Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Matt Harvey

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

  • Let me guess, Joe Borowski had a great season in 2007 since he had 45 saves.
    Last edited by GiambiJuice; 05-23-2013, 12:33 PM.
    My top 10 players:

    1. Babe Ruth
    2. Barry Bonds
    3. Ty Cobb
    4. Ted Williams
    5. Willie Mays
    6. Alex Rodriguez
    7. Hank Aaron
    8. Honus Wagner
    9. Lou Gehrig
    10. Mickey Mantle

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Paulypal View Post
      You must be kidding? Do you watch games or just look at baseballreference.com?

      If a pitcher is up big and falls behind some batters dont you think he is more likely to throw the hitter a cookie instead of walking him? These pitches may get smoked and hurt the pitchers stats, but he is still up big.

      I am all for stats....in fact I love the stats especially the saber stats, but what many fail to remember is that human beings are on the field and although we can expect a certain stat line in a given year from players they can vary based upon game score, game conditions amongst a thousand other factors.

      I am not sure if you ever played ball before but if you did you would know what I mean.

      When you go to work do you perform the same everyday? Dont you have better days and worse days? Dont somethings in your personal have a positive or negative effect on your work day?

      The game is not a computer program as much as some would like it to be.
      When Frank Robinson was forced out in Washington, he said that he was told that "he doesn't know computers".

      One of the absolute greatest all around players of the past 60 years, but he doesn't know computers.

      There isn't a person who ever visited this forum, especially myself , that can even carry Frank's glove. But I bet they could 'out stat' Robinson !

      Comment


      • Originally posted by mandrake View Post
        When Frank Robinson was forced out in Washington, he said that he was told that "he doesn't know computers".

        One of the absolute greatest all around players of the past 60 years, but he doesn't know computers.

        There isn't a person who ever visited this forum, especially myself , that can even carry Frank's glove. But I bet they could 'out stat' Robinson !
        And lets not forget Joe Morgan. One of the greatest and smartest baseball players to ever play, but a complete moron as an analyst with a failure to grasp the most basic of the "advanced" statistics.
        My top 10 players:

        1. Babe Ruth
        2. Barry Bonds
        3. Ty Cobb
        4. Ted Williams
        5. Willie Mays
        6. Alex Rodriguez
        7. Hank Aaron
        8. Honus Wagner
        9. Lou Gehrig
        10. Mickey Mantle

        Comment


        • Originally posted by mandrake View Post
          When Frank Robinson was forced out in Washington, he said that he was told that "he doesn't know computers".

          One of the absolute greatest all around players of the past 60 years, but he doesn't know computers.

          There isn't a person who ever visited this forum, especially myself , that can even carry Frank's glove. But I bet they could 'out stat' Robinson !
          Originally posted by GiambiJuice View Post
          And lets not forget Joe Morgan. One of the greatest and smartest baseball players to ever play, but a complete moron as an analyst with a failure to grasp the most basic of the "advanced" statistics.
          I agree with you guys 100%.

          There is something to be said for the advanced stats. I look at them all the time and they are very useful tools.

          With that said there is something to be said for a baseball IQ. Not everything is measureable. For instance....Willie Mays is one of the greatest players ever I think we all can agree. If you see him interviewed you may not think he is the sharpest tack in the draw, but he was actually an on field manager - positioning players, and even calling pitches at certain times. You cant measure that. His baseball IQ was off the charts.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Paulypal View Post
            You must be kidding?
            Since you phrased this as a question, I'll answer. No. I'm not kidding.

            Do you watch games or just look at baseballreference.com?
            I watch games. I'd imagine that I've been to more professional games this season than you have.

            If a pitcher is up big and falls behind some batters dont you think he is more likely to throw the hitter a cookie instead of walking him? These pitches may get smoked and hurt the pitchers stats, but he is still up big.
            Can you show me an example of a pitcher who does this?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by filihok View Post
              Can you show me an example of a pitcher who does this?
              Everyone one of them that pitches with a big lead. Common knowledge that pitchers are told that they are better off grooving a pitch than walking a batter when they have a big lead. Fairly common knowledge...I am very surprised that you didn't pick that up given you have been to all those professional games. Very surprising.

