PDA

View Full Version : Clayton


kermittheefrog
05-17-2002, 02:38 AM
Why do we have to keep watching Royce Clayton? How can sopme people complain about Thomas when we have Clayton out there everyday? Clayton is a certified out-machine.

Clayton has come to the plate 142 times.

He has already made 109 outs.

So he makes an out 77% of time he steps up to the plate.

His on base percenage is 92nd among 97 AL regulars.

His OPS is 86th.

His batting average is 92nd.

In Kansas City many fans were prepared to protest and stop attending game if Tony Muser wasn't fired. Can we do that to get Royce benched?

Kilroy
05-17-2002, 08:40 AM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
Why do we have to keep watching Royce Clayton? How can sopme people complain about Thomas when we have Clayton out there everyday? Clayton is a certified out-machine.

Why can't you just accept that the guy is in the line-up because of his mitt? When the designated hitter isn't producing at the plate, that's cause for concern. That's his job. When the number 9 hitter isn't producing at the plate, it shouldn't be that big of a deal. If Royce wasn't backing up the pitching with solid defense, then there'd be cause for getting him out of there. Altho I will say that Royce almost never practices situational hitting and that pisses me off.

But this team should not and can not be dependant on the offensive production of the #9 hitter. If they ever do, the team is in real trouble.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-17-2002, 09:05 AM
Originally posted by Kilroy
.... Altho I will say that Royce almost never practices situational hitting and that pisses me off....

That homerun swing Royce took in the eighth inning Wednesday night was a joke. The Sox are down 5-2, need baserunners, and here's Manuel sending a .189 batter to the plate. How is the manager rewarded for this show of confidence in Royce? The guy swings for the fences!

So I ask the rest of you, is it possible Manuel said even one ****ing word to Clayton when he returned to the dugout? I'm betting he didn't say one damned word.

Even if the ball had cleared the wall, Clayton's run doesn't tie the game. Instead of getting on base, he tries to put up some numbers for himself, and in the process makes another out the Sox could hardly afford.

That's selfish baseball. It's also one of the reasons the Sox are so lousy in late-inning comebacks. Manuel is to blame for all of this.

I'm sorry, but we ought to aspire to more managerial competence than simply a guy with more brains than Terry Bevington. Manuel needs to pinch hit for Royce late in games were losing.

Either that, or Manuel needs to be shown the door.

Kilroy
05-17-2002, 09:14 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Even if the ball had cleared the wall, Clayton's run doesn't tie the game. Instead of getting on base, he tries to put up some numbers for himself, and in the process makes another out the Sox could hardly afford.

That at bat was Sosa-esque.

And further still, there were several other Sox players that came to bat late in the game swinging at the first damn pitch. They aren't even giving the pitcher a chance to get himself into trouble. That's another indictment of JM because that's the kind of thing that's coached, not the result of talented players.

Strange, but don't we see and hear Sox commercials all the time that talk about doing the little things? Hmmmm.

Garrison
05-17-2002, 09:26 AM
I am sick and tired of hearing people ask for Royce to be benched or traded or just ripping on him overall. The guy is a great fielder and one of the best defensive short stops in the big leagues. So what if he's batting around .200? That's why he bats 9th! We can't expect Royce to get hits every night. He's in there for his glove and our offense can more than compensate for his lack of ability at the plate. Why worry so much about the production of the #9 hitter? Just accept that it's his glove that keeps him in there. With young pitchers on the mound, we need good defense behind them. Errors and poor defensive play will get to younger pitchers who can't pitch through it as well, and overall hurt their confidence. I like Royce and I support him 100% Give the guy a break for christ's sakes. Sheesh.

KruseControl04
05-17-2002, 09:35 AM
Originally posted by kermittheefrog
Why do we have to keep watching Royce Clayton? How can sopme people complain about Thomas when we have Clayton out there everyday? Clayton is a certified out-machine.


Did you watch the game last night?!? Clayton was awesome! He made some defensive plays that most other shortstops wouldn't have been able to make. He probably saved us a run or two in the process. I say keep Clayton out there, but if we're behind in the later innings, lift him for someone who can hit better.

Soxboyrob
05-17-2002, 09:49 AM
Originally posted by KruseControl04


Did you watch the game last night?!? Clayton was awesome! He made some defensive plays that most other shortstops wouldn't have been able to make. He probably saved us a run or two in the process. I say keep Clayton out there, but if we're behind in the later innings, lift him for someone who can hit better.

