SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Jun 28, 2017 21:32:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jun 28, 2017 23:42:13 GMT -5
It took Miller a while, too. If Barnes takes even half of that sort of step forward in command, he's going to be the shut-down 8th inning guy they need. Kinda wonder if he's ever a rotation try-out candidate. His stuff is terrific.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 29, 2017 4:01:08 GMT -5
Glad Barnes is trying out different tweaks to help his most obvious problem. If this mechanical change works to his delivery, I just hope he can repeat doing it.
This kind of thing could be a game changer for him if it works.
|
|
|
|
Post by bnich on Jun 29, 2017 7:18:41 GMT -5
It took Miller a while, too. If Barnes takes even half of that sort of step forward in command, he's going to be the shut-down 8th inning guy they need. Kinda wonder if he's ever a rotation try-out candidate. His stuff is terrific. Haven't they already been down that road with him before sticking him in the bullpen where his stuff plays up? Picked up some velocity out of the bullpen in short stints. Someone made mention on twitter of his home and away splits. Very bizarre. Matt Barnes Splits |
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jun 29, 2017 12:07:04 GMT -5
It took Miller a while, too. If Barnes takes even half of that sort of step forward in command, he's going to be the shut-down 8th inning guy they need. Kinda wonder if he's ever a rotation try-out candidate. His stuff is terrific. Haven't they already been down that road with him before sticking him in the bullpen where his stuff plays up? Picked up some velocity out of the bullpen in short stints. Someone made mention on twitter of his home and away splits. Very bizarre. Matt Barnes SplitsGood Lord...might hurt his trade value!!! lol. Yeah, I think it's usually a mistake to bounce guys around in roles, and I'm not sure Barnes really has "3" pitches, and he's ditched the CH (which he'd really probably need for LHB as a starter). More that I just have a nagging sense that, with better command, he's otherwise equipped to be an above-average starter. No hard evidence, just a feeling in my gut. Then again, anything that keeps Dombrowski from trading another young, controllable asset for an injury-to-be relief arm is probably good. I still think they're best off: 1) trying out Callahan and Buttrey at the MLB level before trading for another reliever. 2) promoting Devers and seeing if he can provide passable (better than replacement level) production at 3b, especially given what should be average defense. 3) trading Martin, Ramirez, and a couple more arms from the soon-to-be-R5-eligible bunch to boost their IFA pool (which seems a foregone conclusion). |
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jun 29, 2017 12:10:29 GMT -5
For what it's worth, Buttrey has really struggled with the PawSox. Not saying he can't/won't turn it around (he certainly has the stuff to) but his presence shouldn't preclude a move. I could actually see him being the one dealt for IFA pool money, which might not be a terrible thing for him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jun 29, 2017 12:16:52 GMT -5
For what it's worth, Buttrey has really struggled with the PawSox. Not saying he can't/won't turn it around (he certainly has the stuff to) but his presence shouldn't preclude a move. I could actually see him being the one dealt for IFA pool money, which might not be a terrible thing for him. FWIW, he's actually been inconsistent more than he's "struggled." Has had a couple of good outings, a couple of awful ones (the June 21 outing in which he faced six batters and went E9, BB, IFF-5, 2B, BB, BB, and all five guys who reached scored - 4 earned - kind of destroys his numbers itself), couple of meh ones. But yeah, if a spot opens up, I wouldn't mind rotating through some guys to see if anyone's going to stick and help short-term in the middle-innings. That said, I wouldn't count on any of the AAA arms to be your 8th inning guy down the stretch or anything. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 29, 2017 12:42:27 GMT -5
I think I need to see more than 2 innings to declare that Barnes is now pitching like Andrew Miller.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 27, 2017 12:29:09 GMT -5
The Sox have enough right handed relievers to fill an entire bullpen. Workman Kimbrel Smith Kelly Boyer Barnes Hembree They probably just need a left handed reliever to fill one more role that they currently don't have. Neshek isn't really needed in this bullpen. There is one pitcher that I would rather have than Neshek on that list. Barnes has been as good as Neshek since he decided to clone Andrew Miller. FanGraphs has 163 qualified relievers. Barnes-as-Miller would rank 2nd in ERA-, 2nd in GB%, 7th in FIP-, 10th in xFIP-, and 13th in SIERA. That's a guy who would be an above-average closer. Even if he regresses to the mean (and he will, of course), he's a top set-up guy. (Tomorrow I might look at his pitch/fx numbers, before and after.) Obviously Neshek would help, but then you're shunting Barnes into the 7th and pushing Kelly out into the 6th. Given the acquisition cost, is there a need to have a bullpen with one of the two best closers plus two of the best set-up guys and the second toughest-on-RHB setup guy (and 5th among all relievers), too? Once you start pushing guys down the leverage stack, you get diminished returns and it becomes impossible to get the value other teams are getting. You can get close to the same results for hugely less cost by trading for a very good LHR with an average platoon split, to complement Kelly in the 7th. |
