Starlin Castro All-Star?

All-Star?

  • Yes

    Votes: 2 12.5%
  • Not a chance

    Votes: 2 12.5%
  • Yes, Cubs need a representive

    Votes: 9 56.3%
  • Maybe, too early to tell

    Votes: 3 18.8%

  • Total voters
    16

DewsSox79

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 24, 2010
Posts:
29,059
Liked Posts:
7,249
the best team doesnt always win the series, but that doesnt mean it is in any way a rare occurence...in baseball because it is low scoring,dependent on very variable hitting and pitching(much more so hitting wise imo)...you see more variety and parity in games...even in the playoffs(this is where pitching comes huge because if you have an ace and some key guys who can pitch 7-8 innings and allow around 2-3 runs...you're in good shape defensively and that can be the biggest difference...when your bats are cold...pitching can help

I understand that, but it is not ok to be a fan of Team X that has the best record in baseball, and use the scapegoat....oh the best team rarely wins the WS.
 

Rice Cube

World Series Dreaming
Donator
Joined:
Jun 7, 2011
Posts:
18,077
Liked Posts:
3,472
Location:
Chicago
There's a couple things...

1. A team has to make the playoffs to get to the World Series and get a chance to win the World Series. That is not debatable.

2. In order to make the playoffs, a team has to win as many games as possible and out-win everyone else in their division, or anyone else in the wild card race. That is also not debatable.

3. Once in the playoffs, a new season begins. In any given series, if the ball bounces right, any team can win that series, even if they completely sucked in the regular season and only got to the playoffs by the sheer grace of the baseball gods. That is Poodski's point.

You absolutely want your team to win as many games as possible in the regular season in order to get to the playoffs. Even with the luck factor and randomness in the playoffs, it is logical to believe that a team that is built to defeat the Yankees and Red Sox should be able to win most of their games in the playoffs. But again, that is why they play the games on the field. I'd absolutely want my team to be built to defeat the Yankees and Red Sox rather than to just win a weak NL Central, which at certain points in the past few years has not been as weak as people think (i.e. 2005, 2008). You cannot assume that your division will always be weak. You have to build to win as many games as possible.
 

DewsSox79

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 24, 2010
Posts:
29,059
Liked Posts:
7,249
There's a couple things...

1. A team has to make the playoffs to get to the World Series and get a chance to win the World Series. That is not debatable.

2. In order to make the playoffs, a team has to win as many games as possible and out-win everyone else in their division, or anyone else in the wild card race. That is also not debatable.

3. Once in the playoffs, a new season begins. In any given series, if the ball bounces right, any team can win that series, even if they completely sucked in the regular season and only got to the playoffs by the sheer grace of the baseball gods. That is Poodski's point.

You absolutely want your team to win as many games as possible in the regular season in order to get to the playoffs. Even with the luck factor and randomness in the playoffs, it is logical to believe that a team that is built to defeat the Yankees and Red Sox should be able to win most of their games in the playoffs. But again, that is why they play the games on the field. I'd absolutely want my team to be built to defeat the Yankees and Red Sox rather than to just win a weak NL Central, which at certain points in the past few years has not been as weak as people think (i.e. 2005, 2008). You cannot assume that your division will always be weak. You have to build to win as many games as possible.

Well of course you have to build a team to win as many games as possible, but the fact that poodski said the best team rarely wins the WS IMO shows that he is ok with the cubs not winning the world series, like in 2008 when they were awesome....it makes a first round sweep much more tolerable when you have that mindset.
 

dabynsky

Fringe Average Mod
Donator
Joined:
May 17, 2010
Posts:
13,947
Liked Posts:
3,118
There's a couple things...

1. A team has to make the playoffs to get to the World Series and get a chance to win the World Series. That is not debatable.

2. In order to make the playoffs, a team has to win as many games as possible and out-win everyone else in their division, or anyone else in the wild card race. That is also not debatable.

