Don't look now Braves fans

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msstate7

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MetEdDawg

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msstate7

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KB21

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.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...rticleid=10170

Quote:

---

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."

---

Quote:

---

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.

---

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MetEdDawg

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KB21

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?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoomBoom

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KB21

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.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msstate7

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.

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.

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

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***

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KB21

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.