Turn Off Ads?
Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011
Results 151 to 163 of 163

Thread: Logan Ondrusek Thread

  1. #151
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    10,273

    Re: Logan Ondrusek Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    A few points:
    1) Any pitcher whose effectiveness depends upon maintaining a significantly lower than average BABIP will not be as effective in the future as they have been in the past independent of environment or their teammates.

    2) Things like tERA and Sierra are second generation versions of FIP, i.e. they aren't a move away from DIPs theory but rather they are metrics that try to do an even better job of removing factors that are out of the pitcher's control. FIP, tERA, and SIERRA are defense independent metrics.
    As more evidence comes in, we are finding that #1, while still a good general rule, applies to fewer pitchers than expected.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #152
    Box of Frogs edabbs44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    16,296

    Re: Logan Ondrusek Thread

    I have a question. Is the negativity surrounding Logan more because of a negative impact that he has had on the Reds overall or because of a perception of how he will negatively impact the team moving forward?

  4. #153
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,565

    Re: Logan Ondrusek Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    As more evidence comes in, we are finding that #1, while still a good general rule, applies to fewer pitchers than expected.
    And number two isn't even accurate. Independent means "not influenced by the thought or action of others." Both SIERRA and tERA are influenced by the actions of others because they're based on having an average defense. It assumes a normal interaction with the defensive players, so it's not completely independent of fielding.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  5. #154
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    10,273

    Re: Logan Ondrusek Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman View Post
    In relation to the argument that we have a sufficient sample size for Ondrusek to suggest that he has the ability to outperform his FIP going forward, I would have to disagree with that suggestion. 164 innings of pitching is not a sufficient sample. For example, there are plenty of starting pitchers who have a fluke season, that entails about 180-200 innings. Really, Ondrusek's sample is that of one year's worth of a starting pitcher. There are plenty of examples of a starting pitcher being lucky just for a season.

    Secondly, the Reds have had above average defense over the time period that Ondrusek has pitched in the major leagues. Again, considering the relatively small sample size, it would be reasonable to suggest that in front of a good defense, Ondrusek would stand to benefit from that. Mix in some general luck, and there is a clear recipe for how he could outperform his FIP, independent of skill.
    The small sample size argument is a good one, but not just because of luck, or regression, but also because middle relievers strive on being unknown. Once they go through the league, they become known and therefore less effective, which is why a good organization cycles through many middle relievers every few years. If they had the ability to get hitters out over and over again, they would be starters.

    As for defense, I see that the same way I see home park effects. Sure some hitters or pitcher strive in certain parks, but that's because they are smart enough to utilize their home field advantage. There are lots of pitchers who have failed in Petco and Safeco, and hitters who have failed in Coors and GABP.

    Likewise, a smart pitcher who doesn't have a high K rate can use his smarts to take advantage of his defense. This is especially true now with all the special defenses and shifts. I'm not going to penalize a pitcher because he's smart enough to pitch hitters so that they hit into defensive alignments behind him. With more and more of these shifts happening league wide, I think we will see lower and lower BABIP maintained.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  6. #155
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,850

    Re: Logan Ondrusek Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    As more evidence comes in, we are finding that #1, while still a good general rule, applies to fewer pitchers than expected.
    Actually, we're not finding that.

    Make a list of specific guys whose success has been dependent upon chronically having a BABIP that is significantly lower than their counterparts. Let's discuss those guys.

    Both previous points one and two are valid.
    Last edited by jojo; 08-19-2012 at 07:47 PM.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  7. #156
    Viva la Rolen kaldaniels's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,953

    Re: Logan Ondrusek Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by edabbs44 View Post
    I have a question. Is the negativity surrounding Logan more because of a negative impact that he has had on the Reds overall or because of a perception of how he will negatively impact the team moving forward?
    Going forward. I think the Reds are fortunate to have gotten out of him what they have so far.

  8. #157
    One and a half men Patrick Bateman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    5,874

    Re: Logan Ondrusek Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus View Post
    I don't know of any situations where someone with a 1.24 GB:FB ratio is not considered a groundball pitcher. And what's more is that in addition to his GB:FB ratio, which is nearly 50 percent above league average, he's also induced a very healthy 14% IFFB rate in his career. He's keeping the ball down and getting more grounders than flyballs, he's inducing fewer line drives than most players and is getting a high number of infield pop-ups. That's why his OPS continues to be better than average relievers despite his mediocre K:BB rate.

    As far as the sample issue, I don't think there's any comparison to 160 innings over the course of 160 appearances and 160 innings over the course of 27 appearances. Whether 160 innings is enough to gauge a reliever or not is debatable, but to suggest that 160 innings is "like" one season as a starter is disingenuous. If a pitcher has a good outing as a starter, that usually carries over for 6-7 innings. But if you have a good outing as a reliever, you have to come right back the next night and do it again and you're still only a third of the number of innings a starter pitched on one night. There's no comparison in sample size between the two because of the dynamics of an appearance.
    We can probably just conclude that he's above average in that regard, but in a way that doesn't have a significant impact on his overall bottom line.

