Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    Yes, I said I'd start Bogey vs one of the Rays lefties.

     

     

    The Tigers have no lefty starters. The A's have one.

     




    So you would start him against the A's lefty then, right?

    Drew has no history vs Milone, but I do notice that, surprisingly, LHBs hit Milone better than RHB, so I'm not sure I'd go with Bogey.

    Milone vs LHBs .777 OPS against

    Milone vs RHBs  .726 OPS against

    I certainly would not argue against starting Bogey, and maybe how well Drew does in the games before the Milone game might influence the call, but I doubt whatever John chooses will make a big difference. They both are capable SSs. Drew is probably a better fielder right now, but it's hard to judge Bogey on defense at this point.

    2 walks in 2 PAs does not change a single thing in my mind. No sample size that tiny makes a big difference to me.

    Sox4ever

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

    hey, moonslav, take a look at Detroit's lineup tonight and get back to me.

    Get back to you on what?

    Did I ever say Iggy was going to start?

    I simply gave a reason why a manager would start Iggy over Peralta. I don't know the splits vs the A's starter tonight, but I generally lean towards going with a super duper fielding SS over a decent hitting SS.

    Peralta is soemthing like a career .270 hitter with some pop. Recently, with the help of juice, he's been about a .300 hitter. Remember, this guy hit .254 in 2009, .249 in 2010, and .239 last year. Let's say Iggy is about a .225 to .250 hitter, I think it's fair to say that maybe Peralta has a .050 BA advantage. That's one more hit per 5 games. So, one could argue that Peralta has about a 20% better chance of getting one more hit than Iggy per 4 PA game. I'd bet Iggy makes one play Peralta would not make at SS over a 3-4 game stretch. That just about evens them up as Peralta has more power. It's not a slam dunk no brainer call.

     

    Normally, usually, I understand that most things on this board are conjectural, but in this case I thought it was pretty obvious a move should be made.  What I didn't understand was your somewhat stubborn insistence that Iglesias must be the only choice at SS.  As I recall, you also once wrote his consummate skill would save 1 or more runs per game, which was way over the top.  If any SS were actually that good, he would be paid at least $20M a year if he never got a hit. 

    I never came close to saying Iggy would save 1 run per game. My exact words were that I thought Iggy might make 80-100 more plays at SS than an average or slightly below average MLB SS (like I thought Drew was going to be). That's nowhere near 1 run per game.

    I won't argue that Iggy has the same BA as Peralta this year, since I do not think Iggy is a .300 hitter, but can we say for sure that not that Peralta is off the juice, he's a bonafide .300 hitter right now?

    It's not a cut and dry call, and I am not saying Leyland was wrong to start Peralta, I was just answer the question put to teh board by the author of this thread, "what was Leyland thinking?"

    He clearly was thinking Iggy's defense outweighed Peralta's offense for teh game in question. This OP was not about tonight's game.




     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

     

    hey, moonslav, take a look at Detroit's lineup tonight and get back to me.

    Get back to you on what?

    Did I ever say Iggy was going to start?

    I simply gave a reason why a manager would start Iggy over Peralta. I don't know the splits vs the A's starter tonight, but I generally lean towards going with a super duper fielding SS over a decent hitting SS.

    Peralta is soemthing like a career .270 hitter with some pop. Recently, with the help of juice, he's been about a .300 hitter. Remember, this guy hit .254 in 2009, .249 in 2010, and .239 last year. Let's say Iggy is about a .225 to .250 hitter, I think it's fair to say that maybe Peralta has a .050 BA advantage. That's one more hit per 5 games. So, one could argue that Peralta has about a 20% better chance of getting one more hit than Iggy per 4 PA game. I'd bet Iggy makes one play Peralta would not make at SS over a 3-4 game stretch. That just about evens them up as Peralta has more power. It's not a slam dunk no brainer call.

