Games: Boston Red Sox, May 8: Judging the Royals with Lee Judge

Games » Boston Red Sox

May8

Small ball vs. the big inning

If you want to make a case against small ball — and lots of people do — just look at the seventh and eighth innings of this game.

In the seventh inning, with the Royals down by a run, Jeff Francoeur and Mike Moustakas led off with singles. Chris Getz did his job and bunted what would have been the tying and go-ahead runs into scoring position.

Then things got funky. Alcides Escobar laid down what appeared to be a “safety squeeze” bunt. The safety squeeze requires a better bunt than a suicide squeeze because the runner waits to see whether the ball is down in the right area before breaking to the plate. A suicide squeeze will be successful if the bunt gets down anywhere.

Francoeur was blocked off the plate, and the run didn’t score. (Of course, you might argue that the Royals didn’t play small enough ball and go right to the suicide squeeze. It looked as though Francoeur would have scored easily if that had been the call.) After that, pinch hitter Brayan Pena struck out, and a promising inning went up in smoke.

In the eighth, two walks and a long ball courtesy of Billy Butler put the Royals on top to stay. Like I said yesterday, home runs are hard to come by, but when you get one, they do come in handy.

Game notes

• There was a nice piece of bat handling in the second inning. Mike Moustakas was on third, Chris Getz was at the plate. The Red Sox had their infielders charge in as the pitch was delivered. Getz served the ball over the shortstop’s head for an RBI single. I have seen harder shots off a sand wedge, but it got the job done.

• In the same inning, Humberto Quintero was thrown out trying to steal second base. Once again, in case you didn’t believe me the first time, Humberto Quintero was thrown out trying to steal second base.

• I didn’t have a stopwatch on Red Sox pitcher Daniel Bard — I didn’t think I needed to — so I have no idea whether Quintero’s attempt was justified. (I timed Bard later, and he was extraordinarily slow to the plate. But I don’t know how slow Bard would had to have been for Humberto make it — slower than he was, for sure.)

• When you think about what the Royals are doing on the bases, separate base-running (which has been pretty good) from base stealing (which has had some problems). They are not the same thing.

• In the top of the fourth inning, Alex Gordon broke in on a Mike Aviles fly ball, then had to reverse course. The ball dropped in, and Aviles scored on a Dustin Pedroia single. It happened at twilight, the same time Alex lost a ball in Monday’s game.

• Getz made a throwing error on a double-play ball in the fifth inning. That was bad enough, but what was worse, Eric Hosmer did not knock the ball down. A run scored when the ball went past first base as Hosmer stretched for it. If at all possible, a first baseman needs to come off the bag to knock down bad throws. The ball is more important than the bag.

Making an adjustment

Before the Royals’ last series in Detroit, manager Ned Yost talked to Jeff Francoeur about pitch selection. Like a lot of the Royals hitters, Jeff was trying to do too much. Pitchers could run balls in on his hands and Jeff would bite, trying to hit one out — trying to be the guy who turned things around for a struggling team.

Ned talked to Jeff about getting back to the approach he took last year, and here’s what Frenchy did in the next seven games: He went 8 for 24 with four walks and three doubles. That’s only six games, but it is an example of the kind of in-season adjustment that hitters — or at least smart hitters — make all the time.

Blame Bogie

If you like this website, Tim Bogar, the Boston bench coach, deserves a lot of credit. I met Bogie 20 years ago in Williamsport, Pa., when he was an infielder working his way through the New York Mets’ system. We stayed in touch, and when The Star decided to do this website, I called Bogie for his advice. If he ever leaves baseball, Tim should teach journalism. Here was what he told me:

1.) Watch the game. Play close attention to every pitch. Don’t get distracted. You can’t multitask, or you’ll miss something important. No texting. No tweeting.

2.) Think small. Everybody will cover the three-run home run. Instead, go talk to the guy who broke up the double play to keep the inning alive so the three run-home run could be hit. Most of the media have to cover the big stuff, but by the time they get done with that, the small stuff often gets left out. Not having an assigned story is an advantage. Think small.

