Gomes Vs. Nava

[marklmw]

This morning on D & C someone said that the Sox win more with Gomes than with Nava. Is there any truth to this claim and does it make any sense. I like both players but I admit that I have a little bit of a mancrush on Nava.

[Palodios]

This morning on D & C someone said that the Sox win more with Gomes than with Nava. Is there any truth to this claim and does it make any sense. I like both players but I admit that I have a little bit of a mancrush on Nava.

 

If Gomes goes 0-4, plays mediocre defense, and the Red Sox win the game... does Gomes have anything to do with it? Playing Gomes consecutive days against righties is a poor choice.

[jad]

Well, aside from Ortiz, Nava is their best hitter, best average, best OBP. Hitting almost up to standard in the playoffs. The only time he does not come through is when he's on the bench. For some reason, management (i.e., manager?) feels that those who get paid the most, must be best, or why would we be paying them so much?

[User Name]

Well, aside from Ortiz, Nava is their best hitter, best average, best OBP. Hitting almost up to standard in the playoffs. The only time he does not come through is when he's on the bench. For some reason, management (i.e., manager?) feels that those who get paid the most, must be best, or why would we be paying them so much?

 

This is not true. He's a platoon player. His numbers reflect that. However, hitting lefty is his strong side, so he should be starting against all of these righties.

[Emmz]

Nava's an on base guy, and Gomes is a good situational bat (4/8 with a GS this season with the bases loaded, 3/8 with 4 walks and a HR with runners on 2nd and 3rd, and a 135 OPS+ with runners on base this season).

 

Neither one's a full time player, but Nava helps the team more consistently than Gomes does.

[mvp 78]

In the playoffs, Nava is 1-3. Gomes is 5-0.

 

No, I didn't call in to radio shows this AM and don't ever.

[sk7326]

Gomes is also a good on-base guy ... that's how he could sustain a .240 average without dragging the team down. A perfect L/R split between Nava and Gomes is probably not advisable since that means Nava plays a bit more than he ought to. I think Gomes has been playing more in the postseason due to Farrell's old timey tendencieis (proven vet hooey), and also because he is just a more dangerous hitter than Nava, albeit less consistent. If both are scuffling, Gomes has a better chance to hit one out.

[mvp 78]

And Gomes is way better defensively. If Nava is in the game, he doesn't make the catch at the wall. He probably still throws out Cabrera though.

[seabeachfred]

Nava has kind of gotten the short end of the stick in this series. IMHO he should be in there against RH pitching. He hit 303 for us this season, stayed consistent all season and hit with some power as well. I also noticed t hat when he is benched and used as a pinch hitter he does NOT come through. Gomes does. That should be a platoon situation----and I still insist that Drew should come out of the lineup tomorrow and Middlebrooks be put back on third and Xander at short. Steven hasn't hit worth crap this series and has struck out half of his at-bats. I think we can do better than that.

[sk7326]

Nava has kind of gotten the short end of the stick in this series. IMHO he should be in there against RH pitching. He hit 303 for us this season, stayed consistent all season and hit with some power as well. I also noticed t hat when he is benched and used as a pinch hitter he does NOT come through. Gomes does. That should be a platoon situation----and I still insist that Drew should come out of the lineup tomorrow and Middlebrooks be put back on third and Xander at short. Steven hasn't hit worth crap this series and has struck out half of his at-bats. I think we can do better than that.

 

I think the Drew-Middlebrooks who should sit was a coin flip for Farrell. But Drew has been so good defensively - that I think this was the right choice. Both guys are struggling, and Bogaerts at 3rd represents a smaller dropoff defensively.

[Dojji]

Can I just take a second to ask why this is even an issue? We have a good platoon in left, play both players where it makes sense and stop worrying about it.

[mvp 78]

Can I just take a second to ask why this is even an issue? We have a good platoon in left, play both players where it makes sense and stop worrying about it.

 

Because people need something to complain about.

[Palodios]

Can I just take a second to ask why this is even an issue? We have a good platoon in left, play both players where it makes sense and stop worrying about it.

 

It isn't a platoon if you keep the guy with a .410 obp against righties on the bench against righties.

[User Name]

Nava's an on base guy, and Gomes is a good situational bat (4/8 with a GS this season with the bases loaded, 3/8 with 4 walks and a HR with runners on 2nd and 3rd, and a 135 OPS+ with runners on base this season).

 

Neither one's a full time player, but Nava helps the team more consistently than Gomes does.

 

How can you reach this conclusion on such insignificant samples? That's a terrible way to use stats to defend a point.

[RedSoxNC84]

Because people need something to complain about.

 

What's better to do on a travel day though?!

[jung]

Farrell's "logic" for keeping Gomes in is this spark ******** which people are buying into. Crap.....So, I guess I should discount Gomes PH performance this season as valueless because the Sox did not benefit earlier in those games from his "spark" appeal. BS. Farrell should have continued to at least platoon the two players as he did during the regular season. Granted all of the Tigers starters are righties but that's life. They are not hitting as a team so I would buy into dropping Gomes into the lineup in any situations where regardless of a straight platoon decision, Gomes might have better numbers against one or more of the RH pitchers. However this spark garbage just drives me batty.

[User Name]

The real reason why he's kept Gomes in LF is defense. Comerica, unlike Fenway, is very spacious, and Nava is not a good OF. Farrell doesn't need to BS Red Sox fans, we are (in general) not idiots.

