Lester/Gomes to the A's

[NativeBostonian]

Someone who can actually hit with RISP

 

You mean like Allen Craig?

[seabeachfred]

So apparently they don't jack s*** about baseball in St. Louis.

 

RBI is dumb and the people who trust it are dumb.

 

You keep saying that endlessly about Runs Batted In. Apparently you have been comatose with all those LOBsters we've amassed this season. We lead the league in runners left on base and I would think you would realize that some of those driven in would give us a better record than 48-60. Keep in mind that without those RBI's that Ortiz has accumulated in 2004, 2007 and 2013, we'd be the Cubs of the American League and be in the 96 years and counting.

[NativeBostonian]

Oh, he'll put 25 over the wall all right, but what else does he bring to the plate the rest of the time? Answer: not much.

 

I very strong arm in the outfield.

[NativeBostonian]

So apparently they don't jack s*** about baseball in St. Louis.

 

RBI is dumb and the people who trust it are dumb.

Yea, getting runs in is very useless...

[RedSoxNC84]

Cespedes is going to RF it looks like for now

[example1]

Now that the dust has settled, and I have had time to take it all in, I’m not too upset with what the Red Sox did today. Because the Red Sox screwed up the Lester situation, they had no chose but to trade him and they got something that they desperately needed in exchange for Lester, a right-handed power bat.

 

At Fenway Park, Cespedes is built to put holes in the Green Monster. He has averaged around 25 home runs or so, in a pitchers park. Put him in Fenway for the majority of the season, his numbers are bound to go up. That is one of the things the outfield was missing this year, power.

 

Then, they added something else that the offense was missing, someone who drives in a lot of runs. Before this season, Allen Craig has known for being a good RBI guy; they actually called him Mr. RBI in St. Louis. He’s a solid player and people need to look past his injury pledged season this year and see the bigger picture.

 

If I were the Sox I would try to extend Cespedes this offseason. Just see if he's open to a reasonable contract that offers him some security. 5/75 maybe. That's just a little more than what Victorino got so that's whose money he would get in 2016 and beynd. He's still young (26) and offers enough value in enough areas that he's probably worth keeping around for a few years--especially with a lack of power throughout baseball. If he signs now then he's protected from injury etc., in 2015 and with his numbers thus far I don't think it's unreasonable to think that's near what he'd get on the open market after another similar season. He's not elite, but it's hard to argue that his bat wouldn't have a place in the #6 spot on a really good team.

 

He's not a great player if he's your #4 hitter, but if he's your #6 hitter you probably have a pretty good offense.

[Palodios]

If I were the Sox I would try to extend Cespedes this offseason. Just see if he's open to a reasonable contract that offers him some security. 5/75 maybe. That's just a little more than what Victorino got so that's whose money he would get in 2016 and beynd. He's still young (26)

 

Actually, he will be turning 29 in October. That means any extension will be for his 30+ years. He has some good years left, but if the Red Sox weren't willing to pay 75 million for Lester at 30, it would be insulting for them to give it to Cespedes.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Yea, getting runs in is very useless...

Understanding how runs are produced is even more useless, apparently.

Edited August 1, 2014 by Jacoby_Ellsbury

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

You keep saying that endlessly about Runs Batted In. Apparently you have been comatose with all those LOBsters we've amassed this season. We lead the league in runners left on base and I would think you would realize that some of those driven in would give us a better record than 48-60. Keep in mind that without those RBI's that Ortiz has accumulated in 2004, 2007 and 2013, we'd be the Cubs of the American League and be in the 96 years and counting.

Was Ortiz responsible for those runners getting on base to begin with? No? Then why does he deserve credit for them crossing the plate when he gets a hit? He doesn't. RBI is ********, and runners left on base is bad luck. You and NativeBostonian have an astonishingly bad grasp on cause and effect.

 

RBI is not a special stat, and driving in runs is not a special talent. Stop trying to pretend that this is the case. Try thinking critically for once in your life instead of regurgitating the already unoriginal opinions of some hillbilly high school baseball coach somewhere (and demanding that I do the same).

[rorschach]

Was Ortiz responsible for those runners getting on base to begin with? No? Then why does he deserve credit for them crossing the plate when he gets a hit? He doesn't. RBI is ********, and runners left on base is bad luck. You and NativeBostonian have an astonishingly bad grasp on cause and effect.

 

RBI is not a special stat, and driving in runs is not a special talent. Stop trying to pretend that this is the case. Try thinking critically for once in your life instead of regurgitating the already unoriginal opinions of some hillbilly high school baseball coach somewhere (and demanding that I do the same).

 

You're f***ing stupid.

[Yaz Fan Since 67]

You're f***ing stupid.

