Series Thread: Rangers Host Angels for Three Games August 14-16

[WastinSomeTime]

7 for 18 is a bit disingenuous if we’re talking about painting an accurate picture of how good or bad he has been recently because the cut off is right when he had his 2 monster games. Yes, he was quite good in those 2 games, so credit where credit is due. But he batted .167 in the 4 games before those 2 monster ones, and he’s batted .182 since those 2 monster games.

So you can really paint whatever picture you want, depending on how you slice the data and which games you choose to include. Depending on whether you want to go back 6 games, 10 games, or 15 games, his average has been in the low .200’s all the way to the high .200’s. So that is decent in and of itself.

But he leads the team both in strikeouts/at-bat and runners left on base over the last 10-15 games. That’s where he’s been bad. He gets enough odd hits here and there to keep the average respectable. But in clutch situations, he’s definitely not someone you want up to bat.

By contrast, Leody actually has a lower batting average over the last month. He has hit a measly .196. But he also has more than twice the number of RBI Duran has and more RBI/ab. So it just depends on how you look at it. Duran’s a better hitter lately if you need someone to lead off the inning with a hit. Leody is the better hitter lately with men in scoring position.

He was terrible before those 18 ABs so I get that. I am just hoping he is coming out of it.

 

[saddles]

I guess I didn't go back far enough with Duran. So let's do this.

He is hitting .282 with an .805 OPS this year.

 

[saddles]

He was terrible before those 18 ABs so I get that. I am just hoping he is coming out of it.

I don't think any of that is supposed to matter until he gets 2 hits each game for a month. Lol.

 

[WilltheThrill]

I don't think any of that is supposed to matter until he gets 2 hits each game for a month. Lol.

Why stop at the precise game where he got 3 hits, though? Or why not stop before those 2 games? 18 at-bats is an arbitrary number. It was chosen specifically to include his 2 best games but not an at-bat further. And what that does is skew the data set.

If I got 0 for 40, then go 8 for 8, then go 0 for my next 8, have I really been a .500 hitter recently? If you stop at 4 games in your look-back, then yeah, I have. Would you really say that is accurate, though?

 

[WilltheThrill]

He was terrible before those 18 ABs so I get that. I am just hoping he is coming out of it.

We all hope that. More specifically, we hope he starts producing with men on base.

 

[WilltheThrill]

I don't think any of that is supposed to matter until he gets 2 hits each game for a month. Lol.

You’re the one choosing to ignore games in order to boost his average, not me. I’m including ALL recent games. My point was that you can make a player’s average almost anything you want it to be if you use very small data sets and cherry pick arbitrary time frames.

Use the past 3 games, and Duran is hitting .182. Use the past 5 games and he’s hitting .389.

Makes a huge difference.

 

[WastinSomeTime]

We all hope that. More specifically, we hope he starts producing with men on base.

I actually think he some hits with men on base and a couple times in scoring position but they were station to station type baserunners. But that is just of off my memory which is not always all that great at this age.

 

[DT LUNA]

You’re the one choosing to ignore games in order to boost his average, not me. I’m including ALL recent games. My point was that you can make a player’s average almost anything you want it to be if you use very small data sets and cherry pick arbitrary time frames.

Use the past 3 games, and Duran is hitting .182. Use the past 5 games and he’s hitting .389.

Makes a huge difference.

I get what you are saying. The past really doesn't matter in todays game. Only the present that counts. We'll see.

 

[saddles]

Q

You’re the one choosing to ignore games in order to boost his average, not me. I’m including ALL recent games. My point was that you can make a player’s average almost anything you want it to be if you use very small data sets and cherry pick arbitrary time frames.

Use the past 3 games, and Duran is hitting .182. Use the past 5 games and he’s hitting .389.

Makes a huge difference.

The purpose of my post where I said he had gone 7 for 18 was to show that there is hope that he has started to turn things around. If I am going to point to a possible turnaround, why would I go back further than the point where it looks like he started to turn things around? No one would do that.

I don't think that means I am ignoring anything.

Now, later on, if he puts up spots like this occasionally and goes right back into a tailspin every time, then it would be inappropriate to point out those few at bats to indicate anything. Duran has had such a small amount of time in the big leagues that that isn't the case though.

Maybe in 6 weeks we can look back at those few at bats and say they didn't amount to a turnaround at all. Him having a bad game or two afterwards, isn't necessarily an indicator though.

He got into some bad habits. All bad habits aren't broken by going cold turkey.

 

[saddles]

Why stop at the precise game where he got 3 hits, though? Or why not stop before those 2 games? 18 at-bats is an arbitrary number. It was chosen specifically to include his 2 best games but not an at-bat further. And what that does is skew the data set.

If I got 0 for 40, then go 8 for 8, then go 0 for my next 8, have I really been a .500 hitter recently? If you stop at 4 games in your look-back, then yeah, I have. Would you really say that is accurate, though?

I pointed out when he appeared to turn things around. That is just common sense. No one would point to a player's possible turnaround and not do so.

As long as my ending point is the present then any number of games I choose will work to discuss a possible turnaround. If he hasn't turned it around it will show up sooner or later if I always end with the present.

 

[saddles]

New thread is up.

 

[Kelleyman]

Well re Duran the thing that is concerning to me as this progresses is the demeanor. He looks frustrated in the past few games. He has had some bad calls maybe the rookie treatment
He has some success with the slider a little earlier but some pitchers have more than that besides a FB. To me it is a learning curve and we have to decide where he learns here or in AAA. I kind of want it here as Janks is struggling and his bat will never be as good but he is definitely more polished. Tough call

 

[saddles]

Well re Duran the thing that is concerning to me as this progresses is the demeanor. He looks frustrated in the past few games. He has had some bad calls maybe the rookie treatment
He has some success with the slider a little earlier but some pitchers have more than that besides a FB. To me it is a learning curve and we have to decide where he learns here or in AAA. I kind of want it here as Janks is struggling and his bat will never be as good but he is definitely more polished. Tough call

Most likely what he needs to learn will not be available to him in AAA. Some things they can only learn in the big leagues.

 

[DT LUNA]

Well re Duran the thing that is concerning to me as this progresses is the demeanor. He looks frustrated in the past few games. He has had some bad calls maybe the rookie treatment
He has some success with the slider a little earlier but some pitchers have more than that besides a FB. To me it is a learning curve and we have to decide where he learns here or in AAA. I kind of want it here as Janks is struggling and his bat will never be as good but he is definitely more polished. Tough call

We have no replacement for Duran accept Smith and that is worse than Duran at the plate. I see know choice but to stick with him until Jung returns. Dank has no bearing on the Duran problem.