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 27, 2017 14:23:54 GMT -5
Barnes has been solid for his last 12 appearance. But 12 appearances does not make him Andrew Miller. No, he's been unbelievably f***ing good for 12 appearances, after completely changing his mechanics literally overnight. Silly, preposterously good. He won't keep it up, but when he levels off it's still very likely that he'll be good enough to pitch the 8th for a contender. That was the team's actual need, and now it's very likely filled. BTW, the last guy to alter his delivery in exactly this fashion had, in his first 12 appearances: 56 ERA- 59 FIP- 1.97 SIERA (Barnes is 24, 46, 2.57.) Since then: 49 ERA- 51 FIP- 1.77 SIERA Of course, he was already Andrew Miller. (Admittedly, the rest of that year he wasn't nearly as good. But he had almost no relief experience when he made the conversion.) |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 27, 2017 14:48:29 GMT -5
Barnes has been solid for his last 12 appearance. But 12 appearances does not make him Andrew Miller. No, he's been unbelievably f***ing good for 12 appearances, after completely changing his mechanics literally overnight. Silly, preposterously good. He won't keep it up, but when he levels off it's still very likely that he'll be good enough to pitch the 8th for a contender. That was the team's actual need, and now it's very likely filled. BTW, the last guy to alter his delivery in exactly this fashion had, in his first 12 appearances: 56 ERA- 59 FIP- 1.97 SIERA (Barnes is 24, 46, 2.57.) Since then: 49 ERA- 51 FIP- 1.77 SIERA Of course, he was already Andrew Miller. (Admittedly, the rest of that year he wasn't nearly as good. But he had almost no relief experience when he made the conversion.) Not sure what I'm missing here, but Barnes' last 12 appearances arguably isn't even his best stretch this season. He's allowed fewer hits but more walks than, say, the 15 games in which he also threw 16 innings from May 17 to June 16. He was 16.0-14-3-3-2-25 over that stretch, versus 16.1-6-2-2-5-17 in his last 12. He had a .400 BABIP in the first stretch, a .182 BABIP in the second. I'm not going to do the math, but I'd presume that accounts for most of the hits allowed difference. Is it a batted ball difference as well I'm not seeing? He's having a very good season, but has then had a few clusters of outings in which his control has faltered (4/13-18, 5 BB in 4 IP; 6/12-24, 7 BB in 3.1 IP, or probably more specifically 5 BB in 1.1 IP from 6/16-24). The changes in his mechanics helped pull him out of the second funk, but I'm not seeing how he's been so significantly better. But again, could easily be something I'm missing. |
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 27, 2017 21:15:01 GMT -5
No, he's been unbelievably f***ing good for 12 appearances, after completely changing his mechanics literally overnight. Silly, preposterously good. He won't keep it up, but when he levels off it's still very likely that he'll be good enough to pitch the 8th for a contender. That was the team's actual need, and now it's very likely filled. BTW, the last guy to alter his delivery in exactly this fashion had, in his first 12 appearances: 56 ERA- 59 FIP- 1.97 SIERA (Barnes is 24, 46, 2.57.) Since then: 49 ERA- 51 FIP- 1.77 SIERA Of course, he was already Andrew Miller. (Admittedly, the rest of that year he wasn't nearly as good. But he had almost no relief experience when he made the conversion.) Not sure what I'm missing here, but Barnes' last 12 appearances arguably isn't even his best stretch this season. He's allowed fewer hits but more walks than, say, the 15 games in which he also threw 16 innings from May 17 to June 16. He was 16.0-14-3-3-2-25 over that stretch, versus 16.1-6-2-2-5-17 in his last 12. He had a .400 BABIP in the first stretch, a .182 BABIP in the second. I'm not going to do the math, but I'd presume that accounts for most of the hits allowed difference. Is it a batted ball difference as well I'm not seeing? He's having a very good season, but has then had a few clusters of outings in which his control has faltered (4/13-18, 5 BB in 4 IP; 6/12-24, 7 BB in 3.1 IP, or probably more specifically 5 BB in 1.1 IP from 6/16-24). The changes in his mechanics helped pull him out of the second funk, but I'm not seeing how he's been so significantly better. But again, could easily be something I'm missing.
