¿Qué decisión tomar con respecto a Peráza?

chop2chip said:
I think it holds true for players like Freddie Freeman. When he has runners on base he can't be shifted as much. That's the reason why he's been consistently incredible with hitting with RISP.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's possible. What situations would they be forced to not shift as much? First and 2nd? Bases loaded? Second and third?

Most of his damage has been with runners on first and second. He hasn't hit well with runners on 2nd and third. He hasn't hit well with bases loaded. He has hit well with runners either on 2nd or 3rd.
 
thethe said:
I think the scouting community wanted to see if what Mallex did last year was a Cali league aberration. He is repeating that and if not for an injury early in the year he might be besting those numbers. The concerns of his defense are apparently real though which sucks.
Click to expand...

I see Klaw and others say 70 defender...at 2B. Close to that SS. Not CF. That's why I don't get moving him. His max value is at those spots. It's not like he is this amazing hitter you just want to find a spot for to get them in the line up.

I know thethe has Peterson as the new Gattis in terms of love. I like the kid too. But if a team likes Peterson as much as thethe does, then I say we flip him to that team and let Peraza play 2B.
 
gilesfan said:
Maybe it's possible. What situations would they be forced to not shift as much? First and 2nd? Bases loaded? Second and third?

Most of his damage has been with runners on first and second. He hasn't hit well with runners on 2nd and third. He hasn't hit well with bases loaded. He has hit well with runners either on 2nd or 3rd.
Click to expand...

Career wRC+ with men on base is 151 (RISP it is 148)

Based empty it is 116

It also makes logical sense why this would be the case.
 
chop2chip said:
Career wRC+ with men on base is 151 (RISP it is 148)
Based empty it is 116

It also makes logical sense why this would be the case.
Click to expand...

You cannot treat all "men on base" as equal. Just because men are on base doesn't mean the shift is negated.
 
I obviously never played at a competitive level but I just never understood the argument that the game is exactly the same with RISP.
 
sturg33 said:
The pitching is fine (it better be after we sold off all our assets for it).

But offense will be a problem in my opinion. Markakis may never hit a home run. Peterson won't hit them. Simmons won't hit them. Bethancourt won't hit them. Peraza won't hit them. Smith won't hit them. And where the heck is everyone gonna play?
Click to expand...

And yet, even with the notable lack of power you keep pointing to, the Braves are scoring more runs than they did last year, by a considerable margin.

Power is great. I wish we had a little more of it, but it is not the only thing that matters. With a runner in scoring position, I am much more confident that the Braves will get him home than I was with last years team. All that power on last years team didn't help much.
 
mfree80 said:
And yet, even with the notable lack of power you keep pointing to, the Braves are scoring more runs than they did last year, by a considerable margin.

Power is great. I wish we had a little more of it, but it is not the only thing that matters. With a runner in scoring position, I am much more confident that the Braves will get him home than I was with last years team. All that power on last years team didn't help much.
Click to expand...

GF and nsacpi have explained this many times.

The Braves are doing much better stringing hits together and hitting with RISP. Those aren't likely to continue over the long haul... We are still in the bottom third of the league in OPS
 
thethe said:
I obviously never played at a competitive level but I just never understood the argument that the game is exactly the same with RISP.
Click to expand...

Because stats show over time that it is. Players will hit essentially the same with RISP as comapred to when baeses are empty. Yes on a year to year basis a player and a team can hit far better or far worse with RISP. But it's not predictive in nature. Meaning just because the Braves have done this well over the first 10 weeks or season doesn't mean the offense is fine and we should expect it to continue the rest of the way.

Someone said the Braves are 10th in team OPS compared to 6th in runs scored in the league. The true value of our offense is closer to the 10th mark than the 6th mark. Could we continue to hit well with RISP all year? Certainly. But there is just as good of a chance they won't.
 
thewupk said:
Because stats show over time that it is. Players will hit essentially the same with RISP as comapred to when baeses are empty. Yes on a year to year basis a player and a team can hit far better or far worse with RISP. But it's not predictive in nature. Meaning just because the Braves have done this well over the first 10 weeks or season doesn't mean the offense is fine and we should expect it to continue the rest of the way.

Someone said the Braves are 10th in team OPS compared to 6th in runs scored in the league. The true value of our offense is closer to the 10th mark than the 6th mark. Could we continue to hit well with RISP all year? Certainly. But there is just as good of a chance they won't.
Click to expand...

I'm just wondering if we really consider all factors in this analysis. Sure, a large enough sample size does eliminate a lot of noise but to me it feels like a team that takes the approach of the Braves will fare better in these situations. For instance, if you look at the teams with the highest average with runners in scoring position the majority of them are at the mid point or lower in terms of teams that strike out the most.

Maybe I'm just making osmething up to fit my reality but I do think approach matters when you look at variation in success from year to year with runners in scoring position.
 
thewupk said:
Because stats show over time that it is. Players will hit essentially the same with RISP as comapred to when baeses are empty. Yes on a year to year basis a player and a team can hit far better or far worse with RISP. But it's not predictive in nature. Meaning just because the Braves have done this well over the first 10 weeks or season doesn't mean the offense is fine and we should expect it to continue the rest of the way.

