<p>Good one. Though personally, my friends accelerated my learning curve a lot. :- ) I remember one of them saying, "You can't just start with ANY pedal!" Would estimate that because four of my friends were kibitzing, I crashed 3-4 times instead of 20 ... Dr. D a natural athlete? bwahaha</p>

<p>"Old players' skills" are BB's and HR's. We *know* players learn the plate over a period of years. Q is merely whether the teachers play any role in this. Would be an odd job skill indeed that is learned by everybody but cannot be taught by anybody ...</p>

<p>I don't know if anyone mentioned this as I haven't been able to catch up on all the comments yet (but will soon). The Red Sox have been focusing on another level of CtZ for several years now. Neuroscouting. Mookie Betts is a pretty good example used in this article.<br /><a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/02/18/neuroscouting-may-give-red... target="_parent">https://www.bostongl...</a></p>

<p>Roto playing time - right. The best in the world can't predict who saves 14 games for the M's after Cishek goes into dry dock. Have little doubt you're as good at it as t' other champs Matt. :- ) But nobody can peg 350 AB / 20 GF in February.<br />
Would make a good community roundtable - which M's do you see moving forward in playing time by June. First guy that I like for an expanding role is Steve Clevenger. But the #6SP is an obvious waiver stash on draft day.<br />
Also Tony Zych would be, objectively speaking, a nice stash for surprise saves.</p>

<p>Early impression would be: solid B...did an admirable job making substantial changes to a roster that needed depth...added a ton of that depth...proved to be agile, efficient, and flexible in his thinking while retaining what, on paper, looks like a consistent vision for roster construction. Lots to like. Not a big fan of two of his big moves, but that's not why he only gets a B so far...I have a philosophical difference with him on bullpen construction that I think may wind up seriously damaging this club at exactly the wrong moment. But...on the whole, I'm reasonably pleased.</p>

<p>Doc, regarding ROTO, I do tend to do reasonably well making projections in that sense (who will keep their jobs from the marginal pile)...but the main thing I do to win in ROTO isn't projecting...it's working hard. I never stop...I never settle...I always work the wire...every...single...day...for a few minutes at least. Always look for opportunity. Always trying to make a trade to get better or balance my club.</p>
<div class="indented">Reply - blissedj - 1/1/16 7:33pm<br><p>Glad to hear it Matt! We need active owners in the Detect-O-Vision league. Think there is still 1 team that needs an owner if anybody out there wants to play in a competitive keeper league. Good luck trying to beat Patrick (Skynet) in number of transactions per season! I try to out-transaction him every year but only end up in second by about half the moves :)</p>
</div>

<p>Happy New Year everyone.</p>

<p>I also think projections should be probabilistic, as BPs are, and should be verified probabilistically (rather than correlating the 50th percentile projection with the actual results, we should be measuring the reliability of a 50%, 80%, 90% forecast by seeing whether the correct percentages of players exceed each threshold each year). If you did a reliability study on my prior projections, you'd probably find that I did fine with skill, but was catastrophically too bullish on playing time for the main pieces of a roster.</p>

<p>Stay alert Browns...doin projections this weekend :)</p>
<div class="indented">Reply - diderot - 12/29/15 7:40pm<br><p>Your takes that I'm most interested in:<br />
--Walker<br />
--First base platoon (assuming Montero is half of it)<br />
--Cishek vs. Benoit in the bullpen</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - anonymous - 12/29/15 9:26pm<br><p>I'm interested in Marte, Martin and the bullpen</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - MtGrizzly - 12/30/15 8:56am<br><p>Optimal bench/bullpen will be interesting. With a 4th OF that may or may not be able to go on any given day, can the team carry a dedicated 1B/DH on the bench? Given the presence of a number of multi-inning relievers in the bullpen pasta pile, should they look at a shorter pen and 5-man bench?</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - SABR Matt - 12/30/15 10:37am<br><p>My current speculative approach will be to assume that all of the above will happen at some point. That Montero will be tried...that other options like Lucas and O'Malley will be tried at other points. That the pen will change shape many times (and size as well), that DiPoto will be constantly shuttling guys up and down where he can, and that all six starters, plus at least one other, will get significant innings. The mistake I keep making in my projections is underestimating how much playing time the "depth guys" will get.</p>
</div>

<p>Maybe now?</p>

<p>Just watched the video. It seems to me that Control The Zone is really just #Baseball 101.</p>

<p>On the topic of the C the Z mantra...it is obviously correct that the Mariners should try to instruct in controlling the zone..there are teams that have shown the ability to teach that skill. What is not clear is how much of an improvement you can get with teaching. Z seemed to believe that he could make free-swingers into pitch stalkers. He drafted a TON of guys who swung at a lot of pitches and had good power. Dipoto clearly does not believe that you can do this.</p>
<div class="indented">Reply - MtGrizzly - 12/29/15 11:49am<br><p>Yeah, I think that paradigm predates Jack's tenure too. They've seemingly preferred the Jose Lopez/Yuni Betacourt approach to hitting for some time. Swing away in the minors. Patience will come with experience and coaching at the major league level. "Get the bat off your shoulder. Swing at the first pitch you think you can hit - you will learn to tell balls from strikes the hard way, on the job and in the majors." That, along with Jack's patented "position change once you hit the majors" bull-dookie are equally baffling to me.</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - SABR Matt - 12/29/15 12:25pm<br><p>The good news is that DiPoto has a long history of down-shifting people to EASIER positions, of preferring players who have already demonstrated an ability to tell a ball from a strike, etc. So maybe he will change Mariner culture.</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - MtGrizzly - 12/30/15 7:46am<br><p>One can hope!</p>
</div>