[jung]

LF is not SS. If Gomes is there for his defensive numbers over Nava (Gomes does have better numbers) then that is even goofier than the spark BS. This team is not hitting and needs better offense. If that were not the case, then Gomes defensive numbers are enough better than Nava's to me to be worth considering even in LF. Besides, they are coming back to Fenway where there is less acreage to cover. I have not checked Nava vs Gomes against old blue eye but unless Gomes is producing better offensive numbers against him than Nava is, I would play Nava in Game 6.

[Emmz]

How can you reach this conclusion on such insignificant samples? That's a terrible way to use stats to defend a point.

 

He's always been a good situational hitter bro.

[Bellhorn04]

LF is not SS. If Gomes is there for his defensive numbers over Nava (Gomes does have better numbers) then that is even goofier than the spark BS. This team is not hitting and needs better offense.

 

It seems to me that the Tigers pitching has been phenomenally good and it's our pitching (incredible relief pitching) and defence that has saved our asses. Nothing we could do would necessarily generate more offence. Just keep pitching and defending our asses off.

[sk7326]

He's always been a good situational hitter bro.

 

Situational hitting is not a skill - unless the situation is "at the plate" ...

[Emmz]

Situational hitting is not a skill - unless the situation is "at the plate" ...

 

Who said anything about skills? And if hitting well with RISP isn't a skill, I don't know what is.

[sk7326]

Who said anything about skills? And if hitting well with RISP isn't a skill, I don't know what is.

 

It's just hitting ... and you have to look at it as a skill for the stat to have any real predictive value. Hitting is the skill - it doesn't magically get better with baserunners on, certainly not in any way that can be repeated.

[Emmz]

It's just hitting ... and you have to look at it as a skill for the stat to have any real predictive value. Hitting is the skill - it doesn't magically get better with baserunners on, certainly not in any way that can be repeated.

 

.268/.379/.472 lifetime with RISP. I sure do like me some players who excel when there's runs to be driven in.

[Emmz]

As for the "magically get better with RISP" comment, I take it you don't buy into clutch?

 

It's there. Certain players/people just perform better under pressure.

[User Name]

It's just hitting ... and you have to look at it as a skill for the stat to have any real predictive value. Hitting is the skill - it doesn't magically get better with baserunners on, certainly not in any way that can be repeated.

 

This horse has been beaten to death. With certain very specific exceptions, hitters perform at the same level at the plate regardless of situation. Talent level is talent level. You can't use a couple AB's to try to justify a hitter's "situational hitting skills". It's not a repeatable skill.

[Emmz]

This horse has been beaten to death. With certain very specific exceptions, hitters perform at the same level at the plate regardless of situation. Talent level is talent level. You can't use a couple AB's to try to justify a hitter's "situational hitting skills". It's not a repeatable skill.

 

The sample size is over a season worth of ABs.

 

While it isn't a repeatable skill, there's no doubt it exists. Certain players perform above their skill levels (Even great players) and some play below. The problem with your argument is that you want this to be about improved skill in a given situation, as if said player just "hulked up". That's not the case, but sure, by all means keep thinking that.

[sk7326]

As for the "magically get better with RISP" comment, I take it you don't buy into clutch?

 

It's there. Certain players/people just perform better under pressure.

 

This nonsense came up when Ortiz hit the Grand Slam Sunday ... he has 2 hits the entire series. Were the rest of the moments unimportant? Does that mean he dogged it the rest of the time? Does it mean that Gomes dogs it the majority of his at-bats?

 

I buy very much into clutch - there are clutch moments for sure. Papi's slam was clutch. I don't buy into clutch players. Note that all of the clutch players people talk about - are all actually good players in general. I want Papi up with the game on the line. I'd like him out there when the game is not on the line too. There is virtually nobody with a repeatable "gets better in situation X", nothing that has been recorded. And if they were, what would that say about their ability the rest of the time - that they cannot generate runs without some sort of external jump? In some worlds, that would be a working definition for "lazy"

[sk7326]

The sample size is over a season worth of ABs.

 

While it isn't a repeatable skill, there's no doubt it exists. Certain players perform above their skill levels (Even great players) and some play below. The problem with your argument is that you want this to be about improved skill in a given situation, as if said player just "hulked up". That's not the case, but sure, by all means keep thinking that.

 

What you have noted "Certain players perform above their skill levels" is describing a talent, a skill, a knack. A season's worth of "clutch ABs", whatever that means, is very small - far less than what you would want to make an evaluation on. Yes, there are players who will outperform or underperform their averages a little bit in higher leverage spots - but it's not very significant, and could just as easily be coincidence as anything else. The players who go down as clutch players are all great players. Ortiz (for one) doesn't need the artificial definitions when his actual talent level justifies it plenty.

[sk7326]

Farrell's "logic" for keeping Gomes in is this spark ******** which people are buying into. Crap.....So, I guess I should discount Gomes PH performance this season as valueless because the Sox did not benefit earlier in those games from his "spark" appeal. BS. Farrell should have continued to at least platoon the two players as he did during the regular season. Granted all of the Tigers starters are righties but that's life. They are not hitting as a team so I would buy into dropping Gomes into the lineup in any situations where regardless of a straight platoon decision, Gomes might have better numbers against one or more of the RH pitchers. However this spark garbage just drives me batty.

 

Farrell has a streak of old timey hunches and "veteran scappy gamerness" in his decisionmaking which keeps him from the very top of the managerial ranks in terms of the tactics/strategy. This is one of those areas. At the same time a straight platoon probably leaves Gomes on the bench too much and Nava on the field too much. And in a lot of these platoon cases, you can make a "stuff matchup" argument instead of a straight lefty-righty thing. If a righty loves himself a nasty changeup, then it makes sense for Gomes to play over Nava who could be particularly vulnerable from the left side. Stuff like that.