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
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,757
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 10, 2018 6:48:15 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.
I've met Cecilia Tan before at a SABR meeting in CT a few years back. She's a big Yankees fan. She was pitching a book - 50 greatest Red Sox or Yankees moments or something like that. Nice lady.
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Aug 10, 2018 7:03:43 GMT -5
Love to read some of these life stories from you guys, thanks for sharing. It seems to me that there are some extraordinary people on this site.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 10, 2018 7:13:43 GMT -5
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." Calling everyone who is into advanced stats a geek is just a way to discredit them without actually having a reason. Ad hominem fallacy. Werth had no argument, which is why it was just a tirade filled with name calling.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 10, 2018 7:21:32 GMT -5
Mookie added another 0.5 fWAR last night. Up to 7.5. He's now tied with Jose Ramirez and 0.1 behind Trout, while playing 17 and 13 fewer games respectively.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Aug 10, 2018 7:48:16 GMT -5
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." I guess I don't understand who you are talking about if Bill James, probably the most famous "stat geek" in sports, does not fall into your category. I understand your definition, my point is that assuming that someone is a geek in that way because they want to apply statistics to better understand a sport is asinine, and if you aren't thinking that of Bill James I just have no idea who you are talking about. Also, if we get back to the core of this argument I was disputing Werth, who WAS generalizing about all the people in front offices making decisions and calling them geeks. Anyone intelligently applying sabermetrics does not overlook softer factors like character, chemistry, scouting and timing, and I especially doubt that many posters here, on a prospects-centric board, are doing that. As long as we're adding personal stories for color, I just graduated from an Ivy League school where I played baseball, and we were pretty good! I also read the glossaries and articles at Fangraphs, Statcorner, The Hardball Times and others when I was 13 just because I was curious, and I think it helped make me a better player. At the same time, I can go to a game, sit in the bleachers have some beers with friends, not talk about the stuff they aren't interested in and have a great time. People who use the sabermetrics should not be arrogant about it or talk down to others who aren't as keen to, or are but don't understand them, just like people who played their whole life or grew up believing in other methods of evaluation shouldn't insult those who are interested in the metrics. There's plenty of ways to enjoy the game but we don't need to alienate sections of the fanbase from each other because they philosophically disagree on how to do so. Further, we especially don't need to act as Werth did and mock the people calling the shots because he has no legitimate argument as to why they are wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Smittyw on Aug 10, 2018 8:02:33 GMT -5
In fairness, every sabermetric guy I’ve seen looks like he last played in tee ball, doing half games in left field. I’m not sure what position he played in t-ball Alex Cora must be a super geeky stat nerd, too. And J.D. Martinez. And... These guys bitterly raging against changes in the game just sound sad to me.
|
|
|
Post by Canseco on Aug 10, 2018 9:05:57 GMT -5
Reading Werth’s comments reminded me of the locker room scene toward the end of ‘Revenge of the Nerds’.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,757
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 10, 2018 9:31:53 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. I think the human factor is something that's dismissed. There's always talk about chemistry but you can't really quantify it. I think of Theo Epstein and how he talks about the importance of a team coming together, the human element, and not necessarily just the numbers. I think he was saying that when he was GM of the Red Sox, he was more about the numbers but the older he gets the more he sees the human factor. It's the thing you can't put on a stat sheet and it's real. It's the unknown. Yes you start with talent and use numbers to strategically maximize the talent but there's other things whether it's luck, intangibles, whatever. I'll always believe that the Sox chemistry helped get them thru in 04, and I'll always believe that the 13 Sox played as inspired as a team can play. This 2018 team is special, too. I honestly think if you put the same team on the field next year you wouldn't get the upper 1% results you're seeing this year. For whatever reason they just have IT. There's a special confidence that feeds upon itself with every game they play. It's even more than simply just having a great RS/RA ratio. There's something going on. Hope it lasts thru October.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Aug 10, 2018 9:40:14 GMT -5
