The Alex Cora Managerial Decision Thread

[Kimmi]

Kimmi is right on this one. The oil pattern changes (tho not drastically) as the day/tournament goes on. Bowlers also tend to carry both 15 and 16 lb balls with a various assortment of styles (densities, high/low mass, coverstocks). There is both a little bit of luck and a little bit of repeatable skill.

 

Thank you.

[a700hitter]

Thank you.

But I never disputed those factors.

[Kimmi]

I know some bowlers on the professional senior circuit, and I have a lot of excellent bowlers among my friends and family -- lots of 300 games.

 

As far as taking you seriously, it is hard when you go off into crazy town about issues like this calling them facts. Based on your theory (not a fact as you say) since randomness is the predominant factor in close games, there is often not a deserving first place team or deserving champion as most of the time the margins of victory are decided by winning more close games than the other team, especially in the post season. What about football, does the same rule of randomness hold there as well? Six of the 8 Super Bowls by BB's teams were decided by 4 points or less and another one had a 6 point difference and was an overtime game. Were the Super Bowl winners of those games deserving or just lucky?

 

The things that I have stated as fact, are indeed fact.

[a700hitter]

The things that I have stated as fact, are indeed fact.

That's a nonresponsive response.

[Kimmi]

But I never disputed those factors.

 

Yes, you did.

[moonslav59]

It's not just a matter of cherry picked stats though.

 

Cherry=picked or not three seasons of data from one team proves very little.

 

I'm sure someone can dig up many championship teams that had great 1 run game records.

 

(BTW, I agree with your point about randomness being a major part of winning close games, but skill tips the balance a significant amount of time as well- just not in 2004, 2007 and 2013 with the Sox.

[a700hitter]

Yes, you did.

No, I didn't. And i replied to his post.

[Kimmi]

Cherry=picked or not three seasons of data from one team proves very little.

 

I'm sure someone can dig up many championship teams that had great 1 run game records.

 

(BTW, I agree with your point about randomness being a major part of winning close games, but skill tips the balance a significant amount of time as well- just not in 2004, 2007 and 2013 with the Sox.

 

This is a topic that has been statistically studied and proven by the stat geeks.

[moonslav59]

This is a topic that has been statistically studied and proven by the stat geeks.

 

Like I said, I agree with your point that 4+ run wins are a better indicator of a good team than 1 run wins. Randomness plays a greater role in 1 run games for obvious reasons. (Well, obvious to some.)

[Slasher9]

The umpires and their calls, the time of day or night of the game, and strength of schedule are actually all random factors which affect the outcome of a game. Kind of my point. If you had a different umpire in a one run game, with all other things remaining the same, it's very likely that you would have had a different outcome

 

If a game is won by 5 runs, you can be pretty sure, but not 100% sure, that the random factors were not significant factors in the outcome of the game.

 

If the game is decided by one run, you can be pretty sure that the random factors played a significant role in the outcome of the game.

 

Robot umps now!

[illinoisredsox]

No, the immutable laws of physics are set in motion on every roll of the ball.

 

Which laws would those be exactly?

[a700hitter]

Which laws would those be exactly?

Take physics.

[illinoisredsox]

Take physics.

 

Exactly the answer I expected from you. You won’t ever actually answer a question, no matter how simple. The truth is in this case you have absolutely no idea which laws do or don’t apply.

[a700hitter]

Exactly the answer I expected from you. You won’t ever actually answer a question, no matter how simple. The truth is in this case you have absolutely no idea which laws do or don’t apply.

Did you expect a term paper giving you calculations on mass, velocity, friction and gravity etc. I finished in the top of my class in physics in high school and college, but that was 35 years ago, and I am probably rusty. But thanks for being a dickhead.

[Natick to NC]

Lin or Holt at SS ?

[a700hitter]

Wow, high school physics. I’ll try to muster up some level of awe at that accomplishment.

 

Here’s a hint counselor, don’t tell an engineer to “take physics”.

 

And resorting to name calling. Nice.

I am an attorney, so my science studies didn't go very far. My daughter and son in law are are engineers, but thankfully they are not dickheads. Since you are an engineer, you should be able to do all the necessary calculations on the physics in bowling. Take some time and post it when you are ready. There are a lot of good articles on the physics of bowling available on the internet to give you a start.

[notin]

I know some bowlers on the professional senior circuit, and I have a lot of excellent bowlers among my friends and family -- lots of 300 games.

 

As far as taking you seriously, it is hard when you go off into crazy town about issues like this calling them facts. Based on your theory (not a fact as you say) since randomness is the predominant factor in close games, there is often not a deserving first place team or deserving champion as most of the time the margins of victory are decided by winning more close games than the other team, especially in the post season. What about football, does the same rule of randomness hold there as well? Six of the 8 Super Bowls by BB's teams were decided by 4 points or less and another one had a 6 point difference and was an overtime game. Were the Super Bowl winners of those games deserving or just lucky?

 

So... there was no element of randomness in their two losses to the Giants? Or in the win over Seattle? Didn't you see that catch by Jermaine Kearse? And you thought play was all skill?

