics- no doubt about it. Managers use it. Now, they may not use it like sabermeticians WANT them to use it. But they do use it.

That said there is no doubt a human element as well. It's not fantasy baseball. I believe that a lot of the things that sabermetrics people call "luck" more often than not has an explanation. But because they can't see what's going on behind the scenes in batting cage, in the film room, on the training table the only way that it can be explained is "luck". But I do think that most managers use a combination of both stats and gut feeling. Even with sabermetrics, you still have to know situations and possible scenarios and the only way to know and manage through that is to know baseball.

No, I'm not basing my opinion of MLB managers on a movie that was made to glorify Billy Beane, who I do feel is the best GM in baseball. I'm basing my opinion on what I see as decisions managers make that are simply nonsensical when you look at the numbers. Decisions like putting BJ Upton in the lead off spot, putting Billy Hamilton in the lead off spot, putting Dee Gordon in the lead off spot, putting Ender Inciarte in the lead off spot.....etc.

[Todd4State]

No, I'm not basing my opinion of MLB managers on a movie that was made to glorify Billy Beane, who I do feel is the best GM in baseball. I'm basing my opinion on what I see as decisions managers make that are simply nonsensical when you look at the numbers. Decisions like putting BJ Upton in the lead off spot, putting Billy Hamilton in the lead off spot, putting Dee Gordon in the lead off spot, putting Ender Inciarte in the lead off spot.....etc.

I think baseball is starting to transition a little bit because of the lack of offense. And because of guys like Beane speed has gotten undervalued for years- and even going back to the steroid era. A couple of those guys are really young players like Hamilton, who are going to get better as time goes on. When offense goes down, teams start to look for ways to try to create it. We've seen that in college. I think some teams are willing to take some lumps now in hopes that those players are better down the road. We'll see if it works or not.

At any rate, MLB has got to start getting hitters back to using the whole field, they need to stop trying to pull everything, and they need to stop trying to work the count every single time up and they need to start being aggressive.

[Pioneer Dawg]

If speed were undervalued and an inefficiency waiting to be exploited, Billy Beane would be the first to let you know.

[Todd4State]

If speed were undervalued and an inefficiency waiting to be exploited, Billy Beane would be the first to let you know.

Right.**