No Carita Chris Cotillo Verified account @chriscotillo 44m44 minutes ago Full list of Red Sox’ Players Weekend nicknames: Most of these nicknames are pretty bad except Moreland, Devers, Velazquez, and Kelly.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 10, 2018 9:50:45 GMT -5
I think of Theo Epstein and how he talks about the importance of a team coming together, the human element, and not necessarily just the numbers. I think he was saying that when he was GM of the Red Sox, he was more about the numbers but the older he gets the more he sees the human factor. Yeah he's so concerned with the human element that he traded his best prospect for a spousal abuser to increase his chances of winning a World Series by 3%.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,757
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 10, 2018 9:54:39 GMT -5
I think of Theo Epstein and how he talks about the importance of a team coming together, the human element, and not necessarily just the numbers. I think he was saying that when he was GM of the Red Sox, he was more about the numbers but the older he gets the more he sees the human factor. Yeah he's so concerned with the human element that he traded his best prospect for a spousal abuser to increase his chances of winning a World Series by 3%. He was talking about players being good teammates with each other, the interaction between teammates, not necessarily guys being solid citizens.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 10, 2018 9:57:10 GMT -5
No Carita Chris Cotillo Verified account @chriscotillo 44m44 minutes ago Full list of Red Sox’ Players Weekend nicknames: Most of these nicknames are pretty bad except Moreland, Devers, Velazquez, and Kelly. I think step one in addressing this crisis is we start calling him Brock Lobster.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,952
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 10, 2018 9:58:52 GMT -5
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.
I've met Cecilia Tan before at a SABR meeting in CT a few years back. She's a big Yankees fan. She was pitching a book - 50 greatest Red Sox or Yankees moments or something like that. Nice lady. I count Cecilia as one of my best friends, even though we see each other only a couple of times a year. Even though she lives about a 10 minute drive away! (There's no parking in her neighborhood.)
She showed up at the literary science fiction convention whose program I was running in 1990 with a small hand-produced story pamphlet, "Telepaths Don't Need Safewords." She sold all her copies in a matter of hours and had to come back the next day with a ton more. By 1998 Harper Collins was publishing her short story collection and she had a legitimate claim to being the world's leading writer of literary, erotic sf and fantasy (the trick being of course the very small overlaps between erotica and both literary writing and sf).
In 2002 the annual SABR conference came to Boston and we had a great "What are you doing here??" moment. Twelve years of seeing each other at cons and baseball had never been mentioned.
The World Science Fiction Convention periodically has a "Baseball and Science Fiction" panel and for a while the three people who would always be on it were Cecilia, me, and our buddy Rick Wilber, a terrific writer whose dad Del caught for the Sox and other teams. There's actually a lot of terrific fantastic baseball literature, starting with the obvious Shoeless Joe (> Field of Dreams).
Cecilia went on to co-edit a couple of the BP Annuals and become SABR's publications director and editor and I went on to work for the Sox ... and yet she's the much bigger deal at SABR. We've been roommates at 8 of the last 12 SABR conferences and I have to remind her to book a room in Cooperstown for next year's induction ceremony (she has the connections, of course) ... I want to bring a banner saying "Sox Fans for Mo ... Best. Opponent. Ever."
