Sammy Sofa

Pointing out that Maddon often makes bad/baffling decisions isn't helping your case. Heyward is, even at the best of times, a very streaky player in terms of peaks and valleys. We have seen Maddon, time and again, stick with players, position and pitching, giving them playing time or using them in spots when they are clearly struggling....because that's what baseball players do. They go through stretches where they underperform, or don't play well, or are hurt, or just flat out stink. Again, Heyward was already struggling again BEFORE he was moved up to #1. You keep arguing like he was doing fine and then suddenly on a dime started hitting poorly when he was moved up there. That's simply and obviously not true. You repeatedly cherrypick tiny sample sizes for these absurd, intangible-based narratives you insist must exist. Again, there is a very good and obvious argument against Heyward hitting #1, and that's that he has obviously been struggling for several weeks, and his OBP in that time shows he shouldn't be getting the most PA and be the guy you need to get on base in front of better hitters. Why do you need this nonsense storyline of, "leading off gets in Heyward's head, maaaaaaaaaannnnnn?" Look at this: Heyward is slashing .295 .349 .462 .810 in 86 PA when he bats 7th this season. As I pointed out before, he is slashing .343 .453 .557 1.011 in 86 PA when he is hitting 5th. Exact same sample size. Do you honestly believe that Jason Heyward has an OPS 200 points better hitting 5th because he feels more comfortable there, or prefers it, or whatever to hitting 7th?

So that's essentially you answering that, yes, you think hitting #1 inexplicably significantly impacts a player's performance vs. them hitting elsewhere in the lineup.

Being the leadoff hitter is way more than first AB of the game, since the rest of your PA are still in front of the good hitters. His OPS as the first hitter of the game is .983 because the lone 3 hits he has to start games are XBH while that BA is .200 the OBP is .250. Serious question: Do you think that he's hit .159 .227 .377 .603 in 75 PA hitting #1, and that he's hit .343 .453 .557 1.011 in 86 PA hitting #5, means anything? Like, do you genuinely think that moving him back to the #5 spot would likely result in him hitting well again in short order? I'm giving you an out here: if your argument is, "Heyward is slumping and he shouldn't be getting the most PA of anyone on the team right now," that's valid. If your argument is something along the lines, "Heyward can't handle the pressure of leading off," or, "hitting #1 makes Heyward bad," that's a laughably terribly argument.

Maybe leading off an inning other than the first, but not hitting from the leadoff spot this year. Hitting leadoff this season... .159/.227/.377/.603 Those are his season splits hitting as the batter listed first in the lineup, not necessarily always actually "leading off" in the sense of being the first batter of the game or an inning. As Janelle pointed out, Heyward's splits when he actually is the first batter of the game, a situation where he has had only 16 PA this season, is a very lopsided .200 .250 .733 .983, with a BAbip of .077. Those numbers correspond with how Heyward has been slumping or trending for a slump even before he was moved to the #1 spot. If you're curious, his numbers this season when he's leading off an inning are .282 .325 .527 .852 with a .312 OPS in 117 PA. That's roughly in line with how he's hitting .271 .350 .460 .810 with a .304 BAbip over all this season in 437 PA. So what does this tell us? That hitting Jason Heyward #1 is a serviceable idea, and that his current stretch is far more likely due to a slump as opposed to some kind of idea along of the lines of, "Jason Heyward can't handle leading off." The problem is that Maddon didn't plug Heyward in ahead of the team's better hitters sooner, not some nonsensical idea that hitting leadoff makes Heyward suck.

Got that leadoff OBP over .200 for the year. His OBP is over .300 when he leads off I mean....that's not really a good thing. You guys are swiping at each other, but both missing that this is likely just bad timing and Heyward going through a slump. He's definitely not putting up good numbers in the small sample size of his current leadoff hitter stint, but that stretch isn't simply relegated to when he was moved to to the top spot. There's nothing really showing he "should" be leading off right now (for the last month he only has a a .313 OBP, which isn't doing much for a guy who is supposed to be on base for the better hitters behind him), but also Edith's argument seems to be hinged on the idea that hitting leadoff somehow makes Heyward bad, and moving him to another spot would make him good again.

I’ll take a single

Yeah, his numbers of the last week are trending the right way. BAbip going up, too.

It was mentioned earlier in the season that his fastball was what was usually either missing badly or getting clobbered when he was really struggling.

Darvish gave up that home run like the Cubs had actually scored that run last inning.

What are you, some kind of time traveler from 45 minutes from now?

Yeesh. Classic Road Cobs.

Jesus, don't strand the damn gimme tying run.

Now THAT was a sexy AB.

Well, yeah, playoff numbers are typically a terrible way to gauge a player's overall value.

Uh, that is good news. Relax. This [expletive] doesn't understand sample size OK? Zobrist already having 2 dongs is a very good thing regardless.

Uh, that is good news. Relax.

Damn, that fan got rocked in the face.

BRUTALITY.

In a whopping 70 PA with a BAbip of .140.

Until hilariously wearing gigantic shorts on top of pants is lamer than hilariously wearing a belt with a baseball uniform, then the winner will always be obvious. Hockey makes every player look like Kevin Smith.

football? Damn, that's a tricky one.

Right; I just can't help but feel like it is when some dopey baseball manager does it. Nothing is worse than hockey

Right; I just can't help but feel like it is when some dopey baseball manager does it.