<p>Pretty interesting new video tweeted out by the Mariners with all of the new front office guys talking about the new program and "Controlling the zone." Interesting clips in there from DiPoto, Servais, McKay, etc. Check it out: <a href="https://amp.twimg.com/v/5631900d-733d-4a39-8c7a-d9d9b2feeee5" target="_parent">https://amp.twimg.co...</a></p>
<div class="indented">Reply - okdan - 12/28/15 12:42pm<br><p>Servais' point on the 1-1 count is an interesting one. And McKay's about playing against an organization, not just a team is cool.</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - DaddyO - 12/28/15 1:05pm<br><p>All well and good. Generally speaking, good stuff. When I saw Edgar in the clip about everyone using the same terminology, it DID make me wonder if his unique genius might be blunted by having to fit what he says and does into an organizational template. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it WILL be blunted. Just wondering if it might.</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - DaddyO - 12/28/15 1:09pm<br><p>I've been in organizations that tried top down organizational messaging. If not properly implemented, it can become stifling to individual creativity and genius. Anyone who looks at things a little differently is labelled as someone who is "not on board with the program." Properly implemented, with a genuine appreciation for the need to allow people to still be individuals, it can unify and inspire. But if not, it can start that way but spiral into people feeling like they are a cog in a wheel. Hopefully this is implemented with some balance. It worries me sometimes when people at the top think things are so simple and straightforward while the people on the front lines know differently.</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - diderot - 12/28/15 1:24pm<br><p>Sort of mixed feelings on this. On one hand, I am enthused about the establishment of a metric that can be communicated and applied to all people. And this metric seems like a logical and effective one.<br />
But I also agree with DaddyO that 'one size fits all' frequently alienates some individuals. And the fulcrum of this discontent won't be Dipoto or McKay...it will be the guy in the dugout. Few if any of them ever even met Servais before he was hired. How he integrates with the veterans is vital. And I don't know there's any way to predict that until we're at least a month into the season.</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - DaddyO - 12/28/15 2:14pm<br><p>Let me put my concerns another way. There's a kind of smart person who's so smart they think they really don't need other people with different perspectives. All they really need is more eyes, ears, arms, hands, fingers, legs and toes. So they expect others to be robotic extensions of themselves. This is overly simplistic, but you get the point. Other smart people understand that the task at hand is much greater than their smarts. They need more people with smarts, and their happy if those are different smarts than their. They hire smart and capable people to solve problems independently. Of course, neither category is exclusive. Most people have both traits but skew more one way than the other.</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - okdan - 12/28/15 3:40pm<br><p>DaddyO I think you are absolutely nailing the downside scenario here. Have seen the same things play out in work environments before. My hope is that it's simply to set a high level vision, leaving implementation to the coaches and players. But certainly something to watch. From what I know of the 'Cardinal away' handbook and all of that, the decrees are so reudimentary that it's not enough to even be a marching order. More of a North Star to make sure you're on track. I hope that's what this regime is trying to replicate.</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - DaddyO - 12/28/15 4:31pm<br><p>AB-so-LUTE-ly. Implemented properlly, this can be a good and desirable thing. Certainly one could say the opposite of this is everyone doing their own thing and pulling in different directions. We'll all learn soon enough just how much of DiPoto's smarts is savvy and how much is cow pie. To me the tone of the video comes across a bit like a smart a$$, as if a most obvious and elementary aspect of baseball is some kind of secret recipe they've figured out, and people before these geniuses were just too dumb to think of it. Gee, 1-1 is the most important pitch of an at bat because it can result in either a 2-1 or a 1-2 count. Now why didn't I think of that?! (whacks self in the forehead) I coulda had a V-8!</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - SABR Matt - 12/28/15 5:41pm<br><p>The way a top-down strategy like this works is when the team makes certain that all of the personnel that they acquire ALREADY fit the template as much as possible. DiPoto is already doing this with the line-up...and eve the bullpen.</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - diderot - 12/28/15 7:03pm<br><p>The first rule for any communication is, 'who is the intended audience?'<br />
Is there an upside for spelling this out for rival organizations? Obviously not.<br />
For the media? Maybe. But most of them reserve judgment in any case.<br />
For the fan base/season ticket holders? Maybe. Seems likely most of them have heard enough slogans by now.<br />
For players in the organization? That's the logical conclusion. But here's insight from Drayer;</p>
<p>C The Z, or "Control the Zone," is not a new slogan in the organization. It is something that has been preached throughout the minor leagues the last few years with annual C The Z awards being given at the end of each year. While it sounded good in theory, I'm not sure it worked in practice. I talked to a number of young players last spring about C The Z and most were not able to articulate the meaning of the slogan.</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - SABR Matt - 12/28/15 7:11pm<br><p>They didn't draft players skilled in that regard...and their coaches were horrendous at teaching it...the mantra is fine...but Z had no idea how to build a consistent core teaching philosophy around it.</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - diderot - 12/28/15 7:50pm<br><p>Yeah, Matt, and that's the rub.<br />
To know the mantra is not the same thing as teaching the mantra/technique, right?<br />
Is there evidence that Dipoto did this with the Angels?</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - Silentpadna - 12/29/15 4:42am<br><p>Is C the Z a concept this as teachable as we might think? If it's a mantra, that's all well and good. To the extent that it is teachable they should, to the extent that it's not, they have to find players that possess that skill more naturally. That would be the tricky part right?</p>
</div><div class="indented">Reply - Browns8625 - 12/31/15 8:23am<br><p>I like daddyo perspective on that type of guy..the know it all. You need all the right people around you..regardless of profession. No one has done it alone. Just watch a HOF speech to find that out</p>
</div>

<p>Dave #Henderson died?? Well that's a bummer</p>