5/8 late night game
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
5/8 late night game
I am not a full believer in all of this rest either. It is still pretty new, so time will tell. But you do see players breaking down, especially in the younger guys who haven't played 162 games a year. Teams can play over 180 games depending on how far they go into the post season. If the younger players are breaking down, you have to assume the older guys are too. But players are (should be) in better shape than years past.
-
ChitownBucco
- Posts: 492
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 9:10 pm
5/8 late night game
what era are you referring to when players played everyday though?
-
SammyKhalifa
- Posts: 3642
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2016 4:19 am
5/8 late night game
565D55595C5D460305724B535A5D5D1C515D320 wrote: I am not a full believer in all of this rest either. It is still pretty new, so time will tell. But you do see players breaking down, especially in the younger guys who haven't played 162 games a year. Teams can play over 180 games depending on how far they go into the post season. If the younger players are breaking down, you have to assume the older guys are too. But players are (should be) in better shape than years past.
You need to consider though that we remember the exceptional cases where guys did this. Not every player played every game. We remember the ones that did.
There are literally double the number of teams as back then=double the number of players. By that, half of the players in the Bigs today would not have been on a major league roster. And if they had been, they certainly would not have played every game.
Players ARE in better shape than the past. Maybe there's a reason for that? Maybe because we have better ways of monitoring their activity, regulating their training, calculating the amount of rest needed for peak efficiency?
You need to consider though that we remember the exceptional cases where guys did this. Not every player played every game. We remember the ones that did.
There are literally double the number of teams as back then=double the number of players. By that, half of the players in the Bigs today would not have been on a major league roster. And if they had been, they certainly would not have played every game.
Players ARE in better shape than the past. Maybe there's a reason for that? Maybe because we have better ways of monitoring their activity, regulating their training, calculating the amount of rest needed for peak efficiency?
-
johnfluharty
5/8 late night game
I'm not going to get all that worked up over giving McCutchen or Mercer a day off when both are hitting in the 230s.
-
Bobster21
5/8 late night game
1E353429322A331F283E3E325D0 wrote: what era are you referring to when players played everyday though?
I'm not referring to any era where every player played every game. There have always been injuries, platoons, part time players and sometimes an occasional day off (but not strictly adhered to like today). You can select any decade including the current one and find a number of players who played every game or close to it. It seems to be a recent trend that using a lineup that's almost guaranteed to lose is preferable to not resting players. The Pirates seem to have bought into this philosophy as much or more than most.
I'm not referring to any era where every player played every game. There have always been injuries, platoons, part time players and sometimes an occasional day off (but not strictly adhered to like today). You can select any decade including the current one and find a number of players who played every game or close to it. It seems to be a recent trend that using a lineup that's almost guaranteed to lose is preferable to not resting players. The Pirates seem to have bought into this philosophy as much or more than most.
5/8 late night game
737671777F756C71786B6D60190 wrote: I'm not going to get all that worked up over giving McCutchen or Mercer a day off when both are hitting in the 230s.
and the sad thing ... that 230 average is good based on what we have going now.
and the sad thing ... that 230 average is good based on what we have going now.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
5/8 late night game
Yep, very sad.
I sure hope Freese and Frazier don't drop too. The Pirates need some spark. Polanco is heating up. Maybe we should compare someone else to Tabata to get them going?
I sure hope Freese and Frazier don't drop too. The Pirates need some spark. Polanco is heating up. Maybe we should compare someone else to Tabata to get them going?
-
ChitownBucco
- Posts: 492
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 9:10 pm
5/8 late night game
7B565B4A4D5C4B0B08390 wrote: Getting guys back won't help if all the other guys are run into the ground by the time they return. The issue isn't that we're running backups, it's that our backups suck so hard. And I agree that maybe we don't want to use them all in the same game.
On a related note, I saw that Adam Frazier had a rehab start last night. A few years ago I never thought I'd be counting down the days until Adam Freaking Frazier returns but that's where we're at.
I think it's a fallacy that guys are run into the ground. Years ago it was fairly common to play everyday. Now we are accustomed to believe that can't happen. And it's a strange strategy to put a lineup on the field that has no chance of winning that game in hopes that it will make them better able to win another game down the road. What's the difference? I'd rather take my chances of winning each game than to deliberately sacrifice one game in hopes of winning another. As we saw last night, now we have 2 losses in a row instead of perhaps just one.
I'm not referring to any era where every player played every game. There have always been injuries, platoons, part time players and sometimes an occasional day off (but not strictly adhered to like today). You can select any decade including the current one and find a number of players who played every game or close to it. It seems to be a recent trend that using a lineup that's almost guaranteed to lose is preferable to not resting players. The Pirates seem to have bought into this philosophy as much or more than most.
it might seem that way
but if you look back at actual stats
things aren't always as we remember them
in particular Baseball people get very worked up about lineups these days
a big part of that is the technological age we live in.
we get to watch and/or track every pitch via the internet these days.
we get the lineup on social media 3 hrs before the game starts, we discuss the lineup before the game starts on forums, we continue the debate in real time as the game goes on, on the forums. We play monday QB with 20/20 hindsight on the same interwebs.
these lineup abberations get cemented in our brains.
in 1971 how many games were even televised?
many just listened on radio and many many more just read the box score the next day.