Oh, the mixed Sox / Yankees friendship stories are legion. She once had two extra tickets to a pair of Sox / Yankee games and I totally wanted to go to Saturday's game, but my buddy had a trivial conflict and we went to the Friday game instead. So I ended up seeing Kevin Millar hit three homers in a loss instead of ... you know what game.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Aug 10, 2018 10:03:46 GMT -5
No Carita Chris Cotillo Verified account @chriscotillo 44m44 minutes ago Full list of Red Sox’ Players Weekend nicknames: Most of these nicknames are pretty bad except Moreland, Devers, Velazquez, and Kelly. Is there a more insulting one than Dan Butlers? It’s like “nah, not even worth it”
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,952
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 10, 2018 10:06:21 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. I think the human factor is something that's dismissed. There's always talk about chemistry but you can't really quantify it. I think of Theo Epstein and how he talks about the importance of a team coming together, the human element, and not necessarily just the numbers. I think he was saying that when he was GM of the Red Sox, he was more about the numbers but the older he gets the more he sees the human factor. It's the thing you can't put on a stat sheet and it's real. It's the unknown. Yes you start with talent and use numbers to strategically maximize the talent but there's other things whether it's luck, intangibles, whatever. I'll always believe that the Sox chemistry helped get them thru in 04, and I'll always believe that the 13 Sox played as inspired as a team can play. This 2018 team is special, too. I honestly think if you put the same team on the field next year you wouldn't get the upper 1% results you're seeing this year. For whatever reason they just have IT. There's a special confidence that feeds upon itself with every game they play. It's even more than simply just having a great RS/RA ratio. There's something going on. Hope it lasts thru October. Theo mixed up a disastrous brew with the 2011 Sox, a team nearly devoid of wild free spirits like Damon and Millar. Instead he had added two high profile guys who were very conscientious (like Theo himself; hmm) in Crawford and Gonzalez. Once they started losing, the only guy left on the team who didn't think it was predictive was Pedroia.
Great teams collectively have the same mindset that closers do individually: you put every loss behind you as some kind of aberration and remain certain that you'll win tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by Addam603 on Aug 10, 2018 10:06:58 GMT -5
Most of these nicknames are pretty bad except Moreland, Devers, Velazquez, and Kelly. Is there a more insulting one than Dan Butlers? It’s like “nah, not even worth it” The Butler did it!
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,952
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 10, 2018 10:12:25 GMT -5
Most of these nicknames are pretty bad except Moreland, Devers, Velazquez, and Kelly. Is there a more insulting one than Dan Butlers? It’s like “nah, not even worth it” The players choose the names themselves, so it's actually hilarious. It combines self-deprecation (no one's going to know who I am otherwise) with savvy practicality (I'm going to play precisely one baseball game for one of the great (regular-season) teams of all time and I damn well want people to know I was on the field!).
Sale's nickname, courtesy Pedey, is pretty great. It should live on. A "conductor" is also full of electricity, so it has three different meanings (he's also a maestro on the mound).
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 10, 2018 10:18:09 GMT -5
Is there a more insulting one than Dan Butlers? It’s like “nah, not even worth it” The players choose the names themselves, so it's actually hilarious. It combines self-deprecation (no one's going to know who I am otherwise) with savvy practicality (I'm going to play precisely one baseball game for one of the great (regular-season) teams of all time and I damn well want people to know I was on the field!). Sale's nickname, courtesy Pedey, is pretty great. It should live on. A "conductor" is also full of electricity, so it has three different meanings (he's also a maestro on the mound). I'm not sure if the Butler thing is true. If it is, maybe he should have used "The Butler". If you go to the mlb store you can see even more nicknames (pulldown menu on right): MLB storeBoth Brasier and Renda don't have nicknames either, just like Butler.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Aug 10, 2018 10:20:18 GMT -5
Yeah he's so concerned with the human element that he traded his best prospect for a spousal abuser to increase his chances of winning a World Series by 3%. He was talking about players being good teammates with each other, the interaction between teammates, not necessarily guys being solid citizens. Ok, so this is literally the problem. A culture that can separate those two things is a culture that is deeply toxic, destructive, and broken.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,757
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Aug 10, 2018 10:42:35 GMT -5
