PLEASE READ!!!

***** ALL users will have to request a password reset BEFORE you will be able to log into the forum. See the thread in the forum issues section for further instructions. If you have issues with this, email us at admin@urbanohio.com. *****

Author Topic: Cleveland Indians Discussion  (Read 15562 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ChiCleveKid

  • Kettering Tower 408'
  • **
  • Posts: 278
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4470 on: April 16, 2017, 01:23:05 PM »
Early season reality check...
I wish the local pundits would stop with 'the best rotation in baseball' line.
Need more starters if they want to win the AL again.
I basically trust Kluber and sometimes Carrasco and Salazar.

Online surfohio

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6874
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4471 on: April 20, 2017, 09:01:24 PM »
APR. 20, 2017 AT 5:09 PM
Baseballís New Leadoff Hitters Donít Need To Be Speed Demons
By Neil Paine

.......

To find out who is perfect, I ran a regression between a leadoff hitterís playing attributes2 and his teamís runs scored per game (adjusted for the stadium they were scored in). According to that, the ideal current leadoff man3 is Clevelandís Carlos Santana. Leading off for the Tribe while splitting time between designated hitter, first base and right field, the 210-pound Santana doesnít look like the traditional platonic ideal of a leadoff man, and he stole just 5 bases last season. But his peculiar blend of abilities ó great contact skills, tons of walks and the power to drill 34 home runs ó is associated with about 30 extra runs (or 3 more wins) over a 162-game season, tops of any leadoff man in baseball.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/baseballs-new-leadoff-hitters-dont-need-to-be-speed-demons/?addata=espn:frontpage

Offline clvlndr

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6368
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4472 on: April 20, 2017, 09:30:23 PM »
Jose Ramirez is one of the most clutch hitters the Indians have had in recent times.  Just love this guy. With him and Lindor anchoring our hitting attack, it's giving space to guys like Encarnacion to get power hitting swing together.  Being tied for 1st, a game over .500 is right where we need to be.

Offline mrnyc

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 12968
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4473 on: April 21, 2017, 11:27:10 PM »
^Even though not huge in stature, both Santana and Brantley should also be intimidating, and we just got Brantley back as, essentially, a new ballplayer viz much of the current team (with guys like Lindor and Ramirez).  Since last year after we got power-hitting Napoli and a full season with Lindor (and Ramirez's awakened bat), Carlos seems much more relaxed now that he's not called upon to shoulder the lion's share of the offensive load as he was 2 years ago.  He's not pressing and his natural hitting abilities are kicking in and he's a very dangerous hitter.  And Brantley of course is Mr. Clutch (as is Ramirez big time)... And of course this year we've upgraded over Napoli with Encarnacion ... Diaz and, now, Almonte (for a full season and playoffs this time) are like gravy.

All in all, this team is the best Indians team of my lifetime including that 90s power hitting bunch.  While I'm not ready to say this team can mash quite like that team (although ultimately it might, we'll have to see), this year's pitching (starters and pen) is light years better than that team's.  I also give Francona an edge over Hargrove, even though I very much liked Grover.

Francona's probably the best manager in baseball history and if he breaks both the Indians' and Red Sox's droughts that is pretty much cemented. 

He's also complete.   Hargrove could get the best out of a superteam like the mid 90s crew, he was like Torre in that regard.   Not all managers can, even the ones that get the most out of a bunch of overachievers.   Francona can do either.

I was telling some Boston fans last year lamenting Francona and Miller being gone that they, along with Lue, were what they traded for Belichick.



hargrove was in no way shape or form like torre. torre knew to leave the hot hands in, hargrove played the stats and pitch counts and yanked people out no matter what and every time. that was the difference between grovers ultimate failing and torre's success. you don't unalteringly always, always, always play moneyball with very good players. i mean if grover skippered the cavs the other night, he would have put kyrie and love back in. sure, hargrove's steady as she goes style can get you there, but it takes torres and lues to win it. thats why while i really liked hargrove as a player, i never really did as the coach.

Online StapHanger

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 8482
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4474 on: April 22, 2017, 09:42:22 AM »
Alternative view: managers in baseball don't matter all that much and the "hot hand" is 95% myth.

Offline Clevelander17

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4119
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4475 on: April 22, 2017, 09:01:15 PM »
Alternative view: managers in baseball don't matter all that much and the "hot hand" is 95% myth.

If one flipped a coin a thousand times consecutively, there would inevitably be long streaks where, if you didn't know any better, it may appear as though the coin flipper was "in the zone" in landing heads or tails. But ultimately, each side of the coin only has a 50% chance of landing face up. The same is true in sports, a batter or shooter is really only as good as their average or shooting percentage dictates (assuming several seasons worth of data), and long streaks are nothing more than statistical variances to which human beings attribute special meaning. Statistical fallacies, if you will, based on our evolutionary development of pattern seeking.

