Thursday morning things

by Adam J. Morris on Apr 24, 2008 9:10 AM CDT

This, my friends, is rock bottom. I cannot believe it can get any worse than this.

Richard Durrett has an item about Nolan Ryan wanting to avoid any "knee-jerk" reactions, with Ryan saying that he's talking some with Ron Washington, but leaves that mostly to Jon Daniels, saying that there is a "chain of command" that he wants to respect.

Maybe I'm knee-jerking. I don't go into the clubhouse, I don't know what goes on behind the scenes or what the coaching staff and manager is doing on a daily basis. But quite honestly, at this point, I'm ready for some knee-jerking. Watching this team play, two seasons in a row, in such a clownshoes manner, I've got to feel that this is on the manager.

Ben Broussard, Washington's big find, the guy he had to have this offseason, falling on his face doesn't help. But you know, that's not even the thing that breaks it for me.

What I think finally pushed me over the edge was the top of the 4th last night. The Rangers are down 6-5, and the bullpen has already had to be called. It is a high-scoring game. Kenny Rogers is struggling, allowing a single and a walk. Ian Kinsler, 2 for 2 on the night, comes up.

And bunts.

That, to me, is managing scared. That, to me, says you have no faith in your team to have a big inning, to get a runner home without "manufacturing" it. Having Ian Kinsler bunt against a struggling lefty in that situation says that either you don't know what you are doing, or you feel you have to do something in order to make it look like you are doing something.

In other news...Kason Gabbard is heading to the d.l., and Scott Feldman is going to take his place.

On the plus side, Luis Mendoza's complete inability to throw a breaking ball yesterday apparently is the result of a bad shoulder that he didn't tell the team about until after the game, and that could be landing him on the d.l.

0 recs | Comment 53 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

sit on your hands

Washington needs to stop managing and just let the players play.

I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to go chase it. ~Rogers Hornsby

by RangerMad on Apr 24, 2008 9:18 AM CDT 0 recs

Oh my....

Everyone’s injured…...and Ron is still wanting to bunt…..

I’m so defeated as a Rangers fan.

by bspate on Apr 24, 2008 9:21 AM CDT 0 recs

Yeah, when there have been

11 runs by the top of the 4th, bunting is so insanely, monumentally stupid, someone should have kicked him in the nuts when he called it in.

The 11 runs should be a pretty big clue it isn’t going to end up a one run game, and you have to play for crooked number innings, especially when one of the Rangers best clutch hitters this year is up.

"Before I leave, I once again condemn the despicable buffoonery of D.J. Cahill." - Huck

by DJCahill on Apr 24, 2008 9:23 AM CDT 0 recs

Kinsler

he should never bunt vs a lefty.

"When we're mad we'll use our words. Then the rest of the world will play nice with us. And the only boom-booms will be in our pants." - Ralph Wiggum

by rentz on Apr 24, 2008 9:26 AM CDT 0 recs

+1

A Lonestar in California - 2.0

by lonestarJon on Apr 24, 2008 11:02 PM CDT up 0 recs

I agree 100% about the idiocy of bunting in that situation

You can check out why it’s a bad move if you look at a run-expectancy table:
http://www.tangotiger.net/RE9902.html

With men at 1st and 2nd, and no outs, you score 1.573 runs on average. With men at 2nd and 3rd, and one out (the result of the sac bunt), you score 1.467 runs on average. Not a huge drop, but it’s a drop nonetheless. I’m sure Ron Washington has never heard of a run-expectancy table (and Jon Daniels evidently doesn’t care). If you look at this table in conjunction with Washington’s “small-ball” decisions, you’ll see that he’s hurting the team’s chances of scoring runs when he overmanages the game (which is most of the time).

