Crawford Lineup Shuffle?

[SoxFanForsyth]

There's not really any need to change lineups whenever someone's having a hot streak. He's playing above his career averages' date=' and his career averages ain't even enough to get Pedroia off the number two spot even if he's not hitting well. If managers changed their lineups for whenever someone was having a hot streak, you'd never get a consistent lineup.[/quote']

 

I'm talking about a line up that doesn't have Pedroia in it because of his knee.

[Emmz]

He's heating up. His April numbers don't mean anything on June 9th. That's what I'm saying. I understand that his overall numbers may be low, but look at what he's done recently. He's got a .403 OBP and a 1.162 OPS in his last 15 games, which covers 62 PA. That's not just a 12-15 AB span where he's on fire. He's been tearing it up ever since Cleveland.

 

Look - If this was a rookie who we knew nothing about, I could see leaving him down in the line up. But when the 2 slot opens up and you've got a guy with a 1.162 OPS over the last 15 games that has 45-50 SB speed hitting in your 6 hole? You move him up. No questions asked.

 

So what if he's on a hot streak. We know everything about Crawford, and that's what kills your argument. He never walks, he's impatient, and he's playing above what you can reasonably expect.

[redsoxrules]

Oh he doesn't? Sorry pal. You think I just make up these stats? Why don't you do me a quick favor. Run on over to baseball-reference.com, look up Carl Crawford's Game Logs, and use the Click to Sum function to summarize his games from May 23 - June 8.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=crawfca02&t=b&year=

 

That's the link right there. Go check that out and then maybe go edit your other comment.

 

I did , I must of checked off the wrong thing when I did it at first

[Emmz]

I'm talking about a line up that doesn't have Pedroia in it because of his knee.

 

Yeah, maybe with Pedroia out he can have it, but I'm still not so sure he'll get it.

[SoxFanForsyth]

So what if he's on a hot streak. We know everything about Crawford' date=' and that's what kills your argument. He never walks, he's impatient, and he's playing above what you can reasonably expect.[/quote']

 

Right. And for the past 2 seasons, he's had a .360 OBP. So I don't see how that kills my argument?? A .360 OBP with 45-50 SB speed is perfect for our 2 slot if you don't have Pedroia in the line up.

[redsoxrules]

Scutaro should be batting second for tonights game as he owns CC

[SoxFanForsyth]

Yeah' date=' maybe with Pedroia out he can have it, but I'm still not so sure he'll get it.[/quote']

 

The only reason Crawford wouldn't get the 2 slot is because we would be going Ells Craw Gonzo, which is LH LH LH. Unless you want to go Ells - Craw - Youk - Gonzo, which actually wouldn't be bad because Youk has a great OBP and walks a lot, whereas Gonzo is aggressive with RISP and drives in a ton of runs.

 

Wouldn't surprise me at all to go Ells - Craw - Youk - Gonzo vs RHP while Pedroia is out.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Scutaro should be batting second for tonights game as he owns CC

 

I agree, Scut or Lowrie should hit 2. I would actually rather see Scut there because Lowrie can hit in the 6 spot because he's got significant power against LHP (.426/.438/.672/1.110 vs LHP this year) and he'll drive in some runs.

 

I like Ells - Scut - Gonzo - Youk - Ortiz - Lowrie - Crawford - Cam - Tek for tonight's game.

[Emmz]

Right. And for the past 2 seasons' date=' he's had a .360 OBP. So I don't see how that kills my argument?? A .360 OBP with 45-50 SB speed is perfect for our 2 slot if you don't have Pedroia in the line up.[/quote']

 

You're correct, since about 2006ish, he's been more of a .350 OBP guy. However, Pedroia's a .370+ OBP, even this season, he's got a .360 OBP, and up until a couple of posts ago, you were making it seem like he should go over Pedroia at #2, then Pedroia should be switched out to #6.

[SoxFanForsyth]

This was my 2nd post -

 

First off, since May 1st, Crawford is hitting .312/.341/.514. During that same span, Pedroia was hitting .241/.353/.323.

 

Look. Vintage Pedroia? Better hitter, better OBP, etc. Definitely. No doubt about it. But right now? And for the past month +, you gotta go with Crawford. The difference in their OBP over that span would be made up with Crawford's speed.

 

As far as the argument (not sure who posted it) about driving up the pitch count, that's absolutely a ridiculous argument. Crawford is seeing 3.76 P/PA, Pedroia is seeing 4.26 P/PA.

 

THAT'S 2 EXTRA PITCHES PER GAME!!! That is not a significant argument at all.

 

While Pedroia is out, Crawford is the ideal 2 slot hitter. Especially with him heating up.

 

.362/.403/.759/1.162 in last 15 games.

