Turn Off Ads?
Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3910111213
Results 181 to 184 of 184

Thread: Poor Kevin Cash

  1. #181
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    39,689

    Re: Poor Kevin Cash

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Berenyi View Post
    THE RAYS MIGHT HAVE SCORED IF THEY MAINTAINED THEIR LEAD, YOU CANT EXTRAPOLATE THAT THEY DIDNT SCORE WHEN TRAILING,, DIFFERENT THINGS come into play when leading vs trailing,, it is casuistry or sophistry to try and equate hitting with a lead vs trailing
    They spent five innings batting with a lead and did bupkis. Then they spent three innings batting while they were behind (where they hit better during this series) and still did bupkis. It adds up to bupkis. You're just inventing crap to excuse away the fact that the Dodgers pitching put them to sleep that game. Warm glass of milk, tucked them in, read them a story, kissed them on the forehead and said good night.
    Last edited by M2; 11-02-2020 at 10:22 PM.
    Friends don't let friends fWAR.

    Coddle thy pitchers.


  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #182
    Probably not Patrick Bateman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    7,917

    Re: Poor Kevin Cash

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Well, just using those numbers, Snell had a 61% chance of not allowing a run to score. So, using just those numbers, the odds were good that Snell wouldn’t give up a run (for those obsessed with what the odds were). And that is assuming that no pitcher gave up more than one run, which is unlikely, so the odds are likely even better.
    Tampa’s team bullpen era this year was 3.37 (and that doesn’t even get parsed down to just the top 3-5 guys who would be used in high leverage situations), which is lower than the Snell comps before even considering inherited runners.

    Layer in that Snell has not been conditioned for huge durability, and has struggled 3rd time through the order for his entire career, showed declining velocity, and there is a very very strong analytical argument that removing Snell pushed the odds in the right direction.

    You don’t have to be odds obsessed to recognize that it was an important decision to get right and you want the most favourable odds based on best research possible to get it right rather to rely on the average joe’s narrative.

  4. #183
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    25,368

    Re: Poor Kevin Cash

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman View Post
    Tampa’s team bullpen era this year was 3.37 (and that doesn’t even get parsed down to just the top 3-5 guys who would be used in high leverage situations), which is lower than the Snell comps before even considering inherited runners.

    Layer in that Snell has not been conditioned for huge durability, and has struggled 3rd time through the order for his entire career, showed declining velocity, and there is a very very strong analytical argument that removing Snell pushed the odds in the right direction.

    You don’t have to be odds obsessed to recognize that it was an important decision to get right and you want the most favourable odds based on best research possible to get it right rather to rely on the average joe’s narrative.
    All good points and I don’t disagree with any of them. I was mostly responding to this part of the tweet:

    My point in all this, of course, is that the narrative that "Blake Snell was dealing, therefore you keep him in" means nothing.
    The very stats he provided actually go against this statement.
    “We’re going to get the pitching.” -Bob Castellini
    “You got the pitching, now what?” - Reds fans

  5. #184
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    12,977

    Re: Poor Kevin Cash

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    That means going off book every now and then, taking a risk, going against the odds and hoping you get lucky.
    I'd much rather go with the odds and hope I get lucky. Because going with the odds requires less luck.

    Just because the randomness of baseball means that luck plays a huge factor in determining who will win doesn't mean you should abandon all sense and not care about increasing your odds.


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 | cumberlandreds | Gallen5862 | Kinsm | Plus Plus | Powel Crosley | RedlegJake | The Operator