Don't Miss

[Rog]

Don't miss the MLB Network's presentation of the 2017 Giants this afternoon at 3:00.  I haven't seen one of the 30 teams in 30 days presentations, but it should be a good one.  At the very least, it covers our favorite team.

If you like listening to the Giants during Spring Training, listen to the Giants' Spring Training opener at noon today on KNBR.  #Miller Rocks.

[sfgdood]

If they have actual players and not their usual group of pencil necked stats dorks, it might be worth a look

[Rog]

If they have actual players and not their usual group of pencil necked stats dorks, it might be worth a look


Rog -- Pay attention, Randy!




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3750/#ixzz4ZcooVrmn

[Rog]

11 players. Two others.

[Rog]

No comment, Randy?

By the way, why do you use the term "pencil necked stats dorks"? You immediately show your bias. In fact, it seems you usually make derisive comments about things you don't like rather than providing substance to illustrate your point.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3750/#ixzz4ZnJJO0F3

[Islandboagie]

We have provided tons of substance and reasons why we feel that some "stats geeks" don't know the game as well as people who played it, and people who have followed it for a long time. It's well documented in past posts.

[Rog]

First of all, the two aren't mutually exclusive. Players and ex-players are getting more and more into analytics, and many who are into analytics have played. The concept that the two are mutually exclusive is very false.

Getting into particulars, I have asked many times what it is that other here understand that I don't. Boly has a much better knowledge of mechanics than I do, and Don has a better grasp on baseball history. That's about it.

Sometimes someone will say that I don't understand something when in fact were merely see it differently.

I have great respect for Boly and baseball mechanics, but let me give you an example of where we came up short. I asked the question as to what it was mechanically that Buster Posey was doing differently that has caused him to hit about again higher on fly balls in 2012 than he has during other seasons. Boly said that the only thing he had noticed was that Buster seemed to be crouching more at the plate, which was a point I believe I first brought up.

What we have here is that Boly and I both noticed that Buster was crouching lower, but I was the only one who noticed the huge disparity in his batting average on fly balls. Boly didn't point out that Buster was hitting far worse on fly balls, which he likely would have picked up on if he had noticed significant mechanical differences.

So the only mechanical thing we have identified that might be causing by far the huge disparity in batting average on fly balls is that Buster appears to be crouching more. We aren't having a discussion as to specifically how that might be affecting his batted ball angle or whether it affects the exit velocity on balls he hits. We're not having a discussion as to precisely how that might affect the way Buster sees the ball.

From a physical standpoint, fielders seem better able to position themselves against Buster, which would clearly reduce the number of fly balls that fall in. In addition to positioning themselves better across the field, they may be playing Buster more shallow as well. If so, is that because he's hitting the ball differently, or is it simply because they've learned him better?

The point is that 2012 was such an amazing outlier on fly balls that I can't imagine it was all luck. And both before and after that season, Buster has been a much worse hitter on fly balls. Here is Buster's average on fly balls, season by season:

2010 -- .321

2011 -- .205

2012 -- .394

2013 -- .261

2014 -- .185

2015 -- .178

2016 -- .171


Since 2014 Buster has hit .185, .178 and .171 on fly balls, less than half his .394 average of 2012. Yet no one here has brought this up, let alone posited a detailed explanation for it. What is it that I have missed here that everyone else picked up on?

When it comes to strategy, I can go into as many alternatives and the reasons for and against them as anyone here. I don't know the mechanical details of hitting and pitching as well as Boly, but I know how to make defensive plays. No one else here, with the possible exception of Don, has shown a great understanding of mechanics.

And even Boly can't explain how Buster Posey can hit less than half as high on fly balls the past three seasons as he hit in 2012. The reason Buster led the league in hitting in 2012 was because of his wonderful average on fly balls. Yet no one picked up on it, let alone explained it.

