Re: Iglesias--what is Jim Leyland thinking?
posted at 10/10/2013 8:33 PM EDT
That's disingenuous to say you were only giving reasons why a manager, goodness knows who, might possibly consider starting Iggy tonight. I made it quite clear Leyland had to make a change. You made it quite clear he didn't. My guess is you still think that.
That's not the same as saying I thought Iggy will start at SS tonight. You throw in my face the statement to look at the line-up, like the fact that Leyland started Peralta shows I was wrong. I never said anything about what I expected Leyland to do.
Yes, I'd probably have gone with Iggy at SS over the cheater Peralta, but I never made that the central point of my argument. I was approaching this thread in terms of the the questioned posed by the author. I was defending Leyland's position for starting Iggy the last game. I tried to explain the logic behind it.
When the discussion turned towards what to do tonight, I repeated the reasons why one might start Iggy over Peralta. I actually stated that "A team with their backs against the wall can be saved by a great play at SS just as easily as a big hit by one of 9 players." This sounds to me like I figure the odds to be close to even, and is not a strong push to prove Iggy was clearly the best option tonight.
It's a close call, in my opinion. Whether or not it was a close call for Leylans or not was never anything I was coming close to addressing.
And you keep going back to the season. Forget the season. We're in the playoffs, and things change much more rapidly. Iggy has an OPS of .227, for crying out loud. And Peralta's in the same playoffs against the same team is 1.250, five times as much. I said that in the OP.
My avoidance of making definitive judgements based in teeny tiny sample sizes is not something I just came up with. To make decisions based mostly on what a player has done the last 3-4 games is not logical. Should we bench Pedey and play Bogey at 2B? Of course not.
Naoli would have never gotten a chance to turn things around.
BTW, does Peralta's 1 for 15 playoff number last season mean anything?
I could swear you said Iggy would lower ERA's, but fine, you didn't.
Of course saving 80-100 hits over a season would lower ERAs, but I never said by a run or by any amount.
Having watched him for a number of games now, I am prepared to say he cannot possibly make 80-100 plays a season other players can't make unless you assume some really awful SS's.
Listen, I admitted I was wrong about Drew being average, but the facts show that the top ranged SSs do make 80 to 120 more plays than poor to average SSs in range. To me, Iggy has exceptional range. Peralta is not a bad fielder at all, and maybe 80-100 more plays than him is stretching it. I admit, I am not an expert of Peralta's range, but certainly 1 more play every 5 games is not out of the question (30 per year). That would just about even him up with a .040 better BA.
Note: 2012-2013 UZR/150 Iggy +18.3/ Peralta +9.6
I don't forget WAR, which is supposed to at least try to measure the overall player, offense and defense. Peralta's is much higher than Iggy's, and so is Drew's. WAR-wise, you don't yet have a leg to stand on.
I respect WAR. I admitted I was wrong about Drew.
I also respect UZR/150 and think Iggy is a tremendous fiedling SS who can save a hit every 5 games over most MLB SS... maybe even every 2-3 games of several SSs.
Next year, we can resume this discussion and maybe compare WAR's between Iglesias and Bogaerts.
You can. I won't.
I want Bogey at 3B, so my position can never be measured vs yours.