guy like Espada will face other questions/concerns. Analytics is likely not going to be one of them. That's his forte.
"“Joey asks a lot of questions,” said the Phillies bench coach Rob Thomson, who held that role with the Yankees when Espada was the third-base coach. “When he first started with us, what he didn’t know or didn’t realize, he asked the questions, and he figured it out. The true beauty of this job is to be able to balance the analytics with what you’re teaching and how it applies to that player, this team, this situation.”
And Espada was able to produce results internally. Defensive overshifting in the infield is now common throughout the majors, but that wasn’t the case as recently as four years ago. The Yankees, in particular, had seen mixed results.
In early 2016, Girardi went so far as to say he would recommend banning the use of the shift (while conceding he would use it as long as it remained legal). As infield coach, however, Espada not only advocated the shift but also worked with the analytics team to help improve its algorithms and then communicate the plan to the players."
my point is i dont think we need to have a fear of any of these candidates not being open to working with the Ben Zauzmers of the world. I think there is a very very small minority throughout the entire game who don't get that anymore, and anyone still in that group is nowhere near an invitation to interview for this job.
Knows how true it is (and the Mets can easily find this out) but if Scherzer isn’t advocating for his ex-manager and instead Showalter, I keep coming back to that being pretty damning (Ausmus).
it's a Buck interview with Costas from 2015 (someone just resurfaced on twitter). This is where FG grabbed a lot of the quotes from yesterday's article. MLB: Buck Showalter A Life in Baseball - ( New Window )
Is a very smart, well spoken guy who has been a “winner” (I only use quotes because he hasn’t won a WS) I’d be completely on board if they hired him. I’m actually least familiar (even after reading up ) on Quatraro, so I have the least to go on with him (though I do trust most thing Rays). Assuming Bochy is peripheral then my top 2 choices would be Buck and then Espada but all of the guys named have their strengths
he's a guy who the more you see the more you like. I think a unique quality he has that may bond him to Cohen is that you know what his barometer for success is. It's championship or bust. That's his only measure of success.
Joel Sherman
@Joelsherman1
·
16s
Buck Showalter is doing his Zoom managerial interviews with the #Mets today. The plan is to take what is currently six publicly known candidates who will all do the Zoom and whittle it down to 2-3 for face-to-face next week and potentially a decision.
unless he shows up to his interview piss mad or something.
obviously if Bochy is interested that's also enormously compelling but there is 1 key difference between the 2 (which is also the reason why I would guess Bochy isn't realistic) - Bochy's legacy is in tact. He's won his 3 championships and has no doubters. He may or may not want the Mets but he definitely doesn't need them. Is it really worth it to him to give up his ride into the sunset for a job that's 1 or 2 injuries away from a pain cave?
On the other hand the Mets may be Buck's last/only shot to get the 1 thing that's eluded him. there is no question that on day 1 he's probably more desperate for a ring than anyone else in the org - including Cohen.
also if you are cohen, wouldn't you need a really good reason to choose anyone else over a guy who is 4/4 quickly turning around teams he's managed? i dont think this is a search that needs to be overcomplicated.
That many players do not really understand them and that you have to show them how they can be useful.
Because when people do not understand something, they begin to oppose it out of fear or discomfort.
I think that explains--at least, in part--the Mets offense floundering so badly last year. Analytics were imposed rather than implemented with full player buy-in.
unrelated but what exactly happened in Cromie's 2 meetings with Cohen where he DIDN'T get the job. I'd be pretty embarrassed to meet be picked by Sandy and Co. get 2 meetings with the owner (possibly zoom) and then not get the job. More out of curiosity than anything else.
-Puma claims Ausmus is viewed as a poor tactician and questions regarding how he would handle the NY media. Massive pass for me. In fact, I'm taking Geren over Ausmus.
1. Showalter 2. Espada, 3. Quatraro or Kelly (tie), 5. Geren and then Ausmus for me.
That many players do not really understand them and that you have to show them how they can be useful.
Because when people do not understand something, they begin to oppose it out of fear or discomfort.
I think that explains--at least, in part--the Mets offense floundering so badly last year. Analytics were imposed rather than implemented with full player buy-in.
Then Showalter is going to have to accept/want at least one coach on the staff that serves this role. Espada does this for Dusty (for example), the Rays actually just pulled down a member of their FO to now search on the coaching staff (zero coaching experience) to serve this very role.
That many players do not really understand them and that you have to show them how they can be useful.
Because when people do not understand something, they begin to oppose it out of fear or discomfort.
I think that explains--at least, in part--the Mets offense floundering so badly last year. Analytics were imposed rather than implemented with full player buy-in.