3.) Make the first encounter positive. “If I’ve never met you and I make two errors and then you want to talk to me, it will not go well,” Bogar told me. Establish a relationship first. Make the player understand that you will cover the positive things that happen and he will be much more receptive to talking about the negative things. If a player don’t like or trust you, he will speak in cliches. Once he thinks you will be fair, he will be more open.

4.) Have conversations, not interviews. Pull out a notebook, and things change. You’re doing an interview. Start a conversation and let things flow. I’ve told my editors that they never need to think up a story assignment for me. The game, the players and the coaches will suggest better story ideas than I could ever conceive of on my own. A conversation about the weather will morph into throwing a ball after a rain delay. Put the notebook away. Just talk to people and see where you wind up.

Like I said, if you like this website, Tim Bogar deserves a lot of the credit. And if I don’t get this posted until Wednesday morning because I was out drinking beer and eating wings late last night, blame Bogie.

Lee Judge learns about the bench coach job with the Red Sox Tim Bogar

The Star's Lee Judge visits with Boston Red Sox bench coach Tim Bogar and learns about the job of being a bench coach. May 9, 2012 (Video by John Sleezer/The Kansas City Star)

Comments

Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

“Once again, in case you didn’t believe me the first time, Humberto Quintero was thrown out trying to steal second base.”

I assumed that was a missed hit and run. Q is slower than Billy.

Real good post, thanks.
Joel Kallem
1 year ago

After the game, Ned said that he was running Quintero to steal. If he makes it, he is in scoring position, if he doesn’t Dyson leads off the next inning. Given that Dyson will probably not advance him past second at best, not a bad baseball move.

Starting pitching continues to be horrible. Yost really teed off on Duffy on his visit to the mound. Unfortunately, the positive effects only lasted for that inning. The bullpen remained solid, and gives us hope if we can get to it close to the lead.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year ago

This game was driving me insane until Butler went deep in the 8th. But a win makes it alot easier to handle.

Two quick thoughts and a longer one: 1) Duffy was getting straight-up screwed by the home-plate umpire. Go look at the charts on Brooks Baseball. There were pitches all over the upper half of the strike zone being called balls.

2) If we recognize that walks are valuable when our pitchers give them up, why aren’t our batters taking more pitches, especially against a player as rattled as Bard? There were two consecutive innings where he threw fewer than 10 pitches.

3) My impression is that the Royals’ baserunning has been OK outside of base stealing, but the aggregate numbers are fair to negative.

Baseball Refernce tracks a metric called extra bases taken which guages how often a baserunner takes more than one base on a single and more than two on a double. The Royals have taken an extra base on 39% of opportunities, which is 16th in MLB (MLB average: 40%).

Fangraphs tracks a metric called BaseRunning which measures the same concept in a more complex/sophisticated way (it takes into account the other runners, and the inning and out situation so plays late in close games make a bigger difference). It has the Royals 26th in the Majors at 2.7 runs below average.
Ben Reid
1 year ago

Yeah, Joel, no. Duffy was painting the corners all night. Brendan beat my to it, but the strikezone plots from tonight are a joke. Duffy’s walk to Punto in the 5th was the absolute height of absurdity. If there’s one pitcher in this rotation who deserves praise right now, It’s Danny Duffy. I have no problem assuming that Paulino will continue to pitch well, but it’s too early in his stretch of the season to say with certainty that he’s fine (but I trust the projections).

Can we talk about the bunting nonsense though? Yost is actively attempting to GIVE runs away at this point. Have to say there’s something redeeming in knowing that Butler was shaking off bunt signs when he hung dong.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year ago

Correction on mine: Fangraphs BaseRunning (BsR) is using run expectancy, not win expectancy, so all that matters is the number of outs and location of other baserunners. The inning does not affect the values.

For more information you can google Ultimate Base Running and find good background.

Ben -

I agree completely. Duffy basically got half a strike zone tonight while Bard had an extra 10-20% added on to the side of his, and still Duffy battled him almost even. And the bunts are driving me nuts.
Kurt Vancil
1 year ago

I noticed Duffy was being squeezed also. Without looking at the charts on Brooks it seemed like he was not getting the calls on the inner half of the plate but the ump would call a strike two inches off the outside of the plate (like strike two to Dyson in the 8th… although he still walked).

