Explain it to me like I'm a "birther" (1 Viewer)

[LHUCKS]

Ron Washington quickly ascending the "managers I hate" list.

 

[Bogart]

Napoli is the backup catcher. Not the third catcher that many thought he would be. You don't want to use your backup catcher as your DH, because if your starting catcher goes down and you move your backup over to catch in the field, you lose that DH spot and your pitcher has to hit.

 

[Eephus]

Napoli has not provided proof that he's a Major League catcher

 

[shadyridr]

Cuz hes horrible defensively, they have the DH position locked up with Young, and a 1B in Moreland who plays the majority of games vs righties.

 

[brewer]

Napoli is the backup catcher. Not the third catcher that many thought he would be. You don't want to use your backup catcher as your DH, because if your starting catcher goes down and you move your backup over to catch in the field, you lose that DH spot and your pitcher has to hit.

This is always the answer I hear as well, but how many times in a season do you need to remove your starting catcher due to injury?Oh yah, and on the rare case that you do need to do that, you can still pinch hit for your pitcher like the national league counterparts do.If Napoli is one of the top 9 bats on the team(and he certainly is now that Hamilton is hurt), you need to take the chance.

 

[E-Z Glider]

Napoli is the backup catcher. Not the third catcher that many thought he would be. You don't want to use your backup catcher as your DH, because if your starting catcher goes down and you move your backup over to catch in the field, you lose that DH spot and your pitcher has to hit.

This is always the answer I hear as well, but how many times in a season do you need to remove your starting catcher due to injury?Oh yah, and on the rare case that you do need to do that, you can still pinch hit for your pitcher like the national league counterparts do.

If Napoli is one of the top 9 bats on the team(and he certainly is now that Hamilton is hurt), you need to take the chance.

His only hope at regular ABs is to be the best DH on the team (which he isnt).

 

[Bogart]

He is catching today.

I agree with E-Z, while his bat is good, he is not the best DH on the team (Young), best catcher (YT) or best 1B (Moreland). Now with Davis up, Napoli might only be the 3rd or 4th best 1B on the team.

 

[Eephus]

His lack of ABs in Arlington makes more sense than it did in Anaheim.

 

[E-Z Glider]

His lack of ABs in Arlington makes more sense than it did in Anaheim.

I know its a small sample size and all, but this stat has stuck with me...

In 30 innings pitched with Mike Napoli behind the plate last season, Dan Haren's ERA was 4.20.In 44 innings pitched with Jeff Mathis behind the plate, Haren's ERA was 2.25

Fantasy nerds love Napoli for his C eligibility, but real baseball people understand his true value. He's a butcher at every position in the field and an incredibly streaky hitter who happens to have some pop. Basically, a nice bat to have on the bench.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

His lack of ABs in Arlington makes more sense than it did in Anaheim.

I know its a small sample size and all, but this stat has stuck with me...

In 30 innings pitched with Mike Napoli behind the plate last season, Dan Haren's ERA was 4.20.In 44 innings pitched with Jeff Mathis behind the plate, Haren's ERA was 2.25

Fantasy nerds love Napoli for his C eligibility, but real baseball people understand his true value. He's a butcher at every position in the field and an incredibly streaky hitter who happens to have some pop. Basically, a nice bat to have on the bench.

The Angels really needed his bat at the DH spot. The Rangers don't. It made no sense Scioscia didn't get him into the lineup more. Especially considering some 'pop' is what they were really missing.

 

[Spartans Rule]

Napoli also has fairly drastic platoon splits.

Career - 935 OPS vs L, 804 vs R

Last season - 966 vs L, 700 vs R

So it may not be that desirable to have his bat in there all the time against righties.

 

[LHUCKS]

Good info here fellas...thanks.

Looks like I'm going to need to pickup another catcher.

 

[brewer]

Young's bat is mediocre for a DH. Napoli is a bit boom or bust, but he brings more to the table at this point than Young does. Yes, his defense is suspect at best, but the guy can hit.

 

[Brady Marino]

Napoli = Matt LeCroy on steroids.

