Jump to content

5/15 Post Game


Recommended Posts

Raise your hand if your team is still on pace for 96 wins?

 

*raises hand*

 

While I do think that this team is in decent shape, by my estimate the team is on pace for 87-88 wins.

 

It's really stupid to extrapolate by the number of wins, because the number of individual events is so small. I think using the Pythagorean is much, much more precise because it helps reduce the weight of those one-run games.

Last I checked our pyth was like 1 game off our wins.

Feel free to double check my math (which I did after today's game--BR hasn't updated yet), but I think it's currently two games off.

Yeah, might be with this game, considering they scored 8 runs to our 4.

 

But see, we still have a sample size issue there, because the number of individual events is so small. One game just bumped us out of a win.

 

(B-R says that our pyth was 21 wins after yesterday, but that's a rounding error. It was actually ~21.9585, which is 22 wins.)

 

BTW, our pyth is on pace for ~88.8837 wins. Yesterday we were on pace for ~91.2122

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like to look at it like this:

 

We're obviously over performing, and maybe it's sustainable, and maybe not. But, if and when we do regress, we have a couple of games in hand, so to speak. You know, if we play like an 84 win team the rest of the way, we'll win 87-88 games, because we had a string of good luck or overperformance relative to expectations in the beginning.

 

So no, we won't win 96 games. But an 84 win pace, extrapolated to the 123 remaining games, gives us 64-65 wins the rest of the way. So we're looking at high 80's.

 

Basically, I don't look at the run differential as a reason to be pessimistic. It's a reason to be thankful for our good fortunes thus far.

 

It's clear that either overperforming or underperforming, the Marlins are in the thick of things. However, if everything stays the same (of course that won't happen anyway), the Braves and the Phillies have the edge.

 

This basically just means that the Marlins need to find a way to replace Vazquez and hope that Volstad improves a little, because the offense seems to be doing okay even with a slumping Hanley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, all of this is totally theoretical. Sometimes for a variety of reasons, teams over or underperform their expected win total based on RD.

 

It's like FIP and xFIP and tERA and SIERA and all of those pitching metrics that try to pin down a pitcher's "true" talent. They are great tools, and they work for like 90% of samples, but there's always enough noise to throw them off, and sometimes, as with Ricky Nolasco it just can't get it right because there's something about him that confounds the projections.

 

Sometimes there's an explanation: The Diamondbacks in 2007 had a wonderful bullpen and they performed exceptionally well in high leverage situations because of it. And then sometimes you just get lucky for a whole year and it never balances out.

 

But it's important to not take them as gospel, obviously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone really believes that it's an exact science, but I will always give it much more weight than the W% at this point in the season.

 

There is a compulsion to extrapolate the final win total to see if the Marlins can sustain themselves at this rate with Vazquez sucking every 5th game and still be in contention. It's generally understood to be a rough estimate, which is largely due to the fact that moves will be made and injuries will happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point in the season, it's just as volatile and misleading as anything else.

 

Case in point, our Pythag dropped 4 games today because of one loss. This game somehow made us 4 games worse.

 

It's next to impossible to really know anything about a team 40 games in, and that's not even including the fact that roster moves will be made and injuries will happen. It's because sometimes wacky, inexplicable sh*t happens in 40 game stretches.

 

Extrapolating the win% from right now is unsubtle and misleading, but run differential isn't very telling either. We gave up 5% of our season's total in runs today. That's going to dramatically alter anything based on run differential, despite the fact that it's ultimately not any more important than any other game. By the end of the year, this will have dropped to like 1.3% of our season total, and it won't make a difference.

 

It's natural to want to draw big conclusions based on what's happened so far, but we really don't have that that much more hard data than we did 40 games ago, all things considered. We're still at an exceptionally volatile time in the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point in the season, it's just as volatile and misleading as anything else.

 

Case in point, our Pythag dropped 4 games today because of one loss. This game somehow made us 4 games worse.

 

It's next to impossible to really know anything about a team 40 games in, and that's not even including the fact that roster moves will be made and injuries will happen. It's because sometimes wacky, inexplicable sh*t happens in 40 game stretches.

 

Extrapolating the win% from right now is unsubtle and misleading, but run differential isn't very telling either. We gave up 5% of our season's total in runs today. That's going to dramatically alter anything based on run differential, despite the fact that it's ultimately not any more important than any other game. By the end of the year, this will have dropped to like 1.3% of our season total, and it won't make a difference.

 

It's natural to want to draw big conclusions based on what's happened so far, but we really don't have that that much more hard data than we did 40 games ago, all things considered. We're still at an exceptionally volatile time in the season.

 

 

 

Yes, this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point in the season, it's just as volatile and misleading as anything else.

 

Case in point, our Pythag dropped 4 games today because of one loss. This game somehow made us 4 games worse.

