I think you underrate what the new found stability in the rotation and what type of aggregate impact that has on a bullpen over the course of 162. Even without Sale we are significantly better in the starting rotation. That is worth several wins in my opinion.Originally Posted by Enscheff
Exactly right, thethe. Well said. Sometimes I feel compelled to give thanks for well-reasoned opinions with visual and projection elements just to remind the people who think that way that they are not alone. I am certainly not a flat earther, but there's more to team building and discussion than which backward looking metric is righter.
I think the broader look is better, as long as saber analysis is part of it.
You're right. They don't think they're a 70 win club. And on the matter of 3B and C, they're not done yet because they didn't sign Jason Castro. He's a turkey (heh).
He does think he's building a 90 win team, whether you think that's realistic or smart or not.
Not to bring facts into the discussion, but here are Castros number of games played by month last season:
April/March 21
May 22
June 16
July 18
August 16
Sept/Oct 20
That looks like a typical workload for a starting catcher. Harris didn't take any games away from Castro last season. The Astros upgraded offensively with Mac while giving up very little defensively.
To be clear, the article says he added a leg kick. If that's all it takes to become Bautista I would hope all players would make that change.
We will check back in on his season in August and see how much water this prediction holds.
Pretty scary if you think about it
I'm sure many people have tried but Rodriguez not only tried but showed success. Therefore , it deserves more mention.
Natural Immunity Croc
I understand that you guys have strong feelings regarding the projections but the assumption of being correct is probably what rubs people the wrong way. The saber community still presents these projections as facts when in reality there are still margins of error.
Not but it's right way more often than the "I have a feeling" crowd. Yeah, there is a chance he is the new Bautista. But the overwhelming odds are that he is not. The predictions are based on probabilities based on the 100+ year history of the game. Players can alter their approach in a way to change their narrative but that is not the norm and not something to count on.
I think the only people taking these projections as facts are those that don't like them for their team.
I'm not really a Stats guy nor a Scouts guy. I'm more of a Stout. I don't think you can ignore the numbers but also think that the eye test can reveal hidden opportunity. I also think broad trends that turn up over and over, like needing a reasonably powerful team, can't be ignored no matter what the Stats or Scouts might say (if it didn't mean anything, why does it turn up over and over).
My view is that pushing to be competitive in 2017 relies heavily on great seasons from everyone who can actually have one and good seasons from a double handful of ancients. The margin of error is so razor thin that the likelihood of success is extremely small.
Cutting a rebuild short is a quick way to end up in baseball purgatory - never good enough to really win anything, never bad enough to decide to rebuild again - in other words right back where the Braves have been for the majority of the last 10 years.
Agreed it's unlikely but he made the change and his results showed that something may have clicked. That's the only reason I give it more weight.
Something may have which is why I think you saw it being a two year deal. It's either a solid deal or the best FA signing of the offseason.
Correct, it is worth 3-4 wins, which is what Colon and Dickey should provide, and is already factored into the 75 win projection.
I respect where you're coming from. I just disagree. It will be fun to see how the year plays out though.
Ok, then the author needs to do a whole lot more than say, "he added a leg kick and hit better over a few hundred PAs".
Is he hitting the ball with a higher exit velocity? Is he hitting more line drives? More fly balls? Less grounders? Less pop ups? Is he pulling the ball more? Is he laying off pitches outside the zone more often? Is he targeting pitches in a certain area more now? Swinging at more fastballs? What evidence shows any of this being sustainable?
Answering those types of questions counts as analysis. Simply comparing him to 2 superstars that also added a leg kick is not. That type of article is nothing but a hype fluff piece. Adding a few OPS and WAR numbers doesn't change that.
Yes, the season will be fun to watch. But I expect the front office of a professional sports organization to accurately project their roster and act accordingly. There is a reason all the old school thinkers are being phased out of the game, and it isn't because that type of thinking leads to more success.
FG actually just released an article saying all those things coincidentally enough.
Old school guys aren't being pushed out. Old school guys who are too stubborn to utilize all information are
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote