Loading ...
(Turns out, Bill and I were on the same track! He’s just quicker than I am.)
Reds manager Dusty Baker sometimes receives criticism for events beyond his control. However, yesterday, when asked why Todd Frazier hadn’t been in the line-up for a couple days, Baker offered up this reasoning (reported by John Fay):
“Everybody preaches on base percentage, which is great,” Baker said. “But I was talking to (Detroit manager) Jim Leyland about this the other day. You’ve got to have someone to drive them in. The name of the game is touch home plate the most.”
“Ludwick has been very productive at driving in runs,” Baker said. “Which had been one of our downfalls this year, especially RBIs with two outs.”
“We’ll see who’s hot and who can do what,” Baker said
Walt Jocketty didn’t say this, Dusty Baker did. Baker’s reasoning fails at so many levels it’s hard to know where to begin. It’s really breathtaking, and not in a “the view from the Pacific Coast Highway is breathtaking” way. But in a bad, discouraging way. From the beginning …
“Everybody preaches on base percentage, which is great,”
The “preaching” is based on the overwhelming weight of research from the past couple decades showing that on base percentage is intimately tied to “touching home plate.” If a team wants to score runs, they need to get on base, and keep getting on base. The Cardinals followed this orthodoxy to the World Series championship last year. Getting on base is a specific, repeatable skill that organizations can develop, sign and trade to acquire.
It’s also worth saying that the argument for Todd Frazier (.331) over Ryan Ludwick (.305) or Scott Rolen (.258) isn’t just OBP, although it could be.
“I was talking to (Detroit manager) Jim Leyland about this the other day.”
Translation, Jim Leyland agrees. You know, a manager who actually has won a World Series. Fifteen years and a couple jobs ago. Leyland is the Detroit manager who last year gave Magglio Ordonez the most at bats in the Tigers’ #3 spot at an OBP of .276 (19 RBI in 250 AB). He also gave the most AB in the #2 spot to a .211/.277/.338 (12 RBI) hitter. So yeah, Leyland is basically the last guy you’d want to talk to about what it takes to “touch home plate.” He’s the American League mirror image of Baker. Out-of-date. Baker should have this conversation with Terry Francona, Joe Maddon or Tony LaRussa.
“You’ve got to have someone to drive them in.”
Yes, the RBI, hit by RBI-guys. But RBI are statistics of opportunity. They are largely a function of how many runners are on base (!) to drive in, and derivative of a players underlying hitting skill. The weight of research (that, again) shows very few hitters sustain AVG over a career that is higher with runners on base. Modern GMs, like Theo Epstein, ignore RBI when they decide how to build their team. (P.S. He’s won two of the last ten World Series.)
“Ludwick has been very productive at driving in runs,”
At the time Baker made this statement, before last night’s 0-3 game with two Ks, Todd Frazier led Ryan Ludwick in batting average, on base percentage, slugging percentage, line drive percentage and percentage of base runners who scored on the batter’s play. Todd Frazier has been the second or third best hitter on the team since he was called up. Ludwick has been OK, Frazier has been superb, including at driving in runs.
“Which had been one of our downfalls this year”
The Reds are actually league average at driving in runners. For real “downfalls” try the terrible on-base-percentage from the lead-off spot. Or the horrendous walk-rate throughout the lineup, other than Joey MVP and a couple others. Chris Heisey’s one walk in 65 plate appearances batting in front of Votto the past two weeks being an example of that.
“… especially RBIs with two outs.”
Ugh. Hitters don’t hit differently with two outs over large sample sizes. It’s illogical to focus on two-out RBI any more than one-out or no-out RBI. Was Jay Bruce’s 3-run homer last night somehow worth less or less clutch because there weren’t two outs? How about Drew Stubbs’ game winning home run with no outs? Obsessing over RISP/2 is a waste of time.
And unbelievably (are you sitting down?) as John Fay points out, Frazier actually has a HIGHER average with RISP/2 outs than does Ludwick.
