Cafardo's manager ranking

[witesoxfan]

Your way is that anyone that can read percentages can manage.

 

Are there times that you bench a hot hand? Of course. It's much, much more rare that I believe you are indicating.

 

So say the Sox have a series against the Twins in Chicago, and Conor Gillaspie goes 8 for 13 over the weekend against Phil Hughes, Ervin Santana, and Ricky Nolasco. They are heading to Detroit after the finale, and David Price is the starter in the first game. You are telling me that you are going to start Conor Gillaspie because he's hot, completely disregarding the fact that he's an absolute hot mess against left handed pitching?

[brett05]

Bench guys are bench guys for a reason. Just because they get a couple hits one game doesn't make them hot or change the fact that they are not starting caliber players. It doesn't make Robin a bad manager because he doesn't give starts to Konerko and his .572 OPS, or L. Garcia and his .399 OPS, or Nieto and .635 OPS just because they have one good game. Starting those guys more than once a week or so would be what makes you a bad manager.

 

 

You are strawmanning here. I never said one game.

Edited February 17, 2015 by brett05

[brett05]

So say the Sox have a series against the Twins in Chicago, and Conor Gillaspie goes 8 for 13 over the weekend against Phil Hughes, Ervin Santana, and Ricky Nolasco. They are heading to Detroit after the finale, and David Price is the starter in the first game. You are telling me that you are going to start Conor Gillaspie because he's hot, completely disregarding the fact that he's an absolute hot mess against left handed pitching?

 

 

Not only is Conor hot, he's on fire. It's be foolish to bench him. BTW, Conor is hitting .333 against Price in his career. (Small sample size of course)

[witesoxfan]

Not only is Conor hot, he's on fire. It's be foolish to bench him. BTW, Conor is hitting .333 against Price in his career. (Small sample size of course)

 

And because of that small sample, you should disregard it and look at the bigger picture, because Conor Gillaspie is not good against left handed pitching.

 

Essentially, you are throwing logic by the wayside. That doesn't seem like a good way to manage.

[Kyyle23]

Your way is that anyone that can read percentages can manage.

 

Are there times that you bench a hot hand? Of course. It's much, much more rare that I believe you are indicating.

 

i think what is rare here is Leury Garcia getting so hot over the course of two games that it doesnt make sense to remove him from the lineup. I dont think that ever happened.

 

 

You are strawmanning here. I never said one game.

 

Right right right, you said two games. Straw man indeed

[brett05]

i think what is rare here is Leury Garcia getting so hot over the course of two games that it doesnt make sense to remove him from the lineup. I dont think that ever happened.

 

 

 

 

Right right right, you said two games. Straw man indeed

whatever helps you out I guess

[brett05]

And because of that small sample, you should disregard it and look at the bigger picture, because Conor Gillaspie is not good against left handed pitching.

 

Essentially, you are throwing logic by the wayside. That doesn't seem like a good way to manage.

Logically I am riding the hot hand. In your scenario you need to only look at percentages and those that do not succeed from day one won't be provided an opportunity to succeed later. That's poor managing.

[witesoxfan]

Logically I am riding the hot hand. In your scenario you need to only look at percentages and those that do not succeed from day one won't be provided an opportunity to succeed later. That's poor managing.

 

Conor Gillaspie goes 0-4 with 3 K's and the White Sox lose.

[Dick Allen]

Logically I am riding the hot hand. In your scenario you need to only look at percentages and those that do not succeed from day one won't be provided an opportunity to succeed later. That's poor managing.

No, poor managing is basing your decision on what happened in an entirely different scenerio the day before, and not using information that can lead to a better result. I do agree there should be some gut managing. Playing by the book is safe from criticism, but c'mon, riding guys like Leury Garcia, or Adrian Nieto, or a 38 year old Paul Konerko just because they had a hit or 2 the previous 2 games, while keeping better players on the bench? That is silly.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Dick Allen

[brett05]

No, poor managing is basing your decision on what happened in an entirely different scenerio the day before, and not using information that can lead to a better result. I do agree there should be some gut managing. Playing by the book is safe from criticism, but c'mon, riding guys like Leury Garcia, or Adrian Nieto, or a 38 year old Paul Konerko just because they had a hit or 2 the previous 2 games, while keeping better players on the bench? That is silly.

