Tiger337

They basically have every Tigers pitcher with a .500 W/L record, so I wouldn't put much stock in it. W/L record is pretty meaningless with pitchers throwing 5-6 innings per start anyway.

Someone accused Jay Jaffe of being a pedophile who raped little boys because he didn't vote for curt schilling on his HoF ballot. I guess everyone who doesn't agree with conservative dickbags is a pedophile now. It's the new communist.

Just looked up the New Hampshire property taxes and it's more than I thought. But still, no state income tax, no sales tax, cheaper homes and lower cost of living. For most people, it's cheaper to live in NH. Not sure it's nicer though unless you love the outdoors.

It adds up to 162 starts without Boyd, so I assume he's not included in the team totals.

I would guess that they included more than five as all the innings pitched would have to add up to a full season and that's noy going to happen with five starters. The Tigers depth probably helped them in the projections as it should for real.

I use projections as a baseline. I will adjust players up or down if I think a player is ready to break out or if I think the projection is are not accounting for an injury. The other big thing is playing time. Fans who follow their team closely are probably better at guessing playing time than the projections.

Projections do not favor players who are past their primes. They are appropriately harsh in projecting older and injury prone players. For example, the FanGraphs projections have Kershaw pitching only 91 innings next year. It is fair to say that they are tough on young unproven players. On the other hand, most unproven players never prove themselves. Because of the variation in possible results, teams depending on a lot of young players are tough to project. The weakness of projections is that they don't do a great job projecting players who are difficult to project!

How can you doubt heartland? They have also rejected climate change and the harmful effects of second hand smoke.

Isn't that the way they do it these days?

I think every part will have a lot of variation year to year. I think you need a three year rolling average to get any kind of meaningful time trend here. Statcast does have an option where you can do that and it smooths it out quite a bit. https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/leaderboard/statcast-venue?venueId=2394&condition=All&rolling=1&batSide=All&tracking=All&speed=95 plus&angle=FB-angle&wowyBatSide=All

I see more of a time trend than a team talent trend: 2000-2006 bad for home runs 2007-2017 neutral for home runs 2018-2023 bad for home runs. This makes more sense to me, I could see slight alterations to ballparks, balls or backgrounds changing trends over time.

I do. 😀

It could be a lot of players. Most guys who put up good numbers in the minors don't succeed in the majors. Minor league numbers tell you who won't make it, but do not necessarily tell you who will make it.

I am very intrigued by Malloy's on base potential. The question is how well he will hit when the best pitchers in the world are throwing more strikes to him. I would love to see him get a lot of at bats next year. The other question is how a full-time DH fits into modern management's love for positional versatility. I think he would have to put up at least an .800 OPS annually.

The Tigers still play the Braves every year though. It's not like the leagues matter that much anymore. I think that's a mistake as I think the AL versus NL thing was one of the things that made baseball unique, but that's the way it is.

I think any conservative country where Trump could publicly talk **** about the United States would be a mutually beneficial situation. There might be more takers than we realize, although Russia seems like a good guess. Realistically, he is not going anywhere and we will be forced to listen to his BS for the rest of his life.

Is this like the Heartland poll going around facebook which says that 20% of mail-in voters admitted to cheating in the 2020 election?

Pretty good high school staff!

He's not going anywhere and if he does go somewhere, he's going to live a more luxurious life than any of us.

Malloy ahead of Meadows. Interesting.

yeah, that is what is has come down to.

The problem is that LA is smart as well as wealthy.

too risky.

I think they'll just keep delaying/appealing/whatever until the election. And the Democrats will be fine with that as long as they stay in power which is their primary goal. That being said, I think he should have been in prison a long time ago and America should never have allowed itself to get ourselves in a position where we are debating his legitimacy. If he were not born into wealth, he probably would have spent his life going in and out of prisons and mental institutions.

The first time I heard it wasn't all about slavery was from a very left wing political science professor. I think he was just too cynical to think that anything in politics wasn't about politics. I was taking a liberal arts elective to boost my GPA 😀, but it surprisingly turned out to be a valuable class. The final project involved following three newspapers (one liberal, one moderate and one conservative) and comparing the way they followed the issues. This was the first time I became aware of how newspapers covered issues completely differently. I got an A in the class despite supporting Reagan.