 

Gotta agree here. Of course RBI is a product of the hitters in front of you. But as we see this year when you fail to knock those runners in their hits are useless. If you have a guy who does this, in other words hits in the clutch when you need him the most, well that's why they pay those guys the big bucks. I would think anyone would understand this. Guess I was wrong.

Edited August 1, 2014 by Yaz Fan Since '67

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Clutch is a farce.

[a700hitter]

Clutch is a farce.

 

Saying that clutch is a farce is a farce. Anyone who played the game can tell you who they hated to face in a big spot and the players from their own team who they loved to have up in a big spot. There are big game pitchers and clutch hitters and there are guys that simply wilt in those situations. To conclude that clutch doesn't exist based on linear logic such as statements that a batter is not responsible for the runners that get on base before him ignores the dynamics of the games.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Saying that clutch is a farce is a farce. Anyone who played the game can tell you who they hated to face in a big spot and the players from their own team who they loved to have up in a big spot. There are big game pitchers and clutch hitters and there are guys that simply wilt in those situations. To conclude that clutch doesn't exist based on linear logic such as statements that a batter is not responsible for the runners that get on base before him ignores the dynamics of the games.

That's all 100% subjective, and therefore meaningless. If it can't be proven, it's crap. Clutch can never be proven.

[sk7326]

Saying that clutch is a farce is a farce. Anyone who played the game can tell you who they hated to face in a big spot and the players from their own team who they loved to have up in a big spot. There are big game pitchers and clutch hitters and there are guys that simply wilt in those situations. To conclude that clutch doesn't exist based on linear logic such as statements that a batter is not responsible for the runners that get on base before him ignores the dynamics of the games.

 

It is. Clutch numbers are not repeatable, and do not vary with hitter quality. Invariably when an announcer says "this is a guy you'd want up in a big spot" he is also a guy you'd want up in the other spots too. In other words, a good player. Given how difficult it is to make the bigs among all the people who aspire to play baseball - people without the ability to perform under pressure never sniff the show. For instance, David Ortiz is ascribed to be a great clutch performer, but he was total doggy poop in the ALCS, but since the tree fell where no baseball writer was looking, there was no narrative about it.

 

For fans, there are clutch moments for sure. But the idea that there is something about RISP that fundamentally change hitters is just not borne out in any sort of data. Put simply, in basketball for example, you always heard the idea "I'd love to have Larry Bird taking that last shot". Of course you do, because you'd want Larry Bird (of 1986 vintage, not Indiana Pacers GM one) to take EVERY SHOT.

[a700hitter]

It is. Clutch numbers are not repeatable, and do not vary with hitter quality. Invariably when an announcer says "this is a guy you'd want up in a big spot" he is also a guy you'd want up in the other spots too. In other words, a good player. Given how difficult it is to make the bigs among all the people who aspire to play baseball - people without the ability to perform under pressure never sniff the show. For instance, David Ortiz is ascribed to be a great clutch performer, but he was total doggy poop in the ALCS, but since the tree fell where no baseball writer was looking, there was no narrative about it.

 

For fans, there are clutch moments for sure. But the idea that there is something about RISP that fundamentally change hitters is just not borne out in any sort of data. Put simply, in basketball for example, you always heard the idea "I'd love to have Larry Bird taking that last shot". Of course you do, because you'd want Larry Bird (of 1986 vintage, not Indiana Pacers GM one) to take EVERY SHOT.

The clutch performer doesn't perform better than his capability. He is able to control his anxiety/fear and perform up to his capability. They will not get hits all the time. They will experience slumps too. Every AB in the ALCS was not a critical AB just because it was the ALCS, but the biggest and most crucial AB was with David Ortiz up with the bases loaded and down 4 runs. That result was just the laws of averages? Nothing else comes into play? Talk to players and most will tell you otherwise.

 

Other players can't control the anxiety and fear as well and they can't perform to the best of their abilities. Players know who those guys are too. Sometimes a guy with overall good numbers folds in the big situation. It isn't often, because it takes mental toughness to become a major leaguer and even more to become a star. Nevertheless, there are variations even at the star level with regard to how they handle pressure. While the training to become a major leaguer is largely robotic repetition, the players are not robotic and the mental toughness and ability to handle stress plays a large part in differentiating performance. There are a lot of guys that are very talented that never make it to the majors,because they can't handle the mental aspects of the game as well and talent is not eniugh. As Yogi says: 90% of the game is half mental.

[Bellhorn04]

The clutch performer doesn't perform better than his capability. He is able to control his anxiety/fear and perform up to his capability.

 

This statement is exactly the same way I see it.