He was talking about players being good teammates with each other, the interaction between teammates, not necessarily guys being solid citizens. Ok, so this is literally the problem. A culture that can separate those two things is a culture that is deeply toxic, destructive, and broken. This is beyond the scope of what I was trying to talk about. He was talking about the comraderie/chemisty between teammates. Not all 25 plus guys were Aroldis Chapman. I doubt the 2004 Red Sox were all saints. Hello Manny Ramirez. Didn't he have an incident or two or three? But that team was able to get on the same page and handle the game the same way. They bonded. I remember reading about the role Cabrera had in reigning in Manny and Schilling (hardly the most admired man in the world by all) thinking, "OK. This is going to work. Here we go." The team bonded. They were crazy, but united. Unlike the 2011 team Eric referenced. If you want to talk about a toxic, destructive, broken culture, welcome to the sad reality that is 2018 America, but this is not the forum to talk about such things. I'd much rather talk about the Red Sox (complaints and all) because baseball and particularly the Red Sox are uplifting unlike the world I see around me that I'd like to get my mind off of by talking baseball and the Sox.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Aug 10, 2018 11:05:18 GMT -5
Hembree is the perfect example of how much better Cora is at managing a bullpen than Farrell was. I really don't think Hembree is any different, he's just being put into spots were he can succeed. Mainly facing tons of below average to really bad hitters. He's also not being used for those 2-3 inning long stints that was rather common his first two years. Actually, as I explained in detail, the below average hitters have killed him, likely because he gets sloppy and overconfident, and the really bad hitters have hit him like they hit everyone else.
He's been excellent against average hitters, completely dominant against good hitters, and terrible against great ones.
I do agree with you that most of his improvement is Cora using him correctly, but Cora's not matching him up the way you think he is.
With all due respect that is not what the numbers say. The bottom two groups hitting .199 .261 .298 and .238 .300 .376 have not killed him at all. Then you are trying to say he dominates good hitters by allowing a .266 .338 .459 line. Then you say he's excellent against average hitters with a .255 .326 .408 line, but you include guys 9% below average and 9% above average. We have no clue if 80% of those guys are below average or what exactly the average is for the group. You can't call that group average without knowing that, if could easily be below average as a group. You know numbers, so you know what you did was create something that has a huge margin of error. Using the groups average wRC+ would have been a lot better and would tell us a lot more. Monthly splits April .260 average .286 obs 1.200 whip, May .295 .373 1.727, June .030 .200 .750, and July .279 .340 1.548 He was good in April, totally dominate in June and crappy in May and July. That June was backed by a BAbip of .000. That June is an outlier and is scewing his numbers. He won't come close to doing that again the rest of his career. That's right up there with Brady Anderson hitting 50 HRs in a season. It's not a sign of things to come, but just a massive outlier. The guy gives up hit and gives up a good amount of walks. His current .230 .307 1.326 line is not a sign of a new better pitcher from years past, just a crazy lucky June. He is what he is, a decent back of the bullpen arm, that you likely don't want pitching in the postseason. The Yankees are full of good and great hitters that even with that june have hit .266 .338 .459 and .281 .369 .516 against him.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Aug 10, 2018 11:18:52 GMT -5
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." Calling everyone who is into advanced stats a geek is just a way to discredit them without actually having a reason. Ad hominem fallacy. Werth had no argument, which is why it was just a tirade filled with name calling. If you are referring to me in the first half, you are doing the same thing scottysmalls did. I never said or implied "everyone" into advanced stats is a geek. If you took anything I typed that way, it's on you not on me. Stats and geek are two separate nouns. eric, for example, is into advanced stats but he's also interesting. The stats part is there but he's not a geek. Bill James is another. If you read his twitters he posts some interesting things. I don't have the same political view but he's well versed in a variety of topics. He's also the first I've seen that had the gall to say Bryce Harper is not a super star.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 10, 2018 11:23:46 GMT -5
Calling everyone who is into advanced stats a geek is just a way to discredit them without actually having a reason. Ad hominem fallacy. Werth had no argument, which is why it was just a tirade filled with name calling. If you are referring to me in the first half, you are doing the same thing scottysmalls did. I never said or implied "everyone" into advanced stats is a geek. If you took anything I typed that way, it's on you not on me. Stats and geek are two separate nouns. eric, for example, is into advanced stats but he's also interesting. The stats part is there but he's not a geek. Bill James is another. If you read his twitters he posts some interesting things. I don't have the same political view but he's well versed in a variety of topics. He's also the first I've seen that had the gall to say Bryce Harper is not a super star. I was just expanding the conversation, not disagreeing. I hate bad arguments. As soon as someone says the word 'geek' or 'nerd' in a derogatory way, the argument already sucks.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Aug 10, 2018 11:39:19 GMT -5
As a point of reference, the stats guys that annoy me the most are the stats guys that think projections should have more weight than scouting or the extremist of that who think scouting shouldn't be a factor.