     

    Normally, usually, I understand that most things on this board are conjectural, but in this case I thought it was pretty obvious a move should be made.  What I didn't understand was your somewhat stubborn insistence that Iglesias must be the only choice at SS.  As I recall, you also once wrote his consummate skill would save 1 or more runs per game, which was way over the top.  If any SS were actually that good, he would be paid at least $20M a year if he never got a hit. 

    I never came close to saying Iggy would save 1 run per game. My exact words were that I thought Iggy might make 80-100 more plays at SS than an average or slightly below average MLB SS (like I thought Drew was going to be). That's nowhere near 1 run per game.

    I won't argue that Iggy has the same BA as Peralta this year, since I do not think Iggy is a .300 hitter, but can we say for sure that not that Peralta is off the juice, he's a bonafide .300 hitter right now?

    It's not a cut and dry call, and I am not saying Leyland was wrong to start Peralta, I was just answer the question put to teh board by the author of this thread, "what was Leyland thinking?"

    He clearly was thinking Iggy's defense outweighed Peralta's offense for teh game in question. This OP was not about tonight's game.

     




     



    That's disingenuous to say you were only giving reasons why a manager, goodness knows who, might possibly consider starting Iggy tonight.  I made it quite clear Leyland had to make a change.  You made it quite clear he didn't.  My guess is you still think that.

    And you keep going back to the season.  Forget the season.  We're in the playoffs, and things change much more rapidly.  Iggy has an OPS of .227, for crying out loud.  And Peralta's in the same playoffs against the same team is 1.250, five times as much.  I said that in the OP. 

    I could swear you said Iggy would lower ERA's, but fine, you didn't.  Having watched him for a number of games now, I am prepared to say he cannot possibly make 80-100 plays a season other players can't make unless you assume some really awful SS's.  I don't forget WAR, which is supposed to at least try to measure the overall player, offense and defense.  Peralta's is much higher than Iggy's, and so is Drew's.  WAR-wise, you don't yet have a leg to stand on. 

    Next year, we can resume this discussion and maybe compare WAR's between Iglesias and Bogaerts. 

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    My first posts on this thread were...

    (answering the question on the heading)

    It's simple: he values SS fielding more than hitting.

    ____________________________________

    Yes, he has a great glove.  No, he hasn't had many chances to dispay it--half as many fielding chances in 4 games as Drew in 4 games.  Meanwhile the Tigers backs are now to the wall, and Peralta is known to be a very good hitter at SS and is ranked third among AL shortstops in WAR.  

     

    A team with their backs against the wall can be saved by a great play at SS just as easily as a big hit by one of 9 players.

     

    (Note: Where does it say I think Leyland will or even should play Peralta over Iggy?  I probably would have started Iggy. I never implied I thought Leyland would too.)

    _________________________________________

    OK, I could have added or a nonplay by a worse fielding SS.

    How many times do most of us even notice if a game turns on a nonplay?

     

    Yes, Perralta has a better chance of getting a big hit, but what are we talking about? Even if we grant that Perralta has a 10% better chance to get a hit, that's maybe 1 more hit every 2-3 games. How often does a great fielding SS "save a hit" as opposed to a below average SS? My guess is it is better than once every 2-3 games, so yes, I think it is a more than fair statement.

    _________________________________________

    What makes you think not many balls will be hit to the SS tonight?

     

    What happened in the previous 4 games?

     

    What makes you think Iggy can't get a big hit or bunt or SB? It's not like Perralta is hitting .500.

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from S5. Show S5's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

     

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

     

     

    hey, moonslav, take a look at Detroit's lineup tonight and get back to me.

    Get back to you on what?

    Did I ever say Iggy was going to start?

    I simply gave a reason why a manager would start Iggy over Peralta. I don't know the splits vs the A's starter tonight, but I generally lean towards going with a super duper fielding SS over a decent hitting SS.