Is that true? You think if players don't buy into analytics they're less likely to perform when placed in a role that analytics suggest is their best chance at success?
That many players do not really understand them and that you have to show them how they can be useful.
Because when people do not understand something, they begin to oppose it out of fear or discomfort.
I think that explains--at least, in part--the Mets offense floundering so badly last year. Analytics were imposed rather than implemented with full player buy-in.
that's as good of a theory as any. The players liked Chili, so it stands to reason that they may have been similarly rubbed the wrong way by Scotts approach even before he shitcanned Chili and called the players out in the press conference.
don't buy that "excuse". Davis was notably "anti" analytics in his teachings in regard to hitting and they were awful to open the year (and no better with Q, who also wasn't an "analytics" guy, he was simply a teacher of launch angle (which every team is now "into"). I think there is a major level of "lumping in" going on here.
-Lindor started HORRENDOUSLY but his last 100 or so games were in line with his career numbers.
-McCann's numbers are completely in line with his career numbers (career 84 wRC+, 2021 80)
-In regard to Conforto he didn't seem capable of adjusting to what teams were doing to him. 2020 he saw the shift something like 48%, in 2021 it was closer to 75. Playing for a megadeal, likely had him less interested in opposite way singles. He walked nearly identically towards his career mark and his k's were actually down. There was nothing in his numbers to suggest anything but under performance, not a shift in what he was trying to do.
-McNeil also had near identical walk/bb rates to his career marks, his BABIP however was a whopping 55 points below his career WORST, there is nothing in "analytics" that causes you to go from an extremely "lucky" BABIP hitter to below average (especially when you're not walking or striking out more).
Analytics have suddenly become something of a "dirty word" to some but there is no real evidence the Mets hitters were hurt by them at all. An old school hitting coach and a manager who most of these guys hit well for in 2020...
unrelated but what exactly happened in Cromie's 2 meetings with Cohen where he DIDN'T get the job. I'd be pretty embarrassed to meet be picked by Sandy and Co. get 2 meetings with the owner (possibly zoom) and then not get the job. More out of curiosity than anything else.
The same thing happened with Scott too. I don't think any of us know for sure, but it does seem like Sandy was more eager to get someone else into the baseball opps role than Cohen was.
I'm a lot happier with Eppler than either of those 2 so good job Steve I guess?
That many players do not really understand them and that you have to show them how they can be useful.
Because when people do not understand something, they begin to oppose it out of fear or discomfort.
I think that explains--at least, in part--the Mets offense floundering so badly last year. Analytics were imposed rather than implemented with full player buy-in.
that's as good of a theory as any. The players liked Chili, so it stands to reason that they may have been similarly rubbed the wrong way by Scotts approach even before he shitcanned Chili and called the players out in the press conference.
Numbers don't bear this out in any way. See below.
was showing signs of this in 2020, it was mostly ignored because he had a HUGE September which people believed to be "McNeil is finally healthy". 2020 his slash line was .269/.336/.344 over his first 28 games
September... .998 OPS, .364 BABIP
All of his batted ball data from 2021 shows a guy who simply did not make hard contact. But... again 2020 was a harbinger of sorts. He was bottom 8% of the league in barrel % in 2020, in 2021 he was bottom 15%, hard hit% in 2020 was bottom 5%! 95% of the league posted higher HH% than him, we chose to "ignore" it. 2021 bottom 17% etc etc.
Dan you a misunderstanding Vanzetti's point I think (or i am)
I think he's saying there was just conflict/lack of trust/poor communication between the players and FO - specifically when it came to hitting.
not that the players were right and FO was wrong. but rather that the FO's execution didn't work because the players didn't buy in.
I'd add to that argument that I think there was clearly conflict and a lack of being on the same page from a hitting standpoint. If they were that misaligned with chili they shouldn't have brought him back in the first place. Whether chili was right or wrong the players liked him so firing him may have created a rift.
contrast what happened with the hitting coach and how well discarcina (who players spoke highly of) was seemingly able to take advantage of defensive analytics (to great effect). though perhaps defensive analytics are less of a hot button for players where hitting is id imagine very personal?
was showing signs of this in 2020, it was mostly ignored because he had a HUGE September which people believed to be "McNeil is finally healthy". 2020 his slash line was .269/.336/.344 over his first 28 games
September... .998 OPS, .364 BABIP
All of his batted ball data from 2021 shows a guy who simply did not make hard contact. But... again 2020 was a harbinger of sorts. He was bottom 8% of the league in barrel % in 2020, in 2021 he was bottom 15%, hard hit% in 2020 was bottom 5%! 95% of the league posted higher HH% than him, we chose to "ignore" it. 2021 bottom 17% etc etc.
