Comments on: Some more Sheffield stuff

By: vegasdino

vegasdino — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 14:36:22 +0000

I’m so glad to see Sheffield gone. The tigers last year with there aeging players(Shef,jones,rogers,renterea) were a very poor team in the field. I was a season ticket holder for several seasons and would attend about 20 of the games a year and in the last 2 years I saw about 5 wins. So good by season tickets. I look forward th this year not seeing Shef. trying to swing out of his shoes on every at bat. Batting where he did in the lineup he should of had 85 to 95 rbi’s but grounding into another dp was his style. hope he does a good job with the Mets.

By: Baseball Blogs Weigh In: Sheffield, Rays, Red Sox, Yankees

Baseball Blogs Weigh In: Sheffield, Rays, Red Sox, Yankees — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 18:52:50 +0000

[...] The Detroit Tigers Weblog reflects on the release of Gary Sheffield. [...]

By: Coleman

Coleman — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 07:13:02 +0000

Here are some numbers on the ground into double-play thing:
AB/GIDP:
American League avg: 41.2 (1 GIDP every 41.2 AB)
Detroit 2008: 39.2
Detroit 2007: 45.0
Detroit 2006: 47.0

Or another way of looking at it: if Detroit had been average in 2008, they would have hit into 16 fewer double plays last season. On 2006 pace they would have hit into 24 fewer double plays last season. But it’s actually worse than it looks. Because with RISP, last season Detroit got the GIDP 53 times, or 1 in 26.7 AB…out of which 24 came with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 out. That’s 347 plate appearances, 24 GIDP (1 in 14.5 PA). By comparison, 2006: 341 PA, 14 GIDP (1 in 24.4 PA).

[I use PA instead of AB with the runner at 3rd/less than 2 out numbers, since the large number of non-AB sac flies otherwise give a skewed picture of what is going on].

Strangely, the GIDP rate seems to be higher with a runner on 3rd consistently (on DET from season-to-season, league averages, etc). Why is that? Is it just that the primary objective is to put the ball in play, thus more DP, and I assume fewer strikeouts?

By: Coleman

Coleman — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 06:47:38 +0000

There are other factors beyond AB/OBP and RBI/AB etc that put me in favor of Anderson leadoff and Granderson 6th (although if it were me managing I’d bat him 4th. Well, actually not, since if I were managing I would have been fired after a few games, but you get the idea). To me, the Tigers’ biggest problem offensively last season was not getting guys on base, it was getting them from one base to the next, the failure at which can be seen in the number of double plays they hit into. This led to such horrifying apparations as the Ordonez/Thames double-steal attempts. Inserting Granderson–one of the GIDP non-offenders–in place of double-play happy Sheffield/Renteria should rescue many rallies from premature demise. The other, less obvious benefit is that it will give Inge more AB with someone on base in front of him. Seriously. [Inge with bases empty: .176/.584 OPS Inge with runners on .243/.790 OPS]. 2008 classic sequence: Sheffield (doing the one thing he still could do well) works pitcher for a walk…Renteria grounds into DP…Inge, batting with bases empty, strikes out (which he did *57* times last season).

By: Feeder League » Sheffield from the Tigers’ perspective

Feeder League » Sheffield from the Tigers’ perspective — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 20:58:10 +0000

[...] Now that the ink has dried on Sheff’s walking papers, folks familiar with the Tigers organization have been able to offer more than confused shoulder shrugs at the announcement of the slugger’s departure. Billfer at the Detroit Tigers Weblog (unofficial) has offered some perspective on the team’s decision to move on. [...]

By: Chris in Dallas

Chris in Dallas — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 15:07:08 +0000

I’ll say it’s a push. Thames hits exactly 33 HR.

By: Andre in Chi

Andre in Chi — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:52:38 +0000

Chris Y,

That’s a good point and something to keep in mind. I guess the trick is figuring out which yields more runs: more ABs with less possible RBIs, or less ABs with more possible RBIs. I do think that even if Granderson is better off somewhere else in the order, we probably don’t want a guy who’s been considered a 4-5th outfielder for most of his career leading off. Time will tell though, I’m pretty sure of that.

By: Chris Y.

Chris Y. — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:40:22 +0000

Andre in Chi:

I don’t know that it’s all that simple. Hitting behind guys like Polanco, Anderson, or Guillen will yield more runs over the course of a season than if you are continually hitting behind Laird, Inge, and Everett.

By: Chris Y.

Chris Y. — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:34:58 +0000

Sorry, I just repeated what Clank said.

By: Chris Y.

Chris Y. — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:34:13 +0000

I always thought if they moved Granderson, it would be to bat 3rd. Any thoughts on the impact of that position?

One also has to consider the damage done by those homers and XB hits. If no one is on, then you are limited the potential amount of runs. A couple less solo shots for more 2- or 3-run HR or bases clearing doubles/triples sounds just fine to me.

By: Andre in Chi

Andre in Chi — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:31:25 +0000

Clanks,

The thing to keep in mind here is that you only “lead-off” once a game. The real distinguishing factor is how many more ABs the “lead-off” sees over a season. Moving Granderson down the order might yield more RBIs for Grandy, but over the course of the season it could mean less total runs produced do to his lower ABs. Given the choice of more Granderson or more Anderson, you want more “Gr”.

By: jason

jason — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 13:04:36 +0000

I think 33 is a good number for the over/under on a full season, but I doubt he gets a full season’s worth of ABs. I see him getting more ABs than past years, but not a true full-season’s worth. So, I put him around 28.

By: Matt in Toledo

Matt in Toledo — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:49:14 +0000

By: Clanks

Clanks — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:39:53 +0000

Billfer, I think `disturbing’ is too harsh to describe Anderson leading-off with Grandy 6th. Two things to consider:
(1) Anderson’s speed is great for leading-off
(2) Conceding that Anderson will likely get on base less than Granderson (.324 vs. .364 OBP projections [James]), Grandy’s slugging will yield more runs down in the order.

Do we want a .500 slugger leading-off, now that he’s not the fastest on the team?

By: Coach Jim

Coach Jim — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 12:31:29 +0000

It just doesn’t feel right to have Granderson bat in the middle of the order. The prestige spots are 1-4; 5-9 is just where everone else winds up. I don’t think of Granderson being part of “everyone else”…but then again I don’t think that way about PP, Maggs, or Miggy either. Maybe Maggs and Grandy will flip-flop platoon 3rd and 5th based on LHP RHP?

Speaking of Maggs, today I emailed my dad that the Tigers traded Magglio to SD for Jake Peavey. My April Fool joke for him.