What is your opinion of the A.J. Pierzynski signing?
MJH on accountability
Is Wash a good manager? He is an excellent motivator and a below average game manager. To his credit, this season he is not handing in the line up of the likes he mimeographed last season. I take this as a good sign; he learned from last year's errors. I wonder if Wash plays poker or other games of chance. If so, I would hope a few conversations with the Ranger's sabremetrician may at least reduce his propensity to bunt in poor reward situations.
primi, I think we would get along quite well in real life. Have always seen eye-to-eye with you on baseball.
I think there are a few situations where bunting is necessary -- like in the 8th or 9th and you need to get a runner from 2nd to 3rd with nobody out -- but otherwise, it adversely affects the odds of winning a baseball game. This is reflected by WPA, and in almost all cases the team bunting is hurting their odds of winning the game. If you argue that bunting is an effective in-game decision, then you are denying mathematical facts.
Having said this, I know the first thing my detractors would say in response is: "Then why does every team still do it?"
There are multiple theories to this. The one I like the most, or ... put the most credence in, has to do with the Front Office/Clubhouse relationship. I believe it was Joe Sheehan, but don't quote me, who said that regular defensive shifts have become a victory for front offices. Because it's an aspect of the game that's changed, which has had at least a marginal effect on why pitching has trended upward in recent years.
Having said that, telling managers not to bunt, or telling them how to use their bullpen, is just somewhere they don't want to go. Yet. Like most things, it's going to take the younger generation who has grown up engrained with the belief that bunting is dumb, or ineffective, and they will be the ones who materially change the way baseball is played. And it's going to show.
Maybe that's two years from now, or five, or twenty. I don't know.
I don't think any of us can argue that Ron Washington's primary job is to babysit this Rangers' roster. There's so much talent stocked on the 40-man roster that a complete buffoon could manage the team and look good at the end of the day. The difference is, we don't know how the Rangers would respond if Wash got canned, and that's why he isn't going anywhere.
When the team doesn't want to play for Ron anymore, it will reflect in the standings. Right now he's still the man, and I'm totally fine with that.
I'm not trying to challenge you here or anything, but who would be the Rangers saber guy? I know that Daniels considers saber stats in his decisions, but an interesting fact of the Rangers organization is that they don't employ a full time sabermetric staff that a few organizations do have.
I agree that Wash's primary job is to babysit the roster, but another thing I want to point out is how solid the infield defense is. It doesn't hurt that Adrian Beltre is out there either, I do admit that. The infield is Ron Washington's strong point and that is why I wanted Wash to stay this off-season because with this lineup I thought this would be a re-building year with Andrus possibly being traded at the deadline as well as Nathan and others, but this season has made my prediction look a little pessimistic thus far, I pegged them for 88 games and still think they could very well end up at that number, I really hope I am wrong though.
I really think it is funny that while this is brought up all these bunts for the Rangers are working, it has more to do with the Cardinals poor fielding than the actual bunt, but it is just ironic.
Martin Perez looks fairly good today. That was a good looking changeup.
Good to see Berkman out of the lineup and it looks like they are on their way to taking a series from STL.... Something they have probably never done.
Notify me of follow-up comments via email.