0-For To Start

drowssap · 11-07-2015, 11:31 AM

I see a lot of this and I can't really figure it out.

Doesn't matter if it is a callup or a trade, but whenever a new player comes on the team, he will go 0 for something. Usually I see anywhere from 8 to 12 at bats without a hit. It's frustrating.
Examples: Billy Hamilton via trade started 1 for 12
Billy Butler via trade went 0 for 14
Asmedy Alcantara callup 1 for 13
Wilmer Flores via trade 1 for 10

Granted, these guys aren't world beaters. Flores is the best of the bunch. Butler was actually hitting .316 before the trade. He's now under .300. I even brought in Matt Carpenter who had a 82 contact, and even he went 0 for something before bouncing back to a .346 average.

So, what's the deal? What am I doing wrong? Clubhouse is happy. Players are happy. Why do they all have a tough time adjusting?

Dyzalot · 11-07-2015, 11:43 AM

Note that it is more probable for a hitter to start "0 for something" as opposed to starting with a hit. Also what you are seeing is easily explained away as standard variance within a small sample size. Some confirmation bias may be playing a role as well. I usually give my guys a couple of months before I start drawing any meaningful conclusions about their performance.

drowssap · 11-07-2015, 12:02 PM

I get what you are saying. Yes, small sample size. Yes standard variance. You would also expect to see one or two that may come in and hit 3-10, which isn't out of the question. Maybe even high, but less chance. Fact is, I have NEVER seen anyone go .300 or higher on the team when they are new. Never.

I'll try to get more samples as callups and trades are made.

Lazy Horse · 11-07-2015, 12:30 PM

I've seen it go both ways. Also with pitchers not immediately performing up to expectations. Last year I had a free agent signed catcher hit a home run his first at bat (after about a week in AAA) and then become an automatic out for the next two weeks.

It is just sample size and a bit of bad luck for you. Like I said, I've had it go both ways in my franchise. Also, how is the morale of the players after they are traded? I'm not 100% sure how or if it affects performance but I know that a lot of guys become very unhappy after I've traded for them.

... and something tells me that Wilmer might have been just a little upset about being traded

redranger · 11-07-2015, 12:33 PM

I think it is just bad luck maybe. I recently traded prospects and an aged LF for two players to fill voids in the infield. I got a solid 3B and a fair SS (strong in the field and subpar hitter). While the 3B was hitting over .300 before. He continued to hit his average. The subpar hitting SS went 4 for 4 in his first game with me and in the first ten was 20 for 39. He tapered off and fell back to his average but man what a start with a new team

TomVeal · 11-07-2015, 04:45 PM

My experience (that is, my recollection of my experience, unverified by records) is pretty much the opposite. So many call-ups start with a blaze of glory, get my hopes up and then regress to the mean.

Of course, that happens in real life, too. Don't forget that Hoyt Wilhelm hit his only Major League home run in his first at bat.

victims_sanction · 11-07-2015, 07:38 PM

My achilles is long term contracts. Every time I give out a big deal the player seems to get injured or regress tremendously; best two examples:

Hand out a new 5 year, 100 million dollar deal? 60 day DL by the end of the first season after never being out for more than 3 weeks his whole career.

Give star player and team leader a nice new 98 million dollar deal? Tears his ACL in July - out 8 months. At least the back-up randomly became a stud hitting 30 homers. No way am I giving him an extension though; been burned 1 too many times

NYYANKS98 · 11-07-2015, 07:49 PM

I basically try to give more money per year for less years because so many guys regress quick after free agency. If I do splurge in free agency I try to make sure it's a guy who debuted very young and is hitting FA at younger than 28ish. I'm not buying a 5+ year deal for someone past their prime years, whereas other guys will at least give me a couple good years before they suck.

