The Brewster

While we are certainly pleased with our 20-16 PYTH record at the quarter pole of the season, we are even more so with having the Huntsville "identity" back. Because regardless of how the rest of the season plays out, we can have confidence that we're on the right path moving forward. So what do I mean by that? Is it the great run differential? The vastly improved prospect pool? Juan Nicto's Blue Steel impression? No... what I mean by that is we're playing Phantoms baseball - and the stats emphatically show it.

Batting Average .251 - 9th in JL
On-Base Percentage .336 - 6th in JL
On-Base + Slugging .790 - 4th in JL
Strikeouts 300 - tied for 13th in JL
Stolen Bases 44 - tied for 10th in JL

In the ranking of most to least importance, I always go OPS>OBP>AVG and here we see that clearly. In our preferred end state, we're a roster that may not hit the ball often, but hits it hard (with a particular preference for over the fence) - and tries to make sure someone else is on base when it happens. Conversely, we care very little about how often we strike out and actually much prefer to be low on SBs (since that, usually, means we are low on SB attempts).

Home Runs allowed 42 - tied for 5th in JL
Bases On Balls 104 - 8th in JL
Strikeouts 211 - 15th in JL

Just like with offense, we can see our clear preference in the pitching staff shining through here as our preference is always MOV>CON>STU in evaluating a pitcher. Much of this has to do with our HR happy stadium, but is also due to our general emphasis on having good, rangey defensive infields and high GB pitchers to make sure the extra BIP from low Ks don't necessarily turn into extra base runners and runs.

Home Runs allowed 42 - tied for 5th in JL
Home Runs 58 - 4th in JL

This one is perhaps the clearest indicator that the Phantoms style of play is back - winning the HR game. It's always my fervent belief that if you win the HR differential then you'll win the run differential which will more often than not lead to you winning the game differential. Here we see a very encouraging +16 HR delta at the quarter pole - which projects to a +64 at season's end. A total that would've seen us slot in between Charm City (+91) and Jacksonville (+60) for the 2nd best delta in the JL last season. Not bad company, right? Just the only two teams to win triple digit games last season. For fun, do you want to know the other 3 teams that had a tangible positive HR delta last year? Phoenix (+48, 82 wins), Havana (+43, 94 wins... Landis champ) and New Orleans (+22, 86 wins). So 5 of the 8 teams that finished above .500. Montreal (+1), Las Vegas (0) and Rockville (-10) were the other trio that finished above .500. Atlantic City (+1) was the last of the teams that didn't have a large delta here and they finished just shy of .500 at 80 wins.

So, at the very least, it seems pretty clear that at a minimum staving off being a large negative in this delta seems a pre-requisite for contention. The bottom 3 in the conference record-wise happens to correlate with the bottom 3 in HR-HRA as well: Nashville (-42, 56 wins), Hawaii (-60, 47 wins) and Huntsville (-75, 64 wins). Further credence for the correlative theory. And even if you're not buying that, can we at least pause for a second and appreciate that turn around for Huntsville (and how absolutely *absurd* it is that we were inept at hitting the long ball in *this* park?!)? From dead last in the conference to trending to be top 2 the next season in a stat that has a high empirical correlation with team success. On this metric alone, a projected +139 swing. Insane. Regardless of what happens the rest of the year record wise, that seems like something pretty powerful to hang our hats on.

The Stever system begins to grind.

you and I have very different approaches to pitching. I have no problem giving up HRs because in my ideal world I strike a lot of guys out and don't give up a ton of hits so they are a lot of solo shots.

usnspecialist wrote:you and I have very different approaches to pitching. I have no problem giving up HRs because in my ideal world I strike a lot of guys out and don't give up a ton of hits so they are a lot of solo shots.

The adage "more than one way to skin a cat" springs to mind. The difference is, Ron's quip rings more true than it doesn't - Huntsville really does run on a "system" of sorts (which is kind of the whole point of this article - that what we inherited was just so out of whack with what we needed to be on a purely basal level, but now we believe we are on the right track in that regard... and the stats seem to back up the assertion, thus far). We build our roster a very particular way, to both complement the stadium and the roster construction as a whole, to attempt to make the unit more valuable than the sum of its parts in the context of this organization.

