Replacing Weeks with Durham-why?

[endaround]

I still don't get the whole-"Durham should start" argument. Have people arguing this actually looked at what Weeks has done instead of focusing on the fact his season numbers are low? Weeks post ASB: .265/.378/.426 Durham post ASB:.266/.352/.468 Thats as close to a wash as you can get. OXS of .161 vs .164. And I know people hate to face it, but Weeks is superior in the field to Durham at this point in his career. Yes it would be great if either could play 3B but as it is there just isn't any big gain there to moving Weeks out.

[JJHardy7]

I still don't get the whole-"Durham should start" argument. Have people arguing this actually looked at what Weeks has done instead of focusing on the fact his season numbers are low? Weeks post ASB: .265/.378/.426 Durham post ASB:.266/.352/.468 Thats as close to a wash as you can get. OXS of .161 vs .164. And I know people hate to face it, but Weeks is superior in the field to Durham at this point in his career. Yes it would be great if either could play 3B but as it is there just isn't any big gain there to moving Weeks out.

 

It's a good question endaround. I think part of it is the fact that the Brewers blew it last year and may blow it again this year and a veteran may be able to handle it more than the young guys. The young guys as a whole or more or less struggling and the thought might be a guy like Durham might offset that. I know that's a vague point and doesn't have the stats to back it up, but that's my guess.

 

I also think putting a veteran like Durham in the lineup might boost the Brewers confidence level. I think it's much easier for Durham to be a more vocal and active guy when playing than when he isn't. I know that's another point that can't be backed up on stats. I personally would like to see Durham play more since I think if he played more he'd have better numbers post all-star game than Weeks. It's hard to start once a week or so and pinch hit and do well. I would like to see Weeks still get some starts down the stretch and I hope they don't bench him. It will be interesting to see how Durham does in the number 2 spot. If Cameron does well, I feel Durham's stats will look pretty solid and we might be seeing more of Durham than Weeks as the season comes to a finish.

[endaround]

Durham's post ASB numbers are basically a carbon copy of his pre All Star numbers. Again It's be great if they could play both, but Weeks has been on fire for the past 2 weeks (.333/.459/.500) how Durham could actually improve on that just is hard to see. It'd make more sense at this point to platoon Hart with Brad Nelson to try to get some more offense.

[JJHardy7]

Durham's post ASB numbers are basically a carbon copy of his pre All Star numbers. Again It's be great if they could play both, but Weeks has been on fire for the past 2 weeks (.333/.459/.500) how Durham could actually improve on that just is hard to see. It'd make more sense at this point to platoon Hart with Brad Nelson to try to get some more offense.

 

I may not be remembering this right and I apologize if I'm way off here, but wasn't he hitting .280 or .290 when we got him? Again, if I'm way off on this I apologize. That was just my reference in my post above. Durham hasn't been used enough IMO, but he shouldn't be starting more than half the games a week if that makes sense.

[Gobias Industries]

I'm expecting Durham to get the bulk of the playing time the rest of the way. Sveum just said in his interview with Ueck that he likes to have 2 veterans at the top of the order.

 

When Weeks does play, I'd like to see him subbed out late in a close game when we're ahead. I think pressure gets to the guy. The 2 errors last week, the botched DP against the Cubs, and not turning the double play late in Atlanta last year all came very late in close games.

[DHonks]

I like playing Durham right now. Ultimately I hope that when they play Weeks, it's hitting 5th, 6th, or 7th. I used to praise his skillset as a potential leadoff man, but I think his role might get in his head

[logan82]

Why bat Weeks so low? Even with his terrible 1st half he has improved his stats to the point where his OBP is one of the best on the team. The old guy plays way over expectations and the youngert guy plays under his. People think the old guy can keep it up and the young guy will continue to suck even though he hasn't.

[JJHardy7]

the young guy will continue to suck even though he hasn't.

 

How many chances does he continue to get? I understand he's possibly the best hitter in September, but I guess some will bank on a couple of weeks to defend Rickie in the off-season once again. The question is who is the best over 12 games? I don't think it's Rickie playing all 12. You reference an old guy keeping it up, but in reality we're talking about 12 games. There have been discussions on this board that riding the hot guy doesn't make sense, etc. I think you just have to pick the player who will succeed.

