Comments on: The Dombrowski Presser http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/ News, views, and analysis on the Detroit Tigers and baseball Sat, 20 Mar 2010 17:11:17 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Eddie http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134561 Eddie Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:50:51 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134561 "However, I find it hard to believe that McLendon said nothing to Raburn all season, never worked with him or provided advice and reminded him of a mechanical issue or some such thing." It's possible... “However, I find it hard to believe that McLendon said nothing to Raburn all season, never worked with him or provided advice and reminded him of a mechanical issue or some such thing.”

It’s possible…

]]> By: Andre in Chi http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134542 Andre in Chi Sun, 11 Oct 2009 19:20:00 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134542 It always drives me nuts when some announcer says that Polanco is one of the "toughest outs" in the league. Usually I scramble to my computer to check the top-10 OBP and look for Polly. This has, of course, routinely resulted in a failure to find him and me yelling at the TV. It always drives me nuts when some announcer says that Polanco is one of the “toughest outs” in the league. Usually I scramble to my computer to check the top-10 OBP and look for Polly. This has, of course, routinely resulted in a failure to find him and me yelling at the TV.

]]> By: Mark in Chicago http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134537 Mark in Chicago Sun, 11 Oct 2009 03:10:06 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134537 ...to say nothing of the Twins going 13-0 down the stretch against teams that weren't the Tigers (or had Zack Grienke pitching). The Twins faced Grienke twice all year. The Tigers? FIVE times. The Twins got the White Sox in Chicago the last month of the season as they were rolling over. BEFORE Ozzie's tirade that inspired some better baseball for the Tigers' series. Granted, it never should have come down to a playoff game, but the Twins got an AWFUL lot of breaks for it to occur. I felt good about the Yankee series also. I see it happening in much the same fashion as you, T. An exhausted, spent Tigers team loses Game 1, but a confident, loose team wins 2 and 3 with their best pitchers going. The pressure is on the Yankees to win 2 straight and I think the Tigers eventually put them away. We were dangerous in a short series because of our starting pitching, and the Yankees must have been ecstatic to get the Twins and Nick Blackburn, Brian Duensing, and Carl Pavano. …to say nothing of the Twins going 13-0 down the stretch against teams that weren’t the Tigers (or had Zack Grienke pitching). The Twins faced Grienke twice all year. The Tigers? FIVE times. The Twins got the White Sox in Chicago the last month of the season as they were rolling over. BEFORE Ozzie’s tirade that inspired some better baseball for the Tigers’ series. Granted, it never should have come down to a playoff game, but the Twins got an AWFUL lot of breaks for it to occur.

I felt good about the Yankee series also. I see it happening in much the same fashion as you, T. An exhausted, spent Tigers team loses Game 1, but a confident, loose team wins 2 and 3 with their best pitchers going. The pressure is on the Yankees to win 2 straight and I think the Tigers eventually put them away. We were dangerous in a short series because of our starting pitching, and the Yankees must have been ecstatic to get the Twins and Nick Blackburn, Brian Duensing, and Carl Pavano.

]]> By: Mark in Chicago http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134536 Mark in Chicago Sun, 11 Oct 2009 02:58:28 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134536 The burden of proof is not on me, it's on the people that want to see McLendon gone. I challenge you to prove that McLendon did NOT help Raburn. You can't, nor can I prove that he did. We'll never know because we weren't in the clubhouse on a regular basis. However, I find it hard to believe that McLendon said nothing to Raburn all season, never worked with him or provided advice and reminded him of a mechanical issue or some such thing. Maybe he helped, maybe he didn't, but how can you possibly back up a statement such as "you won't find any evidence that McLendon helped Raburn at all this year no matter how hard you dig." How do you know this to be true? Also, I'm not "wrong" about anything because I didn't make a definitive statement. I simply asked the question, "shouldn't McLendon get some of the credit?" for the nice year Raburn had. You are free to disagree, or answer in the negative, but don't tell me I'm "wrong". The burden of proof is not on me, it’s on the people that want to see McLendon gone. I challenge you to prove that McLendon did NOT help Raburn. You can’t, nor can I prove that he did. We’ll never know because we weren’t in the clubhouse on a regular basis. However, I find it hard to believe that McLendon said nothing to Raburn all season, never worked with him or provided advice and reminded him of a mechanical issue or some such thing. Maybe he helped, maybe he didn’t, but how can you possibly back up a statement such as “you won’t find any evidence that McLendon helped Raburn at all this year no matter how hard you dig.” How do you know this to be true?

