I love the home runs, but I also miss seeing JP and Louie getting base hits on bunts and flying around the bases.

 

I still miss Castillo ... still :tissue

 

I like to close my eyes and pretend he doesn't play for the Mutts. :tissue

 

No one can have as much claim to him as the Marlins over the years though, he will always be remembered as a Marlin. I hope when he retires his jersey is retired at ... (The New Marlins Stadium)

 

btw does anyone know if the Marlins retired Conine's jersey?

 

Nope, Kensing wears 19 and I think Jim Presley wears 18.

I love the home runs, but I also miss seeing JP and Louie getting base hits on bunts and flying around the bases.

 

I still miss Castillo ... still :tissue

 

I like to close my eyes and pretend he doesn't play for the Mutts. :tissue

 

No one can have as much claim to him as the Marlins over the years though, he will always be remembered as a Marlin. I hope when he retires his jersey is retired at ... (The New Marlins Stadium)

 

btw does anyone know if the Marlins retired Conine's jersey?

 

Nope, Kensing wears 19 and I think Jim Presley wears 18.

 

Wow thats gross :nugget

guys, there's a fast reply button too :confused

 

Attack of the quoted quote boxes..

 

Also, yes, I foresee Conine's number possibly being retired when the new stadium opens

guys, there's a fast reply button too :confused

 

Attack of the quoted quote boxes..

 

Also, yes, I foresee Conine's number possibly being retired when the new stadium opens

 

Quoting is more fun, though. :shifty

I love the home runs, but I also miss seeing JP and Louie getting base hits on bunts and flying around the bases.

 

I still miss Castillo ... still :tissue

 

I like to close my eyes and pretend he doesn't play for the Mutts. :tissue

 

No one can have as much claim to him as the Marlins over the years though, he will always be remembered as a Marlin. I hope when he retires his jersey is retired at ... (The New Marlins Stadium)

 

btw does anyone know if the Marlins retired Conine's jersey?

 

Nope, Kensing wears 19 and I think Jim Presley wears 18.

 

Wow thats gross :nugget

Helms wears 18. I think Pres changed to 40.

I love the home runs, but I also miss seeing JP and Louie getting base hits on bunts and flying around the bases.

 

I still miss Castillo ... still :tissue

 

I like to close my eyes and pretend he doesn't play for the Mutts. :tissue

 

No one can have as much claim to him as the Marlins over the years though, he will always be remembered as a Marlin. I hope when he retires his jersey is retired at ... (The New Marlins Stadium)

 

btw does anyone know if the Marlins retired Conine's jersey?

 

Nope, Kensing wears 19 and I think Jim Presley wears 18.

 

Wow thats gross :nugget

Helms wears 18. I think Pres changed to 40.

 

Ah, how can I forget about Helms? :nugget

In the end, I don't think 18 is Niner's number. He only wore it because that d**kface Lowell didn't give him his rightful 19.

In the end, I don't think 18 is Niner's number. He only wore it because that d**kface Lowell didn't give him his rightful 19.

 

Bleh, Lowell was the better player anyway.

In the end, I don't think 18 is Niner's number. He only wore it because that d**kface Lowell didn't give him his rightful 19.

 

Bleh, Lowell was the better player anyway.

 

Dont go there... lol

better? we will be talking all day about this :zipper

In the end, I don't think 18 is Niner's number. He only wore it because that d**kface Lowell didn't give him his rightful 19.

 

Bleh, Lowell was the better player anyway.

 

Dont go there... lol

better? we will be talking all day about this :zipper

 

Castillo was the real Mr. Marlin. :shifty

In the end, I don't think 18 is Niner's number. He only wore it because that d**kface Lowell didn't give him his rightful 19.

 

Bleh, Lowell was the better player anyway.

Yeah, he was great in 2005...

In the end, I don't think 18 is Niner's number. He only wore it because that d**kface Lowell didn't give him his rightful 19.

 

Bleh, Lowell was the better player anyway.

Yeah, he was great in 2005...

 

2005 didn't happen. :unsure

AS Much as i love cing small ball it just isnt our style we dont need to hammer all the time but 2 or 3 hrs help

samll ball is unlikely due to lack of speed in most of our players but i remember we used to hit and run wit hanlety nd hermida nd uggla nd hammer we need that again we were winning getting hits

well that is samll ball but if the batter misses boy are we screwed

This drives me bat sh*t crazy. The team is 4th in runs scored. It doesn't matter how the runs are generated. Also, power hitting teams are more consistent, tt is very difficult for teams without power to have a consistent offense.