I'm a big fan of doing what you suggest in that last sentence above. Play Royce for the first 7 innings and then pinch hit for him late if more offense is needed. Royce was brought here for his defense, with his hitting being only a secondary part of his game. That considered, he's doing what's been asked of him and even provides us w/ the surprise home run on occasion.

On the other hand, Jer is nuts for not PH'ing for him late in games when we need baserunners. Maybe if Jer lifted the guy for someone that gets on base once in a while, it would get through his thick skull that we didn't acquire him to hit homers. His refusal to just try to reach base is really becoming aggravating. I'd trade the .200, HR hitting Clayton for a .250, no HR hitting, basestealing Clayton anyday. Speaking of basestealing, why does Clayton no longer try to steal bases for the Sox? When the Sox acquired Royce, much ado was made about the fact that they were getting another guy that was fast and could steal bases.

No-Neck
05-17-2002, 09:53 AM
I was at the game Thursday night in section 146, and Clayton was the best defensive guy on the field this night.

If he was just a mediocre fielder, I could understand the rips at this guy. Granted his bat leaves a lot to be desired, but he's a damn good shortstop.

There is nobody on the roster now who is better defensively. After sitting through 4 or more Post-Ozzie seasons watching a bunch of butchers at short, cringing at every ball hit to the left side of the infield, it felt good to watch a few inning ending double plays get a rookie pitcher a complete game shutout.
The defense picked up Wright in the middle innings, something I haven't seen much of the last few years at Comiskey.

If you want to rip a hitter, look at Carlos Lee, who came up from the minors a very good over-all hitter to all fields, and now only tries to pull everything thrown at him 2 seasons later. This is a guy who is in there for hitting only, and he's at .250.

RedPinStripes
05-17-2002, 11:57 AM
I have a feeling tha many Sox fans are going to be pissed off next year. What if the trade Valentin and keep Royce? It may happen since KW is in love with his defense. The only thing i like about Royce is he will get every routine ball and pick up on strage hopps Jose would boot, but his bat is aweful.

I doubt Royce would want to stay here for a pay cut though. I doubt anyone around the league will give him more then he's maing now. So he might be here on a 1 year deal next year.

cheeses_h_rice
05-17-2002, 12:08 PM
I wonder if the Sox would opt to go without both the Choice and Manos next year, especially if Jose's average and power numbers don't measure up this year.

Do the Sox have any legitimate alternatives at SS? Can Harris or Hummel play the position, assuming the other takes 2B?

Paulwny
05-17-2002, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by RedPinStripes
I have a feeling tha many Sox fans are going to be pissed off next year. What if the trade Valentin and keep Royce? It may happen since KW is in love with his defense. The only thing i like about Royce is he will get every routine ball and pick up on strage hopps Jose would boot, but his bat is aweful.

I doubt Royce would want to stay here for a pay cut though. I doubt anyone around the league will give him more then he's maing now. So he might be here on a 1 year deal next year.


You could be right.
Valentin has trade value and it's time to give Crede a shot.

Zednem700
05-17-2002, 12:12 PM
The problem is that Clayton is SO bad with the bat that he'd have to be a fielding GOD to make up for it. He is not just bad compared to position players, he's bad compared to other shortstops. There are 29 shorstops with at least 100 at bats so far. Royce has a better OPS than only 4 of them. What's worse is that since the renovations, Comiskey has played as a hitters park, and two of the shorstops with a lower OPS than Royce play in pitchers parks, LA and Shea. Once you factor that in, Royce is at best the 3rd or 4th worst offensive shorstop in all of baseball.

To make up for that HUGE flaw in his game Royce would have to be absolutely amazing with the glove, we're talking Ozzie Smith part two. There is some evidence that he has been one of the best defensive shorstops so far this season. He is second in range factor, and first in zone rating according to the stats provided at espn.com. The question though is, is he good enough with the glove to make up for how bad he is with the bat. I feel in order to make up for the outs he is causing with his bat he would have to be head and shoulders above every other shortstop with the glove, and I just don't see him as that much better than other shortstops. Defense is important, and it is most important at shortstop, but hitting is also very important. If your glove can't make up for the problems with your bat, you're hurting the team. I think Royce is hurting the team, if you put Valentin at short, he'll probably allow, lets say 20-25 more runs for the other team than Royce, (a VERY VERY high estimate) but he will almost definitely help create about 35 more runs at the plate over the season than Royce. That's a net gain for the Sox, and they should go for it.

bjmarte
05-17-2002, 12:24 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


That homerun swing Royce took in the eighth inning Wednesday night was a joke. The Sox are down 5-2, need baserunners, and here's Manuel sending a .189 batter to the plate. How is the manager rewarded for this show of confidence in Royce? The guy swings for the fences!

