Red Mosquito

Any reporter who goes by C. Trent Rosencrans deserves to be yelled at.

philpritchard wrote:

Fuck You Jobu wrote:I don't understand how you make the argument against Wins since it's dependent on teammates, but it's ok for ERA, WHIP.

Because it's dependent to a very different extent. ERA depends, to some extent, on defense. Wins depend, to some extent, on defense and the bullpen's ability to hold a lead, and to a huge extent on offense.

Your whole argument has been that Wins are bunk because they aren't solely based on the individual ("when there are so many stats available to show what the individual player actually accomplished"). Yet you will allow them when it suits your argument.

Got it.

Fuck You Jobu wrote:

philpritchard wrote:

Fuck You Jobu wrote:I don't understand how you make the argument against Wins since it's dependent on teammates, but it's ok for ERA, WHIP.

Because it's dependent to a very different extent. ERA depends, to some extent, on defense. Wins depend, to some extent, on defense and the bullpen's ability to hold a lead, and to a huge extent on offense.

Your whole argument has been that Wins are bunk because they aren't solely based on the individual ("when there are so many stats available to show what the individual player actually accomplished"). Yet you will allow them when it suits your argument.

Got it.

Are you really that incapable of grasping the concept of the degree to which a pitcher controls his statistics? He mostly controls his ERA. He barely controls his wins at all. This isn't cherry picking statistics. It's picking the statistics that best reflect what actually happened.

A pitcher can allow 6 runs on 12 hits and 3 walks and get a win. A pitcher can pitch eight shutout innings and get a no decision. A pitcher can throw 6 innings of one-run ball and watch the bullpen blow it. These things happen all the time.

Yesterday Brian Kenny said that the triple crown is irrelevant and those stats won't even be around in 20 years. My head exploded after that so I didn't get Reynolds response.

numbers wrote:Yesterday Brian Kenny said that the triple crown is irrelevant and those stats won't even be around in 20 years. My head exploded after that so I didn't get Reynolds response.

See, I don't like that attitude either. I'm all for advanced stats and I think they tell you so much more about a player than most "traditional" stats. Sure, batting average isn't as important as OBP and RBI don't really tell you much about a player. But that doesn't mean something can't be a historically great accomplishment.

Cabrera winning the triple crown was awesome. Any player having a shot at hitting .400 late in the season is awesome. I really wanted to see Verlander get to 25 wins a couple years ago. I remember Manny driving in 165 and thinking that was just insane. Regardless of what I think about RBIs now, I still feel the same way about that season. Like the triple crown, it's an amazing, rare accomplishment that should be celebrated.

I don't hate sabermetrics, I just hate people that think it is the sole evaluational tool for players. Basically I hate people like Brian Kenny. He needs to go back to announcing boxing matches from vfws and elks clubs.

numbers wrote:I don't hate sabermetrics, I just hate people that think it is the sole evaluational tool for players. Basically I hate people like Brian Kenny. He needs to go back to announcing boxing matches from vfws and elks clubs.

I actually think most people (most that I read or listen to, at least, which is essentially Fangraphs and a few others) are pretty level headed about it. I find the most aggressive people I ever hear are the Hawk Harrelsons of the world who think advanced stats are the devil.

I dont see what's so flawed about batting average, sure it doesnt account for walks, but so what.

Sabermetricians love stats that are attached to how much a team wins. OBP is more closely related to wins, or at least runs scored, than AVG. That said, the RBI is the stat that most fascinates me. I love that one.

numbers wrote:I dont see what's so flawed about batting average, sure it doesnt account for walks, but so what.

I think the idea is that batting average tends to devalue the walk, when they have real, tangible value. You basically have one stat that tells how good a player is at hitting his way on base and one stat that tells how good a player is a getting on base. OBP just tells you more about the player.

I get annoyed at the Sabermetrics crowd with their walks... walks are only great, if the guy after you is driving you in. And the thing thats even more funny about Kinney and walks... it puts men on base, pressure on the defense... but a bunt, that puts the ball in play forcing the defense to make a play (instead of striking out which does nothing) is over rated.

Kinneys an idiot... the triple crown stats will still be around in 20 years... for one simple reason. Your grandma can figure out how many RBI's / HR's a guy gets... and a 2nd grader can figure out batting average...

MLB Network was talking about King Felix last night after he got shelled by the Rangers (again)
In MLB history, the Rangers this year, have a higher single season team batting average against 1 starting pitcher, minimum 5 starts, against King Felix, I wanna say it was over .340 for the team. If you take away the starts against the Rangers, Felix is very much in the discussion if not the front runner for the Cy Young. Just amazing how sometimes, one team, will have one players number.

