Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tom Glavine and the Hall

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by SABR Matt
    And I don't think getting double plays turned behind you is a pitching skill as much as it is a defensive skill.
    I actually think the opposite; the number of DP's would seem to me to be almost entirely dependant on a) how many baserunners a pitcher allows, and b) how high his groundball ratio is.
    "Simply put, the passion, interest and tradition surrounding baseball in New York is unmatched."

    Sean McAdam, ESPN.com

    Comment


    • [QUOTE=SABR Matt]I've many contless posts on the subject of Whitey Ford. If you haven't attempted to learn from those, I can't do anything more.

      QUOTE]Given the lack of understanding pitching that you have exhibited in your later posts, I believe I'll pass on reading your more dated versions.

      Comment


      • Well...it may actually be a blend of our two points EH. You can have all the baserunners in the world be an extreme grounball pitcher but if your MIF defense sucks, you're not going to turn that many DPs.

        But now that I think about it, it's a normal thing for groundball pitchers to (a) give up more hits per ball in play (though the difference is minor) and (b) get those bases right back by getting more DP turns.

        I'm thinking the DPs people are citing as a strong positive for Glavine are nothing more thna a natural outcome of his being a groundballer and his good defenses. That doesn't mean you shouldn't give him credit for it, but I still don't think that kidn of thing is what HOF pitchers are made of.

        Comment


        • [QUOTE=Yankwood]
          Originally posted by SABR Matt
          I've many contless posts on the subject of Whitey Ford. If you haven't attempted to learn from those, I can't do anything more.

          QUOTE]Given the lack of understanding pitching that you have exhibited in your later posts, I believe I'll pass on reading your more dated versions.
          I've studied pitching through observation of the game and through analysis of the pitching/fielding dynamic for years. What the hell gives you the right to come in here and tell me I don't understand pitching. What the hell makes you think you have any more of an understanding than I do...I or anyone else. You can just go straight to hell.

          Comment


          • Now just breathe deep and relax a little. I am about to teach you.
            When a pitcher is able to change speeds effectively and pitch to certain spots, he can successfully keep a batter a.) off stride, b.) guessing and indecisive, thus less agressive. What this does is put balls into play that are not hit as hard as some balls might be that are delivered by pitchers who do not posess the same skill. When balls are not hit very hard it is easier for fielders to make plays on them. These create things that are called "outs". Pitchers who get things called "outs" are better than pitchers who don't. Pitching is very simple when you don't overanalyze.
            OUTS=GOOD
            HITS=BAD
            If you want, I will give you lesson two. But it won't be from hell, not just yet anyway.

            Comment


            • If that old-school dogma were even slightly true, the weak contract would result in fewer hits per ball in play...Glavine BABIP is essentially dead on league average throughout his career.

              Your "knowledge" of pitching astounds me.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by SABR Matt
                If that old-school dogma were even slightly true, the weak contract would result in fewer hits per ball in play...Glavine BABIP is essentially dead on league average throughout his career.

                Your "knowledge" of pitching astounds me.
                League average is around .301, Glavine's is .285. This is even including a few outliers like in 1994 and 1999.

                You may have a point that a good Brave's defense contributed, but .015 is a huge diference. Find me many guys who are lower than .285 for their careers.

                As a reference:

                Maddux is at .288
                Clemens .294
                R. Johnson .301 (pretty high for a flyball pitcher)
                P. Martinez .287
                Smoltz .288
                Pettitte . 314
                Mussina .294 (see R. Johnson)
                Schilling .302 (see Mussina and R. Johnson)
                Wells . 299 ( see Schilling, etc.)

                Most of these guys played in front of average to above average defenses too.
                Last edited by Bothrops Atrox; 07-03-2006, 02:00 PM.
                1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

                1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

                1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


                The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
                The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Yankwood
                  Now just breathe deep and relax a little. I am about to teach you.
                  When a pitcher is able to change speeds effectively and pitch to certain spots, he can successfully keep a batter a.) off stride, b.) guessing and indecisive, thus less agressive. What this does is put balls into play that are not hit as hard as some balls might be that are delivered by pitchers who do not posess the same skill. When balls are not hit very hard it is easier for fielders to make plays on them. These create things that are called "outs". Pitchers who get things called "outs" are better than pitchers who don't. Pitching is very simple when you don't overanalyze.
                  OUTS=GOOD
                  HITS=BAD
                  If you want, I will give you lesson two. But it won't be from hell, not just yet anyway.
                  YW, I realize you think all Matt's numbers are pulled out of some magical land where the facts don't mean anything. I assure that they are in fact all from actual game data, they take into account such things already in the form of the newer, much improved pitching metrics, and that he has put more work into his research than you have put in on the crapper. No small task, considering what you're full of.

