It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 1:48 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 234 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Hank Scorpio wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
They are also well above .500 because they are some of the best pitchers in MLB. :lol:


Except that doesn't explain the correlation between W/L% and per start run support. These are all guys that have been good enough to throw 700 innings in the MLB in the last 5 seasons, so we should expect there to be little to no correlation to their W/L% and true run support, if W/L% was as good an indicator of pitching skill as others believe it to be.


Just out of curiosity, in the same sample (700 IP in the last 5 seasons) who are the top in WL%?


Zack Greinke (.744, 3.47)
Clayton Kershaw (.732, 3.68)
Max Scherzer (.719, 3.96)
David Price (.675, 3.95)
Stephen Strasburg (.643, 3.39)

Keep in mind, W/L% correctly labeling top pitchers as top pitchers does not mean that W/L% is actually good at deciphering who is good and who is not.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:11 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 76673
Location: Chicago Heights
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
To put the above in context, over the last 3 seasons, the league-average starter got 3.04 runs of support per start.


Wait league avg is 3.04 and he's gotten 2.76? So the difference is a quarter of a run (or nothing since that doesn't exist).

Dont do that.

Unless you're ready to say a 3.01 ERA and 4.00 are equal too. Or that a 1.99 Whip is the same as 1.01



That's not a good argument. There's a big difference between a guy allowing one runner per inning and two. If you're talking about an offense that averages a quarter run more against ALL pitchers and today is facing ths guy you are arguing is one of the best, he should pitch right over that fraction most of the time.

_________________
His mind is not for rent to any God or government.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
They are also well above .500 because they are some of the best pitchers in MLB. :lol:


Except that doesn't explain the correlation between W/L% and per start run support. These are all guys that have been good enough to throw 700 innings in the MLB in the last 5 seasons, so we should expect there to be little to no correlation to their W/L% and true run support, if W/L% was as good an indicator of pitching skill as others believe it to be.


Just out of curiosity, in the same sample (700 IP in the last 5 seasons) who are the top in WL%?


Zack Greinke (.744, 3.47)
Clayton Kershaw (.732, 3.68)
Max Scherzer (.719, 3.96)
David Price (.675, 3.95)
Stephen Strasburg (.643, 3.39)

Keep in mind, W/L% correctly labeling top pitchers as top pitchers does not mean that W/L% is actually good at deciphering who is good and who is not.


That's why I wanted to see it. Those are some of the best guys in the league. You WANT WL% to mean nothing so you dismiss it.

I'd like to see it flipped around too, are the bottom 5 guys in WL% just some unlucky good pitchers or are they down there because they are just innings eaters and every team needs 5 starters?

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:14 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 76673
Location: Chicago Heights
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
To put the above in context, over the last 3 seasons, the league-average starter got 3.04 runs of support per start.


Wait league avg is 3.04 and he's gotten 2.76? So the difference is a quarter of a run (or nothing since that doesn't exist).

Dont do that.

Unless you're ready to say a 3.01 ERA and 4.00 are equal too. Or that a 1.99 Whip is the same as 1.01



That's not a good argument. There's a big difference between a guy allowing one runner per inning and two. If you're talking about an offense that averages a quarter run more against ALL pitchers and today is facing ths guy you are arguing is one of the best, he should pitch right over that fraction most of the time.


And that's not even what JLN is doing here. He seems to be making a case that if a starter allows more than his team scores he's likely to lose. No shit.

_________________
His mind is not for rent to any God or government.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32235
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
To put the above in context, over the last 3 seasons, the league-average starter got 3.04 runs of support per start.


Wait league avg is 3.04 and he's gotten 2.76? So the difference is a quarter of a run (or nothing since that doesn't exist).

Dont do that.

Unless you're ready to say a 3.01 ERA and 4.00 are equal too. Or that a 1.99 Whip is the same as 1.01



That's not a good argument. There's a big difference between a guy allowing one runner per inning and two. If you're talking about an offense that averages a quarter run more against ALL pitchers and today is facing ths guy you are arguing is one of the best, he should pitch right over that fraction most of the time.


