Jump to content

CheeseburgerFish

Members
  • Posts

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

CheeseburgerFish's Achievements

Hammerhead

Hammerhead (1/8)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Conversation Starter
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. marlinfan, k-zone is not perfect either
  2. Sure, a retractable roof will probably come in handy just a couple times each season, but is it really NECESSARY to spend this type of money on a roof when we are a small market team just struggling to even pay our current players? just pointing out we're not a small market team
  3. I didn't say that he wasn't going a lot of innings, nor did I say he was giving up many runs. My argument was about luck and his future. My last reply referred mainly to his past, as you're 9:55 post seemed to refer to his past and present progress. Additionally, I think Pavano is doing well this year. I just think he is oftentimes getting lucky.
  4. Lopat was an exception. He was an amazingly tricky junkball pitcher. The man was a pitching genius. Also noted is that he pitched in a time of much lower ERAs (http://www.baseball-reference.com/l/lopated01.shtml). He was also a completely different type of pitcher than Pavano. Second of all, I am not saying that a groundout is worse than a strikeout, I'm saying its not a good an indication of a good pitcher. On Pavano's quality starts: QUALITY START A start in which the pitcher pitches at least six innings and allows no more than three {earned} runs (http://www.sportfanatics.net/Articles/Baseball/Baseball_Definitions.htm). QS is a vastly overrated method of ranking pitchers. A pitcher with 6 innings pitched, giving up 3 earned runs qualifies for a quality start. However a quality start means a 4.50 E.RA. I would rather have a pitcher who goes five innings giving up 2 runs. Also, if a pitcher gets shelled every other appearance, but pitches decently in the other half of starts, QS would have him as a very good pitcher, where in reality he would be terrible. Again, I hope Pavano pitches well.
  5. I hope Pavano is building towards a good career. With that said, his ERAs have not goten consistently lower. They have been up and down. Year ERA Games Starts 1998 4.21 24 23 1999 5.63 19 18 2000 3.06 15 15 2001 6.33 8 8 2002 5.16 37 22 2003 4.30 33 32 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stat...ontext=pitching This does not demonstrate consistent improvement. It does not show a good pitcher. Also, Pavano now pitches in a pitchers park. It shows a pitcher often injured, and one who did a 2002 stint in the bullpen. I hope I am wrong.
  6. I think that DIPS is a good stat and applicable to most pitchers. Once he read the McCracken article hyperlinked below, Bill James did a study on pitchers and found that pitchers who had one year that rose far above the rest of their careers, tended to have this season due to a one-year fluke where the hits just didn't get through the defense. The essay is in his The New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=878
  7. That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that the skill is usually to not walkbatters to make them swing and miss, and not to give up home runs. At the Major League level, the difference between pitchers is rarely enough for one pitcher to be better than another in terms of balls hit into play. The hits and non-hits there are usually decided by luck and fielders. Also, I never said Pavano is bad. I just said that maybe he's not quite as good as he seems.
  8. The odds are if you locate the ball and pitch well enough, the batter will miss. Once the batter has actually hit the ball, luck and fielding are major factors in the outcome of the play. The best pitchers can be identified by BB/9 and K/9. And we have agreed that Pavano does not lack in BB/9
  9. I think that maybe Pavano has gotten a little lucky this year. I don't think inducing ground balls is necessarily all skill. And he did not have a very good ERA last year.
  10. I think that Pavano is pitching well this year due mainly to his great control. If his sinker has been at times subpar, his control has made up for it this year. He has given up only 22 walks in 103 innings. He has only had one very good season in his career (2000), in which he had only 15 starts. Pavano has always had a good BB/9 ratio, but suffers on the strikeout end of pitching. This year, his WHIP is 1.05. He has also had 7 win shares, not including his last two starts. For $3,800,000 he has been a bargain so far this year, but I'm concerned that his control may not make up for some of his lackings for the whole season. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=5945 http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/wsnllead http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stat...ontext=pitching http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/scouting?statsId=5945
  11. k/bb if u dont count win shares
  12. in my opinion there is no question that speed is no problem. Besides Pierre last year, I think we were hurt some with the stolen bases. I am referring to Castillo. 21 sb, 19 cs in my opinion probably hurt us more than helped us by far.
  13. the expos are coming off of the losses of Vlad and Vasquez, so no major threat there. philadelphia has not done much to improve itself. the braves have lost sheff, lopez, and possibly maddux, and have gained drew and marrerro. i think major damage has been done to them this offseason. But the mets. the mets' only big gains have been kaz matsui and mike cameron. this will probably not be enough to overcome their talent defecit. the marlins have lost ugie, pudge and possibly castro (due to the law suit). But with the anticipated return of a.j. burnett, the redman-neu trade, and the prospect of having Conine, Cabrera, Willis, and Lowell for the entire season, my outlook is optimistic
  14. My favorite moment was when beckett tagged Posada to end it. I was nearly in tears. i picked the fish to win it all, and my family laughed at me. and then... champs
×
×
  • Create New...