Generally, I think I've enjoyed quite a bit of success with the approach/theory in this league through the years (a pro) - when I can get the right players to fit the ideology (a con).

there is definitely more than one way to have success in this game. I'm rolling out virtually the exact same staff I did last year, albeit in a different park (last year was 1.0 across the board rating wise) and it isn't going nearly as well. Might need to make a few tweaks, but not panicking quite yet. You clearly have a system that works for you.

Lots of systems/plans work. The key is to pick one and stay the course.

I'll note that HR rate are up across the league right now (.037/AB vs. .034, which may not seem like much, but represents a 5% increase give or take a little). This is probably due as much to the introduction of several new parks (most of which are hitter-friendly, and even Boise's pitcher-friendly park is a homer haven for RHB). It could also be a little adjustment due to the movement change in OOTP 19. You can't actually tell the difference, so pick your on poison there.

usnspecialist wrote:I have no problem giving up HRs because in my ideal world I strike a lot of guys out and don't give up a ton of hits so they are a lot of solo shots.

Real life Ferguson Jenkins rode that idea to the Hall of Fame. At question, though, is whether Jon Reed is a Ferguson Jenkins kind of guy or whether he was just really hot for a season. The difference is that Reed is a walking fiend.

So far, though, "only" two of the six homers Reed has given up this year had a runner on base.

RonCo wrote:So far, though, "only" two of the six homers Reed has given up this year had a runner on base.

Even beyond my general philosophy, low MOV pitchers just drive me insane because of their unpredictability - especially in the 'pen (where I'm even more stricter on MOV as a requirement - and often throw away good RH'd relievers because their sliders manifest -splits for MOV vs. LHBs). The difference between 40 solo HRs and 40 2-run shots is huge on their ERA - and you can only control for that so much with good STU/CON (and not at all if one of the two is poor).

At question is how good are the rest of the guy's ratings. A 10/5/10 reliever can be outstanding (may I introduce you to Jonathan Bowen--though he did drop a point of MOV from the old "6" ... the new "5" ...). The problem is that you don't find that many 10/5/10 kind of rating profiles.

Someone like Reed is interesting to watch because his stuff and control are so off the charts in both directions. Perhaps I'm seeing patterns where none exist, but it seems to me that when Reed's control ticks up to a "5" he's pretty good. When it drops down to a "4" he's got two feet on banana peels.

Anyway, I see Kyle's system as a basic risk-reduction approach. Like a good poker player. Nudge the probabilities your way and eventually you will win.

I note that Reed also has four elite level pitches. So take that into account however you want. Would a guy with Reed's base ratings but only two elite pitches and a decent #3 do the trick? Probably not. But you don't really know.

And last about Reed...his BABIP has been off-the-charts good since 2030. That isn't something you find in most pitchers.

Compare SFB's Ramirez and Reed is always interesting in this way. Ramirez's HR-rate is better, but his BABIP is random like the usual pitcher's is.

I don't think reed would be nearly as effective without the depth of his arsenal. As for the BABIP, part of me wonders if that is tied to his high stuff rating inducing weak contact (and thus easier plays for defenders).

It's possible and even likely, though what the impact is isn't clear. Here's an interesting take done with a little back of the napkin math.

So far this season...

LEAGUE AVG BABIP: .286 *

* This is low due to some issues with my very quick data slice. It should be .293...but I don't have time to dig deeper...still the relative comparisons shouldn't be horrible. So:

Pitchers with 13 Stuff BABIP: .257 (526 BF)
Pitchers with 5 Stuff BABIP: .265 (756 BF)

So, yes, high stuff might make a difference. But this data says low stuff did, too...unless those low stuff pitchers happen to play behind brilliant defenses.

The best part about these online leagues is the diversity of the GM philosophies. I love reading about what other GM's do and comparing it to my own style of play. Sometimes I pick out little things others do and apply it to my own team. Other times I laugh out loud and wonder why they would actually do that. But for the most part, there is no right or wrong as long as you are building a cohesive team. It's just great that we don't have 30 people who try to do things the same exact way. That would be super boring.

I bet you feel better again, man. Running a team that is so out of what with your own personal model just feels so unsettling somehow.