|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 31, 2015 21:52:31 GMT -5
You object to the fact that people object? I don't get it.
It's his phone. He can piss on it in front of Goddel if he wants. Why would you care?
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 31, 2015 14:39:30 GMT -5
Right, two nights ago he was dehydrated for being fat and out of shape. Last night he was hit by a pitch for being fat and out of shape.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 31, 2015 8:54:44 GMT -5
That's not really how anything works in the real life. In baseball negotiations there's only one Kimbrell but there are lots of really good pictures and if you ask for a ridiculous boatload of something the team trading for the player moves on the option number two. In the business world if you distributor ask for a ridiculous amount of money, there are always other distributors. These are unique goods.
The theory you outline is not good negotiating tactics. Except for people who don't really have skin in the game. Then it's a great negotiating tactic because you can always say that well they didn't do what I would've done and asked for even more.
Negotiating is about frameworks and is about framing the contours of what is reasonable. I agree with that. But asking for $1 million for your 50 Cent wigit it doesn't get you $1000 when all of a sudden they realize are getting the steal and not having to pay 1 million.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 30, 2015 21:36:35 GMT -5
He had no (legal) obligation to maintain his phone. So why shouldn't he destroy it if he wants to? He can turn it into a giant needle for all I care.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 28, 2015 7:22:10 GMT -5
One quick one on Vic: When Cherington got the job, one thing i remember him saying is that he was going to acquire players who baseball actually matters too (I always thought that was a subtle jab at players like JD Drew...)...Vic was definitely one of those players. Typical Boston media now questioning the contract and "if" they would have one the WS w/out him...What an absolute joke...Because the one thing i know was that they did win the WS w/ him and trying to surgically extract a player from a winning equation 2 years after the fact to try and make the player/team look bad for a contract is the epitome of armchair quarterbacking...Vic had an excellent year in 2013 and some clutch hits in the playoffs (if not an excellent entire playoff)...His D was "Evans-eque"...just a good overall player in every facet but one who couldn't stay healthy for the Sox...That said, needed to trade him to clear a way to give the last two months to Castillo who's doing no good in AAA...If that time wasn't now for Castillo it was never...next to go should be De Aza for JBJ (who fits the same thing, now or never for him)...actually, part of me wonders if they're keeping JBJ in AAA to trade him (i.e. because he's hitting and they don't want to risk him being exposed again in MLB after he's reestablished value again)... Seriously, how you can write this about Victorino and not think the exact same thing applies to Drew is beyond me. 1. Incredible defense. 2. Don't win in 2007 without him. 3. 2013 Vic playoffs v. 2007 Drew playoffs: 642 OPS vs. 783 OPS. Vic's game winning grand slam was obvious worth more (e.g., has a higher WPA), but Drew's grand slam helped force a game 7 against Cleveland (then in a zero-zero game), and Vic's 2013 playoffs was dominated by a ton of huge strikeouts and kept afloat by 7 lean-in HBPs. 3 out of 5 years, Drew played more games than Victorino's career high with the Sox - and the 5th year he was 35 and by that point broken down. I find Victorino to be a fun player for his personality off the field, but Drew was the significantly better player and added more to both the regular season and his own World Series victory. Whatever "baseball matters to him" means it must at least partially include playing the actual games and playing them well. Sorry to the rest of the board for falling into the obvious trap. But this idea of how to build a baseball team with dirty, gritty players is stupid in large part because we have only partial insight into who the dirty, gritty players are.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 24, 2015 18:54:48 GMT -5
I know this is cherry picking and he's age advanced, but he isn't striking too many people out for someone with his stuff and advanced command of multiple pitches. I'm going to temper my expectations and play it safe. Unfair to expect anyone to be Urias. What is this safe you write of? Irrational exuberance is fun. Baseball is about fun. Just let it go.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 21, 2015 14:26:03 GMT -5
He'll be in Greenville any minute now /Hatfield
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 21, 2015 8:39:25 GMT -5
A question for stat heads. If the concept for batting prowess buys into the concept that BABIP is that a hit vs out is a random function of it being hit to a position where the fielder happens to be. Why does this not apply to singles/doubles/triples? A liner pulled down the line or into a gap is just a hard single to the left fielder save for fortuitous placement. Obviously a double off the wall is different in scope, but that is to my impression, a minority of doubles triples. So, if a double or triple vs a single is not the function of skill, why do we inflate OPS to double or triple the value of those hits? Batter's have control over BABIP (i.e., there is a definite difference in skill between players in the majors leagues related to BABIP). There is also a difference in skill level for hardness of contact as well as FB/GB, all of which correlate with 2B (and HR) power. That's why you'll see people on this board discuss things like LD%, FB%, GB% for batters. (That said, the minor league LD% is very unlikely to be useful data until it is objectively coded - i.e., hitFX.)
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 21, 2015 7:54:40 GMT -5
If anyone else is doing what I was doing and just noting in the box score that Benindenti is hitting just .256, that's .256 / .434 / .538.
