38-45
by NYRoyal on Jun 30, 2008 11:26 PM EDT
91 comments
I love come from behind wins. Thank you Miguel Olivo. Even cooled off, you still hammer lefties.
0 recs |
91 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Oh yeah
And maybe Horacio Ramirez isn’t the worst pitcher in baseball. Too soon to tell, but maybe. Regardless, it’s not like Team Ramrod, Mahay and Soria can pitch every relief inning. Are you more comfortable with Gobble pitching in the middle innings? Peralta? If so, why?
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 30, 2008 11:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
3 2/3 innings
Um, yea its too early to tell.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jul 1, 2008 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
until this season i would have said peralta...
but now, i don’t know
by royalsreview on Jun 30, 2008 11:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
I liked Peralta as much as anybody going into this season, but he hasn’t been himself. Did anyone really want Peralta coming into this game in a good HR hitter’s park? I sure didn’t. I think H.Ramirez was as good a choice as any at the time. Mahay can’t go 4 innings.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 30, 2008 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know what purpose this serves
After all, the game was over after the Orioles took the lead, don’t you know anything?
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jun 30, 2008 11:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
honestly...
I do enjoy ripping Ho-Ram, but at this point, I think that basically bullpen analysis is pretty limited. There are just so few known entities. Look at how CLE/CWS have completely switched positions this year, going first to worst/worst to first more or less, with mostly the same guys. The Tomkos/Ho-Rams of the world might be aight in relief, or they might suck. It’s honestly not a bad idea sending them out there…
by royalsreview on Jun 30, 2008 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"It's honestly not a bad idea sending them out there..."
Particularly when the Royals bullpen outside of Soria-R.Ramirez-Mahay-Nunez has been truly awful. No other pitchers in that pen can be counted on.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 30, 2008 11:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
glad greinke got off the hook for a tough loss
he seemed very unlucky tonight
by royalsreview on Jun 30, 2008 11:39 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
"Off the hook"...
I don’t know if you watched the Royals postgame or not, but after a reporter told him that he basically said he had never heard that expression before.
It was pretty funny.
by rockchalk on Jun 30, 2008 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
aviles= emotional leader and culture of winning
name him player-manager now
by royalsreview on Jun 30, 2008 11:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
(which is Latin for “babies”, doncha know)
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jun 30, 2008 11:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Indians lost
We’re a game up!
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jun 30, 2008 11:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Great, my mom comes to town, and I miss a big comeback win
No sitting in my office, watching Gameday, and waiting to type “That’s what she said” into the Gamethread at the first opportunity for me.
So, does Ho-Ram get 3 or 4 years?
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Jun 30, 2008 11:45 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
two years guaranteed
but then the royals have a team option for 4 straight years
by royalsreview on Jun 30, 2008 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jose says you're a (bleep)ing baby too
If you were a man, you’d kick your moms to the curb until the post-game’s over
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jun 30, 2008 11:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I say he gets a 1-month contract
With team options for August and September.
Here’s a question. If he pitches ok out of the bullpen for the remainder of the year, will there be complaints if the Royals sign him to a one-year deal for 2008?
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 30, 2008 11:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
depends on the money
and expectation/role he has
one thing that really amazes me is that teams constantly do this with bullpen guys: find fungible talent off the scrap heap, ,plug it in, get decent performance, then play player X, instead of just grabbing another guy
by royalsreview on Jun 30, 2008 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
"But, but, but
we CAN’T let Mike Myers go! We’ve gotta give him a 5-year deal!“
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jun 30, 2008 11:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But, if they give him scrap heap money
...then it’s no different than picking up some other scrap heap guy. It’s not like they are going to give him $1M (fearless forecast).
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 30, 2008 11:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
true
then again, we would have never thought Gload/Grudz would have been extended either
i honestly think Davies would make a better reliever than Ho-Ram, maybe that can be next years move
by royalsreview on Jun 30, 2008 11:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree on Davies
But there may be an open bullpen spot which H.Ramirez could fill. We’ll see how it shakes out.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 12:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There will always be compliaints
If you’re asking me if I would complain, well, it depends on what “OK” is and how big the deal is, and what his role is. I can’t imagine that, at this point, he’s the kind of guy who at his best would ever be anything more than a mop-up guy when the other relievers are at their best. What kind of deal are those guys worth? And hopefully Kyle Davies will be getting shoved into that role anyway, with Soria/Rosa joining the rotation.
