Thursday Morning Rockpile:

by Rox Girl on May 3, 2007 9:01 AM MDT in Rockpile

I'm still kind of surprised that Chris Iannetta's getting no love from a lot of Rockies fans, if the game thread from last night is to be believed.

I wouldn't bring him up two days in a row, if I thought the message was getting through, but apparently to some people it's not. I can understand unnamed scouts who have a bee in their bonnet about him, but we should know better. After drawing two more walks yesterday, Iannetta now sports a .362 OBP. Only twice in the team's history has the most frequently used backstop topped that figure, in 1996 when Jeff Reed got on board at a .365 clip, and in 2000 when Brent Mayne sported a .381 OBP. Iannetta should pass both of those marks in the next couple of weeks if he keeps up with the same pace he's been on of late. Plus, if you've followed his minor league career, you'll know that the walks are a leading indicator of his bat. He's scored in four straight games and would be on pace for forty-five this season if he started 100 games, that's the most since Joe Girardi. I believe he'd easily be able to challenge Joe's 1995 total of 63 if given regular playing time. Chris has to be evaluated on the macro level, don't let the trees of single at bats fool you that he's not contributing.

Question: Who is to blame for our poor start?

Answer:

Garrett Atkins and Brad Hawpe - Two big offensive contributors haven't shown up to the party yet.
Jeff Francis - he's given bottom of the rotation production from a top of the rotation slot.
Kaz Matsui and Rodrigo Lopez - for not being here. Lopez we got as an innings eater to replace Jennings, Kaz was supposed to be our starting second baseman.
Willy Taveras - earlier in the season he was higher on this list.
Clint Hurdle - He's too much of a scapegoat for irate fans, but he's not blameless, either.
Jamey Carroll - Our primary bench role was supposed to contribute more.
Jeff Baker - ditto
John Mabry and Steve Finley - Our secondary bench roles were supposed to contribute more.
LaTroy Hawkins and Byung Hyun Kim - again they aren't contributing at the level we needed from the roles they were supposed to have, whether that expectation of contribution was warranted or not.
Aaron Cook - hasn't been an ace, but he hasn't struggled as much as Francis.

Everybody else has pretty much fallen in line with expectations -or gone above them- even if they've taken circuitous routes to get there.

When Matsui does return, the lineup might become an issue, as we have a couple of guys that have thrived in the second slot, and not many that have done well lower down in the order. Iannetta should be moved back to eighth, but who do you drop from the Taveras/Matsui/Tulo group? I'm probably crazy, but I would leave them just like that:

Willy T
Kaz Mat
Tulo
Helton
Holliday
Hawpe
Atkins
Iannetta

At least until Garrett proves himself ready of moving back up. Discuss...

Tweet Comment 26 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Eh...

I don't know that Tulo's ready for the 3 spot yet. So far, he's looked great in the 2 hole. See it's times like these that I wish we were an American League team. That'd solve this problem nice and easily, as we could just shove either KazMat or Willy T to the 9 hole. But if I was pressed to create a lineup...

Willy T
Tulo
Holliday
Helton
Atkins- He's been the unluckiest man in the majors by my count.
Hawpe/Baker
Yorvit/KazMat
Ianetta/KazMat
Automatic Out

KazMat and Willy could flip at the drop of a hat, but for now I have KazMat down because of the more potential for power there.

by MattTheRock on May 3, 2007 9:16 AM MDT reply actions

How long do we have to wait for Kaz?

Until he gets back, maybe it should be.

Taveras
Tulo
Helton
Holliday
Hawpe
Atkins
Ianetta
Carroll/Q

Since Matt's the only guy showing any significant pop, I'd hit him cleanup. When Kaz gets back, I'd put him 2nd, and insert Tulo after Hawpe, or maybe even in front of him. I think he'll hit now no matter where he is in the lineup.

The collective power outage is really starting to worry me. The way they're going, they may only have one guy over 20 hr's, and that ain't gonna do it.

by jlikesrockies on May 3, 2007 9:51 AM MDT up reply actions

I prefer Kaz in the 2 hole.....

