Dodgers-Rays World Series

[Izz]

I love analytics. Love, love, love.

That being said, I find Cash's (and maybe the organization's) application of them to be very narrow. I guess it got the Rays to the World Series (in a 60-game season) but his decision last night to pull Snell really highlighted that deficiency for me.

Personally (because I, at home with a keyboard and with the benefit of objectivity would of course make the right decision all the time - that was sarcasm, by the way ), I would've left Snell in for Betts before making any decision on pulling him. The fact he'd owned Betts the two previous at-bats aside, this season's splits (small sample size, admittedly) show Betts has been poor against LHP this season (slash-line of .200/.313/.218 with only 1 extra-base hit from 11 hits). Against RHP, on the other hand, he's slashing 323/.385/.677 with 25 of his 53 hits going for extra bases. A deep dive doesn't show, imo, that Betts has been especially lucky against RHP either, or especially unlucky against LHP (again, very small sample size).

So the decision to take Snell out for Nick Anderson, who had an amazing regular season, yes, but showed every sign of reverting badly to the mean in the postseason, was just boggling.

Yes, this will sound like nice hindsight but as soon as Cash took Snell out and brought Anderson in I thought, 'You've just lost the World Series for your guys, Cash.'

EDIT: Of course, maybe if Cash would've left Snell in there would've been the same result but that would've been a more forgivable decision, imo.

[Hoiles]

The thing is, keeping Snell in the game is not a "gut decision", it's a completely logical decision based on his performance during the day, the pitch count, and the overall quality of him as a pitcher. If Cash had decided to keep Snell in the game after 110 pitches and walking a couple of guys because he liked the look of his eyebrows or something, then yeah that's a gut decision. But here there's a ton of completely tangible factors that support keeping Snell in, what does "gut" have to do with it?

Just because you're not using a spreadsheet to make a decision doesn't mean you're using your "gut". I mean if I'm hungry, I'm just going to eat because I find eating works, after years of experience, not because I kept stats on it.

[CBeisbol]

Bringing this down a notch


I'm not trying to convince anyone that taking Snell out of the game was 100% the right move. Almost certainly, no such moves exist. Which, of course, implies, that leaving him in wasn't the definite right move either.

I'm only presenting the reasoning for the move.

And there's, as people seem to be alluding to, not probabilities. It's not that leaving Snell in means (looks through reams of paper) there's a 51% chance the Dodgers will score and taking him out means (double checks reams of paper) there's a 49% chance the Dodgers will score so, the correct move based on percentages is to take him out. That's just not how it works. So, no, managing isn't going to be turned over to the computers anytime soon. I mean, this is an OOTP forum, we know how bad the AI is.

There aren't right and wrong moves. There can be better and worse moves. Leaving Snell in would be a better move than bringing me in to pitch, but when we're talking about two major league pitchers there choices are definitely not that obvious.


For all the arguing going on right now, not just here in OOTP land, does anyone know that Cash didn't "go with his gut" (whatever it is that means exactly)?

[Déjà Bru]

Meanwhile, how does everybody feel about this?

Letting COVID-19 positive Justin Turner celebrate with Dodgers was shameful

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

Meanwhile, how does everybody feel about this?

Letting COVID-19 positive Justin Turner celebrate with Dodgers was shameful

Merely stark raving mad.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by Westheim

Merely stark raving mad.

I wonder, did his teammates know? Would they have not minded him appearing on the field and at the trophy ceremony, if so? Or would they have preferred him to celebrate remotely? How do they feel about him now?

[Déjà Bru]

Wow:

"Immediately upon receiving notice from the laboratory of a positive test, protocols were triggered, leading to the removal of Justin Turner from [Tuesday] night’s game," MLB’s statement said. "Turner was placed into isolation for the safety of those around him. However, following the Dodgers’ victory, it is clear that Turner chose to disregard the agreed-upon joint protocols and the instructions he was given regarding the safety and protection of others.

"While a desire to celebrate is understandable, Turner’s decision to leave isolation and enter the field was wrong and put everyone he came in contact with at risk. When MLB Security raised the matter of being on the field with Turner, he emphatically refused to comply."

Still missing Justin Turner, Westheim?

[Izz]

I don't watch Jomboy for his statistical analysis; I watch him because he's fun.

But in his breakdown of the situation he does present some interesting stats: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3G8QytAKWA

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

Still missing Justin Turner, Westheim?

There was a while today where I thought "Oh well, at least poor Justin Turner got a ring for being non-tendered by the stupid Mets being stupid a million years ago."

Then, this.

Screw that guy. Screw all the Dodgers, top to bottom. What a pile of ******** ********.

[Westheim]

Originally Posted by Izz

I don't watch Jomboy for his statistical analysis; I watch him because he's fun.

But in his breakdown of the situation he does present some interesting stats: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3G8QytAKWA

"looks over to Roberts, who smiles, says 'thank you, buddy, thank you, I'm not the bad manager this time'." =)

(laughs, but it's really despair)

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

Wow:

"Immediately upon receiving notice from the laboratory of a positive test, protocols were triggered, leading to the removal of Justin Turner from [Tuesday] night’s game," MLB’s statement said. "Turner was placed into isolation for the safety of those around him. However, following the Dodgers’ victory, it is clear that Turner chose to disregard the agreed-upon joint protocols and the instructions he was given regarding the safety and protection of others.

"While a desire to celebrate is understandable, Turner’s decision to leave isolation and enter the field was wrong and put everyone he came in contact with at risk. When MLB Security raised the matter of being on the field with Turner, he emphatically refused to comply."