Dan if you go back in mcneils profile he has never made a lot of hard contact (HH rate, exit velo, pretty much always under league average). look at his spray charts and you will see this past year he went opposite field way more than he did previously. I posted about it (i think) somewhere in the scherzer thread with pics will try to find that.
Rojas was viewed as one of the most forward thinking managers when it came to his analytic approach. He certainly bought in. Hitters who did well in 2020, ignored their 2020 success (for the entire season, even post Chili Davis) to their own detriment? How does that really make sense? The offense didn't take off once "old school Chili" was let go. So both approaches failed. Jeff McNeil not hitting the ball as hard as he did in 2018-2019 is a Jeff McNeil issue. McCann hitting near his career marks shouldn't be a surprise, when they are his career marks etc etc.
was showing signs of this in 2020, it was mostly ignored because he had a HUGE September which people believed to be "McNeil is finally healthy". 2020 his slash line was .269/.336/.344 over his first 28 games
September... .998 OPS, .364 BABIP
All of his batted ball data from 2021 shows a guy who simply did not make hard contact. But... again 2020 was a harbinger of sorts. He was bottom 8% of the league in barrel % in 2020, in 2021 he was bottom 15%, hard hit% in 2020 was bottom 5%! 95% of the league posted higher HH% than him, we chose to "ignore" it. 2021 bottom 17% etc etc.
Dan if you go back in mcneils profile he has never made a lot of hard contact (HH rate, exit velo, pretty much always under league average). look at his spray charts and you will see this past year he went opposite field way more than he did previously. I posted about it (i think) somewhere in the scherzer thread with pics will try to find that.
That's false. His ISO was .214 his "big" 2019 season, it has been .142 and .109 since then.
From Paul Sporer
"This is a relative “Off the Radar” pick because obviously McNeil isn’t completely forgotten, but he certainly won’t be a Top 100 pick again. He was given a pass for his power outage in 2020 (-72 pts of ISO from 2019 to .142) likely due to his .998 OPS and 4 HR September after a .681 OPS and 0 HR over his first 28 games."
There were many times, especially when he went the other way, that I thought off the bat that the ball was a hit but then it would be caught. This was true mostly of fly balls.
to my eye it looks like he went the opposite way a lot more in 2021 vs. 2019. look at all those blue dots for doubles on the RF line in 2019 and in 2021 he had more blue dots on the LF line.
the exit velocity, barrel %, and hard hit rates weren't far off. Better in the year he pulled the ball more which makes sense but all of them were below league average - so that's never been what he excels at in the first place.
His whiff%, k-rate, and chase rates were actually all better in 2021 - which I guess means they had him trying to be more selective and use the whole field as opposed to grip it and rip it to RF?
That's false. His ISO was .214 his "big" 2019 season, it has been .142 and .109 since then.
From Paul Sporer
"This is a relative “Off the Radar” pick because obviously McNeil isn’t completely forgotten, but he certainly won’t be a Top 100 pick again. He was given a pass for his power outage in 2020 (-72 pts of ISO from 2019 to .142) likely due to his .998 OPS and 4 HR September after a .681 OPS and 0 HR over his first 28 games."
look at the statcast data I just posted from 2019:
avg. exit velocity 41st percentile
hard hit rate 35th percentile
barrel percentage 21st percentile
not quite what you would expect from a guy who hit .318.
2019 Jeff McNeil had an expected slug of .458, in 2021 it was .385, 2020 .405. He's not hitting the ball as hard as he did in 2019. Maybe 2019 was a mirage but the extremely low BABIP suggests something was physically wrong.
2019 Jeff McNeil pulled his balls in play 44.5% of the time, 2021? 35% (career low), line drive%? Again, a career low 22.8%, 2019 26.6
it's your belief that McNeil posted career lows nearly across the board because he wasn't buying into Chili Davis AND Quattlebaum (2 unrelated approaches) were teaching AND his first 30 games in 2020 (with similar numbers aka power outage) were all related to this? Does that really make a lot of sense to you?
also the biggest Sandy fan on this site, if he felt the players were having trouble understanding this data (again, an odd argument when Davis was the hitting coach in 2020 albeit via zoom, when many of these guys had career or close to it years) AND unable to to improve under Quattlebaum... why didn't Alderson do something about it?
79 games .822 OPS, Lindor career OPS... .821, heck his final 104 games his OPS was .776. Lindor had a truly AWFUL start AND expectations of him as an offensive player were too high.
