Break out the torches and pitchforks
2
|
The Hardball Times found this 6/29/2007 on www.hardballtimes.com [flag] |
Tags:
MLB
Comments (13)
-
John Brattain With all due repect, this:
"with Frank Thomas on the 2007 Jays, other than an out, walking him is the best way to neutralize his offensive abilities and the ability of the Jays to score runs"
is one of the silliest things I've read in any baseball story.
First time reader I take it?
Um, not unless Gehrig, McGwire, Canseco etc. were every bit as "good" as McDonald, Fasano, Phillips.
Would you rather face the remainder of the '27 Yankees lineup with a man on base or the Blue Jays Murdered Row of aught-7?
Get a tape of the 1989 ALCS and tell me that putting Rickey on is as good an idea as putting Frank Thomas on. They do have this in common, both are/were killin' the Jays.
Best Regards
John
-
Steve Stein John - you should read yourself better. You said "other than an out". So having Rickey '89 get a hit against you was better for you than walking him? Walking the Babe is worse than having him get a hit? I don't think so.
Clearer thinking, please.
-
-
John Brattain What, I have to write and read myself?
Look, I know it sounds silly to bash a guy for taking a base on balls. I rarely do that. It's not the BB of itself that's the problem.
Somebody's gonna get you around the bases. If Thomas walks w/men on base, somebody's gotta drive them in.
The Jays haven't had the personnel behind Thomas to do that. The numbers speak for themselves. The Jays have had terrific pitching for quite a while but hang around .500.
Where's the problem?
The offense.
What part?
The bottom.
And you're telling me that Thomas should pass on hittable pitches leaving the worst aspect of the Blue Jays' team to do what has been killing the Jays offense in 2007 so he can add to his awesome OBP numbers?
You're asking a first-ballot HOF hitter with 500 HR to leave the moving runners/driving in runs to hitters who are 25% below league average offensive performers just to pad his walk totals? You're asking the Jays to continue doing what has kept them from scoring runs just so one player can keep drawing walks?
I'm sorry, but that makes no sense. The Jays have scored three runs or less in 40-plus% of their games and you wish to continue the status quo.
If something isn't working, you change it, you don't cling to it because of philosophy.
Thomas is swinging earlier in the count, getting big hits and the Jays are finally winning games but you feel the old way (Thomas looks for walks, gets stranded by out-machines behind him) is better?
What am I missing? You seem bent on keeping a philosophy at the expense of winning baseball games.
I'm afraid we're going to have to agree to disagree. I want Frank Thomas to be "The Big Hurt" ... if we wanted walks for the sake of walks, we could just clone Eddie Joost.
Best Regards
John
-
John Brattain Maybe I'm still not being clear as to what I'm saying.
I don't mind the walks. But Thomas bats in a part of the lineup (and in a lineup) where looking to walk doesn't help the 2007 Jays to score runs.
If Thomas had Troy Glaus and Alex Rios behind him, he could walk all day long with nary a peep from me.
But when most of the guys behind him are 25% below league average hitters, I want him to going up there looking to hit. If he doesn't see a hittable pitch--fine, take the walk. But if he's going up there looking to walk thinking that guys with sub .600 OPS are going to move him along and drive in runs--then Thomas needs his head examined.
The bottom of the Jays lineup has been their Achilles Heel in 2007. To look for a walk instead of a hit leaving the offense to the Blue Jays' Achilles Heel makes no sense. These guys have done nothing in their careers that would indicate that they'll ever become even league average batters so why trust the run production to them?
This isn't an all-time philosophy: it's an in-game thought process. Once we get everybody healthy, the Jays may well have Gregg Zaun and Lyle Overbay behind him in addition to Aaron Hill. When that happens, then by all means, look for the walk--these guys can get you around the bases. But when they guys behind are named Jason Phillips, John McDonald and Royce Clayton....
Again: This isn't an all-time philosophy: it's an in-game thought process for this particular set of circumstances. when those circumstances change, then by all means--reach base any way you can.
(Thanks to Heath Bintliff http://dempseysarmy.blogspot.com/ for helping me clarify my thought process)
Best Regards
John
-
cephyn "It was about Frank Thomas' approach; whether taking hittable pitches early in the count looking to walk rather than swinging at them and looking to hit optimized the 2007 Blue Jays' ability to score runs."
No, it's not about his approach. There are facts here - Thomas hits for power, is a threat at the plate, and isn't very fast, so the opposition in certain situations may choose to walk him. That isn't Thomas' fault. It's not like the Jays signed him to steal bases or not get on base. They signed him to be him. And he's being him, and is pretty successful at that.
So it's the management's problem. They know the team they have, that's the team they gotta work with - the Rumsfeld Doctrine. You go to war with the team you have. So the Jays need to learn how to use that team better.
Every team has to deal with slow guys. Every team has to learn how best to score runs. But really, this isn't about Thomas, it's about the Jays. They don't have guys behind Thomas to get him in. Thomas isn't going to fly around the bases on shallow hits. No one expects him to and he shouldn't be expected to. He was signed to hit as best he could and get on base as much as possible. I think he's doing a good job. You just want Thomas to be faster - might as well ask him to grow taller. Your entire argument is "They'd be better off if Thomas was faster" - true. All teams would be better off if every player was a 40/40 type guy. But that's not realistic. Thomas is doing a good job at what he was hired to do, and his limitations were well known. The Jays need to change their approach, not Thomas.
-
John Brattain Thomas himself said he needed to change his approach. That's where I got the comment from in the first place.
Agreed 100% with management's usage of Thomas.