MadTIGERmaN wrote:I get annoyed at the Sabermetrics crowd with their walks... walks are only great, if the guy after you is driving you in. And the thing thats even more funny about Kinney and walks... it puts men on base, pressure on the defense... but a bunt, that puts the ball in play forcing the defense to make a play (instead of striking out which does nothing) is over rated.

Walks are always good. The player who took the walk increased his team's chance of scoring a run. They're obviously not the best (singles are slightly better, extra base hits are obviously a lot better) but they're literally always a good thing.

I think some people make too much of the bunt thing. What the sabermetric crowd tends to dislike is sacrifice bunting, and it makes perfect sense. The most valuable asset a team has is the 27 outs they start the game with, and a sacrifice bunt gives away one of those outs for a moderate increase in the chances of scoring a run. They're basically playing in hopes of scoring one run instead of trying to score a bunch. That's why it's usually considered acceptable in situations (late and close, extra innings) where a single run can change a game.

Bunting for a hit is fine because the player is trying to get on base.

philpritchard wrote:

MadTIGERmaN wrote:I get annoyed at the Sabermetrics crowd with their walks... walks are only great, if the guy after you is driving you in. And the thing thats even more funny about Kinney and walks... it puts men on base, pressure on the defense... but a bunt, that puts the ball in play forcing the defense to make a play (instead of striking out which does nothing) is over rated.

Walks are always good. The player who took the walk increased his team's chance of scoring a run. They're obviously not the best (singles are slightly better, extra base hits are obviously a lot better) but they're literally always a good thing.

I think some people make too much of the bunt thing. What the sabermetric crowd tends to dislike is sacrifice bunting, and it makes perfect sense. The most valuable asset a team has is the 27 outs they start the game with, and a sacrifice bunt gives away one of those outs for a moderate increase in the chances of scoring a run. They're basically playing in hopes of scoring one run instead of trying to score a bunch. That's why it's usually considered acceptable in situations (late and close, extra innings) where a single run can change a game.

Bunting for a hit is fine because the player is trying to get on base.

yeah ill agree, i hate the bunting a guy over to 2nd, with anyone other than the pitcher. Bunting a guy to 3rd with no one out with say your lead off hitter? isnt a horrible play, and sac bunts with speed guys arnt horrible either as, well they can beat it out.

Walks arnt bad either for sure, but im totally with Harold and some of the others with Joey Votto... youre hitting 3... swing it son, thats the spot in the lineup thats supposed to be driving em in lol

MadTIGERmaN wrote:yeah ill agree, i hate the bunting a guy over to 2nd, with anyone other than the pitcher. Bunting a guy to 3rd with no one out with say your lead off hitter? isnt a horrible play, and sac bunts with speed guys arnt horrible either as, well they can beat it out.

Again, I don't think I would bunt someone over to third in that situation unless I thought that single run could be a game changer. Most pitchers are more than welcome to bunt every single time. And with speed guys... yeah, I'm somewhat with you on that because it wouldn't necessarily be a sacrifice if the bunter thinks he has a legitimate shot of getting on base.

MadTIGERmaN wrote:Walks arnt bad either for sure, but im totally with Harold and some of the others with Joey Votto... youre hitting 3... swing it son, thats the spot in the lineup thats supposed to be driving em in lol

Harold can say what he wants, but he's 100% wrong on that. You know what Votto would have to do to change those walks into hits? He would have to swing at pitches outside of the strike zone. He wouldn't drive them in much more often, and he would get out a lot more. If Votto avoids swinging at balls outside of the zone, pitchers have two options: throw it in the strike zone or walk him. That means he'll either walk or he'll get a pitches to hit. He shouldn't start swinging at balls just because his "job" is to drive in runs.

Votto takes pitches literally on the black, but yeah I really cant say too much more on walks, my fantasy team, NEVER walks...

out of 14 teams, im dead last with 310, 46 behind the guy in second to last.
but that puts me 2nd in hits as well, my team goes up there hacking LOL

Amsinger, Plesac, and Casey on together, is like a bunch of school kids sneaking up after the parents went to bed watching TV all night while drinking some koolaid... i dont even know what Plesac said on Werths homer? but the other 2 couldnt stop laughing haha

Morneau to the Pirates.

go stros

spike wrote:go "ass"tros

see what i did there?