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Jun 30, 2008 11:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he pitches at an average or better level
(both in ERA and key peripherals), then I wouldn’t mind giving him a one-year $500K deal. Maybe even $750K deal plus incentives. That’s pretty bargain basement considering that league minimum is around $400K.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jun 30, 2008 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it's way too early to even be talking about it
After all, at one time Tomko was 1-0 with a 1.29 ERA and Jimmy Gobble was unhittable.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jul 1, 2008 12:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's why I put a significant condition on it
I’m not predicting anything with regard to his performance, much less suggesting Dayton call HR’s agent.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, I realize that
it’s just that in a week, we could just as likely be clamoring for him to be DFA.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jul 1, 2008 12:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, he has not even pitched 4 innings yet
Considering he has walked nearly as many batters as he has struck out in 600+ major league innings (and he has not struck out that many) and is the rare sinkerballer who gives up home runs instead of suppressing them, the HoRam love has an expiration date.
by Gopherballs on Jul 1, 2008 1:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is there any HoRam love?
Anyone?
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 1:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does "If he has a few more good outings,
I’ll start airing up the tires on the bandwagon” count?
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jul 1, 2008 11:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Relief
He’s also never pitched in relief where his stuff can play up. And let’s be honest, his stuff has actually looked quite decent so far.
Let’s give the guy a chance.
Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.
by doublestix on Jul 1, 2008 3:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Give him a chance?
Now you’re talking crazy.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 3:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No kidding...
Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.
by doublestix on Jul 1, 2008 3:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No doubt
I’m just wondering if people would be willing to have him around in 2009 if he pitched at a decent level for the remainder of 2008.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 1:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So if Shane Costa got called up today and went 2 for 5
would it be too early to raise the idea of giving him a guaranteed major league contract for next year? Or does Costa get treated differently because he has previously sucked in a Royals uniform, while Ramirez has sucked in different shades of blue?
by Gopherballs on Jul 1, 2008 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Did you read what I wrote?
So if Shane Costa got called up today and went 2 for 5 would it be too early to raise the idea of giving him a guaranteed major league contract for next year?
Did you read the part where I said “what if he pitches ok for the rest of the season?” I didn’t say that the Royals should start considering extending him right now. That’s a pretty big condition, no? Now if Costa came up and played well for the rest of the season, I would think that he should get some consideration for being on the team next year as well.
Apparently no matter what conditions are put on it, one isn’t even allowed to consider the possibility of having H.Ramirez on the team next year no matter how well he pitches. Sorry for going out of bounds.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude
It’s not that signing him for next year if he pitches well the rest of the season is a bad idea.
It’s that starting to discuss whether he’s going to pitch well for the rest of the season after a couple of decent innings is silly, regardless of any disclaimers or caveats.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jul 1, 2008 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hubes!
Justin Huber was 2-4 with a HR last night. If he continues to hit well, should we consider trading for him?
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jul 1, 2008 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did I at any point discuss the likelihood of him pitching at a decent level for the remainder of the season?
Did I predict it or even say that it’s likely? Actually I think it is quite unlikely.
But is it stupid to even present the hypothetical? If you’re saying that is silly to even pose a hypothetical, then I don’t even know how to respond. Granted the hypothetical is likely to occur, but I shouldn’t even bring it up? Now that is silly.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, just stop it.
You know that if we’d called up Chris Lubanski a month ago, and he’d gone 3-4 with 2 HR in his first game, and some over-exuberant soul had broached the subject of locking him up if he keeps hitting like that… you’d have bristled up and said it was silly to even talk about that sort of thing based on one game.
You’re only defending it now because it’s self-defense. You KNOW it’s silly, just chuckle and say “Okay, you got me”, and let’s all move on to arguing about how many former first-round draft picks we need to send to Colorado.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jul 1, 2008 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not against hypotheticals...ever
You’re way, way off base here. If Lubanski came up and performed well for the remainder of the season, I would certainly consider having him on the team next year. No hypothetical is off base. If someone said it is likely that he’d perform at a decent level for the remainder of the year, I’d very much disagree with that.