Here is how Buster's averages on ground balls, line drives and fly balls has varied from 2012 to his career averages, with 2012 first:

Ground balls -- .267 .249

Fly balls -- .394 .248

Line drives -- .742 .674


If instead of merely comparing his career averages to 2012 we instead took 2012 out of his career averages, the difference of course would be even greater. I originally did that subtraction, but it's almost time to go to work.

Anyway, I have repeatedly asked what it is that I'm missing, and no one has come up with anything specific and verifiable. I'm still asking. Mechanics, Boly. History, Don. Otherwise, what is it that we have come up with?

[sfgdood]

in my experience, the biggest reason for lower BA on fly balls is bat speed. I attribute Busters drop in recent years to fatigue. If we move him to 1st base full time he will not get exhausted AND he will need less rest. PLUS we get rid of the big oaf.

[klaiggeb]

Not a bad plan, Randy...If we had a catcher who could hit at least as well as the big Oaf... I'd be on board.

I like Hundley a LOT... but he can't put up Belt's numbers.

Man! That hurt to say!

boly

[sfgdood]

The improvement in Posey's hitting and power will, IMO, make up the difference between Belt and Hundley, Boly.

[Islandboagie]

Rog- First of all, the two aren't mutually exclusive. Players and ex-players are getting more and more into analytics, and many who are into analytics have played.


Boagie- Obviously the MLB network pushes the "stat geek" platform so people that never played can feel like they're knowledgeable on the game. I can assure you DeRosa and Reynolds aren't crunching the numbers in their free time.

The broadcasts are scripted, those guys are reading a teleprompter when they say "I'm really interested in sabermetrics."

Of course they do their homework and adapt to what the viewers are interested in, but they know much more goes into baseball than just the numbers.

People like Brian Kenny recite the numbers and shout down anyone who brings up more complex human elements to the game. He has a smug way about his arguments as do you, Rog.

Randy is an extreme example, but MOST non-numbers people admit numbers are a significant part. Even Randy uses numbers, but knows it doesn't start and end the conversation with just numbers.

I use numbers regularly, but a lot of my opinions are based on what I see on the field, and some opinions are based on just gut feelings.

You keep referencing other posters and yourself as having more experience and being more knowledgeable than others, me notably. But yet, is anyone here more correct than anyone else? Are you more right than I? The history of our discussions and predictions sure wouldn't indicate that anyone is more correct than someone else.

I haven't yet pointed out this repulsive smugness before but this is why people like me and Randy shove back.

Based on experience, Boly and Don COULD drive that point, but they don't. Boly has brought up that he used to coach, but never has he used it in the same asinine fashion as you repeatedly do. You post as if you have a chip on your shoulder like you were routinely picked last in P.E. class in your youth. Do onto others Rog, and maybe you'll get less friction in the future. Consider the other side more and you might have a better understanding of all angles on everyone's opinion.

[donk33]

Feb 27, 2017 10:32:19 GMT -5 Rog said:

First of all, the two aren't mutually exclusive. Players and ex-players are getting more and more into analytics, and many who are into analytics have played. The concept that the two are mutually exclusive is very false.

Getting into particulars, I have asked many times what it is that other here understand that I don't. Boly has a much better knowledge of mechanics than I do, and Don has a better grasp on baseball history. That's about it.

Sometimes someone will say that I don't understand something when in fact were merely see it differently.

I have great respect for Boly and baseball mechanics, but let me give you an example of where we came up short. I asked the question as to what it was mechanically that Buster Posey was doing differently that has caused him to hit about again higher on fly balls in 2012 than he has during other seasons. Boly said that the only thing he had noticed was that Buster seemed to be crouching more at the plate, which was a point I believe I first brought up.

What we have here is that Boly and I both noticed that Buster was crouching lower, but I was the only one who noticed the huge disparity in his batting average on fly balls. Boly didn't point out that Buster was hitting far worse on fly balls, which he likely would have picked up on if he had noticed significant mechanical differences.