    Peralta is soemthing like a career .270 hitter with some pop. Recently, with the help of juice, he's been about a .300 hitter. Remember, this guy hit .254 in 2009, .249 in 2010, and .239 last year. Let's say Iggy is about a .225 to .250 hitter, I think it's fair to say that maybe Peralta has a .050 BA advantage. That's one more hit per 5 games. So, one could argue that Peralta has about a 20% better chance of getting one more hit than Iggy per 4 PA game. I'd bet Iggy makes one play Peralta would not make at SS over a 3-4 game stretch. That just about evens them up as Peralta has more power. It's not a slam dunk no brainer call.

     

    Normally, usually, I understand that most things on this board are conjectural, but in this case I thought it was pretty obvious a move should be made.  What I didn't understand was your somewhat stubborn insistence that Iglesias must be the only choice at SS.  As I recall, you also once wrote his consummate skill would save 1 or more runs per game, which was way over the top.  If any SS were actually that good, he would be paid at least $20M a year if he never got a hit. 

    I never came close to saying Iggy would save 1 run per game. My exact words were that I thought Iggy might make 80-100 more plays at SS than an average or slightly below average MLB SS (like I thought Drew was going to be). That's nowhere near 1 run per game.

    I won't argue that Iggy has the same BA as Peralta this year, since I do not think Iggy is a .300 hitter, but can we say for sure that not that Peralta is off the juice, he's a bonafide .300 hitter right now?

    It's not a cut and dry call, and I am not saying Leyland was wrong to start Peralta, I was just answer the question put to teh board by the author of this thread, "what was Leyland thinking?"

    He clearly was thinking Iggy's defense outweighed Peralta's offense for teh game in question. This OP was not about tonight's game.

     

     




     

     

     



    That's disingenuous to say you were only giving reasons why a manager, goodness knows who, might possibly consider starting Iggy tonight.  I made it quite clear Leyland had to make a change.  You made it quite clear he didn't.  My guess is you still think that.

     

    And you keep going back to the season.  Forget the season.  We're in the playoffs, and things change much more rapidly.  Iggy has an OPS of .227, for crying out loud.  And Peralta's in the same playoffs against the same team is 1.250, five times as much.  I said that in the OP. 

    I could swear you said Iggy would lower ERA's, but fine, you didn't.  Having watched him for a number of games now, I am prepared to say he cannot possibly make 80-100 plays a season other players can't make unless you assume some really awful SS's.  I don't forget WAR, which is supposed to at least try to measure the overall player, offense and defense.  Peralta's is much higher than Iggy's, and so is Drew's.  WAR-wise, you don't yet have a leg to stand on. 

    Next year, we can resume this discussion and maybe compare WAR's between Iglesias and Bogaerts. 

     


    Wow.  80-100 plays a year is  more than one every other game.  I'd suggest he wouldn't get that many *opportunities* to do that. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    The irony for me in this thread is I hated losing Iglesias and loved seeing him in the Sox lineup.  A joy to watch in the field.  But I think I understand and accept the reason for the trade and cringe when Iglesias makes a great play that shows up on the top ten. 

    That said, as I recounted in the OP, the ALDS stats paint a very different picture.  Not only was Iggy not hitting spit, he wasn't fielding spit either because few balls were coming his way.

    If the Tigers win tonight, I would not be surprised if Iglesias started against the Sox.  I would also not be surprised if Peralta started at SS. 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    That's disingenuous to say you were only giving reasons why a manager, goodness knows who, might possibly consider starting Iggy tonight.  I made it quite clear Leyland had to make a change.  You made it quite clear he didn't.  My guess is you still think that.

    That's not the same as saying I thought Iggy will start at SS tonight. You throw in my face the statement to look at the line-up, like the fact that Leyland started Peralta shows I was wrong. I never said anything about what I expected Leyland to do.

    Yes, I'd probably have gone with Iggy at SS over the cheater Peralta, but I never made that the central point of my argument. I was approaching this thread in terms of the the questioned posed by the author. I was defending Leyland's position for starting Iggy the last game. I tried to explain the logic behind it.