But is there anything wrong with posing the hypothetical? Posing a hypothetical is not the same as arguing that it will happen. Arguing against the even posing a hypothetical is really bizarre, at best.
My whole point with bringing up the hypothetical (which I thought would have been obvious) is to determine how important people would think this half+ season of performance is, and whether a decent performance would be viewed as him turning things around. And then, if so, how much risk he’d be worth.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's why I put a significant condition on it
I’m not predicting anything with regard to his performance, much less suggesting Dayton call HR’s agent.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 12:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I will complain
Relievers are volatile, especially ones that can’t strike anybody out like Horacio.
I think DM understands how fungible relievers are.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jul 1, 2008 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
so is your mother staying in your basement?
The concept of progress acts as a protective mechanism to shield us from the terrors of the future. - Collected sayings of Muad'Dib
by buddyball on Jul 1, 2008 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A bad week away from the Pena line
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jun 30, 2008 11:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
he saves at least 4 runs a game with his pitch calling though
by royalsreview on Jun 30, 2008 11:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
TPJ + G-Load + Bako's pitch calling = 10 run advantage before the first Royals at-bat
Another fatal error in letting a guy go
OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG
by devil_fingers on Jul 1, 2008 12:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
bako/la rue >>> buck/olivo
"I've seen the future and it's much like the present only longer." - Dan Quisenberry
by Safe@First on Jul 1, 2008 12:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trey won the game for us
For all the criticism on Trey earlier this year, can we hand this victory to him? He handled the bullpen very well, and called on Olivo at a key moment, even benching a guy like Teahen to do so. Great moves.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jul 1, 2008 10:39 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
No.
Here’s the thing: did you actually see Olivo’s at-bat?
First pitch: low and away. Olivo flails.
Second pitch: low and away. Olivo flails.
Third pitch: Hernandez sets up on the inside corner. Sherrill throws absolute freakin’ meatball. Olivo’s eyes get as big as saucers. Not tea saucers. FLYING saucers. I think TPJ woulda gotten extra bases on that pitch.
If Sherrill makes any kind of pitch on 0-2, 2 outs, bases empty, the Orioles win. Think about that before praising Trey’s genius too much.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jul 1, 2008 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Theoreticals
Sure, if Sherrill makes a great pitch, O’s win. He didn’t. And Trey put a guy in there with the best chance of taking advantage of a mistake – Olivo. Making great managerial moves isn’t about making moves that are guaranteed to succeed. They’re about putting your players in the best position to succeed. And Trey did that.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jul 1, 2008 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Trey’s the man. Has been all season—-even during the losing streak. – TL
by timlacy on Jul 1, 2008 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trey hasn't been a very good manager, but he made the right call here and deserves credit for it.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trey's been as good...
...a manager as the capabilities of his players allow him to be. – TL
by timlacy on Jul 1, 2008 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except...not at all
His strategies have robbed the team of scoring opportunities, and he’s wildly overplayed crappy players like Gload and Gathright, while underplaying decent players like German and Callaspo.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Though I can’t really say that German losing playing time has that much to with Hillman, Hillman has had some definite bumps in the road.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Jul 1, 2008 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
German and Callaspo could and should have taken playing time from Gathright and Gload
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you and...
...NYRoyal brothers? You seem to support each other a lot. I feel like Obama when he said he couldn’t tell whether he was running against Bill or Hillary. – TL
by timlacy on Jul 1, 2008 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Enough with that BS
We have disagreed vehemently with each other in the past and will so again in the future. Our debates last year were epic.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I missed those past...
...debates. My informal statistics on your agreements--per this year—indicate a high correlation of agreement. – TL
by timlacy on Jul 1, 2008 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Another lesson in small sample sizes
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
All too...
...true, I’m afraid. ...The same could be said, perhaps, about those who claim Soria would be a better starter. The sample pool on his success in that role is larger than in starting. I saw something here the other day that pointed out Soria actually relieved more than he started in the Mexican league. – TL
by timlacy on Jul 1, 2008 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We're not saying he'd make a good SP because of his large sample of SP stats
We’re saying he’d make a good SP because he has the stuff and control of a good MLB SP. But the issue of whether or not he should be tried as SP shouldn’t be about how certain we are that he’d succeed in that role. We don’t need to be certain to try him in that role. If he proves that for whatever reason he can’t succeed as a starter, then he can go back to closer. 2008/09 is the perfect time to try this as we likely won’t be in contention. And if the worst thing that happens is that we lose a couple more games than we otherwise would have, it’s definitely worth a shot. The upside potential greatly outweighs the downside risk.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just to be clear:...