The Game · 11-07-2015, 09:12 PM

It does happen IRL also. Jody Gerut is among my top 25 fav players of all time ( went to school with him) I was very happy to see him play for the Cubs, even if it was the Cubs. He started out like 0 for 12.

r0nster · 11-07-2015, 09:15 PM

I have had players start off on a hot note and keep performing above expectation. However on same token I have had more players start off bad for 3 weeks then recover slowly as the season progresses. Have also had a couple players have a hot week then cool off for much of the season. Even the players who are traded and my most recent trade where my player got hot on the other team where as the player I received couldn't hit his weight. When that happens I usually keep him for one year and if he isn't worth his weight then I dump him.

drowssap · 11-07-2015, 09:51 PM

More examples:
J.D. Martinez: 3 for 22
Martin Prado: 3 for 18
Kyle Parker: 4 for 21

The only one I would say c'mon is J.D. At the time he was leading the league in HR, and was over .300. He batted .150 with 0 home runs, and I dumped him.

byzeil · 11-07-2015, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drowssap

I get what you are saying. Yes, small sample size. Yes standard variance. You would also expect to see one or two that may come in and hit 3-10, which isn't out of the question. Maybe even high, but less chance. Fact is, I have NEVER seen anyone go .300 or higher on the team when they are new. Never.

I'll try to get more samples as callups and trades are made.

In your initial post you said...

Quote:

I even brought in Matt Carpenter who had a 82 contact, and even he went 0 for something before bouncing back to a .346 average.

So you've had at least one hit better than .300 even if he had a slow start.

drowssap · 11-08-2015, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by byzeil

In your initial post you said...

So you've had at least one hit better than .300 even if he had a slow start.

Yes, that is correct. He may be the only one but this thread doesn't have to do with what they did for the full season, it's the first 3-5 games. I'm going to try to watch it even closer as callups and trades are made, but I'm seeing these poor starts time and time again. I get that it is a small sample size, but if you take any sample size at any point in time, would you expect .250? Wouldn't that be 2 for 8? 3 for 12? I cannot give you a single example of that at this time.

Chisox59 · 11-09-2015, 05:49 PM

Matt Nokes, my new catcher, is 0 for 34 for 0 BBs and 12 Ks thru the first 14 games. He's rated much higher than the other catchers (my backup is 0 for 16) in my organization, but I'm thinking of giving him some time in AAA for a few weeks and bringing him back up in mid-May.

nightfly · 11-09-2015, 10:30 PM

Hey, some people adapt quickly to new environs.

11-07-2015, 11:31 AM	#1
drowssap Minors (Double A) Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 110	0-For To Start I see a lot of this and I can't really figure it out. Doesn't matter if it is a callup or a trade, but whenever a new player comes on the team, he will go 0 for something. Usually I see anywhere from 8 to 12 at bats without a hit. It's frustrating. Examples: Billy Hamilton via trade started 1 for 12 Billy Butler via trade went 0 for 14 Asmedy Alcantara callup 1 for 13 Wilmer Flores via trade 1 for 10 Granted, these guys aren't world beaters. Flores is the best of the bunch. Butler was actually hitting .316 before the trade. He's now under .300. I even brought in Matt Carpenter who had a 82 contact, and even he went 0 for something before bouncing back to a .346 average. So, what's the deal? What am I doing wrong? Clubhouse is happy. Players are happy. Why do they all have a tough time adjusting?

11-07-2015, 12:30 PM	#4
Lazy Horse Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 36	I've seen it go both ways. Also with pitchers not immediately performing up to expectations. Last year I had a free agent signed catcher hit a home run his first at bat (after about a week in AAA) and then become an automatic out for the next two weeks. It is just sample size and a bit of bad luck for you. Like I said, I've had it go both ways in my franchise. Also, how is the morale of the players after they are traded? I'm not 100% sure how or if it affects performance but I know that a lot of guys become very unhappy after I've traded for them. ... and something tells me that Wilmer might have been just a little upset about being traded Last edited by Lazy Horse; 11-07-2015 at 12:32 PM.