I stopped watching this game after the 4th inning because I was getting too frustrated (and it was dinner time here on the west coast). The beginning of my frustration was Q trying to steal and being nabbed. Bard was having a terrible inning and basically gave us two runs because of his balks AND he was visibly flustered and his pitches were sporadic. Then we sent Q lumbering up to second and the inning was over. Bard was able to rest while Duffy threw balls. Then Bard threw 13 total pitches to get through the 3rd AND 4th inning. Who knows if Dyson gets on base in the 2nd but it just seemed like a crumby decision to send Q.

Thankfully I started watching again in the 8th and was able to see Billy go yard and Brox to finish up the 9th, but if we would have lost I think the turning point would have been the caught stealing and the subsequent innings Bard pitched.
Kurt Vancil
1 year ago

Another thing driving me crazy.

I’ve seen multiple commentors on Royals websites saying that Braxton is our closer. Anybody else notice this? Do the fans really not know his real name?
Ben Reid
1 year ago

Perhaps they’re trying to imagine an alternative reality where we didn’t sign Broxton.
Sean Fischbach
1 year ago

You all posting about Duffy being squeezed are 100% correct. He had more than one walk where several of the “balls” were clear strikes on the MLB game tracker.

Humber’s steal and out was the result of a perfect throw. He almost made it but a perfect throw got him out. If that ball was just a little off he’s safe.
Mark Harkins
1 year ago

Thanks for the comments on Duffy getting squeezed last night. I noticed on the box score that duffy had pretty much hit his limit after just 4IP, but the Sox starter was only at about 60 pitches through 4. I thought (incorrectly) that it was just the Boston hitters being more selective and our usual “nibble at the corners and walk guys” pitching strategy.
Jim Kissane
1 year ago

Lee, Tim Bogar gives sage advice. One of the things I learned in my years as a journalist is that the notebook or the camera put a conversation in an entirely different context, and sometimes you have to make a point of putting them away to get people out of the role of “subject” or “source.” People like to talk about themselves, but you’ve got to get off the front porch and into the living room before they feel comfortable about it. Another related point is that everyone’s got a story, and they’re good stories, but you’re liable to miss them if you focus too much on the obvious ones. That’s why I enjoy your blog - there’s so much here that we can’t find anywhere else. Thanks.

I like Danny Duffy, and I think he’s going to be a great pitcher once he gets the pitch-count monkey off his back. One thing I’ve noticed about him (and Sanchez and Mendoza, as well; not so much with Hochevar and Chen), is that he doesn’t seem to pitch with much rhythm. We hear that a lot about guys like Justin Verlander and Roy Halladay, and watching them pitch is an entirely different experience - get the ball, sign, set, deliver, repeat. It keeps the game moving and I think it also helps keep the pitcher in command. So many times, you’ll see batters step out on our pitchers because they take so long to get ready - the fan who brought a book to read a couple of weeks ago probably finished it in between pitches. Your thoughts?

BTW, I noticed last night our batters started stepping out of the box more often, and it really did rattle the Red Sox pitchers. I hope we continue to do that.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

According to Bob Dutton’s story, Escobar bunted on his own. That’s probably why he bunted the ball too hard toward second—he was going for a hit.

Even if it had worked, that still leaves the winning run on third (although the Royals probably would have settled for tying the game at that point). Putting the tying and winning run into scoring position makes some sense, but Mike Moustakas is not the fastest guy in the world to try to score from second on a single.

Oh well, if there wasn’t more than one way to look at this, what would we argue about all day?
Brendan Woodbury
1 year ago

Boston’s hitters certainly took advantage of the umpire squeezing Duffy and made him throw a ton of pitches.