              I guess in the heat of battle pitchers aren't really concerned about their WAR, WHIP, or their ERA+. My guess is they are probably much more concerned about winning. Imagine that? Imagine that a pro athlete is more concerned about winning and playing the game than what someone in cyberspace with his extra fine retractable pencil in his pocket protector is thinking about why his WHIP has ballooned to 1.27?

              What is this world coming to?
              Last edited by Paulypal; 05-23-2013, 06:00 PM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Paulypal View Post
                Everyone one of them that pitches with a big lead. Common knowledge that pitchers are told that they are better off grooving a pitch than walking a batter when they have a big lead. Fairly common knowledge...I am very surprised that you didn't pick that up given you have been to all those professional games. Very surprising.
                Fair enough.
                I'm guilty of doing something here that I'm usually critical of others doing - not addressing your specific point but, instead, arguing the typical point made by others.
                My fault.

                Yes, pitchers do pitch differently dependent on the situations, however, I haven't seen evidence that pitchers pitch better or worse dependent on the situation.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by filihok View Post
                  Fair enough.
                  I'm guilty of doing something here that I'm usually critical of others doing - not addressing your specific point but, instead, arguing the typical point made by others.
                  My fault.

                  Yes, pitchers do pitch differently dependent on the situations, however, I haven't seen evidence that pitchers pitch better or worse dependent on the situation.
                  I think its some pitcher do & some don't , some better, some worse. I guess like anything else it all depends.

                  All I know is that when a pitcher gets a big lead and he is 3-0 on a batter the manager is getting grayer by the minute.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Paulypal View Post
                    With that said there is something to be said for a baseball IQ. Not everything is measureable. For instance....Willie Mays is one of the greatest players ever I think we all can agree. If you see him interviewed you may not think he is the sharpest tack in the draw, but he was actually an on field manager - positioning players, and even calling pitches at certain times. You cant measure that. His baseball IQ was off the charts.
                    My favorite story regarding this: there was a certain outfielder in the AL (I think he played for Texas) and some stats guy told Buck Showalter "He can play center field." Buck Showalter told him "No, he can't." He was overridden and the guy played CF for a meaningless game. Almost every ball a normal center fielder would've caught fell for a hit.

                    Sabermetrics can be valuable. When it comes down to it, I'd rather have scouts who know how the game is played rather than a computer geek type who has never played.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by pstein View Post
                      My favorite story regarding this: there was a certain outfielder in the AL (I think he played for Texas) and some stats guy told Buck Showalter "He can play center field." Buck Showalter told him "No, he can't." He was overridden and the guy played CF for a meaningless game. Almost every ball a normal center fielder would've caught fell for a hit.
                      ROFL
                      Sounds legit.

                      Similarly, I once heard a scout say a guy could play SS. That guy sucked at SS.

                      Now what?
                      Scouts and stat guys are totally clueless.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by pstein View Post
                        Sabermetrics can be valuable. When it comes down to it, I'd rather have scouts who know how the game is played rather than a computer geek type who has never played.
                        There have been countless articles by respected sabermetricians, including tom Tango, which agree that given a small sample size of data, scouting is more valuable than numerical data. It is when we do have a large enough sample of data to work with that scouting becomes irrelevant. Of course by the time the sample is that large, it isn't often a scout is used practicality anyway. I have never heard a published sabermetrician say that scouting is useless.
                        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 Matthew C. View Post
                          It is when we do have a large enough sample of data to work with that scouting becomes irrelevant.
                          I would disagree with this.

                          Players are constantly changing. Injuries, age, change in technique, etc
                          Players with proven track records can change "overnight". Scouting will pick up on this much faster than stats will.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by filihok View Post
                            I would disagree with this.

                            Players are constantly changing. Injuries, age, change in technique, etc
                            Players with proven track records can change "overnight". Scouting will pick up on this much faster than stats will.
                            Yes - "irrelevent" was too harsh. Scouting always has a place, and sabermetricians know that, despite what some want to be true.
                            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 filihok View Post
                              ROFL
                              Sounds legit.

                              Similarly, I once heard a scout say a guy could play SS. That guy sucked at SS.

                              Now what?
                              Scouts and stat guys are totally clueless.
                              There are good and bad scouts, just like there are good and bad everything else. Some scouts know people, while others played the game.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by pstein View Post
                                There are good and bad scouts, just like there are good and bad everything else.
                                Of course.
                                But what's that got to do with that ... story?

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X