[Emmz]

Yes, but then there's no need to compare their numbers.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Yes' date=' but then there's no need to compare their numbers.[/quote']

 

I was showing that he can replicate Pedroia's success in the 2 hole, and that we wouldn't see a significant drop off in production from that spot because he's on a streak right now.

[Emmz]

First off, since May 1st, Crawford is hitting .312/.341/.514. During that same span, Pedroia was hitting .241/.353/.323.

 

Look. Vintage Pedroia? Better hitter, better OBP, etc. Definitely. No doubt about it. But right now? And for the past month +, you gotta go with Crawford. The difference in their OBP over that span would be made up with Crawford's speed.

 

Like this.

[Emmz]

I was showing that he can replicate Pedroia's success in the 2 hole' date=' and that we wouldn't see a significant drop off in production from that spot because he's on a streak right now.[/quote']

 

ahhh, gotcha

[SoxFanForsyth]

Like this.

 

Exactly. Showing that we're not going to see a decrease in production from the 2 slot.

 

EDIT: Just saw your other post. Nevermind about this one.

[iortiz]

First off' date='[b'] since May 1st, Crawford is hitting .312/.341/.514. During that same span, Pedroia was hitting .241/.353/.323.

[/b]

Look. Vintage Pedroia? Better hitter, better OBP, etc. Definitely. No doubt about it. But right now? And for the past month +, you gotta go with Crawford. The difference in their OBP over that span would be made up with Crawford's speed.

 

As far as the argument (not sure who posted it) about driving up the pitch count, that's absolutely a ridiculous argument. Crawford is seeing 3.76 P/PA, Pedroia is seeing 4.26 P/PA.

 

THAT'S 2 EXTRA PITCHES PER GAME!!! That is not a significant argument at all.

 

While Pedroia is out, Crawford is the ideal 2 slot hitter. Especially with him heating up.

 

.362/.403/.759/1.162 in last 15 games.

 

I knew it, something was wrong with Peddy, Dammit... I mentioned that Peddy was hurting this team offensively lately and mostly with his bat, and now i got the answer... something was happening, that BA wasn't a slump strictly by performance or AB discipline but by injury.

Looking at overall career's numbers, there's no way that CC could take 1-5 spot, but being fair, last month he has the numbers in order to at least give him a shot... and yeah, you have a point here, he's not a rookie that got a short fluke streak... now with Peddy's issue , CC should take that shot and show that he deserves that spot or at least compete for it.

[TedWilliams101]

I knew it, something was wrong with Peddy, Dammit... I mentioned that Peddy was hurting this team offensively lately and mostly with his bat, and now i got the answer... something was happening, that BA wasn't a slump strictly by performance or AB discipline but by injury.

Looking at overall career's numbers, there's no way that CC could take 1-5 spot, but being fair, last month he has the numbers in order to at least give him a shot... and yeah, you have a point here, he's not a rookie that got a short fluke streak... now with Peddy's issue , CC should take that shot and show that he deserves that spot or at least compete for it.

 

Lol. A struggling Pedroia is STILL getting on base more often than a hot Crawford. Someone teach him some damned plate discipline!

[Six4Three]

If he duplicates his last nine years' lack of plate discipline he's a first ballot hall of famer.

 

Advanced stats? There's nothing more un-advanced than thinking that there are only three types of players: guys who walk, sluggers, and guys who fail at being either of those. What a player can do once on base matters, not just a little, but a lot.

 

Consistent lineups? I bet the Rays had over 100 different lineups last year that included half a dozen guys hitting in the low .200's. A consistent lineup didn't beat out NY and Boston.

 

I don't think people here understand advanced lineups.

[ORS]

Advanced stats? There's nothing more un-advanced than thinking that there are only three types of players: guys who walk, sluggers, and guys who fail at being either of those. What a player can do once on base matters, not just a little, but a lot.

Excellent point, you really slayed it with that one.

 

One problem, nobody said that.

 

Strawman, FTW.

[Emmz]

If he duplicates his last nine years' lack of plate discipline he's a first ballot hall of famer.

 

Advanced stats? There's nothing more un-advanced than thinking that there are only three types of players: guys who walk, sluggers, and guys who fail at being either of those. What a player can do once on base matters, not just a little, but a lot.

 

Consistent lineups? I bet the Rays had over 100 different lineups last year that included half a dozen guys hitting in the low .200's. A consistent lineup didn't beat out NY and Boston.

 

I don't think people here understand advanced lineups.

 

Straw man logical fallacy ftw.

[Emmz]

Excellent point, you really slayed it with that one.

 

One problem, nobody said that.

 

Strawman, FTW.

 

 

I didn't even see this.

[ORS]

 

I didn't even see this.

Great minds, and so forth...

 

To add to the discussion since the topic of contributions other than SB on the basepaths has come up. They track that too. Crawford averages about 3 BsR (base running runs not including SB/CS) a year, Pedroia about 1.