With the lineup they had at the time, Thomas BB didn't do them a lot of good (which was what I was saying--or trying to at any rate. The original comment was that his OBP was "blunted" not wrong, not evil, just blunted). His "clogging the bases" simply meant that he needed guys behind him to move him along via hits and/or walks since he's a poor candidate to steal, advance on a groundout/flyball, and it's tough to do a hit-and-run with players who struggle with contact.
The only way for Thomas to get 90' of real estate was through hits and walks from players who seldom hit or walk. Since they don't hit or walk, he can't go anywhere ergo "he clogs the bases."
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
- I will not type clogs the bases anymore.
Best Regards
John
-
cephyn Well you're saying that you agree with Thomas' comment about himself. That's OK. I disagree with him (and you I guess). I hear "I need to change my approach because the guys batting behind me are no good" - to me that is also saying "I feel I need to press and change my game because I need to carry the team because the guys behind me aren't so good" - Frank Thomas is too old to be pressing, too old to carry a team. He's a DH who has a simple job that everyone knew from the beginning - and that job didn't include being fast.
I get what you're saying about OBP being blunted by Thomas being slow. But it's a matter of options here. You either ask a guy to change his game (whether he thinks he should or not, it's not Frank to swing more and walk less) - the other option is you replace Frank in the lineup with someone who is faster. Of course, you risk this guy not getting on base as much. If there is a guy with the OBP of Frank on the team who can steal 20 bases a year and go 1st to 3rd, then by all means put him in. But that's not really an option. So we're back to how best to use Frank because he gets on a lot (without trying at this point - it's just how he plays) but is slow. Which we agree on is the best solution. 8) We just disagree on Thomas' role in the problem.
-
cephyn Oh and I think the ultimate point that everyone is up in arms about is that Thomas has a better chance of stealing 2nd than a speedster has of stealing 1st. The team is ultimately better off with a slow guy on first with no outs than a speedster in the dugout with 1 out.
-
-
John Brattain Fair enough. But I wasn't arguing about wanting a speedster instead of Thomas (I was lobbying for him last year when he went to Oakland).
I wanted Thomas to be "The Big Hurt" and if they (meaning the Jays) wanted Thomas to walk more, then it only makes sense to put him somewhere the walks would be maximized and not minimized.
Heck, bat him second, put another bat behind him, but don't ask a guy to sacrifice BA/SLG for OBP unless there's personnel in the lineup to capitalize.
There is a reason you want you best hitter to bat third. By the same token if you want somebody lacking speed to get on base then put some bats behind him to get him around the bases.
If you don't, he's gonna locg eht sebas (I said I wouldn't type that phrase again) because he can't move himself and neither can the hitters(?) behind him.
Best Regards
John
-
cephyn Which of course brings us back to the old discussion - does lineup construction matter? Probably not enough to get the Jays enough wins to make a difference. If they don't have the bats - they just don't have the bats, and any improvement in Thomas' usage is just going to make us feel better anecdotally.
-
-
John Brattain If they don't have the bats - they just don't have the bats
Which I have also been lobbying for J.P. to rectify.
If you've been reading my whining about the Jays the last while you'd know that the Thomas/OBP issue is merely a piece of a larger complaint--one I've been making since early May.
Taken in isolation, it looks pretty asinine. Taken along with my follow ups, still might sound off. Taken as a whole, epiphany will more assurdely ensue ;-)
Although I'm not a quote/unquote "stat-head" (who have often been encouraged to take their heads out of the spreadsheet and watch a game occasionally) my remarks were from watching Blue Jay games.
If you look at the spreadsheet and mathematics, then OBP is always next to godliness. If you subject yourselves to Blue Jays games, you can see where it might be less than optimal under certain circumstances.
Ask any Giants fan of recent vintage whether they jump up and high-five their buddy when somebody pitches around Barry Bonds.
Best Regards
John
-
John Brattain any improvement in Thomas' usage is just going to make us feel better anecdotally.
Dude, it beats the heck out of feeling crappy anecdotally, cuz in the real world, the Jays offense really sucks!
And having 10:00 PM games on a weekend make me Little Mr. Crankypants so watch yer step ;-)
Best Regards
Little Mr. Crankypants
Links (2)
Personal Archive
Published 10/31/2007 by John Brattain at The Progenitor of Severe Gluteal Discomfort
... Break out the torches and pitchforks ...
Misty water coloured memories of the way we blew...
Published 11/6/2007 by John Brattain at The Progenitor of Severe Gluteal Discomfort
... Take my advice: Don’t mention this on your résumé; and don't blame luck, because luck—whether good or bad—is the residue of design. They were going to contract teams that have outperformed your efforts in Toronto. On the bright side, it gave me a handy topic for another column where I did go into detail as regards my Frank Thomas 'base-clogging' remark Break out the torches and pitchforks. For the first time in 2007, I finally begin to acknowledge that post season baseball may not be in the offing. On the bright side, I'm liking what I see for 2008:Well, the Jays may not be done in 2007, but I’m looking ahead to 2008. There’s something missing and general manager J.P. Ricciardi seems to be disinclined to find out what. I think it was pretty obvious: The Blue Jays gave too many at-bats to guys who could neither hit nor walk. On top of that, manager John Gibbons didn’t e ...
With all due repect, this:
"with Frank Thomas on the 2007 Jays, other than an out, walking him is the best way to neutralize his offensive abilities and the ability of the Jays to score runs"
is one of the silliest things I've read in any baseball story.
OF COURSE it's true. Replace "Frank Thomas" and "2007 Jays" with "Babe Ruth" and "1926 Yankees" or "Barry Bonds" and "2001 Giants" or even "Rickey Henderson" and "1990 Athletics" and the statement would be just as true.