- Joined:
- Apr 26, 2010
- Posts:
- 26,017
- Liked Posts:
- 3,297
- Location:
- Minnesota
My favorite teams
Obviously...
And CO, hating a player because they are scrappy is Special person. It is possible to be scrappy and also good...
Obviously...
And CO, hating a player because they are scrappy is Special person. It is possible to be scrappy and also good...
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
This is true. You should hate a player because they suck at baseball.
brett05
867-5309
- Joined:
- Apr 28, 2009
- Posts:
- 27,226
- Liked Posts:
- 4,579
- Location:
- Hell
My least favorite is also my favorite.....Ryne Sandberg. I wish he would have sucked more. (yep, pure jealousy)
- Joined:
- Jul 31, 2010
- Posts:
- 4,967
- Liked Posts:
- 697
You sure did. And it doesn't make any sense. It hitters WAR and pitchers WAR don't use the same components. Pitchers WAR doesn't incorporate UZR. That is what that dude's whole problem was.
Fielding*
Yet you choose to still use WAR for pitchers.
I'm not going to do all the math for SIERA. You can, but I'm not going to.
Sure, it is possible to be scrappy and good. I'm just not going to like that player.
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,145
Good to see you finally get it.
Keep correcting yourself.
Thanks. I wouldn't trust you to do math for a McDonalds.
Last edited:
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
I think I sort of see what CO is trying to say although he's sort of doing it lazily.
There is a certain point where a pitcher becomes a defender, when the ball is in play. However, when evaluating a pitcher's skill, you look at the things he has much more control over, such as walks, strikeouts and home runs given up (those balls are obviously not playable). So what he's trying to say, albeit poorly, is that you want to look at the pitcher's fielding-independent peripherals.
Pitchers are definitely still fielders, as they help protect the middle of the infield on comebackers and can check baserunners and even pick them off. That part of the game is important. What they get paid for, though, is their ability to generate as many outs by themselves as they can. So you look at guys who can keep the balls on the ground, who can get the most whiffs, and who don't like putting guys on base for free.
Once the ball is in play, the pitcher has almost no control over what happens to it. If it's on the ground or popped up, it'll probably find its way to an infielder, but that's about the extent of the control. However, a lot of a pitcher's worth is still dependent on how many runs he can prevent, so even if a pitcher's FIP or SIERA or whatever looks great, he can still be pure shit because when he's not striking them out, he's serving up doubles in the gap or whatever despite having a solid defense behind him. So just like everything else, you can't evaluate a pitcher based solely off of FIP or luck...you have to look at the whole picture.
There is a certain point where a pitcher becomes a defender, when the ball is in play. However, when evaluating a pitcher's skill, you look at the things he has much more control over, such as walks, strikeouts and home runs given up (those balls are obviously not playable). So what he's trying to say, albeit poorly, is that you want to look at the pitcher's fielding-independent peripherals.
Pitchers are definitely still fielders, as they help protect the middle of the infield on comebackers and can check baserunners and even pick them off. That part of the game is important. What they get paid for, though, is their ability to generate as many outs by themselves as they can. So you look at guys who can keep the balls on the ground, who can get the most whiffs, and who don't like putting guys on base for free.
Once the ball is in play, the pitcher has almost no control over what happens to it. If it's on the ground or popped up, it'll probably find its way to an infielder, but that's about the extent of the control. However, a lot of a pitcher's worth is still dependent on how many runs he can prevent, so even if a pitcher's FIP or SIERA or whatever looks great, he can still be pure shit because when he's not striking them out, he's serving up doubles in the gap or whatever despite having a solid defense behind him. So just like everything else, you can't evaluate a pitcher based solely off of FIP or luck...you have to look at the whole picture.
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,145
I'm surprised you know what he's saying because I'm pretty sure he doesn't even know.
Which makes pitchers WAR hilarious because part of what the pitcher is supposed to prevent is hits. Taking hits out of a pitcher WAR equation is dumb. Both WAR metrics don't account for it.
Pitcher's WAR is utterly worthless.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
I wouldn't go so far as to say it's worthless but it's definitely flawed. I like to use WAR as a standardized comparison between players after the full season is up and also over their careers but I don't think GMs would only use WAR to evaluate players. I'm sure they use something nobody's thought of to do their stuff though.
I also think the reason hits are taken out of the equation is due to the inherent randomness of baseball, which is why DIPS and FIP were implemented. Sometimes a batter squares up on a ball and it lands in a glove. Sometimes he bloops it and it becomes a triple. You can't really penalize a pitcher for that, just like you can't really penalize a quarterback if he delivers the ball right on the hands and the receiver has butterfingers. It's just a matter of whether they choose to include this or not. I believe the Rally WAR uses defensive runs saved so that does account for some fielding-dependent evaluation of pitchers.
I think as long as you don't use only WAR or any one statistic for evaluating a player, it's fine. Just like when you argue HOF qualifications, you have to look at the whole picture to put everything in context.