So the only mechanical thing we have identified that might be causing by far the huge disparity in batting average on fly balls is that Buster appears to be crouching more. We aren't having a discussion as to specifically how that might be affecting his batted ball angle or whether it affects the exit velocity on balls he hits. We're not having a discussion as to precisely how that might affect the way Buster sees the ball.

From a physical standpoint, fielders seem better able to position themselves against Buster, which would clearly reduce the number of fly balls that fall in. In addition to positioning themselves better across the field, they may be playing Buster more shallow as well. If so, is that because he's hitting the ball differently, or is it simply because they've learned him better?

The point is that 2012 was such an amazing outlier on fly balls that I can't imagine it was all luck. And both before and after that season, Buster has been a much worse hitter on fly balls. Here is Buster's average on fly balls, season by season:

2010 -- .321

2011 -- .205

2012 -- .394

2013 -- .261

2014 -- .185

2015 -- .178

2016 -- .171


Since 2014 Buster has hit .185, .178 and .171 on fly balls, less than half his .394 average of 2012. Yet no one here has brought this up, let alone posited a detailed explanation for it. What is it that I have missed here that everyone else picked up on?

When it comes to strategy, I can go into as many alternatives and the reasons for and against them as anyone here. I don't know the mechanical details of hitting and pitching as well as Boly, but I know how to make defensive plays. No one else here, with the possible exception of Don, has shown a great understanding of mechanics.

And even Boly can't explain how Buster Posey can hit less than half as high on fly balls the past three seasons as he hit in 2012. The reason Buster led the league in hitting in 2012 was because of his wonderful average on fly balls. Yet no one picked up on it, let alone explained it.

Here is how Buster's averages on ground balls, line drives and fly balls has varied from 2012 to his career averages, with 2012 first:

Ground balls -- .267 .249

Fly balls -- .394 .248

Line drives -- .742 .674


If instead of merely comparing his career averages to 2012 we instead took 2012 out of his career averages, the difference of course would be even greater. I originally did that subtraction, but it's almost time to go to work.

Anyway, I have repeatedly asked what it is that I'm missing, and no one has come up with anything specific and verifiable. I'm still asking. Mechanics, Boly. History, Don. Otherwise, what is it that we have come up with?

dk....maybe we should look  at his 2012 figures as a complete aberration of his true talent...maybe he had a little "help" to reach those figures....anyway, these figures should change as pitchers change the way they pitch to a batter and how that batter reacts to the change....as usual. with your stats you fail to give the details and thus we are unable to give a real analysis of what you gave....did he hit fewer fly balls and more line drives?   

[klaiggeb]

boagie-Boagie- Obviously the MLB network pushes the "stat geek" platform so people that never played can feel like they're knowledgeable on the game.

***boly says***

Man! What a great point, boagie! Honestly, I never, EVER even thought of that... and I SHOULD have!

I've always wondered why they went so stinking crazy on so many silly stats!

boly

[klaiggeb]

Rog-I have great respect for Boly and baseball mechanics, but let me give you an example of where we came up short. I asked the question as to what it was mechanically that Buster Posey was doing differently that has caused him to hit about again higher on fly balls in 2012 than he has during other seasons. Boly said that the only thing he had noticed was that Buster seemed to be crouching more at the plate

***boly says***

The question you asked, Rog, was "did I see anything different in Posey this season, from the past."

Firstly, I never go as deeply as you do into detailed stats as you do... because I'm really not that interested.

Secondly, I responded only to the question. What did I see differently.

boly

[Rog]

My point was though that there is such a pronounced difference in Buster's hitting on fly balls that we should be able to see something mechanical. In fact, we should have known even before we read his stats that he had essentially fallen off a cliff on fly balls. We should see something different in his swing that would tell us why.

We could discuss his swing plane and how if affects how he is now addressing the ball differently. We could discuss how it affects his launch angle. We could discuss how it makes him more vulnerable to some pitches than others. Perhaps I should answer the question of, does his crouching slightly lower lower his strike zone for the umpire. (I tried to make sure it didn't in my case, but if we had the proper film to look at, perhaps we could tell for sure. Maybe it differs by umpire.)