Someone said the Braves are 10th in team OPS compared to 6th in runs scored in the league. The true value of our offense is closer to the 10th mark than the 6th mark. Could we continue to hit well with RISP all year? Certainly. But there is just as good of a chance they won't.
Click to expand...

I'm interested if that is true for players that are shifted. Looking at McCann's shift stats with men on base he has a 129 wRC+ as opposed to a 101 wRC+ (career averages).

I know that doesn't necessarily negate your argument, but I think there are certain players that benefit from having men on base. If the Braves are getting on base at a higher rate then the average team then perhaps they will be more prone to cluster luck.
 
Your point on the limited use of the shift with runners on seems incredibly valid, especially in the context of how often the shift is used nowadays. The enhanced shifting is a big reason why offense is so suppressed now.
 
thethe said:
I'm just wondering if we really consider all factors in this analysis. Sure, a large enough sample size does eliminate a lot of noise but to me it feels like a team that takes the approach of the Braves will fare better in these situations. For instance, if you look at the teams with the highest average with runners in scoring position the majority of them are at the mid point or lower in terms of teams that strike out the most.

Maybe I'm just making osmething up to fit my reality but I do think approach matters when you look at variation in success from year to year with runners in scoring position.
Click to expand...

So my question to you is. If it's because of their approach then why don't they take that same approach when the bases are empty? The Braves hit 236 with a 649 OPS with the bases empty. 295 with a 781 OPS with RISP. Why can't they hit 295 with a 781 OPS all the time?

To me it's pretty obvious.
 
thewupk said:
So my question to you is. If it's because of their approach then why don't they take that same approach when the bases are empty? The Braves hit 236 with a 649 OPS with the bases empty. 295 with a 781 OPS with RISP. Why can't they hit 295 with a 781 OPS all the time?

To me it's pretty obvious.
Click to expand...

There is no question the Braves have been incredibly lucky.
 
Rather talk about Peraza than our offense again......

Right now to score we have to get 3+ of the following before we get 3 outs: hit, walk, SB. That's hard to do. We all get that. It's a lot easier if you are getting XBH.

I don't think the Braves are trying to get no power guys. That is what was available and they got the best they could. I am surprised D Peterson isn't more celebrated on the board b/c he's one of the few guys that has shown consistent XBH. Davidson's numbers aren't great from a power perspective but there have been scout reports that they are seeing good in game power.

I feel like SS is still a need spot for most teams. We also have some pitching. Can't there be a package that works for two sides were we get a controllable impact guy?
 
chop2chip said:
I'm interested if that is true for players that are shifted. Looking at McCann's shift stats with men on base he has a 129 wRC+ as opposed to a 101 wRC+ (career averages).

I know that doesn't necessarily negate your argument, but I think there are certain players that benefit from having men on base. If the Braves are getting on base at a higher rate then the average team then perhaps they will be more prone to cluster luck.
Click to expand...

That certainly could be the case in those left handed hitters who get shifted to death.
 
thewupk said:
So my question to you is. If it's because of their approach then why don't they take that same approach when the bases are empty? The Braves hit 236 with a 649 OPS with the bases empty. 295 with a 781 OPS with RISP. Why can't they hit 295 with a 781 OPS all the time?

To me it's pretty obvious.
Click to expand...

I don't believe its the same game when runners are not on base. It shouldn't cause that much of a variation and I am agreeing that there are many factors that go into it, luck being one of them. I just don't think its right to have an oversimplication and label it luck because we can't quantify it yet.
 
Russ2dollas said:
Rather talk about Peraza than our offense again......

Right now to score we have to get 3+ of the following before we get 3 outs: hit, walk, SB. That's hard to do. We all get that. It's a lot easier if you are getting XBH.

I don't think the Braves are trying to get no power guys. That is what was available and they got the best they could. I am surprised D Peterson isn't more celebrated on the board b/c he's one of the few guys that has shown consistent XBH. Davidson's numbers aren't great from a power perspective but there have been scout reports that they are seeing good in game power.

I feel like SS is still a need spot for most teams. We also have some pitching. Can't there be a package that works for two sides were we get a controllable impact guy?
Click to expand...

If Dustin peterson continues to do whta he is doing this year then there will be a lot more people who are talking about him. He along with Davidson are our only true middle of the order type bats.

I guess what you are suggesting is that they move Peraza back over to SS so he can be sold to other teams as that?
 
FWIW, I don't believe in the psychological differences or approach changes as a reason for a team/player to hit better with RISP. I feel that way with both pitchers and hitters.

I just think your odds increase of finding a hole when the defense is playing DP depth, the runner is held on first, fielders break to cover a base on SB, etc. I maybe wrong in that regard, but it makes a lot of theoretical sense.
 
chop2chip said:
FWIW, I don't believe in the physiological differences or approach changes as a reason for a team/player to hit better with RISP. I feel that way with both pitchers and hitters.

I just think your odds increase of finding a hole when the defense is playing DP depth, the runner is held on first, fielders break to cover a base on SB, etc. I maybe wrong in that regard, but it makes a lot of theoretical sense.
Click to expand...

I think its everything. Its just natural that if your mind has to think about something else other than your pitching motion that it could lead to inconsistent release points. Again, as I've never played competitively I could be way off. In this age of overwhelming amounts of data I think we lose sight of the fact that this is a game played by humans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top