 

[dparker713]

Napoli also has fairly drastic platoon splits.Career - 935 OPS vs L, 804 vs RLast season - 966 vs L, 700 vs RSo it may not be that desirable to have his bat in there all the time against righties.

YoungCareer - 833 vs L, 793 vs R2010 - 871 vs L, 739 vs RGiven sample size issues, age, and regression, there is really no reason to think Young is a better option at DH against generic lefties and righties.

 

[dparker713]

His lack of ABs in Arlington makes more sense than it did in Anaheim.

I know its a small sample size and all, but this stat has stuck with me...

In 30 innings pitched with Mike Napoli behind the plate last season, Dan Haren's ERA was 4.20.In 44 innings pitched with Jeff Mathis behind the plate, Haren's ERA was 2.25

Fantasy nerds love Napoli for his C eligibility, but real baseball people understand his true value. He's a butcher at every position in the field and an incredibly streaky hitter who happens to have some pop. Basically, a nice bat to have on the bench.

A) He projects to be a better DH than YoungB) I've never seen a study that supports the idea of catcher ERA. C) At this point, Young is a nice bat to have on the bench. But he makes a billion dollars and got pissy this offseason, so he's starting. Maybe if Ron Washington knew anything about how to win baseball games this wouldn't be the case, but the blame really has to fall squarely on Daniels' shoulders. He is Ron's boss. He shouldn't allow him to keep screwing up basic things like who to start and when to use your best reliever.

 

[E-Z Glider]

sounds like LHUCKS isnt the only one who mistakenly drafter Napoli as his catcher.

 

[dparker713]

sounds like LHUCKS isnt the only one who mistakenly drafter Napoli as his catcher.

sounds like you have no actual reason to prefer Young to DH.As for Napoli, I'm getting more than what I expected thus far. Then again I was only expecting 350 or so PAs. But in a 2 catcher AL only league thats entirely playable.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

Napoli will be a top 10 catcher by season's end. It gets ugly after the top few guys and home runs have a way of making up for everything else. Just roll with the days off. I'm shocked people didn't expect this when they drafted him.

 

[Disco Stu]

Maybe if Ron Washington knew anything about how to win baseball games this wouldn't be the case, but the blame really has to fall squarely on Daniels' shoulders. He is Ron's boss. He shouldn't allow him to keep screwing up basic things like who to start and when to use your best reliever.

Wut?

 

[Bogart]

Maybe if Ron Washington knew anything about how to win baseball games this wouldn't be the case, but the blame really has to fall squarely on Daniels' shoulders. He is Ron's boss. He shouldn't allow him to keep screwing up basic things like who to start and when to use your best reliever.

This may be the most insane I have read on here in months.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

Maybe if Ron Washington knew anything about how to win baseball games this wouldn't be the case, but the blame really has to fall squarely on Daniels' shoulders. He is Ron's boss. He shouldn't allow him to keep screwing up basic things like who to start and when to use your best reliever.

This may be the most insane I have read on here in months.

I'm pretty sure he's being sarcastic.

 

[dparker713]

Maybe if Ron Washington knew anything about how to win baseball games this wouldn't be the case, but the blame really has to fall squarely on Daniels' shoulders. He is Ron's boss. He shouldn't allow him to keep screwing up basic things like who to start and when to use your best reliever.

This may be the most insane I have read on here in months.

I'm pretty sure he's being sarcastic.

Washington's usage of Feliz is attrocious. He refuses to bring him into a tie ballgame. Managing to the save statistic does not help win games.And more days than not, Napoli should be starting over Young at DH. He's a better hitter, and its not all that close. Ron Washington is one of the worst strategic managers in baseball. Im sure he's a great clubhouse guy and all that, but his strategy cost the Rangers in the playoffs and it will continue to cost them as long as he's their manager and Daniels does not take steps to correct his mistakes.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

I was wrong. He's serious. Whoa boy.

That whole World Series thing was a fluke. And the whole second best record in baseball? Pffft. He's crap!

 

[dparker713]

I was wrong. He's serious. Whoa boy. That whole World Series thing was a fluke. And the whole second best record in baseball? Pffft. He's crap!