This drives me bat sh*t crazy. The team is 4th in runs scored. It doesn't matter how the runs are generated. Also, power hitting teams are more consistent, tt is very difficult for teams without power to have a consistent offense.

 

While I agree w/ you in the end a run is a run and a win is a win, I would completely disagree w/ you on the consistent comment. A team that is built to hit for avg and speed on the basepaths (like the Marlins used to be due to our cavernous ballpark) get on base and in scoring position more frequently; the more basrunners you have, the more chances to score a run you have, bar none. More baserunners and chances to score a run= more consistency in offensive production in my book.

 

Power hitting teams, like our currrent Marlins teams, are prone to hot and cold stretches. Look at the Friday and Saturday Rays games. Where were the bats in those two games, hmm? They went completely cold. Instead of the "normal" 2-3 homers a game, all they did was a lot of walking back to the dugout. We could hardly get on base, and the result was only 4 runs scored in those two games.

 

In addition, streaky power hitting teams tend to score their runs in bunches, not consistently as you pointed out. This is why I'm sure if we were to analyze the runs scored per win and loss, the runs scored in the wins will be at a much higher rate than normal, and certainly a much higher rate than in the runs scored per loss.

 

While we are 5th in runs scored, we're 22nd in Avg and 23rd in OBP, which contributes more to wins, in my opinion. Think about how more runs we'd have scored, and how many more wins we'd potentially have, if our avg was even just in the middle third of the league. If we were to hit more to get on base than to hit out of the park, I believe we'd be a true force to reckon with; Hanley, Dan, Jake and Hammer would be truly feared as power hitters if they had more discipine at the plate and weren't always swinging for the fences. The all or nothing approach at the plate makes us unconsitent and easy targets for the opposing ptcher to pick apart- this is why we are leading MLB in strikeouts.

For those of you Sabremetrics nerds out there, you know that getting on base and advancing to scoring position provides a higher probability and contribution towards a win than hitting a home run because of the limited commodity of outs. Small ball is true baseball in my books, and the type of play the Marlins had until 06 it seems. Manufacturing runs as they did Monday night is the reason we have two Championship trophies residing at 2267 Dan Marino Blvd. Let's see if Freddi and Presley can steer them that way more often.

 

It's one thing to mean "small ball" as in scoring runs via singles, doubles and such, it's another to say that sac bunts and stolen bases are responsible...

 

No Sabermetric "nerd" (which by the way is unnecessarily derogatory, thanks) will say that scoring runs by walking, singles, doubles is that much different than hitting the home run, as long as the end result isn't using outs.

 

Now, if we had an inning where Hanley leads off, gets sac bunted over, steals third and gets sac flied in... then yes, that is a relatively "weak" way of using "small ball" to score runs

 

However, knocking 6 singles in an inning is ALWAYS good

 

I promise you there aren't many on this board that are geekier or nerdier than me, so when I used the term "Sabremetrics nerd" it wasn't ment as libel, it was ment as a term of endearment. As an Economics grad and Insurance Underwriter, I believe in the power of numbers to explain problems and give insight into outcomes of certain situations; I fully fall into the Sabremetrics nerd category. Sorry if my original post gave the wrong impression.

 

I would agree w/ you from a Sabremetric perspective there is no difference in a run scored via singles and extra base hits vs homeruns; a run is a run. Because of the limited, valuable commodity that is an out, sac bunts and flies to move runners over doesn't yield a higher run expectency than the cost of losing an out.

 

Which is another reason why I'm not a big fan of a team swinging for the fences as the Marlins due: cost-benefit analysis. When a hitter hits the ball into the air towards the outfield, one of the three occuances can happen: it sails over the wall, it touches the field of play (thus allowing the hitter on base either through a hit or an error on the fielder's part) or it is caught for an out. While I don't have the time to dig into the data and analyze the rate of occurance for these three outcomes, I'm willing to bet you the out occurs most often, followed by the hit/error allowing a baserunner and last the home run. To me, the probability of hitting a deep fly out, and its susequent cost, is higher than the benefit of actually hitting the homerun. Factor in the usual swing required to generate the power to hit it out leaves the batter susepital to striking out, well it's just not worth it to have the majority of a lineup built to hit home runs IN A PITCHERS HOMEPARK.