The Royals, on the other hand, exhibited almost no patience at the plate. In the second inning, Bard committed two balks and gave up a walk and a wild pitch. He was totally rattled. We ended the inning with a caught stealing (how many “perfect throws” do major leaguers have to make before we stop chalking them up to bad luck?) and then sent the top of our lineup to bat:

Bottom 3rd:

Dyson 1,(0-0) Bunt Groundout: 1B unassisted

Gordon 2,(0-1) Groundout: 2B-1B

Butler 2,(1-0) Popfly: 1B

Bottom 4th

Hosmer 3,(1-1) Groundout: SS-1B

Frenchy 1,(0-0) Groundout: 3B-1B

Moose 4,(2-1) Groundout: 1B unassisted

13 pitches in 2 innings. Not only did we not give Duffy a chance to rest between innings (Duffy threw 17 pitches in the top of the 3rd and 23 in the top of the 4th), but we didn’t force a struggling pitcher to make several good pitches.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

Jim: Yeah, Bogar has really been influential in this effort and I’ve often thought journalism schools could do worse than bringing in some of the people we cover on a regular basis.

Figuring out what bugs the subjects of our stories might help us do better work. As you say, people like to talk about themselves and want to be understood. If you go to the trouble to educate yourself—at least to the point of being able to ask a good question—they respond.

But back to the pitching: I think working quickly helps everybody. I’ve seen a study that suggests a long wait between pitches helps the batter—almost like he has time to clear the mental image of the last pitch from his mind.

Working quickly helps the pitcher, the defense and most of all, the people who are trying to write their stories in short oredr, so we can go have wings and beer afterwards.
Jim Kissane
1 year ago

Amen to the beer and wings! Growing up I remember Bob Gibson could finish a game in under two hours. Then there was Houston’s Larry Dierker, who was pitching’s version of James Cameron. Pit them against each other and the game had all the continuity of “A Clockwork Orange.”
Darral VanGoethem
1 year ago

Two things, I wish that the TV crew would has shown a replay of the Quintero steal attempt b/c it actually looked like he just beat the tag on his rear. Also, to add a point about the Getz throw/Hosmer pass ball, my high school coach used to say “The ball is more important than the out.” Take the foot off the bag and go get the ball. Don’t always overshoot the cutoff man. These are just examples of why our coach said that sentence often. Not attacking particular Royals plays. However, it is a pretty good phrase.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

After the game I asked Tim Bogar if Bard was slow to the plate and he said not really, so maybe the one time I put a stopwatch on him I messed it up or he was slow on just that pitch. Quintero did make it fairly close. The umpire signalled a tag on the hip as he went by.

Didn’t get to talk to Hosmer about that play at first, but I will today. Eric probably stuck on the bag because he thought he could make the play, but if you can’t reach the ball you have to leave the bag. That play allowed the go-ahead run—at the time—to score.

When Getz made the throw I figured the runner got him—Chris doesn’t make that bad a throw without a little help. I couldn’t tell from the replay, but Bogar said Punto got Chris pretty good while breaking up the double play. Which would explain the off-line throw.
Brian Grant
1 year ago

I was wondering if you would post about the 7th vs. the 8th inning. I made the connection my self the minute Billy started into his trot.

Last night I thought Yost managed a good game. His moves made sense. I liked the Escobar bunt, though now I’m reading this morning that he did it on his own. Still, when your players make smart plays, that reflects on the manager. It just didn’t work in that case. I’m OK with that.

I also think his bunt in the 7th was a no-brainer.

This was the way Royals baseball games were supposed to go. Close game, late innings, 1st and 2nd, no outs, Getz at the plate….bunt. Same situation, Butler at the plate….3 run home run. 1, 2, 3 9th by Broxton. Ball game.
John Wilson
1 year ago

If I remember the replay on the throw from Getz to Hosmer correctly, Hosmer was stretched out far enough to catch the ball but it hopped over his glove. Granted trying to stay on the bag probably made it harder to concentrate on getting the ball in the glove but I’m guessing he thought he had a good shot at finishing the play.
Eric Blatt
1 year ago

It seems to me that the Royals are a little detached from reality on the issue of base stealing.

To the Royals coaches and managers, a stolen base attempt is a scientific calculation. You time the pitcher, you optimize your lead, you perfect your technique, and when the conditions are right, you run and you should be safe. If you’re out, something input into the calculation was off—maybe you hesitated on your jump or didn’t execute your slide properly.