 

Ditto Tyree...

[a700hitter]

So... there was no element of randomness in their two losses to the Giants? Or in the win over Seattle? Didn't you see that catch by Jermaine Kearse? And you thought play was all skill?

 

Ditto Tyree...

Could you jump as hard as Tyree and have the presence of mind and good hands to pin the ball against your helmet as you are getting hit and then hitting the ground? LOL!! Was it bad luck when Wes Welker dropped a wide open pass with no one within 15 yards of him?

[illinoisredsox]

Did you expect a term paper giving you calculations on mass, velocity, friction and gravity etc. I finished in the top of my class in physics in high school and college, but that was 35 years ago, and I am probably rusty. But thanks for being a dickhead.

 

Well, at least you got some of the terms right. Spin rates, launch angle, etc would also have to be taken into account, and BTW, chaos theory and the minute differences in initial conditions does partially account for differing end results.

 

Don't need a term paper nor do I need to "take physics" but I will admit that 40 years out from all those engineering courses probably has me a little rusty as well. As a Chemical Engineer, fluid mechanics and laminar/turbulent flow were more important to my background than dynamics. Doesn't change the fact that you never actually answer a direct question about anything.

 

The name calling shows a certain level of maturity on your part; I'll leave it at that.

Edited April 10, 2018 by illinoisredsox

[a700hitter]

Well, at least you got some of the terms right. Spin rates, launch angle, etc would also have to be taken into account, and BTW, chaos theory and the minute differences in initial conditions does partially account for differing end results.

 

Don't need a term paper nor do I need to "take physics" but I will admit that 40 years out from all those engineering courses probably has me a little rusty as well. Doesn't change the fact that you never actually answer a direct quetion about anything.

 

The name calling shows a certian level of maturity on your part; I'll leave it at that.

In your post you were being a prick. As an attorney, spotting a prick is one of my specialties. You know that you were being a prick when you quizzed me on the laws of physics, so I treated you with the appropriate amount of respect. Edited April 10, 2018 by a700hitter

[illinoisredsox]

Lin or Holt at SS ?

 

My guess is they will split time, with Lin available as a defensive replacement in the games Holt starts. Got to hope for Holt to have his hot half early, if past perfromnce means anything.

[moonslav59]

Lin or Holt at SS ?

 

I'd choose Lin. Cora may choose Holt and use Lin in the late innings.

 

Here's a wild and maybe crazzzy thought:

 

Nunez at SS and Holt at 2B.

[illinoisredsox]

In your post you were being a prick. As an attorney, spotting a prick is one of my specialties. You know that you were being a prick when you quizzed my on the laws of physics, so I treated you with the appropriate amount of respect.

 

As an attorney, being a prick is one of your specialties as well It comes across many times eacgh day here.

 

Take the last word, since you always have to have it.

[a700hitter]

I'd choose Lin. Cora may choose Holt and use Lin in the late innings.

 

Here's a wild and maybe crazzzy thought:

 

Nunez at SS and Holt at 2B.

Isn't SS Nunez's natural and best position?

[a700hitter]

As an attorney, being a prick is one of your specialties as well It comes across many times eacgh day here.

 

Take the last word, since you always have to have it.

Since you are giving me the last word, I will take it. I admittedly can be a prick with the best of them. In this case, you had it coming, and you know that. Edited April 10, 2018 by a700hitter

[illinoisredsox]

I'd choose Lin. Cora may choose Holt and use Lin in the late innings.

 

Here's a wild and maybe crazzzy thought:

 

Nunez at SS and Holt at 2B.

 

That may be Holt's best defensive position (faint praise for sure). But how good is Nunez at short (I don't really know)?

 

I'm prepared write off Holt's 2017 season due to the concussions. He was actually showing some signs of life late in the year, so there is hope, at least on offense.

[moonslav59]

That may be Holt's best defensive position (faint praise for sure). But how good is Nunez at short (I don't really know)?

 

I'm prepared write off Holt's 2017 season due to the concussions. He was actually showing some signs of life late in the year, so there is hope, at least on offense.

 

Nunez sucks at SS, but so does Holt.

 

Nunez has played SS more than any other position. His 2013 season with 600+ innings at SS was horrendous:

-28 DRS

-27.3 UZR/150

 

Career:

-13.4 UZR/150

-42 DRS in 2091 innings

 

He's -11.8 at 2B (-9 DRS is 409 innings)

 

 

Note: from 2014-2108, he's +3.1 UZR/150 at SS in 940+ innings. (14th out of 58 SSs with 900+ innings)

Edited April 10, 2018 by moonslav59

[Slasher9]

i'm OK with Holt never playing another inning for us.

i'll go with Lin.

[mvp 78]

Isn't SS Nunez's natural and best position?

 

His best position is OF.

[sk7326]

He's not, but it doesn't take much to be better than Devers defensively and Moreland offensively.

 

Devers upside is well worth keeping him at 3B ... 1B? The differences defensively are very small. Metrics are pretty useless there.