Offline Clevelander17

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4119
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4476 on: April 22, 2017, 09:14:16 PM »
Getting back to the Indians, though. I am frustrated that Francona can't find a way to get Diaz's bat in the lineup on an everyday basis. I understand that if they couldn't find a place for him that he needs to be in Columbus where he'll get a higher volume of at-bats, but I'm not convinced that they couldn't find a way to do that at the MLB level. Diaz came to the United States as a 2B, and although he has played the most in his minor league career as a 3B, he can comfortably play either corner outfield position and has even spent some time in CF. It's not as if he can only play one or two positions, he has a versatile glove. I mean, if an Abraham Almonte/Brandon Guyer platoon is the best they've got for RF, he's certainly a more promising option than that duo (or at least Almonte, who is not worthy of a spot on the Tribe's roster, let alone a place in the starting 9).

Offline BelievelandD1

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2453
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4477 on: April 22, 2017, 10:14:11 PM »
^Almonte has the highest OBP of all the regulars and is hitting .278.  Also has hit well in clutch situations. Not sure why he doesn't belong not the team

Offline Clevelander17

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4119
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4478 on: April 23, 2017, 05:58:36 AM »
^Almonte has the highest OBP of all the regulars and is hitting .278.  Also has hit well in clutch situations. Not sure why he doesn't belong not the team

Batting average is an overrated statistic and "clutch hitting" probably doesn't exist. As for OBP, Almonte's .396 is a mirage at this incredibly early stage of the season (see my above post above how small sample sizes can play tricks on us). In reality, he has a career .302 OBP, so if given a large enough sample size over the course of the season, he will revert to being much closer to that number.

Online DarkandStormy

  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1547
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4479 on: May 14, 2017, 07:06:03 AM »

Offline bumsquare

  • Key Tower 947'
  • ****
  • Posts: 996
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4480 on: May 14, 2017, 10:20:25 AM »
Pretty sad. TV ratings still among the highest in the league though. It seems like the top of the attendance table is always populated by the largest markets (maybe obviously), while tv rating s are typically dominated by smaller markets. Of course baseball-crazy St. Louis is the exception.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2016/09/28/here-are-the-2016-mlb-prime-time-television-ratings-for-each-team/amp/

Offline Mendo

  • One World Trade Center 1,776'
  • ****
  • Posts: 1144
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4481 on: May 14, 2017, 10:28:03 AM »
What's sad about it? They were last or near last in attendance at this point last year. I see an improvement of 5-6000 people a game during the coldest month of the season.

Offline clvlndr

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6368
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4482 on: May 14, 2017, 10:46:46 AM »
Our attendance is much better this year as is befitting a thrilling World Series contender. 28K yesterday (plus the squirrel) for another small-market, non-Detroit, Cubs, Yankees team was a very nice crowd. I'm more concerned with the team's total lack of hitting more than I am anything else.

Offline BelievelandD1

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2453
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4483 on: May 14, 2017, 12:04:55 PM »
You want attendance to traject upward, which it is. The casual fan wants sustainable success. They've also only had 14 games, they will be middle of the pack this year if we keep winning. However, I think they play better in front of 10k. They have been screaming about attendance for a few years and now that people are coming, they can't hit. That's not gonna make the casual fan want to come back

Offline BelievelandD1

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2453
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4484 on: May 14, 2017, 01:56:54 PM »
The more I look at that table, the less sad it is. I suspect they will jump 3-4 spots after this weekend.  Assuming they get up to 22-23k per game after the first month, that's growth of 7-8k per game from last year, or more than 50% growth. Anyone would take that. This is a big year in terms of the rebranding of Indians baseball, which including stadium renovations, blowing up the team in 2010-2011, etc.  they are where they need to be

Offline mrnyc

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 12968
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4485 on: May 15, 2017, 06:03:28 AM »
also, the marketing is really top notch lately, ie., mothers day and the squirrel. maybe that will draw in millenials. it helps create goodwill about the tribe at the least.

Offline originaljbw

  • Great American Tower 665'
  • ***
  • Posts: 780
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4486 on: May 16, 2017, 09:48:07 AM »
^I would also like to see that number as a %occupancy... No physical way Progressive Field can crack the top 10 ever.

Online DarkandStormy

  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1547
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4487 on: May 17, 2017, 04:09:05 PM »
The more I look at that table, the less sad it is. I suspect they will jump 3-4 spots after this weekend.  Assuming they get up to 22-23k per game after the first month, that's growth of 7-8k per game from last year, or more than 50% growth. Anyone would take that. This is a big year in terms of the rebranding of Indians baseball, which including stadium renovations, blowing up the team in 2010-2011, etc.  they are where they need to be

The Indians so far in 2017 are up a mere 1k over average attendance in 2016.

