Turn Off Ads?
Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 81415161718
Results 256 to 262 of 262

Thread: 8/2/2012 Reds vs Padres

  1. #256
    I'm gettin paper Homer Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    4,689

    Re: 8/2/2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Sea Ray View Post
    Why do you word it that way rather than say "to his credit, he has not given up many HRs..."?
    Because it's not all to his credit. It's flukish to have a HR/FB rate that low at GABP, the same way its flukish that Cueto has that low of a rate. If he was getting a ridiculous ground ball rate, I would say, "he does a good job of keeping the ball on the ground, and in the ballpark." However, he doesn't do that. He has been giving up plenty of fly balls, but he has a flukish HR/FB rate.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #257
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    9,834

    Re: 8/2/2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Homer Bailey View Post
    We clearly will have to agree to disagree, but the bolded part of what you said is just absolutely not true. Back in the day, teams fell victim time and time again to ERA's that were bloated due to random luck over a certain period of time. FIP and xFIP didn't just magically become better predictors of future success, or better indicators of true talent in recent years. Just because no one knew about it then, didn't mean that pitchers that struck out more, walked less, and gave up fewer homer weren't better pitchers than those that relied on excellent defense or luck to get them their outs.
    BAPIP doesn't apply to relievers the same way as it does to starters. Relievers have been shown to be able to maintain low BABIP over many seasons, even whole careers.

    Relievers and starters should not be treated the same way via stats. Even though they are both pitchers, what they do is very different, and nets different results statistically.

    Relievers face only a handful of batters a game and can throw as hard as they want the entire time. Starters have to face the same lineup multiple times each game, and must pace themselves in terms of velocity and pitch selection. Relievers also usually come in during high leverage situations, causing them to pitch differently than when starting an inning clean and/or a big lead.

    All of this and more leads to different stats and changes the importance of each stat for reliever and starters. You are using starter stats to talk about Ondusek, and they aren't as relevant for him since he's a reliever.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  4. #258
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    3,769

    Re: 8/2/2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Homer Bailey View Post
    We clearly will have to agree to disagree, but the bolded part of what you said is just absolutely not true. Back in the day, teams fell victim time and time again to ERA's that were bloated due to random luck over a certain period of time. FIP and xFIP didn't just magically become better predictors of future success, or better indicators of true talent in recent years. Just because no one knew about it then, didn't mean that pitchers that struck out more, walked less, and gave up fewer homer weren't better pitchers than those that relied on excellent defense or luck to get them their outs.
    HB, all I can tell you is that for the Reds teams I watched, the ERA stat worked just fine. The ones with the lower ERA's were the pitchers who tended to be dependable game after game. Of course those Reds pitchers in the 70's benefited greatly from defense. They had four Gold Glovers straight up the middle (C, 2B, SS, CF). I guess that made them lucky. But if lucky can bring World Series titles, I can live with lucky.

    You pasted a quote from another post that outlined Ondrusek's 2012 numbers:
    #141 of 155 in FIP (4.93)
    #152 of 155 in xFIP (5.22)
    As I went back through the stats, 25 out his 47 appearances have come against teams with winning records, and 12 appearances were against teams who were in first place in their division. He went his first 17 appearances and gave up NO runs.

    Finally, on May 17th, he had a bad game and gave up five runs (in NY, not GABP). Take away that one appearance and his ERA drops to 1.84 for the season.

    Honestly, I've never been a Logan Odrusek champion - mainly because I've listened to and believed all the complaints about him. But the more I look at Ondrusek's stats, the more I wonder why all the uproar. I'm not sure what else Logan Ondrusek can do.

    Is Ondrusek lucky? Probably. But his luck has been going on for about three years and at some point, you have to start wondering if some of it is actual skill, an not luck.
    Opinions are like belly buttons. Everybody has one, and they don't want someone else's shoved into their face.

  5. #259
    I'm gettin paper Homer Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    4,689

    Re: 8/2/2012

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    BAPIP doesn't apply to relievers the same way as it does to starters. Relievers have been shown to be able to maintain low BABIP over many seasons, even whole careers.

    Relievers and starters should not be treated the same way via stats. Even though they are both pitchers, what they do is very different, and nets different results statistically.

    Relievers face only a handful of batters a game and can throw as hard as they want the entire time. Starters have to face the same lineup multiple times each game, and must pace themselves in terms of velocity and pitch selection. Relievers also usually come in during high leverage situations, causing them to pitch differently than when starting an inning clean and/or a big lead.

    All of this and more leads to different stats and changes the importance of each stat for reliever and starters. You are using starter stats to talk about Ondusek, and they aren't as relevant for him since he's a reliever.
    A whole lot to disagree with there. Sure, some great relievers in history have had low BABIP's in the career. Rivera and Hoffman come to mind. However, its beyond unfair to put Logan in that group.

    Across MLB, there is little to support that relievers do a better job of controlling BABIP than starters. Currently, starters in the MLB have a .294 BABIP against, while relievers have .290.

    Whether or not a pitcher is pitching 1 inning or 7 innings, you still want the same things: High K rate, low walk rate, low HR rate. The fact that Logan doesn't K enough guys, and walks too many guys doesn't make it OK just because he's a reliever and he's had some BABIP luck. I'd find it very, very, very difficult to argue that Logan is such a good pitcher that he's able to control his BABIP, yet he's not good enough to strike guys out, and not good enough to prevent from walking them.