(Not that you should pay a second of attention to it, partly because it’s based on fewer than 25 AB, 17 in Frazier’s case. Joey MVP was hitting .188 after 16 AB this year. Zack Cozart had an OBP of .520 after 22 AB.)
Evaluating a hitter on that few AB is crazy. But if you’re Dusty Baker, and you have an irrational love for that statistic, please, at least get it right, not freakin’ backwards.
“We’ll see who’s hot and who can do what.”
Performance-based line-ups would be a positive departure from Baker’s usual methods. No manager is more well known, save maybe Jim Leyland, for stubbornly using players day-after-day, even though they are underperforming. See Willy Taveras’ 437 plate appearances in the lead-off spot in 2009, for example. When Baker starts using players based on performance instead of their “established veteran-ness” the line-ups will be better. Maybe he can also start rewarding “who’s hot” by their place in the line-up, because that also influences their number of AB. But I wouldn’t hold my breath.
—
I realize this has been a lot of digital ink spilled over a few sentences. The thing is, what Baker said yesterday is pure, distilled Dusty Baker. His ill-conceived, poorly-informed essence. A perfect reflection of how he has always been, and sadly, how he always will be as a manager.
And exactly why you shouldn’t want him, or any manager like him, to be in charge of the Reds.
My apologies to Steve for jumping the gun on him..I saw this in the AM paper and it SCREAMED for comment…I should have looked in our queue and seen that Steve was working on something.
Steve, I must say very well written and in-depth in the inherent analysis. I love how you broke down multiple things Dusty said in his comments. But overall, as you say, Dusty is not going to change his ways, HE’S ALWAYS GOING TO PLAY THE VETERAN ABOVE THE YOUNG BUDDING STAR (i.e. Ludwick over Frazier)! It doesnt matter if the numbers hit Dusty right in the face, he’s still going to play the veteran. SO FRUSTRATING!
Dusty makes my head hurt.
Ludwick has objectively been a better hitter over the past month than Frazier so I really don’t understand this whole article beyond confirming that yes, you have read Moneyball.
@SteveMcBarks – By your objectivity perhaps but I don’t see it that way. I see Ludwick as swinging a much better bat than he did at the beginning of the year and in having been the better hitter over the last couple weeks but over the last month and throughout the season, Frazier has been the better hitter.
@nick was in va: Mr. Baker’s antics and idiocies don’t make my head hurt, I’ve dealt with similar incompetence and falacies for years, but he does make my heart ache. I love the Reds and have always loved the Reds, even through the dark days of Marge Schott and Schottzie. Since Mr. Baker is the manager of my beloved Reds, I want to provide him with the same unabashed support that I provide the entire Reds team, but he is such a bombastic baffoon of a manager that I simply can’t.
Dusty creates conversation that’s for sure, personally I take the Bill James approach that a manager makes hundreds of decisions a day/game and he has to be ready to be quoted for the the millions of zeros and ones that the internet and that in itself is a job that no one can know until they do it.
Creates conversation for sure… every time he opens his mouth, I lived in the Bay Area during his whole tenure (going down tomorrow to catch all 4 games) and I can say one thing about his teams…
They play hard, unlike the Reds of the “aughts” and this despite the need to point out the obvious (Dusty is target for many a criticism) makes me happy and somehow deep in the recess of my aging mind I think that’s a really good thing that gets lost in the zeros and ones.
I agree with this. The Reds under Dusty’s watch have never seemed to give up. At least not in my observation. That is a nice positive for Dusty. Does it make up for many of his mistakes though? That’s where you’re going to find an argument.
Do you do anything but whine about Baker and Chapman? Good grief…
So to collect some of the things that Dusty has said out loud to actual people (and I’m sure I’m forgetting some good ‘uns):
- Walks clog the bases
- hitters gotta go after that “get ahead” strike. Working the count is useless.
- Chapman only needs the one pitch
- “RBI guy” is much more important that “OBP guy”
The manager of your Cincinnati Reds.
Sadly, the time and thought you’ve put into this essay probably exceeds the time and thought Dusty ever puts into any of his lineups. I’ve often wondered what Dusty DOES do all day, since he obviously doesn’t spend more than a minute or two (if that, even) thinking about ways to improve the offense.
