Collateral Damage Dail... (10/26)
14 comments have been left for this article. BP Comment Quick Links
| |
|
|
October 26, 2012 Wezen-BallReminder: Prince Fielder Doesn't Know How to SlideThe second inning of Game 2 of the 2012 World Series gave us all a little reminder of something that is all-too well-known to Brewers and Tigers fans: Prince Fielder does not know how to slide. And he even admits it! From this past July: “I just don’t know how to slide,” Fielder said after the game. “I’m trying to get there. I just want to be safe. So, however I can get there, I just try to get it done.” It's debatable whether Fielder should have even been put in that situation last night—Prince is not the fastest guy to begin with; he wasn't prepared to head home during the play and, thus, was forced to slow down while re-adjusting his feet making the turn at third base; there were no outs and runners on second and third if he stopped at third—but the actual out at home was clearly due to Fielder's poor slide. If he had kept his leg flat on the dirt, or if he had slid in at a different angle, the tag from Buster Posey would have been too late and Detroit would have had an early 1-0 lead. The Tigers didn't lose the game on that play, but it most definitely did not help their cause. But that's how it is when you're depending on Prince Fielder to get a good slide down. And if you don't believe that, here's a gallery from Dave Brown at Big League Stew showing just how truthful Fielder was being back in July.
|
I cannot for the life of me understand what is going on at BP.
"It's debateable on whether Fielder should have even been put in that situation last night..."
How is it debateable? Ben Lindbergh was said something similar in his write-up today, too. It's actually kind of interesting. It seem to me that you guys are going overboard in trying to come off as even-handed...I don't know. Do you believe everything is debateable?
Second inning, scoreless, Prince Fielder running from first base. Sending him was beyond asinine.
I wish Joe Sheehan were still at BP.
Fielder was out at the plate by mere inches and only because he doesn't slide well. If he had made a better slide - by either keeping his lead leg down or approaching from a different angle out of Posey's reach - he would have been plenty safe. And this after a good relay throw from the outfield grass and a great stretch-and-tag from Posey.
Considering that the play probably should have worked (since Prince beat the ball to the plate), I'd say using "debateable" is fine. If Prince was out by three steps or something, I'd think differently.
I don't know what else to say. It's the second inning. There's no one out, and it's an absolute rally-killer, that play. You don't play for one run in that situation by sending your rotund, glacial slugger, because you could very well kill a big inning. This is basic stuff, and it's usually pretty much a mantra around these parts.
I can't believe I'm arguing with a BP author about this. It's Prince Fielder. He had run almost a football field and was running in slow motion by the time he reached the plate.
What is your argument here? That maybe it would be a good decision (that is to say, it WOULD be debateable) if the worst base runner in the league were a better base runner and slider? Is this not (yet another) reason that there should be no debate? You think maybe it's in Gene Lamont's job description to know something about his players' abilities?
You need to be reasonably certain that he'll make it in that situation (again, no one out, second inning, slow base runner) if you send him. I don't know what the number is, 90% certain? 95% certain? I don't know. If Gene Lamont felt 90% certain, he's an idiot. If not, you don't send him. Either way, wrong decision.
But I suppose you win, since we're "debating" this. Would love to hear your thoughts on Intelligent Design.
I realize that I'm obnoxious here, but I'm a Tigers fan, and this annoys me to no end. You're just wrong, and it's annoying.
The argument here is that every human being on earth would likely be safe in that situation, Fielder included. That he was out was not because the 3b coach failed, or made a poor decision, it's because Fielder can't slide worth a damn.
While you may be sure Lamont is an "idiot" for being let's say 90% certain, based on the ball position, the fielder and Fielder, it was more than reasonable to expect him to be safe. He should have been safe.
But continue to excoriate BP staff because you're the only person who can predict the future with any effectiveness. Shame the Tigers haven't hired you, I can't imagine why they haven't.
Again, I wish Joe Sheehan were still here. His write-up on this pretty much explains it. If you don't already subscribe to his email newsletter, I highly recommend it. Why do I get the feeling that if he had written the same opinion here on BP, no one would have stacked up logical fallacies in order to argue against him?
It was a stupid decision. The fact that Fielder might have been safe if things would have gone a little differently does not constitute a good argument, because you're not taking into account the cost versus the benefit. The fact that I'm having this "debate" with BP readers is really stunning.
I've seen Lamont do it all year long. He might be a Shakespeare scholar, and he might do differential calculus to kill time during rain delays, but as a third base coach he's terrible. It's not that tricky of a job.
I suspect someone smarter than me has already done this analysis, but, based on Run Expectancies (I'll abbreviate to RE) (http://www.tangotiger.net/re24.html):
DON'T SEND HIM scenario
-runners on 2nd, 3rd, 0 out= 2.050 RE
SEND HIM scenario
-if we assume a 90% chance of Prince scoring:
-scores (90%): (1{Prince's run} + 1.170{RE 2nd,0out} * 0.90 = 1.95
-doesn't score(10%): 0.721{RE 2nd,1out} * 0.1 = 0.07
-total RE: 1.95 + 0.07 = 2.02
I *think* it's safe to say 2.05 vs 2.02 RE is pretty debatable.
And, there are other factors in play: the back end of the Tiger's lineup (Peralta, Garcia, Laird) was due up, no doubt decreasing the RE, also it was a scoreless game at that point, so the value of scoring AT LEAST one run was higher (there are #'s on the linked RE page for that too, but this comment is already too long).
p.s. the threshold point in that situation is 92%. If Lamont was less than 92% sure that Fielder would have scored, the RE of holding him would have been greater than that of sending him (ignoring who was up or the game situation, etc.), and so he should have held him.
Joe wasn't exactly infallible. He voted for Manny Ramirez to make the All Star team when he was suspended with PEDs because he, as a rule, always used past performance instead of current season totals to determine his votes.