But I'm willing to think outside the box until Atkins/Hawpe start hitting:

Tavarez
Kaz
Holliday
Helton
Tulo
Atkins
Hawpe
Ianetta

Let Tulo have some RBI opportunities. Lord knows he'd have a TON of pitches to hit getting a chance to hit between Helton and Atkins (call the the Holliday Corilary from last season)

by sg8335aa on May 3, 2007 9:36 AM MDT reply actions

Other than being cool

Statistically speaking, how important is it to have a L-R-L-R setup through the order? Doesn't seem that crucial until the late innings, and even then, does it really matter?

Free Jason Bates!!

by rox in october on May 3, 2007 10:09 AM MDT reply actions

I honestly don't think it will make much differenc

There have been incredibly potent lineups that didn't have this little gimic going on. Ours has the little gimic and it's not working so I say, it can't hurt to try something new.

The Colorado Rockies: Making the opposition look better since 1993.

by Blake20th on May 3, 2007 10:23 AM MDT up reply actions

I don't know,

I go back and forth on this. It seems to help Helton and Holliday to be batting next to each other in the lineup, but it does diddly elsewhere, so I probably should have bumped Atkins up to sixth and Hawpe down to seventh in my "ideal" situation. Tulo could be third or fifth depending on how you want to use Matt and Todd. Actually, I kind of like this one:

Willy T
KazMat
Helton
Holliday
Tulo
Atkins
Hawpe
Iannetta

by Rox Girl on May 3, 2007 10:56 AM MDT up reply actions

Looking at walk rates

I'd be more inclined to leave Tulo and Taveras at the top of the order.

Contrary to what many here believe, both have showed very good plate disicipline. Taveras' walk rate is 9.1%, up over 3% on last year, which is a pretty big spike. His K rate is high, but when you look at his rate over the last stirng of games, it more in line with his career norms. As for Tulowitzki, his walk rate is an even higher 10.9, which would be in the good leadoff hitter stratosphere if not for a high K rate that is falling slowly. The success of these two at working pitchers lately and reaching base is no part of the offense' turnaround. If Taveras would just hit a double or two a week, he'd be more satisfactory, but you take what you can get.

The problem with Matsui is that his success has been average heavy. His walk rate is around 5%, so if he's hitting any less than than .30o he's not helping. Even Sullivan could produce a walk rate higher than that (but not Barmes, lets not get too crazy).

I didn't mind your idea of Tulo hitting third too much, since his plate discipline has come around and he's been one of our better sticks lately. However, I could also see Matsui batting fifth when he returns. He has a little bit of pop with an ISO not far from the numbers of both Hawpe and Atkins, and his speed and contact skills could regenerate the lineup after the top:

Taveras
Tulowitzki
Helton
Holliday
Matsui
Atkins
Hawpe
catcher

Does that leave Holliday a little unprotected? Perhaps, but when you look at the walk rates of the three hitters above him, teams may nothave a choice but to throw to him. On the flip side, Holliday is the team's best bet to smoke a ball outside the zone.

by David OhNo on May 3, 2007 11:27 AM MDT up reply actions

Sort of does

It only really matters in the late innings, you're right about that. But if you were to bat Hawpe right after Helton, the other team could bring in the LOOGY to pitch to both of them. Batting Holliday (or Atkins) between them forces the other team to either have the LOOGY pitch to Holliday, or use three pitchers, or eschew the lefty-lefty matchups altogether.

The Coors Effect... thinking about changing the name to The Humidor Effect.

by Rox Fan in TN on May 3, 2007 11:41 AM MDT up reply actions

How about this...

R Taveras
L Helton
R Holliday
L Hawpe
R Atkins
R Tulowitzki
L Matsui
R Iannetta

Now that Helton is an OBP machine without as much power, put him higher up in the order and let him get more at-bats and get on-base for the big bats. The only part I don't like is that someone as inconsistent as Hawpe is hitting 4th, but if he starts picking his game up, it could work. But, to play devil's advocate, I hate taking a consistent bat like Helton out of a big RBI spot. But I still think his near .500 OBP would be incredibly value in the two spot.

