Leadership deceived
“I felt like if Mateo came in and threw the way he can that we’d have a chance of getting a ground ball,” Hargrove said. “It just didn’t work.”
Julio Mateo’s groundball percentage is 24.2%. There are exactly two major league pitchers with a lower GB% than Mateo this season; Keith Foulke, who has spent most of the season on the DL because he was unable to pitch effectively, and Chuck James, a rookie starting pitcher who has an ERA of 4.69 in the National League.
And I’m sure the response from Hargrove would be something like “he’s throwing the ball better lately”, due to the slightly altered arm slot that they worked on. Thankfully, we have game logs, so we can know if Recent Mateo is any more likely to get a groundball than Yearlong Mateo.
August 1st: 5 batters faced, 0 groundballs
August 4th: 2 batters faced, 0 groundballs
August 7th: 6 batters faced, 1 groundball
August 8th: 4 batters faced, 0 groundballs
Julio Mateo had faced 17 batters since they altered his mechanics and he had started “throwing better”. In that time, he has induced one ground ball. After last night’s performance, he’s now faced 21 batters in August and has a 5% groundball rate.
There isn’t a pitcher on an American League roster right now that is less likely to get a groundball than Julio Mateo.
This post isn’t about taking Mike Hargrove to task for a difference in philosophy. This is an indictment on his ignorance of the skills of his players. I guarantee you that Mike Hargrove does not know that Julio Mateo is the absolute worst choice in the entire league if your hope is to get a ground ball.
He’s managing the club based on bad information. He’s making critical decisions while lacking basic, publically available information that even fans who follow the team know.
We’ve documented the problems with Hargrove’s in game strategies before, so I won’t document those again. But man, I have no idea how a guy who is using fundamentally, tangibly incorrect ideas to make pitching decisions still has a job.
Comments
USSM uses and recommends
When I heard that quote, I thought the same thing. I know Mateo is an extreme flyball who doesn’t get many strikeouts. How does Hargrove not know that? And if he doesn’t know that, what else doesn’t he know?
It’s mindboggling. How much say does Chavez have in a decision like that? I often get the feeling that they’ve make up their minds in advance which relievers are going to be used on a given day and they don’t let the game situation dissuade them from sticking to the original plan. But even so, it doesn’t make sense to rationalize the decision with nonsense. The sooner Grover’s gone, the better.
Does Hargrove have an email account? I feel like sending a nasty gram . . .
This quantifies what has been visually obvious for sometime and why. Sometimes you just need to see a post like this to focus the why. So, it does beg the question, is there any feeling that Grover is on his last road trip if he returns in the same place or worse? Or does the “It’s a young team and learning” mantra continue to protect him?
They’re way too far along in the season to fire him now. He’ll last the rest of the year.
Dave, you’ve said you think Bavasi will be back next year (and I agree I think he will be). Do you think Hargrove will be?
Well, you always have to respect the man if not the work. If Rohn is a candidate (assuming they actually would change), a month and half look at him would be valuable to see how he handles it.
Isn’t part of the question who is available to replace Hargrove? It seems like there would be a lot of candidates who would be an improvement, although when they hired Hargrove the choices seemed pretty limited. Too bad they didn’t think of Jim Leyland. Dave, is there anybody out there who you think could lead this team to the Promised Land (i.e. World Series) given a good starting pitcher or two?
Dave, you’ve said you think Bavasi will be back next year (and I agree I think he will be). Do you think Hargrove will be?
No.
Isn’t part of the question who is available to replace Hargrove? It seems like there would be a lot of candidates who would be an improvement, although when they hired Hargrove the choices seemed pretty limited. Too bad they didn’t think of Jim Leyland. Dave, is there anybody out there who you think could lead this team to the Promised Land (i.e. World Series) given a good starting pitcher or two?
Trying to find a great manager is like a needle in a haystack. There’s been so few who have made significant and undeniable contributions to the win column over the years that you just really have to get lucky to end up with one. What this team needs is a guy who isn’t a trainwreck. Mike Hargrove’s in game strategies are a disaster. They just need someone who won’t sink the team.
Wow. Hargrove expecting to get a ground ball from Julio Mateo is like George Bush expecting to get a Christmas card from Osama Bin Laden. This is simply indefensible and he should be fired NOW.
Is there a stat to figure out how many games above league average Hargrove has lost us?
I’ve actually come up with a new stat category (though I leave it to others to determine what data makes it up):
(NU)mber of (M)ind-(B)lowing (N)on-rational (U)ber-mistakes by (T)he (S)kipper = Affectionately known as the NUMBNUTS factor.
I’d love to see Larry Dierker here.
He did have some problems in Houston at the end, but they seemed (to this outsider) to be a power struggle between the manager and the two stars, Biggio and Bagwell, for control of the team. Dierker lost.
I don’t think Ichiro and Moyer would be a comparable challenge. The rest of this team’s core is young.
Dave,
Is Rohn going to be the guy? I honestly know nothing about the situation other than that Rohn’s present position was thought to be a good place from which to move him into Hargrove’s spot, should the team choose to do that.
Isn’t it also the bench coaches job to support the manager with this kind of decisions? And isn’t the bench coach expected to know these things?
I’m curious, Dave, from what you know of Bavasi, do you think HE’S fully aware of Mateo’s skillset and tendencies, and is he inclined to raise an eyebrow if made aware of Hargrove’s explanation for using Mateo in that particular situation?
Very good work producing the data to show the idiocy of Mike’s statement. Maybe he just wanted to give the press something to quote, sort of like “tough loss tonight”, “big win tonight”, yada, yada.
I feel that they can’t fire him as long as they can make some fans think that they are still in the pennant race. We know that’s dumb, but the M’s broadcasters are still flogging it, and people who only look at the Games Back figure in the standings think it can happen, especially those folks who remember 1995’s miracle.
But putting that aside for the moment, why not fire him now? Rohn is hanging around; make him interim manager and see how it goes. I would also think that they’d want to make the job opening clearly evident as soon as possible.
Is Rohn going to be the guy? I honestly know nothing about the situation other than that Rohn’s present position was thought to be a good place from which to move him into Hargrove’s spot, should the team choose to do that.
Rohn would have been the guy if Hargrove got canned in season. In the offseason, I think they’ll do a full search that probably includes more veteran guys people have heard of.
Isn’t it also the bench coaches job to support the manager with this kind of decisions? And isn’t the bench coach expected to know these things?
Yep – I know for a fact that the M’s coaching staff has this information. It’s available to Hargrove if he wants it.
I’m curious, Dave, from what you know of Bavasi, do you think HE’S fully aware of Mateo’s skillset and tendencies, and is he inclined to raise an eyebrow if made aware of Hargrove’s explanation for using Mateo in that particular situation?
I doubt Bill knows that Mateo is the most anti-groundball pitcher in the AL. And he’s a firm believer in letting the manager make decisions on strategy autonomously – he’s not going to get involved in things like that. He might not agree with the decision, but he’s not going to tell Hargrove who to use.
the other question is does Hargrove really think what he is saying to the media, or is he a) covering his butt, b) covering for his player or c) both. Post-game, Drayer said (after talking about Mateo’s ongoing struggles) that as the official press gaggle was leaving, she’d asked ‘if he’d have been available, would that have been a situation where he’d have gone to Lowe first?’, and that Hargrove acknowledged that he would have… it’s good to know that Mateo was not the first choice; I guess our question is why was he the 2nd choice?