We could look at pitch charts to see if the umpires' strike zone changed. We could look at his hit chart in regards to where in the strike zone he's not hitting the ball as well. I don't know if I can find them, but I'm pretty sure they're available.

But back to my original point: We should already have noticed mechanically such a glaring change, shouldn't we?

Which also brings us to a point that was asked in a newspaper article and addressed on the MLB Network: If there were no stats, how would we know who the best players are?

The panel, half of which was made up of ex-players, believed we would look at the players' builds and how athletic they looked. How good their swings looked.

Thinking about it myself, we would notice extremes. For instance, we would notice Yasiel Puig's arm -- and at the other extreme, Denard Span's. We would notice the guys with the sweet swings. We might notice how much contact a batter makes, although except for swings and misses on third strikes, perhaps not so much.

We would notice if a guy hit a ball well over 400 feet, and possibly consider him more of a home run hitter than a guy who just clears the fences but hits more out overall. We might notice guys who walk more, although certainly when we were kids, we didn't pay much attention. OBP has made us more aware of that.

We would notice diving plays, although it would be tougher to notice reactions, breaks and ground covered. We would give fielding credit to guys who made those diving plays and perhaps miss the poor jump or bad route they took to the ball. We would give fielding credit to players who were graceful and made some plays look easier than they truly are.

We might give credit to the hard throwers, although somewhat like a hitter, if a pitcher threw an average fastball but very slow off-speed pitches, we would notice the difference more than the pure velocity.

We would likely downgrade pitchers with awkward motions. Hitters with strange stances. Unorthodox fielders.

One player who was brought up by a player was Javier Baez. The player (Erick Byrnes I think) said that the athletic things Baez would do would get our attention. Apparently he looked pretty good at the plate during the regular season, although clearly he was exposed in the postseason.

Regarding Baez, I found it surprising that almost no one examined the play where he struck out bunting. Because it went against baseball convention it was immediately dismissed as a bad play. Clearly it didn't work out, but that doesn't mean it was a bad play. It merely means that it didn't work that particular time.

I don't know enough about Baez's bunting ability to fully determine the play's viability. The only things I know is that he considered bunting for a hit against Johnny Cueto in the Cubs' first playoff game against the Giants, but Conor Gillaspie played him in, so he instead swung away and wound up hitting the home run that defeated the Giants, 1-0. And that he was successful 50% of the time in the regular season. And that he had only one sacrifice bunt during the regular season. And that he failed on the particular play in question. But I do know that to simply reject the play out of hand is wrong.

One final question: If there are things I truly don't understand about the game, why aren't you guys teaching me? To me, it seems that when we go into strategy, I get into it as deeply as anyone. When it comes to a particular play, the same. I'm not like Barry Bonds where I can predict 27 straight pitches as he is said to have done, but I can predict them pretty well.

I have talked baseball with Chris Speier and for hours with Chris Lincecum.

I learned a lot of baseball from my dad, who once shagged flies for Michael Jordan. Who played catch with Chris Speier over the winter to help Chris keep his arm loose. Who had a small tribute on the Candlestick scoreboard the day after he died. Who would have made an on-field presentation at Pac Bell to Speier as the San Francisco Giants' top shortstop if he had lived four years longer.

I was lucky to have my dad and to be a member of a family that has been Giants fans for close to a century despite having lived in the Midwest.

If there are things about the game I truly don't understand, how about teaching me? Hopefully I've taught some of you a little about using baseball stats -- pointing out how far Buster Posey has fallen on fly balls, if nothing else. Teach me the things I'm missing. Thanks.

[sfgdood]

I notice you completely ignored my bat speed theory, which also explains why dumping Belt makes a lot of sense

[Rog]

boagie-Boagie- Obviously the MLB network pushes the "stat geek" platform so people that never played can feel like they're knowledgeable on the game.

***boly says***

Man! What a great point, boagie! Honestly, I never, EVER even thought of that... and I SHOULD have!