Also, I’m not “wrong” about anything because I didn’t make a definitive statement. I simply asked the question, “shouldn’t McLendon get some of the credit?” for the nice year Raburn had. You are free to disagree, or answer in the negative, but don’t tell me I’m “wrong”.

]]> By: Coleman http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134530 Coleman Sat, 10 Oct 2009 22:22:42 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134530 On the other hand it's easy to be "hard to strike out" like Polanco if you routinely bounce the 2nd pitch to the 2nd baseman...they never mention that as hard as he is to strike out, he's just as hard to walk. You don't do much of either putting the 2nd pitch in play. (Which makes Polanco dangerous in some situations--give me Polly every time with a runner on 3rd less than 2 out). On the other hand it’s easy to be “hard to strike out” like Polanco if you routinely bounce the 2nd pitch to the 2nd baseman…they never mention that as hard as he is to strike out, he’s just as hard to walk. You don’t do much of either putting the 2nd pitch in play. (Which makes Polanco dangerous in some situations–give me Polly every time with a runner on 3rd less than 2 out).

]]> By: Andre in Chi http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134510 Andre in Chi Sat, 10 Oct 2009 16:14:26 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134510 Fair, I wasn't taking sides on the issue, just thought Mark deserved "better" :) Fair, I wasn’t taking sides on the issue, just thought Mark deserved “better” :)

]]> By: jb61973 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134506 jb61973 Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:18:33 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134506 I don't think ppa is the issue. I haven't done an analysis but when you strike out as much as Inge does you are going to see at least three pitches in most of your at bats. The issue, to me, is what pitches players swing at in what counts at what time of the game and in what game situation. I don't know if it is even possible to do an analysis of this, and I don't have the ability, time or the inclination to do one. What I mean is when Miguel Cabrera comes up with 2 out and nobody on and he hits the first pitch which is down and away for a bloop single to right field. That, for the most part is a win for the opposition. In that situation, especially early in the game, Cabrera needs to look for and wait for a pitch to drive out of the park. Chances are, if he;s selective enough, he will be able to work a walk if necessary, especially with the guys he had hitting behind him. I don’t think ppa is the issue. I haven’t done an analysis but when you strike out as much as Inge does you are going to see at least three pitches in most of your at bats. The issue, to me, is what pitches players swing at in what counts at what time of the game and in what game situation. I don’t know if it is even possible to do an analysis of this, and I don’t have the ability, time or the inclination to do one. What I mean is when Miguel Cabrera comes up with 2 out and nobody on and he hits the first pitch which is down and away for a bloop single to right field. That, for the most part is a win for the opposition. In that situation, especially early in the game, Cabrera needs to look for and wait for a pitch to drive out of the park. Chances are, if he;s selective enough, he will be able to work a walk if necessary, especially with the guys he had hitting behind him.

]]> By: billfer http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134503 billfer Sat, 10 Oct 2009 12:03:09 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134503 Just as a related aside, I did some looking at results and depth of a plate appearance after the 2006 season. Once the retrosheet data is available it's probably worth reproducing this year. http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2007/01/examining-depth-of-plate-appearances/ Just as a related aside, I did some looking at results and depth of a plate appearance after the 2006 season. Once the retrosheet data is available it’s probably worth reproducing this year.