Or is the question why did they let Pineiro get into such trouble before pulling him?
11 – Well, you always have to respect the man if not the work.
I believe respect has to be earned, and thus far, with this team, Hargrove has done nothing to earn it.
Dave,
We, as Mariners fans and faithful, have a personal stake in the success of the team. This generally means that, as much as we may want to be rational about things, mistakes tend to get amplified within our community. You have said before that you have friends within the baseball community, I assume beyond the Mariners. Has this information, that Hargrove can’t seem to either get or understand the data available, gotten to your friends? I mean it’s one thing for us to say that Hargrove is an idiot, or at least is making idiotic moves, but it’s entirely another when you’re chatting with the guy scouting for the Brewers, and he says “Mateo as a groundball pitcher?!? What was Hargrove thinking?” Can you comment on the perception of Hargrove’s performance outside of the Mariner fan base?
Thanks.
#19 – Although there may be the dual “respects” you talk about, I don’t know Hargrove personally, so I don’t have to respect the man. I certainly don’t respect the work. Not sure if that’s what you were talking about.
Sorry, the first comment above was in response to Eleven11, comment #7
Dave: Thinking about your response about Bavasi’s hands-off stance toward managers, is there a model that would be more ideal? In other professions it seems that having everyone on the same page is pretty important. Given that the GM has to make talent acquisition decisions factoring in skill sets, stats, contract, character, injury history, etc., why wouldn’t the acquisition also come with a set of “use as directed” instructions for the manager? Or better, at the hiring stage, would it not be really important to have an idea of what kind of team you are building and hire the manager accordingly? I’m not talking about managing by phone to the dugout during games–I mean establishing a philosophy that informs both talent acquisition and its use and that is clear as during the managerial hiring stage as a condition for the job. It seems bizarre to me that a GM can assemble a $90 payroll and then be content to have nothing to say about its use. I’m not suggesting that our man Bavasi has an idea about it, which puts the question to those hiring the GM in the first place, of course. It is possibly more disturbing that the people assembling the front office don’t insist on this kind of coherence from the get-go? But baseball is different, I suppose. Any thoughts?
Got it . .
$90 MILLION payroll, of course.
#9, Dave, I agree, our next manager just has to be a guy who doesn’t overmanage (avoids aggressive baserunning, 1st inning bunting, etc.), understands his personnel (platoon advantages, etc.) and certain basic concepts like patience (you can only preach it, though, players have to practice it), high versus low-leverage bullpen usage, that kind of thing.
These things aren’t that hard, but Hargrove seems to be absolutely anti-intuitive when it comes to even the most basic of baseball concepts. It’s really quite unbelievable this is the guy we wound up with (and I was FOR his hiring as I always had the impression he was a “get out of the way, let your guys play” kind of manager).
Is Earl Weaver really too old to manage for a couple more years (because I essentially just described him, above)?
Befuddlement, or is that Elmerfuddlement?
How could he not know that one of his own pitchers has a very low GB tendency and expect him to induce a GB? He can’t be dumb. These are things he has to know. From all accounts Hargrove is knowledgeable and relatively smart.
Is it because he doesn’t care? Is he just going through the motions because he knows he is going to be let go at seasons end?
And something for Willie to ponder when he wants playing time:
“I get tired of hearing ballplayers bellyache all the time. They should sit in the press box sometime and watch themselves play.”
(former)San Diego Padres President, Buzzie Bavasi
Of course if they were sitting in the pressbox, how could they watch themselves play, but you get the idea.
How did Hargrove get away with saying that? If a manager in Boston said those same words about Mateo, the local media would be all over him. The second he said that a local reporter should have known enough to tell him he’s wrong.
Why is nobody calling this guy on the ridiculous in-game strategies he’s using?
I fear that we’re more likely to get Don Baylor than Larry Dierker.
Worst case scenario: the Cubs fire Dusty Baker.
Why, when he says dumb stuff like this, isn’t there a reporter in the room knowledgeable enough to ask the obvious follow-up question?
28: If the Mariners hire Dusty Baker in the offseason, I will switch my loyalty to a different team. Dusty is probably the only manager I can think of that is worse than Grover.
There’s pretty much no chance the M’s hire Dusty Baker.
What about Buddy Bell?
Well, that’s a relief.
Dave: Thinking about your response about Bavasi’s hands-off stance toward managers, is there a model that would be more ideal?
I don’t know, honestly. The A’s and Blue Jays tried the model of “GM tells manager what to do” with mixed results. Personally, I don’t think that’s the ideal situation, and the A’s and Blue Jays both lost a lot of good talent evaluators because of the way they marginalized the importance of lower level employees.
In an ideal world, I’d split the manager’s responsibilities in half, with one man in charge of organization and communication, with the other in charge of strategy and tactics. There aren’t very many people in baseball who are good at both, but both are necessary. Rather than trying to find a guy who can both relate to his players and understand a win expectancy table is probably asking too much of most people.
Teams already do this in their front offices – while Bavasi is the public figure of the front office and handles most dealings with the media and other clubs, guys like Fontaine, Na, Hunter, Engle, Pelekoudas, and Looper are doing an awful lot of the groundwork, and he leans heavily on their input when making decisisons.
Again, in a hypothetical nirvana, I’d like to see a manager brought in with the understanding that his job was to motivate, nurture, and lead the players, and he’d have a right-hand man who was responsible for tactical moves and optimized roster handling. People Manager would run interference to the players for decisions made by Idea Manager, and hopefully, everyone would get along well.
That’s all a theory, though, and I have no idea how well it would work in practicality.
I understand Bavasi won’t tell Hargrove how to use guys. But when his manager says he brought a guy into the game in a key situation in hopes of getting a ground ball from him when he is arguably the worst ground ball pitcher in baseball, doesn’t he have to say something? Shouldn’t it at least be talked about i.e. Yo Mike, what information are you using to make that decision? If Bavasi allows total ignorance of this sort to go unchecked, he should be fired as well.
I understand Bavasi won’t tell Hargrove how to use guys. But when his manager says he brought a guy into the game in a key situation in hopes of getting a ground ball from him when he is arguably the worst ground ball pitcher in baseball, doesn’t he have to say something? Shouldn’t it at least be talked about i.e. Yo Mike, what information are you using to make that decision? If Bavasi allows total ignorance of this sort to go unchecked, he should be fired as well.
That’s just not how baseball works. You can argue that it’s how baseball should work, I guess, but it doesn’t.
In almost every organization, the manager operates autonomously on in game strategy decisions. Separation of powers between the front office and the field staff is a long tradition in MLB.
I doubt the manager would have the players’ respect as a team leader if they knew he wasn’t empowered with the game decisions.
In almost every organization, the manager operates autonomously on in game strategy decisions. Separation of powers between the front office and the field staff is a long tradition in MLB.