    160 innings is 160 innings. Same amount of batters being faced. It's not a significant sample to draw conclustions from. You have a hyopthesis on Ondrusek from that sample, which is fine, but I think history suggests that the hypothesis is likely incorrect. I think what we know about pitchers controls on batted balls that Ondrusek may very well have 'some' control, and as a result might continue to outperform his peripherals to 'some' degree, but I don't think it's to the extent you are suggesting, because there just aren't a history of examples consistent with that analysis.

    In the end, you think he's average, I think he's a clear cut below average. That might be the difference between half a win in a given year, so the debate is hardly material. The Reds already figured that whatever he was, they didn't love using him in key situations, hence the Broxton addition.

    I'm fine just leaving it at that.

  9. #158
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,565

    Re: Logan Ondrusek Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman View Post
    We can probably just conclude that he's above average in that regard, but in a way that doesn't have a significant impact on his overall bottom line.

    160 innings is 160 innings. Same amount of batters being faced. It's not a significant sample to draw conclustions from. You have a hyopthesis on Ondrusek from that sample, which is fine, but I think history suggests that the hypothesis is likely incorrect. I think what we know about pitchers controls on batted balls that Ondrusek may very well have 'some' control, and as a result might continue to outperform his peripherals to 'some' degree, but I don't think it's to the extent you are suggesting, because there just aren't a history of examples consistent with that analysis.

    In the end, you think he's average, I think he's a clear cut below average. That might be the difference between half a win in a given year, so the debate is hardly material. The Reds already figured that whatever he was, they didn't love using him in key situations, hence the Broxton addition.

    I'm fine just leaving it at that.
    I think he's average despite his OPS being above average. That's because I'm allowing for 'some' regression with balls in play. So really, I don't need to jump very far to make the conclusion because even if you regress some of his BABIP, his OPS-against would be right in line with a league-average reliever. That's the beauty of this... I'm not suggesting that because his OPS is above-average thereby he's above average, I'm suggesting he's probably average because I'll confess one would expect a little bit of a nudge back to center. Regress his BABIP by 20 points and guess what? His OPS is still almost exactly league average.

    My point here is that I've given some buffer zone to acknowledge there could still be a little bit of a movement back to center over time.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  10. #159
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    10,273

    Re: Logan Ondrusek Thread

    One real quick point that I think might be causing some confusion.

    All middle relievers are below average. They are the worst pitchers on a staff by definition. If they were even average, they would be starters or late inning relievers. Ondrusek is below average as pitchers go, but around average as middle relievers go.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  11. #160
    Haunted by walks
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Syracuse
    Posts
    6,640

    Re: Logan Ondrusek Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    One real quick point that I think might be causing some confusion.

    All middle relievers are below average. They are the worst pitchers on a staff by definition. If they were even average, they would be starters or late inning relievers. Ondrusek is below average as pitchers go, but around average as middle relievers go.
    Interesting point. Then he pitches well for awhile, is talked about as part of the Reds' dominating bullpen, is used in high-leverage situations, and is exposed.

  12. #161
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    10,273

    Re: Logan Ondrusek Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    Actually, we're not finding that.

    Make a list of specific guys whose success has been dependent upon chronically having a BABIP that is significantly lower than their counterparts. Let's discuss those guys.

    Both previous points one and two are valid.
    I'm not smart enough even if I had the time to do this, lol. However, I think that if someone did attempt this, they would find quite a few relievers on the list. I agree that #1 applies to most starters, but that's because if a pitcher's success is chronically dependent on having a low BABIP, he ain't starting, he's in the pen. But I'm guessing there are quite a few relievers whose sole talent is inducing weak contact.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  13. #162
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    10,273

    Re: Logan Ondrusek Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by BCubb2003 View Post
    Interesting point. Then he pitches well for awhile, is talked about as part of the Reds' dominating bullpen, is used in high-leverage situations, and is exposed.
    ... and Bingo was his nameo
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  14. #163
    Member Tom Servo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    7,382

    Re: Logan Ondrusek Thread

    So I hate to have to bring this thread back, but from the last two games or so I'm getting the impression that Dusty is back to figuring Ondrusek's struggles are "water under the bridge" and that he is one of his top 7th/8th inning guys, dude.
    "Since I've been with the Reds in 1989, we've never had a farm system this loaded," Bowden said. "If we were the New York Yankees and had unlimited dollars, we could have traded for Colon, (Jeff) Weaver, Rolen, (Cliff) Floyd, (Kenny) Rogers and Finley and gotten them all -- and still held onto our top five prospects. That's an amazing statement."


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25