...I’m not opposed to his being tried as a start in the future (i.e. 2009 or 2010), but not this year. Some RR readers are overly enthusiastic about moving him into the starting role. I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating. We don’t disagree as much as it might appear in some of the comments. – TL
by timlacy on Jul 1, 2008 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why wait?
The reason he needs to start making starts this year is that the research is pretty clear that it is very dangerous to greatly increase IP from one year to the next. So he needs to be stretched out this year to get up to around 100 ip. And then about 130 the next year. Then, by 2010, he’d be ready to be nearly a full-time SP.
What do the Royals gain by waiting until 2009 or 2010? If he’s more valuable to the team as a SP than a RP, why should the Royals postpone that advantage?
Some RR readers are overly enthusiastic about moving him into the starting role.
I wonder what constitutes over-enthusiasm? I think the vast majority of people are basically saying that they think he’d be a good SP and that he’d be more valuable to the team in that role. Is that overly enthusiastic?
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who recommended this?
This is a snarky, pointless comment that adds nothing to an actual baseball discussion. Whoever did it, be a little more reserved next time with you rec.
A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.
by NHZ on Jul 2, 2008 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, even though...
...I wrote the comment, it doesn’t deserve a recommend. I didn’t do it. But don’t sweat it. It was a heat of the moment thing. – TL
by timlacy on Jul 2, 2008 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is poppycock.
First, would Teahen have been down 0-2 on the crap Sherrill threw to start the at-bat? No.
Second, do you seriously think Teahen’s incapable of parking a fat-ass 87-MPH meatball in the seats?
It wasn’t a stupid move, and was probably the best percentage move, but it worked out not because Olivo was at the plate rather than Teahen, but because Sherrill threw one of the worst 2-out, bottom 9, 0-2 pitches in history. Lionizing managers because shit like this works out is why people think Tony LaRussa is a genius.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jul 1, 2008 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hubes!
Justin Huber was 2-4 with a HR last night. If he continues to hit well, should we consider trading for him?
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jul 1, 2008 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oops
Wrong reply. But my reply to this is that managers don’t win games, they put guys in the best position to win games. Could Teahen have hit that pitch into the seats? I don’t know, but his track record against lefties isn’t that great. And I doubt Sherill pitches a lefty exactly the same as he pitches a righty. We’re not lionizing Trey, we’re simply saying he did a really good job last night for one night. If we’re going to criticize when he makes dumb moves, I think we should give credit when he makes a good move.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jul 1, 2008 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lemme put this a different way.
If Sherrill throws the same pitch on 0-2 that he threw on 0-0 and 0-1, and Olivo flails away at it again for strike three, does anyone - anyone - talk about how Trey made a good move?
Before you can give credit (or blame) to a manager for a decision, you have to be able to say you think it would have been a good (or bad) decision even if it had failed (or succeeded).
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jul 1, 2008 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think in that situation, pinch hitting for a lefty like Teahen with a righty like Olivo makes sense
Isn’t Olivo more likely to keep the inning going than Teahen in that situation?
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Apparently.
I just looked up the numbers, and whereas I had thought Teahen still had a better OBP than Olivo even against lefties, I was wrong.
Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.
by jonfmorse on Jul 1, 2008 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
this argument is rediculous, of course Olivo should be in there in that situation over Teahen, against a lefty.
by I need more Esteban on Jul 1, 2008 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You could use that logic in any situation
throughout the game. So Sherill made a mistake, if no one ever made mistakes then there would be a lot more perfect games. Hillman did a good job of putting the right guy in the right situation to take advantage of that mistake….BTW, TPJ would’ve whiffed that no doubt (although I do see what point you were trying to make)
by I need more Esteban on Jul 1, 2008 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
NYRoyal and a few others here are not going to like this, but...