However, you’d think that in-game strategy is a criterion to use in off season evaluations….
But no matter how you cut it or spin it, it was a remarkably dumb thing for Hargrove to say….
it’s a technique that does have the advantage of making finger-pointing & firing easier at the end of a year…
re: Baker– as Dave says, not a likely scenario– if the Ms wouldn’t talk to him when he was the flavor of the month, why would they do it now with the added baggage?
Art Howe anyone? As I recall, he was pretty good in green and gold. I can’t hold him responsible for what happened in NY with the Mets, that was all Steve Phillips.
I doubt the manager would have the players’ respect as a team leader if they knew he wasn’t empowered with the game decisions.
I don’t know – maybe, maybe not. Piniella essentially handed the entire pitching staff to Bryan Price and said “keep me away from thoser $%^*”, and I never heard any rumblings that they stopped respecting him. And while I’ve never been in the military, my understanding is that the platoon commanders garner all kinds of respect while not actually being the ones to plan the attacks.
I think – and again, all hypothetical here – players want to play for managers who give them respect and the best chance to win. And if the best chance to win is to have a guy whose sole job is to figure out the best matchup possible, they’d be fine with that, so long as he wasn’t some computer geek who was trying to tell them how to hit or field.
Tomorrow’s Hargrove quote of the game:
“I felt like if Bloomquist came in and hit the way he can that we’d have a chance of getting a home run,” Hargrove said. “It just didn’t work.”
Dabe, you’re a lot closer to the siutation than I am; and I thought of Price right after I posted. I would guess that coaches command the respect of players in a similar way to the manager — they work with them every day, in the trenches — so it’s not the same as the idea of the manager having his strings pulled from the front office.
But I really don’t know, of course.
Yet by report, Larry Dierker wasn’t able to get his players to go along with his non-traditional ideas of getting the best matchups possible, etc. I suppose there must have been more going on than that, though.
Dabe! Sorry about that.
I hab a code.
I should clarify, so long as I’m serially posting, that I’m talking about the idea of Bavasi telling Hargrove what to do, not the idea of splitting tha manager duties between a couple people, which seems like an interesting idea to me.
If you want your GM to manage in-game strategy than you have gone horribly wrong in your hiring process.
The manager should be the expert on the team, not the GM.
We just hired a really bad expert.
*Very relieved to hear we are unlikely to hire Baker.
Grover’s handling of the pitching was abysmal – Pineiro staying in the 6th, Pineiro startingthe 7th, Pineiro staying in the 7th, Mateo.
But what really pissed me off was his treatment of Adam Jones. The kid just hit his first ML home run. Showed some defense. Then you pinch hit for him yet again? When the team is down by 6? Oh, yeah – the 9-hole is Hargrove’s designated pinch-hitter spot. (He used to pinch hit for Betancourt all the time.)
I mean, it’s bad enough that the Mariners called Jone up, only to have Hargrove bench him for Willie. But give the kid a chance to finish a game. Really – how likely are you to win the game, at that point? (Well, according to Jeff’s chart at LL, it was about 5%) If Jones fails, well, nothing lost. But if he comes through, man, that’s a real boost.
Grrr.
It seems like there’s been some movement toward the split duties for a while, what with the increasing importance of bench coaches as managers-in-training.
You can also take advantage of the Piniella-Price model if the handling of the pitching staff needs to be separated. The problem there, I would guess, is that coaches traditionally focus on mechanics and instruction. So there’s no reason to expect your average coach to be any better than the manager for the in-game strategy or leader-of-men motivational stuff.
Dave, what is your opinion regarding the root cause of management’s failure to utilize basic factual material in running the team? You said earlier that you doubted Bavasi actually was aware that Mateo is close to being the worst groundball pitcher in MLB — so do you you think Hargrove’s equally uninformed? And is their ignorance willful or perhaps are these guys just hopelessly innumerate? For a business, however, it’s just astonishing to see management so unskilled in the basics of their profession.
I know some will kill me for saying this, but would it KILL Hargrove to give Woods some of Mateo’s innings?
I would much rather see him out there from time to time than Mateo in every darned game.
And, yeah, Dave’s right. It’s probably too late to fire Hargrove this season. The time to do it was back in May. I’m sure someone who knows where to look can find the statistics, but mid-season manager moves CAN have a huge positive impact on a team.
Often, the players want to prove it was the manager’s fault, not theirs, so they kick butt. (Or, they continue to suck, which means the manager was the scapegoat.)
Back in May, the Mariners still had a shot. Bring in Rohn, get the tema fired up, and go on a roll. The talent is there for this team. All they need is a) a competent manager, and b) some sense of urgency.
The most frustrating thing, to me, about this season, is that this team is too good to suck badly enough to get Hargrove fired. Every time we think he’s a goner, they play just well enough to get him off the hook. They win DESPITE their manager, and he gets out of jail.
The dude should NOT pass go, and he should NOT collect $200, let alone another penny of his salary.
I sort of feel like it would help out the Idea Manager if he could do something that made it clear he was working really hard at his job. Like, if in addition to crunching a bunch of numbers for matchups, he was seen in the video room a lot looking over hours and hours of tape trying to look for advantages. If the players could figure out, without needing to be told, that Idea Manager was working really hard at his job, they would probably be more inclined to have respect for him.
so, is it too soon for a thread discussing potential candidates for the manager’s job?
so, is it too soon for a thread discussing potential candidates for the manager’s job?
Yes.
dang
Dave, what is your opinion regarding the root cause of management’s failure to utilize basic factual material in running the team? You said earlier that you doubted Bavasi actually was aware that Mateo is close to being the worst groundball pitcher in MLB — so do you you think Hargrove’s equally uninformed? And is their ignorance willful or perhaps are these guys just hopelessly innumerate? For a business, however, it’s just astonishing to see management so unskilled in the basics of their profession.
I don’t think it’s really necessary for Bavasi to know what Mateo’s GB% is on any given day to do his job effectively. I doubt he knows, but I don’t really care either way. It’s not going to have an impact on how he handles his daily business. I’m sure he knows that Mateo is a flyball pitcher overall.
And Hargrove’s not the kind of guy who cares about things like groundball percentages. He’s been a baseball guy for a long time, and he trusts his own instincts, just like pretty much everybody who has held a job in organized baseball for a long time.
And Hargrove’s not the kind of guy who cares about things like groundball percentages. He’s been a baseball guy for a long time, and he trusts his own instincts, just like pretty much everybody who has held a job in organized baseball for a long time.
Which is fine and dandy, as long as his instincts align with reality. But this sort of thing strikes me as sticking in a right handed hitter against a right handed pitchers who kill RH hitters.
Hargrove has always mainained that he would protect players publicly to the media. I do think that sometimes this leads him to appear foolish when answering questions.
Another thing, the Mariners lately seem to be tight lipped about the real health status of their bullpen staff. Perhaps Hargrove’s options were more limited than we know about?
Of course, even in spite of that, last night’s managerial display was just awful.
I had hoped that when we hired him, we were getting the Cleveland version rather than the Baltimore version. Little did I understand that they were one and the same, and that talent in Cleveland was really that good.