    When the discussion turned towards what to do tonight, I repeated the reasons why one might start Iggy over Peralta. I actually stated that "A team with their backs against the wall can be saved by a great play at SS just as easily as a big hit by one of 9 players." This sounds to me like I figure the odds to be close to even, and is not a strong push to prove Iggy was clearly the best option tonight.

    It's a close call, in my opinion. Whether or not it was a close call for Leylans or not was never anything I was coming close to addressing.

     

    And you keep going back to the season.  Forget the season.  We're in the playoffs, and things change much more rapidly.  Iggy has an OPS of .227, for crying out loud.  And Peralta's in the same playoffs against the same team is 1.250, five times as much.  I said that in the OP. 

    My avoidance of making definitive judgements based in teeny tiny sample sizes is not something I just came up with. To make decisions based mostly on what a player has done the last 3-4 games is not logical. Should we bench Pedey and play Bogey at 2B? Of course not.

    Naoli would have never gotten a chance to turn things around.

    BTW, does Peralta's 1 for 15 playoff number last season mean anything?

     

    I could swear you said Iggy would lower ERA's, but fine, you didn't. 

    Of course saving 80-100 hits over a season would lower ERAs, but I never said by a run or by any amount.

    Having watched him for a number of games now, I am prepared to say he cannot possibly make 80-100 plays a season other players can't make unless you assume some really awful SS's. 

    Listen, I admitted I was wrong about Drew being average, but the facts show that the top ranged SSs do make 80 to 120 more plays than poor to average SSs in range. To me, Iggy has exceptional range. Peralta is not a bad fielder at all, and maybe 80-100 more plays than him is stretching it. I admit, I am not an expert of Peralta's range, but certainly 1 more play every 5 games is not out of the question (30 per year). That would just about even him up with a .040 better BA.

    Note: 2012-2013 UZR/150  Iggy +18.3/ Peralta +9.6

     

    I don't forget WAR, which is supposed to at least try to measure the overall player, offense and defense.  Peralta's is much higher than Iggy's, and so is Drew's.  WAR-wise, you don't yet have a leg to stand on. 

    I respect WAR. I admitted I was wrong about Drew.

    I also respect UZR/150 and think Iggy is a tremendous fiedling SS who can save a hit every 5 games over most MLB SS... maybe even every 2-3 games of several SSs.

    Next year, we can resume this discussion and maybe compare WAR's between Iglesias and Bogaerts. 

    You can. I won't. 

    I want Bogey at 3B, so my position can never be measured vs yours.

    Sox4ever

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    That's disingenuous to say you were only giving reasons why a manager, goodness knows who, might possibly consider starting Iggy tonight.  I made it quite clear Leyland had to make a change.  You made it quite clear he didn't.  My guess is you still think that.

    That's not the same as saying I thought Iggy will start at SS tonight. You throw in my face the statement to look at the line-up, like the fact that Leyland started Peralta shows I was wrong. I never said anything about what I expected Leyland to do.

    Yes, I'd probably have gone with Iggy at SS over the cheater Peralta, but I never made that the central point of my argument. I was approaching this thread in terms of the the questioned posed by the author. I was defending Leyland's position for starting Iggy the last game. I tried to explain the logic behind it.

    When the discussion turned towards what to do tonight, I repeated the reasons why one might start Iggy over Peralta. I actually stated that "A team with their backs against the wall can be saved by a great play at SS just as easily as a big hit by one of 9 players." This sounds to me like I figure the odds to be close to even, and is not a strong push to prove Iggy was clearly the best option tonight.

    It's a close call, in my opinion. Whether or not it was a close call for Leylans or not was never anything I was coming close to addressing.

     

    And you keep going back to the season.  Forget the season.  We're in the playoffs, and things change much more rapidly.  Iggy has an OPS of .227, for crying out loud.  And Peralta's in the same playoffs against the same team is 1.250, five times as much.  I said that in the OP. 

