GT 7/31: One good Turner deserves another

[mostonmike]

Garver is toast

.Mitch Garver: "I've already accepted the fact that I'm not going to hit above .200 this year. I don't know. It might not get any better. Who knows? Maybe it just gets worse. I don't know. But I show up to the field every day prepared to play and prepared to get better and work."

He said that shit?

So he needs to go 20 for 58 (.345) to get back to .200 and then maintain .200. He’s saying he can’t go on a streak of .345 over a 12 game stretch?

Bellend.

[D-train]

Regarding Garver: Not surprising there are enraged insane likely loser gamblers lashing out at him but how and why would he allow strangers to send him messages on social media???

[Pharmabro]

Garver is toast

.Mitch Garver: "I've already accepted the fact that I'm not going to hit above .200 this year. I don't know. It might not get any better. Who knows? Maybe it just gets worse. I don't know. But I show up to the field every day prepared to play and prepared to get better and work."

I heard that post game and it is time to make the Mitches part time:
Garver has a .235 .347 .471 .817 line which is good for a WRC+ of 134 vs Lefties. (He is the back-up C and platoon DH vs Lefties)
Haniger has been basically evenly productive vs L?R in his career .780/.776 OPS against but this year has shit the bed against left handed pitching in 2024: VS
LHP .135 .210 .146 .355 ( 1 double is all the power he managed in over 100 PAs) FFS they march him out vs lefties all the freaking time. I was fine with it in March/ Maybe May but small sample size does not apply anymore. Haniger only hits vs RHP here on out.
VS RHP 2024

[Donn Beach]

Sounds like garver will lose playing to Turner.

If you want to reverse split haniger go for it. But you are working under the impression that 100+ PAs is predictive of future outcomes. I know it seems tempting but there's really nothing that supports it, it's not considered predictive. You really need to be disciplined to sample size, it's hard.

[Donn Beach]

A lot of it has to do with sites making the stats available. It's interesting looking at past production, but that doesn't necessarily make it predictive of future outcomes. But that's what everyone wants. See into the future. I do it myself. I look at season splits at ESPN and the natural inclination is to decide that's who the player is.

I really don't think splits are that useful, not to the extent we love to read them. They are fun but don't carry a lot of meaning. Teams use splits but more sophisticated I'm sure.

Maybe Haniger should be handled that way but I think it take a lot more digging at the numbers or whatever

[D-train]

Both Randy and Turner were unable to get guys in from 3rd with less than two outs. Fitting in nicely.

[Donn Beach]

And that's really where the game was decided, the failed scoring opportunities, as opposed to Diaz in the 10th

[Sibelius Hindemith]

Diaz shouldn't be on the roster. That's the problem.

And why was Munoz unable to go? 18 pitches Tues and 20 Sun made him unavailable?

[Donn Beach]

Seemed like am odd place to have to use him but I'm not privy to the bullpen situation. Terms of being on the roster, he's your crafty left hander. He had pretty good success in Tacoma this season. Believe he was being used more as a starter middle reliever. His ML stats are pretty miminal

[Michael K.]

Diaz shouldn't be on the roster. That's the problem.

And why was Munoz unable to go? 18 pitches Tues and 20 Sun made him unavailable?

I thought I saw that he was unavailable, but I don’t recall why.