So I ask the rest of you, is it possible Manuel said even one ****ing word to Clayton when he returned to the dugout? I'm betting he didn't say one damned word.

Even if the ball had cleared the wall, Clayton's run doesn't tie the game. Instead of getting on base, he tries to put up some numbers for himself, and in the process makes another out the Sox could hardly afford.

That's selfish baseball. It's also one of the reasons the Sox are so lousy in late-inning comebacks. Manuel is to blame for all of this.

I'm sorry, but we ought to aspire to more managerial competence than simply a guy with more brains than Terry Bevington. Manuel needs to pinch hit for Royce late in games were losing.

Either that, or Manuel needs to be shown the door.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Royce is what he is, very good at some things and very bad at others. A good manager should be smart enough to play him in a way to maximize his positives and minimize his negatives. JM is not doing that.

bjmarte
05-17-2002, 12:26 PM
And a good manager would also tell Royce to quit swinging for the ****ing fences.

:hitless
"You wouldn't say that to me, would 'ya Uncle Jer?"

Paulwny
05-17-2002, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by bjmarte
And a good manager would also tell Royce to quit swinging for the ****ing fences.

:hitless
"You wouldn't say that to me, would 'ya Uncle Jer?"

JM, as his mentor Felipe Alou, has the rep of being a teacher for young players. We now have a more veteran team, "You can't teach an old dog new tricks".

bjmarte
05-17-2002, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by Paulwny


JM, as his mentor Felipe Alou, has the rep of being a teacher for young players. We now have a more veteran team, "You can't teach an old dog new tricks".

I don't want him to learn new tricks. I don't want Royce to become a power hitter, I wan't him to stop trying to become one. Someone needs to smack him upside his head and tell him so.

Garrison
05-17-2002, 06:56 PM
Originally posted by bjmarte
A good manager should be smart enough to play him in a way to maximize his positives and minimize his negatives. JM is not doing that.

Exactly true! Royce is awesome at defense. We can't expect big offensive numbers, and granted they could be better, but we can't keep playing him in late innings where we need baserunners and offense. He is almost an automatic out and JM has to know this and shouldn't let this big negative about Royce drag down the team. If he pinch hits for him when needed, then suddenly Royce is using his full positives and not throwing in his negatives as well. It'll get some people off his back also. This is one of the things that makes JM a crap manager at times. Not doing "the little things." Wait.....what does he preach in those commercials? Oh brother..... :gulp:

Nellie_Fox
05-18-2002, 02:05 AM
Originally posted by Zednem700
I think Royce is hurting the team, if you put Valentin at short, he'll probably allow, lets say 20-25 more runs for the other team than Royce, (a VERY VERY high estimate) but he will almost definitely help create about 35 more runs at the plate over the season than Royce. That's a net gain for the Sox, and they should go for it.
This might make sense if Royce were in the lineup instead of Jose, but currently they are both in the lineup. If you take Royce out and put Jose at short, you concede that defense at that critical positon goes down. Now, who goes to third? Are you sure that whoever goes there is at least as good defensively as Jose (not saying much) but better offensively than Royce? Even then, have you ended up totally ahead? How much offense do you have to gain to offset the lost defense?

The "up the middle" positions are first and foremost defensive positions. You should never sacrifice defense there to get more offense. The problem with this team is not their offense. The offense has been very good, considering that it is a given that offense will not show up every day. Defense has been pretty good. Pitching has been suspect. Tell me how we improve by lessening the defense behind suspect pitching to get more offense without changing the pitching?

Zednem700
05-18-2002, 10:20 AM
Originally posted by Nellie_Fox

This might make sense if Royce were in the lineup instead of Jose, but currently they are both in the lineup. If you take Royce out and put Jose at short, you concede that defense at that critical positon goes down. Now, who goes to third? Are you sure that whoever goes there is at least as good defensively as Jose (not saying much) but better offensively than Royce? Even then, have you ended up totally ahead? How much offense do you have to gain to offset the lost defense?