This isn't a good argument either. You are oversimplifying the effect a lineup has within a single game.

The Nationals this year have averaged 5.66 runs a game. The Braves have averaged 4.71. At first blush, it's easy to say "Oh, that's less than a run per game." But the reality is that the Nats aren't scoring one more run per game here and there. They also have games in which they score less than the Braves... and yet they still wind up with about 154 more runs per year. That is significant. That means they are MUCH more likely to explode and give a pitcher a huge cushion to work with. The average runs per game is a misleading stat because it's over so many games that it looks miniscule. Odds are that if a pitcher pitches for the Nationals, he is likely to pitch in at least 4 or 5 more games which he should easily win than he would if he pitched for the Braves. And a 5-game swing is the difference between 11-14 and 16-9.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Hank Scorpio wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
They are also well above .500 because they are some of the best pitchers in MLB. :lol:


Except that doesn't explain the correlation between W/L% and per start run support. These are all guys that have been good enough to throw 700 innings in the MLB in the last 5 seasons, so we should expect there to be little to no correlation to their W/L% and true run support, if W/L% was as good an indicator of pitching skill as others believe it to be.


Just out of curiosity, in the same sample (700 IP in the last 5 seasons) who are the top in WL%?


Zack Greinke (.744, 3.47)
Clayton Kershaw (.732, 3.68)
Max Scherzer (.719, 3.96)
David Price (.675, 3.95)
Stephen Strasburg (.643, 3.39)

Keep in mind, W/L% correctly labeling top pitchers as top pitchers does not mean that W/L% is actually good at deciphering who is good and who is not.


That's why I wanted to see it. Those are some of the best guys in the league. You WANT WL% to mean nothing so you dismiss it.



No, 60% of W/L% being explained by something pitchers have literally no impact on (run support) does that all on its own.

Quote:
I'd like to see it flipped around too, are the bottom 5 guys in WL% just some unlucky good pitchers or are they down there because they are just innings eaters and every team needs 5 starters?


(W/L%, FIP in observed range)

Andrew Cashner (.370, 3.84)
Jeff Samardzija (.408, 3.70)
Tom Koehler (.409, 4.47)
Ricky Nolasco (.436, 4.08)
Scott Feldman (.442, 4.10)

League average FIP over that time period is around 4.12, so Cashner and Samardzija are well above average, Nolasco and Feldman marginally above-average, and Koehler is below average. Two of the bottom-five are very unlucky, another two are solidly unlucky (league-average W/L% is .500), and one is about where he should be.

That doesn't sound like a statistic that is very good.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
To put the above in context, over the last 3 seasons, the league-average starter got 3.04 runs of support per start.


Wait league avg is 3.04 and he's gotten 2.76? So the difference is a quarter of a run (or nothing since that doesn't exist).

Dont do that.

Unless you're ready to say a 3.01 ERA and 4.00 are equal too. Or that a 1.99 Whip is the same as 1.01



That's not a good argument. There's a big difference between a guy allowing one runner per inning and two. If you're talking about an offense that averages a quarter run more against ALL pitchers and today is facing ths guy you are arguing is one of the best, he should pitch right over that fraction most of the time.


Do you not understand different kinds of averages? Did you not comprehend the significance of Quintana "averaging" 2.76 runs of support per start but still getting 2 actual runs or fewer in almost two-thirds of his starts? The league averages a little more than 3 marginal runs per game, which results in actual run distribution that is centered on 3-or-more runs per start, whereas Quintana's is centered on 2-or-fewer.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
I don't even know Koehler :lol: The rest of those guys are meh but there is a certain value in eating innings.

So far WL% seems to be pretty decent to me to judge players. Certainly not in a half season or a couple months but when you give it a couple years, the good pitchers make themselves known. You've convinced me as much as JORR has. W/L forever!!!!!

