PDA

View Full Version : But...but...but...



redssince75
07-20-2011, 12:08 AM
I thought pitching was the problem. :confused:

I guess maybe it is.....why can't they hold the Pirates down to -1? This is ridiculous.

R_Webb18
07-20-2011, 12:15 AM
cant there be more than 1 problem? :confused:

redssince75
07-20-2011, 12:23 AM
cant there be more than 1 problem? :confused:

Oh, I think we're full of problems. But post-Volquez, starting pitching is the best part of this team (admittedly, not saying much).

ervinsm84
07-20-2011, 03:34 AM
sick sample size of games

try reading this thread from ORG.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90895

or check out one of this sites own bloggers
http://basecloggers.tumblr.com/post/7765029767/lovelob

Best quote about the men LOB

The team that left the most men on base in a season in the history of baseball was the 1976 Reds with 1326.

wlf WV
07-20-2011, 04:22 AM
'76 reds were 66-38 at the end of July.

ervinsm84
07-20-2011, 04:29 AM
'76 reds were 66-38 at the end of July.


o rly?

The whole point is using LOB as a pure counting stat is a pretty inept way to evaluate how good or bad a teams offense really is.

bshall2105
07-20-2011, 06:07 AM
o rly?

The whole point is using LOB as a pure counting stat is a pretty inept way to evaluate how good or bad a teams offense really is.

If you leave 10 on base and score 10 runs then sure it's great, but we have not been scoring any runs lately so using runners LOB is appropriate right now.

ervinsm84
07-20-2011, 06:56 AM
If you leave 10 on base and score 10 runs then sure it's great, but we have not been scoring any runs lately so using runners LOB is appropriate right now.

Lets look a little deeper than the past 4 games. As mentioned in the ORG thread by member AtomicDumpling



The Reds actually lead the National League in having the best percentage of their baserunners come around to score a run at 31%. In other words, when a Reds hitter gets on base he has a 31% chance of scoring.

The lowest percentage in the NL is 27% (Padres and Dodgers), so you can see there really is not much difference between the best and the worst in terms of scoring your baserunners. This magnifies the importance of getting more baserunners and diminishes the importance of the "clutch factor" -- if you want to score more runs you must get more runners on base because you are not going to be significantly more effective than the other team at getting those runners around the bases.

RS% -- Run Scoring Percentage
Percentage of times a baserunner eventually scores a run.
(R - HR) / (H + HBP + BB - HR)

The baserunning formula only applies to baserunners that are on base for subsequent batters, which means a hitter that hits a home run is not counted in the formula, but any runners that were on base at the time of the homer would count. So another way to improve your runs scored (in addition to getting more runners on base as mentioned above) is to hit more home runs.


also here are the splits for the REDS and MLB average based on game score situations
http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/484/redsclutchnumbers.jpg

FireDusty
07-20-2011, 07:02 AM
sick sample size of games

try reading this thread from ORG.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90895

or check out one of this sites own bloggers
http://basecloggers.tumblr.com/post/7765029767/lovelob

Best quote about the men LOB

The team that left the most men on base in a season in the history of baseball was the 1976 Reds with 1326.That is because they had more runners reach base than any team in the history of baseball.

Please.

ervinsm84
07-20-2011, 07:25 AM
That is because they had more runners reach base than any team in the history of baseball.

Please.

which is why we should look at the conversion rate of baserunners who score, not a pure counting stat like total LOB. No one would judge a QB on who had the most incomplete passes as being a bad qb if hes throwing 50 times a game and completing 40 for an 80% comp rate but he had 10 incomplete passes so hes worse than the guy who was 14/23 61% comp % but only 9 incomplete attempts.

And yes the reds lead the NL in conversion of baserunners, see above posts.

redssince75
07-20-2011, 09:24 AM
"Lies, damn lies, and statistics." Statistics can educate me about things I don't know about. But they can never convince me to disbelieve what I am seeing with my own two eyes. I'll go with my eyes every time. And in a sample size of the entire season AFTER the first two weeks, I have seen this offense fail over and over and over again -- actually, freakishly consistently and predictably -- in clutch and RISP situations.

swaisuc
07-20-2011, 09:52 AM
I thought pitching was the problem. :confused:

I guess maybe it is.....why can't they hold the Pirates down to -1? This is ridiculous.

It depends on the time period you're talking about. Pitching WAS the problem and that is how we got in a hole in the first place this year. The reason we haven't turned it around once we finally starting getting pitching the last few weeks is, of course, the offense.

Neither is particularly relevant though to the front office. What they need to decide is which, if either, needs to be improved if they're going to expect it to be playoff worthy going forward. My instinct is that the offense will be fine moving forward, but its certainly debatable given the way things have been going.

ervinsm84
07-20-2011, 12:19 PM
"Lies, damn lies, and statistics." Statistics can educate me about things I don't know about. But they can never convince me to disbelieve what I am seeing with my own two eyes. I'll go with my eyes every time. And in a sample size of the entire season AFTER the first two weeks, I have seen this offense fail over and over and over again -- actually, freakishly consistently and predictably -- in clutch and RISP situations.


So more or less, no matter what piece of evidence is provided to counter your view of the team, your view of the team is more representative of what the truth really is than a bunch of "numbers"

The first line you quote pretty much sums up your stance on statistics in that you dont buy into them, and no matter how much they contradict what you believe, youll always believe your eyes.

Do you think your eyes watching every single game, without actively counting or using statistics could tell the difference between a 275 ba hitter and a 295 ba hitter over the course of, ill even use a whole 162 game season with 500 ABS.