Up in the Rockies

by rockiesfan06 on May 3, 2007 11:44 AM MDT reply actions

LINEUP CONSTRUCTION 101....

1. and 2. set the table (OBA)....if those #s are close, the 2 spot is LH or SW, if possible to take advantage of the 3-4 hole if leadoff is at 1st or the rt. side if the leadoff is at 2nd with 0 outs to advance the runner to 3B with one out. 3. is your best hitter with some power at least....if you can't do this (personell), then you have another OBA guy who can run....3 is usually your best combo of power and speed (in a perfect world Mays, Mantle, Rodriguez etc) So far Maz is a no brainer, Helton is awesome OBA without speed and no longer power. ...4. is RBI/POWER/AVG....Holiday is perfect...5.must force opposition to pitch to 3/4 nobody right no but Atkins and/or Hawpe will fill that position soon at a very high level. Other spots in order to come next time. PEACE/OUT!

by 86 wins in 07 on May 3, 2007 12:14 PM MDT up reply actions

CONTINUED LINEUP CONSTRUCTION........

6. Solid power/solid speed/solid hitter....doesn't need to be outstanding in any category but can't be weak in any...Hawpe/Atkins depending on L/R and who is hitting 3/5 as both could be capable when at top of their game. 7. leadoff type with lower OBA than 1/2 hitters. 8.) some power because P is coming up (in NL only) and usually your slowest player (unless a stud hitter) so sacrifice by the pitcher is in order and gives opportunity to stay out of the DP.....9. every place but NL and their farm clubs, this is your 4th best leadoff hitter i.e. speed (so you don't clog up the top of the order) lowest OBA of 1/2/7/9 hitters (otherwise would have value at top of order.....8 spot and lack of speed is why most catcher hit 8....unless they are Pudge/Bench/Piazza type hitters. NOTE: Great compound bunt by Francis. last night and he became a man (as a pitcher) last night. He pitched well enough to win and had to endure seeing the win evaporate before his eyes, in the dugout without being able to do anything. It was painful to watch his face but I became a big fan of his last last night.

by 86 wins in 07 on May 3, 2007 12:27 PM MDT up reply actions

Sorry, I don't like that one

Hawpe isn't inspiring any confidence that he can carry a team's run production in the clean-up slot, he's still not looking very good with RISP. What's more, I think you'd see Tulo's gains dip when pitchers don't have to throw him anything decent to avoid the heavy hitters. I'm not sure how Matsui would react that low. Like David says, his production is average heavy, but his swing plus his speed, plus his contact skills since he's been with the Rockies seem to say that he should have a high average. A plus contact/plus speed hitter would probably be good to have in the five or six hole to keep rallies going and drive in Helton and Holliday, I'm just worried that the a shift in the delicate balance will have him revert to Kaz Mets.

by Rox Girl on May 3, 2007 12:17 PM MDT up reply actions

Rotation

There will only be a slight tweak in the rotation this time around and it is only do to the off day today.

Manager Clint Hurdle said with an off day today, Buchholz will be pushed back to start Tuesday in St. Louis so left-hander Jeff Francis can pitch Monday on his normal four days' rest.

Jimenez is also listed as a possibility but, as I mentioned yesterday, it seems the team wants him to make at least one more AAA to make some more adjustments.

by lgh77 on May 3, 2007 11:57 AM MDT reply actions

im thinking

taveras
tulo
helton
holliday
hawpe
atkins
chris
kaz
p

why not have speed on the top and bottom of the order? this will help flip the order and maybe instead of a pitcher bunting a guy to second he will bunt him to third.

by roxfan4life on May 3, 2007 1:15 PM MDT reply actions

Best lineup I've seen

I like the idea of dropping kaz to the 8 spot. It doesn't help the team any to have our 3-6 get on base a ton, only to watch our 7/8 guys strand them. This to me has been the single biggest reason for the Rockies early struggles. I think many of you agree, except it's been refered to as something like, "Can't blow the game open/get a big inning." By putting a high contact guy in the lineup down there (combined with chris' high OBP and walk rate), hopefully he could help turn all those 1 run innings into 3+ run innings. Just watching Carroll and Ianetta struggle last night at 7/8 was depressing.