As for % of capacity...Progressive Field is ranked #27 in the MLB by capacity of seats.  At its heyday, the Jake would rank #9 today.  The Jake held 45,569 in 2010 but has since slashed over 10,000 seats (which is freaking embarrassing).  Guess they need to slash 10k more so games look full?

Online Whipjacka

  • One World Trade Center 1,776'
  • ****
  • Posts: 1086
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4488 on: May 17, 2017, 04:19:14 PM »
that isn't a mere 1,000 when you consider that the attendance rises as the summer goes on.  being up an average of 1,000 through april and the first half of may (traditionally the least attended months) is good. 

Offline Clefan98

  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1635
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4489 on: May 17, 2017, 05:04:24 PM »
The more I look at that table, the less sad it is. I suspect they will jump 3-4 spots after this weekend.  Assuming they get up to 22-23k per game after the first month, that's growth of 7-8k per game from last year, or more than 50% growth. Anyone would take that. This is a big year in terms of the rebranding of Indians baseball, which including stadium renovations, blowing up the team in 2010-2011, etc.  they are where they need to be

The Indians so far in 2017 are up a mere 1k over average attendance in 2016.

As for % of capacity...Progressive Field is ranked #27 in the MLB by capacity of seats.  At its heyday, the Jake would rank #9 today.  The Jake held 45,569 in 2010 but has since slashed over 10,000 seats (which is freaking embarrassing).  Guess they need to slash 10k more so games look full?



Indians' attendance is up 42%, and weekday crowds have increased 45%
Through 12 games, the Indians' attendance average of 20,376 is 6,003 ahead of the norm for the first 12 home dates of 2016. The Tribe could top 2 million at the gate for the first time in nine years.

https://home.crainscleveland.com/clickshare/authenticateUserSubscription.do?CSProduct=crainscleveland-metered&CSAuthReq=1:173645974950930:AID:610322D7783710FD22C7DD1C9AF77178&AID=/20170501/BLOGS06/170509985&title=Indians%27%20attendance%20is%20up%2042%25%2C%20and%20weekday%20crowds%20have%20increased%2045%25&CSTargetURL=http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20170501/BLOGS06/170509985/indians-attendance-is-up-42-and-weekday-crowds-have-increased-45


The Cleveland Indians boast the highest local TV ratings in Major League Baseball


http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ssf/2017/05/cleveland_indians_have_highest.html#incart_river_index
« Last Edit: May 17, 2017, 07:59:13 PM by Clefan98 »

Offline BelievelandD1

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2453
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4490 on: May 17, 2017, 05:55:07 PM »
Yeah, I think you are thinking of season ticket holders with the 1K. Through May in the past they would have 15k. They are in the 20's now. By end of season if they can start actually playing good baseball, they will likely be mid to high 20's.  A good one year increase

Offline ChiCleveKid

  • Kettering Tower 408'
  • **
  • Posts: 278
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4491 on: May 17, 2017, 10:07:30 PM »
I wish my post a few weeks back was wrong but the starting rotation is a mess.
Carrasco is fragile, Salazar is weak mentally and don't get me started on Bauer.
Frustrating that this wasn't addressed in offseason.
And yes...the signs were there last year.

Offline BelievelandD1

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2453
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4492 on: June 13, 2017, 07:20:59 PM »
The more I look at that table, the less sad it is. I suspect they will jump 3-4 spots after this weekend.  Assuming they get up to 22-23k per game after the first month, that's growth of 7-8k per game from last year, or more than 50% growth. Anyone would take that. This is a big year in terms of the rebranding of Indians baseball, which including stadium renovations, blowing up the team in 2010-2011, etc.  they are where they need to be

The Indians so far in 2017 are up a mere 1k over average attendance in 2016.

As for % of capacity...Progressive Field is ranked #27 in the MLB by capacity of seats.  At its heyday, the Jake would rank #9 today.  The Jake held 45,569 in 2010 but has since slashed over 10,000 seats (which is freaking embarrassing).  Guess they need to slash 10k more so games look full?