I've always wondered why they went so stinking crazy on so many silly stats!


Rog -- The MLB Network covers pretty much every aspect of baseball more deeply than any other network of which I'm aware. Much of their work is done by former ballplayers, and they interview players, managers, GM's, scouting directions and player development directors.

As for the "silly stats," perhaps we don't fully understand them.

Incidentally, did we know that last winter Mark Trumbo changed his swing in order to increase his launch angle, contributing to his more than doubling his home run total? That teams are cutting of hundreds of hits because of their use of spray charts? That players study which pitches which pitchers use in which situations?

That last season many players wore monitors that told them how fresh their bodies were? That the major leagues are doing studies of the effect of rest and travel on player performance? That all major league teams have added a department for statistical analysis? That the prevailing wisdom is that neither scouting nor analytics has all the answers, but that combining them provides a better result than either one alone?

Randy's tag line here is not only rude, it's downright embarrassing in the way it shows his ignorance. Want to know something Randy doesn't seem to be able to grasp? It isn't because I'm a better judge of baseball talent than he that I presented Gary Brown pretty well here while Randy whiffed. It's because I read scouting reports.

People here seem thing I'm all about numbers. I'm definitely about numbers alright. They're what help me understand the game better than I did 20 years about. But I also read all the scouting reports I can get my hands on. I learn everything about the game that I can. I likely study it more than anyone here. If not, someone is spending a ton of time doing so.

When I've talked to Chris Speier and Chris Lincecum, I'm not sure numbers even came up. Chris Lincecum even insisted on paying our dinner bill. Just as Boly did when I had dinner with him and Candee.

Man, baseball has gotten me a lot of free meals! Not with Paul Doyle or Migel Puente though -- two former Giants pitchers from a long time back.

Interesting story about Puente: He hurt his right arm while pitching in Mexico and came back as a southpaw.

Something I just remembered about another Giants pitcher -- reliever Jerry Johnson. In Spring Training I told Jerry I thought he ought to use his change up more often. He replied, "You're probably right." Later that season I saw him throw one to Hank Aaron, and I'm not sure it has come down yet. Possibly not my best advice!




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3750?page=1#ixzz4a0EkIxRT

[sfgdood]

I have no trouble admitting the obvious, that I was very wrong about Gary Brown. But nobody will EVER convince me that he didn't have the talent to be a top player. To me he just didn't have the work ethic to adjust. He believed that his talent alone would carry him. Then later he just gave up. It was his lack of mental toughness that I misjudged. There are no stats to measure that. I'm pretty sure the Giants came to that conclusion eventually and that is why they cut him loose.

[klaiggeb]

Rog-My point was though that there is such a pronounced difference in Buster's hitting on fly balls that we should be able to see something mechanical.

***boly says***

Not necessarily, Rog, and honestly, not all that likely as one would think.

Small, subtle changes in mechanics might not be noticed by even the coach.

But those small changes COULD have dramatic effects on the outcomes of both pitching and hitter.

For example: I say Buster is crouching more... which may be true.

Why would that be an issue? you ask.

Crouch down, and then rise up.

Notice how the "eye level" changes as the body rises.

For a hitter...this presents a two-fold problem.

One, IF he's rising out of a crouch, not only does the eye level change, but also the hands and where they are in relationship to the ball.

Hitting coaches preach: The less movement of the hands and head, the better.

But in coming out of a crouch that is DIFFERENT than was previously used, there is a lot of movement!

Thus, my statement.

boly

[klaiggeb]

Randy, I think Gary Brown is the PERFECT example of someone WITH a lot of talent, who couldn't mentally make the adjustments necessary to get the most out of his abilities.

Gary had wheels, bat speed, defensive ability.

But that jump from AAA to the show, mentally, is huge!

Most can't do it, and thus we have had so many AAA players with great numbers that didn't translate at the pro level.

I was one of Gary's biggest proponents, too.

Sad.

Reminded me of Solomon Torres.