I just wish he noticed that his instincts keep letting him down. I guess it’s human, though, to remember everything that validates what you already “know” and forget everything that contradicts it.
I think for a GM to call up a manager and question an in-game decision just isn’t done in baseball. I expect if Bavasi did it, Hargrove would quit on the spot. And cover his ass by leaking publicly how it went down.
That would make it very difficult for the M’s to hire an experienced replacement, because nobody would want to take a job under those circumstances. I think that would be such a radical departure from baseball culture that, right or wrong, you’re not going to see Bavasi start down that road.
I don’t think anyone was talking about questioning a decision during the game, but afterward.
And another thing Dave’s right about – this IS a good team. There’s a ton of talent, and when they show up to play, they actually do quite well.
I know you can’t really ignore certain results, but if you take out the 1-12 record against Oakland, and take out the 9 non-Oakland shutouts, you get a record of 55 and 37.
So, essentially, when they don’t suck, they’re damn good.
So what? Well, I would argue that the single biggest factor in that suckitude is the Manager:
1) The A’s have our number this year. Why? Because our team has a flawed approach against them. Swinging at everything, while Oakland watches pitches and wears down our rotation. This is something that a competent manager MUST address. ie, “Anyone swinging at a non-meatball first or second pitch is benched.” Or something. But matchup advantages do exist between teams, and it’s up to the coaching staff to change that.
2) Shutouts happen. But too many times the Mariners just don’t seem prepared/interested/driven. Again, this is something that coaching needs to see, and adjust. Yes, being a non-walking team, the Mariners are prone to batting-average-related streaks. But they are too talented to lead the league in shutouts.
3) Then, you add in the assorted first-inning bunts, dumb pitching moves, poor bench management and substitution, etc., and I really thing Hargrove is hamstringing this team.
The 2006 Mariners are disappointing. And very discouraging. But the truth is, they’re actually a very good team. And if they could play without an arm and a leg tied behind their backs, I think we’d see it.
Excellent post that confirms the Hargrove is an idiot theory. I think you need to break this down in two idiot moves, both of which deserve to be condemned #1. Bringing in Mateo. He is the weakest member of the Bull Pen, and if he should ever be brought in again under any circumstances it should only be when the game is already lost. This is why Hargrove should not be brought back next year.
#2. Being so stupid as to actually state that he brought in Mateo to get a ground out, when this is the last person to bring into the game in that situation. #2 is why he should be fired immediately.
How can you keep a manager around for even one more day who is that stupid?
Dave, what’s Soeianos GB rate? Because I know Michael Young is already 0 for 5 against him.
12: I just read an advance copy of Dierker’s book, “My Team,” in which he assembles what he believes to be the best possible team from the players he’s seen play during his time in major league baseball. He gets it, no question about it (although in the proof I saw, OPS was referred to as OBS, which sorta drove me nuts). That said, I don’t get the impression he’s interested in managing again. I could be wrong, of course, but that was the impression that I got.
Dave, what’s Sorianos GB rate? Because I know Michael Young is already 0 for 5 against him.
Sorry.
I have heard that a good manager will not get a team wins they otherwise would not have had; but a bad manager can potentially cost a team a lot of wins.
I think we’ve seen this manifest this year.
Dave, what’s Sorianos GB rate? Because I know Michael Young is already 0 for 5 against him.
Soriano is also an extreme flyball pitcher – his GB% is only 27.7%. However, the strikeout rate (10.6 K/G) more than makes up for that. There’s nothing inherently wrong with being a flyball pitcher – you just have to miss bats to make up for it. If you don’t miss bats, you better not put the ball in the air a lot.
Basic principle of pitching: there’s throwing strikes, missing bats, and putting the ball on the ground. You have to do two of the three to be successful.
re: 67 — go to the site at the opening comment. Ton of good information there. But Soriano’s below 30% GB rate in 2006 (54 innings) while, in comparison, Sean Green’s almost 60% (on only 21+ innings) and Jake Woods is ~43% (50 innings). Of course you want to crank in a few other things, like Soriano’s sub-2.0 ERA. No matter, though, it’s hard to find a statistic where Mateo isn’t greatly challenged — maybe he excels at ’stabs self in eye with glove’ but otherwise….
Dave ducked in there with the true facts.
Hi.. longtime listener first time caller.
There that’s out of the way. The thing that is really starting to get to me is that you can see this all coming an inning ahead of time. It’s like when you play chess you anticipate moves. Hargrove seems to just be on the ropes all the fricken time. I used to have a coach that when things got stagnant he’d yell ” Come on guys start something a fistfight any damn thing “. And believe me these guys are so stagnant when a mosquito lands on them he dies instantly.
Ok first rant over. But I still feel like crap. Damn
You have to do two of the three to be successful.
Dave, what are the relative contributions of these factors to pitching success or are they roughly equal? And aside from ERA what are the best measures of ‘pitching success’ in your view?
#66– he and TK both seem to be happy doing what they are doing; of course, Leyland was that way until, what, November? of 2004 when he suddenly changed his mind…
Dave, what are the relative contributions of these factors to pitching success or are they roughly equal?
Throwing strikes – 50%
Missing bats – - 35%
Keeping ball on ground – 15%
Or something like that. Those are really rough estimates with no statistical backing.
And aside from ERA what are the best measures of ‘pitching success’ in your view?
This goes back to what you’re trying to evaluate. ERA (or RA, as a lot of people prefer) is fine for retroactive value-add analysis of starting pitchers, where you want to know how much a player helped his team win ballgames in the past. But it’s not very helpful for relievers, and it’s predictive value is awful.
To me, if you want to evalutae a pitcher effectively, you can’t just look at one number. You have to look at the whole picture and figure out why he’s succeeding or failing. Even if his components (BB%, K%, GB%) are good, other things can really skewer his performance that might not be under his control (HR/FB%, LOB%, BABIP).
If you really just want to use one number to see how to expect a pitcher to throw going forward, I’d suggest xFIP for starters and regular old FIP for relievers (the HR/FB rate for relievers is way lower than for starters, so adjusting it to a league average doesn’t make sense). But that’s just the beginning of a real analysis, and only gets you to part of the truth.
I’d like to chime in and agree with post #48. Hargrove should be fired just for his handling of Adam Jones last night alone!
The kid is having a great game, we’re down by six, let him finish! If it were a one run game, I can see making a move, but to pinch hit for him in that situation? Are you TRYING to destroy his confidence?
Argh! (Announcement: Thingray will be drinking many beers tonight because Hargrove pisses me off!)
I’d like to chime in and agree with post #48. Hargrove should be fired just for his handling of Adam Jones last night alone!
The kid is having a great game, we’re down by six, let him finish! If it were a one run game, I can see making a move, but to pinch hit for him in that situation? Are you TRYING to destroy his confidence?
Yeah, what the hack was THAT all about? He’s getting wood on the ball from the two at bats I saw…what was the point?
Exactly! The kid hits his first major league home run, and from what I heard he made a heck of a defensive play, and then you don’t let him finish out the game.
I can tell you if it were me, I sure wouldn’t be happy about it!