If you have nine hitters and nine batting order slots to put them in there are 362,880 ways to do it, and only one of them is right.
Bill James
@SteveMcBarks: A better hitter over the past month? Really? Let’s see, for the month of June, Frazier has a line of .258/.347/.452 with 16 SO & 9 RBI while Ludwick has a line of .250/.325/.544 with 19 SO & 11 RBI. That looks like a wash any way you look at it. I’m ecstatic that Ludwick has finally had some positive production in June as opposed to the miserable production in April and May, but he also has had nothing but the full support of the manager, even when he didn’t deserve it and is simply responsible for playing just one defensive position. A young player’s ego can only absorb so much undeserved rejection before it has a negative effect on his performance. After a superb performance in ST, Frazier was undeservedly and publicly rebuked with an assignment to Louisville in favor of Wee Willie Harris for creep’s sake. Understandably, he reports to Louisville, publicly says all the right things, puts a positive spin on a terrible injustice and promptly hits .231/.268/.359. Then after Rolen places himself on the DL, Frazier is recalled out of shear necessity and promptly puts up an exceptional performance in April and May while playing 3B. Then Rolen comes back off the DL and what happens? Yeah, Mr. Baker rebukes him publicly again. Mr. Baker has Frazier moving from the bench to 3B to LF to DH, but mostly to the bench. This is even after Frazier added significant heart and soul to this team with his positive attitude and comraderie after he was recalled from Louisville. I’m amazed that Frazier has maintained any sort of even keel in the face of such adversity and rejection.
I actually like that two Editors were on the same page. Gives you both credence.
Steve, I mentioned this in another thread, but I must respectfully disagree with your assessment that there is no evidence that certain players hit better with runners in scoring position.
You can check for yourself, but it is demonstrated that certain players do in fact hit better or worse than their career average with runners in scoring position. The ones that do tend to be these “RBI Guys” that Bakers seems to crave. True, you can look at other stats to figure out what an “RBI Guy” is, like his overall batting average and hit slugging percentage. You’re not going to get a .235 hitter who suddenly hits 100 points higher with runners on, but there IS a difference for some players.
However, I do agree that you need high OBP guys hitting in front of these guys in order to give them runs to drive in. That seems like a no-brainer.
Dusty would appear so much more intelligent if he kept his mouth shut.
I hate Dusty Baker as a manager.
I just threw up in my mouth. If it were possible for the players to mutiny, I would hope they’re thinking about doing it soon. Frazier needs to be installed at third every day now. Despite his couple of great games right after coming off the DL, we all know Scott Rolen has a giant fork in his back.
No matter where he’s gone, Dusty has always favored the over-the-hill veteran types over young and exciting players. His resistance to them is astounding, insomuch as he keeps getting work. Yes, he’s coached a few teams to the playoffs, but they always seem to make it there in spite of him (The 2010 Reds, everyone!)
We won’t be in a position to move up the ladder until we have a real game manager. Joe Maddon would be awesome for this squad, or John Farrell, Buck Showalter…
The players aren’t going to mutiny. Dusty’s players like him. His main strength as a manager is his ability to run the players and clubhouse. His linups and in-game strategy drive me insane though.
I think Dusty does many, many, many things well. As someone said, everyone plays hard, he has the gravitas to get them to play hard. He is not a jerk. Think of all the managers the Reds have had which could you could not say that about; Narron, Miley, Boone, Knight. Ugh. Dusty’s players seem to like him; that is job #1. He takes the blame when appropriate, he calms people down, he calls them out when need be. The Reds are in first place.
Batting order? Sticking with guys too long? Nobody cares. Batting order makes no difference. Sure, his catchers bat 8th. Egos and psyches are more important.
It is possible, no, probable, that people criticize him because we can’t see/understand/appreciate the things he does well. We have like 10% of the picture of what Dusty does.
We DO see and hear about his disdain for Reds hitters working the count and for drawing walks. You all are right; it is a clear blind spot. And a real problem. Even worse, it seems like it is an obvious and seemingly easily fixable one, but if it were truly fixable it would have been fixed by now. It therefore can’t be, at least not with him. At this point in time, we are not fixing it.