    My avoidance of making definitive judgements based in teeny tiny sample sizes is not something I just came up with. To make decisions based mostly on what a player has done the last 3-4 games is not logical. Should we bench Pedey and play Bogey at 2B? Of course not.

    Naoli would have never gotten a chance to turn things around.

    BTW, does Peralta's 1 for 15 playoff number last season mean anything?

     

    I could swear you said Iggy would lower ERA's, but fine, you didn't. 

    Of course saving 80-100 hits over a season would lower ERAs, but I never said by a run or by any amount.

    Having watched him for a number of games now, I am prepared to say he cannot possibly make 80-100 plays a season other players can't make unless you assume some really awful SS's. 

    Listen, I admitted I was wrong about Drew being average, but the facts show that the top ranged SSs do make 80 to 120 more plays than poor to average SSs in range. To me, Iggy has exceptional range. Peralta is not a bad fielder at all, and maybe 80-100 more plays than him is stretching it. I admit, I am not an expert of Peralta's range, but certainly 1 more play every 5 games is not out of the question (30 per year). That would just about even him up with a .040 better BA.

    Note: 2012-2013 UZR/150  Iggy +18.3/ Peralta +9.6

     

    I don't forget WAR, which is supposed to at least try to measure the overall player, offense and defense.  Peralta's is much higher than Iggy's, and so is Drew's.  WAR-wise, you don't yet have a leg to stand on. 

    I respect WAR. I admitted I was wrong about Drew.

    I also respect UZR/150 and think Iggy is a tremendous fiedling SS who can save a hit every 5 games over most MLB SS... maybe even every 2-3 games of several SSs.

    Next year, we can resume this discussion and maybe compare WAR's between Iglesias and Bogaerts. 

    You can. I won't. 

    I want Bogey at 3B, so my position can never be measured vs yours.

    Sox4ever

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    That's disingenuous to say you were only giving reasons why a manager, goodness knows who, might possibly consider starting Iggy tonight.  I made it quite clear Leyland had to make a change.  You made it quite clear he didn't.  My guess is you still think that.

    That's not the same as saying I thought Iggy will start at SS tonight. You throw in my face the statement to look at the line-up, like the fact that Leyland started Peralta shows I was wrong. I never said anything about what I expected Leyland to do.

    Yes, I'd probably have gone with Iggy at SS over the cheater Peralta, but I never made that the central point of my argument. I was approaching this thread in terms of the the questioned posed by the author. I was defending Leyland's position for starting Iggy the last game. I tried to explain the logic behind it.

    When the discussion turned towards what to do tonight, I repeated the reasons why one might start Iggy over Peralta. I actually stated that "A team with their backs against the wall can be saved by a great play at SS just as easily as a big hit by one of 9 players." This sounds to me like I figure the odds to be close to even, and is not a strong push to prove Iggy was clearly the best option tonight.

    It's a close call, in my opinion. Whether or not it was a close call for Leylans or not was never anything I was coming close to addressing.

     

    And you keep going back to the season.  Forget the season.  We're in the playoffs, and things change much more rapidly.  Iggy has an OPS of .227, for crying out loud.  And Peralta's in the same playoffs against the same team is 1.250, five times as much.  I said that in the OP. 

    My avoidance of making definitive judgements based in teeny tiny sample sizes is not something I just came up with. To make decisions based mostly on what a player has done the last 3-4 games is not logical. Should we bench Pedey and play Bogey at 2B? Of course not.

    Naoli would have never gotten a chance to turn things around.

    BTW, does Peralta's 1 for 15 playoff number last season mean anything?

     

    I could swear you said Iggy would lower ERA's, but fine, you didn't. 

    Of course saving 80-100 hits over a season would lower ERAs, but I never said by a run or by any amount.

    Having watched him for a number of games now, I am prepared to say he cannot possibly make 80-100 plays a season other players can't make unless you assume some really awful SS's. 