3. Once in the playoffs, a new season begins. In any given series, if the ball bounces right, any team can win that series, even if they completely sucked in the regular season and only got to the playoffs by the sheer grace of the baseball gods. That is Poodski's point.

You absolutely want your team to win as many games as possible in the regular season in order to get to the playoffs. Even with the luck factor and randomness in the playoffs, it is logical to believe that a team that is built to defeat the Yankees and Red Sox should be able to win most of their games in the playoffs. But again, that is why they play the games on the field. I'd absolutely want my team to be built to defeat the Yankees and Red Sox rather than to just win a weak NL Central, which at certain points in the past few years has not been as weak as people think (i.e. 2005, 2008). You cannot assume that your division will always be weak. You have to build to win as many games as possible.

The only thing I would add that is building the best baseball team possible increases your odds of winning in the postseason, but that is all that a team can possibly do.
 

poodski

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
3,276
Liked Posts:
680
Well of course you have to build a team to win as many games as possible, but the fact that poodski said the best team rarely wins the WS IMO shows that he is ok with the cubs not winning the world series, like in 2008 when they were awesome....it makes a first round sweep much more tolerable when you have that mindset.

I'd rather get swept in the playoffs than miss the playoffs yes.
 

Rice Cube

World Series Dreaming
Donator
Joined:
Jun 7, 2011
Posts:
18,077
Liked Posts:
3,472
Location:
Chicago
Well of course you have to build a team to win as many games as possible, but the fact that poodski said the best team rarely wins the WS IMO shows that he is ok with the cubs not winning the world series, like in 2008 when they were awesome....it makes a first round sweep much more tolerable when you have that mindset.

I understood why the Cubs lost, but I absolutely wasn't okay with it. It sucked balls. I'm sure the folks in Tampa Bay weren't okay with losing to the Rangers last year either. Or the Yankees to the Rangers. Texas wasn't a bad team by any means but they weren't better than the Rays and Yankees...just luckier.

Poodski is right in that you have to be both good (to get to the playoffs) and lucky (to actually win the championship) but I think he places a bit too much emphasis on the luck. I'm too lazy to go back and look at Pythags and matchups and other shit, but I'm guessing that while the best team doesn't always win the World Series, once they get to the championship round, the more loaded team is probably going to win the majority of the time. But the ultimate marker of success is how many championships you win. So if you don't win any, you're considered a failure. I would love to see the Cubs make the playoffs more consistently, but I don't want them to be considered a failure anymore. Hope that makes sense.
 

Rice Cube

World Series Dreaming
Donator
Joined:
Jun 7, 2011
Posts:
18,077
Liked Posts:
3,472
Location:
Chicago
The only thing I would add that is building the best baseball team possible increases your odds of winning in the postseason, but that is all that a team can possibly do.

Yeah, that was a major problem with the early 2000s Oakland teams. That was also annoying (I'm from CA) :D
 

Jntg4

Fire Forum Moderator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
26,017
Liked Posts:
3,297
Location:
Minnesota
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  2. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Chicago State Cougars
  2. DePaul Blue Demons
  3. Illinois-Chicago Flames
  4. Loyola Ramblers
  5. Northern Illinois Huskies
  6. Northwestern Wildcats
Middle RP usually never make it and I saw somewhere today that had said that exact same thing. The pitchers that usally make it are closers and starters.

I think by Middle Relievers you mean Set-up Men, Middle Relievers, AND Long Relievers collectively, right?
 

