Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
Quote:
Originally Posted by
cincrazy
However, they were 10-5 against the Astros. They didn't own them anymore than you'd expect to own a bad team. I'm not saying it won't play a factor in their win total, maybe a few games, but you don't buy into them for that reason? That's the only reason you give? Just silly to me.
It could be that the evaluation could have been deeper than that but Olney found that to be the best line to use.
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
Quote:
Originally Posted by
klw
It could be that the evaluation could have been deeper than that but Olney found that to be the best line to use.
And the context could've been "world series favorites" which is a much, much higher bar than "legitimately good".
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RedLegsToday
vs Cubs/Astros in '12
Reds 22-9
Cards 21-11
Brewers 22-12
Pirates 20-13
Not seeing the Reds huge advantage. It's the Brewers fault they only went 9-8 against the 'Stros!
The advantage lost comes more into play if they finish second and are vying for the wild card. They don't have that now.
I'm fairly optimistic and have them down for 96 wins with the talent on the roster.
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
This is a Buster Olney column? Yeah, you lost me there. Who cares whether or not the AL evaluator attaches his name.
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Strikes Out Looking
Are the Cardinals not playing the Astros 18 times either?
Exactly.
:beerme:
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
Is anyone else tired of the "drinking the Kool-Aid" expression? I actually find it kind of weird when EVERYTHING becomes a comparison to something like Jonestown. Just wondering.
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RedEye
Is anyone else tired of the "drinking the Kool-Aid" expression? I actually find it kind of weird when EVERYTHING becomes a comparison to something like Jonestown. Just wondering.
Yep. Almost as tired as "getting the band back together".
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
Losing the Astros might implicate that we won't get 97 wins. In no way does that have any effect on who wins the NL Central. This guy is an idiot.
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MrRedLegger
Losing the Astros might implicate that we won't get 97 wins. In no way does that have any effect on who wins the NL Central. This guy is an idiot.
OTOH, the Cards did have a better run differential than the Reds in 2012. If that holds and a little luck goes the other way (not to mention the much superior help that the cards could be getting from their system in 2013), the Cards could take the central and push the Reds into the wildcard race. At that point the loss of all those games against the astros could become very important.
I think the changes the Reds have made makes them the favorite in the central, but lambasting the article seems off to me.
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RedEye
Is anyone else tired of the "drinking the Kool-Aid" expression? I actually find it kind of weird when EVERYTHING becomes a comparison to something like Jonestown. Just wondering.
Yes. And it wasn't even Kool-Aid.
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mth123
I think the changes the Reds have made makes them the favorite in the central, but lambasting the article seems off to me.
They're lambasting the article because it's illogical.
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Scrap Irony
They're lambasting the article because it's illogical.
There is always concern for not taking the division again (see 2011), but for the reasons the author listed, it just seems like poor judgement.
The entire division doesn't play the Astros now, and we have addressed our run differential issue by getting a high OBP leadoff hitter who will hit in front of a .270 hitter and two spots in front of the .300+ BA doubles machine.
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MrRedLegger
There is always concern for not taking the division again (see 2011), but for the reasons the author listed, it just seems like poor judgement.
The entire division doesn't play the Astros now, and we have addressed our run differential issue by getting a high OBP leadoff hitter who will hit in front of a .270 hitter and two spots in front of the .300+ BA doubles machine.
This exemplifies why using run differential from season to season is very problematic. Teams change their rosters in the off-season, players get older, rookies and young players break through, and some players fall off in terms of production. And that doesn't even take in account injuries.
I really think we will discover that the Pythag will become less and less useful as we move forward with understanding the game.
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
The only thing I will give the Reds on luck last year is that no starting pitcher was injured. Otherwise to attribute the Reds success on the Astros or contribute future success based on not playing the Astros is silly. I think what will affect the Reds more than not playing the Astros this year is regressing to the means on the injury front to starters in their rotation.
Re: AL evaluator critique of the Reds
The Reds had the 3rd best winning percentage vs teams at or over .500, but also had 7 more wins than anyone else vs teams under .500.