ashbury

"The purpose of computation is insight, not numbers.” Richard Hamming, 1962. I was introduced to this quote from an early giant of computing at some point in my young career (no, I don't go back quite as far as Hamming). That principle guides a good portion of what I try to do here. Quoting a number, or a bunch of them, isn't intended to close a discussion, but to try to suggest how to look for something beneath the surface. Take that for what it's worth, because disagreement about that certainly would be where to "agree to disagree." Finally, please take the following in the playful spirit it's intended:

You asked me what I disagreed with, and I told you. Return the favor, my friend. BTW I didn't address your first sentence, about intentionally mischaracterizing. I don't have reason to think that, when it's simpler to assume sloppiness in handling averages. And in overlooking the effect on small samples when batted balls fall in safely, or fail to do so, for a period of time.

I disagree if your implication is that he's been "not good" the entire 28 days. One foot in a bucket of comfortably warm water, one foot in a bucket of dry ice, and on average there's frostbite on both feet if you don't drill down in the data just a little bit.

The joke, feeble as it was, concerned the difficulties of extrapolation in general. But forget extrapolation which isn't even relevant (that was part of the joke - insert the Nathan Fillion gif if it helps). If you wanted a serious response, it's this: If the last 28 days is games of 7-17 (All-Star game cut into this) through 8-11 (because today's game isn't on b-r.com yet) which have an OPS of .639 as you quoted, and if the span I quoted of 7-23 through 8-9 (because I was posting yesterday) was .540, then that means the games at the beginning of your range to before the beginning of mine, namely 7-17 through 7-22 had an OPS of 1.069. (I'm using the features of b-r.com's Game Logs feature to select ranges of interest. He's had bad enough results lately that even the few good games right after ASG aren't enough to raise the total averages. But to say he's been "not good" and then include games at the beginning of the range when he still was good, doesn't give a very fair picture. Finally, during the 28-day stretch of .639 OPS performance, good and bad games commingled, his BABIP has been .205. It's very likely that he's the same Trevor Larnach as when his BABIP was well above .300 earlier this season and people were remarking about what a breakthrough year he's having. Same guy the entire time, if you ask me.

He's been even worse in the more recent stretch I quoted. Soon, he'll be down to .000.

Minter and Morris with clean innings - very welcome. The bullpen has done well but I don't see enough completely clean innings to instill confidence.

He's started 61 games in CF and 20 games as DH in 2026. If the 25% ratio hasn't spared him from the IL, I'm not confident that 50% becomes the magic number.

BABIP reflects a certain combination of batting skills. Some players maintain a high one (Joe Mauer), some maintain a low one (Max Kepler) - just as some players hit homers and others don't. Coming into this season, among players with at least 2000 PA (to try to rule out small samples, which obviously biases toward good players) across the past ten seasons, Brandon Marsh maintained a .371 BABIP. (He's "down" to .339 this season.) Austin Hedges, in case anyone's curious, is low man among these 296 players, with .238. When someone's on a hot streak, almost certainly some components of his game will be outside his usual norms. If for instance the strikeouts are suddenly low, you could expect regression to his prior mean - but there do exist players who don't strike out very much, and fans of the player could hope that he's found some new tactic that cuts down the Ks permanently. Similarly if the HRs are suddenly up at some kind of Kyle Schwarber rate, probably it's just a fluke, but maybe our hero has unlocked something that will continue, because there do exist players who have that kind of production. Walks, ditto - batters with great eyes exist, and maybe the guy on a good run has joined their ranks. So, my point really is just that the tear Lewis has been on is supported by something, a .484 BABIP, that is literally .100 higher than any major leaguer has been able to maintain on a long term basis the past ten years. It would be one thing if we thought Lewis had suddenly become Brandon Marsh. It's another, if we thought he became Kal-El of Krypton come to Earth Players tinker with their plate approach all the time. They're trying to get better, they're trying to confound the "book" that opposing teams have on him. The opposing teams tinker with the "book" on him, in response. Health and any number of factors play in as well. Thus I don't call it luck. Lewis is trying his best on every at bat, and the opposing pitcher is trying his best on every throw he makes. Let the best man win. But the rate of success Lewis is enjoying isn't based on the kind of thing that continues indefinitely.

Massey has played zero games at SS as a professional. Kreidler/Gray's usage on the Twins this season has nothing to do with him.

Is it impossible to edit a headline (or article content, for that matter)? Simply changing "Joe Ryan" to "Joe Ryan's Injury" takes care of most of the pushback on this one. Elsewhere at the site we see occasional errors get corrected in the comments, the author acknowledges the mistake, but the text remains unchanged. I know publishing gets done on a deadline, but it sure would be nice if flat-out errors could be corrected.

Those 12 games comprised 51 plate appearances. 15 strikeouts is 29% which is pretty bad but one can hope he comes back down to his career norms more like 22%. 1 BB is a crazy low 2% and he's usually more like 8%. Three homers in that span is like 6% which is a little above his usual 4%. So then why is his OPS so high, in the face of a couple of headwinds (high SO, low BB)? On balls hit in play, he's batting .484. If he's engaging in guesswork and the ball evades fielders' gloves when he sticks the bat out there, that kind of result is extremely unlikely to continue at this .484 success rate. Nobody sustains a rate even .100 below that. Concepts like "heating up at the right time" are almost bound to disappoint fans. Fluctuations in BABIP don't explain anything about the batter per se, but it can take some of the mystery out of hot and cold periods, and encourage us to say "this too shall pass."

His OPS was .844 as recently as July 22. Since then he's OPSed .540 but that's only 13 games, not "several weeks", and he's had a couple of HR in that span with reasonable 20% SO rate, so the only thing going wrong for him is a BABIP of .148. Seems like a reasonable candidate to start "being good" at the plate without warning.

Can't even hit in Coors (.591 OPS). Sad news but it had to be only a matter of time if he couldn't turn that around.

Aw man. Hope the early diagnosis is correct, and rest is the cure.

I think this came up also in another thread, but now is not the time of year team control is a consideration. Rookie of the Year considerations are the only thing at the moment, and that is probably not enough to account for Jenkins being at AAA.