Blue Jays GDT: Next: @LAA | Thu, May 8 | 9:30pm ET/6:30pm PT | Bassitt vs Soriano

[Tw1ster]

That’s one of the funniest outfielder plays I’ve seen in a while

 

[MK78]

VLADDY 3 RUN DINGER

 

[Tw1ster]

Fore!

 

[MK78]

Finally some CLUTCH hitting from these big boys.

 

[The Nemesis]

Mattingly telling Schneider to trim his sideburns.

 

[LaP]

Did the guys went golfing yesterday?

 

[The Nemesis]

Guys have generally made good, hard contact the last couple of games and it's paying off.

 

[MK78]

Garcia is a stud!

 

[Tw1ster]

Huge couple of wins, bats could be coming around

 

[Seath The Scaleless]

Home runs are fun.

 

[PanniniClaus]

I cannot believe we won this series.. We will take it.

 

[MK78]

Dingers win games. not f***ing silly advanced stats.

 

[Discoverer]

Back to back games with clutch, late three-run shots from the big boys. Nice.

 

[Eyedea]

Dingers win games. not f***ing silly advanced stats.

Do you think advanced stats told them to sign Santander? There's plenty of raw power in the lineup, not management's fault they aren't hitting them out.

 

[Discoverer]

Do you think advanced stats told them to sign Santander? There's plenty of raw power in the lineup, not management's fault they aren't hitting them out.

Also, advanced stats LOVE homeruns.

 

[MK78]

Do you think advanced stats told them to sign Santander? There's plenty of raw power in the lineup, not management's fault they aren't hitting them out.

No, it was someone arguing earlier in the year spewing all these stats, that they are playing so well, and i argued that it doesnt make diddly f***ing squat, just watching the game was showing that they weren't getting it done. Few of those earlier games where they were getting on base a lot, a timely few homers coulda given this team 4-5 more wins.

 

[The Nemesis]

No, it was someone arguing earlier in the year spewing all these stats, that they are playing so well, and i argued that it doesnt make diddly f***ing squat, just watching the game was showing that they weren't getting it done. Few of those earlier games where they were getting on base a lot, a timely few homers coulda given this team 4-5 more wins.

The advanced stats were what was saying this was possible while people were losing their minds and declaring that everyone needed to be traded because the roster was trash and wasn't pulling out of it. They were what was saying that some guys were having crap luck that should even out. Or that other guys were making good hard contact that would eventually yield dingers.

Also, as was said, advanced stats love power/homers. They were the thing arguing for a greater importance on power hitting while people were still screeching about how vital hit-and-runs and sacrifice bunts were to effective winning.

Framing this like "well you could just see that they needed to hit more HRs" as if people citing advanced stats wouldn't also grant that yes, hitting for power is better and would've helped them a lot. Arguing that it was at least a positive that they were getting on base doesn't equate to "well, they don't need HRs because lolz math!"


I always love that just about any diatribe against advanced stats is bound to start with fundamental misunderstanding or mischaracterization of what they are and what they mean/support.

 

[MK78]

The advanced stats were what was saying this was possible while people were losing their minds and declaring that everyone needed to be traded because the roster was trash and wasn't pulling out of it. They were what was saying that some guys were having crap luck that should even out. Or that other guys were making good hard contact that would eventually yield dingers.

Also, as was said, advanced stats love power/homers. They were the thing arguing for a greater importance on power hitting while people were still screeching about how vital hit-and-runs and sacrifice bunts were to effective winning.

Framing this like "well you could just see that they needed to hit more HRs" as if people citing advanced stats wouldn't also grant that yes, hitting for power is better and would've helped them a lot. Arguing that it was at least a positive that they were getting on base doesn't equate to "well, they don't need HRs because lolz math!"


I always love that just about any diatribe against advanced stats is bound to start with fundamental misunderstanding or mischaracterization of what they are and what they mean/support.

Baseball was around for 100+ years before Statcast. Did guy have bad luck hitting balls directly at infielders? Did guys hit balls hard but got nothing to show for it? It just wasn't made a big deal of.

