MLB - 2006 Season!

[Imran Siddiqui]

Indeed... one really wonders how much is a manager's credit and how much is the style of the team matching a manager's style (a kind of right place at the right time).

[Lawrence of Arabia]

didnt bill james say that managers dont contribute much to wins?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
didnt bill james say that managers dont contribute much to wins?

In a certain way, yes. He said that managers don't contribute much in a quantifiable way. For example, batting lineup orders really don't matter all that much throughout a season. The difference may be 1 win between an optimal lineup (highest to lowest OBP) to a total randomized lineup. Managers may however contribute in other ways, such as psychological or knowing when and who in making the right choice of pinch hitter or pulling a pitcher.

No one is saying everything is quantifiable, but a lot of things can be. Those that are measurable, the manager has little impact on, leading us to speculate that the stuff we have difficulty measuring (like the difference between an actual record and pythagorean record) may have part of its result due to managerian competance.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

but what if a manager manages (haha) to pull an extra 5 OPS out of all of his hitters. you wouldnt be able to quantify that because that stat will be what it is, but you dont know how or why it is that they are batting higher.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
but what if a manager manages (haha) to pull an extra 5 OPS out of all of his hitters. you wouldnt be able to quantify that because that stat will be what it is, but you dont know how or why it is that they are batting higher.

How do you determine the manager is pulling an extra OPS out of his batters or whether such batters are simply happier in the clubhouse or whatnot? You could take expected runs for each player and see if they all exceed that number, but how do you assign weight to whatever factor? And you have to make sure that it continues to be at that level. AFAIK no stat like that (runs above expected, wins above pythagorean wins) have carried over consistently. It is random for even the mangers who are considered the best.

The new book, "Baseball Beyond the Numbers" by the Baseball Prospectus guys has a chapter on trying to quantify managerial performance, but what they end up with is saying that on raw numbers, nothing shows up consistently, so the effect, if any, is on the psychological side. (more or less, I'm GREATLY simplifying, of course).

[Lawrence of Arabia]

How do you determine the manager is pulling an extra OPS out of his batters or whether such batters are simply happier in the clubhouse or whatnot?

exactly my point. if you cannot say that a manager is having a positive effect, how can you say hes have no effect, if you cannot even find what he is supposed to be effecting in the first place. like i said, you wouldnt be able to quantify that. but just because you cannot find it or tease out causality, doesnt mean it doesnt exist. doesnt mean that the manager has no effect on the team (or minimal)

[Arrian]

Try doing it sometime... it might change the way you think about baseball.

Sava tells me to watch baseball.

Sava, I watch approximately 160 Yankees games per year (reg. season + playoffs), and a similar number of Red Sox games (or, more accurately, we flick back and forth between them, b/c my wife is a Sox fan).

I watch PLENTY of baseball. So I'm not just pouring over spreadsheets when I talk baseball. I watch AND read. Last night I watched Joe Torre put Mariano Rivera into a tie ballgame on the road. I was, I admit, shocked at the competance of that move*. And it worked, beautifully (man, was Mo on last night).

You really didn't address my arguments in any meaningful way. You just waved your (figurative) hands at my post and spouted "baseball is played one game at a time." And you call ME Captain Obvious?

Stats are useful in baseball precisely because of the 162 game season, Sava. It gives us a large sample size, without which you can't really do much with stats (a guy who goes 1 for 1 is batting 1.000, but that doesn't tell us anything meaningful).

Stats do not tell the whole story, of course. Stats can't tell you if a player is playing hurt (Damon, for instance). You have to watch or read the articles to know that. But if you watch and ignore stats, you can easily be fooled into thinking a good player stinks or a bad player rocks.

Or, going back to the case of Pods, that a good player is somehow the magical key to a team's success. He's good. Many teams (such as the Cubs) could use him. But there are far better players out there, and the White Sox could certainly win w/o him, because they have good pitching, defense, and hit the longball.

-Arrian

* - especially considering the incompetance of using Scott "The Run Fairy" Erickson earlier in the game. Although that's as much on Cashman as Torre. Erickson has no business on a major league roster.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia

How do you determine the manager is pulling an extra OPS out of his batters or whether such batters are simply happier in the clubhouse or whatnot?

exactly my point. if you cannot say that a manager is having a positive effect, how can you say hes have no effect, if you cannot even find what he is supposed to be effecting in the first place. like i said, you wouldnt be able to quantify that. but just because you cannot find it or tease out causality, doesnt mean it doesnt exist. doesnt mean that the manager has no effect on the team (or minimal)

It's pretty much impossible to measure the impact of the manager's intangible qualities. You can analyse in-game strategy, but who knows how much players improve if they're playing for a manager they really like & respect? Nobody. That being said, I think we can all agree that managers tend to look like geniuses when they have a good team and idiots when they have a bad one, and these effects snowball (winning begets good chemistry & more winning, and losing does the opposite).

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel
I'm a cards fan, I know how bad Torre can be with the wrong pieces. Though I'm sure the same could be said for any manager.

I've long felt that Joe Torre is the type of manager who generally manages to not screw up a good thing, but likewise isn't very good at making lemonade out of lemons.

-Arrian

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia

How do you determine the manager is pulling an extra OPS out of his batters or whether such batters are simply happier in the clubhouse or whatnot?

exactly my point. if you cannot say that a manager is having a positive effect, how can you say hes have no effect, if you cannot even find what he is supposed to be effecting in the first place. like i said, you wouldnt be able to quantify that. but just because you cannot find it or tease out causality, doesnt mean it doesnt exist. doesnt mean that the manager has no effect on the team (or minimal)

The reason you say he has minimal measurable effect is because there is no measurable positive or negative effect that is consistant over a career in any way. Any measure for determination does not show a clear and consistant effect of managers on their players. There are indeed measures to see what effects a manager may have (the amount of wins unexplained by offense or defense), but are inconclusive.

Like I said, that does not account for any psychological effects a manager may have, or any other unmeasurable intangible effect.

[Arrian]

I can't help it.

MELKY! MELKY! MELKY!

Ok, I'm better now.

-Arrian

[Imran Siddiqui]

Btw, I was only a day early with the Clemens coming back to the 'Stros .

http://cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/story/9471999

When he is added to the major league roster, he gets a one-year contract worth $22,000,022 -- his uniform number is 22. Because he won't be playing the full season, he gets only a prorated percentage of that, which would come to about $12.25 million if he rejoins Houston in late June. The tentative goal is to have him start against the Minnesota Twins on June 22 -- if he's put on the big league roster on that day, he would earn $12,632,307.

Whew... that's a ton of money.

[Arrian]

Sure is. So I get what I was hoping for: Clemens does not impact the AL East. Good.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Hmm. Timlin is hurt, huh? That's not good for the Red Sox... though those two callups pitched quite well.

By the way, as if we didn't already know it, the All-Star voting is a total joke.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Wow, is "good Moose" fun to watch. Complete game 6 hitter, one walk, 5 strikeouts, one unearned run, 101 pitches. Shoulda been a CG shutout on 95 pitches. That was a thing of beauty.

The Tigers may be improved from last year (clearly they are), but they're not as good as their record would seem to indicate. They beat up on some pretty bad teams to get that record, and haven't done very well against winning teams.

Obviously, I'm hoping for the sweep tonight, but even if they don't get it, 3-1 vs. the Tigers at Comerica is good. Then it'll be interesting to see how the Tigers do against the Red Sox.

-Arrian