But in the minds of the Royals decision-makers, while the inputs for a stolen base consideration may vary, the calculation itself is never wrong. A stolen base is always a matter of cold science where if you optimize your execution and pick your spots, you can be safe almost every time.

But the results tell a different story. How long does reality need to keep banging on their door, yelling that Jeff Francoeur, Alex Gordon, Humberto Quintero, etc are not good risks to steal before Royals management opens the door?

Things regularly happen in a stolen base attempt that the Royals maddeningly chalk up to bad luck. “Pefect throw—unlucky!” “That pick-off throw should have been called a balk!” “The ONE time they pitched out!” “Just didn’t get a good jump that time—he’ll do better next time.”

It’s time for the Royals to accept that their calculations don’t match the empirical results, and to adjust their base stealing philosophy accordingly. If they want to steal with an 80% success rate, they need to limit their base stealing to their personnel that can steal safely even if the catcher makes a good throw, even if the jump isn’t perfect, even if he stumbles into the slide or whatever fraction of a second disruption it is that the Royals don’t account for. Because reality throws curveballs, and if you calculate that if things go right, you have an 80% chance of being safe, reality is going to turn that 80% calculated success rate into a 40% success rate.

If you instead limit your steals to Jarrod Dyson, Chris Getz and Alcides Escobar, you’ll find that your base stealing will actually be improving your chance to win instead of hamstringing it by giving away outs and runners.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

I think the Royals would not agree that every base-stealing situation is the same. At different times, different odds would affect their thought process. In one situation the runner would have to almost be certain to be successful for it to make sense—in another situation lower odds would be acceptable.

I didn’t get to talk to Yost afterwards, but it sounds like he was willing to accept less than optimal odds on the Quindero steal, because with two outs and Dyson at the plate, you’d need at least two more hits to score Quindero. If Quindero were thrown out, the Royals had their next inning set up with their lead-off hitter.

Doesn’t mean you have to agree, but as I understand it, that was the thought process and Quindero made it closer than I thought he would.

The Royals would agree with you that the base stealing—as opposed to the base running—needed to be addressed. Too many runners making bad decisions that didn’t follow the philosophy.

They cleaned it up and the base stealing percentage has improved since then.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

“It’s time for the Royals to accept that their calculations don’t match the empirical results, and to adjust their base stealing philosophy accordingly.”

Adjustments have been made and the success rate is trending up, Q last night makes them 11 of the last 14, as I recall. And execution does have a lot to do with baseball, which is why the sequence pitch-catch-throw-catch-tag is challenged so often, lots of things can and do go wrong, but sometimes they’re executed perfectly. Just the breaks.

Personally, I’m happy that one of our Big Ball players managed to execute in an important situation after the Small Ball guys managed to keep the game close. Too many times this year the result has been taking strike three or whiffing on three consecutive change-ups or hitting into a double-play by the big guys in critical situations.

Liked Esky’s idea on the bunt, he just hit it too hard and straight at the 1B and the 1B made a good throw and the C made a professional block, Frenchy never even touched the plate. Execution.
Eric Blatt
1 year ago

I’ll buy that the Quintero steal followed a different logic than your typical Jeff Francoeur caught stealing, but the logic on the Quintero steal was every bit as misguided. More misguided even.

The idea, as you said, was that if Quintero was safe, he’d on 2B for Dyson, and if he was out, Dyson would lead off the next inning as sort of a consolation prize. But think about what the potential reward was—Quintero standing on 2B instead of 1B with Dyson batting. Quintero isn’t going to score from 2B on a Dyson single, so even with a successful steal, you’re still going to need 2 good outcomes to score, the same as you’d need without attempting a steal. And if Dyson were to walk, the stolen base would have given the Royals nothing except an opportunity for an out.

And of course if Quintero is out, you’ve taken the pressure off the pitcher, lowered his pitch count, and taken away the possibility of Dyson reaching base and Gordon coming to bat with runners on 1st and 2nd. Your next inning is now Dyson-Gordon-Butler instead of Gordon-Butler-Hosmer. So not only have you sacrificed a scoring opportunity this inning, you’ve also significantly downgraded your chances to score in the next inning.