 

It's riding it out. All players slump and all players have hot hands. When they are hot you play them out. That's the right thing to do. More than likely the bench guys regress back to the norm fairly quickly. But while they are hot, you ride that out. That is maximizing the value.

[brett05]

Conor Gillaspie goes 0-4 with 3 K's and the White Sox lose.

Or he continues and goes 1 for 3 with a 2b and a run scored.

[Eminor3rd]

Logically I am riding the hot hand. In your scenario you need to only look at percentages and those that do not succeed from day one won't be provided an opportunity to succeed later. That's poor managing.

 

There's been a ton of research on this. All of it concludes that while hot streaks are certainly real, they hold no predictive value whatsoever. In other words, a guy is hot until he cools down, and there's no way to know when that will be. In any given at bat, a player's career numbers are better predictors of the result than his recent numbers. Even though a guy may be hot for a week, he isn't any more likely to STAY hot the next day.

 

So if you put a guy into a terrible match-up, you're setting him up for failure no matter how hot he's been. You're "helping" the hot streak end.

 

It's riding it out. All players slump and all players have hot hands. When they are hot you play them out. That's the right thing to do. More than likely the bench guys regress back to the norm fairly quickly. But while they are hot, you ride that out. That is maximizing the value.

 

Yeah I see why this makes sense intuitively, but it turns out that things don't actually work that way. You maximize a guy's value by putting him in the best position to succeed. If you ride him until he fails, that huge failure takes a chunk out of the value he got you with his streak.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Eminor3rd

[Dick Allen]

It's riding it out. All players slump and all players have hot hands. When they are hot you play them out. That's the right thing to do. More than likely the bench guys regress back to the norm fairly quickly. But while they are hot, you ride that out. That is maximizing the value.

So you wait for your bench guy to suck and perhaps cost you a game before you take him out. And anticipating no success is just dumb?

 

Leury had hits in consecutive games 5 times last year. The first time he went 2 for 4, then 1-4 with 2 k's. I guess that qualifies for hot. He didn't play the next game and the Sox lost 3-2.

 

He went 1-2 and 1-3, sat out the next game and the Sox lost 6-3.

 

He went 1-3 then 2-4, then sat and the Sox won 3-2

 

He went 1-5, then 1-3, then played and went 0-3. Keeping the "hot bat" in the line up didn't pay off.

 

He went 1-4,then 1-4 then sat and the Sox won 6-3.

 

I know these are actual results and probably mean nothing, but you are wrong.

 

 

Edited February 17, 2015 by Dick Allen

[brett05]

There's been a ton of research on this. All of it concludes that while hot streaks are certainly real, they hold no predictive value whatsoever. In other words, a guy is hot until he cools down, and there's no way to know when that will be. In any given at bat, a player's career numbers are better predictors of the result than his recent numbers. Even though a guy may be hot for a week, he isn't any more likely to STAY hot the next day.

 

 

 

 

So if you put a guy into a terrible match-up, you're setting him up for failure no matter how hot he's been. You're "helping" the hot streak end.

 

 

 

Yeah I see why this makes sense intuitively, but it turns out that things don't actually work that way. You maximize a guy's value by putting him in the best position to succeed. If you ride him until he fails, that huge failure takes a chunk out of the value he got you with his streak.

I'm not talking predictive. Predictive is odds based and with that you can just use the sheet which anyone can do. This is riding the hot hand. Yes the hand will end. But one player in a lineup ending a hot streak does not mean the game is lost. It could mean though that the streak continues and thus could mean a win. It's also the opportunity to see if perhaps a bench guy can be something more.

 

The streak shouldn't be interrupted. This maximizes value.

[brett05]

So you wait for your bench guy to suck and perhaps cost you a game before you take him out. And anticipating no success is just dumb?

 

Leury had hits in consecutive games 5 times last year. The first time he went 2 for 4, then 1-4 with 2 k's. I guess that qualifies for hot. He didn't play the next game and the Sox lost 3-2.

 

He went 1-2 and 1-3, sat out the next game and the Sox lost 6-3.

 

He went 1-3 then 2-4, then sat and the Sox won 3-2

 

He went 1-5, then 1-3, then played and went 0-3. Keeping the "hot bat" in the line up didn't pay off.

 

He went 1-4,then 1-4 then sat and the Sox won 6-3.

 

I know these are actual results and probably mean nothing, but you are wrong.