I could just say "yes, " but the more technically accurate response would be "boy oh boy." Barnes' GB% (OK, GB rate since I like to express it like a BA) was .427 career, .469 this year before the change. It's .727 since. His Hard% in this stretch is .147 with an .091 LD%. In the sample you cite, .357 Hard% with a .314 LD%; he was .333, .272 on the season. All of the prior figures are below average (the average pitcher with 30+ IP this year is .315, .199). (BTW, this is why xFIP in small stretches can be misleading; if you simply change your approach to challenge people in the strike zone more, you will strike out more batters, walk fewer, and you will absolutely give up harder contact.) It's hard to overestimate the importance of a high GB rate for relievers, as long as the ball remains juiced. Barnes has a .214 K-BB to go with the .727 GB. Of all pitchers with 30 IP+, Dallas Keuchel comes closest to matching that this year, with .180 and .674. Alex Wood has .216 and .619. No doubt Barnes will come back to earth somewhat, but those numbers are why I described his performance in these 12 games the way I did. Which brings us to a methodological point. If Barnes weren't doing something different, you'd be right to look for other stretches that were comparable. Even if he'd made a minor tweak, there would be some skepticism. But this is an almost completely changed delivery. And I'm using the entire sample. There's no reason inherent to the sample to think he's pitching particularly well (or poorly) at the moment, in terms of the factors that can make you run legitimately hot or cold (quality of sleep, mental frame of mind, etc.). The only reason he seems likely to regress is that nobody has a track record of sustaining what he's doing. When I said he's been unbelievably good, I meant that literally. Now I've got to look at pitch/fx ... |
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 28, 2017 15:42:51 GMT -5
Mods might want to move all of this into a "Matt Barnes' Transformation" thread.
Since changing his delivery ...
No change to arm slot, although he may have moved an inch to his right on the rubber.
The FB had 4% more movement (all vertical) and the curve 4% less (break-wise). Those are almost certainly random. The slider, though, has gone from 7.2" to 8.2" relative to his FB (12%), both downward and glove side; that has a chance of being real. (Impossible to know that without knowing the intended variance of movement when you throw the pitch.)
His pitch usage vs. LHB is unchanged, but vs. RHB he's gone from throwing the FB 58% to 45%. The reduction is split equally between slider and curve.
He's made significant alteration to pitch location.
FB to RH have gone from 38% in the zone to 50%. Here are breakdowns, first vertical and then horizontal.
The five buckets are above the zone, top 3rd, mid 3rd, bottom 3rd, below the zone.
Was Now
38% 23%
23% 29%
19% 27%
14% 9%
6% 13%
He's reduced missing high.
Here the five buckets are inside, inner third, middle third, outer third, outside.
Was 10% 21% 25% 25% 19%
Now 4% 9% 30% 38% 20%
He's gone from 31% to 13% working inside (successfully or missing).
FB to LHB have gone from 31% in the zone to 43%.