Free Jason Bates!!

by rox in october on May 3, 2007 1:59 PM MDT up reply actions

The one think I don't like about this...

Is that it completely cuts off a couple of big parts of Kaz' offensive value to the team: his ability to steal bases and his ability to beat out infield hits. By putting the slow and frequently able to get on base Iannetta in front of him, he'll be penned in and hit into a lot of fielders' choice outs. Switch them around to Kaz 7 and Chris 8, and I like it a lot better.

by Rox Girl on May 3, 2007 3:53 PM MDT up reply actions

Too many blown saves

I blame the bullpen more than anything else for our present record. Five times this season the Rockies have held the lead after the 7th inning and failed to win. Had the bullpen just converted at 60% we would have gone 3-2 in those games, not 0-5. W-L record today would be a respectable 14-14.

by DeepPurple on May 3, 2007 1:38 PM MDT reply actions

That's a very telling stat

Imagine if we had won all of those games. that would really be a nice little record.

The Colorado Rockies: Making the opposition look better since 1993.

by Blake20th on May 3, 2007 1:42 PM MDT up reply actions

Iannetta...

I like Iannetta a lot and think he should get the majority of playing time at Catcher, but, let's be honest, he hasn't performed well this season. His OBP is now pretty good, but his Slugging is .250, which is, uh, not good. With playing time and experience he will improve, but for the time being he is not helping the team much.

by DenverBears on May 3, 2007 2:45 PM MDT reply actions

I know somebody was trying to tell you this...

But right now, with fewer than 60 PA's, most of these stats are still insignificant. I just read an article on this a couple of weeks ago and am trying to find the link, but as I recall, the only stat that has really shown to be significant at that point in a season is SB's for some odd reason. The walk rate and the K rate you were talking about yesterday will reach significance a whole lot quicker than slugging percentage.

To show this, note that it would just take a 2 for 4 night with a homerun and double to raise that SLG to over .350. Check out his hit chart at Coors Field and again at AT&T and you can see that he's been close enough that this is possible. Another two for four with two doubles and walk like he had two nights ago would raise his OPS over .700.

What's more, if the burden of run production and slugging for the team is falling on Iannetta's shoulders, we're really in trouble. His game is mostly based around singles, doubles and that OBP. Yes, he needs to get the SLG and average up, but he isn't doing much wrong in his approach at the plate to do so.

by Rox Girl on May 3, 2007 3:48 PM MDT up reply actions

yes...

somebody was trying to tell me this before, but that doesn't mean I am wrong--tell me where you think my numbers are wrong. If you can find the link, I'd like to read it.

This all depends on how you define significance. I agree that slugging % is less meaningful at this point in the season than most other stats, but the fact is that his low BA (and slugging) is largely due to his huge strikeout rate--and his K rate has some significance (I don't know exactly what you mean by being 'significant'). He leads the team in strikeouts, despite his limited plate appearances. Let me put it this way--Adam Dunn led the NL in strikeouts last year (194 in 561 ABs--). Someone with Adam Dunn's strikeout rate would have only a 2.5% chance of striking out 21 times or more in 44 ABs (if you prefer plate appearances, then Dunn has a 3.6% chance of repeating Iannetta's performance). In short, Iannetta is striking enough to make Rob Deer blush--sample size or no sample size. In any event, I am rooting for Iannetta's and I expect that given the chance he can work through this. Personally, I think he should be starting 4 to 5 times a week.

Lastly, I never claimed that run production should fall on Iannetta's shoulders.

by DenverBears on May 3, 2007 5:22 PM MDT up reply actions

Still looking,

I swear I read it, as soon as I find it I'll try to post a link.