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:36 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 76673
Location: Chicago Heights
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
To put the above in context, over the last 3 seasons, the league-average starter got 3.04 runs of support per start.


Wait league avg is 3.04 and he's gotten 2.76? So the difference is a quarter of a run (or nothing since that doesn't exist).

Dont do that.

Unless you're ready to say a 3.01 ERA and 4.00 are equal too. Or that a 1.99 Whip is the same as 1.01



That's not a good argument. There's a big difference between a guy allowing one runner per inning and two. If you're talking about an offense that averages a quarter run more against ALL pitchers and today is facing ths guy you are arguing is one of the best, he should pitch right over that fraction most of the time.


Do you not understand different kinds of averages? Did you not comprehend the significance of Quintana "averaging" 2.76 runs of support per start but still getting 2 actual runs or fewer in almost two-thirds of his starts? The league averages a little more than 3 marginal runs per game, which results in actual run distribution that is centered on 3-or-more runs per start, whereas Quintana's is centered on 2-or-fewer.


You're completely ignoring the fact that there are other actual pitchers allowing less than Quintana in those games. "Run support" is nothing more than the opposing ERA.

_________________
His mind is not for rent to any God or government.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 5:15 pm
Posts: 16923
Hank Scorpio wrote:
I don't even know Koehler :lol: The rest of those guys are meh but there is a certain value in eating innings.

So far WL% seems to be pretty decent to me to judge players. Certainly not in a half season or a couple months but when you give it a couple years, the good pitchers make themselves known. You've convinced me as much as JORR has. W/L forever!!!!!

Time doesn't make a bad statistic good. It's useless for one game then it's useless for 10 games or 100 games or 1000 games.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 9:52 pm
Posts: 516
pizza_Place: Barraco's
This is all a bit, right??


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:47 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 76673
Location: Chicago Heights
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
Keyser Soze wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
I don't even know Koehler :lol: The rest of those guys are meh but there is a certain value in eating innings.

So far WL% seems to be pretty decent to me to judge players. Certainly not in a half season or a couple months but when you give it a couple years, the good pitchers make themselves known. You've convinced me as much as JORR has. W/L forever!!!!!

Time doesn't make a bad statistic good. It's useless for one game then it's useless for 10 games or 100 games or 1000 games.



So who are the great starters with losing records?

_________________
His mind is not for rent to any God or government.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:48 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 76673
Location: Chicago Heights
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
ChiefWampum wrote:
This is all a bit, right??


That W/L record is "meaningless"? I sure hope so.

_________________
His mind is not for rent to any God or government.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 9:52 pm
Posts: 516
pizza_Place: Barraco's
If Cub fans don't like Quintana, could I interest them in the other sexy name on the supposed trade market? How about a Chris Archer? He who owns a 3.57 career ERA (3.43 FIP). He who owns a 48-56 record and went 9-19 last season? Does that do anything for ya?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 3:05 am
Posts: 28664
pizza_Place: Clamburger's
ChiefWampum wrote:
This is all a bit, right??

This is the CFMB quintessential no surrender debate. Nothing really compares outside of abortion arguments, and Jimmy Butler greatness threads.

_________________
Nardi wrote:
Weird, I see Dolphin looking in my asshole


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
ChiefWampum wrote:
This is all a bit, right??


No, I was a former W/L means nothing person and JORR eventually won me over. I'm also getting older and turning into an 'old man yells at clouds' type of guy. :lol:

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81627
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
To put the above in context, over the last 3 seasons, the league-average starter got 3.04 runs of support per start.


Wait league avg is 3.04 and he's gotten 2.76? So the difference is a quarter of a run (or nothing since that doesn't exist).

Dont do that.

Unless you're ready to say a 3.01 ERA and 4.00 are equal too. Or that a 1.99 Whip is the same as 1.01



That's not a good argument. There's a big difference between a guy allowing one runner per inning and two. If you're talking about an offense that averages a quarter run more against ALL pitchers and today is facing ths guy you are arguing is one of the best, he should pitch right over that fraction most of the time.