    Listen, I admitted I was wrong about Drew being average, but the facts show that the top ranged SSs do make 80 to 120 more plays than poor to average SSs in range. To me, Iggy has exceptional range. Peralta is not a bad fielder at all, and maybe 80-100 more plays than him is stretching it. I admit, I am not an expert of Peralta's range, but certainly 1 more play every 5 games is not out of the question (30 per year). That would just about even him up with a .040 better BA.

    Note: 2012-2013 UZR/150  Iggy +18.3/ Peralta +9.6

     

    I don't forget WAR, which is supposed to at least try to measure the overall player, offense and defense.  Peralta's is much higher than Iggy's, and so is Drew's.  WAR-wise, you don't yet have a leg to stand on. 

    I respect WAR. I admitted I was wrong about Drew.

    I also respect UZR/150 and think Iggy is a tremendous fiedling SS who can save a hit every 5 games over most MLB SS... maybe even every 2-3 games of several SSs.

    Next year, we can resume this discussion and maybe compare WAR's between Iglesias and Bogaerts. 

    You can. I won't. 

    I want Bogey at 3B, so my position can never be measured vs yours.

    Sox4ever

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    oooops

    Sox4ever

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    moonslav, too bad about the repeats, but they have happened to me too.  OK, peace.  You were presenting your rationale.  Ironically, I almost always defend any decision Farrell makes, and Leyland is worth defending.  My argument for keeping Iglesias was and is he is great fun to watch.  I love hitting and winning games, but great fielding is the poetry of baseball. 

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    Wow.  80-100 plays a year is  more than one every other game.  I'd suggest he wouldn't get that many *opportunities* to do that.  

    Every season a SS makes 100-130 more plays than others with about the same innings. It's not an impossible event.

    I am not sure how good Peralta's range is, so I admit I could be wrong about assuming Iggy might make one more play every 4-5 games over Peralta as Peralta gets about one more hit every 4-5 games.

    Here's one example from this year:

    Simmons 1352 innings and 739 plays (PO+A)

    A Escobar 1388 innings and 616 plays

    Y Escobar   1320 innings and 603 plays

    or

    Florimon 2000 innings/646 plays

    A Cabrera 2000 innings/484 plays

    or

    Tulo 1029 inn/562 plays

    Perr  936 inn/434 plays

    Sox4ever 

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    I also respect UZR/150 and think Iggy is a tremendous fiedling SS who can save a hit every 5 games over most MLB SS... maybe even every 2-3 games of several SSs.

    While that could theoretically happen, Drew got to more balls than Iggy did this year, something like 4.2/game for Drew and 3.9/game for Iggy, based on actual innings played.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    I also respect UZR/150 and think Iggy is a tremendous fiedling SS who can save a hit every 5 games over most MLB SS... maybe even every 2-3 games of several SSs.

    While that could theoretically happen, Drew got to more balls than Iggy did this year, something like 4.2/game for Drew and 3.9/game for Iggy, based on actual innings played.



    I admitted I was wrong about Drew. I'm not sure how many times I have to say it.

    Iggy has better range than Drew, regardless of RF/9 numbers, but it certainly was not close to what I thought it might have been before I realized Drew is a good fielder.

    240 innings is not a very large sample size. In a 191 innings last year, Iggy was at about 4.1.

    I trust UZR/150 more than RF/9, because it takes into account how many balls were actually hit in his range (zone).

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    Peralta had 4.2/game with the Tigers and Iggy had 4.4/game.  So even rated against someone like Peralta, who I don't think has good range, Iggy makes ~ 32 more plays a season.  Rated against Drew, he doesn't even make as many.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    I tried to find 2 SSs with about equal time from the same team. Most had pretty similar plays per inning at SS, but I di find this from the Yanks:

    J. Nix 380 inn/191 plays

    Nunez 608 inn/244 plays

    If you go 4 times Nix's numbers:

    J. Nix  1520 inn/764 plays

    2.5 times Nunez:

    Nunez  1520 inn/710 plays

    That comes to one play every 3 or so games. (54 per 162)

     

    Like I said, this is not very scientific, but one play every 5 games is not absurd.