I also think the reason hits are taken out of the equation is due to the inherent randomness of baseball, which is why DIPS and FIP were implemented. Sometimes a batter squares up on a ball and it lands in a glove. Sometimes he bloops it and it becomes a triple. You can't really penalize a pitcher for that, just like you can't really penalize a quarterback if he delivers the ball right on the hands and the receiver has butterfingers. It's just a matter of whether they choose to include this or not. I believe the Rally WAR uses defensive runs saved so that does account for some fielding-dependent evaluation of pitchers.
I think as long as you don't use only WAR or any one statistic for evaluating a player, it's fine. Just like when you argue HOF qualifications, you have to look at the whole picture to put everything in context.
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,145
I would. When you're looking at pitcher evaluations and you compeltely take hits allowed out of the equation then the numbers holds no meaning.
Take a look at a guy like Ricky Nolasco in 2009(I believe that is the year).
ERA over 5. One WAR had him as a +4ish WAR pitcher. Another a (-).06ish.
That's ridiculous.
When you can start having gaps that wide the metric(s) are stupid and should be disregarded post haste.
Ok but let's not kid ourselves. I would venture a guess that a vast majority of hits allowed are the result of the pitchers fault...not errors or bad fielding in general. I agree you have to factor for fielding to an extent but displacing hits etc overall is cutting off your nose to "spiderface".
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
I think in the Nolasco example you posted you're looking at fWAR for the positive and rWAR for the negative. I tend to trust the rWAR better as they have a lower replacement level and they use DRS in the calculations which should take into account certain fielding parameters. The WAR calculators are pretty transparent with how they actually come to the numbers, but especially for position players, the defensive metric is very flawed and thus, like all other statistics and metrics, WAR has to be taken with a grain of salt.
I can't really quantify how many hits are the pitchers' fault and how many are just because of bad luck, but that is probably more philosophical as now you have to factor in how the defense is set, how well they are coached, whether they're even good athletes with good jumps, range, instincts etc. That's stuff way out of the pitchers' control. That's why I can appreciate DIPS, but you're right, if a pitcher is giving up more than 10 hits per 9 IP, there's something seriously wrong with his approach for that season. If he's doing that over a few seasons, then he's probably just not a good pitcher no matter what his DIPS says.
I'm okay with using WAR as a quicky comp method. I do like the approach of using multiple metrics to evaluate a player though. I think, as has been discussed before, the problem with CO and certain others is that they latch onto one metric and have a myopic view of what that pitcher can do because they're pigeonholed into that metric.
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,145
I believe that is right.
And guess what site CO uses?
.........
lulz.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
:lol:
I kind of wish the sabermetricians would standardize the WAR a bit better, but I think that's mostly for us basement-dwellers to have fun with. I'm pretty sure the GMs use something proprietary (or at least the smart ones do) that they don't share with the closet spreadsheet-pushers.
I kind of wish the sabermetricians would standardize the WAR a bit better, but I think that's mostly for us basement-dwellers to have fun with. I'm pretty sure the GMs use something proprietary (or at least the smart ones do) that they don't share with the closet spreadsheet-pushers.
- Joined:
- May 4, 2010
- Posts:
- 27,077
- Liked Posts:
- 15,145
As if we needed more proof that CO is an idiot and I'm generally really fucking smart.
ESPN CHICAGO: 50 Greatest Cubs Photo Gallery - ESPN Chicago
Zambrano is the 15th ranked pitcher on this list.
Last edited:
- Joined:
- Apr 17, 2010
- Posts:
- 10,038
- Liked Posts:
- 819
- Location:
- Peoria IL
Stewart is my most hated player right now
- Joined:
- Apr 28, 2010
- Posts:
- 1,380
- Liked Posts:
- 165
i loved guys like DeRosa, Byrd, D. Lee. hated the effort put forth but Aramis, but he hit well & i enjoyed watching him. Milton Bradley cuz he's just a fuckin dick, Theriot cuz he said he was "on the right side of the rivalry" between the Cubs/Cards, but he just sucks ass now. **** em.
- Joined:
- Jun 14, 2010
- Posts:
- 7,127
- Liked Posts:
- 3,072
- Location:
- Los Angeles, CA
My favorite teams
Jeff Samardzija
- Joined:
- Apr 28, 2010
- Posts:
- 1,380
- Liked Posts:
- 165
but why are all these stats brought up? DeRo & Byrd, those type of guys' impacts arent on a sheet of paper. you can bring up numbers all you want, but to the organization is doesnt make a difference. i liked Big Z & i still have his jersey, but what he did w/ all the retirement bullshit & taking his frustrations out on the team... it was selfish bullshit. however, he did contribute to the team in his younger years w/ his intensity. it's a shame he didnt keep it in check. Lee tailed off @ the end of his Cubbie years, but his lead-by-example demeanor helped stabilize the Cubs for awhile. it's a shame most of these players listed ended up leaving on bad terms.
Jamfan
Twitter: @jamfan41
- Joined:
- Apr 28, 2010
- Posts:
- 514
- Liked Posts:
- 48
- Location:
- Carbondale, Illinois
Aaron Miles
- Joined:
- May 17, 2010
- Posts:
- 13,947
- Liked Posts:
- 3,118
ChitwnRyan60452
@Chitown_Ryan
- Joined:
- Feb 8, 2012
- Posts:
- 222
- Liked Posts:
- 68
Joe Ricketts...He counts right?