It’s incredibly rare that a 30% success rate SB attempt will be a good gamble. Unsurprisingly, this wasn’t one of them.
Eric Blatt
1 year ago

“Adjustments have been made and the success rate is trending up, Q last night makes them 11 of the last 14, as I recall.”

Weren’t they 9 of their last 10 the other day? So if they’re 11 of their last 14, they’re also 2 of their last 5.

This is why you don’t make a big deal out of “trends” in a tiny sample. Show me when they stop trying to steal bases with slow runners that have less than 70% career success rates, and I’ll show you when their base stealing philosophy has been corrected.
Eric Blatt
1 year ago

Er, 2 of their last 4, not 5.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

Eric: You’re right that there’s more than one way to look at this, but I think Quindero does score from second on most singles, at least with two outs since he wouldn’t have to wait for the ball to get down.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year ago

I can’t easily pull stats for 2-out situations, but, like most catchers, Humberto is not great about taking extra bases. He’s 9 of 25 in his career (6 of 18 over the last three years) scoring from 2nd on a single. We’d assume he’d do a bit better with 2 outs.
Eric Blatt
1 year ago

Lee:

You’re right that Quintero would score on some singles, but a big part of Dyson’s game is scrapping to get on base with walks and infield singles. And of course, ‘running speed’ is not part of Quintero’s game at all, so between the likelihood of a walk, or an infield single, or a single right at an outfielder, there were plenty of possible outcomes where Dyson could reach safely without driving Quintero in from 2nd. If any of those occurred, a successful steal would have almost no value.

But a normal single to an outfielder probably would have scored Q from 2B, so there was something to be gained from a successful steal attempt.

The upside just wasn’t nearly worth the risk. And of course, Q was out just like any reasonable observer would expect, making the risk all that much more apparent.
Larry Tindle
1 year ago

Had Q stayed on first and Dyson hit one of his infield hits they would have just forced Q at second instead of having to make a play on Dyson. Also not sure how much attention Bard was paying to Q. I would say not much because of how close the play wound up being. I have more problems with us letting Bard of the hook the next 2 innings with 13 pitches.
Jeff Circle
1 year ago

After Alcides’ failed bunt attempt, Rex was emphasizing that Frenchy got a bad jump (while they were insisting it was a safety squeeze). That pretty much told me Alcides tried that on his own - Jeff didn’t know it was coming and therefore didn’t get a good walking lead. So I guess Rex has finally told me something that helped during a broadcast-even though it was by analyzing the play incorrectly and therefore an accident! :)

Also thought it was funny - in a nerdy sort of way - that yesterday’s small-ball/big-ball discussion centered at least in part on how the Royals can’t count on two walks and a bomb, then they got two walks and a bomb after a “failed” small-ball inning. I know we’re still not built that way and that’s not how we’re going to win all summer, but it was funny in context.

And btw, I call it a “failed” small-ball inning because Escobar’s play was not Yost’s call. If it had been Yost’s call, remove the quotations marks.
Jeff Circle
1 year ago

Lee, I’ve been noticing that no one drag-bunts any more. Can you ask Getz or Dyson or someone about that? As much as I hate bunting in general, a well-executed drag bunt by a speedy lefty seems to be a pretty sharp weapon.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year ago

Lee -

If Escobar bunted on his own, do you classify Francoeur breaking for home as a baserunning mistake? First base was open, so he wasn’t forced to go. He only had a short lead. Why go in that situation?
Jeff Circle
1 year ago

Brendan, I know you asked Lee but in that type of situation I’d probably call it “no time to think” or “oh crap, what’s he doing”. Probably saw him square to bunt and aggressiveness took over. Sometimes the element of surprise gets your own guys too.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

“This is why you don’t make a big deal out of “trends” in a tiny sample.”

You might not, I do, as large samples miss changes while this small sample begins with the coaches making adjustments, so is much more relevant to the current situation, isn’t it?

“Why go in that situation?”

Because he thought he could make it. Took a good throw and a good catch and block to get him.

“Sometimes the element of surprise gets your own guys too.”