CODE_BLUE56

Ded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
19,725
Liked Posts:
4,699
Location:
Texas
I understand that, but it is not ok to be a fan of Team X that has the best record in baseball, and use the scapegoat....oh the best team rarely wins the WS.

oh i agree...but sometimes pitchers and batters arent hot at the right time...the best team might face a bad matchup or not be playing like the best team at the playoffs...baseball is all about winning and losing streaks...teams fluctuate throughout the season because of how much parity there onset by gameplay(variable hitting,fielding,luck,etc.)

to win the WS...obviously you need to make the playoffs...have good pitchers...and yes, have some luck with hitters...it sure helps if you had the best record in baseball and they should be the favorites to win it all...and sometimes they end up do winning it all...but thats not always the case
 

Jntg4

Fire Forum Moderator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
26,017
Liked Posts:
3,297
Location:
Minnesota
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  2. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Chicago State Cougars
  2. DePaul Blue Demons
  3. Illinois-Chicago Flames
  4. Loyola Ramblers
  5. Northern Illinois Huskies
  6. Northwestern Wildcats
FIP is meant for prediction, not saying how well they actually did. Fact is, they gave up those runs. FIP predicts future success.
 

DewsSox79

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 24, 2010
Posts:
29,059
Liked Posts:
7,249
I understood why the Cubs lost, but I absolutely wasn't okay with it. It sucked balls. I'm sure the folks in Tampa Bay weren't okay with losing to the Rangers last year either. Or the Yankees to the Rangers. Texas wasn't a bad team by any means but they weren't better than the Rays and Yankees...just luckier.

Poodski is right in that you have to be both good (to get to the playoffs) and lucky (to actually win the championship) but I think he places a bit too much emphasis on the luck. I'm too lazy to go back and look at Pythags and matchups and other shit, but I'm guessing that while the best team doesn't always win the World Series, once they get to the championship round, the more loaded team is probably going to win the majority of the time. But the ultimate marker of success is how many championships you win. So if you don't win any, you're considered a failure. I would love to see the Cubs make the playoffs more consistently, but I don't want them to be considered a failure anymore. Hope that makes sense.

Im too tired to look. All I know is the Sox where the best in the AL and were the team to represent the AL in 2005, while 1 game better, the cardinals didnt make it to the WS.
 

poodski

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
3,276
Liked Posts:
680
FIP is meant for prediction, not saying how well they actually did. Fact is, they gave up those runs. FIP predicts future success.

I don't believe it was created for predictions, it shows what they have done thus far.

It does how ever predict future ERA better than ERA itself.
 

Jntg4

Fire Forum Moderator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
26,017
Liked Posts:
3,297
Location:
Minnesota
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  2. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Chicago State Cougars
  2. DePaul Blue Demons
  3. Illinois-Chicago Flames
  4. Loyola Ramblers
  5. Northern Illinois Huskies
  6. Northwestern Wildcats
I don't believe it was created for predictions, it shows what they have done thus far.

It does how ever predict future ERA better than ERA itself.

It shows how well they would have done with an average defense. I kinda find that worthless to a Cubs standpoint unless we can really improve our defense first. However, they still gave up those runs, so they really haven't done as well as FIP suggests in many cases, or may have done better than FIP suggests.
 

poodski

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
3,276
Liked Posts:
680
I'm too lazy to go back and look at Pythags and matchups and other shit, but I'm guessing that while the best team doesn't always win the World Series, once they get to the championship round, the more loaded team is probably going to win the majority of the time.

I'm pretty bored so I will take a look. I will do the entire playoffs though, because not quite sure what the point is in just the championship round though.

Last year:
ATL-SFG Giants won with better Pyth
PHI-CIN PHI won with better pyth
SFG-PHI SFG won with worse Pyth
NYY over MIN with better
TEX over TBR with worse pyth
TEX over NYY with worse pyth
SFG over TEX with better pyth

So last year 4-3. Also Texas had the worst pyth of all of them.

2009:
PHI over COL with better pyth
LAD over STL with better pyth
PHI over LAD with worse pyth
LAA over BOS with worse pyth
NYY over MIN with better pyth
NYY over LAA with better pyth
NYY over PHI with better pyth

5-2 but this year the best team won it all so thats a guaranteed 3-0.