Smith was horrendous in 2021. He had just an 86 wRC+ and 11 HR in 493 PA coming off a pair of 177 AB gems (134 wRC+ in 2019, 166 in 2020) and I don’t really have any answers for why he was so poor. He pulled the ball a lot less (-7 pts to 37%), but that doesn’t come close to explaining the downfall. His HR/FB plummeting from 22% to 9% certainly stings, but again, it only explains some of it.
The simple fact is that I’m willing to bet on his .236 ISO from 2017-20 over the .119 from 2021 and his bargain bin price gives the pick built-in protection in case he flops again as you won’t be inclined to hang on as long as we did this past season.
"Back then, teams weren't concerned with launch angles, spray charts or defensive shifts -- elements of today's game that have become Rojas' bread and butter. As a quality control coach, he was a uniformed liaison between the Mets' analytics staff and the coaching staff. It was his job to help coaches and players -- in his case, hitters -- digest the information.
"He does a great job of filtering through some of the analytical numbers and stuff like that to make them a little more usable," former Mets manager Mickey Callaway said at the time.
So this narrative doesn't really hold up to scrutiny. Many of these guys (Conforto, McNeil, Dom etc) had strong 2020's with Rojas the manager and still here to communicate the data.
Dan you are getting off on one of your multi post crusades
that are generally difficult to track. So here's some answers for you that I think hit on most of the questions i've seen to this point to keep things organized.
1. i have no idea whether chili or the analytics group was right or wrong. Nobody knows that for sure because they cant just redo 2021 and test different things to figure out who was right and wrong.
2. i think the 2021 team was not on the same page and there was internal conflict. chili got fired and clearly didn't like scott. again don't know who was right or wrong but i think that kind of conflict is bad for all involved.
3. re: mcneil I don't think his talent disappeared in 2021.
a) His bat control was still elite (whiff rate, k rate both better than 2019).
b) his average exit velo was similar to 2019 as well (88.8 vs. 88.1).
c) K rate and walk rate also almost identical.
his BABIP dropped and his spray charts show he pulled the ball a lot less. it stands to reason there may have been an approach change that didn't work. Again no idea who to blame for that. Using the whole field was more of a Chili concept btw and it looks like McNeil did that more in 2020 as well. or it could have just been a very bad luck (injury impacted) year.
4. Re: Sandy, guilty as charged that I'm a fan, however if there's 1 area i've long disagreed it's his lean towards 3 outcomes vs. contact players with bat control. I'm very happy Eppler seems to be a little more balance and actually that was 1 of the few positive things BVW did as well.
79 games .822 OPS, Lindor career OPS... .821, heck his final 104 games his OPS was .776. Lindor had a truly AWFUL start AND expectations of him as an offensive player were too high.
Recall good article read on Lindor that I will look for talking about 2021 not as a slump but a 3 year slide.
Not a good year but he did hit .283 hitter with runners in scoring position last season. And over the final month, had a .895 OPS, with nine home runs and 25 RBI. Will take a lot of this.
regard to McNeil Chili Davis was fired on 5/4, Jeff McNeil over his final 97 games had a .673 OPS. Chili Davis had such a negative impact on Jeff McNeil that he was unable to overcome his teachings over the final "100" games? Does that really pass the sniff test for you? Sure doesn't for me.
79 games .822 OPS, Lindor career OPS... .821, heck his final 104 games his OPS was .776. Lindor had a truly AWFUL start AND expectations of him as an offensive player were too high.
Recall good article read on Lindor that I will look for talking about 2021 not as a slump but a 3 year slide.
Not a good year but he did hit .283 hitter with runners in scoring position last season. And over the final month, had a .895 OPS, with nine home runs and 25 RBI. Will take a lot of this.
What is his new norm?
Lindor's 2018 looks like an outlier so of course there will be a "3 year slide" if you don't accept that as one. His wRC+ in 2018 was 132, he's surpassed 120 wRC+ on only 1 other occasion (his rookie season).
His wRC+ in 2019 was 118... his wRC+ second half of 2021? 118. His 2020 was a down year and he opened his career with the Mets with a horrendous first 150 ab's (.589 OPS). So this "3 year slide" stuff only exists if you think his 2018 is who he is, which likely isn't the case (a near 8 fWAR player). His 2018 would have led all full-time position players in fWAR by near 1 full win. That's how ridiculous his 2018 season was.
says hire Showalter (I'll say this, it's kinda weird how it seems to be a consensus in the media, I said Buck is my first choice just strange no real support for the other candidates, Bochy in particular... who looks like he's not even being considered would seemingly be a name to push for) Link - ( New Window )
If @RaysBaseball can do this (as well as hire a coach specifically to help explain/synthesize data) @mets should be all about flexing their muscle when it comes to the 2022 coaching staff Link - ( New Window )
Also interviewing today. View is he’s a very smart guy , highly thought of but lost the clubhouse in Oakland. Maybe he’s learned from his mistakes with the Dodgers?
