IdahoBert Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 20 minutes ago, 1776 said: KC is one game back of Cleveland. I’d be more than happy to see them win this division. Yes, blank Cleveland. Two of my closest friends live in KC anyway. This is a picture of me enjoying some famous KC barbecue five years ago. KC has some nice areas. The rolling green hills surrounding the city are splendid too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 9 hours ago, gehringer_2 said: Jung Ks on a what would have have an RBI BB. They did burn up another WS pitcher for the weekend. World Series pitcher? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermojo Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 5 minutes ago, chasfh said: World Series pitcher? Worcestershire Sauce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 50 minutes ago, Tigermojo said: Worcestershire Sauce Maybe it’s Western Samoa? I assumed his personal preference abbreviation of FB means “fastball” and not Facebook. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger337 Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 10 hours ago, 1776 said: I believe Vierling is possibly the most under appreciated player on this team. I’ve become a big fan of his this year. He is boring because he is pretty good at every aspect of the game, but not great at any one thing. The sum result is an average player and an average player is a good player. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 W hite S ox ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Tiger337 said: He is boring because he is pretty good at every aspect of the game, but not great at any one thing. The sum result is an average player and an average player is a good player. BR has him at 1.8 WAR at 113 games. If you could get nine 2 WAR guys on a team you'd have a pretty good team! Edited August 24 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger337 Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 44 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: BR has him at 1.8 WAR at 113 games. If you could get nine 2 WAR guys on a team you'd have a pretty good team! 2 WAR is an average player, so if you had a team of "2 WAR" players including pitchers you'd win 81 games. So, if you have mostly 2 WAR players and a few really good players (4+ WAR), you've got a contender. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shinzaki Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 Over the course of his 87 game career BR has Meadows as a 1.9 WAR player..1.0 this season. If he continues to improve offensively...he could be a 4-5 WAR player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 (edited) 53 minutes ago, Tiger337 said: 2 WAR is an average player, so if you had a team of "2 WAR" players including pitchers you'd win 81 games. So, if you have mostly 2 WAR players and a few really good players (4+ WAR), you've got a contender. Looking at BR numbers. The Yankees have the most WAR as a team in the AL with a total 12.6 WAR and they are just about 12 wins over 500. At the other end the WS are more than 30 wins below 500 but 'only' rate -22 WAR. The Yankees could end up near 20 WAR by season's end, maybe more like 16. The fit isn't perfect but not bad for a rough approximation. One thing I don't know is whether the BR numbers count injured/moved players in the current team totals. Edited August 24 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 1 hour ago, Tiger337 said: 2 WAR is an average player, so if you had a team of "2 WAR" players including pitchers you'd win 81 games. So, if you have mostly 2 WAR players and a few really good players (4+ WAR), you've got a contender. That’s how I remember the Giants team that won 3 World Series recently. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger337 Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 53 minutes ago, oblong said: That’s how I remember the Giants team that won 3 World Series recently. All three of their recent championship teams were like that. Conventional wisdom would say that a team like that would be good during the season but wouldn't be built for a championship. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 14 minutes ago, Tiger337 said: All three of their recent championship teams were like that. Conventional wisdom would say that a team like that would be good during the season but wouldn't be built for a championship. Is there a good way to quantify or discern hitters who are "relatively" better at hitting good pitching? Can we define what that mean evens? As specific examples, say you have a LH hitter with a 750 total OPS and an 800/600 R/L platoon OPS split. When you get to the playoffs and aren't necessarily going to face an average amount of R and L hand pitching in a given match-up, so would you rather have the guy with a 750 OPS or may even a 725 OPS but no platoon split? Likewise in the playoffs where I might see a team more overloaded with L or R hitters than league average, do I prefer to have a pitcher who relies mostly on command and change of speed (Skubal type) than a guy with a similar total ERA but who is primarily a slider pitcher who may to struggle against a heavy LH lineup? (maybe a Scherzer) type)? Or just take a guy like Vierling who doesn't have any all star numbers but *seems* to have excess "clutchness" because he can and is willing to adjust by going the other way or pulling the ball depending on what the pitchers is trying to do. He's not a better hitter overall than another guy but he doesn't have a single point of weakness for a good pitcher to exploit as successfully. I think I'd like him on playoff team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 lol "WS". What, does your internet provider charge you by the letter? 😉 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 (edited) 6 minutes ago, chasfh said: lol "WS". What, does your internet provider charge you by the letter? 😉 Not the $/byte, it's the MPG* for the fingers...... (*Miles per Grain of ibuprofen) Edited August 24 by gehringer_2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sports_Freak Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 I forgot to mention...did anyone catch who started the winning rally to win the game? A Parker Meadows walk. He actually scored the winning run, I think. The kid really can be a difference maker. I realize he's on a hot streak and can't keep it up but it's great to see what he can be capable of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sports_Freak Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 7 minutes ago, chasfh said: lol "WS". What, does your internet provider charge you by the letter? 