The "up the middle" positions are first and foremost defensive positions. You should never sacrifice defense there to get more offense. The problem with this team is not their offense. The offense has been very good, considering that it is a given that offense will not show up every day. Defense has been pretty good. Pitching has been suspect. Tell me how we improve by lessening the defense behind suspect pitching to get more offense without changing the pitching?

Umm well there's this guy down in AAA with a .370 on base percentage, Joe something or other, so I really do think it won't be hard to replace Royce's offensive contributions. Remember Royce is one of the worst regulars in all of the game right now with the bat, it won't be hard to improve on that. And it also shouldn't be that hard to make up the defensive drop.

So far Royce has had 204 chances in 40 games started that's about 5 a game. About 73 of those chance came from things other than balls hit in his defensive "zone" meaning they are things like covering second base on a steal attempt, covering the bag on a force play or dp attempt etc. Now I think most middle infield types should be able to handle that, 2bs have it rough when covering the bag on an attempted dp, shortstops have it easier. Also most of these are simply a factor of catching the ball when its thrown to you. I don't know if he's messed up any of these chances, but I'll argue that even if he hasn't messed one up, that isn't that much better than even the worst defensive middle infielder, catching a thrown ball simply isn't a huge issue for anyone who has made it to the majors, or even the high minors.

Now accoording to the Zone rating stats on Fox sports.com Royce has had 131 balls hit into his zone and converted them into 121 outs for a .924 zone rating the best in the majors. the absolute worst ZR for a regular is Tony Womack's .760. now let's assume that Jose will be just as bad as Tony, which I honestly believe is seriously underrating Jose. If Jose had a ZR just as low as Tony, he would have turned those 131 balls hit into the zone into just 99 outs (well more lik 99.5 but that's silly) So Jose would create 22 fewer outs on defense. Now that isn't insignificant, but how many runs does that translate to? Obviously not every missed ball will turn into a run. the sox have given up 222 runs over 1095 outs if they keep up this rate those extra 22 outs SHOULD result in 4.4 more runs. Not insignificant, but something more than made up for by the bat of Jose.

Garrison
05-18-2002, 10:59 AM
wow that is a lot of crazy stats. but it still didn't really prove anything. Royce is the best infielder on the team and that's all there is to it. He's in there for his glove and not offense. Our other big guns can compensate for the #9 hitter not getting hits. Remember he heated up last year into one of the hottest hitters on the club. The guy is awesome with the glove. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

voodoochile
05-18-2002, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by Zednem700


Umm well there's this guy down in AAA with a .370 on base percentage, Joe something or other, so I really do think it won't be hard to replace Royce's offensive contributions. Remember Royce is one of the worst regulars in all of the game right now with the bat, it won't be hard to improve on that. And it also shouldn't be that hard to make up the defensive drop.

So far Royce has had 204 chances in 40 games started that's about 5 a game. About 73 of those chance came from things other than balls hit in his defensive "zone" meaning they are things like covering second base on a steal attempt, covering the bag on a force play or dp attempt etc. Now I think most middle infield types should be able to handle that, 2bs have it rough when covering the bag on an attempted dp, shortstops have it easier. Also most of these are simply a factor of catching the ball when its thrown to you. I don't know if he's messed up any of these chances, but I'll argue that even if he hasn't messed one up, that isn't that much better than even the worst defensive middle infielder, catching a thrown ball simply isn't a huge issue for anyone who has made it to the majors, or even the high minors.

Now accoording to the Zone rating stats on Fox sports.com Royce has had 131 balls hit into his zone and converted them into 121 outs for a .924 zone rating the best in the majors. the absolute worst ZR for a regular is Tony Womack's .760. now let's assume that Jose will be just as bad as Tony, which I honestly believe is seriously underrating Jose. If Jose had a ZR just as low as Tony, he would have turned those 131 balls hit into the zone into just 99 outs (well more lik 99.5 but that's silly) So Jose would create 22 fewer outs on defense. Now that isn't insignificant, but how many runs does that translate to? Obviously not every missed ball will turn into a run. the sox have given up 222 runs over 1095 outs if they keep up this rate those extra 22 outs SHOULD result in 4.4 more runs. Not insignificant, but something more than made up for by the bat of Jose.

Required reading for all Choice supporters, right there...