He's not my first choice but let's not forget both Billy Beane and now Andrew Friedman thought highly enough of Bob Geren to employ him long-term. He's a legitimate candidate
Had the Phillies not recently hired him, I think Bobby Dickerson would have been a near lock to join Buck Showalter's staff (should he get the Mets job). One of Showalter's closest confidants
John Russell served as Buck Showalter's bench coach for 7 seasons with the Orioles and has previous managerial experience, assumption is they would pair him with somebody analytically inclined but a name to watch
the thing i come back to is buck track record turning teams around
the Yankees had a lost decade before Buck. he won 88 games year 2, had them in first year 3 at the time the players went on the strike, and in the ALDS year 4 after the strike. Year 5 they won the WS that began the dynasty (with Torre, and the foundation Buck helped develop).
the Diamondbacks were an expansion team and he won 100 games and a division in year 2. Got fired year 3 with an 85-77 record, and they win the WS in year 4.
the Rangers won 71, 73, 72 games the years before he got there. it was prime A-Rod. In Buck year 2 they trade A-Rod and go on to win 89 games. Obviously didn't keep that momentum going for whatever reason but he left them a better club than when he got there.
the Orioles hadn't made the playoffs for almost 15 years before him. Made it 3x with him and had 5 straight non-losing years. In his last year they only won 47 games but in the 2 full years since they had just 52 and 54 wins. Those years after 6 straight with 75 wins or more.
it's a lot like Dusty, all he does is win. Also a lot like Houston when they hired Dusty, this org could use a wide respected face.
One final name to note as a potential member of Buck Showalter's staff is ex-Met Wayne Kirby. Kirby served as Orioles 1b coach for all 8 seasons Buck managed there, and has served as an MLB 1b coach each of the last 10 seasons
the thing i come back to is buck track record turning teams around
the Yankees had a lost decade before Buck. he won 88 games year 2, had them in first year 3 at the time the players went on the strike, and in the ALDS year 4 after the strike. Year 5 they won the WS that began the dynasty (with Torre, and the foundation Buck helped develop).
the Diamondbacks were an expansion team and he won 100 games and a division in year 2. Got fired year 3 with an 85-77 record, and they win the WS in year 4.
the Rangers won 71, 73, 72 games the years before he got there. it was prime A-Rod. In Buck year 2 they trade A-Rod and go on to win 89 games. Obviously didn't keep that momentum going for whatever reason but he left them a better club than when he got there.
the Orioles hadn't made the playoffs for almost 15 years before him. Made it 3x with him and had 5 straight non-losing years. In his last year they only won 47 games but in the 2 full years since they had just 52 and 54 wins. Those years after 6 straight with 75 wins or more.
it's a lot like Dusty, all he does is win. Also a lot like Houston when they hired Dusty, this org could use a wide respected face.
"“Joey asks a lot of questions,” said the Phillies bench coach Rob Thomson, who held that role with the Yankees when Espada was the third-base coach. “When he first started with us, what he didn’t know or didn’t realize, he asked the questions, and he figured it out. The true beauty of this job is to be able to balance the analytics with what you’re teaching and how it applies to that player, this team, this situation.”
And Espada was able to produce results internally. Defensive overshifting in the infield is now common throughout the majors, but that wasn’t the case as recently as four years ago. The Yankees, in particular, had seen mixed results.
In early 2016, Girardi went so far as to say he would recommend banning the use of the shift (while conceding he would use it as long as it remained legal). As infield coach, however, Espada not only advocated the shift but also worked with the analytics team to help improve its algorithms and then communicate the plan to the players."
Link - ( New Window )
MLB: Buck Showalter A Life in Baseball - ( New Window )
@Joelsherman1
·
16s
Buck Showalter is doing his Zoom managerial interviews with the #Mets today. The plan is to take what is currently six publicly known candidates who will all do the Zoom and whittle it down to 2-3 for face-to-face next week and potentially a decision.
obviously if Bochy is interested that's also enormously compelling but there is 1 key difference between the 2 (which is also the reason why I would guess Bochy isn't realistic) - Bochy's legacy is in tact. He's won his 3 championships and has no doubters. He may or may not want the Mets but he definitely doesn't need them. Is it really worth it to him to give up his ride into the sunset for a job that's 1 or 2 injuries away from a pain cave?
On the other hand the Mets may be Buck's last/only shot to get the 1 thing that's eluded him. there is no question that on day 1 he's probably more desperate for a ring than anyone else in the org - including Cohen.
also if you are cohen, wouldn't you need a really good reason to choose anyone else over a guy who is 4/4 quickly turning around teams he's managed? i dont think this is a search that needs to be overcomplicated.