    Sure, some pitchers' "stuff" is better suited for the bullpen than the rotation, and obviously relievers pitch differently that starters. That doesn't mean that FIP and xFIP are any less valuable for a reliever than it is a starter. It certainly is a better predictor of talent and future success than ERA is.

  6. #260
    I'm gettin paper Homer Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    4,689

    Re: 8/2/2012

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeS21 View Post
    HB, all I can tell you is that for the Reds teams I watched, the ERA stat worked just fine. The ones with the lower ERA's were the pitchers who tended to be dependable game after game. Of course those Reds pitchers in the 70's benefited greatly from defense. They had four Gold Glovers straight up the middle (C, 2B, SS, CF). I guess that made them lucky. But if lucky can bring World Series titles, I can live with lucky.

    You pasted a quote from another post that outlined Ondrusek's 2012 numbers:

    As I went back through the stats, 25 out his 47 appearances have come against teams with winning records, and 12 appearances were against teams who were in first place in their division. He went his first 17 appearances and gave up NO runs.

    Finally, on May 17th, he had a bad game and gave up five runs (in NY, not GABP). Take away that one appearance and his ERA drops to 1.84 for the season.

    Honestly, I've never been a Logan Odrusek champion - mainly because I've listened to and believed all the complaints about him. But the more I look at Ondrusek's stats, the more I wonder why all the uproar. I'm not sure what else Logan Ondrusek can do.

    Is Ondrusek lucky? Probably. But his luck has been going on for about three years and at some point, you have to start wondering if some of it is actual skill, an not luck.
    There isn't much of a point of continuing this back and forth, because we're talking about two different things. You're still talking about ERA, and arguing things that are results based. I'm talking about Logan's actual ability, and things he can control.

    Overall, Logan's ERA is below 3.00, yes. If I'm looking backwards, would I rather have a guy with a 3.00 ERA but a 5.00 FIP, or would I rather have a guy with a 5.00 ERA, and a 3.00 FIP? Obviously (if looking backwards), I would want the guy with the 3.00 ERA. But, if I'm looking forward (as Dusty, and anyone in any decision making role with this ball club should be doing), I want to put the best pitchers in the best situations to succeed. A guy that walks that many and allows that many balls to be put in play is a ticking time bomb. It almost came back to bite Dusty against Houston last week, but Stubbs saved him. Logan's only saving grace is luck on balls put in play. Do we really want to see how long we can ride out that lucky streak?

    The point is there are many, many arms in the bullpen that are better than Logan. Logan should be used in the Simon role, and should not pitch in key situations.

  7. #261
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,581

    Re: 8/2/2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Homer Bailey View Post
    There isn't much of a point of continuing this back and forth, because we're talking about two different things. You're still talking about ERA, and arguing things that are results based. I'm talking about Logan's actual ability, and things he can control.

    Overall, Logan's ERA is below 3.00, yes. If I'm looking backwards, would I rather have a guy with a 3.00 ERA but a 5.00 FIP, or would I rather have a guy with a 5.00 ERA, and a 3.00 FIP? Obviously (if looking backwards), I would want the guy with the 3.00 ERA. But, if I'm looking forward (as Dusty, and anyone in any decision making role with this ball club should be doing), I want to put the best pitchers in the best situations to succeed. A guy that walks that many and allows that many balls to be put in play is a ticking time bomb. It almost came back to bite Dusty against Houston last week, but Stubbs saved him. Logan's only saving grace is luck on balls put in play. Do we really want to see how long we can ride out that lucky streak?

    The point is there are many, many arms in the bullpen that are better than Logan. Logan should be used in the Simon role, and should not pitch in key situations.
    I guess that is why the Reds brought in another arm intended to backfill the bullpen. I was a little surprised by the numbers you presented, thought Ondrusek had performed a little better than that. He has been very inconsistent, and tanked in the 2nd half of 2011, perhaps the polarity between his good/bad performance periods is what makes one think he is a better pitcher than he is.
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  8. #262
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    9,834

    Re: 8/2/2012

    Quote Originally Posted by Homer Bailey View Post
    A whole lot to disagree with there. Sure, some great relievers in history have had low BABIP's in the career. Rivera and Hoffman come to mind. However, its beyond unfair to put Logan in that group.

    Across MLB, there is little to support that relievers do a better job of controlling BABIP than starters. Currently, starters in the MLB have a .294 BABIP against, while relievers have .290.

    Whether or not a pitcher is pitching 1 inning or 7 innings, you still want the same things: High K rate, low walk rate, low HR rate. The fact that Logan doesn't K enough guys, and walks too many guys doesn't make it OK just because he's a reliever and he's had some BABIP luck. I'd find it very, very, very difficult to argue that Logan is such a good pitcher that he's able to control his BABIP, yet he's not good enough to strike guys out, and not good enough to prevent from walking them.

    Sure, some pitchers' "stuff" is better suited for the bullpen than the rotation, and obviously relievers pitch differently that starters. That doesn't mean that FIP and xFIP are any less valuable for a reliever than it is a starter. It certainly is a better predictor of talent and future success than ERA is.
    Much wider and broader range of BABIP for relief pitchers than starters. The overall average of them is meaningless for this discussion, it's the range that exists within that average that's important.

    Plenty of relievers, not just the elite ones have been able to maintain low BABIP over their careers. Extremely logical that a pitcher can control his BABIP by getting weak contact, but can't get a lot of K's. Not sure why that is hard to understand.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.


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