Not that any fuel needs to be added to the fire, but Grover doesn’t need to know Mateo’s FB/GB tendencies to know that it was a bad call. He just needs to look at their history – 5 for 13 with two homers for a 1.275 OPS, which is about 400 points higher than his (Teixeira’s) career mark I think he actually got off pretty easy.
Not that any fuel needs to be added to the fire, but Grover doesn’t need to know Mateo’s FB/GB tendencies to know that it was a bad call. He just needs to look at their history – 5 for 13 with two homers for a 1.275 OPS, which is about 400 points higher than his (Teixeira’s) career mark I think he actually got off pretty easy.
I hate, hate, hate this kind of logic. A 13 at-bat sample is less than worthless. If it was worthless, everyone would ignore it. It’s less than worthless because people take worthless information and then try to make it useful, often being misled in the process.
On the Rangers broadcast last night, they were talking about how Buck Showalter has completely stopped using batter vs pitcher matchup statistics, because he’s come to realize that so much of what they contain isn’t useful information. The specific example cited was Mark DeRosa’s career numbers against Barry Zito. They were very poor heading into Wednesday’s game, and most managers would have used them as a reason to sit DeRosa down. But Showalter correctly assessed that DeRosa is a different hitter than he was several years ago, and therefore, the data isn’t telling him anything useful.
DeRosa had a monster game, helping chase Zito in route to a blowout victory.
It’s another feather in Buck Showalter’s cap. He’s one of the good ones.
I had to quite follwoing the game while we were still ahead. I had a good laugh to myself seeing the score on ESPN later, but looking at the box score it’s even more incomprehensible. Yes, obviously, trying to get a groundball with Mateo is crazy, but my biggest concern, is letting Piñeiro face Teixeira.
He’s obviously running out of gas, we have a two run lead, Piñeiro has already qualified for the win and was going through the lineup for the third time. Does anyone think Teixeira is really going to go 0-3 against Piñeiro in Texas? Not a chance.
I actually probably would have pulled him against Young, but leaving him in against Teixeira is inexcusable in my opinion. Tough to throw a rookie like Woods or Green into that situation, but the way I see it, that’s what you have to do. After that, all those other mistakes just confirmed the loss.
You don’t even need to know any stats to figure out that Mateo isn’t the best option for that situation. My girlfriend couldn’t tell you any pitching stats, but even she went “why’s Mateo coming in, shouldn’t they use somebody else?”
It actually occurred to me after I saw on Gameday that Jones got his first homer, that Hargrove would probably use that as an excuse to bench him later. Maybe keep Willie sharp or something. Kid’s already got a homer, don’t let him get too comfortable. I only thought that because I’m cynical about Hargrove and his idiotic in-game moves. And then he turns around and does exactly that – pinch hits Dobby the Bench Elf for crying out loud, and puts Willie in CF! Un- freaking- believable!!!
I heard Pelekoudas on the radio talk about Hargrove ‘protecting’ Jones by not playing him against some of the better pitchers (Burnett, Westbrook, Zito)– of course that was before sitting him during the Tampa series and some of the recent pinch-hitting adventures…
81 – Wow, that was a wonderful little anecdote. I’m really quite impressed to hear that Showalter was not only thinking outside of the box, but that the announcers were praising him for such forward thinking.
I wonder what that would feel like? I guess we’ll never know…
You have to do two of the three to be successful.
. . . and if you can do all three, your name might be Good King Felix.
This latest gem from Hargrove reminds me of a Bill James quote I heard a year or two ago. I’m going to paraphrase here because I won’t get the exact quote right but he (James) said that when he was first trying to show his analytical methods to baseball people they would all essentially say: ‘I don’t need this; I already understand the game better than you.’
My two cents is that Hargrove has got to go but I also think it’s worth noting that he is just symptomatic of this Old School approach of guys who have been in and around the game their entire lives, have been brought up a certain way and rewarded for adhering to that in their playing and/or management/front office careers — and who, at this point in life have no real incentive to change. Dave alluded to this in post #57.
But the real fear for me is that Hargrove goes and they hire another “name” candidate who has the same old blind spots.
Someone please tell me I’m off base.
Pitcher vs. batter statistics are hilarious, especially in light of the way some managers (and local broadcasters) drool over them.
To illustrate, let’s pretend that there was a strike-shortened year, and to pass the time all the players held an exhibition tournament to see which batter could hit for the highest average against Roy Halladay over a 100 AB stretch. After the first week of competition, Manny Ramirez, Jim Edmonds, and Benji Molina have each separated themselves from the pack by hitting 8 for 10 against him. Would we assume, as Fairly likes to, that those three just “wear out” Halladay? Or would we not really care, realizing that (naturally) a few random guys from a large pool will always start out hot, and could still end up hitting .220 after 90 more at bats? Of course we wouldn’t care about the small sample size – with enough batters facing Halladay, some of them will hit him hard after the first 10 tries, and some will start off in a slump. If Vlad were to go 0 for his first 10, would we decide that he “hates to face” Halladay?
Of course we wouldn’t. Not even Ron Fairly would. Everyone would understand that there are 90 AB’s to go. But for some reason, people tend to throw out logic when the scenario is less isolated.
That all said, I don’t care about Hargrove not looking at stats. You don’t need stats to make basic observations. Mateo does not posess the tools to pitch shutout innings consistently, to strike guys out, or to induce ground balls. If Hargrove can’t make simple observations that are evident to casual fans, he should submit his own resignation.
#88– FWIW, in 2002 the four finalists were Bob Melvin, Sam Perlozzo, Jim Riggleman & Buddy Bell, with Lee Elia a strong candidate before he took his name oout of the running– this was after also interviewing John McLaren, Bryan Price, Dan Rohn, Tony Muser, Willie Randolph, & Terry Francona. In 2004 (after a different process where they pared the list down before they had personal meetings) the four finalists were Hargrove, Terry Collins, Grady Little & Jerry Manuel.
#89– speaking of small sample size, the KJR update guy just felt compelled to tell us just how fabulously Choo was doing after the M’s got rid of him …
90 – Yeah, that’s what scares me. We’re all totally fixated on Hargrove now, and for good reason, but we were equally fixated on getting rid of Bob Melvin.
89 – I know what point you’re trying to make, but I actually think Ron Fairly WOULD say Vlad hates to face Halladay after he was 0-for-10. Early results tend to have a higher impact on perception than later ones where regression to the mean happens.
Also, I assume Dusty Baker is the manager allowing Roy Halladay to rack up those egregious pitch counts.
#61: I’m not saying Bavasi should question Hargrove’s in-game decision to use Mateo, but rather he should question the reasoning behind the decision. Hargrove says he put in Mateo hoping to get a ground ball. Bavasi, at a minimum, has to know that Mateo is not a ground ball pitcher and thus, after hearing Hargrove’s statement, has to feel that Hargrove is at a minimum misinformed about his own player’s tendencies. Given that, I would hope Bavasi would at least try to correct Hargrove or make sure Hargrove saw the numbers showing how flawed his reasoning was. If he doesn’t, then in my opinion, he’s not managing his manager.
