|
Post by aztecron on Sept 30, 2011 19:01:17 GMT -8
I think its almost comical how quickly the Padres go through hitting coaches. As I stated in another thread, it ain't the hitting coaches. It's the GM's, both Towers and Hoyer, and the bare pocket owners who keep bringing in talent who seem to lack the ability to hit professionally. I give Towers credit for the trade for Adrian Gonzales, other than that, flat out fail. Long story short, until now, I don't think we've had the quality minor league development staff that we have in place now. Why it took some 15 years to d, blows my mind. That will help develop some of our younger players. We had some kids who had some breakout years the last two years in the minors. Next year will be tell the tale as some of those kids will be at San Antonio and at Tucson. I have no doubt Randy Ready lands another big league job if he wants too, this off season.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Oct 3, 2011 8:51:01 GMT -8
One other interesting thing I found looking at his statement about power and strikeouts that surprised me is the correlation between SLG and Ks. In MLB this year that correlation (by team) is mildly negative. It is -.41. The correlation between walks and strikeouts is very close to zero. It is +.038. I guess it should be done at player level using K-Rate instead of gross Ks. But that I will leave to a later date.
But I agree the Padres need to cut down on strikeouts but I hate that being the focus instead of more walks and more power being the focus. You do realize Moneyball was published in 2003 and the game has gone through another evolution since then right? Just kidding around. The big problem with Moneyball is that most people fail to realize what was done. It isn't that walks are magic. It is that walks were undervalued in the market. Today something else is undervalued. That is what GMs need to get at a discount. Statistics need to be used to determine what is undervalued. I think it is probably doubles and stolen bases. GMs tend to value walks sufficiently now.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Oct 3, 2011 8:52:16 GMT -8
And I disagree. General managers can be wrong you know. An appeal to authority does nothing for me. Right, cause Jed Hoyer has less access to statistics than you do, and obviously his in house analytical gurus running highly advanced statistical analysis don't have it right either. Bill, Bill, Bill. That doesn't #1 make them right and that doesn't #2 mean they always articulate exactly what they know is true.
|
|
|
Post by untitled on Oct 5, 2011 17:41:13 GMT -8
You do realize Moneyball was published in 2003 and the game has gone through another evolution since then right? Just kidding around. The big problem with Moneyball is that most people fail to realize what was done. It isn't that walks are magic. It is that walks were undervalued in the market. Today something else is undervalued. That is what GMs need to get at a discount. Statistics need to be used to determine what is undervalued. I think it is probably doubles and stolen bases. GMs tend to value walks sufficiently now. You know who doesn't value watching batters continually walk? The average fan. Baseball, though I love it, doesn't contain a whole lot of action in most games (esp. Padres games) and to watch a team continually gun for the walk is the most trying thing in being a baseball fan. Value hitting. I'd rather see a game be won 3-2 and played with great defense and people actually making contact, than a game ending in 6-2 with a bunch of walks. Walks will happen, obviously, but to watch our hitters being 'selective' (looking for a walk) like when Forsythe watched 3 straight fastballs for strikes is ridiculous and not worth my time or money. Baseball is meant to be entertainment. Value people who can at least make contact and make it interesting.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 24, 2011 13:43:58 GMT -8
Moneyball is a fraud. It doesn't win World Series. It can build contenders for division titles, but that's not what the goal is supposed to be.
The Padres were plenty offensive last season. The fans were completely offended that the organization would put out a bunch of AAA players and some journeymen and call that a Major League roster. I know a lot of fans who were offended by that - and I'm one of them.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Oct 24, 2011 14:18:25 GMT -8
Moneyball is a fraud. It doesn't win World Series. It can build contenders for division titles, but that's not what the goal is supposed to be. The Padres were plenty offensive last season. The fans were completely offended that the organization would put out a bunch of AAA players and some journeymen and call that a Major League roster. I know a lot of fans who were offended by that - and I'm one of them. Moneyball is simply revaluing elements within the game to more accurately reflect their true value rather than their perceived value. When that was done by the "A"s, walks were undervalued and looking good was overvalued. Those things have been adopted by the mainstream of baseball for the most part. To use the moneyball concept now requires you to find other things that are under valued as the game changes. It is not the very narrow concept that walks are good. Things that are currently undervalued in my opinion are: 1. Value of signing foreign free agents. 2. Value of extra draft picks from losing free agents. 3. Value of steals (less home runs makes steals have more relative value) 4. Value of doubles Walks are already valued within the market so you can not get them for cheap anymore.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Oct 24, 2011 14:19:07 GMT -8
Moneyball is a fraud. It doesn't win World Series. It can build contenders for division titles, but that's not what the goal is supposed to be. The Padres were plenty offensive last season. The fans were completely offended that the organization would put out a bunch of AAA players and some journeymen and call that a Major League roster. I know a lot of fans who were offended by that - and I'm one of them. Boston won the world series using moneyball concepts.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 24, 2011 20:02:28 GMT -8
Moneyball is a fraud. It doesn't win World Series. It can build contenders for division titles, but that's not what the goal is supposed to be. The Padres were plenty offensive last season. The fans were completely offended that the organization would put out a bunch of AAA players and some journeymen and call that a Major League roster. I know a lot of fans who were offended by that - and I'm one of them. Boston won the world series using moneyball concepts. Boston won the world series spending a crapload of money. They may have spent it wisely, but they spent a lot more money than most teams can. Moneyball is primarily referred to in relation to teams that cannot afford (or refuse to pay) mid to high priced free agents (including their own).
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Oct 24, 2011 20:12:53 GMT -8
I agree the Padres need to cut down on strikeouts but I hate that being the focus instead of more walks and more power being the focus. How about good players being the focus? You can micromanage a team to death, but that won't bring chemistry, and it won't bring wins. The Padres had ZERO power this season. None. They had mediocre fielders and awful hitters. It wouldn't have mattered if they led the league in walks and stolen bases, they still would have lost 85+ games. This team sucks. No talent outside of a few pitchers. Just a bunch of scrubs who would probably be sent down to the minors or cut outright by most other teams. They needed to find a way to keep Gonzo. If they would have been willing to have just a middle of the pack team salary then not only could they have kept Gonzo but they could have gotten another couple of legit major leaguers to build the team around. I'll tell you what's undervalued by the Padres - Talent. Legit Major League talent.
|
|