4.4 frickin' more runs than the worst defensive SS in the majors? WOW, Royce's glove is all that is keeping this team from falling into the abyss that is Detroit.... Come on, there is no way that a better 3B doesn't make up the runs that Royce has cost us. Beyond that - some of those outs would be made back up by having a real 3B, which is NOT factored into the above analysis. If he can make up 11 of those outs, with improved range and glovework at 3B, then the number of extra runs created drops back to 2.2 (which again is just silly, so lets call it 2 runs) - over the whole frickin' season...

BENCH ROYCE NOW!!!

voodoochile
05-18-2002, 11:58 AM
Originally posted by Garrison
wow that is a lot of crazy stats. but it still didn't really prove anything. Royce is the best infielder on the team and that's all there is to it. He's in there for his glove and not offense. Our other big guns can compensate for the #9 hitter not getting hits. Remember he heated up last year into one of the hottest hitters on the club. The guy is awesome with the glove. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Once again, when they can't win the argument, Choice supporters change the topic. Okay, nice and slow... There is NO EXTRA AMOUNT OF DEFENSE IN THE WORLD THAT ROYCE CAN PROVIDE THAT MAKES UP FOR HIS LITTLE LEAGUE CALIBER BAT. Sheesh...

Also, just in case you missed the autopsy and the newspaper obituary... Royce's offense is broken. There is no shop to repair this bad boy. It is totaled, kaput, it is no more, it has gone to the great beyond, it's pushing up daisys...

I can hear the RADL now... It isn't dead, it's just resting...

Face it, it would have fallen off the perch if it wasn't nailed to it. This parrot is dead......

Heck, at the least, benching him last year lit a fire under his ass and then he started to look like a major leaguer, albeit only for a while, and then he went back to his crap attitude and play that has marked his time with the Sox.

Royce has got to go...

Yes, I know it isn't the only thing wrong with the Sox, but they have to start fixing things somewhere don't they? Or, does anyone here see the curent team going far in the playoffs this year? If not, are you willing to settle for another disappointing first round loss (at best)?

Bring up Crede, get a veteran starter, make a run at the pennant, seems pretty simple to me...

Zednem700
05-18-2002, 02:40 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile


Required reading for all Choice supporters, right there...

4.4 frickin' more runs than the worst defensive SS in the majors? WOW, Royce's glove is all that is keeping this team from falling into the abyss that is Detroit.... Come on, there is no way that a better 3B doesn't make up the runs that Royce has cost us. Beyond that - some of those outs would be made back up by having a real 3B, which is NOT factored into the above analysis. If he can make up 11 of those outs, with improved range and glovework at 3B, then the number of extra runs created drops back to 2.2 (which again is just silly, so lets call it 2 runs) - over the whole frickin' season...

BENCH ROYCE NOW!!!

I feel I should just make clear one thing in case it has anyone confused. The number of runs Royce has saved over someone like Tony Womack is what he has saved so far this season. We're about 1/4 of the way through the season so over a whole season if Royce plays as well defensively as he has so far (no sure thing, I don' believe he has been this good for a whole season for a very long time) he will save a total of about 17 runs more than a worst case scenario Jose. Now this was a pretty low level analysis there could be a serious flaw or two in it but I think it gives us at least a decent picture of how much his defense helps. Frankly I believe it doesn't even come close to making up for his bat, unless you think Jose's bat isn't 17 runs better than Royce's over a whole season.

According to the stats provided by ESPN.com, so far this year Jose has created 20.4 runs in 37 games. Royce has created 11.4 in 40. Translating into about a 36 run difference over a season. I think Royce will hit a bit better as the season progresses, he couldn't possibly get worse, but I also think Valentin will hit better. I honestly can't come to any conclusion other than replace Royce with Valentin and call up Crede.

raul12
05-18-2002, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile


I can hear the RADL now... It isn't dead, it's just resting...

Face it, it would have fallen off the perch if it wasn't nailed to it. This parrot is dead......


that bat wouldn't voomph, if you put 4 million volts through it! he's f'n snuffed it!

i do have a slug that could play SS.

does it hit?

yup.

alright, i'll take that one then.

(i do apologize to monty python productions for the utter shameless copyright violations that just occured. the opinions expressed therein are not the official opinions of Monty Python productions and any resemblence to any sketch created by same is purely coincidental.)

voodoochile
05-18-2002, 04:49 PM
Originally posted by raul12


that bat wouldn't voomph, if you put 4 million volts through it! he's f'n snuffed it!

i do have a slug that could play SS.

does it hit?

yup.

alright, i'll take that one then.