Was Now
42% 30%
26% 36%
16% 16%
9% 7%
7% 11%
Was 31% 31% 16% 16% 7%
Now 25% 34% 32% 5% 4%
(Inside and outside of course reversed here.)
Again, successfully getting the high FB into the zone, and a big reduction in working inside, from 23% to 9%.
SL to RHB (he doesn't throw it to LHB) has become more of a chase pitch, going from 39% to 31% in the zone.
Was Now
20% 22%
22% 13%
24% 19%
16% 28%
18% 19%
Was 3% 4% 25% 33% 36%
Now 0% 13% 16% 31% 41%
Working with it lower in the zone, especially (from the lower-level data) lower third but outside. (The 13% inner third is probably SSS noise.)
CU to RHB essentially unchanged for strikes, 31% to 33%.
Was Now
13% 0%
9% 6%
14% 11%
15% 22%
48% 61%
Was 11% 21% 34% 22% 12%
Now 3% 17% 17% 19% 44%
Working much more down and away, offset by not missing high or inside.
CU to LHB more of a chase pitch, 38% to 32% -- pretty much exactly what he's done with the slider vs. RHB.
Was Now
11% 3%
13% 5%
19% 22%
19% 14%
38% 57%
Was 25% 28% 34% 10% 3%
Now 5% 22% 27% 27% 19%
Exact same pattern, but not mirrored -- he's working much more down but (naturally, when you think of it) much more inside and less outside. And missing much less often high and to his glove side.
The conclusion is that his command seems really sharpened. His Strike% hasn't gone up that much, but that's misleading. He's gone from 35% FB in the zone to 46%, and it's allowed him to use the SL to RH and CU to LH more effectively as chase pitches. He also seems to have altered his approach, presumably to areas where he was getting hurt.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 30, 2017 15:14:25 GMT -5
There is one pitcher that I would rather have than Neshek on that list. Barnes has been as good as Neshek since he decided to clone Andrew Miller. FanGraphs has 163 qualified relievers. Barnes-as-Miller would rank 2nd in ERA-, 2nd in GB%, 7th in FIP-, 10th in xFIP-, and 13th in SIERA. That's a guy who would be an above-average closer. Even if he regresses to the mean (and he will, of course), he's a top set-up guy. (Tomorrow I might look at his pitch/fx numbers, before and after.) How about now? Small samples are a bitch after one bad game. |
|
|
|
Post by giatree12 on Jul 30, 2017 15:30:21 GMT -5
He's 27. Given that he JUST altered his delivery and still has been really good as of late, give the guy a break. It also helps that his "elite" shortstop let him down to start the inning
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 30, 2017 15:45:34 GMT -5
He's 27. Given that he JUST altered his delivery and still has been really good as of late, give the guy a break. It also helps that his "elite" shortstop let him down to start the inning There's quite a spread between giving Barnes a break and declaring him to be as effective as Andrew Miller. I do give him a break and call him a pretty good relief pitcher. |
|
|
|
Post by giatree12 on Jul 30, 2017 15:57:37 GMT -5
He's 27. Given that he JUST altered his delivery and still has been really good as of late, give the guy a break. It also helps that his "elite" shortstop let him down to start the inning There's quite a spread between giving Barnes a break and declaring him to be as effective as Andrew Miller. I do give him a break and call him a pretty good relief pitcher. Im not in the boat of those proclaiming Barnes the second coming of Miller. He has been a sub par reliever until he made his adjustment. Yes he has a ton of potential, but its way to premature to call him Miller 2.0. |
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 30, 2017 18:15:13 GMT -5
I'm sorry but Barnes is hardly the second coming of Andrew Miller. He's a useful reliever but I don't feel very comfortable with him as the 8th inning guy.
No offense meant Eric, because I have no problem acknowledging that your brain is on entirely different plane way ahead of mine, but I think you sometimes see things with your heart and you let the small sample size lead you to what you really want to see when it's not much more than a really small sample size. If Barnes puts up 60 kick butt innings after his changes then I'll believe it more.