Because when people do not understand something, they begin to oppose it out of fear or discomfort.
I think that explains--at least, in part--the Mets offense floundering so badly last year. Analytics were imposed rather than implemented with full player buy-in.
-Puma claims Ausmus is viewed as a poor tactician and questions regarding how he would handle the NY media. Massive pass for me. In fact, I'm taking Geren over Ausmus.
1. Showalter 2. Espada, 3. Quatraro or Kelly (tie), 5. Geren and then Ausmus for me.
Because when people do not understand something, they begin to oppose it out of fear or discomfort.
I think that explains--at least, in part--the Mets offense floundering so badly last year. Analytics were imposed rather than implemented with full player buy-in.
Then Showalter is going to have to accept/want at least one coach on the staff that serves this role. Espada does this for Dusty (for example), the Rays actually just pulled down a member of their FO to now search on the coaching staff (zero coaching experience) to serve this very role.
Because when people do not understand something, they begin to oppose it out of fear or discomfort.
I think that explains--at least, in part--the Mets offense floundering so badly last year. Analytics were imposed rather than implemented with full player buy-in.
Is that true? You think if players don't buy into analytics they're less likely to perform when placed in a role that analytics suggest is their best chance at success?
Because when people do not understand something, they begin to oppose it out of fear or discomfort.
I think that explains--at least, in part--the Mets offense floundering so badly last year. Analytics were imposed rather than implemented with full player buy-in.
that's as good of a theory as any. The players liked Chili, so it stands to reason that they may have been similarly rubbed the wrong way by Scotts approach even before he shitcanned Chili and called the players out in the press conference.
-Lindor started HORRENDOUSLY but his last 100 or so games were in line with his career numbers.
-McCann's numbers are completely in line with his career numbers (career 84 wRC+, 2021 80)
-In regard to Conforto he didn't seem capable of adjusting to what teams were doing to him. 2020 he saw the shift something like 48%, in 2021 it was closer to 75. Playing for a megadeal, likely had him less interested in opposite way singles. He walked nearly identically towards his career mark and his k's were actually down. There was nothing in his numbers to suggest anything but under performance, not a shift in what he was trying to do.
-McNeil also had near identical walk/bb rates to his career marks, his BABIP however was a whopping 55 points below his career WORST, there is nothing in "analytics" that causes you to go from an extremely "lucky" BABIP hitter to below average (especially when you're not walking or striking out more).
Analytics have suddenly become something of a "dirty word" to some but there is no real evidence the Mets hitters were hurt by them at all. An old school hitting coach and a manager who most of these guys hit well for in 2020...
The same thing happened with Scott too. I don't think any of us know for sure, but it does seem like Sandy was more eager to get someone else into the baseball opps role than Cohen was.
I'm a lot happier with Eppler than either of those 2 so good job Steve I guess?
Quote:
That many players do not really understand them and that you have to show them how they can be useful.
Because when people do not understand something, they begin to oppose it out of fear or discomfort.
I think that explains--at least, in part--the Mets offense floundering so badly last year. Analytics were imposed rather than implemented with full player buy-in.
that's as good of a theory as any. The players liked Chili, so it stands to reason that they may have been similarly rubbed the wrong way by Scotts approach even before he shitcanned Chili and called the players out in the press conference.
Numbers don't bear this out in any way. See below.
September... .998 OPS, .364 BABIP
All of his batted ball data from 2021 shows a guy who simply did not make hard contact. But... again 2020 was a harbinger of sorts. He was bottom 8% of the league in barrel % in 2020, in 2021 he was bottom 15%, hard hit% in 2020 was bottom 5%! 95% of the league posted higher HH% than him, we chose to "ignore" it. 2021 bottom 17% etc etc.
I think he's saying there was just conflict/lack of trust/poor communication between the players and FO - specifically when it came to hitting.
not that the players were right and FO was wrong. but rather that the FO's execution didn't work because the players didn't buy in.
I'd add to that argument that I think there was clearly conflict and a lack of being on the same page from a hitting standpoint. If they were that misaligned with chili they shouldn't have brought him back in the first place. Whether chili was right or wrong the players liked him so firing him may have created a rift.
contrast what happened with the hitting coach and how well discarcina (who players spoke highly of) was seemingly able to take advantage of defensive analytics (to great effect). though perhaps defensive analytics are less of a hot button for players where hitting is id imagine very personal?
