The Inevitable Weekly Jenkins Discussion

by Jeff Sackmann on Mar 8, 2007 8:28 AM CST in Milwaukee Brewers News

Okay, now that Geoff Jenkins is hitting 27 for 21 or something, is it possible he really is as good as ever? That I shouldn't be so skeptical at the possibility that he might just deserve his full-time job back?

Tom Haudricourt describes Geoff's offseason work:

Jenkins, who got himself in trouble with a pronounced front-leg lift in past seasons, has made adjustments with dramatic results. After going 3 for 4 Wednesday with two doubles and three RBI in an 8-2 split-squad victory over Colorado in Tucson, Jenkins is batting .579 (11 for 19) with nine RBI in six games.

Coming off a sub-par season in which he batted .271 with 17 homers and 70 RBI, Jenkins worked hard over the winter on fine-tuning his hitting mechanics. He didn't abandon the leg lift but did make it less pronounced, allowing him to be quicker and smoother to the ball.

"I think it's just more fluid now, not hanging," Jenkins said. "I would hang and drift, hang and drift. It's just something you break down, look at and try to figure out what's wrong, figure out your deficiencies and make adjustments."

I hate to continue to be a naysayer here, but I don't buy it. Every year, somebody--usually a veteran coming off a lousy season--spouts all this stuff, and then the writers pick up on it because the guy goes 10-for-20 in his first 5 or 6 games. I mean, it's great that Jenks is hitting, but those lefties? Ryan Meaux, Erasmo Ramirez, and Eric DuBose. Please.

One of my favorite articles of the spring is this one by Tim Dierkes, about all the nonsense we hear every spring training:

Spring training comes with many traditions. Prior/Wood injuries. Unbridled optimism from last place teams. Ridiculous promises from players. And, of course, clichés. You know the ones - "best shape of my life," "perfected a new changeup," and so on. We can't help but get our hopes up when hearing these things.

Tim doesn't include "changed his approach," but he might as well have.

Think of it this way: going 11 for 19 (instead of, say, 5 for 19) is basically luck. Everybody's going to have a stretch at some point--usually multiple points--during the season where they do that or better. Also, everyone is going to come to spring training with a story as to why they'll be better than they've ever been before.

The law of probability tells us that if enough players who should be going 5 for 19 get 19 at-bats, a decent number of them will get 11 hits. (Some will also get zero.) Of course, beat writers have eleventy-billion column inches to fill this time of year, and since nothing is going on, they take those lucky guys, talk about their fake why-I'm-good-now stories, and then fans get excited about the brand-new Jenkins. (Or whoever.)

When really it's all luck.

Of course, it might not be all luck--it's possible that Jenkins or Mench really did learn how to hit better, and they're applying that right now. But if sabermetric research teaches us anything that we should be able to apply with a minimum of thought, it's that players usually don't suddenly get better in their 30s. Sure, it can happen, but it usually doesn't. In Jenkins's case even more than others, we should take his hot start--and his accompanying feel-good story--with a grain of salt.

Tweet Comment 8 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Of course

This raises the question: Why did Jenkins let himself get bad in the first place?

Haudricourt is just looking for stuff to write, but it is appalling that he doesn't recognize that spring training stats don't count. Or, more importantly, don't translate to the type of season a player will have.

As long as members of the board can get Bill Schroeder to answer our most pressing questions.

by nmc on Mar 8, 2007 9:15 AM CST reply actions

How many times have I read the leg-lift story?

I'm sure we could dig up one of these Haudricourt specials from every season. Here was his breakthrough in 2003:

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=151973

Do you think he even remembers each time he's written this piece? I mean, as a writer, aren't you obligated to call bull on someone when you notice a trend?

by mitch on Mar 8, 2007 9:57 AM CST reply actions

Nice catch.

Then again, I wouldn't mind if Jenks gave us his '03 :).

by Jeff Sackmann on Mar 8, 2007 10:01 AM CST up reply actions

Hey now

Let's give poor Geoff a break for a day or two. After all, what has he done wrong? He's hitting too well?

Don't get me wrong, I've been as frustrated as the harshest BCB critics with Jenkins's performance and mouth. But I don't think we can jump on the guy for performing too well.

What would you rather have, a terrible Jenkins proving how smart we are? Or a Jenkins who turns it around, has a productive year, and contributes to a winning season?

Obviously, Jenkins isn't going to hit .579 for the season. Obviously, a small sample of spring training stats racked up against weak pitching does not predict a successful year. But isn't 11 for 19 better than 0 for 19? If he were 0 for 19 would we be chalking that up to luck, or the fact that he stinks?

In addition, what is he supposed to say to Haudricourt? "I'm really a crappy player who has just had a run of luck."?

I'm not going to pile on Jenkins over this. My concern, and I think some of your concerns, might really be directed at Ned Yost's potential reaction to this. Let's pray that he's not pencilling Jenkins into the number 3 spot to face Dontrelle Willis.

Don't try to do too much with it. Just take the ball the other way.

by shooty babitt on Mar 8, 2007 10:39 AM CST reply actions

Wow

That's a lot of questions.

My expectations for Jenkins are pretty simple. If he goes .280/.350/.500 on the season, the Brewers should pick up his option. If he doesn't, then he can be let go.

The danger of a productive spring training for Jenkins is that he can tee off on minor league pitchers, and guys just warming into shape, and then expect to start all year based on a good spring training performance. As someone mentioned in the game thread yesterday, they were already talking about his 2008 option on the broadcast yesterday.

I'm happy to see him hitting well and I hope he keeps it up. I will not buy into any of the excitement about hitting in spring training, though.

by Marty McSuperFly on Mar 8, 2007 10:53 AM CST up reply actions

Upside

The upside is, of course, that he keeps hitting in spring training, and Moustache can convince another owner that Jinxie is having a rebirth.

If Jinxie is the Giving Tree that he thinks he is, it's time to cut him down for firewood.

"C'mon, boys, let's get 'em some RUNS!" --- Daron Sutton, pretty much every game of the 2005 season.

by roguejim on Mar 8, 2007 11:19 AM CST up reply actions

You're right

I don't want Jenkins to be bad, of course.

The real blame here is on Haudricourt (and fans who get too excited about 19 s.t. ABs) ...and my real worry is about Yost.

That said, I'm still peeved at Jenkins for being uncoachable last year and for shooting off his mouth last week, and 20 ABs ain't gonna change that.

by Jeff Sackmann on Mar 8, 2007 12:11 PM CST up reply actions

FINALLY

A Brewers who cares enough to take performance enhancing drugs, wait, I mean "train" in the offseason.

Thanks for that dedication Geoff!

I have seen the coming of the Lord. Savior, thy name is Gallardo.

by ESK on Mar 8, 2007 11:59 AM CST reply actions

Comments For This Post Are Closed

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

NL Central Standings

	W	L	PCT	GB	STRK
St. Louis Viva El Birdos	22	15	.594	0	Won 2
Cincinnati Red Reporter	19	17	.527	2.5	Won 1
Pittsburgh Bucs Dugout	17	20	.459	5	Lost 2
Milwaukee Brew Crew Ball	16	21	.432	6	Lost 1
Houston The Crawfish Boxes	16	21	.432	6	Won 1
Chicago Bleed Cubbie Blue	15	22	.405	7	Lost 2