500 ABs for a major league season

500 x .275 = 137.5
500x .295= 147.5


Thats a total of 10 hits over the course of 162 game season with ~500 ABS and the difference works out to 1 extra hit every ~16 games. Then we need to add in that the hits wont be evenly distributed as 1 extra hit per 16 games bc guys end up with short term surges and declines in hit totals over the course of the year.

Maybe youre the one special guy who has this ability, but Id have a hard time believing anyone could pick this out from only watching the games unless they were counting them by hand.

ukwazoo
07-20-2011, 12:29 PM
So more or less, no matter what piece of evidence is provided to counter your view of the team, your view of the team is more representative of what the truth really is than a bunch of "numbers"

The first line you quote pretty much sums up your stance on statistics in that you dont buy into them, and no matter how much they contradict what you believe, youll always believe your eyes.

Do you think your eyes watching every single game, without actively counting or using statistics could tell the difference between a 275 ba hitter and a 295 ba hitter over the course of, ill even use a whole 162 game season with 500 ABS.

500 ABs for a major league season

500 x .275 = 137.5
500x .295= 147.5


Thats a total of 10 hits over the course of 162 game season with ~500 ABS and the difference works out to 1 extra hit every ~16 games. Then we need to add in that the hits wont be evenly distributed as 1 extra hit per 16 games bc guys end up with short term surges and declines in hit totals over the course of the year.

Maybe youre the one special guy who has this ability, but Id have a hard time believing anyone could pick this out from only watching the games unless they were counting them by hand.

Well, since your signature is in a bright, large, bold, pink font, it must be something very important. :beerme:

redssince75
07-20-2011, 01:23 PM
So more or less, no matter what piece of evidence is provided to counter your view of the team, your view of the team is more representative of what the truth really is than a bunch of "numbers"

The first line you quote pretty much sums up your stance on statistics in that you dont buy into them, and no matter how much they contradict what you believe, youll always believe your eyes.


Not exactly, I do rely on statistics to a certain extent, but if they flatly contradict what I am seeing myself, they carry less weight than if they support what I am seeing, sure. That just seems natural and logical to me.

Vottomatic
07-20-2011, 07:13 PM
Not exactly, I do rely on statistics to a certain extent, but if they flatly contradict what I am seeing myself, they carry less weight than if they support what I am seeing, sure. That just seems natural and logical to me.

:beerme: :thumbup:

You said it well. I rely on statistics to a point, also, until they flatly contradict what I am seeing with my eyes. Then those stats carry less weight.

Well said.

texasdave
07-20-2011, 07:18 PM
:beerme: :thumbup:

You said it well. I rely on statistics to a point, also, until they flatly contradict what I am seeing with my eyes. Then those stats carry less weight.

Well said.

Or it's time for an eye exam. :laugh:

Redeye fly
07-20-2011, 11:14 PM
I'm a stats guy to a certain extent too. But we can debate and tear things apart and go over all the numbers we want to with a fine toothed comb. I think a little kid can understand that the team that gets the most runners on base also stands a decent chance of leaving the most runners on base.... while at the same time over the course of a season also probably driving a fair amount of them in.

But we can look back at past stats and season stats up until this point and in a sense it's all irrelevant. If it was the pitching before (and it was) that kind of put us in a hole, there's nothing that can change that now. Or to put it best, it's perhaps already been changed. The biggest offenders and problems in our starting rotation were a wild and erratic Volquez and an inconsistent Travis Wood, and they're both in Triple A. Arroyo has been a bit of a problem, but he still battles and gives you at least 5 or 6 innings generally keeping you in the game. Cueto has been ace like. Leake has been damn good. Bailey has had some bumps in the road in his second trip back off the DL, but still has been decent. Willis only has two starts, but they were both good ones.

Point being we can't change, or the team can't change the results of what happened before. They can only deal in the now and try to prepare to have success in the future. This is a very winnable division, and right now the problem indeed is the inability to get runners across home plate. As annoying as George Grande can be for some, "get em on, get em over, get em in" is a very key fundamental concept that the Reds have not done very well lately.

But all in all, it was nice to get a win today.

webbbj
07-20-2011, 11:20 PM
the hitting with RISP is just variance and not really concern this offense has more runs than every team in the NL. Pitching needs improvements.

FireDusty
07-20-2011, 11:21 PM
which is why we should look at the conversion rate of baserunners who score, not a pure counting stat like total LOB. No one would judge a QB on who had the most incomplete passes as being a bad qb if hes throwing 50 times a game and completing 40 for an 80% comp rate but he had 10 incomplete passes so hes worse than the guy who was 14/23 61% comp % but only 9 incomplete attempts.

And yes the reds lead the NL in conversion of baserunners, see above posts.

Ok, I see.

That is shocking to see the Reds are leading in conversion rate. The stats don't lie. The eyeball test is very deceiving because it seems like they haven't had a clutch hit in a month.

Better starting pitching would allow us to win games in a more conventional manner. I still say we have the talent now in the starting staff. I question the game plan in how we approach opponents. Opponents left handed hitters seem to own us.

The ballpark is also a factor. It seems like the Reds should teach a 2 seem fastball to everyone in the system. We need to get the ball pounded intot the ground more.

texasdave
07-21-2011, 07:32 AM
No new news here.


MONTH BR/G OER R/G
APRIL 11.9 0.340 5.26
MAY 12.2 0.300 4.59
JUNE 11.5 0.313 4.62
JULY 10.5 0.217 3.47

PREJULY 11.8 0.317 4.82

2010 11.8 0.314 4.88
2011 11.7 0.303 4.61

vottofan4life
07-21-2011, 11:27 AM
Just on a Random note
i was checking out some of the worst contracts in baseball and the only ones i could see lining up for bronson arroyo are carlos lee, aaron rowand, or some boston red sox players