I gotta say, while I agree 100% that Hargrove is a terrible manager, I think folks tend to overestimate the impact of a terrible manager on wins and losses. Yeah, he brought in Mateo, when he clearly should have brought in someone else, but the Ms probably would have lost the game anyway. Bavasi is having a FAR greater impact on the Ms, now and in the future, than Hargrove could ever have. Some decisions most of us knew were bad when they were made:
- Huge, terrible, Sexson contract, which was roundly criticized here at USSM.
- Everett contract
- Trade future for Perez
- Trade future for Broussard
- Spiezio contract
- Failing to trade Guardado when he had value
Now try to think of smart, forward-thinking, ways in which Bavasi has helped the organization. I can think of 3:
- Signing Kenji – no problem here.
- Behind the scenes, putting the farm system in good hands – not a lot of good, though, if he’s going to trade away the products of the system for peanuts.
- Generally doing a good job with the media and handling FO/Player relations. I’m not sure what value that adds, but I’ll concede it adds something.
Until Bavasi goes, and probably until ownership rethinks how it wants this organization to operate, the Ms will not be able to sustain run of success. With their payroll, they might get lucky and make a run at contention every few years, but that’s it.
I can think of 2 questions– what did Choo have to do with the future, and when did Guardado have value?
– Huge, terrible, Sexson contract, which was roundly criticized here at USSM.
Got a point here.
– Everett contract
Agreed.
– Trade future for Perez
- Trade future for Broussard
Um, that’s what ANY GM does; these moves are in NO way a negative.
- Spiezio contract
…though this is.
– Failing to trade Guardado when he had value
This may or may not be true, depending on what he was offered. If you knew that he was offered, say, Papelbon or Lester, yeah, then I might agree with you. But if he was offered crap, then I can’t.
Now try to think of smart, forward-thinking, ways
The one good thing to be said about Mateo is that he’s giving up less homeruns per flyball than in recent years.
93 – That’s oversimplifying a little bit. As the USSMariner boys have noted before, Bavasi isn’t the top of the pyramid. He does not operate in a vacuum… there are people above and below him that influence the decisions he makes. I’m not saying he hasn’t made bad moves, but every GM in the game makes bad moves. I’m more curious than pessimistic about the moves he makes in the future.
And if Bavasi came to my house and shot my puppy, but fired Hargrove the next day, I’d consider that a fair tradeoff.
Anybody but Grover or Dusty Baker. I don’t need Baker in charge of Felix Hernandez. No, no, no.
It seems to me as if Bavasi may have traded away or called up some of the old regime’s prospects, but he is reloading the system from the bottom up.
I think it’s crucial for us to restock our farm system and get it healthy again. It’s been a long time since I can remember us being ranked in the top half of the minor leagues.
On a different subject, after last night I want Hargrove gone. He made to inexcusable decisions as far as I’m concerned. Sending Mateo out to pitch in that situation, and pulling Jones to PH Dobbs.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result. But from now on I will refer to that as “pulling a Hargrove”, or better yet “pulling a Grover”!
That should be “two” inexcusable decisions. Oops!
93 – That’s oversimplifying a little bit. As the USSMariner boys have noted before, Bavasi isn’t the top of the pyramid. He does not operate in a vacuum… there are people above and below him that influence the decisions he makes.
I admit I oversimplified. It’s almost impossible not to. And I agree that Bavasi does not work in a vacuum. That’s why I concluded with the opinion that ownership needs to rethink the way it operates. It isn’t just Bavasi, and, for all I know, it might not be Bavasi that’s the root of the problem at all. It is clear to me, though, that there is a deep-rooted problem in the Ms organization, vis a vis building a team that will win for an extended period, that cannot be addressed AT ALL by firing Hargrove. If anything, firing Hargrove will further retard progress in the organization by giving the appearance of progress while accomplishing nothing.
- Trade future for Perez
- Trade future for Broussard
Um, that’s what ANY GM does; these moves are in NO way a negative.
I believe Dave would agree that we gave up way too much for Perez. As to the Broussard deal, I might be alone in thinking this way, but… Broussard is 30 year-old 1B/DH that mashes righties. How many friggin 1B/DH types do we need? Ibanez, Everett, Sexson, Broussard, Perez, Petagine, Dobbs… Does Bavasi not understand that you don’t *have* to be a slug to DH? Choo is a 24-year good corner outfielder, who can play CF in a pinch, who mashes righties. Why give that up?
Apparently I don’t understand how to use the italics tag.
Apologies
I believe Dave would agree that we gave up way too much for Perez. As to the Broussard deal, I might be alone in thinking this way, but… Broussard is 30 year-old 1B/DH that mashes righties. How many friggin 1B/DH types do we need? Ibanez, Everett, Sexson, Broussard, Perez, Petagine, Dobbs… Does Bavasi not understand that you don’t *have* to be a slug to DH? Choo is a 24-year good corner outfielder, who can play CF in a pinch, who mashes righties. Why give that up?
I can understand that you feel we got too little for Cabrera. On the other hand, he was being blocked with little chance for advancement. Bavasi definitely did the right thing in trading him before he rotted in the farm system and lost his value.
Same with Choo; he was blocked at his postion and was traded before he lost his value by being lost in the farm system.
And do YOU understand that for THIS club, DH is the place where we can add slugging power?
I disagree about Bavasi. The distinction here is this:
We could spend all day weighing the good and the bad about Bavasi. Short term, long term, minors, majors, how much is bad luck, how much is his idea, how much isn’t… there is no definitive answer on whether Bavasi is debit… or how much of one.
Hargrove, on the other hand, is without question bad at his job. And while managers in general have less impact on their clubs than most would think, he specifically has had a much bigger impact on the games from day one. He has hurt this team badly. And in a division only a few games apart, he has quite possibly been the difference.
Basically, we know for a fact that Hargrove has been bad. Bavasi is murkier.
Anybody but Grover or Dusty Baker. I don’t need Baker in charge of Felix Hernandez. No, no, no.
Don “The guy who ruined Kerry Wood before Dusty had his shot” Baylor is available.
#103– and Bavasi implied Choo was losing value; that they had fewer calls about him this year than last….
Hargrove’s bad, m-kay….
Does anybody really believe that Choo will continue to hit like he has in Cleveland? If I’m not mistaken, we’ve seen two perfect examples of this situation in the past two years (see Mike Morse and Jeremy Reed).
What I don’t understand is why bring in Mateo? Why not just take the team off the field at that point, and at least avoid the risk of injury?
I believe Dave would agree that we gave up way too much for Perez. As to the Broussard deal, I might be alone in thinking this way, but… Broussard is 30 year-old 1B/DH that mashes righties. How many friggin 1B/DH types do we need? Ibanez, Everett, Sexson, Broussard, Perez, Petagine, Dobbs… Does Bavasi not understand that you don’t *have* to be a slug to DH? Choo is a 24-year good corner outfielder, who can play CF in a pinch, who mashes righties. Why give that up?
We paid too high a price for Perez, yes.
But as for the rest of the points? Everett’s gone, so I don’t know why’d you include him in the list. Petagine is 35, and he’s never hit in the majors. Dobbs is terrible. These guys are not major league caliber DH’s going forward. So, you’re arguing that we shouldn’t have acquired Broussard to DH because we had Ibanez in LF and Sexson at 1B? Really, you think that’s a logjam?