Kelly and Barnes are good relief pitchers but I don't trust either to bridge the game to Kimbrel in a big situation. I trust Neshek or Reed (I'm sure if the Red Sox get him I'll wind up putting the whammy on him with this statement) more than I do Barnes.
|
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Jul 30, 2017 21:17:30 GMT -5
I think the ability is all there - but he has something mental to get over - a hump - trusting his stuff to throw strikes and not do the nibble thing or too many wasted pitches to run up counts. He also slows to molasses with runners on. I think he will come along and be more consistent than we are seeing, but pretty erratic this year for sure.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 1, 2017 2:09:28 GMT -5
Barnes has been as good as Neshek since he decided to clone Andrew Miller. FanGraphs has 163 qualified relievers. Barnes-as-Miller would rank 2nd in ERA-, 2nd in GB%, 7th in FIP-, 10th in xFIP-, and 13th in SIERA. That's a guy who would be an above-average closer. Even if he regresses to the mean (and he will, of course), he's a top set-up guy. (Tomorrow I might look at his pitch/fx numbers, before and after.) How about now? Small samples are a bitch after one bad game. Which consisted of an error on a routine ground ball, one hard-hit grounder up the middle, and two routine ground balls that found holes. I thought each one of them was a GDP coming off the bat, and so did you. After this terrible implosion, his ERA-, FIP-, xFIP-, and SIERA are up to 57, 47, 68, and 2.85. His K-BB% is down to .188 and his GB% is down all the way to .683, a combination still better than anyone in MLB this year. His LD% is up all the way to .098, and his Hard% is up to .167. His numbers since he changed his delivery are still unsustainably good. So many strawmen in this thread ... he's pitching like Andrew Miller in that he's copying his style. He has had unsustainably good results so far. My claim for him was that he'll be good enough to pitch the eight inning for a contender, which means he'll be one of the top 40 or so relievers in MLB. Guys that rank 30th to 40th right now in bWAR are Justin Wilson, Dominic Leone, Hunter Strickland, Danny Barnes, Tny Zych*, Pedro Baez, Yusmeiro Petit, Cody Allen, Tommy Kahnle, Jake McGee, and Richard Bleier. Barnes currently ranks 80th. Now, Addison Reed ranks 20th in reliever bWAR / G. Bumping Barnes to the 7th inning gives us a first-rate setup crew for a contender rather than just an OK / solid one. *Yes, that was a typo, but obviously I'm leaving it be. |
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 21, 2017 21:33:15 GMT -5
How about now? 9 pitches 3 strikes tonight. He was definitely as effective as Aaron Miller tonight.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 22, 2017 10:26:06 GMT -5
How about now? 9 pitches 3 strikes tonight. He was definitely as effective as Aaron Miller tonight. I said he'd regress. I think it was in the game threads that I pointed it that what he was doing was unsustainably great, literally better than anyone could possibly pitch in the long run. Regression happened. He now has a .230 wOBA allowed since he changed his delivery. As a point of comparison: .185 Kimbrel .222 Workman since his recall .230 new Barnes.266 Kelly .290 Reed .304 old Barnes (2017)
Now, his splits by home vs. road and high leverage vs. low and medium (Reg in the tables below) are really interesting. Before Reg High Tot
Home .210 .313 .238
Road .361 .407 .369
Tot .291 .349 .304
After Reg High Tot
Home .173 .398 .215
Road .194 .428 .250
Tot .182 .413 .230His home / road splits have improved a lot. He may be working on whatever was behind that, or it may be random (in fact, the splits in general may be random and what we've seen may just be regression). His leverage splits have gone from medium-large to massive. Except in high leverage, he's been as good as Kimbrel. In high leverage, he can't throw strikes at all. Now, what I saw last night and the game before was a guy thinking about his delivery. Not that you can literally see what a guy is thinking, but whenever mechanics get messed up, it's almost always because of self-consciousness. You have to blank the mind and just let the "muscle memory" do the job. That's as basic as sports psychology gets. At this point, he's probably thinking about his mechanics at least a little bit, all the time. But it makes a lot of sense to me that the problem started in high leverage and is now much worse there. When I proclaimed him to be good enough to be an 8th inning guy for a contender, I was unaware of his leverage problems. But that's a mental thing, and is therefore fixable. His role for the time being ought to be to pitch in ordinary leverage for one or two innings at a time, including late in decided games. The goal is for him to get his confidence back so that he can be a weapon in higher leverage in September and the post-season. He has 22.1 IP in non-high-leverage since he changed his delivery, a decent sample. xFIP is 2.89, FIP 2.51, LD .154, Hard .192, GB .615. That's a really good pitcher. |
