I was very confused by the timing of this. Did he JUST hurt his hip? If not, why wait until now to address it?
Smart move for LA. I don’t think they overpaid, I think he is a big draw (esp in the latin community which I understand is a big win in LA) and a huge bat for them. I’d say they are the favorites in the west now.
I mentioned this in my first post in the thread actually. I love the signing. Crosby is the new Ben Grieve, and I think cabrera is underrated. I definitely think the A’s have been one of the more improved teams this offseason.
And elvis, I insinuated nothing. I openly said you made claims without backing them up. You are imagining this whole business about lying. If thats what you want to believe, well I can’t stop you other than pointing out the facts which I have already done.
I absolutely agree. I would hope we would agree that the way a catcher “handles” a pitcher deals, in large part, to pitch selection (among a great many other things). Pitch selection is pretty much factored out of the picture with a knuckleballer. Thus, I find it valid to take Wakefield out of the equation on both sides, since neither Varitek or any other catcher wouldn’t be “handling” him. Correct?
PLEASE tell me where I indicated this. I’ve asked you this in other threads, and I suspect I’ll get the same response - silence.
Your preconceived notions aside, where would you make this assumption? Take the chip off your shoulder, Elvis - you yourself said you’re open to discussing other viewpoints, why are you so eager to automatically dismiss anything other than your own posts?
Folks, just a reminder that this is The Game Room, not the Pit. Please keep your tempers in check, and if you want to have a row, please do it elsewhere.
As much as you know baseball ,you will be surprised to see how much you can learn in a league. You will not only be aware of players that you never gave a second thought to, but you will know their batting averages and slugging percentages. Then you will comb through the players nobody owns trying to find a replacement for an injured player. You will know every reliever . It helps if you are in a big league,then you will get to the bottom of the barrel .
I don’t doubt that at all. I’m actually looking forward to having a go at a fantasy league, even though i’ll probably end up near the bottom. I have even called my team The Mendozas.
I was simply making the point, for the benefit of some people who apparently don’t understand it, that plenty of folks are interested in baseball stats because it actually makes following the game baseball more interesting to us, not just as a tool for running a fantasy league.
Sure, as I’ve been trying patiently to explain. But you seem to have a problem with saying that it makes a credible statistical analysis of Varitek’s handling of pitchers, in the context you and others have been so belligerently challenging, simply impossible. Why is that?
It’s embedded in every single post you’ve made on the subject here.
It isn’t automatic, and not “anything” - when I’ve dismissed what you’ve said it’s because it lacks or even flouts substance, and I’ve explained why too. The problem is not mine, champ. HoboStew, perhaps you could explain what you *did *mean to imply, then? :dubious:
Honestly, I’m not sure what you’re saying here. I don’t feel you’ve “been trying to patiently explain” anything - so I’ll ask you to do it again. You seem to be disagreeing on a point we’re agreeing on - which just indicates a breakdown in understanding.
This is just simply a prejudiced assertion.
Quite possibly. But it would be challenging to find a single post in a baseball thread where you agree with a single thing, or engage in anything other than misdirection and mudslinging.
From 1997 to 2008, the Red Sox have played 1944 regular season games.
From 1997 to 2008, Jason Varitek has started 1175 regular season games.
From 1997 to 2008, Tim Wakefield has started 769 regular season games.
From 1997 to 2008, the Red Sox have played 461 games in which neither Tim Wakefield nor Jason Varitek have started.
Why is it “simply impossible” to make a “credible statistical analysis” that compares the actions of the rotation between the 1175 games Tek started and the 461 games some other catcher started? It’s the same pitchers, in the same period, in the same ballparks with the same defense (apart from catcher). What makes that “simply impossible”?
From 1998* to 2008, the Red Sox have played 1782 regular season games.
From 1998 to 2008, Jason Varitek has started 1175 regular season games.
From 1998 to 2008, Tim Wakefield has started 279 regular season games.