Great stuff... couldn't make the adjustments.

boly

[Rog]

in my experience, the biggest reason for lower BA on fly balls is bat speed. I attribute Busters drop in recent years to fatigue. If we move him to 1st base full time he will not get exhausted AND he will need less rest.


Rog -- That may not be a bad theory. But the only way to prove that Buster's bat speed is down is by measuring it, and then we're back to stats again. I haven't seen anywhere where they have measured bat speed, but if they haven't, they will. If they can measure the rotation speed on a pitch, it seems highly likely they can measure bat speed.

One thing we see is that in 2012, Buster hit almost the same no matter the direction. .415 when he pulled; .412 up the middle; .400 opposite field. Last season he hit .370 when he pulled the pitch; .313 up the middle; .330 to right. He dropped off more when he didn't pull, so perhaps his bat speed isn't the issue.

If his bat speed went down, wouldn't we expect him to strike out more? He would have to commit a split second earlier to make up for the reduced speed. Yet his strikeouts have dropped a fair amount since 2012.

As for why Buster has hit better when playing first base, much of that can be explained by his batting against left-handers more when he plays that position. Belt is more likely to be rested against southpaws, and Buster hits them far better than he hits righties. In fact, Buster's OPS against righties is below .800.

If Buster were tiring, he would hit lower later in the season, wouldn't he? In fact, he has hit almost equally in the first half and the second. His first half OPS is .848, and in the second half it is .849.

Many think Buster was hurt later in the season, so I'm not sure we can learn from that. But in 2015 he did some of his best hitting of the season from August 30th through September 27th, raising his OPS by 25 points during that time. It may have been coincidental, but when he slumped off after the 27th of September, he was playing first base almost exclusively because of a season-ending injury to Brandon Belt.

Your theory may be a good one, Randy. We just don't know. The anecdotal data we have available indicates it may not be correct, but it certainly doesn't disprove it.

What we need is another stat -- bat speed. Then we would know for sure.

I do think that the sample sizes are big enough that we can see that much of Buster's hitting better as a first baseman has to do with hitting more lefties in that situation. We've been talking about it for years, and we recently saw an estimate of what Buster's average might be if he caught exclusively, and if he played first base exclusively. The evidence indicated he would hit better playing first base, but not by nearly as much as has been the case given the differences in how much he has hit against southpaws from each position.

Your theory that Buster's improved hitting if he played first base would be enough to fill in the gap from Brandon Belt's hitting to Nick Hundley's hitting sounds good at first, but when we look at the much greater correlation of his hitting against southpaws when playing first base than when he catches, we see that it is quite unlikely that would be the case.

I like that you posed the theory. It might be true. But there is evidence indicating that it may well not be, and the irony is that the only way to prove it is via stats.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3750/#ixzz4a4AHO5RD

[Rog]

.as usual. with your stats you fail to give the details and thus we are unable to give a real analysis of what you gave....did he hit fewer fly balls and more line drives?


Rog -- Gosh, Don, if you want to make a point, why don't you look this stuff up? I'm not sure what you're getting at, but in 2012 he hit 24.6% line drives and 28.9% fly balls. In the years since he has hit between 19.9% and 24.3% line drives and between 29.9% and 33.8% fly balls. Overall, he has hit a few more fly balls and a few fewer line drives. His ground ball percentage in 2012 was 46.5%, and it has since varied between 41.9% and 48.6%.

Buster's average on ground balls and line drives in 2012 was a little higher, but didn't make nearly as much difference to his batting average as his hitting about half as high on fly balls as he did in 2012. I think positioning has something to do with it, but better positioning would hurt his average on ground balls and line drives too.

There is something quite different with Buster's fly balls now. I'm disappointed first that we didn't notice it, and second that we can't explain it.

Randy took a good shot at it, but I don't think there is any way of knowing whether he is right or wrong. Hopefully it won't be long until bat speed stats are available to the public.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3750?page=1#ixzz4a4J5UwQx

[Rog]

Boly's point about the changing eye angle is a good one as well. But why would that have little affect on ground balls and line drives compared to its effect on fly balls? And why didn't we notice his increased crouching sooner?

