SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
8/7-8/9 Red Sox @ Blue Jays Series Thread
|
Post by kjkramer on Aug 9, 2018 20:32:42 GMT -5
I wouldn't put anything past this team based on the year so far, but if they come back and win this game......that would just be ridiculous at this point and you would just have to believe they have the magic and destined for another WS title
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Aug 9, 2018 20:40:07 GMT -5
Theo Epstein, Jed Hoyer, Billy Beane, Andrew Friedman just four big names who immediately come to mind with reputations both as stat geeks and totally normal people. I mean really this belief that intelligence somehow prohibits normality is just so ignorant. Nobody is really saying that, though. What Werth is doing is the same thing that Sabermetricians do , it is just Werth decided to go public with his comments. This is just another form of tribal / class warfare that humans do. Believe me, the saber guys were taking shots at the lifers/ ballplayers also. To me it is funny, because it is silly. I also found it funny when Goose Gossage did it vs The Yankee office.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Aug 9, 2018 20:40:16 GMT -5
Theo Epstein, Jed Hoyer, Billy Beane, Andrew Friedman just four big names who immediately come to mind with reputations both as stat geeks and totally normal people. I mean really this belief that intelligence somehow prohibits normality is just so ignorant. Nobody is really saying that, though. What Werth is doing is the same thing that Sabermetricians do , it is just Werth decided to go public with his comments. This is just another form of tribal / class warfare that humans do. Believe me, the saber guys were taking shots at the lifers/ ballplayers also, The point of sabermetrics is just to help teams make decisions that will better help them win baseball games. Werth is simply wrong that it doesn't work and to me he just comes off as bitter, whereas sabermetricians are probably right that he shouldn't be in the majors any more and that the new methods are superior to the old ones the lifers are so attached to. I don't know about you but I enjoy seeing my team making smart decisions and winning more games, and I enjoy seeing better players get to play. I don't begrudge anyone for not looking into the statistics or having that influence your enjoyment of the game, but to say it's killing it is just nonsense, and to think teams shouldn't use them to evaluate decisions, or that the methods used in the past are superior, is wrong. I do agree that Werth's general disposition is funny though.
|
|
|
Post by kjkramer on Aug 9, 2018 20:42:13 GMT -5
Thornburg gaining my confidence..
Edit: NM
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Aug 9, 2018 20:42:27 GMT -5
In fairness, every sabermetric guy I’ve seen looks like he last played in tee ball, doing half games in left field. LOL, when's the last time you heard anyone say, I'd have a beer with this or that stats geek. A "stat geek" is someone who's interested in baseball, and curious about it, which means they're probably curious about other things. I would think that if you're into baseball, that might be someone you could have a beer with. Honestly, the only kind of person I can't stand is someone who's incurious. I love to find out about people who have lived all different kinds of lives, but if the sort of life they've lived doesn't have an element of openness and exploration to it, then... I don't know. How is that a fun person to have a beer with? There's lots of people who are into the game and enjoy it in other ways, and that's great. But the policing of how others enjoy the game just speaks to a weird insecurity. Like, let the mathy people do their mathy thing, you know? How does that ruin anything for anyone else?
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Aug 9, 2018 20:44:28 GMT -5
The point of sabermetrics is just to help teams make decisions that will better help them win baseball games. Werth is simply wrong that it doesn't work and to me he just comes off as bitter, whereas sabermetricians are probably right that he shouldn't be in the majors any more and that the new methods are superior to the old ones the lifers are so attached to. I don't know about you but I enjoy seeing my team making smart decisions and winning more games, and I enjoy seeing better players get to play. I don't begrudge anyone for not looking into the statistics or having that influence your enjoyment of the game, but to say it's killing it is just nonsense, and to think teams shouldn't use them to evaluate decisions, or that the methods used in the past are superior, is wrong. I do agree that Werth's general disposition is funny though. I agree, but nobody has, nor ever will, corner the market on smart decision making. Decision making, evaluation...are constantly evolving.
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Aug 9, 2018 20:47:48 GMT -5
Every now and then the team needs to flush a game - satisfy the baseball gods or something like that. This is clearly the flush game (and yes, I know - we have one more chance to get some runs. I want to see Mookie get his cycle most of all!)
