Batter's Box Interactive Magazine - Roundup

The Jays have still not had a winning streak this year, as they lost 11-3 to the Orioles on Friday Night.

*Fordin Notes - Tosca feels the players are pressing, Howie Clark gets a 2nd straight start, and Tosca talks about the recent death of former NFL player Pat Tillman in Afghanistan.

* Speaking of the NFL, Brian Butterfield is a big football fan, and especially the Patriots. He even did his own mock NFL draft that takes place in NYC today beginning at Noon. As a NFL Draft follower myself I think there are 4 can't miss players this year - Larry Fitzgerald, Sean Taylor, Kellen Winslow and Robert Gallery. As history has shown taking QBs high in the draft is a big risk. The success rate is no better than 50%. I think JP Lohsman may be the best QB of the bunch and he's the 4th QB on just about everyone's lists.

To make this baseball related - stay tuned for baseball draft coverage here in Da Box in the coming weeks.

* Ricciardi not ready to push panic button. Don't expect Ricciardi to tap into the Blue Jays' deep minor-league system to try to kick-start the offence. Alexis Rios and Gabe Gross will be everyday contributors, but not likely this season.

"None of those guys are tearing it up in the minors right now to begin with," Ricciardi said, "but even if that was the case, there's no way we're going to sacrifice service time just to give ourselves a kick in the butt at this stage of the season."

I'm a little surprised that I haven't seen anyone in the media, and especially the Star, try and claim that the Jays are playing poorly because Tosca's in the last year of his contract. I thought that was covered in sports journalism 101.

* Baker - Pitching Poor Jays Lose Again. While the Jays pitching has been disappointing they're 9th out of 14th in the AL in ERA. The Jays, however, are last in the league in runs scored/game. The lack of hitting is the much bigger problem at this point.

* Any way you look at it, the Jays bats have been awful. However, for the most part, Mike Barnett says few of his troops are out of whack mechanically.

"Their mechanics really aren't bad," Barnett said. "The problem is they've become more outcome-oriented than process-oriented."

* El Artista isn't worried about his slow start. I'll be more confident when he starts throwing more strikes.

Batistsa - "Walks aren't harmful unless they come around and score"

Apparently Keith Law and El Artista haven't chatted too much with each other.

* All Star Ballots are out. Of course, at this point I can't think of a Jay that would deserve a vote.

* Today's Matchup - Another former O takes a shot at Baltimore today at 4:35. Pat Hentgen vs. LHP Eric Bedard.

Posted by Pistol on Saturday, April 24 2004 @ 09:24 AM EDT.

Roundup - This One's For The Birds | 4 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

_Shane - Saturday, April 24 2004 @ 10:02 AM EDT (#70475) #

in Jeff Blair's piece:

In the meantime, the guess is we'll know a great deal more about Tosca as a manager by the end of the month. He has fiddled with his lineup, adding Howie Clark and Gomez, and needs to do more, such as installing Hinske permanently as the No. 2 hitter, where he enjoyed success in his rookie year.

Why exactly he says this I hope extends beyond the 'it's where he had success before' thing, but either way I love hearing someone say it, as this has always been a personal staple for me to moan and groan about. Eric's been racking up the walks thus far and it appears it's not a product of him being pitched around what with some lesser bats coming up behind him.

I personally feel he's better utilized as more a table setter, not a 'RBI slugger' lower in the order (Tosca's belief) much like is always recommended for Durazo in Oakland. I know many chime in with the 'batting sequence doesn't really factor in with end results' but i'm of the mind (as is Joe Sheehan) that it can make a difference -- you want to get your best hitters the most possible AB's you can, so when Reed Johnson is getting more AB's than Hinske, somethings wrong.

/My latest addition of: 'Hinske for #2 hole' ramble

_R Billie - Saturday, April 24 2004 @ 12:10 PM EDT (#70476) #

Hey, one is a streak! A streak of one!

To Batista: walks ARE harmful when you use up your pitch count before the 6th inning is over. They also weren't as harmful when you were giving up few homeruns in the National League but have become moreso now that you're giving up homers and tons of hits in the AL.

I also don't buy the argument that batting order doesn't matter. Are you telling me that having two guys who can get on base ahead of Vernon and Carlos would not make a difference? Are you telling me that having someone who can hit immediately behind your cleanup man doesn't make a difference when he's pitched around? Of course it matters. If you have a guy batting .100 you're going to bat him ninth where he'll get 20% fewer plate appearances or whatever the math works out to.

Leigh - Saturday, April 24 2004 @ 12:53 PM EDT (#70477) #

I think what you guys are arguing, R Billie and Shane, is that a player's insular performance may actually differ depending on spot in the order (due to the quality of pitches that they will see). This may or may not be true - I cannot imagine how one would test it. What the studies point out, however, is that - given the same numbers being produced by each player - lineup shuffling does not make a significant difference.

Intuitively, it would make sense to simply set the batting order according to some offensive formula - Runs Created/27 Outs, or perhaps EQA. This would ensure that the best players get the most plate appearances. On this idea, the Jays lineup would go something like: Delgado, Wells, Catalanotto, Hinske, Phelps, Johnson, Hudson, Woodward, Cash. If this lineup configuration got the Jays 50 more Delgado plate appearances...

But again, the evidence is that lineup shuffling makes no meaningful difference.

_Andrew K - Saturday, April 24 2004 @ 01:35 PM EDT (#70478) #

Leigh,

I'd be interested to see those studies. I find it very hard to believe that lineup order doesn't matter to the runs scored. I certainly don't buy into the "leadoff man who hits for average, cleanup who hits for power" philosophy - mostly because the #1 hitter doesn't lead off much more often than anyone else, except at the start of the game.

But I am certain that there is an advantage in clustering your better batters together, and given the PA factor this should be near the top of the order. The difference between hits and runs is men left on base (roughly!), hence the need to string hits together.

A few weeks ago I was wondering about a scenario where your number 9 hitter is very very weak (I must admit I had Cash in mind here). Then one possibly strategy is to *deliberately* get him to make an out whenever he would be the third out of an inning - this gives your best hitter more chance to score because they are more likely to come along at the start of a new inning with no outs. The question would be how bad the #9 hitter has to be for this to be worthwhile, if at all. Probably extremely marginal; it's the sort of thing one could very easily determine by simulation, given enough data on the rest of the lineup. Obviously this is more relevant in the NL, and if you train for the bunt.

Of course this ignores psychological factors, which tend to live outside mathematical models. Maybe pitchers give an easier ride to "weak" hitters lower down the order, allowing Gomez to hit a grand slam for example. Maybe hitters feel better about their bats in different positions in the lineup. So much of baseball results are due to luck that perhaps a bit of superstition is allowable.

Roundup - This One's For The Birds | 4 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.