July 21, 20214 yr Here's the link to the article. (I happen to think the article is completely off the mark -- another whack job by an author looking for controversy where it doesn't exist, i.e., in the Sox dugout -- but I'm sure many here will agree with it.) ************
July 21, 20214 yr Hit job trying to stir drama where there is none. Using old quotes when there are newer ones that are far more relevant. ESPN just mad that their beloved Yankees are trash.
July 21, 20214 yr @VAfan you can't post entire articles. It needs to be a blurb and a link or it will be deleted.
July 21, 20214 yr 1 hour ago, DoUEvenShift said: Hit job trying to stir drama where there is none. Using old quotes when there are newer ones that are far more relevant. ESPN just mad that their beloved Yankees are trash. I read that article this morning and it's one of the most moronic, dumb articles I've ever read. None of it made any sense. It was some of the worst, lazy "journalism" of the season. I didn't bother linking it because it was so bad.
July 21, 20214 yr 6 minutes ago, chitownsportsfan said: I read that article this morning and it's one of the most moronic, dumb articles I've ever read. None of it made any sense. It was some of the worst, lazy "journalism" of the season. I didn't bother linking it because it was so bad. No kidding. Trying to link a strategy statistic such a bunting and giving up an out to an performance statistic such as spin rate to say TLR hates statistics is absurd. Talk about someone with an agenda to promote.
July 21, 20214 yr 1 minute ago, ptatc said: No kidding. Trying to link a strategy statistic such a bunting and giving up an out to an performance statistic such as spin rate to say TLR hates statistics is absurd. Talk about someone with an agenda to promote. It was incoherent. If it was a undergrad essay it would have required an extra red marker.
July 22, 20214 yr “ You cannot take percentages of what you think -- how you would script it -- and take them into a game. You have to watch the game and see. Do you smell a close game? Do you smell a crooked-number game?” When I “smell” a close game under Tony, I smell a loss. Games decided by 2 + runs: 48-25 .658 Games decided by 1 run: 10-12 .455 ”When you play for one run, that’s usually all you get. I have nothing against the bunt in its place, but most of the time, that place is in the bottom of a long forgotten closet.” - Earl Weaver
July 22, 20214 yr 17 hours ago, DoUEvenShift said: Hit job trying to stir drama where there is none. Using old quotes when there are newer ones that are far more relevant. ESPN just mad that their beloved Yankees are trash. That is the job of ESPN.
July 22, 20214 yr Author 21 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: @VAfan you can't post entire articles. It needs to be a blurb and a link or it will be deleted. I wondered, but figured the moderators would sort it out. No problem with them cutting it. I think it's a terrible article.
July 22, 20214 yr Author 8 hours ago, South Side Hit Men said: “ You cannot take percentages of what you think -- how you would script it -- and take them into a game. You have to watch the game and see. Do you smell a close game? Do you smell a crooked-number game?” When I “smell” a close game under Tony, I smell a loss. Games decided by 2 + runs: 48-25 .658 Games decided by 1 run: 10-12 .455 ”When you play for one run, that’s usually all you get. I have nothing against the bunt in its place, but most of the time, that place is in the bottom of a long forgotten closet.” - Earl Weaver The 2005 White Sox, who won the World Series, had 53 sacrifice bunts, and were 35-19 in one-run games. The 2021 White Sox, after more than half the season has been played, have had 18 sacrifice bunts, and are 10-12 in 1 run games. That alone casts serious doubt on your attempt to correlate bunt attempts with one-run losses. Also, Tony LaRussa is having the Sox bunt at the next to lowest rate of his long managerial career - 1.8%. Only the 1998 St Louis Cardinals bunted less -- 1.7%. ********* I also found this 2007 article from Bill James on one-run games that I find kind of interesting. Quote The 50 teams which did well in one-run games had more stolen bases (96-92 on average), more sacrifice bunts (71-67), more complete games (35-31), more saves (34-30), issued fewer walks (513-531), drew more walks (526-520) and had a better ERA (3.77 to 3.91). The 50 teams which did poorly in one-run games hit more home runs (127-117), scored more runs (674-658), had a higher slugging percentage (.386-.380), a lower on-base percentage (.325-.323), used more relief pitchers (278-257), threw more wild pitches (47-44) and had more balks (8-7). They were more likely to play in hitter’s parks (park factors 100.3 vs. 98.5). And there's this excerpt at the end. Quote Can one infer anything about a manager from his one-run record? I would have guessed, going into this study, that the answer to that might be a flat “no”, or, at least, an equivocal “no” (we can find no evidence within our study that playing well in one-run games is anything but a random occurrence, etc., etc., yada yada yada, bullshit, snore.) I can’t give you that answer, for two reasons: 1) There does seem to be some persistent tendency of teams to play poorly in one-run games, and 2) Teams which play well in one-run games do seem to have some identifiable characteristics, to a small degree. But I will say this: that I would be careful about drawing any such inferences. Tony Muser is -15 games in one-run decisions. I can’t say that this IS just coincindence—but it certainly could be. It’s not an overwhelming number, in and of itself. Rany began this discussion with a comment about Bobby Cox’ relatively poor record in one-run games. Well, from 1990 through 2001 the Atlanta Braves scored 8,836 runs, allowed 7,409. This is a ratio of 1.19 to 1. In one-run games they have gone 297-256, a ratio of 1.16 to 1. The Braves have missed their expected won-lost record in one-run games, over the ten years, by 2.1 wins. Obviously, no conclusion of any kind can be drawn from such an occurrence. One-run games involve a huge amount of luck. This may be the only safe statement that can be made about them. Edited July 22, 20214 yr by VAfan
July 23, 20214 yr How he is perceived in that locker room is far more important than any feelings any of us slappies have about him.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.