😉 It's...WSox. 😅😅 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 I regularly see CWS as the three-letter designation for the team, much as DET is for the Tigers, although I've seen CHW in usage as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger337 Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 56 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: Is there a good way to quantify or discern hitters who are "relatively" better at hitting good pitching? Can we define what that mean evens? As specific examples, say you have a LH hitter with a 750 total OPS and an 800/600 R/L platoon OPS split. When you get to the playoffs and aren't necessarily going to face an average amount of R and L hand pitching in a given match-up, so would you rather have the guy with a 750 OPS or may even a 725 OPS but no platoon split? Likewise in the playoffs where I might see a team more overloaded with L or R hitters than league average, do I prefer to have a pitcher who relies mostly on command and change of speed (Skubal type) than a guy with a similar total ERA but who is primarily a slider pitcher who may to struggle against a heavy LH lineup? (maybe a Scherzer) type)? Or just take a guy like Vierling who doesn't have any all star numbers but *seems* to have excess "clutchness" because he can and is willing to adjust by going the other way or pulling the ball depending on what the pitchers is trying to do. He's not a better hitter overall than another guy but he doesn't have a single point of weakness for a good pitcher to exploit as successfully. I think I'd like him on playoff team. Vierling is batting .263/,302/.422 with the bases empty and .229/.279/.458 with RISP in limited PA. So, he does not seem to have excess clutchiness. I think clutchiness exists in certain players, but that it's so minor that you can't rely on it on a regular basis. You can't plan around it. Match-ups do matter in the playoffs and throughout the season and I think managers such as Hinch know how to take advantage of them, but you can't know who you are going to face in the World Series. You can't build for a championship. You can only build a talented team that makes the playoffs multiple times and hope that things go right in post-season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sports_Freak Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 30 minutes ago, Tiger337 said: Vierling is batting .263/,302/.422 with the bases empty and .229/.279/.458 with RISP in limited PA. So, he does not seem to have excess clutchiness. I think clutchiness exists in certain players, but that it's so minor that you can't rely on it on a regular basis. You can't plan around it. Match-ups do matter in the playoffs and throughout the season and I think managers such as Hinch know how to take advantage of them, but you can't know who you are going to face in the World Series. You can't build for a championship. You can only build a talented team that makes the playoffs multiple times and hope that things go right in post-season. Yeah, limited at bats. Look at the splits for Javy. Last I saw, he was hitting over .320 with RISP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 51 minutes ago, Tiger337 said: Vierling is batting .263/,302/.422 with the bases empty and .229/.279/.458 with RISP in limited PA. So, he does not seem to have excess clutchiness. I think clutchiness exists in certain players, but that it's so minor that you can't rely on it on a regular basis. You can't plan around it. Match-ups do matter in the playoffs and throughout the season and I think managers such as Hinch know how to take advantage of them, but you can't know who you are going to face in the World Series. You can't build for a championship. You can only build a talented team that makes the playoffs multiple times and hope that things go right in post-season. Your most clutch players—that is, the players you can count on most in clutch situations—are almost always your best players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 (edited) 27 minutes ago, chasfh said: Your most clutch players—that is, the players you can count on most in clutch situations—are almost always your best players. My question would be whether your best statistical performances are always the best measure though. One of the worst things that can happen to a team is a high season performing player is slumping come playoff time. I think if I'm putting together a team something I would look are the monthly performance variances of the players I'm collecting. I suppose probability wise maybe in the end it makes no difference, a guy might be just as likely to get hot, but I think if I'm a manager it's going to be easier to make decisions with guys that are more predictable. That - and as noted previously, I'd give up a little overall performance for a guy with a smaller platoon split. I don't want a guy I have to depend on to be an easy mark because of a pitching change. This become a cost issue also though and guys with low splits are also more expensive. Edited August 24 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 At the risk of not overthinking, I’m going to play my best players at playoff time. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 Just now, chasfh said: At the risk of not overthinking, I’m going to play my best players at playoff time. no, you can't do much about it once you are there. Those are considerations at the front end of your team building. Stars are great when they don't let you down. I remember a lot of gnashing of teeth over ARod in 2005 after he put up a 1000 OPS for an MVP season and then did nothing against the Angels and NY went out in the 1st round. He carried them in 2009 though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger337 Posted August 24 Share Posted August 24 54 minutes ago, chasfh said: At the risk of not overthinking, I’m going to play my best players at playoff time. I agree and I am going to put together a team of the most talented players possible. Cutchness exists to an extent, but you just can't predict when it's going to happen. If you try to do it basd on past performance splits you will always being dealing with small sample sizes arising from too many variables. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.