The poor decision becomes worse when you consider the fact that he’s bunting with one of his best hitters (Kinsler). I could understand if it was your 8th or 9th place hitter batting, but it’s just inexcusable to take the bat out of Kinsler’s hands when doing so doesn’t even increase your run-scoring chances.

by DogDips on Apr 24, 2008 9:26 AM CDT 0 recs

Variables

With Kinsler up versus a struggling lefty, there is probably a much larger discrepancy. If that is Broussard or any lefty that really struggles against lefties with the heart of the lineup coming up, then maybe it is actually a good move, statistically. However, I fear that Wash, despite his time with Oakland, doesn’t have any idea (or cares to know) what a run expectancy chart is.

by badradiorules on Apr 24, 2008 9:47 AM CDT up 0 recs

not a good move

No, when your starter can’t hold a 5-run lead, your bullpen is running on fumes, you do not play for one run.

...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.

by t ball on Apr 24, 2008 9:49 AM CDT up 0 recs

Agree

It was a terrible move, just saying that statistically, there may be a scenario where it was a good move. However, that wasn’t the scenario that was presented.

by badradiorules on Apr 24, 2008 9:58 AM CDT up 0 recs

The scenario for a bunt being a good move

is pretty simple. Late innings, low scoring game, good bullpens on both teams. An inning left to score, and one run ought to be enough to decide the game. If the hitter is poor, the decision becomes easier.

Basicly, in that scenario, 1 run is every bit as good as a crooked number inning, and its worth trading an out for one run. The run expectancy chart goes out the window, because scoring multiple runs isn’t particularly more valuable than just scoring one run.

However, in a game where 11 runs are scored by the 4th, the reasonable expectation is you are gonna have to score a crapload of runs to win, and you need big innings.

"Before I leave, I once again condemn the despicable buffoonery of D.J. Cahill." - Huck

by DJCahill on Apr 24, 2008 10:04 AM CDT up 0 recs

From the chart

Not that I would do it as a manager, but if you crunch the numbers from the same scenario with Broussard at the plate instead of Kinsler, you would be expected to score more runs if he bunts rather than if he didn’t. Also, that assumes that Broussard can actually get a bunt down, which is a stretch.

However, in that case, its not a the same as a late inning situation, bunting may actually be the best way to score multiple runs, because Broussard has virtually no chance against lefties. The score of the game is irrelevant at that point.

Any way, the point was that, while the chart says that it is only a slight disadvantage to bunt in that case, with Kinsler up versus a struggling lefty, it would be a much larger disadvantage to bunt, thus making the move even worse.

by badradiorules on Apr 24, 2008 10:27 AM CDT up 0 recs

There is not a chance in hell

bunting makes a damn bit of sense in the 4th inning of an 11 run game in the AL. I don’t care who is hitting.

"Before I leave, I once again condemn the despicable buffoonery of D.J. Cahill." - Huck

by DJCahill on Apr 24, 2008 10:32 AM CDT up 0 recs

You're right

I wouldn’t do it. However, statistically, you would expect to score more runs if you did bunt, meaning at least you could justify it.

by badradiorules on Apr 24, 2008 10:39 AM CDT up 0 recs

No, statistically you'd expect

to score less total runs by bunting. Thats what the run expectations chart tells us.

"Before I leave, I once again condemn the despicable buffoonery of D.J. Cahill." - Huck

by DJCahill on Apr 24, 2008 10:43 AM CDT up 0 recs

Okay

The chart above states that on average, you’d expect to score 1.573 runs with runners at first and second and 0 outs and you’d expect to score 1.467 runs with runners at second and third and 1 out. Now, what I said was with Kinsler at the plate against a struggling lefty, that’s not the average situation, so the difference would be even greater, thus a bad move.

Also, if Broussard is at the plate and Young and Hamilton coming up, that is not an average situation either. The run expectancy of the first situation would likely decrease with Broussard’s numbers thrown into the mix and the run expectancy of the latter would go up with Young and Hamilton coming up.