Absolutely. Runner on 3rd doesn’t have the time to email TangoTiger to get the odds. Esky probably saw something that told him to bunt and after that it’s a matter of execution with the bunt being a little hard and a little straight and the Sox defense executing well.
Jim Wilson
1 year ago

The latest small sample shows that the SB strategy is as flawed as ever.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year ago

Jim F -

Sometimes I feel that if Frenchy fell to the ground and got picked off, you’d say it wasn’t a baserunning mistake because, um, Francoeur could have been digging a latrine with his hands and, uh, proper sanitation is vital to keeping any population healthy, including a baseball team that needs its best players in the lineup for 162 games a year.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

“Sometimes I feel that if Frenchy fell to the ground”

While I feel that some posters are here only to criticize a specific group of players. I’ve had some experience with other sites built on that idea and sometimes half a dozen of them will come here to play. I think that, given the majority of posters and bloggers fall into the Negative Nancy Niche, someone needs to be willing to stick up for the players. Lee often has better things to do than stay on top of a thread, so me and Larry and some others do the dirty work.

“The latest small sample shows that the SB strategy is as flawed as ever.”

78%, and that after Q actually stole the base and was called out by the ump. The previous sample shows the strategy much more flawed. Adjustments are the hardest things for large sample sizes to spot, which often makes them irrelevant sample sizes.
Jim Kissane
1 year ago

Francoeur goes on the safety squeeze as soon as he’s sure the ball is down. There’s one out, and generally in that situation, the runner on third breaks for home on any ground ball. Esky’s bunt was just a little too hard for Francoeur to make it home. Why did Esky do it? Because he’s more certain to make contact with a bunt than swinging away, and again, with the ground ball or bunt to the right side, the chances of scoring are really quite good because the catcher has to turn to make the tag (or make a Martin Brodeur kick save on Frenchy’s hand). Good idea, bad result.

Dyson did drag a bunt for a hit in Monday’s game. I think we’ll see that more often.
Jim Kissane
1 year ago

And actually, the safety squeeze was really just an “unsuccessful” result rather than actually “bad” because you’ve still got a runner at third with two out, which is what you’d have if he struck out or popped up.
Brendan Woodbury
1 year ago

Jim F -

If you see your role as sticking up for the players, I can understand why you’re unwilling to charge Francoeur with mistakes. My question was directed at Lee, who is using a system that is supposed to identify players’ mistakes. Francoeur’s baserunning numbers are not good. His SB success rate isn’t very good, his extra bases taken rate has been below average for five years, and he makes unforced outs on the bases, like last night. If you don’t want to criticize players, that’s fine, but Lee is willing to, and I would like to know if last night would be a base running mistake if Yost is right that the squeeze play was not on.

Jim K -

What you say makes total sense if there was a squeeze play on. That’s what I thought happened. But Yost said that there wasn’t and Escobar missed a sign. If that’s the case, I don’t understand why Francoeur tried to score on the bunt.
Ben Weddle
1 year ago

Lee, Really good column today and, just like Frenchie, I think it’s because you got back to the things that worked previously. We can always find statistical minutia to argue about but your insight and access to the players and others associated with the game are what I crave. With the absence of Frank in the booth, I want to hear about the things that led up to that bunt, that error, that homer. It’s easier to remain a fan of a struggling ball club when you’re made privy to the reasoning behind some of the decisions that might go awry.

You also put a face on the people who comprise this line-up. That builds bonds between readers and the team, and that translates into support. As a small market team we need to play to our strengths and what we have over the New York’s and Boston’s is a sense of community. We get to know these players through your disarming style and they become our friends. We pull just a little bit harder for them and, in the wake of an ugly losing streak, maybe we don’t just throw up our hands and start counting the days till football season.

Again, great work, look forward to more of the same.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

I’ll ask someone about drag-bunting, although it seems like Getz does it. The situation has to be right: if third is playing back, which way the pitcher falls off the mound, etc., plus bunts that don’t work now may pay off later in repositioning of the infield.

Don’t know about Frenchy breaking for home, I’ll ask, but one of the things people who play the game for a living continually emphasize: there’s a human element and it will always be there.