Yeah, always best to evaluate baseball on the results instead of the process

 

[Dr. Awesome]

I was wrong. He's serious. Whoa boy. That whole World Series thing was a fluke. And the whole second best record in baseball? Pffft. He's crap!

Yeah, always best to evaluate baseball on the results instead of the process

What process would you like to measure things with? Wins are the ultimate result but I'm game for hearing other arguments. But your argument is his style cost the team wins...yet you don't want to actually measure wins?

 

[Bogart]

I was wrong. He's serious. Whoa boy. That whole World Series thing was a fluke. And the whole second best record in baseball? Pffft. He's crap!

Yeah, always best to evaluate baseball on the results instead of the process

Yeah, I mean who cares about wins and losses really?

 

[Disco Stu]

I was wrong. He's serious. Whoa boy. That whole World Series thing was a fluke. And the whole second best record in baseball? Pffft. He's crap!

Yeah, always best to evaluate baseball on the results instead of the process

Yeah, I mean who cares about wins and losses really?

I'm really more interested in how his mistakes affect my fantasy team.

 

[dparker713]

I was wrong. He's serious. Whoa boy. That whole World Series thing was a fluke. And the whole second best record in baseball? Pffft. He's crap!

Yeah, always best to evaluate baseball on the results instead of the process

Yeah, I mean who cares about wins and losses really?

Win or lose, the job of the manager is to put the team in the best position to win. Just because you're able to overcome a bullpen collapse in game 1 without bringing your best reliever to later win the series doesn't mean it was the right thing to do. Likewise, just because you get stopped a few inches short on a 4th and 2 conversion that would have ended the game, doesn't mean it was the wrong thing to do. The Rangers won the AL West last year because they had superior talent compared with the other members of their division. They played to a 92 win pythag record, and actually won 90 games. Ron Washington, and all managers for that matter, have little effect on the overall record over the course of a season. As for the playoffs, the odds of each team advancing in any given round are fairly even.

 

[dparker713]

I was wrong. He's serious. Whoa boy. That whole World Series thing was a fluke. And the whole second best record in baseball? Pffft. He's crap!

Yeah, always best to evaluate baseball on the results instead of the process

What process would you like to measure things with? Wins are the ultimate result but I'm game for hearing other arguments. But your argument is his style cost the team wins...yet you don't want to actually measure wins?

Serious question, how much of those wins do you attribute to Washington as opposed to the players.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

I was wrong. He's serious. Whoa boy.

That whole World Series thing was a fluke. And the whole second best record in baseball? Pffft. He's crap!

Yeah, always best to evaluate baseball on the results instead of the process

What process would you like to measure things with?

Wins are the ultimate result but I'm game for hearing other arguments. But your argument is his style cost the team wins...yet you don't want to actually measure wins?

Serious question, how much of those wins do you attribute to Washington as opposed to the players.

Please answer the bolded. You want to criticize Washington for hurting his team's ability to win games. Yet you do not want to actually count their wins and losses. What would you like to go by?

 

[Dr. Awesome]

I was wrong. He's serious. Whoa boy.

That whole World Series thing was a fluke. And the whole second best record in baseball? Pffft. He's crap!

Yeah, always best to evaluate baseball on the results instead of the process

Yeah, I mean who cares about wins and losses really?

Win or lose, the job of the manager is to put the team in the best position to win. Just because you're able to overcome a bullpen collapse in game 1 without bringing your best reliever to later win the series doesn't mean it was the right thing to do. Likewise, just because you get stopped a few inches short on a 4th and 2 conversion that would have ended the game, doesn't mean it was the wrong thing to do. The Rangers won the AL West last year because they had superior talent compared with the other members of their division. They played to a 92 win pythag record, and actually won 90 games. Ron Washington, and all managers for that matter, have little effect on the overall record over the course of a season. As for the playoffs, the odds of each team advancing in any given round are fairly even.

But the odds of advancing in EVERY round are significantly lower.

 

[dparker713]

I was wrong. He's serious. Whoa boy.

