2003 vs 2023

[chasfh]

8 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

I'm not trying to whitewash Avila, FWIW, he was an awful GM.... but a lot of the dialog surrounding his tenure (and how he was the worst) really whitewashes Randy Smith and just how aimless and hopeless the franchise was at that time. And yeah, I think it was worse then than now.

And certainly, IDK if Tork, Greene, the pitchers and some of the other hangers on (such as Meadows or Lipcius or Wenceel Perez) ever reach their true potential, but the odds are a higher for these guys than some of the garbage that Smith and company brought in.

Some of that might be differences in scouting over time, obviously the industry uses more data than it did in the late 90s/early 2000s, but that's just what I see looking at it.

Exactly how am I whitewashing Randy Smith? I have already called him one of the worst GM in baseball history!

[mtutiger]

10 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Exactly how am I whitewashing Randy Smith? I have already called him one of the worst GM in baseball history!

I was addressing my initial post and more just the general discussion that surrounds where the franchise currently sits, not you.

There are other fans of this team who, due to age or recency bias or whatever, kinda overlook just how bad the franchise was when Randy Smith was ****canned when complaining about where the franchise currently sits. And honestly, having lived through both eras, I'll have to disagree with with you in that I do think this current iteration is in better shape than the 2002 one was. And I'm not sure that it is that close.

Edited April 21, 2023 by mtutiger

[Tiger337]

I do think the current franchise is in better shape than it was after Smith was done.  On the other hand, the general drafting process has a little more certainty to it than it did 20 years ago, so it is a little easier to draft now. 

I think the difference between Avila and Smith was that Avila seemed to have an overall plan (although executed poorly).  Not only did Smith execute poorly, but he never really seemed to have a plan.  

[chasfh]

18 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

I was addressing my initial post and more just the general discussion that surrounds where the franchise currently sits, not you.

There are other fans of this team who, due to age or recency bias or whatever, kinda overlook just how bad the franchise was when Randy Smith was ****canned when complaining about where the franchise currently sits. And honestly, having lived through both eras, I'll have to disagree with with you in that I do think this current iteration is in better shape than the 2002 one was. And I'm not sure that it is that close.

I'm the only one here today arguing that Al Avila was very similar to Randy Smith instead of being way, way better than Smith, and you made that comment right on my heels, so that's why I thought that was a direct shot today.

That notwithstanding, I don't know that I have seen the evidence that Smith is way way worse than Avila, other than people repeatedly saying that they think so. They both had terrible drafts, they both had terrible FA signings, they both made terrible trades, and neither could develop a decent cold let alone a winning baseball franchise. The main difference I see between the two is that the report card on Randy Smith has been completed, and Avila's has not. So at most, the comparison is incomplete, rather than settled fact. I'm open to being persuaded, though, so if anyone can cite real evidence of what Avila did that was way, way better than Smith, I'd like to know. For the record, I don't think citing Mize, Manning et al., will be enough, because even though they have given us little to nothing so far, it's still incomplete.

 

[mtutiger]

3 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

I do think the current franchise is in better shape than it was after Smith was done.  On the other hand, the general drafting process has a little more certainty to it than it did 20 years ago, so it is a little easier to draft now. 

That is true.

[mtutiger]

3 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I'm the only one here today arguing that Al Avila was very similar to Randy Smith instead of being way, way better than Smith, and you made that comment right on my heels, so that's why I thought that was a direct shot today.

I can't speak for others, but while I think the assembled talent is far better today than it was when DD ****canned Smith, I wouldn't characterize my views as thinking that Avila was way, way better than Randy Smith.

[oblong]

It would be interesting to see how Baseball America's track record was until the internet and such sites like BR and Fangraphs became prominent.  My impression is BA just hired a local writer in each city, had them talk with the organization to get their "top 10" lists, then BA put them all together somehow.

I think the org today is in better shape than in 2002/2003.

[Jim Cowan]

Not to get too nitpicky but Juan Encarnacion, Gabe Kapler and Mike Drumright were all here before Randy Smith was.  The list of "exciting" prospects that Randy Smith acquired begins and ends with Eric Munson.

[Tigerbomb13]

11 minutes ago, Jim Cowan said:

Not to get too nitpicky but Juan Encarnacion, Gabe Kapler and Mike Drumright were all here before Randy Smith was.  The list of "exciting" prospects that Randy Smith acquired begins and ends with Eric Munson.

It doesn’t get much worse than that. My god. 

[Dan Gilmore]

Chas, I think you are way, way off in characterizing posters stance on this. IMO. 😎

[casimir]

Arguing over whether Avila or Smith was worse than the other seems like trying to decide whether to be poked in the eyes or kicked in the plums.