I would expect that at worst they would be even, but it is more likely that statistically, the run expectancy of runners at second and third, one out, with Young, Hamilton and Bradley coming up would be greater than first and second, 0 out with Broussard (vs. lefty), Young and Hamilton coming to the plate.

by badradiorules on Apr 24, 2008 10:59 AM CDT up 0 recs

And the Rangers

only scored that inning because Rogers couldn’t find the strike zone.

I don't want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to go chase it. ~Rogers Hornsby

by RangerMad on Apr 24, 2008 10:07 AM CDT up 0 recs

I think the Rangers...

need to take a full week off, forfeit those games and go to a Steve Ballmer seminar.

by Apes and Androids on Apr 24, 2008 9:27 AM CDT 1 recs

Developers Developers Developers Developers!

"When we're mad we'll use our words. Then the rest of the world will play nice with us. And the only boom-booms will be in our pants." - Ralph Wiggum

by rentz on Apr 24, 2008 9:27 AM CDT up 0 recs

Owen Wilson

7 Kind of Smoke or something like that. We just need to find our ness…

by OKC Ranger Fan on Apr 24, 2008 9:30 AM CDT up 0 recs

Take a page from Chubs Peterson

and find their happy place.

by corbsclinton on Apr 24, 2008 9:40 AM CDT up 0 recs

Is there a "date that Big Tex fires Washington/Daniel" lottery yet?

Wharter

by Wharter on Apr 24, 2008 9:34 AM CDT 0 recs

Daniels

I remember the diary a few weeks ago from the guy betting on whether Daniels could possibly get fired within the year. I thought there was no chance.

Now I wonder. If Ryan wants more personnel input, and this team is still cruising for 90+ losses…

Would they fire Daniels if firing Wash didn’t change the pace of losing?

Go Strangers.

by hightowersmith on Apr 24, 2008 9:46 AM CDT up 0 recs

I'm still amazed that a savvy entrepreneur like Tom Hicks would allow the worse tandem in organized sports to run his franchise!

Wharter

by Wharter on Apr 24, 2008 10:04 AM CDT up 0 recs

Bunting, walks

For me walking Pudge, of all people, on 4 pitches was the low on the other side of the ball. This team must be demoralized, I can’t imagine that they take these losses easily. If we’re all discombobulated they must be ready to drop-kick a baby holding a puppy.

And unless Feldman has a wonderful outing today it could only get worse. The team’s WHIP over the last 6 games is a hefty 2.27, and they’re walking over SEVEN batters per 9.

...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.

by t ball on Apr 24, 2008 9:36 AM CDT 0 recs

Injury

I understand trying to be a gamer and play through pain, but seriously, if you are hurt and can’t be effective, don’t go out there (especially for a pitcher!). All he ended up doing is getting shelled, losing the game and killing the bullpen. Unlike a position player, a starting pitcher has the ability to cause the team to lose several in a row by killing the bullpen.

by Jack Nicholson 1974 on Apr 24, 2008 9:37 AM CDT 0 recs

Skating

Its amazing how little heat Jaramillo and Connor get.

by red shoe ranger on Apr 24, 2008 9:39 AM CDT 0 recs

Well,

not sure they deserve a lot of blame. I doubt Connor is out there encouraging the relievers to walk every other batter. The bullpen has been historically bad over the last 12 games, as has the defense. But the offense has had its ups and downs and really isn’t the problem, and relievers are notoriously unpredictable. The blame should go first on the players, second on Washington (for his in-game weirdness, lineup idiocy, and defensive ineffectiveness), third on Daniels (he signed Broussard, hired Washington, assembled the bullpen, etc.).

...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.

by t ball on Apr 24, 2008 9:47 AM CDT up 0 recs

the hitting

if the players are at fault….then JD signed them.

if is the managers fault…well, JD hired him.

So…JD is numero uno in the blame game

Of course hicks hired JD but you cant fire the owner, unfortunately.

by red shoe ranger on Apr 24, 2008 9:54 AM CDT up 0 recs

The hitters

Are you saying that Blalock (for instance) is always going to hit so poorly with RISP? The hitting ups and downs are just luck overall. This lineup is not terrible (well, unless Washington is putting Laird at DH). This lineup projects to at least average to slightly above average. Offense is not a long-term problem for this club. It is not the ‘27 Yankees, but it is not the reason they are losing so much.