http://www.detroittigersweblog.....pearances/

]]> By: Coleman http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134501 Coleman Sat, 10 Oct 2009 05:59:50 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134501 I didn't have a real conclusion--as I said, I'm not sure what the answer is. But I'm not sure that I contradicted myself. I think I explained how higher PPA can be good for a team, even though taking more pitches might be bad for an individual hitter. The paradox comes from the combined effect from the individual instances. If you mean that it's impossible that each batter could do what is most advantageous in each at bat and yet the sum total may not necessarily be the most advantageous, then I guess that's where we aren't seeing eye to eye, which is reasonable. I just wouldn't call it self-contradicting. I agree that the problem with the Tigers isn't necessarily the low PPA--if they are hitting the first pitches all over the place, they'll go through pitching staffs just as well if not better. The problem is that they aren't. An easy way to see that is just to look at the total number of pitches they've seen (over 1,100 fewer than the Twins for example...there are other factors involved, like teams who hit much better at home vs road, but the Twins comparision is still good). If you're aggressive approach is paying off, you have lower PPA, but more PAs, so you see more pitches that way. Clearly something isn't working. And while Cabrera, Ordonez, and to some extent Polanco hit well with the aggressive approach, that doesn't mean that that approach wouldn't be even MORE successful within a lineup of higher PPA hitters. I didn’t have a real conclusion–as I said, I’m not sure what the answer is. But I’m not sure that I contradicted myself. I think I explained how higher PPA can be good for a team, even though taking more pitches might be bad for an individual hitter. The paradox comes from the combined effect from the individual instances. If you mean that it’s impossible that each batter could do what is most advantageous in each at bat and yet the sum total may not necessarily be the most advantageous, then I guess that’s where we aren’t seeing eye to eye, which is reasonable. I just wouldn’t call it self-contradicting.

I agree that the problem with the Tigers isn’t necessarily the low PPA–if they are hitting the first pitches all over the place, they’ll go through pitching staffs just as well if not better. The problem is that they aren’t. An easy way to see that is just to look at the total number of pitches they’ve seen (over 1,100 fewer than the Twins for example…there are other factors involved, like teams who hit much better at home vs road, but the Twins comparision is still good). If you’re aggressive approach is paying off, you have lower PPA, but more PAs, so you see more pitches that way. Clearly something isn’t working. And while Cabrera, Ordonez, and to some extent Polanco hit well with the aggressive approach, that doesn’t mean that that approach wouldn’t be even MORE successful within a lineup of higher PPA hitters.

]]> By: Jeff Molby http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134500 Jeff Molby Sat, 10 Oct 2009 05:39:44 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134500 When you come to a conclusion that contradicts your premise, it's usually best to double-check your premise instead of calling it a paradox. =P I guess I don't put much stock in PPA because there's no quicker way to run a pitcher out of a game than to drop 10 hits on him. I don't have a problem with training the defensive specialists to go up there and waste pitches, but anyone safely above the Mendoza line should go up there looking to get on base. If you have guys that <em>can</em> hit and swinging early improves their chances, then they certainly have the green light from me, because the extra baserunners should make up for the 0.5 PPA that I might be sacrificing. When you come to a conclusion that contradicts your premise, it’s usually best to double-check your premise instead of calling it a paradox. =P

I guess I don’t put much stock in PPA because there’s no quicker way to run a pitcher out of a game than to drop 10 hits on him. I don’t have a problem with training the defensive specialists to go up there and waste pitches, but anyone safely above the Mendoza line should go up there looking to get on base. If you have guys that can hit and swinging early improves their chances, then they certainly have the green light from me, because the extra baserunners should make up for the 0.5 PPA that I might be sacrificing.

]]> By: Coleman http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134499 Coleman Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:21:34 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134499 PLEASE tell me this means McClendon will be first base coach next season and we have a new hitting coach coming in... PLEASE tell me this means McClendon will be first base coach next season and we have a new hitting coach coming in…

