|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 22, 2016 8:01:08 GMT -5
I was seriously thinking about that today. How is he not up? Maybe a service time thing, because he's gotta be ready, at least for that team. He's not likely to get called up until he can't accumulate a year's service time in 2016. Happens every year. That's coming very soon. Except that people were wondering why he wasn't called up last year when the Twins were contending. I mean, why not just keep him in AAA forever? You'll never have to pay him! You have to start the service time clock at some point. Might as well start it when your team is halfway decent and he hasn't had to visit Dr. Andrews yet.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 22, 2016 8:02:37 GMT -5
Calling this year's Twins team "halfway decent" is stretching the truth a little.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 22, 2016 8:33:16 GMT -5
He's not likely to get called up until he can't accumulate a year's service time in 2016. Happens every year. That's coming very soon. Except that people were wondering why he wasn't called up last year when the Twins were contending. I mean, why not just keep him in AAA forever? You'll never have to pay him! You have to start the service time clock at some point. Might as well start it when your team is halfway decent and he hasn't had to visit Dr. Andrews yet. Just to keep track of the technical details here, had the Twins called him up last year but after roster expansion, he wouldn't have accumulated any service time and the Twinkies would still be in the same situation today. If they didn't call him for a September look, there were other reasons than economic ones.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Apr 22, 2016 13:56:47 GMT -5
I wonder how long before Ockimey is pushing Longhi for that spot in Salem? A 19% BB rate indicates it's time to move up soon. We're about halfway to walk rate stabilization of 120 PAs. Ockimey has 12 walks. He has a three-walk and a four-walk game this season, which means that more than half of his walks on the year came in two of his 13 games. Seriously folks, it's still WAY, WAY too early to be drawing anything from statistics other than "this guy is playing well; that's nice" or "this guy is not playing well; I hope he turns it around" at this point.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 23, 2016 3:34:01 GMT -5
I wonder how long before Ockimey is pushing Longhi for that spot in Salem? A 19% BB rate indicates it's time to move up soon. We're about halfway to walk rate stabilization of 120 PAs. Ockimey has 12 walks. He has a three-walk and a four-walk game this season, which means that more than half of his walks on the year came in two of his 13 games. Seriously folks, it's still WAY, WAY too early to be drawing anything from statistics other than "this guy is playing well; that's nice" or "this guy is not playing well; I hope he turns it around" at this point. Plus the fact that Longhi is doing just fine which means that he would have to be moved to Portland for that to be realistic. They're both only 20, there's no major rush.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 23, 2016 6:59:24 GMT -5
I wonder how long before Ockimey is pushing Longhi for that spot in Salem? A 19% BB rate indicates it's time to move up soon. We're about halfway to walk rate stabilization of 120 PAs. Ockimey has 12 walks. He has a three-walk and a four-walk game this season, which means that more than half of his walks on the year came in two of his 13 games. Seriously folks, it's still WAY, WAY too early to be drawing anything from statistics other than "this guy is playing well; that's nice" or "this guy is not playing well; I hope he turns it around" at this point. Yeah, I pointed out when walk rates stabilize so it's not like I don't realize that it hasn't happened yet.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 23, 2016 8:05:16 GMT -5
The "stabilization point" is not a magic threshold at which point things become predictive. It's just a shorthand way to show which peripherals become predictive sooner (it's the point where you only need to regress observed performance by 50%). It also was derived from MLB performance, and I suspect minor league performance (especially low minors walk rate) takes much more of a sample to become predictive.
|
|
|
Post by ethanbein on Apr 23, 2016 8:53:52 GMT -5
The "stabilization point" is not a magic threshold at which point things become predictive. It's just a shorthand way to show which peripherals become predictive sooner (it's the point where you only need to regress observed performance by 50%). It also was derived from MLB performance, and I suspect minor league performance (especially low minors walk rate) takes much more of a sample to become predictive. There's a special place in sabermetric hell for all the analysts that continue to use the word "stabilization point" and know better. Could there possibly be a term that confuses casual consumers of analytics more? (I mean, Russell Carleton is great, but come on.)
|
|