From 1998 to 2008, the Red Sox have played 328 games in which neither Tim Wakefield nor Jason Varitek have started.
*Tek played in 1 game in '97, so that’s hardly a decent starting point.
Now, in 2005, there were only 2 non-Tek, non-Wake games played - that’s impressive. There were 4 seasons where there were 12 or fewer such games - those are also legitimate reasons to discount this approach.
But here’s the thing, Elvis - you never made that point. You just handwaved it all away, without making a specific argument against it, saying the actual process is irrelevant. Again - how is it irrelevant? If there was a generic team out there that had 2 catchers each playing 81 games, why wouldn’t you be able to compare the results of the pitching staffs? THAT is what my original question was.
I’m not sure what the confusion is here. Can’t we just drop this? You made a claim and I said you did so without backing it up with a cite. Then you backed it up with a cite, and there was much rejoicing.
I think baseball statters are going overboard. There are so many things involved in winning a baseball game. Ump mistakes, dumb luck, chalkline hits ,weather and a myriad of others. To look at games won with a player in the game and reward him with points for it ,seems along stretch.
Munch, please, your posts are getting more choleric and more pointless every time. You might avoid the problem if you actually followed the game on the field - you might then have noticed exactly what I’ve been trying to tell you about how Francona uses his backup catchers.
But, since you apparently don’t, there’s nothing further to discuss, no matter how motivated you might be to show me wrong about Varitek’s value to his team, or at least some trivial side point. biow about this - show me one of those trivial side points you think you’ve “got me” on, in a way that you think proves it, and I’ll concede it to make you happy, okay?
This thread is for discussion of the game. Please try to remember that in the future.
Don’t make that demand to someone contradicting you unless you’re sure of your own facts. It *is *tantamount to accusing the other person of making shit up. In a thread that’s supposed to be a fun talk about a fun pastime, that is highly inappropriate.
We’re still waiting for your *own *cite from Bill James, btw. :dubious:
ElvisL1ves, I’ve already asked everyone in this thread to behave themselves. Do not just post to bait others; if you want to call out Munch, please do so in the Pit, not here.
Let me provide you with a perfect example of how Bill James, the doyen of “stat geeks,” thinks characteristics like leadership “don’t matter.”
All quotes in this post are from Seth Mnookin, Feeding the Monster: How Money, Smarts, and Nerve Took a Team to the Top (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006). Mnookin was given unprecedented access to the Red Sox management and players, over an extended period, and his book is an excellent study of the reasons behind their recent success.
Anyway, here’s James showing how all he cares about is the numbers:
Again, bolding mine. Which is pretty much exactly what most stat people believe.
Here’s Mnookin’s discussion of Ortiz’s signing, and of James’ role in it. You’ll note that two words not appearing in this story are “Pedro” and “Martinez.”
Mnookin then notes that one thing Epstein and the rest of the Red Sox management worried about was Ortiz’s age, especially given the tendency of some foreign players to lowball their ages (e.g., Miguel Tejada). Here’s how Epstein dealt with that issue:
Tell us again how James had nothing to do with Ortiz’s move to Boston.
So James was just one of many guys, some of whom had actually watched Ortiz play and whose opinions thereby carried some actual weight, who offered an opinion about him. Thanks for the support.
Mnookin, btw, isn’t even on the regular Red Sox beat - I can provide other cites for Pedro’s lobbying from reporters who do and who were there if you insist, but frankly you’d have to convince me it’s worth the effort.
The problem with James personally (as if that mattered) isn’t, btw, that he doesn’t think unquantifiables or intangibles matter, it’s that he has nothing to offer there to help guide the baseball people. He doesn’t follow the game on the field enough to say anything as useful as the career scouts, development people, or maybe even serious fans do.
The problem with too many of his acolytes, some of whom have posted right here, is that they think those things not only don’t matter but don’t even exist. Even many who do are often much less interested in discussing them than in discussing what they *can *see and quantify. They miss the heart of what makes fanship so much fun. It’s sad, really.