Choo’s not a corner outfielder, and he’s an abomination in center. He’s a guy with no defensive value who can only hit RHP’s, and isn’t going to hit for enough power to be a major league regular. If all goes well for Choo, he’ll turn into Ben Broussard. And because he’s a LH hitter, his future role (fourth outfielder) wasn’t going to happen here, since all the players he’d be backing up are also LH hitters.
#108 – Exactly. Do the 36 AB in Cleveland batting .417 have greater weight than his previous 29 AB with the M’s where he batted well under .100? It’s obvious that somewhere in the middle lies the truth.
Once again we come back to small sample size theater..
I managed to hack into the M’s computer system and look what I found:
To: Mike (humanraindelay@seattlemariners.com)
From: Bill (myheadisincrediblylong@seattlemariners.com)
RE: ground ball tendencies
Mike, just wanted to remind you we’re spending a bunch of money –well, OK, not really all that much money, not considering how much we wasted on C-Rex
lol — on this Olkin guy who can crunch whatever numbers you might want. The other day, just for fun, I had him run some numbers on how many ground balls different pitchers get, and you might be amazed at his results!!!!
Turns out Mateo almost never gets guys to hit ground balls. Funny, you’d figure guys like him who don’t throw that hard get ground balls, but Olkin says it’s all in the numbers. Anyhoo, thought I’d send along this chart in case you want to look at it before the next time you’re looking for a double play.
By the way, we didn’t bring that Jones kid up so he could sit on the bench, so would you mind getting him a few more at bats? Otherwise I’ll have to trade him for another first baseman. lol
Also, lets not forget how instrumental Hargrove was in making sure Everett was the guy Bavasi signed. Bavasi is guilty too, of course, but a big part of that was Hargrove. I don’t know how many more Washburn/Spezio/Aurilia type signings to expect from him, but hopefully his love affair with washed up Angels is over. Besides, if the rest of the front office is obsessed with Schmidt and maybe Matsuzaka, well, Bavasi might pay them too much, but he’s not going to sign the wrong guys this time.
As for Choo, I agree he was probably losing value. I certainly sensed that from my admittedly unknowledgable position. He’s a useful piece for Cleveland, and I think that the trade was good for both sides. Except that Ibañez should also be the power-hitting LH part of a DH platoon, but it seems like the Mariners would be pretty reluctant to platoon him, however much he deserves it.
What I don’t really understand is all of this talk of mortgaging the future and such. We don’t really need a lot of position players close to the majors in our farm system. If we can get legit major-league talent for guys like Cabrera and Choo, that’s good. I was sad to see Cabrera go, but it is what it is. If Jones or Clement went, that’s mortaging the future. The rest? Role players, probably. Maybe not Cabrera, but who knows?
We don’t know how good Benuardo will really perform next year, but if it’s anything close to this year’s aggregate numbers, that could be a huge part of our playoff hopes. It kind of leaves Snelling out in the cold unless we trade Sexson, but I wouldn’t mind seeing Snelling as a 4th OFer, alternate DH, and 1st bat off the bench. I think he’d excel in that role. I’d rather trade Sexson, especially if we could actually get some talent for him, but it’s also scary to pencil in Snelling as a starter at a position without a backup plan.
We have an impressive, impressive young core. If Jones continues to develop quickly, and Clement can stick at catcher, we have great talent up the middle for years to come. The future folks talk about mortaging is mostly up and playing for the club, so sit back and enjoy 2007 and beyond. That’s my opinion anyway.
Does anybody really believe that Choo will continue to hit like he has in Cleveland? If I’m not mistaken, we’ve seen two perfect examples of this situation in the past two years (see Mike Morse and Jeremy Reed).
Of course no one believes Choo’s going to keep batting .400 for Cleveland. But he did put up a 1.000+ OPS against righties this year in AAA, and he’s continued to mash righties in the majors. Taking into account defense, I’d straight-up, right now, rather have Choo in LF and Ibanez at DH than Ibanez in LF and Broussard at DH, and that ignores the fact that Choo is 24 (i.e. on an upward trajectory) and Broussard is 30 (i.e. likely on downward trajectory).
CCW, you must think more highly of Choo than I do. I think he is a AAAA hitter, and a AA corner outfielder. He may stick as a fourth outfielder with Clevland for a while, but I will be surprised if he becomes anything more than that. But I wish the kid luck!
OK, Choo looks shaky in the OF but he has good speed and a cannon for an arm. Isn’t there room for him to grow into a good defensive outfielder?
I wonder about that. I’ve watched him for a few years, and it’s always bothered me that he takes horrible routes to the ball.
That being said, he did make the “top plays” on BBTN last night or the night before.
#103– and Bavasi implied Choo was losing value; that they had fewer calls about him this year than last….
I think that’s relevant information (and usually stuff the GM has more info on than fans). But it also could be seen from the cold hard facts of time…a 24 yearold minor league who can’t bust into the big leauges loses value every month he languishes in the minors…
We could spend all day weighing the good and the bad about Bavasi. Short term, long term, minors, majors, how much is bad luck, how much is his idea, how much isn’t… there is no definitive answer on whether Bavasi is debit… or how much of one.
Well, I think it’s a lot more split (and I land more on the side of mediocre, with strengths that somewhat overshadow his weaknesses). But you’re right that Hargrove is clearly doing poorly (and may behind some of the more bizarre roster decisions—Bavasi may have given him a free hand (within reason) so he can say that he was given a fair shake with the people Grover wanted).
The reason a guy takes a horrible route is because he’s misjudging the ball, of course. Unless he has poor depth perception or some other kind of problem with his eyesight — which is certainly possible — he should be able to get better at that if he spends an hour a day taking fly balls in the outfield. Maybe spend a month in the offseason doing nothing but taking fly balls.
Admittedly, some guys just don’t have the vision to be able to do it. But I do think it’s something you can get better at with hard work.
Choo might be a better choice than Broussard as the DH. But would he have gotten a shot with Grover? He sure go shot out of here in a hurry after only a few attempts….
Hasn’t Choo been an outfielder for his entire minor league career though? You would think that after six years of doing nothing but chasing fly balls in the minors, he would be better at judging them than Adam Jones (who also has a cannon, but has only been playing CF for what, a year now?).
I’m beyond being angry. Fuck Hargrove as the manager of the team I follow as a fan. And fuck the management that didn’t can him before the Texas sweep, when ANYONE ELSE might have turned up the Division crown.
Anyone here have any “inside” info on the players’ opinion of this clown? I cannot imagine ANYONE has the least trust in his abilities, or is able to play up to their potential under his command.
What a waste of opportunity this season has been!!!!!!!
Don’t anybody tell pinball1973 where Hargrove lives! LOL!
But as for the rest of the points? Everett’s gone, so I don’t know why’d you include him in the list. Petagine is 35, and he’s never hit in the majors. Dobbs is terrible. These guys are not major league caliber DH’s going forward. So, you’re arguing that we shouldn’t have acquired Broussard to DH because we had Ibanez in LF and Sexson at 1B? Really, you think that’s a logjam?
