BTH

38 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I agree:

 

Good to know that your reading comprehension is non-existent.

He’s not good, but because of the Angels poor depth and Rengifo’s defensive struggles, Adrianza would’ve been an upgrade defensively at second base.

We saw Rengifo make 5 misplays the last week.

(and, btw, I’ll admit I was wrong about Adell. He’s carrying his worth offensively, even though his baserunning has been awful)

7 minutes ago, samwum said:

I love reading these and not being on a side. If anyone wants to talk about how Adrianza shouldn't be on the roster or on the field in the first place, feel free to tap me in WWE style.

You’re right, he shouldn’t be on the roster or on the field in the first place.

But he is because Perry built no depth.

Unfortunately, he probably is the 13th best, healthy position player in the Angels organization right now due to that lack of depth.

2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Because a better outcome became more available. It simply didn’t work. 

We’re not getting anywhere, obviously.

But the runner moving to 3B doesn’t create a better outcome that became more available, since they originally wanted to get the tying run at 1B into scoring position, and that player was still at 1B.

2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

No shit.  Your personality wants THE answer and when offered an answer you fall back on your opinion which is you are owed THE answer. 

Yeah, I’d prefer THE answer if possible.

I know I’m not always gonna get it, but I’m gonna ask.

1 minute ago, Blarg said:

No, it's not the same, it's diminishing a return. Trading two bases for one out is not the same as one for one. 

The input (giving up an out) and the output (runners at second and third with 1 out) are the same.

So if your goal was having second and third with 1 out, who cares about “diminishing returns?”

1 minute ago, Stradling said:

 

I gave you AN explanation which is what you asked for.  I don’t have Washington’s explanation because it doesn’t matter. 

It does matter because he’s the one who made the decision and knows what went into it, unlike you.

I wanted to hear any possible explanations from others because I couldn’t determine why he made those moves.

Thanks for contributing a possible explanation, but that doesn’t mean your explanation is accurate.

15 minutes ago, Blarg said:

Andriazi didn't fuck up, he played his role. 

Washington didn't fuck up, he played with what he thought would maximize his resources and leave him something to use if the gamecwent extras. 

Trout fucked up, the Angels lost. 

Adrianza and Trout both made outs, so their contributions were the same.

Yet, you say he “played his role” by striking out.

12 minutes ago, Blarg said:

You guys are not right. That is the real point. BTH decided that leaving a left handed hitter Andriazi to face a right handed pitcher was a mistake and refuses to believe Drury wasn't available, he isn't tonight. Rengifo was going to replace Neto so you are out of infielders. 

Simple left vs. right matchups are thrown out the window when you’re talking about a guy with a lifetime 80 wRC+

Wash said in his post game interview that Drury was available. My OP was way before tonight’s lineup came out with no Drury. And, btw, we don’t know Drury’s status because (as Jeff said), they didn’t ask Wash that pre-game.

14 minutes ago, Blarg said:

Him going ape shit over Andriazi not squaring to bunt after Adell's stolen base is more nonsense. There is no compelling reason to sacrifice to move only one runner which would have been the probable outcome. 

The reason for sacrificing one runner over is the same reason for sacrificing two runners over: to get the winning run into scoring position.

Seeing that replay of Trout’s last leadoff HR reminds me that Texas’ old stadium was way, way better than their current stadium.

Too bad they couldn’t just put a roof over the old stadium.

3 minutes ago, Stradling said:

The same as BTH being happy with any answer provided to him. 

Yet your explanation for the decision in question was the run expectancy charts.

7 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Ok and what is it with 1st and 3rd no outs in the bottom of the ninth?

My bad. Typo.

The 17.5% is with 1st and 3rd 0 outs, not 1st and 2nd.

https://gregstoll.com/~gregstoll/baseball/stats.html#H.-2.9.0.6.0.0

Just now, Stradling said:

He deleted it. 

Had to fix the link

12 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I have no idea. But Adell stole the base and it no longer made sense to bunt. 

They needed to score two runs and not just one.

Probability of the home team scoring two runs in the bottom of the 9th, down two runs, with runners at 1B and 3B, and 0 outs: 17.5%

Probability of the hone team scoring two runs in the bottom of the 9th, down two runs, with runners at 2B and 3B, and 1 out: 23.13%

https://gregstoll.com/~gregstoll/baseball/stats.html#H.-2.9.1.7.0.0

12 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Here you go, less runs expected with runners on 2nd and 3rd with one out than 1st and 3rd with zero outs  

 

If Wash’s decisions were based on run expectancy, then why did he want Adrianza to bunt so it’d be 2B and 3B with 1 out (1.38) vs. 1st and 2nd with 0 outs (1.44)?

Phil Nevin is back in NY… as a fan, to watch his son play.

@Swordsman78

32 minutes ago, Blarg said:

Yes, plenty of sensible reasons have been explained to you but you don't want to accept them. That's a you problem. 

False.

No one has explained why Adell taking 3B resulted in the bunt call being taken off.

7 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Nope. But I don’t pretend I know I’m right and the manager is wrong nor do I think I’m entitled to answers. I also don’t say things like, “well that specific question was never asked”. 

If someone wants to provide a legitimate explanation that makes sense, I’m happy to admit I’m wrong.

But no one has done that, which lends credence to the notion that the manager made a bad move.

5 minutes ago, Stradling said:

And you think you are smarter than everyone because you demand questions be asked. Before you pretend that isn’t the case need I remind you getting into it with Erica Weston where you questioned her ability to do her job. 

No one has given me an explanation to indicate that I’m wrong.

I don’t think I’m smarter than anyone else, because other people had the same question.

I probably am more aggressive in asking the question than others, which is what happened in your example, but I’m not on some island asking a ridiculous question.

I’m asking a fair question.

No one has an answer to my fundamental question and is instead skirting around it because that specific question wasn’t asked and everyone with decent baseball IQ knows the decision made no sense.

Instead of admitting it, there a number of people on here who are acting like we should just believe whatever they say, like dumb idiots.

Just now, Stradling said:

You, personally, live in a world where you feel entitled to all the answers. 

You, personally, conform to whatever the Angels do and refuse to have an original thought.

You think that whatever the Angels do must be right, and it shouldn’t be questioned.

23 minutes ago, T.G. said:

Sometimes we don't get to know "the why." That's life.

Especially if that specific question is never asked to the guy who made the decision.

9 minutes ago, Kendo36 said:

I trust Wash. Ultimately, the bases were loaded and the bums couldn’t come through. There is going to be some feel to Wash’s managing rather than a straight analytical approach. He’s building a culture.

I generally agree, but I’d at least like to try and understand his thinking and not blindly believe everything he does is right.

9 minutes ago, Tank said:

when you're behind by two runs, scoring one is a necessary step to scoring two.

And scoring one run is meaningless if you don’t score the second run.

9 minutes ago, Tank said:

all of this would be an unnecessary distraction if trout would have gotten a clutch hit with the bases loaded, which he didn't do. 

Sure. Or if Schanuel did. Or if Rengifo hit an XBH.

But I’m still curious about the thinking there, as a similar situation could come up again, and I don’t get what they were thinking.

1 minute ago, Tank said:

because adell is a moron on the bases and probably would have been thrown out at home by 40 feet.

I hope that’s not the answer.

And if it was, that’d be easily preventable by telling him to stay at third or having Hicks run for him.