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Aug 9, 2018 20:49:58 GMT -5
LOL, when's the last time you heard anyone say, I'd have a beer with this or that stats geek. A "stat geek" is someone who's interested in baseball, and curious about it, which means they're probably curious about other things. I would think that if you're into baseball, that might be someone you could have a beer with. Honestly, the only kind of person I can't stand is someone who's incurious. I love to find out about people who have lived all different kinds of lives, but if the sort of life they've lived doesn't have an element of openness and exploration to it, then... I don't know. How is that a fun person to have a beer with? There's lots of people who are into the game and enjoy it in other ways, and that's great. But the policing of how others enjoy the game just speaks to a weird insecurity. Like, let the mathy people do their mathy thing, you know? How does that ruin anything for anyone else? We interpret 'stats geek' quite differently. I picture someone fixated going thru life with blinders on, ignoring things like scouting. We have some of those here but no sense in mud slinging. I also think ericmvan is the best poster at this site.
|
|
|
Post by kjkramer on Aug 9, 2018 20:52:54 GMT -5
Mookie with the cycle plus Amazing extend him
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Aug 9, 2018 20:53:52 GMT -5
Mookie the best player ever !!!!!! CYCLE !!!!
and my 5k post !!!
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Aug 9, 2018 20:54:27 GMT -5
Every now and then the team needs to flush a game - satisfy the baseball gods or something like that. This is clearly the flush game (and yes, I know - we have one more chance to get some runs. I want to see Mookie get his cycle most of all!) Hey - I called this one!
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Aug 9, 2018 20:58:31 GMT -5
I just turned off the tv before the Mookie at bat. Is there anything Mookie can't do?
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Aug 9, 2018 20:59:12 GMT -5
alright....on to the O's. See you boyz then.
|
|
|
Post by soxfansince67 on Aug 9, 2018 20:59:56 GMT -5
I just turned off the tv before the Mookie at bat. Is there anything Mookie can't do? He couldn't turn your TV back on so you could watch his dinger!
|
|
|
Post by kingofthetrill on Aug 9, 2018 21:00:22 GMT -5
We didn't lose, we just ran out of time.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Aug 9, 2018 21:00:41 GMT -5
Theo Epstein, Jed Hoyer, Billy Beane, Andrew Friedman just four big names who immediately come to mind with reputations both as stat geeks and totally normal people. I mean really this belief that intelligence somehow prohibits normality is just so ignorant. It's all in the presentation. I'd have a beer with Einstein and I'm guessing only one of us declined full boat rides to both Harvard and MIT. I mean really this belief that stats geek and intelligence are correlated is just so ignorant. ADD: And relating 'stats geek' to Theo Epstein, Jed Hoyer, Billy Beane, Andrew Friedman is on you not me. I don't really get your point related to the humble brag, but as far as baseball decision makers go yeah I'd say that those who put more emphasis on modern statistics are generally more intelligent or at least more open minded. The "stat geek" you seem to be describing sounds like a straw man that I just don't believe exists in the numbers you think it does.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 9, 2018 21:05:44 GMT -5
Mookie is awesome! When he gets hits in his first couple of ABs you know he's going to go 4-4.
Too bad the Sox couldn't take advantage of his cycle and JDM's 35th HR.
Cora was too late in pulling Porcello when it was obvious he didn't have it. I think he really wanted to preserve the bullpen, but I think he could have gone to Velazquez earlier or could have used Hembree.
It just never really felt like their night tonight. It happens. Law of averages.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Aug 9, 2018 21:14:07 GMT -5
It's all in the presentation. I'd have a beer with Einstein and I'm guessing only one of us declined full boat rides to both Harvard and MIT. I mean really this belief that stats geek and intelligence are correlated is just so ignorant. ADD: And relating 'stats geek' to Theo Epstein, Jed Hoyer, Billy Beane, Andrew Friedman is on you not me. I don't really get your point related to the humble brag, but as far as baseball decision makers go yeah I'd say that those who put more emphasis on modern statistics are generally more intelligent or at least more open minded. The "stat geek" you seem to be describing sounds like a straw man that I just don't believe exists in the numbers you think it does. The point was that if you are going to personally insult someone in a post you should be prepared for an appropriate response. You also continue to interpret the words 'stats geek' into your frame of reference, not mine. This is obviously a battle of the wits with an unarmed opponent. (like that one ?)