 

When you add that to the nubmers I posted before, Pedroia is still the better offensive player by 7 runs in the BB/Baserunning comparison.

[iortiz]

I knew it' date=' something was wrong with Peddy, Dammit... I mentioned that Peddy was hurting this team offensively lately and mostly with his bat, and now i got the answer... something was happening, [b']that BA wasn't a slump strictly by performance or AB discipline but by injury.[/b]

Looking at overall career's numbers, there's no way that CC could take 1-5 spot, but being fair, last month he has the numbers in order to at least give him a shot... and yeah, you have a point here, he's not a rookie that got a short fluke streak... now with Peddy's issue , CC should take that shot and show that he deserves that spot or at least compete for it.

 

hehehe... don't get me wrong, Peddy deserves that spot, and i already said that. What i tried to say is that his BA was poor lately, (out of his standards (.300)).... Now, if you take out CC's 2008 OBP, since 2006 he is .355 OBP player (2006,2007,2009,2010), so...no discipline at all?, i don't know man. Peddy and Ells are more disciplined but CC has a decent OBP being fair.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Great minds, and so forth...

 

To add to the discussion since the topic of contributions other than SB on the basepaths has come up. They track that too. Crawford averages about 3 BsR (base running runs not including SB/CS) a year, Pedroia about 1.

 

When you add that to the nubmers I posted before, Pedroia is still the better offensive player by 7 runs in the BB/Baserunning comparison.

 

Sure. But at a time when Pedroia has a bum knee and a screw in his foot, is it really that outrageous to think that Crawford may be more valuable than him this year, from an offensive standpoint?

[Six4Three]

Straw man logical fallacy ftw.

 

TedWilliams 101 said that Crawford needs more plate discipline.

 

SweetChinMusic33 asked why I would consider other players' variables when suggesting where CC or Pedroia should hit in a lineup. (Please folks, take a moment to soak in the absurdity of that comment). Then he/she asked if I had read ORS' post, which I clearly did and disagreed with completely. At least I thought it was clear.

 

Then Emmz said I did read it but didn't understand advanced stats. Clearly not realizing how much most of the people in this post are over-simplifying their favorite players' stats, specifically, Pedroia's OBP. I illustrated this by typing out the only three types of players I've seen acknowledged in this thread.

 

No "straw man" here. From what I've seen on this forum so far though, that term gets thrown around almost as much as the word "sucks". Neither ever has nor ever will win a debate.

[Emmz]

More straw men, pretty soon you'll have an army bro.

 

Advanced stats? There's nothing more un-advanced than thinking that there are only three types of players: guys who walk, sluggers, and guys who fail at being either of those. What a player can do once on base matters, not just a little, but a lot.

 

That is a textbook straw man, trying to repeat someone's argument with something that's easier to defeat (Basically, not what anyone said AT ALL) so you can pretend to be smart.

[Six4Three]

Thanks, I know what the definition is, and that the first person to bust out the term is usually losing the argument. The adult equivalent of "I know you are but what am I??"

 

Tell me then, please, what type of player you think Carl Crawford is, if not one of those three admittedly over-simplified models? I've yet to read anything that suggests the majority of people on this forum think he deserves a spot on this roster at all, much less a spot near the top of the order.

[SCM33]

SweetChinMusic33 asked why I would consider other players' variables when suggesting where CC or Pedroia should hit in a lineup. (Please folks, take a moment to soak in the absurdity of that comment). Then he/she asked if I had read ORS' post, which I clearly did and disagreed with completely. At least I thought it was clear.

 

Wow, really? You don't get it, no matter how its spelled out. You completely missed the target with my comment.

 

I'll try again. YOU CANNOT COMPARE THE PRODUCTION OF PEDROIA TO CRAWFORD USING OTHER PLAYERS AS VARIABLES.

 

Is that clear enough?

 

Also, if you read ORS's post and understood it, you would see that your argument is completely wrong is proven wrong with statistics, not opinion, which means you clearly did not understand it.

[ORS]

Thanks' date=' I know what the definition is, and that the first person to bust out the term is usually losing the argument. The adult equivalent of "I know you are but what am I??" [/quote']

Actually, no. The reality is, the person using a strawman is losing the argument because they can't address the other party's actual points.

 

Tell me then, please, what type of player you think Carl Crawford is, if not one of those three admittedly over-simplified models? I've yet to read anything that suggests the majority of people on this forum think he deserves a spot on this roster at all, much less a spot near the top of the order.

Why does it matter what "type" anyone is? None of the players in question can accurately be described with the "types" you suggested. And the argument you presented is that speed is more valuable than not making outs. Statistically, there's nothing to support that claim.

[jacksonianmarch]

speed has to be worth a small drop in OBP, but not the drop from Pedroia (vintage, not this yr) to Crawford (same).