Agree on the Washington hire, though Hicks certainly shares the blame there.

...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.

by t ball on Apr 24, 2008 9:57 AM CDT up 0 recs

I would guess..

this team will be a below average power team, walk less than the league average, and strikeout more than the league average. This is one of the poorer lineups I’ve seen the Rangers have in recent memory.

Does Jaramillo make more $ than Wash. sidebar (does Wade make more $ than Garrett?)

by red shoe ranger on Apr 24, 2008 10:12 AM CDT up 0 recs

Your guess would be off a bit.

AL batting AVG .263
TX batting AVG .263

AL OBP . 339
TX OBP .335

AL slg pct. .403
TX slg pct. .413

AL P/PA 3.78
TX P/PA 3.85

AL RISP .274
TX RISP .200 – ding ding ding!
That number is just not going to stay there all season. The bullpen and defense, however, have been awful just about all the way around.

...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.

by t ball on Apr 24, 2008 10:23 AM CDT up 0 recs

Nolan...

He ough to knee-jerk so hard he blows out his ACL

All I can say is the team is full of below average players and this manager certainly hasnt shown the ability to “raise” there level of play.

Wash very well may suck…..but JD hired him.

JD and Hicks were caught up in orgasmic euphoria after interviewing Wash. Please tell you remember there amazement with Washington.

Hicks quote…”I looked a JD and I said, “are we missing something?”“

Remember the cookout at Hick’s house where they both came together and knew Wash was the man without one having to influence the other.

If this is the braintrust of this thing then you know all you need to know about why this team sucks.

Maybe Nolan can make a difference…but nothing in his background to this point proves he knows how to lead a ML franchise.

Hicks made three straight hires of people who were rookies at their respectine positions JD, Wash, and then Nolan.

Gotta love the collective experience of our upper management.

by red shoe ranger on Apr 24, 2008 9:48 AM CDT 0 recs

In fairness

He also hired Hart and Showalter, and how’d that work out?

by brettgardner on Apr 24, 2008 9:49 AM CDT up 0 recs

Hicks' mind

Hart and Showalter may not of worked but the logic behingd bringing them in was solid. They were both experienced and highly thought of by many in baseball. Just because they didnt work out doesnt mean you have to change your hiring philosophy.

Here Hicks apparent thought processes:

I brought in A- Rod and other high dollar FA’s. That failed…so as a result I will no longer spend money. Spending money wasnt the problem, its HOW it was spent

I hired Hart and Showalter and that failed. So, as a result i will no longer hire experienced “baseball men”. Again, he hired the wrong people, for the right reason.

Why does Hicks have to go polar opposite when something fails? I believe he now hires the wrong people, for the wrong reason.

He brings in poor talent…because its cheap
He hires a novice GM…....because its cheap
He hires a novice mgr…...because its cheap

2 things Hicks did recently that were not cheap. Hiring Nolan and re-signing MY. Sadly, I believe those decisions had to down with fan appeasement and not “what the best baseball decision”.

by red shoe ranger on Apr 24, 2008 10:07 AM CDT up 0 recs

So by your logic

We should fire JD, and then immediately hire another young, unproven guy? After all, if he didn’t, he’d be going to the polar opposite after failure.

by brettgardner on Apr 24, 2008 10:20 AM CDT up 0 recs

Obviously

I would not be in favor of hiring another GM in the mold of JD. I guess I do wish Hicks would swing back to the “experienced, proven track record” side of things when hiring.

by red shoe ranger on Apr 24, 2008 10:40 AM CDT up 0 recs

Great, we can have

John Hart again.

"Before I leave, I once again condemn the despicable buffoonery of D.J. Cahill." - Huck

by DJCahill on Apr 24, 2008 10:43 AM CDT up 0 recs

?????