 

I think a more important question is was it Cameron vs. Weeks for lead off or Weeks vs. Durham at the 2 spot. If it's a debate about the 2 spot, I go with Durham as long as Cam is leading off.

[TooLiveBrew]

batting leadoff has gotten to his head to the tune of a .430+ OBP so far in September http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

I'm all for trying Ray out at 3B to split time with Bill & backup 2B as well.

[rluzinski]

Svuem says he want's a "veteran presence" on the top of the order. There you have it. Can't begin to argue against something like that, since it's more or less a meaningless cliche that we are all just supposed to nod in approval at when someone says it.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

Because Durham can actually turn a double play.

[rluzinski]

Because Durham can actually turn a double play.

 

Weeks and Durham both stunk last year, according to the fans:

 

http://www.tangotiger.net/scouting/pos2007_2B.html

 

I think we might see Weeks a bit higher this year, when the 2008 report comes out.

[JJHardy7]

Svuem says he want's a "veteran presence" on the top of the order. There you have it. Can't begin to argue against something like that, since it's more or less a meaningless cliche that we are all just supposed to nod in approval at when someone says it.

 

I think some of your posts should being going in the vent thread. You also like to mock other posters in an indirect way the past few weeks. You may have your spreadsheets and you know quite a bit about stats, but I would like to think you could respect fellow posters at the same time. Do you honestly think Durham is ONLY in the lineup because he's a veteran? Do the Brewers need to give a term paper type report for their decisions?

[Fatter than Joey]

Svuem says he want's a "veteran presence" on the top of the order.

 

Weeks is a veteran, right?

[rluzinski]

That's the reason Svuem listed, so I'm not exactly going out on a limb in thinking that was the deciding factor. It certainly wasn't because Weeks was struggling, as end pointed out.

 

As for my mocking tone, I'm mocking Svuem for saying it and the media for just accepting it as a an acceptable explanation. Who cares about actual production on the field when you can add presence to the top of your lineup, right? Hey, maybe EY is still available.

 

And I don't need a statistical study in every explanation. I do want a concise, well thought out explanation, though. Not just another unexplained baseball cliche. Take for instance today's TV broadcast of the game. After Theriot sacrificed Soriano over to 3B in the 1st, Anderson said (paraphrasing), "That another reason why the Cubs score so many runs. They execute" nevermind that lee hits a double right after that, making the sacrifice largely irrelevant. The Cubs lead the NL in OBP and SLG, so presuming that the Cubs really do "execute" very good, just how much of a contributing factor is it? Who the heck knows because we are supposed to see "execute" and nod out heads in approval.

 

Maybe that's good enough for you but not me.

[JJHardy7]

That's the reason Svuem listed, so I'm not exactly going out on a limb in thinking that was the deciding factor. It certainly wasn't because Weeks was struggling, as end pointed out.

 

Well he has more experience than Weeks. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but to me picking on two words of the reason is a little over the top. Everyone around here talked about shaking things up and maybe this is why. Maybe Durham vs. Weeks at the 2 hitter was the debate. I don't anticipate receiving a report from the Brewers about it, but to nitpick on two words seems to be little on the edge...much like the Brewers this year.

 

As for my mocking tone, I'm mocking Svuem for saying it and the media for just accepting it as a an acceptable explanation. Who cares about actual production on the field when you can add presence to the top of your lineup, right? Hey, maybe EY is still available.

 

What is the media supposed to do? Grill Svuem about it? The media has a tight rope and they can't push any manager too much or else he just won't give them real answers. The media has to be able to have the trust of the team/players so they don't report on issues that are in-house. If the media pisses off the manager enough, you just get garbage in, garbage out. I don't see it as the media accepting it I see it more like the media reporting what they were told. I don't think there's any need to press the issue further given the state of the team and how shaky it looks and having a new manager that you may not want to piss off on the day of his first game.

 

He wants to shake things up and that might kill some of the stats, but what the Brewers were doing so far in September wasn't working so well. Will this work? Who knows, but this is essentially Svuem's long interview in the next 12 games for the job next year.