2008:
PHI over MIL with better pyth
LAD over CHC due to cheating
PHI over LAD with better pyth
TBR over CHW with better pyth
BOS over LAA with better pyth
TBR over BOS with worse pyth
PHI over TBR with better pyth

So again 5-2 also its amazing how good LAA record is despite their awful pyth.

2007:
COL over PHI with better pyth
ARI over CHC due to cheating
COL over ARI with better pyth
CLE over NYY with worse pyth
BOS over LAA with better pyth
BOS over CLE with better pyth
BOS over COl with better pyth

Another year of the best winning it all.

2006:
Cards over SDP with worse pyth
NYM over LAD with better pyth
STL over NYM with worse pyth
OAK over MIN with worse pyth
DET over NYY with equal pyth
DET over OAK with better pyth
STL over DET with worse pyth

So 2-4-1 this year, but the worst pyth won it all.

So over the last 5 years the better pyth has gone 21-13 so they win more often but still not all that often. The best team has won twice in the last 5 years and the worst team has won once.
 

poodski

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
3,276
Liked Posts:
680
It shows how well they would have done with an average defense.

Correct

I kinda find that worthless to a Cubs standpoint unless we can really improve our defense first.

Correct FIP is trying to show we need to improve the defense.

However, they still gave up those runs, so they really haven't done as well as FIP suggests in many cases, or may have done better than FIP suggests.

This is where I think the confusion lies. Is it the pitchers fault our defense has been garbage? If you are going to look at just the pitcher and just the defense you have to separate them and realize they both affect ERA. The pitcher is more responsible than the defense, but they are still responsible.

If you put a pitcher in front of the Rays are they really going to "pitch" better or does the defense artificially lower their ERA? Where as you put them in front of the Orioles do they now become a worse pitcher? Just because their ERA is lower or higher doesn't mean they pitched better per say. Could they? Sure, but that may not be the only indicator, and FIP can help illustrate that.

Garza hasn't been as good as his FIP indicates, but he has been better than his ERA shows. He is somewhere in between.
 

CODE_BLUE56

Ded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
19,725
Liked Posts:
4,699
Location:
Texas
I see what you're saying...FIP is a good way of getting a better look at the pitcher's performance itself...although its not always perfect(doesnt take into account # of hits(and doubles and triples allowed as well as a couple of other things)...and ERA of course is distorted by the inclusion of fielding...although ERA for the most part is reliant on the pitcher's performance and defense...

you can find a good read of a pitcher's overall performance and value imo in the zone between FIP and ERA
 

poodski

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
3,276
Liked Posts:
680
I see what you're saying...FIP is a good way of getting a better look at the pitcher's performance itself...although its not always perfect(doesnt take into account # of hits(and doubles and triples allowed as well as a couple of other things)...and ERA of course is distorted by the inclusion of fielding...although ERA for the most part is reliant on the pitcher's performance and defense...

you can find a good read of a pitcher's overall performance and value imo in the zone between FIP and ERA

Bingo. Basically you are talking performance vs results. Those two are not always the same due to things like luck, defense, and sequencing.
 

Jntg4

Fire Forum Moderator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
26,017
Liked Posts:
3,297
Location:
Minnesota
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  2. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Chicago State Cougars
  2. DePaul Blue Demons
  3. Illinois-Chicago Flames
  4. Loyola Ramblers
  5. Northern Illinois Huskies
  6. Northwestern Wildcats
Garza hasn't been as good as his FIP indicates, but he has been better than his ERA shows. He is somewhere in between.

Exactly why I feel that DIPS stats are nice, but FIP doesn't cut it for me.
 

Jntg4

Fire Forum Moderator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
26,017
Liked Posts:
3,297
Location:
Minnesota
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  2. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Chicago State Cougars
  2. DePaul Blue Demons
  3. Illinois-Chicago Flames
  4. Loyola Ramblers
  5. Northern Illinois Huskies
  6. Northwestern Wildcats
Because of one player over a small sample size?

If it doesnt cut it for you what does?

SIERA, and for more than 1 player...
 
Top