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Aug 9, 2018 21:36:16 GMT -5
I don't really get your point related to the humble brag, but as far as baseball decision makers go yeah I'd say that those who put more emphasis on modern statistics are generally more intelligent or at least more open minded. The "stat geek" you seem to be describing sounds like a straw man that I just don't believe exists in the numbers you think it does. The point was that if you are going to personally insult someone in a post you should be prepared for an appropriate response. You also continue to interpret the words 'stats geek' into your frame of reference, not mine. This is obviously a battle of the wits with an unarmed opponent. (like that one ?) I didn't insult anyone I insulted a belief system which hopefully no one here has, and if you do truly believe that it's not worth having a beer with smart people then yes I think that's ignorant. Again, your frame of reference for a "stats geek" is a ridiculous straw man argument describing people who do not exist, so fine don't get to know these fabricated boogey men. There's plenty of sabermetricians I'm sure I wouldn't want to spend time with and plenty I would, just like any other group of people. The generalizations are what bothers me.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Aug 9, 2018 22:08:02 GMT -5
The point was that if you are going to personally insult someone in a post you should be prepared for an appropriate response. You also continue to interpret the words 'stats geek' into your frame of reference, not mine. This is obviously a battle of the wits with an unarmed opponent. (like that one ?) I didn't insult anyone I insulted a belief system which hopefully no one here has, and if you do truly believe that it's not worth having a beer with smart people then yes I think that's ignorant. Again, your frame of reference for a "stats geek" is a ridiculous straw man argument describing people who do not exist, so fine don't get to know these fabricated boogey men. There's plenty of sabermetricians I'm sure I wouldn't want to spend time with and plenty I would, just like any other group of people. The generalizations are what bothers me. Again, the generalizations and interpretations are yours not mine and they do exist, we have a few here but the numbers you think that I think, are also way off. You seriously need to just stop trying to put other people's posts into what frame of reference exists in your mind. I have twitter, Bill James and pitching ninja are my favorite follows and I'd have a beer with either of them. Both intelligent in different ways but neither is a geek. Maybe a dictionary would be of interest to you. Geek, "socially inept person."
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Aug 9, 2018 23:03:55 GMT -5
I'm going to relate a story mostly because it was one of the cooler events in my life that's related to the above conversation. It's not baseball and I'm guessing the majority of the general public won't be familiar with some of the references.
In the early 80's I had done a project for the Department of Defense with a gentleman named Lee Stripling. If you were to look up the word 'nerd' in a dictionary, Lee's picture would be the perfect illustration, complete with white socks, highwater pants, belt line at the lower chest, white shirt, pocket pencil holder and horned rim glasses. On the other hand, Lee is considered the father of modern cavitation theory. The twist in your fan, propellers for silent submarines, modern fire boat guns, ocean oil slick skimming ships, mine shaft ventilation, and the shrouded blisks used on satellites are among the things associated with him and significantly so.
Sometimes in the late 80's he contacted DoD and told them he was dying of Parkinson's and had had something he wanted to pass along before he died and he requested me to pass that information to. I lived in California and he lived in Florida. I had planned to go to Sturgis so I decided to ride my bike to Florida when I went. yada,yada,yada, given the concepts he wanted to impart, I told him I wanted him to meet Paul Mills, the ultimate surface machining guru who lived in Southern California. Surprisingly, rather than wanting to fly to California, Lee wanted to try a motor cycle trip so we did and went via Sturgis. Also interestingly, Lee was a big hit there, he never had to buy a beer. That whole situation I consider to be a personal life highlight, a biker and a nerd.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,952
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 10, 2018 1:14:02 GMT -5
Mookie becomes the 14th player to hit for the cycle plus draw an unintentional walk, while not making an out. I'm including career bWAR. You'll see why.
37.1 Cy Williams, 1927 72.9 Arky Vaughan, 1933 (extra 1B) 52.1 Mickey Cochrane, 1933 (extra BB) 48.0 Earl Averill, 1933 (15 days after Cochrane and against his Phillies) 12.3 Sam Leslie, 1936 (extra 1B) 78.1 Joe DiMaggio, 1937 (extra HR) 57.5 Willie Stargell, 1964 96.4 Carl Yastrzemski, 1965 (extra HR) 77.3 Robin Yount, 1988 15.3 David Bell, 2004 -0.9 Eric Valent, 2004 (rookie)
11.0 Brad Wilkerson, 2005 14.2 Gary Matthews, 2006
Imagine predicting in June of 2004 that the feat was going to be accomplished 4 times in the next 3 years, and by 4 guys who would end up with less total WAR than 7 of the 9 guys who had done it previously (and Williams just misses), all of whom are in the Hall. Very strange.