[Rog]

Reminded me of Solomon Torres.

Great stuff... couldn't make the adjustments.


Rog -- The illusion that Salomon had great stuff continues. He struck out well under a batter per inning in the minor leagues. He pitched in both AA and AAA in 1993 before being called up to the Giants. He struck out only 166 in 188.2 innings. He yielded 172 hits in those innings, which is decent but doesn't show great stuff.

His biggest problem with the Giants in 1993 wasn't that he was hit hard (37 hits in 44.2 innings, a lower rate than he had in the minors), but rather giving up more walks (27) than strikeouts (23).

My point? Salomon was over-hyped, and his initial major league success hid the fact that his results were better than his underlying performance. Prior to his last two starts, Salomon had an impressive 3.03 ERA, but that hid his 18 walks to go along with just 21 K's.

The Giants didn't really do him any favors in his last two starts of 1993, either. He made both of them on three days' rest. After a then-career high 118 pitches in his previous start. Salomon threw 233.1 combined innings that 1993 season, which is a LOT of innings for a 21-year-old to throw. Madison Bumgarner hasn't thrown that many innings in a season, and he's a horse and an older one at that.

Salomon wound up with arm problems, and it apperas likely that the Giants overused his young arm.

Torres wasn't as good as the Giants thought he was, and they likely misused him to boot. October 3, 1993 was certainly a sad day. Many forget too that while Salomon didn't help much, it was Dave Burba who let the game get out of hand. Salomon had yielded just three runs, and Trevor Wilson got him out of the inning with a line drive double play. But Burba then yielded four runs in an inning and third, and it was all over but the shouting.

Jim (Two Silhouettes On) Deshies wound up finishing that game, but he had given up only seven earned runs in 22 innings over four starts in September and might have been a better choice to start. I'm not sure if he was injured. Wilson, who relieved Torres, may also have been a better shot.

It's all hindsight now though, and I don't honestly remember the circumstances. I do recall that former Giant Brad Wellman was impressed with Torres that September. He too got fooled a bit, and he's a pretty good baseball man. After playing, he taught some baseball in Hayward along with his father. Years later, his younger son played a little hockey in the National Hockey League despite being well undersized.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3750?page=1#ixzz4a4MszOHe

[Rog]

It was his lack of mental toughness that I misjudged. There are no stats to measure that.


Rog -- Not sure about the mental toughness part, but his mental acuity may have been lacking. Perhaps we're just talking semantics.

Despite his great speed, Gary never could became an efficient base stealer. As you mentioned, he had tools but never wound up putting them together beyond A Ball.

My being able to judge him came about not so much because of stats, but because I read the scouting report on him. Not patient enough it read, and when he hit AAA, he started to strike out too much as well.

The Giants no doubt felt he had the makeup to overcome his issues. Little question he had the tools.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3750?page=1#ixzz4a4YHhTWu

[donk33]

Mar 1, 2017 5:34:13 GMT -5 Rog said:

.as usual. with your stats you fail to give the details and thus we are unable to give a real analysis of what you gave....did he hit fewer fly balls and more line drives?


Rog -- Gosh, Don, if you want to make a point, why don't you look this stuff up? I'm not sure what you're getting at, but in 2012 he hit 24.6% line drives and 28.9% fly balls. In the years since he has hit between 19.9% and 24.3% line drives and between 29.9% and 33.8% fly balls. Overall, he has hit a few more fly balls and a few fewer line drives. His ground ball percentage in 2012 was 46.5%, and it has since varied between 41.9% and 48.6%.

Buster's average on ground balls and line drives in 2012 was a little higher, but didn't make nearly as much difference to his batting average as his hitting about half as high on fly balls as he did in 2012. I think positioning has something to do with it, but better positioning would hurt his average on ground balls and line drives too.