...last night was a perfect example of why we need a superb bullpen anchor. Imagine the emotional/psychological devastation if we’d lost that game? Having Soria as our lockdown closer is why we had the mentality to come back. The team is confident that we won’t lose at the end if we can fight and scrape to get ahead.
In sum, every team needs a lockdown, lights-out closer, and last night was one more demonstration why that is true in baseball. – TL
by timlacy on Jul 1, 2008 12:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
You say "NYRoyal and a few others"
as if there’s only a handful of people in favor of trying Soria in the rotation. I’d be willing to bet that’s not the case at all.
As for the emotional devastation you suggest? I think they would have been pretty disappointed if we had lost, and then would have gotten over it pretty quickly. Are the Orioles going to not show up for the rest of the series now that they’ve blown a late lead?
Do you really think our hitters approached their at bats with a different mindset than they would have if we had a less dominant closer? I have to believe that a vast, vast majority of major league hitters are going to be trying to help the offense score regardless of their bullpen confidence.
Royals, NBA, Golden Hurricane, Hawkeyes, Chiefs, and KU basketball, in that order.
by Rowyal on Jul 1, 2008 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
By the last poll on this site
17% of the respondents were against Soria going into the rotation
83% of the respondents were for Soria going into the rotation at some point this year or next year
+10 on the overestimation of emotional devastation. I hate it when fans try to play sports psychologist. But if we’re playing that silly game, what effect do you think more wins would have on the team psyche, Tim?
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I missed...
...the poll. When was it done?
Oh, and why is it any worse to play armchair sports psychologist than armchair coach via statistics? – TL
by timlacy on Jul 1, 2008 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The poll was in the Royals Confidence Index post on June 15
Statistics are real. They describe real and understandable variables. Of course they take interpretation, but it is more than guesswork. We know that players with high OBP and high SLG are good hitters. We know that certain players hit better against LHP than RHP. There is a lot to know and understand from studying and properly utilizing statisitcs.
A lay person analyzing sports psychology is just very slightly educated guesswork. That’s all.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just went to find...
...the poll but didn’t locate it in the June 15 area.
The fact that some things are not empirical and cannot be measured does not, in turn, make them not real. Coaches who did their work on hunches before the stats fad (not to undermine the legitimacy of some stats) had the potential to be quite successful. They played bench/armchair psychologist, and their teams won. Let’s not underestimate the power of the force—-err psychology! lol
You would rob the casual fan of her/his armchair psychology role would also rob the same of all her/his fun. Let’s not denigrate one type of fun at the expense of another. De gustibus non disputandem est—-About taste, there is no disputing. – TL
by timlacy on Jul 1, 2008 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just found the...
...poll you were talking about—-published in last day or so from a poll done the week of the 15th (I was out of town that week). Sorry about the misunderstanding. I’ll read up. – TL
by timlacy on Jul 1, 2008 4:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not saying psychology doesn't exist
These players do have psyches. But we can only guess at what is going on their heads. We can only guess at the psychological importance of a good closer.
. They played bench/armchair psychologist, and their teams won.
At least those coaches were close to their players. They at least have some insight into what their players are thinking, because they see them for several hours everyday. They see how they are acting and reacting. They hear what they are saying in the dugout and in the clubhouse. All we as fans have is seeing the players on the field and a little in the dugout during games and quotes in the media. We have very, very little on which to make our guesses.
Let’s not underestimate the power of the force—-err psychology! lol
Psychology is important, but we just don’t know much about what players are thinking or what effect various things have on their psychology. We at least have stats to help describe what is going on with hitting, pitching and fielding. With psychology, we just have gut feelings.
You would rob the casual fan of her/his armchair psychology role would also rob the same of all her/his fun. Let’s not denigrate one type of fun at the expense of another
I’m not trying to rob anyone of any kind of fun. I’m just trying to point out the relative quality of different kinds of analysis. I prefer analysis based on facts (like stats) to analysis based on gut feeling (like psychological guesswork). Therefore if one person says Soria should start based on the stats and scouting reports and another says he shouldn’t based on psychological guesswork, I think the former argument is much, much stronger.
This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.
by NYRoyal on Jul 1, 2008 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
ditto to that...
Tell 'em a hookah smoking caterpillar
Has given you the call. "
by grudz96 on Jul 1, 2008 12:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
