The Clarence Gaston and co. Effect

[s e n s i]

Cito can be a stubborn guy at times, and it bites us in the ass on more than a few occasions. Having said that, how much stock do y'all think his hitting philosophy- along with the tutelage of Murphy and the rest of the coaches, has on the projected record-shattering power stats this team is on pace for? I mean the bats are freakin' hot right now and guys seem to go to the plate oozing with confidence and a simple yet effective plan to find and smash their pitch of choice.

Our pitching has been surprisingly stellar as well, but it just makes me wonder if we'd be this potent offensively if someone else was coaching. Granted, it's still way early in the season and a drop off is kinda inevitable, but even still, it's pretty nice watching these guys tattoo the living **** outta the ball on a daily basis.

And as a side note, it's jokes how after every Jays HR or double off the wall, Rance says it's the hardest hit he's seen all year. The hits just keep getting harder and harder apparently.

[Randle McMurphy]

I remember when this was suggested in the 2nd half of 2008 when Cito and Tenace took over, too. But yeah, I'm not a big believer in that. Bautista's inexplicable power jump may have had something to do with the change in approach that was suggested by Murphy but the others (Gonzalez, Buck, Encarnacion) have all shown this kind of power before. They all will likely fade sooner rather than later.

[s e n s i]

Not that I disagree with you, cause I do agree mostly, but having power is one thing and actually being able to hit the ball is another. These guys aren't just hacking away at everything, praying they make contact. They are going to the plate with a specific plan and executing it surprisingly well. The preparation for opposing teams pitching staffs looks to be thorough as well. You gotta wonder if Cito has even the slightest effect on this, no?

[Randle McMurphy]

Not that I disagree with you, cause I do agree mostly, but having power is one thing and actually being able to hit the ball is another. These guys aren't just hacking away at everything, praying they make contact. They are going to the plate with a specific plan and executing it surprisingly well. The preparation for opposing teams pitching staffs looks to be thorough as well. You gotta wonder if Cito has even the slightest effect on this, no?

Every major league hitter has a specific plan before going to up to bat. I don't think that would be any different with any other manager.

And really, if Cito had anything to do with this, what happened last season? Did everyone just stop listening to him and Tenace in late 2009 and then start listening to him and Murphy in Spring Training this year?

I think the more reasonable explanation is that this a prolonged hot streak for Gonzalez, Buck, and Bautista. Though, with Murphy's advice, there may be more to Bautista's stretch than the others.

[s e n s i]

Ok, just saying guy. I think we'd still be good, but I don't think we'd be leading the league in jacks by a country mile if say John Gibbons was still our coach, but what do I know. I just think Cito actually possesses some sort of baseball knowledge and does a solid job relaying it to his players.

I only really believe this because of the conversation I had with my younger brothers baseball coach over the weekend. I brought up how the Jays are smashing the baseball and the first thing he said was that Cito is a helluva hitting coach. He went on to say that the way Cito breaks down the nuances of hitting is so straight-forward yet so effective and the way he comes across to his players make what he says so easy to buy into. He also said that a large majority of what he teaches these teenagers, he learned from Cito and Gino themselves. My brother never used to be able to hit for sh*t, but after playing for this guy, he's been tearing the lid off the baseball. Now this coach wasn't in the league for long, nor was he even a remotely good hitter, but having been taught by Cito first-hand for a few years, it's tough not to believe what he says about the old skipper.

[Schad]

I tend to agree that most of them look the same as they ever have, except that they're getting bat on ball, and their plate discipline splits back that up for the most part.

Well, all except for Buck, who must think that he has died and gone to heaven...he's swinging far more than in previous years, and it might owe partially to the fact that he has a manager who couldn't give the smallest of damns whether he strikes out in spectacular fashion.

[Randle McMurphy]

Ok, just saying guy. I think we'd still be good, but I don't think we'd be leading the league in jacks by a country mile if say John Gibbons was still our coach, but what do I know. I just think Cito actually possesses some sort of baseball knowledge and does a solid job relaying it to his players.

I really hate being a downer, but a couple of things.

#1. It's May. How about we wait until the end of the season before judging where this team ends up offensively? What they've done so far isn't sustainable in the slightest. You should know that. It wasn't too long ago, of course, that Gene Tenace was being praised for this team's offensive success only to be fired after 3-4 months of struggles. Did he suddenly become a bad hitting coach over night? Or is it possible that hitters just go on streaks?

#2. Not too sure why you have a bone to pick with John Gibbons, but what I can tell you is that I would be far more comfortable with him at the helm than Cito. The Jays would probably end up with a few more wins at the end of the year, too. I have all the respect in the world for Cito, but I can't wait until the guy is gone. The mutiny from last September tells me most of the players share the same frustration.

#3. This team has quite a few players known for being streaky hackers. And fortunately for us, our streaky hackers have been streaking against mediocre competition for 47 games now (though Gonzalez has been regressing in May considerably). Really, nothing that Buck, Gonzalez or Encarnacion have done has been overly surprising to me. Wells has hit like this before in his career (though he has also trended downward in May), as has Lewis. The other players on the roster are struggling (Hill, Lind, Overbay). As I said, it is only Bautista's success that stands out to me as something the coaching staff might have had a significant hand in, but I also expect him to fade soon.

I only really believe this because of the conversation I had with my younger brothers baseball coach over the weekend. I brought up how the Jays are smashing the baseball and the first thing he said was that Cito is a helluva hitting coach. He went on to say that the way Cito breaks down the nuances of hitting is so straight-forward yet so effective and the way he comes across to his players make what he says so easy to buy into. He also said that a large majority of what he teaches these teenagers, he learned from Cito and Gino themselves. My brother never used to be able to hit for sh*t, but after playing for this guy, he's been tearing the lid off the baseball. Now this coach wasn't in the league for long, nor was he even a remotely good hitter, but having been taught by Cito first-hand for a few years, it's tough not to believe what he says about the old skipper.

