Kerb Hohl wrote:ReasonablySober wrote:The Winker decision is fair to criticize because even if you want to argue he was the best of bad decisions (which he wasn't IMO), the other bad decisions had at least had recent MLB at-bats. Winker hadn't been in MLB in over two months. His last in game AB was almost three weeks ago.
It just wasn't a good move.
Is there really that big of a difference between taking ABs in Nashville or a simulated game in the park vs. some of the guys that have like 10 ABs in the final week?
Basically, my Winker support is in opposition to people that don't understand how bad Mitchell's peripherals project. 40% K rate is bad and I'd treat him as a .210 hitter as well when making decisions.
I think everyone, even if they hate Winker, also understand Rowdy sucked and that punch hitting for Turang is fine.
I don't mind pinch hitting for Turang. It's using a guy who hasn't seen an MLB pitch in two months. It's using a guy who barreled literally 5 balls all season. That's 4.3%, compared to 8.7% (Rowdy) and 10.8% (Mitchell).
Winker hasn't played, hasn't faced MLB competition, and when he does he makes dog-sh*t contact.
Also, if we're using advanced numbers, Mitchell's K% is 35%, not 40. Even if that number is worse than Winker's 25%, in a situation where weak contact is worse than striking out, Mitchell or Rowdy would have been much better choices.