Nook Logan's entire amazing career was like a dream. There is no way to sufficiently replicate his existence on a video. Was he even real or was it just something we imagined?
Flaherty's career has been inconsistent, but he seems to be a good comeback candidate given his under the hood numbers this year. They still need another good healthy starter along with a right-handed bat and bullpen help.
I think a likely contender with the best pitcher in the league has to try to win now. You don't know when that opportunity will happen again. You don't know what kind of team they'll have in a couple of years. Maybe the hitters are slower to develop than expected. Maybe they do just fine, but they don't have enough pitching after Skubal leaves. They have a chance to win now. Opportunities like this are why teams go through re-building processes. They need to take advantage of it. That, of course, means making some meaningful additions in the off-season to maximize their chances.
That is accurate, so then you have to calculate the probability of getting a bye.
Suppose they have a 60% chance of making playoffs which seems about right looking at last years pre-season odds on fangraphs. Suppose they have a 30% chance of a bye assuming they make the playoffs. Then, they have a 12.5% of winning WS if they have a bye and and 6.25% chance without a bye.
P(win)= P(playoffs)*(P(bye/playoffs)*P(win/bye) + P(no bye/playoffs)*P(win/no bye))
= .60 (.30*.125 + .70*.0625) = .04875 or just under 5%
I am not sure winning the World Series makes it more likely he stays, but their chance of winning the World Series is probably a lot lower than 15%. All things being equal, the chance of winning the World Series once you make the playoffs is 1 in 12 or 8% and you have to make the playoffs first.
That gets back to the local fan thing you were talking about. Fans don't care what happens to other teams. I think the problem with the Dodgers being too good is overblown. Regardless of who wins, the fans of 96.7% of teams are going to be disappointed. That is going to be true regardless of whether or not there is parity.
Do we know that framing statistics are the result of framing or could it be something else? For example, perhaps some teams know that you need to pitch to certain locations way with a certain umpire behind the plate? I know that framing is part of it, but maybe not as much as we think.
Of course not, but odds are being made now. As of now, I wouldn't project the Tigers to finish behind the Orioles. Then again, the betting odds likely look at things a very different way than I would.
I don't know if it's REALLY low, but it's on the low side. I could easily see them finishing 7th behind Tor, NY, Bos, Cle, Sea, Hou. I guess another team like kansas City could sneak in there.
That is my understanding as well. Batters are going to challenge called strikes that they believe were out of the zone. It's likely that some of those pitchers were framed. Pitchers/Catchers will challenge called balls that they believe were in the zone. Those were pitches that were not helped framing. There may be some unitended consequence which I'm not thinking about, but it seems likeframing would become less valuable.
This was one of my favorite games ever and the Tigers didn't even win. It was the night Gibson hit the ball over the roof in one at bat and then later tripled and scored when he knocked down the homeplate umpire. It was an exciting display of power, speed and boldness unlike anything I had never seen from the Tigers before.
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=607993830328466