Every player says their personal hitting coach breaks the game down in a simple and effective way. I remember Jays hitters over the last 8-9 years praising Barnett, Brantley, Denbo, Tenace and now Murphy for their ability to teach and get people to buy into their ideas. With the exception of Murphy, they all got fired at some point because their teams eventually stopped hitting (for reasons that, I believe, were entirely out of those hitting coaches' control).

Now, some of these guys are better than others at teaching, but how are we, as fans, to know the difference? That's kind of what I'm trying to get across here.

I'm also not saying Cito doesn't have baseball hitting knowledge, obviously. In fact, I'm sure he has a lot, but I also don't think the Jays' hitters are doing anything that out of the ordinary. Their success is far more attributable to regular hot streaks than Cito Gaston or Dwayne Murphy changing approaches at the plate.

[Attonitus]

Now, some of these guys are better than others at teaching, but how are we, as fans, to know the difference? That's kind of what I'm trying to get across here.

I'm also not saying Cito doesn't have baseball hitting knowledge, obviously. In fact, I'm sure he has a lot, but I also don't think the Jays' hitters are doing anything that out of the ordinary. Their success is far more attributable to regular hot streaks than Cito Gaston or Dwayne Murphy changing approaches at the plate.

You say that nobody knows and then you say it's attributed to hot streaks. How do you know? for all the same reasons you stated it couldn't be attributed to Cito could also be used against the idea that it's just hot streaks.

You are so quick to deny that it could be anything but hot streaks. It seems like a hell of a coincidence that you have so many guys over achieving at the same time. In 145 AB's, Lewis has almost similar numbers than he did last year in 295 AB, specifically power numbers. Gonzo has 2 more HR's than he did in over twice as many bats last year. Buck has 8 HR's in 38 games and opposed to 8 HR all of last season and is batting .30 higher than his career average. Encarnacion has 7 HR in 53 AB, last year he had 13 HR in 6 times as many AB's! But somehow none of this is attributed to Cito's free swinging philosophy? All four of these guys as well as Bautista are just on ridiculas hot streaks? come on. I wouldn't deny that some of these numbers could be some streaky hitting but all of it is just too much of a coincidence.

Now, I don't think Cito makes very good in game decisions, his line-ups baffle me as does his substitutions but I think it's really hard to flat out deny that he has a knack of making players better than they are, if nothing else but by the confidence he instills in them.

[LittleOzzy]

Sorry the shine off this ring has made the negativity hard to read.



I would suggest writing it all up on a big banner for all to see, but it looks like that space it taken too...

[Schad]

Sorry Ozzy, that's a really, truly silly argument...there isn't a professional sport where managing makes less of a difference. Winning two World Series at the helm of teams with quite a bit of talent does not a miracle-worker make.

Go up and down the order for the championship teams; there's exactly one starting position player that had their career-best OPS+ in either season, and that was Olerud's crazy 1993.

[Hoopstarr]

Jim Leyland once went from 92 wins with the world champion '97 Marlins to 54 wins the next year. Did he suddenly suck at pushing the managerial buttons? No, his team just got gutted, because they were the Marlins after all, and they sucked.

There is just very little room for baseball managers to impact a team. I don't know why this is so hard for people to understand, but I imagine it has to do with a natural tendency for the brain to want to form patterns and relationships to handle ambiguity and chaos. That is, if X is succeeding or failing, the straightest possible line to the designated authority must be the cause. We see this all the time, whether it's sports, politics, social constructs, whatever. Managers and coaches are fired for losing teams, Presidents are responsible for just about anything that goes right or wrong, parents are responsible for anything their kids do, etc.

Joe Posnanski recently blogged that he thinks overmanaging artists like Tony LaRussa struggle with the inherent lack of control they have. Then they compensate by finding every possible way they can to play God. This gets mistaken by many as "genius" and "innovation". I personally think any random person with a flowchart could manage a game just as well as any manager. A manager's impact is finite to the point that one can only make the most common sense decisions beyond which any tinkering is just overdoing it. I'd say there's no such thing as a good manager, only bad ones who don't make the common sense decisions.

Regarding Cito, he's a good man and it's hard not to like him. I'll even say that his confidence-boosting and "player's managering" stuff can make a real difference. However, it's just not a sustainable thing. The team played well in the 2nd half of 2008 because of the change of scenery to Cito, but that quickly wore off to the point that half the clubhouse hated him. Likewise, the aggressive hitting style is also a fleeting thing as we saw last year. The laws of baseball always catch up to you eventually.

[Randle McMurphy]

You say that nobody knows and then you say it's attributed to hot streaks. How do you know? for all the same reasons you stated it couldn't be attributed to Cito could also be used against the idea that it's just hot streaks.

No, I said it's impossible for any of us, as fans, to know which hitting coach is better at doing his job. I also said it's impossible for us to know how much of an impact these coaches have had on the players this season, considering none of them are really doing anything much different than they've done in the past (with the exception of Bautista).

The more reasonable explanation as to why this team is hitting for power is that it has a bunch of streaky power hitters, not that the players finally started "listening" to their hitting coaches that have been here since mid-2008.

[Randle McMurphy]

Sorry the shine off this ring has made the negativity hard to read.

I wasn't being negative. I was pointing out that the players' success has a lot more to do with the fact that the players have actually been good themselves.