                  Sorry about that last part...sometimes the line is too good not to use.

                  Comment


                  • Yankwood: you have been passionately attacking the DIPS theory, but you voted "No" on whether or not Glavine deserved election. Was this an accidental vote, or is there some other reason you aren't in favor of Glavine?
                    Except for Elhalo, is is very rare to see a non-McCracken fan not accept Glavine.
                    1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

                    1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

                    1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


                    The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
                    The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by baseballPAP
                      YW, I realize you think all Matt's numbers are pulled out of some magical land where the facts don't mean anything. I assure that they are in fact all from actual game data, they take into account such things already in the form of the newer, much improved pitching metrics, and that he has put more work into his research than you have put in on the crapper. No small task, considering what you're full of.

                      Sorry about that last part...sometimes the line is too good not to use.
                      Well, not really true. I'm sure the numbers come from somewhere but numbers are now being thrown around just to support certain prejudices regarding players we like and don't like. It's just lying to yourself. In this case it sounds like the only good pitches thrown are those that are swung at and missed. If that's the case, forget analyzation, K's would be the only determining factor as to whether a pitcher is good or not. So, if that means I'm full of crap, so be it.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by STLCards2
                        Yankwood: you have been passionately attacking the DIPS theory, but you voted "No" on whether or not Glavine deserved election. Was this an accidental vote, or is there some other reason you aren't in favor of Glavine?
                        Except for Elhalo, is is very rare to see a non-McCracken fan not accept Glavine.
                        I don't think that Glavine is Hall of Fame worthy, but I don't like the insinuation that because a large pct of balls are put into play, a pitcher can't be good. I think Glavine is VERY good. The Hall of Fame worthiness is another subject altogether. But thanks for pointing that out.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Yankwood
                          Well, not really true. I'm sure the numbers come from somewhere but numbers are now being thrown around just to support certain prejudices regarding players we like and don't like. It's just lying to yourself. In this case it sounds like the only good pitches thrown are those that are swung at and missed. If that's the case, forget analyzation, K's would be the only determining factor as to whether a pitcher is good or not. So, if that means I'm full of crap, so be it.
                          Prejudices?? I started this project HATING Greg Maddux...six years ago, I could not stand Maddux...thought he was the beneficiary of a plate 10 ijnches wider than everyone else. Now I can't help but respect him because of what my research has taught me. If you really think I'm just inventing numbers to back up preconceived notions of what kind of player is great, you don't know me at all. You can disagree with me but don't you dare presume to tell me what my motives were/are.

                          Comment


                          • Back on subject...

                            With regard to Glavine's BABIP, the Braves as a team had a BABIP is .287 while Glavine had (as a Brave) a BABIP of .286.

                            Not a significant difference. When talking about a pitcher's BABIP, don't look at the league average...look at what the defense is allowing.

                            Comment


                            • You see, back in caveman days when I first started watching baseball, we old fashion guys had this belief that pitchers could make hitters tentative. I didn't realize that EVERYTHING once believed to be true is now incorrect. I would like to comment on the DIPStheory, but in the olden days DIPStheory was a vaccination we got for our kids.

                              Comment


                              • What I don't understand is the part where you dismiss it without trying to understand it. I don't fully go with everything DIPS says, but I read the procedure, and looked it over first. What you're saying about the pitcher's role is exactly why I don't believe it hook line and sinker. BUT, there are some serious problems if you believe that the 1970-ish Orioles pitchers didn't benefit at all from having Belanger, Blair, Robinson et al behind them. I don't think of the Braves defense as being superior, but they were very good.

                                And for STL2, the fact that you can keep bringing up pitchers that had good years outside of Atlanta isn't that impressive...you can do the same the other way, just proving that it is a smallish factor. Glavine is good but not great....but has done it for a great (in baseball terms) amount of years. That has him somewhere aboe good to me...but still not at a top 50 level...although he's close there as well....50-something probably.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X