Obviously Hart didnt work out. Personally I wanted Dave D. at the time. And if JD were to get fired I would hope we hire someone who is closer to the Hart mold than the JD mold.

Are you suggesting JD is a better GM than Hart?

by red shoe ranger on Apr 24, 2008 10:53 AM CDT up 0 recs

Here?

Absolutely.

by brettgardner on Apr 24, 2008 10:55 AM CDT up 0 recs

+1

by robert_d_wilfong on Apr 24, 2008 10:57 AM CDT up 0 recs

No question

Hart lost at the big league level, and depleted the minors.
JD lost at the big league level, but has improved the minors.

"Before I leave, I once again condemn the despicable buffoonery of D.J. Cahill." - Huck

by DJCahill on Apr 24, 2008 11:10 AM CDT up 0 recs

I dont recall..

I dont remember there being a bevy of talent in the minor leagues from which to deplete.

by red shoe ranger on Apr 24, 2008 8:20 PM CDT up 0 recs

This is stupid

Hicks was following a MLB trend when he hire JD. Bosox hired Epstein and I think that worked out pretty well for them. NYY hired Cashman and he’s still around. Cleveland hired Shapiro and I think they ‘re pretty happy with him. These are all in the same mold as JD—young and inexperienced Ivy-league types.

If you don’t think JD is the guy, that fine. But it doesn’t mean that there wasn’t a potential track record of success with his type.

by robert_d_wilfong on Apr 24, 2008 10:56 AM CDT up 0 recs

wayyyyyyy OT

“young and inexperienced Ivy-league types.”

are your referencing Obama?

seriously….You (or me) can find examples to back both hiring mindsets. I just generally prefer experienced over inexperienced. Im 31 and would like to think im alot wiser than I was when I was 21 and I hope this trend of gained wisdom continues as I age. Anyone can be “smart” . I prefer widom…which tends to come from time and experience. Im not arguing absolutes…I would never “rubber stamp” a decision on this one factor alone.

by red shoe ranger on Apr 24, 2008 8:16 PM CDT up 0 recs

Maybe in another 10 years

you’ll spell a lot better.

"I hope it's a special dumb person hell so that I don’t have to meet up with you after I die."

- The D-tron

by Chase Irwin on Apr 24, 2008 8:26 PM CDT up 0 recs

thankes foor....

leting mee nho.

by red shoe ranger on Apr 24, 2008 8:35 PM CDT up 0 recs

Why

do you have

so many paragraphs

in your posts?

...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.

by t ball on Apr 24, 2008 9:52 AM CDT up 0 recs

Recondite thoughts

require more pauses to digest =)

"I hope it's a special dumb person hell so that I don’t have to meet up with you after I die."

- The D-tron

by Chase Irwin on Apr 24, 2008 6:14 PM CDT up 0 recs

Weird

I’m not too distraught. If the Rangers win, I’m pretty damn happy. If they lose, I’m meh. I’ve been horribly reprogrammed by these horrible teams. Two days ago:

The Girl: why are the Rangers so bad?
Me: I dunno. Bad D, bad hitting with RISP, bad bullpen. I guess.

I’m just conditioned to expect losing. I’m now thinking that isn’t that great.

What happened to my old signature?

by WyoRanger on Apr 24, 2008 9:50 AM CDT 0 recs

just got the text that wes littleton

is getting optioned. really really didnt want to see that. but whatevers its not gonna matter

touchdown... touchdown... and st.micheals takes the lead.

by kmacsm on Apr 24, 2008 9:57 AM CDT 0 recs

Wash

I bet he woke up yesterday morning thinking “One day at a time, Wash. So long as you don’t go out there and lose 20-5 you’ll probably be okay tomorrow morning, and that is all you can control…”

Fortunately for Wash it was only 19-6

by JBImaknee on Apr 24, 2008 9:58 AM CDT 0 recs