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    What will Leyland be thinking game 1?

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    I think Leyland has to stay with Peralta at SS and whoever in LF.  Peralta has the hot bat and adequate glove.  Iglesias has a great glove, but lost his bat in the first four games of the ALDS if not earlier.  And even with the great glove he had half as many fielding chances in 4 games in the ALDS as Drew had in 4 games in the ALDS--9  vs. 18 fielding chances. 

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

    I think Leyland has to stay with Peralta at SS and whoever in LF.  Peralta has the hot bat and adequate glove.  Iglesias has a great glove, but lost his bat in the first four games of the ALDS if not earlier.  And even with the great glove he had half as many fielding chances in 4 games in the ALDS as Drew had in 4 games in the ALDS--9  vs. 18 fielding chances. 



    I'm still not sure why the amount of chances by the Tiger SS in the first series is somehow a predictor of what might come.

    Peralta is hot and will play. He should, but the SS might get 8 plays the next game. He might get 2.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    I admitted I was wrong about Drew. I'm not sure how many times I have to say it.

    That wasn't really directed at you.  It just seemed to me that the posters that wanted Iggy, were going nuts on the number of hits he was going to save.  If anyone could save even close to 100 hits, then he could have a .500 OPS and be a star.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    I tried to find 2 SSs with about equal time from the same team. Most had pretty similar plays per inning at SS, but I di find this from the Yanks:

    J. Nix 380 inn/191 plays

    Nunez 608 inn/244 plays

    If you go 4 times Nix's numbers:

    J. Nix  1520 inn/764 plays

    2.5 times Nunez:

    Nunez  1520 inn/710 plays

    That comes to one play every 3 or so games. (54 per 162)

     

    Like I said, this is not very scientific, but one play every 5 games is not absurd.

     



    The NYY had similar pitchung staff the past two years, and had 42 more chances this year over last year.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

    Sheriff, thanks very much for taking the opposite side.  First, about Ted Williams.  By 1946, he had already established himself as one of the greatest if not the greatest hitters then playing MLB, so of course his manager would stay with him for all 7 games. 

    Not so with Iglesias.  His hitting has always been suspect.  His fielding his anything but suspect and is in fact superb, but what's the point when so few balls are hit his way? 

    While I stated repeatedly this is a small sample, four games, I actually think a good manager has to think differently in the playoffs because four games is 4/5 of his ALDS season.  That's why I cited the example of Ellsbury in 2008, or I could have said how Francona replaced starter Coco Crisp in the 2007 playoffs.  You gotta, gotta go with the hot bat and dump the cold one where it makes sense, and in this case with Iglesias it makes all kinds of sense.

    Last night we saw both managers, Maddon and Farrell, manage differently because it's the postseason.  Maddon used 9 pitchers in 9 innings and replaced his starter in the second inning in a scoreless game!  And it was absolutely the right move.  Farrell took Peavy out with a 1-0 score in the 6th inning and a 74 pitch count.  Insane in the regular season, but it made sense last night because the Sox had a chance to close out the Rays. 

    FWIW, feel free to jump all over this OP if Iglesias starts tonight, gets a couple hits, makes a couple of great plays, and the Tigers win. 

     

     



    Well Max, Jim Leyland did it your way, and you have the right to jump over my post.  I don't know if Peralta or Kelly would have been the odd player out had Iggy played, but FWIW, Peralta went 2 for 4 with 2 singles, and Kelly went 0 for 2 with two walks.  One of Peralta's singles advanced VMart to second and led to the third run.  There were also no apparent defensive plays that Iggy would have made that weren't made by Peralta.  In any case, however, it mostly came down to Verlander and it probably didn't matter much who was in the lineup or in the field anyway.

    Good thread and OP, Max.  I take back what I wrote earlier about it being more provocative than insightful, although as expected, many posters took it as an extension of the Iggy trade debate.  

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share