I wonder how much complaining there was when that WS champion winning team had a starting lineup that all took 20-30 days off
Team Batting
Share & more
Modify & Share Table
Embed this Table
Get as Excel Workbook (experimental)
Get table as CSV (for Excel)
Strip Mobile Formatting
Copy Link to Table to Clipboard
About Sharing Tools
Video: SR Sharing Tools & How-to
Video: Stats Table Tips & Tricks
Hide non-qualifiers for rate stats
Glossary
Rk Pos Name Age G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS OPS+ TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB
1 C Manny Sanguillen 27 138 559 533 60 170 26 5 7 81 6 4 19 32 .319 .345 .426 .771 116 227 21 3 1 1 13
2 1B Bob Robertson 24 131 536 469 65 127 18 2 26 72 1 2 60 101 .271 .356 .484 .840 135 227 7 4 0 3 8
3 2B Dave Cash 23 123 532 478 79 138 17 4 2 34 13 5 46 33 .289 .349 .354 .703 98 169 10 0 5 3 0
4 SS Gene Alley 30 114 389 348 38 79 8 7 6 28 9 2 35 43 .227 .296 .342 .638 79 119 6 0 4 2 14
5 3B Richie Hebner* 23 112 434 388 50 105 17 8 17 67 2 2 32 68 .271 .326 .487 .813 126 189 6 3 5 6 1
6 LF Willie Stargell* 31 141 606 511 104 151 26 0 48 125 0 0 83 154 .295 .398 .628 1.026 185 321 8 7 0 5 20
7 CF Al Oliver* 24 143 573 529 69 149 31 7 14 64 4 3 27 72 .282 .317 .446 .763 113 236 14 5 2 10 2
8 RF Roberto Clemente 36 132 553 522 82 178 29 8 13 86 1 2 26 65 .341 .370 .502 .871 143 262 19 0 1 4 5
On a related note, I saw that Adam Frazier had a rehab start last night. A few years ago I never thought I'd be counting down the days until Adam Freaking Frazier returns but that's where we're at.
I think it's a fallacy that guys are run into the ground. Years ago it was fairly common to play everyday. Now we are accustomed to believe that can't happen. And it's a strange strategy to put a lineup on the field that has no chance of winning that game in hopes that it will make them better able to win another game down the road. What's the difference? I'd rather take my chances of winning each game than to deliberately sacrifice one game in hopes of winning another. As we saw last night, now we have 2 losses in a row instead of perhaps just one.
I'm not referring to any era where every player played every game. There have always been injuries, platoons, part time players and sometimes an occasional day off (but not strictly adhered to like today). You can select any decade including the current one and find a number of players who played every game or close to it. It seems to be a recent trend that using a lineup that's almost guaranteed to lose is preferable to not resting players. The Pirates seem to have bought into this philosophy as much or more than most.
it might seem that way
but if you look back at actual stats
things aren't always as we remember them
in particular Baseball people get very worked up about lineups these days
a big part of that is the technological age we live in.
we get to watch and/or track every pitch via the internet these days.
we get the lineup on social media 3 hrs before the game starts, we discuss the lineup before the game starts on forums, we continue the debate in real time as the game goes on, on the forums. We play monday QB with 20/20 hindsight on the same interwebs.
these lineup abberations get cemented in our brains.
in 1971 how many games were even televised?
many just listened on radio and many many more just read the box score the next day.
I wonder how much complaining there was when that WS champion winning team had a starting lineup that all took 20-30 days off
Team Batting
Share & more
Modify & Share Table
Embed this Table
Get as Excel Workbook (experimental)
Get table as CSV (for Excel)
Strip Mobile Formatting
Copy Link to Table to Clipboard
About Sharing Tools
Video: SR Sharing Tools & How-to
Video: Stats Table Tips & Tricks
Hide non-qualifiers for rate stats
Glossary
Rk Pos Name Age G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS OPS+ TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB
1 C Manny Sanguillen 27 138 559 533 60 170 26 5 7 81 6 4 19 32 .319 .345 .426 .771 116 227 21 3 1 1 13
2 1B Bob Robertson 24 131 536 469 65 127 18 2 26 72 1 2 60 101 .271 .356 .484 .840 135 227 7 4 0 3 8
3 2B Dave Cash 23 123 532 478 79 138 17 4 2 34 13 5 46 33 .289 .349 .354 .703 98 169 10 0 5 3 0
4 SS Gene Alley 30 114 389 348 38 79 8 7 6 28 9 2 35 43 .227 .296 .342 .638 79 119 6 0 4 2 14
5 3B Richie Hebner* 23 112 434 388 50 105 17 8 17 67 2 2 32 68 .271 .326 .487 .813 126 189 6 3 5 6 1
6 LF Willie Stargell* 31 141 606 511 104 151 26 0 48 125 0 0 83 154 .295 .398 .628 1.026 185 321 8 7 0 5 20
7 CF Al Oliver* 24 143 573 529 69 149 31 7 14 64 4 3 27 72 .282 .317 .446 .763 113 236 14 5 2 10 2
8 RF Roberto Clemente 36 132 553 522 82 178 29 8 13 86 1 2 26 65 .341 .370 .502 .871 143 262 19 0 1 4 5
-
ChitownBucco
- Posts: 492
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 9:10 pm
-
ChitownBucco
- Posts: 492
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 9:10 pm
5/8 late night game
sorry table doesn't translate well here
here is the link
032829342F372E023523232F400 wrote: http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/PIT/1971.shtml
here is the link
032829342F372E023523232F400 wrote: http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/PIT/1971.shtml