Do you not understand different kinds of averages? Did you not comprehend the significance of Quintana "averaging" 2.76 runs of support per start but still getting 2 actual runs or fewer in almost two-thirds of his starts? The league averages a little more than 3 marginal runs per game, which results in actual run distribution that is centered on 3-or-more runs per start, whereas Quintana's is centered on 2-or-fewer.


You're completely ignoring the fact that there are other actual pitchers allowing less than Quintana in those games. "Run support" is nothing more than the opposing ERA.


But the opponents are different


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:03 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 76673
Location: Chicago Heights
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
rogers park bryan wrote:

But the opponents are different


Yeah. So what? They're all big league offenses capable of scoring ten runs in a game at times. I don't expect the "better" pitcher to allow more than the lesser guy over half the time.

The thing that separates the teams is the pitching. The Sox would have been the best team in baseball last year if there was a way for Sale to start every game. It would be like if the Bears had a four man quarterback rotation- Brady, Cutler, Siemian, and Bortles. They'd probably be 3-1 with Brady, 1-3 with Cutler, and 0-4 with each of the other two. If Brady could start all 16 they're a Super Bowl contender.

_________________
His mind is not for rent to any God or government.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81627
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:

But the opponents are different


Yeah. So what? They're all big league offenses capable of scoring ten runs in a game at times. I don't expect the "better" pitcher to allow more than the lesser guy over half the time.

The thing that separates the teams is the pitching. The Sox would have been the best team in baseball last year if there was a way for Sale to start every game. It would be like if the Bears had a four man quarterback rotation- Brady, Cutler, Siemian, and Bortles. They'd probably be 3-1 with Brady, 1-3 with Cutler, and 0-4 with each of the other two. If Brady could start all 16 they're a Super Bowl contender.

Unless Bradys 4 games were against great defenses like the Ny Football Giants (Stoneroses) and Cutler faces bad teams.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Hank Scorpio wrote:
I don't even know Koehler :lol: The rest of those guys are meh but there is a certain value in eating innings.


No, the rest of those guys are pretty good, as indicated by their above-average FIP figures. You don't just get to declare guys "meh" because it makes your argument look silly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:28 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 76673
Location: Chicago Heights
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:

But the opponents are different


Yeah. So what? They're all big league offenses capable of scoring ten runs in a game at times. I don't expect the "better" pitcher to allow more than the lesser guy over half the time.

The thing that separates the teams is the pitching. The Sox would have been the best team in baseball last year if there was a way for Sale to start every game. It would be like if the Bears had a four man quarterback rotation- Brady, Cutler, Siemian, and Bortles. They'd probably be 3-1 with Brady, 1-3 with Cutler, and 0-4 with each of the other two. If Brady could start all 16 they're a Super Bowl contender.

Unless Bradys 4 games were against great defenses like the Ny Football Giants (Stoneroses) and Cutler faces bad teams.


Granted, there is a far greater difference between the best and worst NFL defenses than between any two major league offenses. It's a difference that can be seen in the space of the game. If I only saw the Cubs play this last series I'd have the impression they were one of the best offenses in history.

_________________
His mind is not for rent to any God or government.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
I don't even know Koehler :lol: The rest of those guys are meh but there is a certain value in eating innings.


No, the rest of those guys are pretty good, as indicated by their above-average FIP figures. You don't just get to declare guys "meh" because it makes your argument look silly.


Go ahead and like Shark's FIP. I'll go ahead and think he's a bad pitcher that eats up innings. He has a role in MLB. Every team needs someone to go out and throw 180 innings each season. If you're going to defend him after seeing him stink on both sides of town, I feel more confident than ever that I'm on the right side of history here. :lol:

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:31 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 76673
Location: Chicago Heights
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Zack Greinke (.744, 3.47)
Clayton Kershaw (.732, 3.68)
Max Scherzer (.719, 3.96)
David Price (.675, 3.95)
Stephen Strasburg (.643, 3.39)


Andrew Cashner (.370, 3.84)
Jeff Samardzija (.408, 3.70)
Tom Koehler (.409, 4.47)
Ricky Nolasco (.436, 4.08)
Scott Feldman (.442, 4.10)



I'll take the first group and you can have the second plus Mike Trout and Bryce Harper and my team kicks your ass.