Is there any reason (other than idiotic tradition) why these box scores still report batting average instead of OPS? Isn't it obvious? Keith Law says OPS is a garbage stat; therefore it MUST BE. Law says that because OPS is a garbage stat because it over values SLG relative to OBP. He is correct; that is kind of SABR 101. However, the hyperbole involved in calling it a "garbage" stat makes people write silly things. It is still significantly better than AVG, much easier to understand than a properly weighted OPS (or any linear weight based stat, like RC+ or wOBA etc), and at this point ubiquitous.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 21, 2015 7:48:22 GMT -5
Had a chat with folks in the know this weekend, and confirmed that just because a player is announced at a certain position when drafted, it doesn't mean the team asked for that - it might just be what they were in the database as. So from this same conversation, I was able to confirm that Tyler Spoon is converting to catcher and that Jagger Rusconi is going to play second base. I'd assume, then, that Downs is staying at first as well. This would also explain the strange roster construction when we thought all those guys were going to play outfield. And that helps explain why he's in the GCL. Right - just like Ben Moore last year.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 20, 2015 9:10:12 GMT -5
He's not getting pitched around so much as he's much better than most SSA hitters at laying off pitches out of the strike zone. That's not the reason he's in Lowell, though - my guess is that the Red Sox know he's not going to sweat the pitches he can't hit and they want to see him punish the pitches that he can. I really liked the discussion by Ian (?) about this issue with respect to Sam Travis on the most recent podcast, fwiw.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 9, 2015 13:58:42 GMT -5
Mike Antonellis @seadogsradio Miguel Celestino has been traded to the Cincinnati Reds I thought Cueto would take more, but I like it!
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jul 7, 2015 8:24:24 GMT -5
BA is often more results based, but congrats Johnson! The world is now flipped on its head.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jun 26, 2015 14:40:56 GMT -5
I had no idea before hand, but some quick googling yields that this is probably Yorvit's kid, who was kidnapped a half dozen years ago. That's... weird.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jun 22, 2015 16:01:22 GMT -5
For the record, I have never argued for the dumping of any of those players, either. For the record, I've never had a dog as an avatar.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jun 19, 2015 15:45:37 GMT -5
Deafening silence. We'll see what comes out. Have some high hopes for this guy, and it seems like we need a Snowden to find out much about his destination. Has anyone on here decided to "hack" the Sox database? I tried pa55w0rd but it didn't seem to work. Have you tried Sawdaye's Login credentials here?
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jun 17, 2015 15:13:45 GMT -5
No Whitson listed, means he'll move up to Greenville soon /Hatfield
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Jun 17, 2015 9:32:14 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by joshv02 on Jun 17, 2015 9:32:14 GMT -5
Hate to say it but a little research shows that Ball has little to no chance of becoming even a serviceable big league arm... 137 hs pitchers were drafted in the 1st round (including sandwich picks) in the 13 drafts from 1999-2011: and 22 (or just 16%) had/have a career war above 5.0. I think the most interesting fact that only 22 of the high school pitchers drafted in the first round had career WAR above 5.0. That's really unbelievable and suggests how much of a crap shoot that drafting is outside of he very top picks.
Just on velocity and athleticism alone I would think (barring injury) that Bell is going to get to the big leagues in some way shape or form. Obviously, we are hoping for much more than Brian Matsuz's career but there are always teams looking for hard-throwing LH pitchers.
Right. And this is the point. The prior is always: every minor league pitcher has a slim chance of making an impact in the majors, even first round picks. Therefore, of course Bell has a slim chance of making the majors: he is on the minors, ipso facto. So studies showing us that but not adjusting for the known prior are just not that informative, imho. Also studies with an average or mean war projection by pick are ok but still lack much information. First only done of them blend the pick curve: there is nothing magical about a number seven vs six vs eight pick, therefore we should do a blended curve especially since our n is so small. But even with that correction, the variability is so great that really even adjusting and with the prior of failure expectation, what can we really say that is new about any one in particular? That the odds are stacked? Ok, but we already should have known that. Draft studies are great for showing large patterns but relatively weak for showing individual players. It is the exception to failure were are looking for, and if the studies just tell us to expect failure we didn't answer the question we are looking to answer.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jun 9, 2015 11:44:34 GMT -5
Yes, but responding to they post as obviously you meant it wouldn't be very funny.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jun 9, 2015 5:54:11 GMT -5
So he didn't make a single out.
Fantastic transition music in the podcast. Retire now, Hatfield; it doesn't get any better.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jun 9, 2015 5:30:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Jun 4, 2015 12:56:40 GMT -5
Ehh - MGL isn't saying too much that is different. The long of it is: just about every review of the subject will find that there is a 9-11ish run difference over a season between prevailing construction and optimal. Most of that these days is really just making sure that the #2 batter doesn't suck (the "make sure he can make contact!" construction) because most teams put their best batters in the 1, 3 & 4 spots anyway. There are a bunch of nifty lineup simulators out there - they aren't great because the run environment has changed (the first popular one I recall is from baseball musings - you could put in whatever projections you wanted and it would spit out various run projections based on lineup construction), but there are a bunch now.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on May 29, 2015 10:04:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on May 22, 2015 12:54:22 GMT -5
I'm not a lawyer and I'm not gonna read all of that but doesn't it just basically say the Red Sox don't do enough in California but go ahead and sue them somewhere else? Basically.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on May 22, 2015 10:46:47 GMT -5
Gracias. There is a lot of interesting information there regarding how the Sox set up their CA scouting staff - more probably on PACER. Also, I hadn't appreciate that Mark Wagner was a plaintiff.
|
|