]]> By: Coleman http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134498 Coleman Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:06:48 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134498 That's why it's a paradox. :) Basically the way I would describe my feel for this is that taking pitches and getting high pitch counts helps teams (and yes, the teams with the high PPAs score more runs). On the other hand, taking pitches and getting a high pitch count hurts a batter--the best batter's pitch is the first one (unless you can get a 3-0 count of course). So you have a situation where what's good for the individual batter and what is good for the team are different. If I do it, it will hurt my hitting--but if I do it, AND you all do too, it will help my hitting, and yours. That kind of thing. That's why it has to be an organizational thing. It has to be a team effort. The key, I think, is that there is a point at which the additional pitches have a cumulative effect that swing the balance. The only way to reach this tipping point though is to have many batters seeing pitches--the Red Sox, Yankees, Twins, and Rays all have multiple hitters among the high pitch count leaders. And when the extra pitches tire the starters or bring in relief pitchers, then the first pitch hitters have an even larger advantage than usual. When you have, say 2 guys above average (Inge and Granderson, barely) those hitters end up making their at bats more difficult without helping the team--the extra 4 or 5 pitches don't change anything for the other staff, the way an extra 20 pitches would. I'm not sure where the balance tips. Would having 2 or 3 more guys seeing a lot of pitches in addition to Inge (I don't mention Grandy because I think that's something he has to stop thinking about because I think it worsens the batting funks he gets in) have an effect? I don't know. But it would be nice if it did; one gets tired of the straight line we always see from starter to closer, when there are so many awful middle relief and even setup guys in the league... That’s why it’s a paradox. :)

Basically the way I would describe my feel for this is that taking pitches and getting high pitch counts helps teams (and yes, the teams with the high PPAs score more runs).

On the other hand, taking pitches and getting a high pitch count hurts a batter–the best batter’s pitch is the first one (unless you can get a 3-0 count of course).

So you have a situation where what’s good for the individual batter and what is good for the team are different. If I do it, it will hurt my hitting–but if I do it, AND you all do too, it will help my hitting, and yours. That kind of thing. That’s why it has to be an organizational thing. It has to be a team effort.

The key, I think, is that there is a point at which the additional pitches have a cumulative effect that swing the balance. The only way to reach this tipping point though is to have many batters seeing pitches–the Red Sox, Yankees, Twins, and Rays all have multiple hitters among the high pitch count leaders. And when the extra pitches tire the starters or bring in relief pitchers, then the first pitch hitters have an even larger advantage than usual.

When you have, say 2 guys above average (Inge and Granderson, barely) those hitters end up making their at bats more difficult without helping the team–the extra 4 or 5 pitches don’t change anything for the other staff, the way an extra 20 pitches would.

I’m not sure where the balance tips. Would having 2 or 3 more guys seeing a lot of pitches in addition to Inge (I don’t mention Grandy because I think that’s something he has to stop thinking about because I think it worsens the batting funks he gets in) have an effect? I don’t know. But it would be nice if it did; one gets tired of the straight line we always see from starter to closer, when there are so many awful middle relief and even setup guys in the league…

]]> By: Kathy http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134497 Kathy Sat, 10 Oct 2009 02:50:27 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134497 I keep thinking of the flag-raising in the spring and how everyone would have felt so proud to finally have a division flag hoisted. Honestly, if I allow myself, I can work myself into a rage about it. It is infuriatingly disappointing. I can't talk about it anymore. I keep thinking of the flag-raising in the spring and how everyone would have felt so proud to finally have a division flag hoisted. Honestly, if I allow myself, I can work myself into a rage about it. It is infuriatingly disappointing. I can’t talk about it anymore.

]]> By: Kevin in Dallas http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134496 Kevin in Dallas Sat, 10 Oct 2009 02:36:09 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134496 FML. FML.

]]> By: T Smith http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/2009/10/the-dombrowski-presser/#comment-134495 T Smith Sat, 10 Oct 2009 02:21:36 +0000 http://www.detroittigersweblog.com/?p=5425#comment-134495 Randy Marsh is a putz. Have the courage to say you missed the call. I have no respect whatsoever for him -- not that he blew the call, it happens -- but to deny blowing the call. What a putz. Randy Marsh is a putz. Have the courage to say you missed the call. I have no respect whatsoever for him — not that he blew the call, it happens — but to deny blowing the call. What a putz.

]]>