My point was that Bavasi continues to give up valuable commodities (prospects or money) for mediocre hitters at the wrong end of the defensive spectrum. He has committed to 3 guys who really shouldn’t be play any position other than 1B. That’s poor roster construction, in general, but especially so for a team that should be building for the future.
Ibanez is not a good 1B.. I’m not saying he’s a great lf, but at least out there he has an accurate and (fairly) strong arm that he can make use of.
(LF)
Again, in a hypothetical nirvana, I’d like to see a manager brought in with the understanding that his job was to motivate, nurture, and lead the players, and he’d have a right-hand man who was responsible for tactical moves and optimized roster handling. People Manager would run interference to the players for decisions made by Idea Manager, and hopefully, everyone would get along well.
Isn’t that how Joe Torre and Don Zimmer used to work together for the Yankees? Torre puts the Zen face on Zimmer’s technical expertise, since everybody knows Zimmer is the hot hand with game strategy and tactics, but he’s too abrasive to manage himself.
Mike “Milquetoast” Hargrove:
“A lot of positive came out of bringing Mateo in to face Michael Young. I thought Julio really competed well on that pitch he hung. And Raul did a nice job of digging that ball out of the corner and holding Young to a double. There’s a lot of good we can take out of this.”
I just wonder how that relay got past Kenji. It sure looked like he could have knocked it down (even though it was a bad throw, up the line). Did anyone notice if it took a funny hop, or what happened?
I wonder: Surely our own Mariners position players know the M’s pitchers enough to know which ones are GB pitchers and which ones are FB pitchers, and which are one unto themselves (Moyer)? If any of them were watching that post-game interview by Grover, I’ll bet there were a few #%@&*@ comments in the clubhouse…
Hmmm. This may be one instance where it might be advantageous to let the inmates run the asylum for the next 6 weeks. Heck, name Ichiro interim manager.
[/gentle sarcasm]
Hey! I qualified my white-hot hatred of Hargrove AS THE MANAGER OF THE MARINERS only! I recall rather liking him as a player, with all that “Human Rain-Delay” stuff.
Oh, and besides my astonishment at Bavasi (presumeably) keeping the Clown in full costume, I only mildly distrust him running the FO, and have found many things to like about him. I don’t think he will ever put together a World Series team, here or elsewhere, though.
Okay, you had me worried there for a minute pinball1973..
You sounded like I did when I blew a gasket about Bloomquist a week or two ago! Port Orchard was scared that day, I tell you..
Still, Grover will be the cause of me drinking many beers tonight!
#103 – funny stuff. It cracked me up to think of Bavasi slipping in all those “lol”s…
Re: #34, splitting the manager’s job responsibilities into two jobs: Dave, that’s an _excellent_ idea, one of the first really innovative ideas in baseball organization that I’ve heard in years. Particularly in the way that you present it, leadership in one position, strategy in another. If we accept as we do now that pitching is a special responsibility which should have a dedicated coach, and that hitting is a special responsibility which should have a dedicated coach, it’s but a small leap to accept that tactics and substitutions are together a special responsibility which should have a dedicated coach.
It’s so ingrained in baseball tradition that ‘The Leader’ makes the tactical and strategic decisions that it’s hard to see that management in general would be better if he handed those off. The real and essential function of The Manager in the present day context is actually morale, man management, discipline, and above all ego management. Sixty years ago, baseball players were working class stiffs who could be told what to do or replaced (supposedly); now, they’re super-rich, super-famous celebrities around whose _personal_ names and personas many million dollar sports corporations have leveraged there profit-making strategies. The manager’s real responsilities are to build team and manage his people, and good manager’s are often fairly good at this. Finding one of those guys who’s also a shrewd tactitician is a pretty tough call, especially since most managers are former ballplayers without a broadbased background in information management or data analysis. Turning the bench coach into someone with actual tactical responsibility while having the manager be a team exec is A Really Good Idea. Hmmmm.
And I agree, in the offseason the Ms will go shopping for a marketable name to replace Hargrove. That’s how they operate, and why they got _him_.
And yes, that was how Torre and Zimmer worked it, and just another good example of how and why Torre was and is an outstanding manager. By the time the Yanks gave him the hat, he had his ego under control, farmed out subtantial responsibilites entirely to able subordinates like his pitching coach, and concentrated on personnel management.
And re: Bill Bavasi, as I understood the deals this season Bavasi made the Perez deal, but Pelekoudas negotiated the Broussard deal. Now that was from hints in the paper and such, and I don’t know that I’d weight the info too much since obviously they discussed together what was done, but . . . One deal was good and reasonable, and one wasn’t. As throughout nearly his whole career, Bavasi’s name is attached to the deal that wasn’t.
I’m probably almost as tired saying that as Bill B. is hearing it, supposing that he hears it at all.
Playing time, honest explanations, and accountability are what players look to in their team exec. If a manager was totally clueless and demonstrably uninvolved in in-game decisions, it would hurt, but that would be a clumsy wat to handle it. The manager and his tactician should confer just like the manager and his pitching coach do now, but the tactitian then executes the call or substitution. In the end, the tactitian and the coach are both accountable to the manager. Not a problem. But the two coaches would have to be able to work together, otherwise it’s Dysfunction Junction. A manager and his hitting coach can survive not being on speaking terms, but I wouldn’t see two roles this close as playing that way. Still, a really interesting idea.
At least David Andriesen of the P-I gets it — this from his Mariner Notebook in Saturday’s paper (he probably reads USSM):
“In a one-run game, the Mariners needed a double-play grounder to end the seventh inning, and instead got a three-run Michael Young double on Mateo’s first pitch. Mateo wasn’t terribly likely to get the rescue ground ball — he has one of the lowest ground ball ratios in the American League — but the two pitchers Hargrove would rather have used were unavailable.”
Mateo wasn’t terribly likely…
Bob Melvin gave much better post game interviews than Mike Hargrove. Losing under Melvin didn’t hurt as much because Bob was such a nice guy you couldn’t help but like him. For some reason Mike Hargrove just makes me mad as hell.
I have added my light to the glowing firmament of this discussion.
Just looking at the fangraph data, he’s basically always been an extreme flyball pitcher. Interestingly, his HR/FB has always been at least league average or like this year, significantly lower than league average (I guess thats expected for a reliever). Basically just looking at his rate stats, the only thing that jumps out is a career high LD% of 25 which seem to be at the expense of his GB%. I guess I’m struggling to translate the rate stats into his awfulness if you just had the blind data without the nightly visual info. Is the LD%-GB% flip-flop enough to signal this guy is a a pile of kindling this year versus say 2003? I suppose if his K% and BB% were also shown, they’d reflect trends in the wrong direction too.
Is it as simple as he is striking out less and walking more so he’s struggling with command/velocity and this is translating into more hits (line drives)? This would conform with the BB>K>GO/FO theory of pitching. If so though, why aren’t more balls leaving the yard?
Finally, on the field, what is going on? Is everything basically slow and straight?
I know these are naive questions but they are honest ones.
Of ya, one final dumb question…. where can I find league average for all of the rate stats?