That whole World Series thing was a fluke. And the whole second best record in baseball? Pffft. He's crap!

Yeah, always best to evaluate baseball on the results instead of the process

What process would you like to measure things with?

Wins are the ultimate result but I'm game for hearing other arguments. But your argument is his style cost the team wins...yet you don't want to actually measure wins?

Serious question, how much of those wins do you attribute to Washington as opposed to the players.

Please answer the bolded. You want to criticize Washington for hurting his team's ability to win games. Yet you do not want to actually count their wins and losses. What would you like to go by?

Wins and losses are predominately due to talent on the field, not the manager. So, just looking at wins and losses has too much noise due to variance and granularity. A better way to evaluate is to look at his individual decisions and patterns of decisions. In baseball over the long haul, results follow from good decisions. Leaving Feliz in the pen the last two losses, for instance, was a bad decision even if they had won.

 

[dparker713]

I was wrong. He's serious. Whoa boy.

That whole World Series thing was a fluke. And the whole second best record in baseball? Pffft. He's crap!

Yeah, always best to evaluate baseball on the results instead of the process

Yeah, I mean who cares about wins and losses really?

Win or lose, the job of the manager is to put the team in the best position to win. Just because you're able to overcome a bullpen collapse in game 1 without bringing your best reliever to later win the series doesn't mean it was the right thing to do. Likewise, just because you get stopped a few inches short on a 4th and 2 conversion that would have ended the game, doesn't mean it was the wrong thing to do. The Rangers won the AL West last year because they had superior talent compared with the other members of their division. They played to a 92 win pythag record, and actually won 90 games. Ron Washington, and all managers for that matter, have little effect on the overall record over the course of a season. As for the playoffs, the odds of each team advancing in any given round are fairly even.

But the odds of advancing in EVERY round are significantly lower.

And the odds of 3 coin flips in a row coming up heads is significantly lower than 1 coin flip coming up heads. Whats your point?

 

[Dr. Awesome]

Wins and losses are predominately due to talent on the field, not the manager. So, just looking at wins and losses has too much noise due to variance and granularity. A better way to evaluate is to look at his individual decisions and patterns of decisions. In baseball over the long haul, results follow from good decisions. Leaving Feliz in the pen the last two losses, for instance, was a bad decision even if they had won.

Why?

 

[Dr. Awesome]

And the odds of 3 coin flips in a row coming up heads is significantly lower than 1 coin flip coming up heads. Whats your point?

You just made it. The Rangers didn't advance in just one round.

 

[dparker713]

And the odds of 3 coin flips in a row coming up heads is significantly lower than 1 coin flip coming up heads. Whats your point?

You just made it. The Rangers didn't advance in just one round.

And this matters how? What does this prove about Washington's managing?

 

[E-Z Glider]

I was wrong. He's serious. Whoa boy. That whole World Series thing was a fluke. And the whole second best record in baseball? Pffft. He's crap!

Yeah, always best to evaluate baseball on the results instead of the process

Yeah, I mean who cares about wins and losses really?

I'm really more interested in how his mistakes affect my fantasy team.

This is also how he decided that Napoli is a much better DH than Young.

 

[dparker713]

I was wrong. He's serious. Whoa boy. That whole World Series thing was a fluke. And the whole second best record in baseball? Pffft. He's crap!

Yeah, always best to evaluate baseball on the results instead of the process

Yeah, I mean who cares about wins and losses really?

I'm really more interested in how his mistakes affect my fantasy team.

This is also how he decided that Napoli is a much better DH than Young.

Yeah, its just him and Bill James and Marcel and RotoChamp and ZiPS and the consensus of fangraphs readers. Alone on an island alright.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

And the odds of 3 coin flips in a row coming up heads is significantly lower than 1 coin flip coming up heads. Whats your point?

You just made it. The Rangers didn't advance in just one round.

And this matters how? What does this prove about Washington's managing?

I believe talent and managing the team lead to them advancing. Again, how would you like to measure things if you don't want to use wins?

 

[dparker713]

And the odds of 3 coin flips in a row coming up heads is significantly lower than 1 coin flip coming up heads. Whats your point?