_________________
His mind is not for rent to any God or government.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 20082
pizza_Place: Aurelios
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
I don't even know Koehler :lol: The rest of those guys are meh but there is a certain value in eating innings.


No, the rest of those guys are pretty good, as indicated by their above-average FIP figures. You don't just get to declare guys "meh" because it makes your argument look silly.


Scott Feldman is pretty good because a certain stat says he is!!! Who is being silly here? The only useful thing he's ever done is being traded. He's the definition of meh. :lol:

_________________
drinky wrote:
If you hate Laurence, then don't listen - don't comment. When he co-hosts the B&B show, take that day off ... listen to an old podcast of a Bernstein solo show and jerk off all day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 9:52 pm
Posts: 516
pizza_Place: Barraco's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Zack Greinke (.744, 3.47)
Clayton Kershaw (.732, 3.68)
Max Scherzer (.719, 3.96)
David Price (.675, 3.95)
Stephen Strasburg (.643, 3.39)


Andrew Cashner (.370, 3.84)
Jeff Samardzija (.408, 3.70)
Tom Koehler (.409, 4.47)
Ricky Nolasco (.436, 4.08)
Scott Feldman (.442, 4.10)



I'll take the first group and you can have the second plus Mike Trout and Bryce Harper and my team kicks your ass.

That's not how this works.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Hank Scorpio wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Hank Scorpio wrote:
I don't even know Koehler :lol: The rest of those guys are meh but there is a certain value in eating innings.


No, the rest of those guys are pretty good, as indicated by their above-average FIP figures. You don't just get to declare guys "meh" because it makes your argument look silly.


Scott Feldman is pretty good because a certain stat says he is!!!


How is that materially different from you saying guys are "meh" because their W/L% says they are?

Quote:
Who is being silly here?


Still you.

Quote:
The only useful thing he's ever done is being traded. He's the definition of meh.


TIL above-average FIP is "the definition of meh". That's a mighty fine brain you have.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 20575
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Zack Greinke (.744, 3.47)
Clayton Kershaw (.732, 3.68)
Max Scherzer (.719, 3.96)
David Price (.675, 3.95)
Stephen Strasburg (.643, 3.39)


Andrew Cashner (.370, 3.84)
Jeff Samardzija (.408, 3.70)
Tom Koehler (.409, 4.47)
Ricky Nolasco (.436, 4.08)
Scott Feldman (.442, 4.10)



I'll take the first group and you can have the second plus Mike Trout and Bryce Harper and my team kicks your ass.


JORR, trying to be flippant, completely misses the entire point of this exercise. Imagine that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32235
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
JORR, there's a single thing you could admit to which would help clarify your stance. I'm not saying it'd make anyone agree with you, but it would at least clarify...

You think Major League hitters don't matter, correct?

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:32 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 76673
Location: Chicago Heights
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
leashyourkids wrote:
JORR, there's a single thing you could admit to which would help clarify your stance. I'm not saying it'd make anyone agree with you, but it would at least clarify...

You think Major League hitters don't matter, correct?



Of course they matter. But we're discussing events within the minute space of a single game vs. a pitcher you keep insisting is among the best in baseball. If that were really the guy you're saying he is, he has a huge advantage vs. an offense that averages .5 more runs per game than his own admittedly anemic offense.

_________________
His mind is not for rent to any God or government.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:34 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 76673
Location: Chicago Heights
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
Put another way, if all of Babe Ruth's at-bats were against Walter Johnson and Christy Mathewson, he wouldn't be Babe Ruth.

_________________
His mind is not for rent to any God or government.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 234 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group