My two least favorite stats gurus are (I'm botching their names) Tangelier (the monkey systems guy) and Dan Syzsomething of Zips. That though is based on comments they made about Shandler several years ago which pretty much was saying combining scouting and sabermetrics was witchcraft which would result in lucky or unlucky results. They were pretty much poopooing the human element. Neither of them do work which tries to quantify the human element like, for example, the difference the amount of break on a curve makes on the resulting contact.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,952
|
Post by ericmvan on Aug 10, 2018 12:33:50 GMT -5
Actually, as I explained in detail, the below average hitters have killed him, likely because he gets sloppy and overconfident, and the really bad hitters have hit him like they hit everyone else.
He's been excellent against average hitters, completely dominant against good hitters, and terrible against great ones.
I do agree with you that most of his improvement is Cora using him correctly, but Cora's not matching him up the way you think he is.
With all due respect that is not what the numbers say. The bottom two groups hitting .199 .261 .298 and .238 .300 .376 have not killed him at all. Then you are trying to say he dominates good hitters by allowing a .266 .338 .459 line. Then you say he's excellent against average hitters with a .255 .326 .408 line, but you include guys 9% below average and 9% above average. We have no clue if 80% of those guys are below average or what exactly the average is for the group. You can't call that group average without knowing that, if could easily be below average as a group. You know numbers, so you know what you did was create something that has a huge margin of error. Using the groups average wRC+ would have been a lot better and would tell us a lot more. Monthly splits April .260 average .286 obs 1.200 whip, May .295 .373 1.727, June .030 .200 .750, and July .279 .340 1.548 He was good in April, totally dominate in June and crappy in May and July. That June was backed by a BAbip of .000. That June is an outlier and is scewing his numbers. He won't come close to doing that again the rest of his career. That's right up there with Brady Anderson hitting 50 HRs in a season. It's not a sign of things to come, but just a massive outlier. The guy gives up hit and gives up a good amount of walks. His current .230 .307 1.326 line is not a sign of a new better pitcher from years past, just a crazy lucky June. He is what he is, a decent back of the bullpen arm, that you likely don't want pitching in the postseason. The Yankees are full of good and great hitters that even with that june have hit .266 .338 .459 and .281 .369 .516 against him. You're not reading the data right. Go back and reread the post again. The first set of numbers is the league average of each group (so, in fact, I know precisely what each group has done, and by design they were balanced across their midpoints) and the second set is Hembree's difference, where negative is better. In the text that follows I give you what he actually allowed so you don't have to do the subtraction.
I began by dividing all the hitters into groups in a way that seemed most rational, the goal being to get 5 groups of roughly equal size. I didn't expect a single year's worth of data to show splits big enough to be significant, but they did, and they were significant in a way that made excellent sense if you'd been watching him.
In plain English: there's a group of hitters, all 29 guys he has faced with wRC+ between 110 and 126 (mean 118, median 118) who have combined to hit .266 / .338 / .459 against everybody. But those numbers include 45 PA, from every month of the calendar, where they hit .143 / .289 / .229 off of Heath Hembree.
|
|
|