Hampton's return stymied by Eckstein: Astros 3 Padres 4
by DyingQuail on Jul 1, 2009 10:01 AM CDT
in Events
16 comments
Sorry to have this up so late. I couldn't bring myself to write it last night because tiredness won out.
Alright, the title is a little non sensical, but David Eckstein was responsible for driving in the fourth run, which put the proverbial nail in our proverbial coffin, did have a 3/4 night at the plate, and was the subject of some of FireJoeMorgan's greatest material. My attempts to resurect the greatness of FJM aside, Eckstein was worth a game leading .318 WPA for the night, so I'm pretty much spot on.
Yes, Chris Sampson came in and blew a two run lead in what felt like a matter of seconds, but Chris Sampson has also been one of the best relievers in baseball in the this year (that's not a joke either, click here for your proof). It was probably unavoidable that the game gets tied up, but I think if I'm Coop, I'm pulling Sampson after Tony Gwynn doubles; although, I can't recall if anyone in the pen was warming up.
Anyway, here's your tidy little pictorial game summary:
Astros vs Padres coverage ; Astros vs Padres recap ; Astros vs Padres boxscore ; Gaslamp Ball
0 recs |
16 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Arias had warmed up previously.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Sampson is showing the effects of overuse this month. I think this was Sampson’s 15th appearance in June. That may or may not have had an effect. But when Sampson starts going bad, it usually turns out that his arm is showing some tenderness. Sampson was having trouble getting his sinkers down and he wasn’t getting the usual movement. A sinker ball pitcher who can’t get the sinker to sink is an ugly sight, because it’s like a death by a thousand cuts.
by clack on Jul 1, 2009 10:45 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I hadn't even glanced at Sampson's appearances
Coop just must have a genetic predisposition to abusing relief pitchers.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on Jul 1, 2009 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
also, recall that Sampson's last "bad outing" was June 13....
when he was taken out with a “dead arm.” Sampson said that dead arm is something which happens to him if he pitches too many days.
by clack on Jul 1, 2009 2:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
On a more positive note
I have laughed so hard I cried reading the FJM Eckstein stories.
The Crawfishboxes
A good friend of mine used to say, "This is a very simple game. You throw the ball, you catch the ball, you hit the ball. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains." Think about that for a while.
by DyingQuail on Jul 1, 2009 10:49 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Hunter Pence on whether he should have hit the cutoff man:
“I needed to hit the cutoff man, and I didn’t,” Pence said. “I think I tried too hard to throw him out at home when there really wasn’t much of a chance, and I should have just hit the cutoff man. When I was throwing it, I was trying to throw him out instead of hit the cutoff man. In hindsight, I should have just hit the cutoff man.”
Cecil Cooper on whether Hunter Pence should have hit the cutoff man:
“You’ve got to try to throw the guy out,” Cooper said. “That’s the run that ties the game, and you’ve got to try to go for it. You can’t be worried about that. Hunter’s one of our better outfielders as far as assists are concerned.”
Is Coop’s statement just him protecting his player from the media and from beating up on himself too much? Or does it reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of in-game strategy.
Discuss.
by AstroAndy on Jul 1, 2009 12:30 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
In the game thread, I mentioned my view that Pence made a game-affecting mistake by missing the cut off man. Jim Deshais seemed to have the same view. The post game analyst on FSN said he disagreed with JD, because Pence has been an assist leader and you don’t want to do anything to hurt his aggressiveness. The latter seems to be similar to Cooper’s view. I agree with JD’s view more than Coop’s. The infielder is in a better position to read the play, and Pence should follow his signal and hit the cut off man. When outfielders ignore the cut off man and try to be a hero, it usually results in a gaffe. I like the fact that Pence acknowledges his mistake. Failing to hit the cut off man is common problem among young outfielders with good arms, and it can be a big problem when repeated over and over again. (Willy T used to drive me crazy by throwing over the cut off man.)
As for Cooper, this seems to fit in his general approach of encouraging aggressiveness in Pence, even at the cost of condoning bad decisions. He did that with Pence’s hitting, saying that he didn’t want to reign in his plate discipline last year. It’s not irrational on Cooper’s part, but I personally don’t think it’s the best approach. Pence seems like a guy who is more than willing to accept criticism.
by clack on Jul 1, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
by the way, as I thought about Pence's remarks...
it made me think that someone in the clubhouse must have taken him aside and told him he made a mistake in failing to hit the cut off man (which would be the opposite of what Cooper would have told him). It would be interesting to know who might have reinforced the mistake message to Pence. It could be anyone (including a coach), but I am guessing either an infielder (perhaps Berkman) or Pudge.
by clack on Jul 1, 2009 2:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder who it was? And I wonder if he’s open to the job of player-manager…
;)
by AstroAndy on Jul 1, 2009 2:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Has anybody else seen this (don't really think it's big enough to warrant a separate post)?
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/morgan-dunn
Basically, Dave Cameron at FanGraphs lambastes the Sabermetric community for ignoring that Adam Dunn is an awful defender, than Nyjer Morgan is pretty good in the field, for ignoring that their current WARP values are very similar (2.5 for Dunn vs. 2.0 for Morgan), and for seeing the Pirates-Nats trade as a clear Pittsburgh “victory.”
The arguments in the comments section are pretty interesting. Many commenters argue that UZR is imperfect (it is, of course) because of the variation it shows in individual players’ defensive contributions. (This is a whole debate in itself, but my question is this: Why shouldn’t defensive numbers fluctuate? We’re not measuring “true skill” in UZR, we’re measuring the plays they have made. OPS and EQA fluctuate all the time. Tejada had an awful year at the plate last season, but nobody says, “OPS is clearly a flawed metric. Tejada is a good hitter, and thus his numbers should be better.” That’s because OPS and EQA and wOBA and VORP don’t measure “true skill,” either. They just measure past contributions, and some people just have bad (or good) years.)