[rluzinski]

but to me picking on two words of the reason is a little over the top... What is the media supposed to do? Grill Svuem about it?

 

That's the only explanation the TV guys listed (at least that I heard). If "shaking things up" was another reason, not exactly proving me wrong.

 

And I'm not calling for the media to directly challenge Svuem. But all they did was state the reason and apparently.... that was good enough for them. No real discussion. nothing. I mean, you don't even bring up production at all? I swear that an explanation like that would not be the beginning and end of a discussion if it were the Packers making a change. It seems like football isn't crippled by a culture of cliches, though. Making a change to shake things up. Veteran presence. Give me a break.

[jackalope02ca]

Does anyone actually think Weeks will be back next year? I just don' see it.

[JJHardy7]

That's the only explanation the TV guys listed (at least that I heard). If "shaking things up" was another reason, not exactly proving me wrong.

 

And I'm not calling for the media to directly challenge Svuem. But all they did was state the reason and apparently.... that was good enough for them. No real discussion. nothing. I mean, you don't even bring up production at all? I swear that an explanation like that would not be the beginning and end of a discussion if it were the Packers making a change. It seems like football isn't crippled by a culture of cliches, though. Making a change to shake things up. Veteran presence. Give me a break.

 

Really? Did you see the Favre saga? General lame answers by management (not saying they were wrong) and the whole train is moving thing? Every sports team and media is bound by unwritten rules. If you don't think so, I really think you should try the gig out. Go out and piss management off and you'll lose all the exclusive things. The JS posts 'tidbits' about the interaction with the players. I think TH interviewed Braun in the elevator or lobby yesterday. A media outlet that pisses off management doesn't get Braun or any other players thoughts.

[Postseason2006]

Weeks defense is probably #1 reason.

[logan82]

Sorry for my tearse reply earlier. I will try to expand.

In the first half

 

Weeks(26) 217/320/367/687

Durham(36) 293/385/414/799

 

The problem is that neither line makes sense compared to what either has done in their career. I have a hard time believing that a 26 year old is going to produce far below career numbers and a 36 year old is going to put up an OBP 33 points over his career average.

 

3 year(2005-2007)

Weeks 250/357/411/768

Durham 268/338/439/777

and just to be fair to Durham since he had one really bad year in the last 3

Durham career 277/352/436/788

Weeks career 245/352/403/755

[TooLiveBrew]

Durham career 277/352/436/788

Weeks career 245/352/403/755

 

Much of the difference in SLG is in singles there, too. Even just in '08 Rickie has really smacked some balls, just right at fielders. I have no idea if that's real, or if it just seems he's lined out sharply more than others.

 

I think Weeks had a shot at catching that 'single' by Dempster tonight. His range, not hands, is what's better than Durham, and at 2B Durham's playing towards a weakness (covering ground). But can't argue about Durham playing tonight -- did well.

[Gobias Industries]

Much of the difference in SLG is in singles there, too. Even just in '08 Rickie has really smacked some balls, just right at fielders. I have no idea if that's real, or if it just seems he's lined out sharply more than others.

I was looking over my 08 BP Guide and saw that PECOTA had him at .265/.368/.454 for 2008. And they are pretty much gonna be right on with his XBH's.

 

They pegged him as having 24 2B'S, 4 3B's, 16 HR.

 

Right now he's at 22 2B's, 6 3B's, and 12 HR. So his power is a bit down, but he has walked more than they expected.

 

His numbers could really finish close to their projections. With a career low .277 BABIP, he's really not that far off from having a solid year. 10 - 15 more hits finding holes and your damn close to those projections. Amazing. Even SB and CS's are right on.

[ELCABALLO45]

Pretty simple answer...

A. .287/.378

B. .233/.340

Also player B has a hard time turning simple double plays.

Who would you rather have?

[danzig6767]

I would have started Durham tonight also simply because i don't think Weeks matches up well with Dempster. Weeks really seems to struggle against right handed pitchers with a very good slider like Dempster has.

 

With so few games left and both Durham/Weeks being below average defensively, i'd decide who to start entirely by who is on the mound that game. I'd start Weeks vs all lefties and certain righthanders.