 

There is an obvious reason that being a clutch hitter is not a repeatable skill. The pitcher is going to get you out most of the time because that's how baseball works. You can be the biggest clutch hitter in the world, but if the guy on the mound is at the top of his game, painting the corners with 98 MPH, or throwing insane splitters like Uehara, you're still going to lose most of the time.

 

What about being a clutch pitcher? To me that's more interesting. Was Curt Schilling one of the greatest clutch pitchers, or was October just a good month for him?

[sk7326]

The clutch performer doesn't perform better than his capability. He is able to control his anxiety/fear and perform up to his capability. They will not get hits all the time. They will experience slumps too. Every AB in the ALCS was not a critical AB just because it was the ALCS, but the biggest and most crucial AB was with David Ortiz up with the bases loaded and down 4 runs. That result was just the laws of averages? Nothing else comes into play? Talk to players and most will tell you otherwise.

 

Other players can't control the anxiety and fear as well and they can't perform to the best of their abilities. Players know who those guys are too. Sometimes a guy with overall good numbers folds in the big situation. It isn't often, because it takes mental toughness to become a major leaguer and even more to become a star. Nevertheless, there are variations even at the star level with regard to how they handle pressure. While the training to become a major leaguer is largely robotic repetition, the players are not robotic and the mental toughness and ability to handle stress plays a large part in differentiating performance. There are a lot of guys that are very talented that never make it to the majors,because they can't handle the mental aspects of the game as well and talent is not eniugh. As Yogi says: 90% of the game is half mental.

 

The players ARE human, but the dudes with poor makeups are weeded out by the process to make the show. If "clutch" existed, then it would be repeatable and a meaningful way to differentiate guys. Nothing in evidence shows any sort of consistent variation. It's like "knowing how to win close games" - aside from some small impact from having a good bullpen, year after year, records in 1 run games are basically coin flips, and those who are good (or bad) do not correlate with much of anything.

 

The contrapositive to clutch players is also a bit alarming - that dudes are loafing during the other at-bats. The players will tell you in the biggest spot they want their best guy - stop the presses. When someone says "I want Nick Punto in there for a big at-bat" then that is newsworthy. Are there variations among stars? Of course - but there are variations among them already. There is no proof that such variation (in clutch spots) is outside of their variation in general.

[Bellhorn04]

Was Jeff Bagwell a non-clutch hitter? .948 regular season OPS, .685 postseason OPS in 129 PA's. Of course it can't be proved, but that's a pretty big disparity right there.

 

Nick Swisher? One of the worst postseason hitters in history. It doesn't mean he was a choker, but it could mean that his postseason failures were in his head. I think psychological factors are very real, even if impossible to measure with any empirical certainty.

[reYoukilis]

The players ARE human, but the dudes with poor makeups are weeded out by the process to make the show. If "clutch" existed, then it would be repeatable and a meaningful way to differentiate guys. Nothing in evidence shows any sort of consistent variation. It's like "knowing how to win close games" - aside from some small impact from having a good bullpen, year after year, records in 1 run games are basically coin flips, and those who are good (or bad) do not correlate with much of anything.

 

The contrapositive to clutch players is also a bit alarming - that dudes are loafing during the other at-bats. The players will tell you in the biggest spot they want their best guy - stop the presses. When someone says "I want Nick Punto in there for a big at-bat" then that is newsworthy. Are there variations among stars? Of course - but there are variations among them already. There is no proof that such variation (in clutch spots) is outside of their variation in general.

Theres no proof that it isnt either but I daresay that Jeter is more clutch than A-Rod even though A-Rod is considered more talented. And yes, maybe some guys do loaf when its not as meaningful, isnt that what they said about Reggie Jackson? Why it could be like that is hard to know, it could just be confidence, or it could be that a guy works the count to his favor better, or he is a better guesser.

[GomesBeard]

I don't think baseball can be totally turned into numbers. I do believe in the existence of the 'clutch hitter' but I also think that they mostly tend to be the best players. Are they the clutch hitters because they are among the best? Or are they the best players because they are clutch? I don't know.

[sk7326]

Was Jeff Bagwell a non-clutch hitter? .948 regular season OPS, .685 postseason OPS in 129 PA's. Of course it can't be proved, but that's a pretty big disparity right there.

 

Nick Swisher? One of the worst postseason hitters in history. It doesn't mean he was a choker, but it could mean that his postseason failures were in his head. I think psychological factors are very real, even if impossible to measure with any empirical certainty.

 

129 PAs is literally nothing from a measurement perspective - I think the best example of clutch being narrative over facts was Papi at the ALCS. That homerun will live as it should - amazing. But he was also really terrible in a series where the Red Sox lost twice.