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Aug 22, 2017 11:41:54 GMT -5
i have always rooted for Matt. I think his stuff is good enough to be an 8th inning guy. The problem is that he walks too many guys and I think that is because he doesn't trust his stuff. Now I know that isn't data, but we have all seen the same. I just don't know about a delivery tweak being the answer.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 22, 2017 11:47:02 GMT -5
How about now? 9 pitches 3 strikes tonight. He was definitely as effective as Aaron Miller tonight. I said he'd regress. I think it was in the game threads that I pointed it that what he was doing was unsustainably great, literally better than anyone could possibly pitch in the long run. Regression happened. He now has a .230 wOBA allowed since he changed his delivery. As a point of comparison: .185 Kimbrel .222 Workman since his recall .230 new Barnes.266 Kelly .290 Reed .304 old Barnes (2017)
Now, his splits by home vs. road and high leverage vs. low and medium (Reg in the tables below) are really interesting. Before Reg High Tot
Home .210 .313 .238
Road .361 .407 .369
Tot .291 .349 .304
After Reg High Tot
Home .173 .398 .215
Road .194 .428 .250
Tot .182 .413 .230His home / road splits have improved a lot. He may be working on whatever was behind that, or it may be random (in fact, the splits in general may be random and what we've seen may just be regression). His leverage splits have gone from medium-large to massive. Except in high leverage, he's been as good as Kimbrel. In high leverage, he can't throw strikes at all. Now, what I saw last night and the game before was a guy thinking about his delivery. Not that you can literally see what a guy is thinking, but whenever mechanics get messed up, it's almost always because of self-consciousness. You have to blank the mind and just let the "muscle memory" do the job. That's as basic as sports psychology gets. At this point, he's probably thinking about his mechanics at least a little bit, all the time. But it makes a lot of sense to me that the problem started in high leverage and is now much worse there. When I proclaimed him to be good enough to be an 8th inning guy for a contender, I was unaware of his leverage problems. But that's a mental thing, and is therefore fixable. His role for the time being ought to be to pitch in ordinary leverage for one or two innings at a time, including late in decided games. The goal is for him to get his confidence back so that he can be a weapon in higher leverage in September and the post-season. He has 22.1 IP in non-high-leverage since he changed his delivery, a decent sample. xFIP is 2.89, FIP 2.51, LD .154, Hard .192, GB .615. That's a really good pitcher. It's not that I don't believe in stats because I am right on board with most of your researched posts. But it's that I don't believe in the sample size on Barnes. I'm waiting for him to regress to exactly what he was before the change. I'd presume that it's more likely that he's out of baseball by age 30 than it is that he becomes a truly elite relief pitcher like Andrew Miller. I agree that he shouldn't be in any high leverage situations until he's shown some real consistency. But we all know how JF is about that and that's probably why anger is always misdirected at the players instead of the manager. |
|
|
|
Post by MLBDreams on Aug 22, 2017 12:38:41 GMT -5
Remember Dan Bard from Sept 2011. He cannot throw consist strike in entire month & gave up too many walks. Terry Francona lost his job for gave him the ball so often that contribution to greatest Sept collapse. Dan is already out of MLB baseball before 30.
Matt Barnes could end up being like Dan by being inability to throw strikes (way too high or hit the dirty) and gave up unnecessary walks. John Farrell could follow same way as Terry did.
|
|
|