You just made it. The Rangers didn't advance in just one round.

And this matters how? What does this prove about Washington's managing?

I believe talent and managing the team lead to them advancing. Again, how would you like to measure things if you don't want to use wins?

I answered that.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

And the odds of 3 coin flips in a row coming up heads is significantly lower than 1 coin flip coming up heads. Whats your point?

You just made it. The Rangers didn't advance in just one round.

And this matters how? What does this prove about Washington's managing?

I believe talent and managing the team lead to them advancing. Again, how would you like to measure things if you don't want to use wins?

I answered that.

Is this how you answered it? "So, just looking at wins and losses has too much noise due to variance and granularity. A better way to evaluate is to look at his individual decisions and patterns of decisions. In baseball over the long haul, results follow from good decisions."

 

[dparker713]

And the odds of 3 coin flips in a row coming up heads is significantly lower than 1 coin flip coming up heads. Whats your point?

You just made it. The Rangers didn't advance in just one round.

And this matters how? What does this prove about Washington's managing?

I believe talent and managing the team lead to them advancing. Again, how would you like to measure things if you don't want to use wins?

I answered that.

Is this how you answered it? "So, just looking at wins and losses has too much noise due to variance and granularity. A better way to evaluate is to look at his individual decisions and patterns of decisions. In baseball over the long haul, results follow from good decisions."

Yes

 

[Dr. Awesome]

Is this how you answered it? "So, just looking at wins and losses has too much noise due to variance and granularity. A better way to evaluate is to look at his individual decisions and patterns of decisions. In baseball over the long haul, results follow from good decisions."

Yes

In baseball over the long haul results follow from good decisions. Isn't winning a bunch of games and making it to the World Series one helluva result? Isn't having the best record in American League this year some proof as well?Okay, you want to look at individual decisions. Do you have any way to measure Ron Washington is doing a poor job? Really it seems like you just don't like the guy and to hell with the results he's a crappy manager.

 

[dparker713]

Is this how you answered it? "So, just looking at wins and losses has too much noise due to variance and granularity. A better way to evaluate is to look at his individual decisions and patterns of decisions. In baseball over the long haul, results follow from good decisions."

Yes

In baseball over the long haul results follow from good decisions. Isn't winning a bunch of games and making it to the World Series one helluva result? Isn't having the best record in American League this year some proof as well?Okay, you want to look at individual decisions. Do you have any way to measure Ron Washington is doing a poor job? Really it seems like you just don't like the guy and to hell with the results he's a crappy manager.

Yes, but the playoffs are a crapshoot. Some, but hardly dispotive and the talent on the roster is nearly entirely responsible for their record.No, there is no good metric currently to evaluate managers. Maybe you could try looking at expected pythag wins versus actual wins - in that case the Rangers played 2 wins below expectations. Of course, thats a rather crude and imperfect solution. No idea when the sample size would be large enough to provide meaningful results and much of the Rangers difference last year could be noise or just random variation. I really have no feelings about the man one way or another. I'm not a fan of the Rangers or any AL team really. However, objectively he uses Feliz poorly and Napoli is a better hitter than Young at this point in their careers. Of course, for all I know he makes up for his strategic deficiencies through player management or something else. But that doesn't change the fact that he often fails to put his team in the best position to win.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

Yes, but the playoffs are a crapshoot. Some, but hardly dispotive and the talent on the roster is nearly entirely responsible for their record.

No, there is no good metric currently to evaluate managers. Maybe you could try looking at expected pythag wins versus actual wins - in that case the Rangers played 2 wins below expectations. Of course, thats a rather crude and imperfect solution. No idea when the sample size would be large enough to provide meaningful results and much of the Rangers difference last year could be noise or just random variation.

I really have no feelings about the man one way or another. I'm not a fan of the Rangers or any AL team really. However, objectively he uses Feliz poorly and Napoli is a better hitter than Young at this point in their careers. Of course, for all I know he makes up for his strategic deficiencies through player management or something else. But that doesn't change the fact that he often fails to put his team in the best position to win.