 

 

You keep getting hung up on a name. We can't discuss this intelligently can we?

[witesoxfan]

I'm not talking predictive. Predictive is odds based and with that you can just use the sheet which anyone can do. This is riding the hot hand. Yes the hand will end. But one player in a lineup ending a hot streak does not mean the game is lost. It could mean though that the streak continues and thus could mean a win. It's also the opportunity to see if perhaps a bench guy can be something more.

 

The streak shouldn't be interrupted. This maximizes value.

 

I'm glad you are not the manager of the White Sox.

[Dick Allen]

You keep getting hung up on a name. We can't discuss this intelligently can we?

Sure we can. Nieto never played consecutive games, so he can't qualify for your "hotness". Are you saying Paul Konerko didn't play enough? Who are the names of the non regulars that were yanked while they were "hot"?

 

If this is a managerial weakness, you should be able to provide some examples.

Edited February 17, 2015 by Dick Allen

[brett05]

I'm glad you are not the manager of the White Sox.

Ditto...so we got that in common.

[brett05]

Sure we can. Nieto never played consecutive games, so he can't qualify for your "hotness". Are you saying Paul Konerko didn't play enough? Who are the names that were yanked while they were "hot"?

 

If this is a managerial weakness, you should be able to provide some examples.

Sorry, but I don't think we can.

 

For you and I, it's best we agree to disagree.

Edited February 17, 2015 by brett05

[Dick Allen]

Sorry, but I don't think we can.

 

For you and I, it's best we agree to disagree.

So not 1 example. LOL.

[brett05]

So not 1 example. LOL.

 

 

Please see previous post.

[Eminor3rd]

I'm not talking predictive. Predictive is odds based and with that you can just use the sheet which anyone can do. This is riding the hot hand. Yes the hand will end. But one player in a lineup ending a hot streak does not mean the game is lost. It could mean though that the streak continues and thus could mean a win. It's also the opportunity to see if perhaps a bench guy can be something more.

 

The streak shouldn't be interrupted. This maximizes value.

 

You ARE talking predictive. You're saying that if a guy just had a good game (or several good games), he is likely to have another good game. Statistically, that just isn't true. So it isn't predictive, and so it doesn't make sense to "ride the hot hand" if that means putting a guy in a situation where he seems less likely to succeed than the alternative.

 

If it's close to a wash and the manager feels it's important mentally for a bench guy to feel like he can earn himself playing time, I get it. Makes sense. But it ISN'T maximizing a guy's value in terms of his on-field contributions, because his hot hand doesn't make him more likely to produce the next day.

[brett05]

You ARE talking predictive. You're saying that if a guy just had a good game (or several good games), he is likely to have another good game. Statistically, that just isn't true. So it isn't predictive, and so it doesn't make sense to "ride the hot hand" if that means putting a guy in a situation where he seems less likely to succeed than the alternative.

 

If it's close to a wash and the manager feels it's important mentally for a bench guy to feel like he can earn himself playing time, I get it. Makes sense. But it ISN'T maximizing a guy's value in terms of his on-field contributions, because his hot hand doesn't make him more likely to produce the next day.

 

 

If this was a craps table you would be right. But this isn't.

 

You've said yourself the hot hand is real and I don't think anyone doubts that. But to assume that a streak ends because of a matchup isn't the right play. You don't know when the hot hand ends so you ride it out until it does. The moment trumps the history in the majority of cases.

 

 

If there is evidence that this doesn't work, I'd be interested in reading it Eminor3rd

 

 

EDIT: Benching a player ends the Hot Streak every single time.

Edited February 17, 2015 by brett05

[NorthSideSox72]

If this was a craps table you would be right. But this isn't.

 

You've said yourself the hot hand is real and I don't think anyone doubts that. But to assume that a streak ends because of a matchup isn't the right play. You don't know when the hot hand ends so you ride it out until it does. The moment trumps the history in the majority of cases.

 

 

If there is evidence that this doesn't work, I'd be interested in reading it Eminor3rd

 

 

EDIT: Benching a player ends the Hot Streak every single time.

You're asking to prove a negative. What you have yet to do is prove the positive, apparently because there is no evidence to support your claim.

 

[witesoxfan]

EDIT: Benching a player ends the Hot Streak every single time.

 

What empirical evidence do you have of this?