September... .998 OPS, .364 BABIP
All of his batted ball data from 2021 shows a guy who simply did not make hard contact. But... again 2020 was a harbinger of sorts. He was bottom 8% of the league in barrel % in 2020, in 2021 he was bottom 15%, hard hit% in 2020 was bottom 5%! 95% of the league posted higher HH% than him, we chose to "ignore" it. 2021 bottom 17% etc etc.
Dan if you go back in mcneils profile he has never made a lot of hard contact (HH rate, exit velo, pretty much always under league average). look at his spray charts and you will see this past year he went opposite field way more than he did previously. I posted about it (i think) somewhere in the scherzer thread with pics will try to find that.
Quote:
was showing signs of this in 2020, it was mostly ignored because he had a HUGE September which people believed to be "McNeil is finally healthy". 2020 his slash line was .269/.336/.344 over his first 28 games
September... .998 OPS, .364 BABIP
All of his batted ball data from 2021 shows a guy who simply did not make hard contact. But... again 2020 was a harbinger of sorts. He was bottom 8% of the league in barrel % in 2020, in 2021 he was bottom 15%, hard hit% in 2020 was bottom 5%! 95% of the league posted higher HH% than him, we chose to "ignore" it. 2021 bottom 17% etc etc.
Dan if you go back in mcneils profile he has never made a lot of hard contact (HH rate, exit velo, pretty much always under league average). look at his spray charts and you will see this past year he went opposite field way more than he did previously. I posted about it (i think) somewhere in the scherzer thread with pics will try to find that.
That's false. His ISO was .214 his "big" 2019 season, it has been .142 and .109 since then.
From Paul Sporer
"This is a relative “Off the Radar” pick because obviously McNeil isn’t completely forgotten, but he certainly won’t be a Top 100 pick again. He was given a pass for his power outage in 2020 (-72 pts of ISO from 2019 to .142) likely due to his .998 OPS and 4 HR September after a .681 OPS and 0 HR over his first 28 games."
Quote:
There were many times, especially when he went the other way, that I thought off the bat that the ball was a hit but then it would be caught. This was true mostly of fly balls.
to my eye it looks like he went the opposite way a lot more in 2021 vs. 2019. look at all those blue dots for doubles on the RF line in 2019 and in 2021 he had more blue dots on the LF line.
the exit velocity, barrel %, and hard hit rates weren't far off. Better in the year he pulled the ball more which makes sense but all of them were below league average - so that's never been what he excels at in the first place.
His whiff%, k-rate, and chase rates were actually all better in 2021 - which I guess means they had him trying to be more selective and use the whole field as opposed to grip it and rip it to RF?
https://corner.bigblueinteractive.com/index.php?mode=2&thread=615417&show_all=1#15475720 - ( New Window )
That's false. His ISO was .214 his "big" 2019 season, it has been .142 and .109 since then.
From Paul Sporer
"This is a relative “Off the Radar” pick because obviously McNeil isn’t completely forgotten, but he certainly won’t be a Top 100 pick again. He was given a pass for his power outage in 2020 (-72 pts of ISO from 2019 to .142) likely due to his .998 OPS and 4 HR September after a .681 OPS and 0 HR over his first 28 games."
look at the statcast data I just posted from 2019:
avg. exit velocity 41st percentile
hard hit rate 35th percentile
barrel percentage 21st percentile
not quite what you would expect from a guy who hit .318.
2019 Jeff McNeil pulled his balls in play 44.5% of the time, 2021? 35% (career low), line drive%? Again, a career low 22.8%, 2019 26.6
.246/.299/.387 career, 80 wRC+
2021 .232/.294/.349 84 wRC+
732 career games played
Does 2021 really look like an outlier? Or maybe what the player has done for the vast majority of their career?
Steamer projects said player... "shockingly" to post....229/.292/.370- 84 wRC+...
HOT TAKE: Dominic Smith hits 30 HR.
Smith was horrendous in 2021. He had just an 86 wRC+ and 11 HR in 493 PA coming off a pair of 177 AB gems (134 wRC+ in 2019, 166 in 2020) and I don’t really have any answers for why he was so poor. He pulled the ball a lot less (-7 pts to 37%), but that doesn’t come close to explaining the downfall. His HR/FB plummeting from 22% to 9% certainly stings, but again, it only explains some of it.
The simple fact is that I’m willing to bet on his .236 ISO from 2017-20 over the .119 from 2021 and his bargain bin price gives the pick built-in protection in case he flops again as you won’t be inclined to hang on as long as we did this past season.
"He does a great job of filtering through some of the analytical numbers and stuff like that to make them a little more usable," former Mets manager Mickey Callaway said at the time.