I am sure Jocketty would not have picked Dusty as his manager. I am equally sure that he’d take Dusty over about all but 20 people on the planet right now, most of whom have jobs elsewhere. Francona is about the only obvious choice at the top of my head.
He is the Drew Stubbs of managers. He does so many things so well, and a few glaring things so poorly, we just want to step in and fix the few flaws he has. And we can’t.
And if we complain about how bad his few flaws are, we forget and fail to appreciate what we have in him. Let’s celebrate his strengths once in a while.
The Reds are in first. They have one exactly one division title since 1995; under him. Cut him some slack; he deserves it.
I couldn’t read any further in your post than this. You really don’t think it would make a difference to put, say, Phillips (.329 OBP) and Hanigan (.361 OBP) in front of Votto, as opposed to Cozart and Heisey, both with OBPs under .300? Sure, Hanigan’s walk rate may drop a bit when he isn’t batting in front of the pitcher, but he’s not suddenly going to forget what to do at the plate if you move him up in the order.
I believe the Reds have a real shot at the playoffs this year, not that they are a definite. What I fear from watching Dusty’s moves day to day is not that he will keep the team out of the playoffs. Rather I worry about the damage he may cause when there is little margin for error to recover in the short playoff series.
Take yesterday’s game for example. Bronson gave up a walk and two hits in the 8th. The lead was down to one run with a runner on 2nd. Marshall is warmed up and ready to enter against a LH hitter, but Dusty leaves Arroyo in to face Aoki and give up a game tying hit. Stubbs bailed him out with his HR.
I suppose Dusty was “trying to get him a win” and he deserved the opportunity after carrying a no hitter into the 8th. To me, it looks like Dusty is once again conflicted between rewarding a player vs. making a move that puts the team in a better position to win. When does Dusty make begin making decisions to put the team in the best position to win a game? Once the Reds make the playoffs?
@Cincinnati Dave: Dave, while I respect that the players play for him, and he’s not always a jerk, I don’t agree that he “does many things so well, and a few glaring things so poorly”. Drew Stubbs is not a comparison that fits.
Dusty can’t maximize his lineups. Never has been able to. Doesn’t go with the hot hand, doesn’t play percentages…Mike C said it best that he doesn’t make decisions to put his team in a better position to win games.
His game decisions are awful, we’ve all seen them.
He plays washed-up veterans at the expense of developing new talent and building their confidence. You say Dusty’s players seem to like him…amend that slightly…Dusty’s VETERAN players seem to like him. Think Devin Mesoraco or Todd Frazier or Chris Valaika or Stubbs, or Jay Bruce have loved the way this guy jerks them around? I seriously doubt it.
The Reds have won one division title since 1995, and it was under Dusty’s leadership, but there’s a reason he’s 685-684 since leaving the Giants. He’s simply not a good manager. Even with those high-powered Giants teams, he won one NL Pennant and finished second in the NL West 6 times.
He won a division title with the Cubs the Bartman year…his lineup? Damian Miller, Eric Karros, Mark Grudzielanek, Alex Gonzalez, Aramis Ramirez, Moises Alou, Kenny Lofton and Sammy Sosa. Ramirez, at 25, was the lone starter under the age of 30. The youth was in his rotation, where Carlos Zambrano (22), Mark Prior (22), Matt Clement (28) and Kerry Wood (26) all won 13 or more games and threw 200+ innings. Only Zambrano ever threw 200+ innings after that. Is it coincidence?
Pitchers who have thrown 200+ innings for Baker – Bill Swift (1993, won 21 games that season, never threw 200+ innings ever again. John Burkett (1993, won 22 games, and threw two more seasons of 200+ – 1996 and 2001), Shawn Estes (1997, 19 game-winner, threw two more 200+ – ’99 and ’04) Mark Gardner and Orel Hersheiser in 1998, neither did it again, but Gardner was 36 and Orel 38. Russ Ortiz in 1999 (he did this a few more times), Livan Hernandez in 2000 (who can explain Livan, really?) Kirk Rueter in ’02 (never again, and out of baseball 3 years later) Maddux and Big Z in ’04 and ’05 (Hey, he’s Greg Maddux), Arroyo almost every year he’s been in Cincy…and no one else in a Reds uniform…not even big Aaron Harang. Interesting….