11-07-2015, 04:45 PM	#6
TomVeal All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Spanaway, Washington Posts: 1,181	My experience (that is, my recollection of my experience, unverified by records) is pretty much the opposite. So many call-ups start with a blaze of glory, get my hopes up and then regress to the mean. Of course, that happens in real life, too. Don't forget that Hoyt Wilhelm hit his only Major League home run in his first at bat. Last edited by TomVeal; 11-07-2015 at 04:45 PM. Reason: Typo

11-07-2015, 09:12 PM	#9
The Game Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Inside The Game Posts: 30,807	It does happen IRL also. Jody Gerut is among my top 25 fav players of all time ( went to school with him) I was very happy to see him play for the Cubs, even if it was the Cubs. He started out like 0 for 12. Attached Images __________________ Go today don't wait for tomorrow It isn't promised, all the time you get borrowed Don't live your life for other people Don't bottle your emotions till they crack and fill a couple just sorrows Take your mind and refocus go get a paper write your goals out Throw your middle fingers to all your haters "Stay Strong"

11-09-2015, 10:30 PM	#15
nightfly Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: New Jersey Posts: 81	Hey, some people adapt quickly to new environs. Attached Images

11-07-2015, 11:43 AM	#2
Dyzalot All Star Starter Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 1,735	Note that it is more probable for a hitter to start "0 for something" as opposed to starting with a hit. Also what you are seeing is easily explained away as standard variance within a small sample size. Some confirmation bias may be playing a role as well. I usually give my guys a couple of months before I start drawing any meaningful conclusions about their performance.

11-07-2015, 12:02 PM	#3
drowssap Minors (Double A) Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 110	I get what you are saying. Yes, small sample size. Yes standard variance. You would also expect to see one or two that may come in and hit 3-10, which isn't out of the question. Maybe even high, but less chance. Fact is, I have NEVER seen anyone go .300 or higher on the team when they are new. Never. I'll try to get more samples as callups and trades are made.

11-07-2015, 12:33 PM	#5
redranger All Star Reserve Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Birmingham, Alabama Posts: 536	I think it is just bad luck maybe. I recently traded prospects and an aged LF for two players to fill voids in the infield. I got a solid 3B and a fair SS (strong in the field and subpar hitter). While the 3B was hitting over .300 before. He continued to hit his average. The subpar hitting SS went 4 for 4 in his first game with me and in the first ten was 20 for 39. He tapered off and fell back to his average but man what a start with a new team

11-07-2015, 07:38 PM	#7
victims_sanction Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jul 2015 Posts: 58	My achilles is long term contracts. Every time I give out a big deal the player seems to get injured or regress tremendously; best two examples: Hand out a new 5 year, 100 million dollar deal? 60 day DL by the end of the first season after never being out for more than 3 weeks his whole career. Give star player and team leader a nice new 98 million dollar deal? Tears his ACL in July - out 8 months. At least the back-up randomly became a stud hitting 30 homers. No way am I giving him an extension though; been burned 1 too many times

11-07-2015, 07:49 PM	#8
NYYANKS98 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Aug 2015 Posts: 128	I basically try to give more money per year for less years because so many guys regress quick after free agency. If I do splurge in free agency I try to make sure it's a guy who debuted very young and is hitting FA at younger than 28ish. I'm not buying a 5+ year deal for someone past their prime years, whereas other guys will at least give me a couple good years before they suck.

11-07-2015, 09:15 PM	#10
r0nster Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2006 Location: Michigan Posts: 3,002	I have had players start off on a hot note and keep performing above expectation. However on same token I have had more players start off bad for 3 weeks then recover slowly as the season progresses. Have also had a couple players have a hot week then cool off for much of the season. Even the players who are traded and my most recent trade where my player got hot on the other team where as the player I received couldn't hit his weight. When that happens I usually keep him for one year and if he isn't worth his weight then I dump him.

11-07-2015, 09:51 PM	#11
drowssap Minors (Double A) Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 110	More examples: J.D. Martinez: 3 for 22 Martin Prado: 3 for 18 Kyle Parker: 4 for 21 The only one I would say c'mon is J.D. At the time he was leading the league in HR, and was over .300. He batted .150 with 0 home runs, and I dumped him.

11-09-2015, 05:49 PM	#14
Chisox59 Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 36	Matt Nokes, my new catcher, is 0 for 34 for 0 BBs and 12 Ks thru the first 14 games. He's rated much higher than the other catchers (my backup is 0 for 16) in my organization, but I'm thinking of giving him some time in AAA for a few weeks and bringing him back up in mid-May.