Indians will be passing Cincinnati in attendance after tonight as they keep climbing up the ladder, averaging 22,100 per game. Very nice increase from last year. The tribe are building something with the fans, have to keep winning games though

Offline MuRrAy HiLL

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 5863
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4493 on: June 14, 2017, 11:48:29 AM »
In case we needed it:

A crash course for Cleveland fans shifting their focus to the Indians following the NBA Finals

Updated on June 14, 2017 at 10:31 AM
Posted on June 14, 2017 at 7:00 AM

http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ssf/2017/06/cleveland_indians_cleveland_ca.html

Offline clvlndr

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6368
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4494 on: June 14, 2017, 01:03:01 PM »
The more I look at that table, the less sad it is. I suspect they will jump 3-4 spots after this weekend.  Assuming they get up to 22-23k per game after the first month, that's growth of 7-8k per game from last year, or more than 50% growth. Anyone would take that. This is a big year in terms of the rebranding of Indians baseball, which including stadium renovations, blowing up the team in 2010-2011, etc.  they are where they need to be

The Indians so far in 2017 are up a mere 1k over average attendance in 2016.

As for % of capacity...Progressive Field is ranked #27 in the MLB by capacity of seats.  At its heyday, the Jake would rank #9 today.  The Jake held 45,569 in 2010 but has since slashed over 10,000 seats (which is freaking embarrassing).  Guess they need to slash 10k more so games look full?



Indians' attendance is up 42%, and weekday crowds have increased 45%
Through 12 games, the Indians' attendance average of 20,376 is 6,003 ahead of the norm for the first 12 home dates of 2016. The Tribe could top 2 million at the gate for the first time in nine years.

https://home.crainscleveland.com/clickshare/authenticateUserSubscription.do?CSProduct=crainscleveland-metered&CSAuthReq=1:173645974950930:AID:610322D7783710FD22C7DD1C9AF77178&AID=/20170501/BLOGS06/170509985&title=Indians%27%20attendance%20is%20up%2042%25%2C%20and%20weekday%20crowds%20have%20increased%2045%25&CSTargetURL=http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20170501/BLOGS06/170509985/indians-attendance-is-up-42-and-weekday-crowds-have-increased-45


The Cleveland Indians boast the highest local TV ratings in Major League Baseball


http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ssf/2017/05/cleveland_indians_have_highest.html#incart_river_index

Now if the team could only match the fans' response on the field... If they keep playing as inconsistently and well below their potential as they've been this season to date, look for those attendance numbers to drop off.

Offline Clefan98

  • Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • *****
  • Posts: 1635
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4495 on: June 14, 2017, 01:07:51 PM »
^ I doubt there will be much drop off either way.  There's a lot of big weekday series left (Toronto,NYY, BoSox) and the remaining weekend games are almost sold out..

Here's a good look at the numbers:

Big weekend at the box office adds to belief Tribe will finally get to 2 million at gate


The Indians drew 88,407 for a three-game series vs. the White Sox and are averaging 22,014 fans per contest this season. With eight more weekend series ahead, it seems likely Edwin Encarnacion will reach at least one of his attendance bonuses.

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20170612/BLOGS06/170619949/big-weekend-at-the-box-office-adds-to-belief-tribe-will-finally-get
« Last Edit: June 14, 2017, 01:10:45 PM by Clefan98 »

Offline originaljbw

  • Great American Tower 665'
  • ***
  • Posts: 780
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4496 on: June 22, 2017, 04:38:26 PM »
I just punched through the numbers and the Indians are filling the stadium to 62.9% of capacity. We are right between the pirates and rangers in that metric.

At the top over 90 percent you have the usual suspects who mostly play in old stadiums (giants-99.3%, red sox-93.8%, cubs-91.7%, cards-91.5%) the bottom is the A's-38.2%, Rays-47%, and diamonbacks-48.3%.

I'm thinking as summer goes along and the Indians start to get a little steam they could get to over 70% which would put them in with the Yankees and braves.

Offline Clevelander17

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 4119
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4497 on: July 02, 2017, 08:02:52 AM »
So former Indian minor leaguer Clint Frazier made his Yankees debut last night and had a home run. He's only 22, so I'll be curious to follow along with his progress to see if he's really ready to make an impact on the MLB level or if he'll have to go back down at some point.

I still think it was a great trade for the Tribe as Miller is so dominant in his flexible role in the late innings of close games. Having him for last year's postseason run plus this year and all of next year seems well worth what was given up for his services.

Offline BelievelandD1

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 2453
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4498 on: July 02, 2017, 12:28:54 PM »
No looking back on that one even if Frazier turns out to be a complete stud. Miller already made that value back. Steamrolled the tribe through two rounds of the playoffs and almost cashed in a ring in year 1

Online surfohio

  • Jeddah Tower 3,281'
  • *****
  • Posts: 6874
Re: Cleveland Indians Discussion
« Reply #4499 on: July 02, 2017, 12:46:19 PM »
No looking back on that one even if Frazier turns out to be a complete stud. Miller already made that value back. Steamrolled the tribe through two rounds of the playoffs and almost cashed in a ring in year 1

And we still have Zimmer.