@CI3J:
Name one.
@Jason in Toronto:
Jason, here is Bill James on batting order — he says it better than me:
Several years ago you introduced the idea, new to me, that lineup order has hardly any meaning in terms of a team’s runs scored total. Is that still the conventional wisdom among more thoughtful fans, or has there been any movement in the direction of, no, lineup order does matter more? Also, since that time, you sometimes seem to accept the assumptions behind the traditional 1-2-3-cleanup lineup (as if it is too much work to knock down that conventional way of thinking every time you write about any aspect of a player’s productivity), even though that article suggested that #5 hole was poorly used and seemed to result in less runs overall. Is the classic setup irrational?
Asked by: Martin
Answered: 2/25/2009
Well. . .I think all of that is true, particularly the parts that contradict one another. I think the consensus of researchers is that, when we say that batting order makes very little difference within normal the normal range of options, we need to be careful that people get the qualifiers. If you bat Robert Fick leadoff and Ryan Howard 7th, that’s not within the normal range of options, and it will certainly cost you some runs. Some people think we’re underestimating the subject, but I still don’t; I still think it doesn’t make much difference.
I accept the traditional roles for exactly the reason you suggest: the traditional arrangement works as well as any other. The #5 hole is a problem, because the #5 hitter leads off a lot of innings, and many times #5 hitters are the worst leadoff men you could find, but realistically, what are you going to do about it?
I do like LaRussa’s batting the pitcher 8th. It makes sense to me.
@Jason in Toronto:
Jason, I respectfully disagree. Batting order matters minimally, if at all, unless you are talking about doing something ridiculous, like hitting Votto 7th or something. The difference between hitting Hannigan 8th or 2nd is minimal.
I do believe his veteran players like him. I also don’t think that he jerks around young players. Bruce jerked around? Dusty made him an everyday starter as a 21 year old. Valakia is not even on the team. Frazier? Mesaraco? I am not convinced.
You seem to cite the Cubs and Giants has failures for him. You say the Cubs were too old. Look at that lineup. What should he have done, not played Alou? He actually did play a 23 year old Patterson MORE than Lofton that year, despite Lofton hitting over .320. They won the division, and he led them to deepest playoff runs since 1945. That team won had 67 games the year before.
And those Giant teams he had were pretty damn bad if not for a Bonds. Tsuyoshi Shinjo? Marvin Bernard? This was Bonds, Kent, and nobody else. He finished first or second year after year. And he led them to their second pennant in 40 years.
I think he is unjustly blamed for lots and lots of things.
@Cincinnati Dave: Sorry, that was for dc937
Even the dreaded RISP stats don’t support Dusty very well. Some quick and dirty numbers based on a WAY too small sample size:
Frazier:
AVG-RISP: .222
AVG-Men-on-base: .246
OPS-RISP: .841
OPS-Men-on-base: .870
PA/RBI: 7.45
Ludwick:
AVG-RISP: .231 (a virtual wash)
AVG-Men-on-base: .222 (worse but close enough that it’s a virtual wash)
OPS-RISP: .781 (a full 60 points less than Frazier)
OPS-Men-on-base: .795 (a full 75 points less than Frazier)
PA/RBI: 6.09 (a little better)
At best, just looking at PA/RBI and AVG with men on base or RISP Dusty could say that Ludwick and Frazier are about equal. Looking even a little deeper at OPS in those same situation or looking at percentage of runners on-base who score when Frazier vs Ludwick are up (as Steve mentioned) and it’s clear that Frazier has been better this year in those situations.
So basically, as much of a Dusty apologist as I am, it is only Dusty’s perception that Ludwick is a better RBI guy. And going back even further and looking at Ludwick the last few years, he’s not been a very good RBI guy at all really.