I only had one year in college, this is getting to deep for me.

I promise you there aren't many on this board that are geekier or nerdier than me, so when I used the term "Sabremetrics nerd" it wasn't ment as libel, it was ment as a term of endearment. As an Economics grad and Insurance Underwriter, I believe in the power of numbers to explain problems and give insight into outcomes of certain situations; I fully fall into the Sabremetrics nerd category. Sorry if my original post gave the wrong impression.

 

I would agree w/ you from a Sabremetric perspective there is no difference in a run scored via singles and extra base hits vs homeruns; a run is a run. Because of the limited, valuable commodity that is an out, sac bunts and flies to move runners over doesn't yield a higher run expectency than the cost of losing an out.

 

Which is another reason why I'm not a big fan of a team swinging for the fences as the Marlins due: cost-benefit analysis. When a hitter hits the ball into the air towards the outfield, one of the three occuances can happen: it sails over the wall, it touches the field of play (thus allowing the hitter on base either through a hit or an error on the fielder's part) or it is caught for an out. While I don't have the time to dig into the data and analyze the rate of occurance for these three outcomes, I'm willing to bet you the out occurs most often, followed by the hit/error allowing a baserunner and last the home run. To me, the probability of hitting a deep fly out, and its susequent cost, is higher than the benefit of actually hitting the homerun. Factor in the usual swing required to generate the power to hit it out leaves the batter susepital to striking out, well it's just not worth it to have the majority of a lineup built to hit home runs IN A PITCHERS HOMEPARK.

 

Hmm, I think I like you :lol

 

The thing about the argument of a pitcher's homepark, is that this Marlins team has proven that Dolphin Stadium isn't as much a pitcher's park as some people think, still is, but not as bad.

 

Also, your argument regarding flyballs and such is basically built around BABIP, teams that hit more groundballs/line drives tend to have higher BABIPs than teams that hit Fly Balls/Line Drives, but at the same time, it's harder to hit a ground ball for extra bases, unless you basically hit it right down the line. So (and I'm guessing here) flyball teams probably have higher SLG%s than most high BABIP teams. Obviously there are exceptions to this in my line of thinking, but over the course of a season, I think it works itself out.

 

Now, another part of your argument is based on the value of a strikeout, I happen to don't attribute as much negative weight to a strikeout as most, so that's why (to some extent) the strikeouts don't bother me... I mean, sure, seeing some guys come in and rack up like 12 Ks in a game against us kinda sucks, but if we also drive in 4-5 runs in those games it becomes a wash.

 

Also, by hitting homeruns at an unprecendented rate (per this ballpark) whenever we go to other pitcher's parks (unless it's like San Diego, but that's extreme) we still retain the ability to slug, and in Cincinatti, we can pretty much put up a 6-spot in ANY inning, as evidenced against Cordero, one can argue we struggled a bit, but Volquez does that to everyone... Harang was due and well... there's pretty much no excuse for what Arroyo did to us :confused

 

I mean though, for all the negatives, we have 5 of our starting 8 OPS+ing OVER 100, to include Uggla's eye-popping 161, and this isn't including Willingham who was at 174 when he went down, now obviously Hammer probably wont go 174 all year, but given everyone else's production it's not far fetched to believe he'd also be leading the team.

 

The only problems are the strings of inconsistency, but I think so far this year, one guy slumps, another goes off... Hammer, Jacobs, Uggla... etc

This drives me bat sh*t crazy. The team is 4th in runs scored. It doesn't matter how the runs are generated. Also, power hitting teams are more consistent, tt is very difficult for teams without power to have a consistent offense.

 

While I agree w/ you in the end a run is a run and a win is a win, I would completely disagree w/ you on the consistent comment. A team that is built to hit for avg and speed on the basepaths (like the Marlins used to be due to our cavernous ballpark) get on base and in scoring position more frequently; the more basrunners you have, the more chances to score a run you have, bar none. More baserunners and chances to score a run= more consistency in offensive production in my book.

It might be in your book, but it isn't the case in practice. The Marlins produce 3+ runs in 75%+ games, and that is about as consistent as one gets in baseball. Our bats in the Tampa series went where everyone's bats have gone in most series played in Tampa, they went quiet. Contact "small ball" guys included. Their home ERA is 2.88. The data indicates that teams with less power are less consistent run scoring teams than teams with power. Take some time to look at the aggregate winning % of the top HR hitting teams, and your will find that it is over .500 - always.