(i do apologize to monty python productions for the utter shameless copyright violations that just occured. the opinions expressed therein are not the official opinions of Monty Python productions and any resemblence to any sketch created by same is purely coincidental.)

Still their all time funniest sketch, though the members themselves didn't care for it and got tired of people talking about it...

(pokes Royce) "There, see he moved."

raul12
05-18-2002, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by Zednem700


I feel I should just make clear one thing in case it has anyone confused. The number of runs Royce has saved over someone like Tony Womack is what he has saved so far this season. We're about 1/4 of the way through the season so over a whole season if Royce plays as well defensively as he has so far (no sure thing, I don' believe he has been this good for a whole season for a very long time) he will save a total of about 17 runs more than a worst case scenario Jose. Now this was a pretty low level analysis there could be a serious flaw or two in it but I think it gives us at least a decent picture of how much his defense helps. Frankly I believe it doesn't even come close to making up for his bat, unless you think Jose's bat isn't 17 runs better than Royce's over a whole season.

According to the stats provided by ESPN.com, so far this year Jose has created 20.4 runs in 37 games. Royce has created 11.4 in 40. Translating into about a 36 run difference over a season. I think Royce will hit a bit better as the season progresses, he couldn't possibly get worse, but I also think Valentin will hit better. I honestly can't come to any conclusion other than replace Royce with Valentin and call up Crede.

one theoretical flaw would be the fact that the runners that get on could be the start of a rally since our pitchers are young and might get flustered with runners on base. however, i agree with you that royce's glove does not make up for his bat. furthermore, what's up with the few errors that were originally charged to him in previous games, that were taken away later? seems a little suspicious to me.

:thechoice

"i've blackmaled the official scorer too! It's amazing how much stuff you can find out about people with that there internet thingy."

raul12
05-18-2002, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile


Still their all time funniest sketch, though the members themselves didn't care for it and got tired of people talking about it...

(pokes Royce) "There, see he moved."

i must agree. although the election day special and cheese shop sketches are pretty damn funny too.

AsInWreck
05-18-2002, 06:10 PM
This argument of run creation vs. run prevention leaves out a considerably positive effect that defense has on a winning team that is not reflected in any statistic, particularly for a team with inexperienced starting pitching. Bad defense increases pitch counts, it may cause a pitcher like garland to try to make perfect pitches instead of going striaght after a batter. This may effect the events of a game innings after the error occurs, obviously having no impact on the fielders run prevention statistics. Poor fielding places undo stress upon a team, pitching in particular, and over the haul of an entire season, has a serious impact on a team beyond just the immediate action.

Besides, offense is the least of this team's worries.

Zednem700
05-18-2002, 07:19 PM
Originally posted by AsInWreck
This argument of run creation vs. run prevention leaves out a considerably positive effect that defense has on a winning team that is not reflected in any statistic, particularly for a team with inexperienced starting pitching. Bad defense increases pitch counts, it may cause a pitcher like garland to try to make perfect pitches instead of going striaght after a batter. This may effect the events of a game innings after the error occurs, obviously having no impact on the fielders run prevention statistics. Poor fielding places undo stress upon a team, pitching in particular, and over the haul of an entire season, has a serious impact on a team beyond just the immediate action.

Besides, offense is the least of this team's worries.

There are definitely things that can't be measured, but I can't say I agree with your argument. It "may" cause Garland to pitch differently, and it "may" affect events innings later? sure it "may" and it might not do any of that at all. Sure our young pitchers might give up more runs because of a drop in defense, but they are also going to have more runs scored FOR them. Couldn't the extra confidence of pitching with a lead make up for the loss of confidence in one defensive position? There's no proof of course, but there's also no proof that any of your objections will come to pass.

Another thing to consider is the other side of your argument. With Jose in the lineup instead of Royce, the Sox will make outs less frequently, leading to higher pitch counts for the opposition. Leading to them being taken out earlier and replaced with middle relievers and they are who good hitters feast on. Also having men on base always makes offense go up, just look at league stats for no men on, one man one, two on, loaded, whatever, the more baserunners the better batters hit. With Valentin on base, instead of Clayton being put out and sitting on the bench, other hitters will hit better making the offense even better than just the difference between Valentin and Clayton.