[Tiger337]

1 hour ago, Jim Cowan said:

Not to get too nitpicky but Juan Encarnacion, Gabe Kapler and Mike Drumright were all here before Randy Smith was.  The list of "exciting" prospects that Randy Smith acquired begins and ends with Eric Munson.

You forgot Matt Wheatland.  

[chasfh]

Nm

Edited April 21, 2023 by chasfh

[mtutiger]

30 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

You forgot Matt Wheatland.  

Eighth overall pick, never once played above Single A...

Doesn't get much worse tbh 

[Shinzaki]

Matt Wheatland's arm was shot about 15 minutes after he was drafted.  

[RedRamage]

On 4/10/2023 at 10:04 AM, RedRamage said:

I sincerely hope that this is just yet another slow start for the Tigers.  I sincerely hope that in a few weeks y'all will be making fun of me for even thinking that a thread like this tracking the two years was necessary.  I really, really hope that...

Through 9 games:

2003: 0-9, R = 9, RA = 14, pW/L = 1-8
2023: 2-7, R = 27, RA = 62, pW/L = 0-9

For Pythagorean Theorem, I'm using this formula from Baseball-Reference: W%=[(Runs Scored)^1.81]/[(Runs Scored)^1.81 + (Runs Allowed)^1.81] 

Through 33 games I'm pleased to say that we're pulling away from the pace of 2003:

2003: 7-26, R=96, RA=164, pW/L = 9-24
2023: 15-18, R=121, RA=162, pW/L = 12-21

It's probably worth noting that at this point in '03 we were under performing out pW/L while in '23 we're actually out performing it.  If you compare pW/L the two years are still pretty close, but '23 is still the better year.

[mtutiger]

4 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

Through 33 games I'm pleased to say that we're pulling away from the pace of 2003:

2003: 7-26, R=96, RA=164, pW/L = 9-24
2023: 15-18, R=121, RA=162, pW/L = 12-21

It's probably worth noting that at this point in '03 we were under performing out pW/L while in '23 we're actually out performing it.  If you compare pW/L the two years are still pretty close, but '23 is still the better year.

The 2003 club really hit their "stride" in June... 5-22 for the month.

The two shouldn't be close once July hits.

[chasfh]

16 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

Through 33 games I'm pleased to say that we're pulling away from the pace of 2003:

2003: 7-26, R=96, RA=164, pW/L = 9-24
2023: 15-18, R=121, RA=162, pW/L = 12-21

It's probably worth noting that at this point in '03 we were under performing out pW/L while in '23 we're actually out performing it.  If you compare pW/L the two years are still pretty close, but '23 is still the better year.

FWIW, we are also outperforming our Pythag during our post 2-9 run.

[oblong]

Wasn't there a school of thought that performance against pythag is a function of your bullpen?

 

[Tiger337]

11 minutes ago, oblong said:

Wasn't there a school of thought that performance against pythag is a function of your bullpen?

 

Yes, it can be a function of the bullpen.  Jazayerli and Woolner discovered that teams with strong bullpens exceed their pythagorean by an average of 1-2 games over a full seson.  Teams with weak bullpens fall behind their pythagorean by an average of 1-2 games.  I think if it gets up to four or more games then there is probably some luck involved.  

[bobrob2004]

4 hours ago, RedRamage said:

Through 33 games I'm pleased to say that we're pulling away from the pace of 2003:

2003: 7-26, R=96, RA=164, pW/L = 9-24
2023: 15-18, R=121, RA=162, pW/L = 12-21

It's probably worth noting that at this point in '03 we were under performing out pW/L while in '23 we're actually out performing it.  If you compare pW/L the two years are still pretty close, but '23 is still the better year.

How about we compare the 2023 A's to the 2003 Tigers?  Through 35 games: 

2003 Tigers: 8-27, R=106, RA=169, pW/L = 10-25

2023 A's: 8-27, R=137, RA=261, pW/L = 8-27

The A's are averaging 7.46 runs allowed per game this year and have a team ERA of 7.25.  

[chasfh]

20 hours ago, bobrob2004 said:

How about we compare the 2023 A's to the 2003 Tigers?  Through 35 games: 

2003 Tigers: 8-27, R=106, RA=169, pW/L = 10-25

2023 A's: 8-27, R=137, RA=261, pW/L = 8-27

The A's are averaging 7.46 runs allowed per game this year and have a team ERA of 7.25.  

Incredibly, even this morning, Fangraphs projects the A’s to have a better record from now through the end of the season than the Reds, Rockies, or Nationals.