Still missing Justin Turner, Westheim?

Ahh, yes

The MLB propaganda...er...statement. Trying to place all the blame on the player and absolve themselves.

Turner, and the Dodgers certainly aren't blameless here

But MLB
1) started a game without the test results. Whats the point of tests if there's no result?
2) let Turner be on the field after the first test came back either positive or "inconclusive" (which CDC guidelines say should be treated as a positive test).
3) allowed the game to continue after a player in the game tested positive
4) Security allowed Turner onto the field for the celebration. What good is security if they don't do their job? Does anyone think they would have let one of us onto the field?

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by Izz

I don't watch Jomboy for his statistical analysis; I watch him because he's fun.

But in his breakdown of the situation he does present some interesting stats: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3G8QytAKWA

He horribly misuses stats here

When he's talking about Mookie's stats in 2020 vs left-handed pitchers that's literally 64 plate appearances

When he's talking about left-handed fastballs, that's literally some fraction of 64 plate appearances.

And when he's talking about Betts' and Snell's third time through the order, it's basically the same thing.

Jomboy says the analytics don't support taking Snell out. Jomboy is not doing analytics. He's looking at stats. Those are two wildly different things. There's a reason people spend years at universities studying statistics and learning to analyze statistics. Because it's not nearly as easy as just looking at what happened in some fraction of 64 plate appearances. Analytics is largely learning how to figure out what numbers are meaningful and which aren't.

What he's doing here is the equivalent of flipping a coin, seeing it lands on heads and declaring that this coin is more likely to land on heads in the next flip

Or the old joke about "what does a batter hit on Tuesday day games after a full moon in July. Everyone knows that's meaningless.

I do agree that his breakdowns are usually entertaining. But, he's way out of his element here

[Cod]

My biggest gripe with the pitching change wasn't the taking Snell out part. It was the fact Cash brought in Nick Anderson who up until then had given up at least one run in his past six appearances and Betts was killing RHP this season. Just look at his splits:

* vs RHP - .323 / .385 / .677
* vs LHP - .200 / .313 / .218

If Cash is truly a numbers manager, then he had to have known this...right? Why not bring in Loup instead? I'm afraid the front office set a pitching schedule and Cash had to stick to it, regardless of whether or not the ninth man in the LAD lineup got a hit. I honestly think Snell was coming out regardless of the outcome of that at-bat.

I just looked at more of the Mookie's stats and something stuck out to me. His batting average actually goes down the third time he faces a pitcher (.229) and climbs to .337 the first time he faces a relief pitcher. Also, the sixth inning was his worst inning from a hitting perspective by far (only batted .158 / .261 /.316 over 23 plate appearances). More reason Snell maybe should've stayed...

[Izz]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

I do agree that his breakdowns are usually entertaining. But, he's way out of his element here

I don't disagree but he doesn't *just* reference Snell's and Betts' 2020 stats. The 2019 stats (re times thru order/facing SP) support the same conclusion.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by Cod

My biggest gripe with the pitching change wasn't the taking Snell out part. It was the fact Cash brought in Nick Anderson who up until then had given up at least one run in his past six appearances and Betts was killing RHP this season. Just look at his splits:

* vs RHP - .323 / .385 / .677
* vs LHP - .200 / .313 / .218

If Cash is truly a numbers manager, then he had to have known this...right? Why not bring in Loup instead? I'm afraid the front office set a pitching schedule and Cash had to stick to it, regardless of whether or not the ninth man in the LAD lineup got a hit. I honestly think Snell was coming out regardless of the outcome of that at-bat.

I just looked at more of the Mookie's stats and something stuck out to me. His batting average actually goes down the third time he faces a pitcher (.229) and climbs to .337 the first time he faces a relief pitcher. Also, the sixth inning was his worst inning from a hitting perspective by far (only batted .158 / .261 /.316 over 23 plate appearances). More reason Snell maybe should've stayed...

No. A true numbers manager wouldn't base decisions on the results of 23 plate appearances.

What I say below applies as well.

Originally Posted by Izz

I don't disagree but he doesn't *just* reference Snell's and Betts' 2020 stats. The 2019 stats (re times thru order/facing SP) support the same conclusion.

And that's still "looking at the stats" and not at all "analytics"

First. MLB teams aren't looking at anything as crude as OPS. wOBA is much better than OPS and they aren't looking at that either. They are probably looking at something more like xwOBA which looks at how they hit the ball (using exit velocity and, yes, launch angle) not whether or not someone caught the ball when he hit it.

That aside

Sure, in 2020 an 2019 Mookie didn't hit well the 3rd time facing a pitcher
But, in 2018 he went .855>1.170>1.278
In 2017 it was .655>.876>.913

So, some years we can see that Betts hits worse the third time facing a pitcher and some years he hits better. In lieu of having a reason that he started getting worse when he saw a pitcher for the third time, it's best to assume that he follows the overall trend - he gets better as he sees a pitcher more times in a game. That's analytics 101 (or maybe 100 or 99).

[Izz]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

And that's still "looking at the stats" and not at all "analytics"

lol I never said otherwise, CB.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by Izz

lol I never said otherwise, CB.

They don't support the conclusion, which you did say.

[Izz]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

They don't support the conclusion, which you did say.

lol

[Déjà Bru]

I'd say this is not good news for MLB.

[Westheim]

How much of this is down to it being the most toxic election year ever and people being on [insert your least favorite news channel] instead?

Wait, what's rating? Share is the % of all people watching anything, no?