The game is not played by robots. It’s played by people and they’re playing it in real time. They don’t have luxury of examining replays and debating possible outcomes based on a multitude of studies, none of which can duplicate the exact circumstances the ballplayer finds himself in on that particular night.

Frenchy’s on third knowing he’s the tying run. He’s looking for anything that will allow him to advance. He should be taking a walking lead toward home no matter what.

When the ball was bunted he had a split-second decision to make, especially if he didn’t know it was coming. Once he sees the pitcher turn to go get the bunt he knows he’s got a shot—and if you give Jeff Francoeur a choice, he’s probably going to be aggressive. It’s who he is as a ballplayer and a person.

When he broke he had no way of knowing if the ball would be fielded cleanly, if the throw would be good and if Shoppach would make a great block of the plate. Jeff took a gamble—to tie the game up—and it didn’t work out.

How bad would the Royals be getting criticized is Frenchy just stood there and watched Escobar get thrown out at first?

As they say, “The farther you get from dirt, the easier the game becomes.” I’ve got a lot of sympathy for the guys on the dirt.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

Ben: Thanks, nice of you to say.
Jim Kissane
1 year ago

Just out of curiosity, Lee, what is your vantage point when you watch the games? Are you in the press box, or down at field level?
Jim Wilson
1 year ago

The latest sample is 2 of 4 — 50%.
Jim Wilson
1 year ago

Jim F., your sometimes outlandish defense of players, coaches and management is often what brings out the critics. Myers had another HR last night.
Larry Tindle
1 year ago

Jim K: Lee watches from the press box which I will tell you has a great view. I know this because when they remodeled the K they put the press box where my season ticket seats where.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

“The latest sample is 2 of 4 — 50%.”

Is there anything that makes that sample relevant in any way, some change of approach that gives it validity? For our readers I will mention once more that one of the greatest weaknesses of so-called advanced metrics is the inability to spot changes or adjustments in real time or close to it.

“Myers had another HR last night.”

So the talking point tomorrow is DFA Frenchy and bring Myers up?

Gio has been called up, looks like to platoon with Getzie, whose new stance hits righties much better than lefties. Wondering if that moves Tony Abreu to 2B to start getting some reps? Or maybe even a chance to promote Christian Colon, whose bat is finally showing some signs of life?
Tony Helfrich
1 year ago

I am frustrated by Yost—the bunting is driving me crazy. Maybe, this isn’t the site for this, but I really enjoy what you do Lee and read the site daily since last year. Not a Getz hater—felt like he earned the job this spring—and I believe he had the best chance of getting a hit in the 7th to drive in the run. Lefty/Righty matchup and swinging a better bat than Pena or Escobar. I would take three cracks at a single to drive Franceour from 2nd over 2 give-away outs to get the scoring opportunity we had with the Esky bunt. There’s a time to bunt…but to bunt so Escobar and Pena can drive in a run makes no sense. To blow up the big inning in the 2nd and 3rd (as done earlier in the year) also makes no sense—I know I’d love to see teams do that when Hoch or Sanchez are pitching. Give us a free out. With that said, I know that bunting is not the reason for KC being in the tank. A manager’s more critical role is being a leader and managing people.
Larry Tindle
1 year ago

Tony: I don’t feel that you are wrong bringing your thoughts to this site. We all have differing opinions on how some of these situations are handled. I like that about this site. We try to stay civil and have good discussions. Personally I did not have a problem with Getz bunting them over with no outs. That gave us at least a chance of tying the score without needing a hit. Ground ball to the left side or a long fly ball. Had Esky’s bunt worked there was a good chance Frenchie would score and Esky safe on first with a runner on third. It didn’t work for what ever reason so it looks bad. Good post.
Lee Judge
1 year ago

I agree with whatever Larry says. He’s right, I’m in the press box right above home plate—sorry I took your seat Larry.

And this web site is a place for anyone who wants to have a civil discussion about baseball and the Royals.

I see it as my job to bring you their views and mix in what I observe while doing so. People are free to disagree and make their arguments.

The fact that there is more than one way to look at things or play the game is part of what make this so interesting.
Jim Fetterolf
1 year ago

Found it interesting that the Red Sox were also playing some small ball tonight.