So Mookie (already 31.4!) can be seen as restoring the universe to its proper order.
Only two guys did this in a losing cause. The other? Yaz.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,952
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 10, 2018 1:55:59 GMT -5
Re the geekiness of sabermetrics guys ...
I got my first taste of analytics when I was 11, when my Dad explained to me that you couldn't just look at ERA. What he liked to do was add up hits and walks and compare the total to IP. Fewer H+BB than IP was exceptional, he explained. This was in 1965. He's probably neither the first nor last guy to have invented WHIP, but still, that's pretty good.
Back in 1934, he got headlines in the local papers when he broke the state high-jump record as a 15 y/o sophomore. The bar was set at 6'0"; at the time the world record was 6'9". I got a small portion of his genes and regularly scored in the 90th to 95th percentile for running events in the President's Physical Fitness Test they had back then. I thought I was fast because I was one of the two or three fastest kids in my gym class (50 yards and 600) and definitely the quickest (shuttle run). I asked my Dad, was he fast? "No, not really. Sometimes they had me run the 100 when so-and-so was hurt and I didn't always win. He was fast." Dad played football with the YMHA on the sly (track coach wouldn't let him play for the school) and believed he could have punted in the NL; I've paced off the punts he used to launch in front of the house, in his 40's with a bad back ... he was correct.
---- In Francona's biography he talks about how the Sox didn't want him to meet me, even though I was the (mysterious) guy giving him lineup advice for each series. I presume there was a little geek-in-basement stereotyping behind that. It was probably reasonable for Theo and Jed to assume that I had devoted all my spare time to stat geeking, which was a very solitary activity in my formative years. But it was actually never my #1 passion; from '76 to '86 I was out in Boston's punk clubs 4 and sometimes 5 nights a week and writing for local 'zines, and from '86 on I was running the program at the leading literary science fiction / fantasy conference (where I met Cecilia Tan). Both of those involved a lot of socializing (as does my current #1 pastime, film geeking). I actually think that Zack Scott, who took over Jed's job of passing my numbers to Tito in 2006, fits the geek stereotype better than I do.
At the SABR conference, BTW, the history researchers are much geekier than the saber guys.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Aug 10, 2018 2:46:39 GMT -5
I don’t care that much about nerd/not nerd, except in so far as sabermetrics folks tend (in my experience) to seem to speak with an aggression and at times arrogance that is off putting. I’m pro-nerd (I’m a teacher with a PhD), but I also think people who have played know a lot of the game cannot be quantified. I played through college (Div I) until TJ surgery put me down, and I don’t buy generic replacement players because there is no such thing. Every game, every moment, every psyche and skill set will perform differently. And.. until sabermetrics quantifies who I want my locker next to, it is missing something that was huge for me for 20+ years.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Aug 10, 2018 3:05:31 GMT -5
I don’t care that much about nerd/not nerd, except in so far as sabermetrics folks tend (in my experience) to seem to speak with an aggression and at times arrogance that is off putting. I’m pro-nerd (I’m a teacher with a PhD), but I also think people who have played know a lot of the game cannot be quantified. I played through college (Div I) until TJ surgery put me down, and I don’t by generic replacement players because there is no such thing. Every game, every moment, every psyche and skill set will perform differently. And.. unttil sabermetrics quantifies who I want my locker next to, it is missing something that was huge for me for 20+ years. That's an experience I wish I had (the baseball part, I don't posses the patience to be a teacher). Unfortunately for me, I blew my arm out playing pitcher and catcher in the snow and didn't want to burden my dad with something as frivolous as an elbow. I don't know what's wrong but for years and years it seemed normal but whenever I tried baseball or softball, I could make one good throw. After that I could only throw popups. That pretty much dashed any baseball aspirations I might have had. It's OK though, LOL, at about the same time I also discovered girls. ADD Same for the PhD part. I was pretty much done with structured education after my sophomore year. After that, the majority of my courses were self study under the guidance of a sponsoring PhD in whatever topic I was studying. I don't know if they still have that type of program (UMass Amherst) but it was called Bachelors Degree with Individual Concentration (BDIC). My concentration was Systems Analysis but not just computer systems, any system. I don't believe I could handle the structure involved with obtaining a PHD, hats off to you for that. Half of my undergraduate credits were Masters or PhD level so it's the structure, not the topics which would hold me back.
|
|
|