I don't want to make it sound like I'm saying that you're wrong, particularly in him having to improve in regards to the K rates which have been awful, but when you say this:

Let me put it this way--Adam Dunn led the NL in strikeouts last year (194 in 561 ABs--). Someone with Adam Dunn's strikeout rate would have only a 2.5% chance of striking out 21 times or more in 44 ABs (if you prefer plate appearances, then Dunn has a 3.6% chance of repeating Iannetta's performance).

It took me less than a minute to find a 43 AB stretch in which Adam Dunn did precisely that in 2006, check out the games from April 8 to April 21. This is what I mean by significant. 50 AB's won't necessarily tell us close to what the final season line will be. Like I mentioned, with slugging percentage and average, any 50 AB stretch has even less of a correlation.

Now, Iannetta doesn't have nearly Adam Dunn's power, and as is pointed out in this article and as you're pointing out, somebody like Chris would serve his pocket book and the team well by making a bit more contact, so I'm only arguing the small point and not the big one.

by Rox Girl on May 3, 2007 6:41 PM MDT up reply actions

I'll argue the small point...

There's a big difference between finding a 43 AB stretch and saying that in any specific 43 AB stretch is that likely. The point here is that if someone has 500 at bats in a season, then that is 457 43 at bat stretches (500 - 43), so even if the likelihood of any particular stretch is a few percent, then it is still likely to happen at some point over the course of the season. In Iannetta's case, we are not cherry picking the stretch--just taking his entire start of the season, whereas in your case with Dunn, you are looking for stretches--apples and oranges.

by DenverBears on May 3, 2007 6:50 PM MDT up reply actions

Not really,

My point is that the stretch you're picking with Iannetta is just as arbitrarily cherry picking, whether it starts at day one of this season or September 10 of last year. The stretch I picked with Adam Dunn was intentionally close to the start of the season to compare April AB's. If you want to look at his first forty-four AB's in 2006, he had 18 K's, if you look at his first 60, he had 26 and at the 76 AB mark, he had 31. Thanks to a 12 AB streak without a K shortly thereafter, he only had 35 in his first 100 AB's. Now you seem to be arguing that you can reasonably predict from this "start of the season" stretch that Iannetta's K rate will still be higher than Dunn's at that 60 AB mark and then again at the 76 and 100 marks. I'm not going to convince you, but perhaps the results will.

My guess is that Chris' entire career to date rate of 1K/3.18AB is more telling than his first forty four AB's this year and I'm going to predict that he'll have between 35 and 39 K's after 100 AB's this season. I also predict that Chris's 2007 K rate will be better than Dunn's 2006 rate by the 150 AB mark, when Dunn had 52 strikeouts. If you want to take the over with Chris on either of those, be my guest and we'll just have to find out who's right on this one, as it seems to be an agree to disagree situation.

by Rox Girl on May 4, 2007 8:16 AM MDT up reply actions

my argument is a statistical one...

and is not a predictive one. The numbers say that his high K rate is not due to a statistical fluke of small numbers, it doesn't say anything about the cause--just that it is non-random (I deal with these sorts of things in my job). Since his K-rate historically is better than what he has done so far this season and he is an improving rookie, it is reasonable to expect that his numbers will improve. I haven't said anything about what it predicts for future at bats. Having said that, if you want me to make a prediction, I'll take the over on the first 100 ABs and I'll say that he corrects the situation by 150 ABs and is below Dunn's rate by 150 ABs.

I should also say that Iannetta's K-rate is also statistically significantly (p<.01) worse than last year's performance, despite small sample sizes.

by DenverBears on May 4, 2007 8:57 AM MDT up reply actions

Alright, I probably misunderstood, then

And I'm not trying to argue what you're saying here, which clarify me if I'm wrong is:

"For unknown reason X, Chris Iannetta's early season K rate is cripplingly worse than any he's done in the past or any professional did last season."

and that we shouldn't write off X or its effects as just a fluke. I'm okay with that, and think the next step should be to figure out X and what needs to happen to bring him back in line with where he was. I'm sure the math major Iannetta's already on it...

by Rox Girl on May 4, 2007 11:33 AM MDT up reply actions