 

It's next to impossible to really know anything about a team 40 games in, and that's not even including the fact that roster moves will be made and injuries will happen. It's because sometimes wacky, inexplicable sh*t happens in 40 game stretches.

 

Extrapolating the win% from right now is unsubtle and misleading, but run differential isn't very telling either. We gave up 5% of our season's total in runs today. That's going to dramatically alter anything based on run differential, despite the fact that it's ultimately not any more important than any other game. By the end of the year, this will have dropped to like 1.3% of our season total, and it won't make a difference.

 

It's natural to want to draw big conclusions based on what's happened so far, but we really don't have that that much more hard data than we did 40 games ago, all things considered. We're still at an exceptionally volatile time in the season.

 

Just about exactly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh? How are the two the remotely the same?

 

Several people have been extrapolating the win total here. I'm not taking issue with that practice, but am suggesting that there is a more mathematically sound way of doing it. Please don't try to compare that to the exchange in the other thread, because it's reaching.

 

Looking at the Pythagorean is useful and shows where the team stands.

 

 

I didn't compare it to the other thread at all. I referred to you saying you dislike when people take things to seriously when your words convey the same in yourself.

 

Saying it's "really stupid" is not "suggesting" - that's reaching.

 

I'm well-aware of the implications of the Pythagorean and never said or implied otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh? How are the two the remotely the same?

 

Several people have been extrapolating the win total here. I'm not taking issue with that practice, but am suggesting that there is a more mathematically sound way of doing it. Please don't try to compare that to the exchange in the other thread, because it's reaching.

 

Looking at the Pythagorean is useful and shows where the team stands.

 

 

I didn't compare it to the other thread at all. I referred to you saying you dislike when people take things to seriously when your words convey the same in yourself.

 

Saying it's "really stupid" is not "suggesting" - that's reaching.

 

I'm well-aware of the implications of the Pythagorean and never said or implied otherwise.

You weren't referencing the other (Vazquez) thread when you said this?

 

It's kinda funny that you're ripping others for taking things too seriously, but you call posting the team's pace based on current W-L "really stupid."

 

Riiiiight.

 

I dislike it when people cause a fit when other members here are trying to make jokes about certain things in away that isn't always "appropriate." Hence my comments in the other thread and comments when these types of things have occurred in the past. This place can be way too uptight and puritanical when it comes to off the cuff remarks, which is why I accuse people of being "too serious." I'd like to see people relax and have more of a sense of humor, because I feel that breeds healthier exchanges. Whenever something is said off the cuff, it seems like it has to be broken down and analyzed, which seems to be precisely what you are trying to do here.

 

I have no idea how that has anything to do with me finding fault with your mathematical modeling in this thread.

 

To be quite honest, I have no clue as to what you are setting out to prove here. You are conflating things that seem completely unrelated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what he's saying is his original post was not really that serious, and you took it seriously.

 

I realized that both now and at the time. Having said that, I still don't see what the issue is and how it's an indication of hypocrisy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would help our run differential if our "superstar" SS started playing up to expectations. Of course, I suppose that evens out because some guys are overachieving, but Hanley still has to produce, either way. It's now a month and a half and his #'s (specifically, his #'s against right-handed pitching) are a joke.

 

With that said, I don't think winning one-run games is simply a matter of luck. It's no coincidence that we're 11-4 in one-run games and we have the 2nd best bullpen ERA in baseball, at the same time. Certainly luck is involved, but having a very good bullpen certainly helps. Better team defense helps, as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I'm starting to worry about Hanley, as well.

 

Against RHP: .167/.262/.204, 22.2 K%, 61.9 GB%, 9.5 LD%.

 

That doesn't include his 0-4, K day today.

 

 

How long do you think that lasts? Hanley, throughout his career, rakes right handed pitching. Those numbers will improve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I'm starting to worry about Hanley, as well.

 

Against RHP: .167/.262/.204, 22.2 K%, 61.9 GB%, 9.5 LD%.

 

That doesn't include his 0-4, K day today.

 

 

How long do you think that lasts? Hanley, throughout his career, rakes right handed pitching. Those numbers will improve.

 

 

It's not really about the results; it's what he's doing to get those results.

 

He's striking out more, not hitting line drives, and hitting groundballs way more than he ever has.

 

If it was simply a matter of bad luck, I'd say "well, whatever," but right now, he kinda just really sucks against right-handed pitching.

 

The only positive thing about his line against right-handed pitching is that he's still drawing walks. Absolutely no power, though; .037 .ISO, to be exact. That's pathetic. It's amazing that we're 23-16, despite his play being so pathetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Volstad is better than most #4's and better than almost all #5's - so I wish we would stop putting him in the same category with Vazquez who is currently hapless.

 

 

 

Pretty sure this is not true.

 

He's a #5. In the National League.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...