Games are overmanaged because of this crap. How many times in recent years do we groan and moan because the manager apparently does stupid shit because of stats and doesnt follow his baseball knowledge or his gut feeling at the given moment to give the pitcher that extra batter, or not put in a pinch hitter because his star is struggling. They had to put in a 3 batter rule for relievers because they were just overmanaging ever freakin at bat. I just enjoyed baseball a lot more before this stuff.

 

[nilan30]

While I imagine that it's technically possible, I don't think I've ever seen it happen because the play is dead the moment the winning run crosses home, so there's basically no incentive for the fielders to even try and go for any of the runners besides the one going home unless the ball doesn't leave the infield and they can turn the force out/double play before the lead runner can score (which would either have to be someone slow at 3rd or trying to score from 2nd.)

Would the play be dead though? My hypothetical would be similar to runner on first and third, one out. Batter grounds into a double play but the runner scores before the batter is out at first. In that case the run is negated because the third out was a force out. My situation is similar but looks a lot different. Say Kirk makes that hit two nights ago and whoever was on first and Kirk start celebrating instead of running to their base. The left fielder notices runs and gets the ball and throws it to second then first thus doubling them off. The run would be negated would it not?

 

[Leaf Rocket]

Mattingly telling Schneider to trim his sideburns.

 

[Bjindaho]

Would the play be dead though? My hypothetical would be similar to runner on first and third, one out. Batter grounds into a double play but the runner scores before the batter is out at first. In that case the run is negated because the third out was a force out. My situation is similar but looks a lot different. Say Kirk makes that hit two nights ago and whoever was on first and Kirk start celebrating instead of running to their base. The left fielder notices runs and gets the ball and throws it to second then first thus doubling them off. The run would be negated would it not?

Here's the force out rule:

https://www.mlb.com/glossary/rules/force-play

And after finding the Appeal Plays rule, you can actually be called out on a home run, but the defending team would have to verbally indicate their appeal to the umpire (cannot throw to a base or any other variation because a ball cannot be put in play on a play where the initial ruling would end the inning/game):

https://www.mlb.com/glossary/rules/appeal-plays

Any out by force out would preclude runs scoring. Where this could get really funny is if the team noticed Kirk not running it out and threw to first first, that would actually score the winning run by eliminating all other force outs.

Another quick quirk is that if the 3 runners advance and Kirk does NOT run to first, his hit becomes an out and even could become a 3 run fly out if the ball left the park but he didn't run to 1st.

One that I really did not know is that on a caught fly ball, there is no force out at the base the runners came from (this means that if a player flied out to left with runners on 1st and 3rd and the runner from 1st intentionally kept running then a throw to first could score the other runner if the player crossed the plate before the out was made at 1st).

 

[nilan30]

One that I really did not know is that on a caught fly ball, there is no force out at the base the runners came from (this means that if a player flied out to left with runners on 1st and 3rd and the runner from 1st intentionally kept running then a throw to first could score the other runner if the player crossed the plate before the out was made at 1st).

That is pretty interesting. Seems like the type of rule the umps wouldn't even know about and would have to get some help with

 

[Suntouchable13]

Is it possible to tell Varsho to not worry about batting average and just thump? Don’t worry about hitting singles the other way or whatever. I think we can get the best version of him in that case, imo.

 

[Eyedea]

Is it possible to tell Varsho to not worry about batting average and just thump? Don’t worry about hitting singles the other way or whatever. I think we can get the best version of him in that case, imo.

I feel like that’s pretty much his MO anyway. Extreme pull/flyball hitter. Like a quarter of his singles were infield hits last season and probably a good majority of those were drag bunts.

 

[Bjindaho]

Is it possible to tell Varsho to not worry about batting average and just thump? Don’t worry about hitting singles the other way or whatever. I think we can get the best version of him in that case, imo.

Varsho hit 75 balls to LF last year (LF defined as middle of LF-CF gap to the LF line) and had a .147/.267 BA/SLG split with 20 total bases on 11 hits. He put up an unimaginable 8wRC+.

The only times he should be hitting the ball the other way is that specific scenario (a tailing fastball that he is swinging into) and the 2 strike make contact swing.