So this narrative doesn't really hold up to scrutiny. Many of these guys (Conforto, McNeil, Dom etc) had strong 2020's with Rojas the manager and still here to communicate the data.
1. i have no idea whether chili or the analytics group was right or wrong. Nobody knows that for sure because they cant just redo 2021 and test different things to figure out who was right and wrong.
2. i think the 2021 team was not on the same page and there was internal conflict. chili got fired and clearly didn't like scott. again don't know who was right or wrong but i think that kind of conflict is bad for all involved.
3. re: mcneil I don't think his talent disappeared in 2021.
a) His bat control was still elite (whiff rate, k rate both better than 2019).
b) his average exit velo was similar to 2019 as well (88.8 vs. 88.1).
c) K rate and walk rate also almost identical.
his BABIP dropped and his spray charts show he pulled the ball a lot less. it stands to reason there may have been an approach change that didn't work. Again no idea who to blame for that. Using the whole field was more of a Chili concept btw and it looks like McNeil did that more in 2020 as well. or it could have just been a very bad luck (injury impacted) year.
4. Re: Sandy, guilty as charged that I'm a fan, however if there's 1 area i've long disagreed it's his lean towards 3 outcomes vs. contact players with bat control. I'm very happy Eppler seems to be a little more balance and actually that was 1 of the few positive things BVW did as well.
Recall good article read on Lindor that I will look for talking about 2021 not as a slump but a 3 year slide.
Not a good year but he did hit .283 hitter with runners in scoring position last season. And over the final month, had a .895 OPS, with nine home runs and 25 RBI. Will take a lot of this.
What is his new norm?
Quote:
79 games .822 OPS, Lindor career OPS... .821, heck his final 104 games his OPS was .776. Lindor had a truly AWFUL start AND expectations of him as an offensive player were too high.
Recall good article read on Lindor that I will look for talking about 2021 not as a slump but a 3 year slide.
Not a good year but he did hit .283 hitter with runners in scoring position last season. And over the final month, had a .895 OPS, with nine home runs and 25 RBI. Will take a lot of this.
What is his new norm?
Lindor's 2018 looks like an outlier so of course there will be a "3 year slide" if you don't accept that as one. His wRC+ in 2018 was 132, he's surpassed 120 wRC+ on only 1 other occasion (his rookie season).
His wRC+ in 2019 was 118... his wRC+ second half of 2021? 118. His 2020 was a down year and he opened his career with the Mets with a horrendous first 150 ab's (.589 OPS). So this "3 year slide" stuff only exists if you think his 2018 is who he is, which likely isn't the case (a near 8 fWAR player). His 2018 would have led all full-time position players in fWAR by near 1 full win. That's how ridiculous his 2018 season was.
lol, just kidding.
2021- None
2020-None
2019 Trout (won MVP), Yelich (2nd in MVP voting), Bregman (2nd in MVP voting), Bellinger (tied with Lindor 7.7, won NL MVP)
Link - ( New Window )
that kind of mental flexibility is just what the Mets need even if the decision was a disaster.
Link - ( New Window )
lol, just kidding.
not a bad idea.
(also kidding, i truly enjoy all the met discussions here even during these lightning rounds)
Need a bit more than that, say 122 or so.
the Diamondbacks were an expansion team and he won 100 games and a division in year 2. Got fired year 3 with an 85-77 record, and they win the WS in year 4.
the Rangers won 71, 73, 72 games the years before he got there. it was prime A-Rod. In Buck year 2 they trade A-Rod and go on to win 89 games. Obviously didn't keep that momentum going for whatever reason but he left them a better club than when he got there.
the Orioles hadn't made the playoffs for almost 15 years before him. Made it 3x with him and had 5 straight non-losing years. In his last year they only won 47 games but in the 2 full years since they had just 52 and 54 wins. Those years after 6 straight with 75 wins or more.
it's a lot like Dusty, all he does is win. Also a lot like Houston when they hired Dusty, this org could use a wide respected face.
the Diamondbacks were an expansion team and he won 100 games and a division in year 2. Got fired year 3 with an 85-77 record, and they win the WS in year 4.
the Rangers won 71, 73, 72 games the years before he got there. it was prime A-Rod. In Buck year 2 they trade A-Rod and go on to win 89 games. Obviously didn't keep that momentum going for whatever reason but he left them a better club than when he got there.
the Orioles hadn't made the playoffs for almost 15 years before him. Made it 3x with him and had 5 straight non-losing years. In his last year they only won 47 games but in the 2 full years since they had just 52 and 54 wins. Those years after 6 straight with 75 wins or more.
it's a lot like Dusty, all he does is win. Also a lot like Houston when they hired Dusty, this org could use a wide respected face.