 

I do not discount the psychological aspect of the game - just pointing out that those factors are baked into the results over a long period of time. Also, what is a big at-bat? They are all big - or the implication is that some players do not try all the time and that's cool. I tend to think (if you want to psychoanalyze) that assigning simplistic things like nerves and whatnot (which is what we'd feel as fans) to guys who do this their whole lives is a bit insulting. What I do think happens is that guys who have mastered the craft allows them to perform it when it is the hardest to do so. But that's what makes them good. I am not even necessarily saying "clutch" does not exist - but none of the definitions of what that means (runners in scoring position, when a new moon is out) have borne out any truth other than either A) luck or the variation you'd expect between good and less good players.

[Bellhorn04]

I do not discount the psychological aspect of the game - just pointing out that those factors are baked into the results over a long period of time. Also, what is a big at-bat? They are all big - or the implication is that some players do not try all the time and that's cool.

 

I don't think there is necessarily any implication about players trying or not trying more than usual. I think it's about high-leverage situations naturally raising the fear and adrenaline levels.

 

One of my favorite lines in connection from this came from Sox relief pitcher Steve Crawford, who came into Game 5 of the 1986 ALCS after Dave Henderson had put us ahead. I'll paraphrase, but this is close enough to what he said: 'I wished there had been a Port-a-John on the mound because I really thought I was going to s*** myself.'

[NativeBostonian]

Actually, he will be turning 29 in October. That means any extension will be for his 30+ years. He has some good years left, but if the Red Sox weren't willing to pay 75 million for Lester at 30, it would be insulting for them to give it to Cespedes.

 

From what I am hearing, they don't like giving pitcher who are 30+ long term deals, not hitter.

[Behindenemylines]

Was Ortiz responsible for those runners getting on base to begin with? No? Then why does he deserve credit for them crossing the plate when he gets a hit? He doesn't. RBI is ********, and runners left on base is bad luck. You and NativeBostonian have an astonishingly bad grasp on cause and effect.

 

RBI is not a special stat, and driving in runs is not a special talent. Stop trying to pretend that this is the case. Try thinking critically for once in your life instead of regurgitating the already unoriginal opinions of some hillbilly high school baseball coach somewhere (and demanding that I do the same).

 

What? What? If a guy is hitting .330 with no runner on base, and .100 with runners in scoring position then you have a problem. The last time I looked in baseball you win if you score runs. Someone needs to drive them in - RBIs!

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

What? What? If a guy is hitting .330 with no runner on base, and .100 with runners in scoring position then you have a problem.

It's called luck. Bad luck, to be specific.

 

The last time I looked in baseball you win if you score runs. Someone needs to drive them in - RBIs!

This logic is so f***ing horrible that I'm legitimately offended that you tried to present it as a valid point.

[SoxFanForsyth]

From what I am hearing, they don't like giving pitcher who are 30+ long term deals, not hitter.

 

It's not even just that. It's pitchers who have X amount of 200+ innings under their belt basically.

 

I think what they theorize is that pitchers only have X amount of innings on their arm, which is probably pretty fair, and so it's not necessarily "over 30" as much as it is "they have X innings under their belt and project to have another 1,000 innings, of which we project 500 of them will have an increased risk of injury"

[jad]

If clutch existed to any meaningful extent, it would be easily documented. And it hasn't been. It's the same as what to most of us seems obvious: that basketball players get on 'hot' streaks. Of course they do ... Except they don't, and hot streaks have been shown to be indistinguishable from chance performance (right--Bird had more of them than, say, Jim Luscatof, because he has a higher fg percentage). Same goes for "protection" for hitters, which has repeatedly been shown to be mythical. And of course, the idiotic bunt sacrifice and moving the runner up (not rocket science--the most bases you can 'move the runner up with an out' in an inning is two, and unfortunately ... oh well). But so what? We watch sports for the mythology, not the reality! That's why when Gomes claims responsibility for WS wins, there will always be those who believe him. Maybe our clinging to the notion of 'intangibles' gives us the illusion that we too can 'get our minds right' and be professional athletes too. Sure. Just as I see no reason the RS can't go on a run, win all their final games, and bring another WS back this year.

[Palodios]

There was a great pic on Reddit today, titled Lester and Gomes look really happy to be in Oakland.

 

[Spudboy]

I saw a clip of the intro. Lester said something about hopefully continuing his relationship with the Sox. I don't recall his exact words but it will sure fuel the idea that he will return next year. Who knows?

 

Both Lester and Gomes did not smile which is unusual for this type of affair. Imagine how they feel.

 

I can't wait to see a photo of those two having dinner ( and smiling ) with Jake Peavey.