Will the occasional extra out on defense force higher pitch counts, maybe. Of course I could argue, with as much validity as you did, that opposing batters are going to be more likely to get out quicker since they'll be trying to hit homeruns or something similar, because they know how potent the Sox offense is since they got rid of that automatic out. Its also certainly posible that these competing pressures will balance out.

Offense may be the strongest point of the team, but its also the easiest one to make better. We can score 36 more runs while only giving up 17 more, how can this possibly be a bad thing? A net gain is a net gain, if we could make a move that drops our offense 50 runs but improves our run prevention by 90 I'd take it. the problem is we don't have that option, at least not where I've seen. We do have an option to improve in this area however. It doesn't make sense to ignore this potential area of improvement just because you have stylistic beliefs about how the game "should" be played. If you have a way to improve the team you should do it, this is a way to improve the team.

Paulwny
05-18-2002, 08:16 PM
Originally posted by Zednem700

Now accoording to the Zone rating stats on Fox sports.com Royce has had 131 balls hit into his zone and converted them into 121 outs for a .924 zone rating the best in the majors. the absolute worst ZR for a regular is Tony Womack's .760. now let's assume that Jose will be just as bad as Tony, which I honestly believe is seriously underrating Jose. If Jose had a ZR just as low as Tony, he would have turned those 131 balls hit into the zone into just 99 outs (well more lik 99.5 but that's silly) So Jose would create 22 fewer outs on defense. Now that isn't insignificant, but how many runs does that translate to? Obviously not every missed ball will turn into a run. the sox have given up 222 runs over 1095 outs if they keep up this rate those extra 22 outs SHOULD result in 4.4 more runs. Not insignificant, but something more than made up for by the bat of Jose.

Do these figures for zone rating include the errors committed or are the just balls hit into a zone which could be converted to outs?
With the possibility of Jose committing >30 errors that figure of 4.4 runs is now doubled. also do the 4.4 runs include other runs which score because the ball wasn't gotten to or is it just the batter who hit the ball who is counted as a run?

Zednem700
05-18-2002, 09:29 PM
Originally posted by Paulwny


Do these figures for zone rating include the errors committed or are the just balls hit into a zone which could be converted to outs?
With the possibility of Jose committing >30 errors that figure of 4.4 runs is now doubled. also do the 4.4 runs include other runs which score because the ball wasn't gotten to or is it just the batter who hit the ball who is counted as a run?

I'm not absolutely certain but I have to think Zone Rating counts errors. Basically Stats Inc. breaks down the field into different zones, one for each position. Any ball that gets hit into the zone (actually into, a flyball to left field doesn't enter the zones for the left side of the infield) is considered a chance. They then look at the number of chances you have and see how many of them you turn into outs, not a perfect system but it offers some insight I think. If you commit an error then obviously you aren't going to get credit for an out and your zone rating will drop accordingly. ZR does not however treat an error differently from a ball that the player just couldn't get to.

The 4.4 runs come from the average number of runs the sox give up per out. Before today's game the Sox were giving up about .2 runs for every defensive out they recorded. Switching Royce with Jose in the little mock up I did resulted in the opposition basically getting 22 more outs than they would have had if no switch was made. 22 outs at .2 runs per out comes out to 4.4 runs. thats a total and includes everyone who scores because of the out that wasn't recorded. By no means a perfect system I think its pretty reasonable and accurate within a half run or so in this sample size.

Tragg
05-18-2002, 11:47 PM
Originally posted by Kilroy


Why can't you just accept that the guy is in the line-up because of his mitt?

because

1)His mitt isn't substantially different than numerous other no hit shortstops. And he lacks range.

2)You don't pay the kind of money we're paying clayton for that mitt.

3)He is one of the worst hitters in baseball - probably baseball history (for a player to have stuck around for so long). He's worse than bad - much worse. He's a liability.

Kilroy
05-19-2002, 01:32 AM
Originally posted by Tragg


because

1)His mitt isn't substantially different than numerous other no hit shortstops. And he lacks range.

2)You don't pay the kind of money we're paying clayton for that mitt.

3)He is one of the worst hitters in baseball - probably baseball history (for a player to have stuck around for so long). He's worse than bad - much worse. He's a liability.