But, anyways, it’s an interesting article. It’s cool to see a relatively prominent contributor to the public Sabermetric community accuse everyone of inadequately valuing defense (didn’t we have this fight already, anyways? Didn’t the defensive dudes win?).
It think Cameron is ignoring the “Milledge as a prospect” angle to this, but I think he’s basically right. Some people in the comments section seem to think he’s arguing that Dunn is a worse player, but he’s not, and that’s why arguments like “It’s not Dunn’s fault he plays the OF” or “He should DH” don’t really address the article: Cameron’s talking about value, and the Nats don’t really have the option of DHing him.
Anyways, good stuff. At least it’s a good article for the “Defense is important” crowd.
Your friendly neighborhood Dream Shake mod.
by Only_A_Lad on Jul 1, 2009 1:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
BBTF and Fangraphs came to opposite conclusions on which team “won” the Nats-Pirates trade. I tend to think that the Pirates made a better trade (Cameron says it was clearly a bad trade for the Pirates), but I also think that it probably made sense for both teams. In my view, Nyjer Morgan is overrated as a defensive CFer. He mostly played LF for the Pirates because McLouth (and now McCutcheon) play CF, and he was a very good LFer, leaving many people thinking about the Web gems he made in LF. But he does not appear to me to be that great a CFer. I think the UZR rating in CF for Morgan is deceptive. He has only played 50 career games in CF, which is too small a sample to rely on his UZR rating to say that his value is equal to Dunn. The fact that UZR says that Morgan is something like 10 runs/150 better in CF than LF should send up a red flag, since most outfielders perform much better in LF than CF.
This trade was a classic low ceiling-low risk players for high ceiling-high risk players. The Nats are on the low ceiling side and the Pirates took the high ceiling side. Both teams are in a rebuilding state where high ceiling is probably better. However, I can see the Nats making this trade simply because they don’t have anybody who can really play CF. I think Milledge, at age 24, still has tons of potential if someone can unlock it. This article at BBTF lays that case out in very colorful fashion.
by clack on Jul 1, 2009 2:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
good article, Clack
He has only played 50 career games in CF, which is too small a sample to rely on his UZR rating to say that his value is equal to Dunn. The fact that UZR says that Morgan is something like 10 runs/150 better in CF than LF should send up a red flag, since most outfielders perform much better in LF than CF.
True, but Cameron tries to rectify those concerns by projecting him as a much more reasonable +10 run defender in CF.
I think Milledge, at age 24, still has tons of potential if someone can unlock it.
Probably. But I don’t think that “someone” is Washington. Maybe getting him out of the Nats (and out of CF) can help him develop.
Your friendly neighborhood Dream Shake mod.
by Only_A_Lad on Jul 1, 2009 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, after I wrote the post, I saw that Cameron "regressed" his UZR result...
to a +10 defender. But my problem with that is the sample size. If the sample size is too small to be reliable, you don’t cure it by “regressing” the numbers toward average. How do you know if you have regressed it too much or too little? For all we know, he could be negative in CF if the 50 game sample isn’t large enough to be reliable. As an example, if you took Willy Taveras’ 86 game 2007 UZR of -7.1, by itself, you would reach a quite different conclusion than his 138 game 2006 season of +22. From what I have seen of Morgan, I don’t think he is as good a CFer as Michael Bourn. And Bourn is only a +3.3 over his career in CF.
by clack on Jul 1, 2009 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
As I read this I'm watching the Pirates LF not make a defensive play
but I thought it was interesting that the talking heads on ESPN and MLB network took such extreme positions. It was a really bad trade for one team or the other.
by ol Pete on Jul 1, 2009 7:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Byrdak was already warming...
and I was hoping that Cooper wouldn’t bring him in, he went with Sampson which was smart… But, since Cooper believes so much on the matchups, I.E. Righty on Righty, Lefty on Lefty… There is a 50/50 chance Byrdak would have done better, and I would have gone with Byrdak after the Gwynn single…
"When McGwire hits one, it goes half way to the moon. Many of Aaron's home runs were just over the fence." -Milo Hamilton
by NocturnalMatt on Jul 1, 2009 3:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
check that...
Byrdak v. Gwynn
"When McGwire hits one, it goes half way to the moon. Many of Aaron's home runs were just over the fence." -Milo Hamilton
by NocturnalMatt on Jul 1, 2009 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
interesting you brought that up...
I didn’t realize it, until I looked up Sampson’s stats this morning…but he has a good sized platoon split. Lefthanders are hitting 70 points higher than righthanders this year against Sampson. This doesn’t hold up for the rest of his career, so it could just be too small a sample.
by clack on Jul 1, 2009 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
THE CRAWFISH BOXES GETS SOCIAL
NL Central Standings
| W | L | PCT | GB | STRK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
St. Louis
|
91 | 71 | .561 | 0 | Lost 6 |
|
Chicago
|
83 | 78 | .515 | 7.5 | Lost 1 |
|
Milwaukee
|
80 | 82 | .493 | 11 | Won 3 |
|
Cincinnati
|
78 | 84 | .481 | 13 | Won 2 |
|
Houston
|
74 | 88 | .456 | 17 | Lost 3 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
62 | 99 | .385 | 28.5 | Lost 2 |
(updated 2.9.2010 at 11:43 PM CST)
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