So you have nothing to claim he's actually a bad manager. Misuse of Feliz? That's completely arbitrary.As far as Napoli vs. Young, Young had a higher batting average and obp than Napoli in 2010. And in 2009. And in 2008. And in 2007.

Now let's look at slugging percentages:

Young had a lower slugging percent in 2010 (468 vs. 444) but Young had a higher slugging percent in 2009. And the ba/obp more than make up for the minor slugging difference.

How is Young this clearly inferior hitter to Napoli? It's not like Napoli is Ryan Howard or Albert Pujols. He's a crappy glove and nothing more than a quality bat against left handed pitchers.

Of course even if Washington were only playing Young because of a tantrum Young threw, he'd still be a good manager. Sometimes you need to manage egos. It's my understanding Young is fairly well liked in the clubhouse. It's not going to be great to piss him off when he's still going to be sitting with the team each game.

Bah, can't believe I'm defending the Rangers.

 

[dparker713]

Yes, but the playoffs are a crapshoot. Some, but hardly dispotive and the talent on the roster is nearly entirely responsible for their record.

No, there is no good metric currently to evaluate managers. Maybe you could try looking at expected pythag wins versus actual wins - in that case the Rangers played 2 wins below expectations. Of course, thats a rather crude and imperfect solution. No idea when the sample size would be large enough to provide meaningful results and much of the Rangers difference last year could be noise or just random variation.

I really have no feelings about the man one way or another. I'm not a fan of the Rangers or any AL team really. However, objectively he uses Feliz poorly and Napoli is a better hitter than Young at this point in their careers. Of course, for all I know he makes up for his strategic deficiencies through player management or something else. But that doesn't change the fact that he often fails to put his team in the best position to win.

So you have nothing to claim he's actually a bad manager. Misuse of Feliz? That's completely arbitrary.As far as Napoli vs. Young, Young had a higher batting average and obp than Napoli in 2010. And in 2009. And in 2008. And in 2007.

Now let's look at slugging percentages:

Young had a lower slugging percent in 2010 (468 vs. 444) but Young had a higher slugging percent in 2009. And the ba/obp more than make up for the minor slugging difference.

How is Young this clearly inferior hitter to Napoli? It's not like Napoli is Ryan Howard or Albert Pujols. He's a crappy glove and nothing more than a quality bat against left handed pitchers.

Of course even if Washington were only playing Young because of a tantrum Young threw, he'd still be a good manager. Sometimes you need to manage egos. It's my understanding Young is fairly well liked in the clubhouse. It's not going to be great to piss him off when he's still going to be sitting with the team each game.

Bah, can't believe I'm defending the Rangers.

The misuse of Feliz isn't arbitrary at all. He is obviously their best relief pitcher. Therefore he should be used in the highest leverage situations as often as possible.Michael Young is 34 years old and has a career wOBA of .346. Past three years he's posted .331, .385, .335. He's projected to post .344 this year.

Mike Napoli is 29 years old has a career wOBA of .359. Past three years he's posted .399, .362, .340. He's projected to post a .384 this year.

Now, Young could of course have a better offensive year than Napoli. But its not the most likely outcome. And yes, Napoli crushes left handed pitching, but he hits right handed pitching well. Young's career wOBA vs righties is .344, Napoli's is .340. Seeing as one of them is a much more likely regression candidate and the other would crush any leftie reliever he would face, how is Young anything more than a super utility guy in that lineup?

 

[TinHat]

It's a bog conspiracy

 

[Finless]

Ron Washington quickly ascending the "managers I hate" list.

You shouldn't have drafted him as your catcher without a back-up plan. You think Washington gives a #### about your team?

 

[Disco Stu]

Of course even if Washington were only playing Young because of a tantrum Young threw, he'd still be a good manager. Sometimes you need to manage egos. It's my understanding Young is fairly well liked in the clubhouse. It's not going to be great to piss him off when he's still going to be sitting with the team each game.

Not just fairly well liked... Young is one of the main leaders on this team (if not the leader). Barring a Jeteresque drop-off, the best thing for team morale is to have him in the lineup every day.He's also batting .367 right now.