Blah, blah, blah. When each of the other 8 guys in your batting order are easily capable of hitting over .300 ranging from some power to plenty of power, Clayton's bat isn't an issue. Like I said before: if Clayton's hitting in the 9 hole ever is the focal point, then there's far greater problems that need to be dealt with.

Zednem700
05-19-2002, 02:20 AM
Originally posted by Kilroy


Blah, blah, blah. When each of the other 8 guys in your batting order are easily capable of hitting over .300 ranging from some power to plenty of power, Clayton's bat isn't an issue. Like I said before: if Clayton's hitting in the 9 hole ever is the focal point, then there's far greater problems that need to be dealt with.

Most of the offense is fine so we shouldn't want to improve the weak spot? That makes NO sense. Batting someone instead of Royce gives us FAR more runs than we lose due to defensive shortcomings. How can you possibly argue against something that will IMPROVE the team. Our offense is a strength so you shouldn't make any efforts to improve it?!?! That is completely ridiculous. We can make a move RIGHT NOW that will help us far more than it will hurt us, please give me a REAL reason why we shouldn't do it.

RedPinStripes
05-19-2002, 03:06 AM
Originally posted by Kilroy


Blah, blah, blah. When each of the other 8 guys in your batting order are easily capable of hitting over .300 ranging from some power to plenty of power, Clayton's bat isn't an issue. Like I said before: if Clayton's hitting in the 9 hole ever is the focal point, then there's far greater problems that need to be dealt with.

And Manuel never ph's for your useless hero. And you back both of these guys?

Kilroy
05-19-2002, 08:45 AM
Originally posted by Zednem700
Most of the offense is fine so we shouldn't want to improve the weak spot? That makes NO sense. Batting someone instead of Royce gives us FAR more runs than we lose due to defensive shortcomings. How can you possibly argue against something that will IMPROVE the team...

You're right, that doesn't make any sense. But I didn't say it, either. There's no reason not to try to improve the current Sox offense if we can. But not at the expense of the defense up the middle. If you have a better hitter with equal defense to put there fine. But replacing Royce to get hitting in that spot at the expense of defense up the middle is no good.

Originally posted by RedPinStripes
And Manuel never ph's for your useless hero. And you back both of these guys?

I didn't ever defend Manuel for not PH'ing Royce. Sorry, I think you got the wrong guy. But feel free to prove me wrong.

RedPinStripes
05-19-2002, 09:36 AM
Originally posted by Kilroy


You're right, that doesn't make any sense. But I didn't say it, either. There's no reason not to try to improve the current Sox offense if we can. But not at the expense of the defense up the middle. If you have a better hitter with equal defense to put there fine. But replacing Royce to get hitting in that spot at the expense of defense up the middle is no good.



I didn't ever defend Manuel for not PH'ing Royce. Sorry, I think you got the wrong guy. But feel free to prove me wrong.

OK. I can't say you're a Manuel lover. But overly protective of the choice.

Kilroy
05-19-2002, 12:26 PM
Originally posted by RedPinStripes


OK. I can't say you're a Manuel lover. But overly protective of the choice.

It's more that with our pitching, I'd rather see solid defense up the middle. We all saw how Garland went into the ****ter after Durham couldn't come up with that grounder Friday night.

If any of the other options for SS were going to be as solid as Royce w/ better stick then I'm the first one to call for him to be replaced. Or if we didn't have Lofton, Durham, Maggs, PK, Hurt, CLee, and Jose all hitting before Royce, I'd be more inclined to look for some O from his spot. But it doesn't make sense to sacrafice some of the D with all the offense we have.

Bucktown
05-19-2002, 02:25 PM
Bring Royce back!! Fricking Graffanino just cost us two runs with a 1st inning error. Nothing like digging one self out of a hole.

voodoochile
05-19-2002, 04:27 PM
Originally posted by Bucktown
Bring Royce back!! Fricking Graffanino just cost us two runs with a 1st inning error. Nothing like digging one self out of a hole.

Ummm... he was playing third...

Which he clearly is not suited for. His performances there have been awful this year.

PaleHoseGeorge
05-19-2002, 04:45 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile


Ummm... he was playing third...

Which he clearly is not suited for. His performances there have been awful this year.

It was an honest mistake. Buck simply forgot that only Royce gets to play one position exclusively. Everyone else has to move around our shortstop and #9 hitter.

That's what our genius manager has decided is best. That's why our offense is so good, too.