GovClintonTyree (04-19-2018)
If Bautista get a single PA at 3B over Camargo we should all be yelling at the FO.
This is the season to see what Camargo is once and for all, not the season to let a washed up player soak up PAs.
I'm guessing Bautista never sees any real playing time at the MLB level unless it's as a DH.
50PoundHead (04-19-2018)
GovClintonTyree (04-19-2018)
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?
Pays to have a short memory, doesn't it?
None of you were interested in bringing him back because of his pitch framing - everyone said he couldn't hit and the numbers "proved it". There's no doubt he's beloved now because of his ability to steal strikes, but that wasn't talked about when he re-signed - only the fact that he wasn't good enough to be a full-time starter. Couldn't hit enough, couldn't throw anybody out.
Newest, hottest metrics have a way of constantly changing the narrative.
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?
I'm sure you were excited to bring back a 30 year old catcher with a career 665 OPS. Flowers had always been a good pitch framer and turned into an excellent one his last year in Chicago which he still is. That said, no, I didn't think he could be a full time starter and neither did the Braves. But he forced himself into that role and has been a very good player since coming back. Players can change their narrative at 30 but it's not the norm.
jpx7 (04-19-2018)
Sorry, guy, but this is demonstrably false. From "Braves to sign Flowers" (8 December 2015):
Like, the consensus was literally the opposite of what you're saying it was. And I don't see one complaint about his bat.
"For all his tattooings he was on the whole a clean, comely looking cannibal."
Enscheff (04-19-2018)
And I'll say, while I didn't comment in that thread, I'd personally just moved from Chicago, where I'd watched him for a couple seasons with the Sox and regretted that the Braves had felt the need to trade him.
"For all his tattooings he was on the whole a clean, comely looking cannibal."
No, I think you're off a little bit here. Thing is, nearly all those metrics are looking backwards and using them, some in very granular and clever ways, to predict the future. And so you get some of the statisticians on here who are able to make very accurate predictions on future events, often using measurables that would have been unimaginable a few years ago. However -
They're still predictions. There will be results 1-2 standard deviations from the mean. Seems to me a lot of the arguments around here are because one guy is making a prediction with a very useful statistical analysis and another guy says, well, yeah, but not necessarily, because he's [Lost weight. Figured something out. Changed his swing plane. Simplified his mechanics. Showed improved pitch recognition in a SSS in spring training. BSOML.] or he's got a hunch or feeling.
I think it's better to manage a baseball franchise, or any other business, informed by whatever the data can tell you. But you should be informed, not governed.
AA signing Jose Bautista is an example. Any number of statistical analyses would suggest that he is on the decline, unlikely to rebound. He hit .203 last year, had 170Ks, BABIP was only .230, and yet our new, statistically inclined GM decides to take a flyer on him. In the press conference, he mentioned that Bats keeps himself in impeccable shape and is unusually driven to succeed and not to bet against him.
That's talk that would get a poster ridiculed around here. But Anthopoulos, at least for now, gets a pass because things are looking pretty good and he's hit on a number of unlikely acquisitions. I'm sure he knows Bautista K'ed 170 times last year and hit .203 with a .232 BABIP. But he's choosing to be informed by data, rather than letting the data govern him. I'm okay with that, what about you?
jpx7 (04-19-2018)
Indeed.
A lot of people (myself included) liked the Flowers signing because he could take a walk and hit for some power, even if his average wasn't very good, and he was/is an excellent pitch-framer—all key things to see from a catcher on your roster, whether he's a backup or a lower-end to middling starter. All told, Flowers was a good bet; then he bloomed out of his likeliest outcomes and became a great payout on what was "only" a good bet.
"For all his tattooings he was on the whole a clean, comely looking cannibal."
Remember that time clvderpclv said, "None of you were interested in bringing him back because of his pitch framing", and then jpx7 quoted me as saying, "Having an excellent framer like Flowers might go a long way towards getting better performance out of these young starters" along with several other posts touting his framing in the thread about signing Flowers?
derrrpppp