There is something quite different with Buster's fly balls now. I'm disappointed first that we didn't notice it, and second that we can't explain it.

Randy took a good shot at it, but I don't think there is any way of knowing whether he is right or wrong. Hopefully it won't be long until bat speed stats are available to the public.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3750?page=1#ixzz4a4J5UwQx

dk...wow, I think I did as much "research" about Posey than you did...and one thing stuck out to me....he hit most of his home runs on fly balls...and his average was highest on line drives...his numbers show very little on balls called line drives, his average peaked in 2012 and then regressed until 2016 where it flatted out just over the previous year. however, he hit fewer total liners than previous... on balls labelled "fly balls" he  shows a big decline  in average year by year fro 2012 to 2016...his BA dropped from .294 to .171  as his total flies  per year dropped from 136 to 110...which translates into 30% of the balls he hit down to 22%....his ground ball numbers have been fairly steady although there was a slight rise of 4% in total ground balls in 2016 and a large drop off in BA on balls hit on the ground... all this proved very little to me....also, positioning could be a factor as    they place infielders differently than outfielders...and the way they pitch to a batter changes.....
and I still think Posey should play first......

[Rog]

he hit most of his home runs on fly balls...and his average was highest on line drives...


Rog -- That is almost universally true, Don. What I want to see is the guy who hit a home run on a ground ball. It must have happened somewhere along the line, probably involving an injury.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3750/#ixzz4aBoKJYkF

[Rog]

I still think Posey should play first..


Rog -- I'm curious as to what you thought of the theory that Brandon hits better playing first base in part because he plays a higher percentage of his game against southpaws when he plays there. I think I may have overstated the effect a little, but I do think it applies to a significant degree.

One other thing we don't know is how much of whatever first base lift there is would carry over if he played first base on a daily basis.

Two advantages of playing Buster at first base would be a lower injury risk and an ability to play more games. If the Giants were to make such a move without an injury to Buster causing it, it might come prior to the 2020 season or at the trade deadline. Brandon Belt's new contract would be past its midway point but still have enough time left that the Giants wouldn't be trading a lame duck. Buster will turn 33 just before the start of the 2020 season, so perhaps that would be a little early.

Unless he falls back, Brandon should be easily tradeable. After this season, Brandon will make $16 million per season. At this point I think teams would rather have him than Hanley Ramirez or Adrian Gonzalez, and both those players make in excess of $22 million.

Right now Buster and the Giants seem very committed to his catching for the near and mid-term future.

[klaiggeb]

Body movement up or down, when coming out of a crouch, effects whether or not a hitter can square up the ball.

Now add to that the talent of professional hitters.

The body moves, the hands/arms compensate, or at least try to compensate, the result being a fly or ground ball BECAUSE of the excess movement.

boly

[Rog]

I'm not necessarily looking for statistics, Boly, although they can demonstrate a point. What I'm looking for here is how Buster's average on fly balls plummeted, but accompanied by the following:

. Modest change on ground balls.

. Modest change on line drives.

. FEWER strikeouts (which seems incongruent with eye and hand movement)


The only thing being significantly affected in a negative manner here is fly ball average, and strikeouts are actually DOWN significantly. I guess what I'm trying to do here is match the statistical results with mechanical causes. Believe it or not, I could delve even deeper into the statistical aspects -- although I won't do so unless they become truly relevant -- and I'd like to see as much depth on the mechanics side as we can come up with.

One question I would like to ask as well is, have you gone back to watch video of Buster in 2012 compared to video of him now? I'm not even positive he crouches down more, although it was something that suddenly seemed to jump out for me. I can't remember if Buster was slumping and I was looking for possible reasons, or if it simply suddenly seemed to me that there was a change. And as I say, I'm not even positive there was a change in that regard.

I'm a student of the game, and I feel I can learn a lot here. I'm looking forward to it. With the games not counting yet, their not being on TV or radio as often, their not having the same performance meaning, and the regulars playing fewer innings, it's not like there are dozens of things to discuss on a daily basis.