A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Does intellectual integrity include answering questions?

    I did say I agreed with Sciosia didn't I. Twice. I answered that question.
    Catcher's CERA is, like Scioscia said, related to the combination of certain players. Napoli might have a lot better CERA if he were with another pitching combination. The data would probably still skew toward him not being good defensively but maybe not as much. Then again, it could be maybe worse. It's a stat that's based upon the combination of two players and one could even make a strong case that it is a stat based upon 9 players and even the manager, the umps involved....etc. It is very difficult to quantify accurately. So difficult that even guys a lot better at math than I am describe the data to be lying below the threshold of detection. 

    To me, harness, that means the impact is less than some people think

    I asked you quite a few, but didn't see any answers.
    The one I'd like answered the most is why Scioscia, whom you agreed with,
    deployed both Mathis/Napoli when he could have used the better hitting Napoli full-time.

    Because of the pitcher / player combinations involved, as he stated.

    Do you think he was aware of the data favoring Mathis regarding over-whelming pitcher effectiveness and resulting team-loss records? If he doesn't value that, why play a .199 career hitter so often?

    I appreciate the Woolker piece you posted, Boom, but have seen variations of it before. He tries to numerically quantify it via formulation. Problem is, and the article admits this, the comparisons are drawn using several catchers catching different pitchers from different teams employing different defenses.

    Should they use fewer catchers, and more limited data?

    You really have to dig to find credible examples where the criteria can be useful and properly measured. The Napoli/Mathis data is a great example. It consistently favors Mathis year to year.

    You are formulating your opinion based on CERA articles that admit it (criteria of game-calling, etc.) lies below the threshold of detection. Well, much in life does, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I asked you several times to look at the data on the Catcher's relevance thread last year. You finally admitted you didn't. So, your opinion  is being stated without ever acknowledging some pretty compelling information, which spanned 1000's of IP.

    Had you read it, you'd understand why VMART, who openly stated he wants to catch FT, is now employed as a DH/PT receiver.

    Here's another question: Why do you feel it's "overrated"? If articles admit the obscure conclusions can easily result from lack of info, resulting in alternative but inaccurate methods of measuring the phenomenon, then it's hardly over-rated. Perhaps understated. Definitely mis-understood. Because it's a hot topic on this board due to it's obvious importance to the team, that doesn't mean it's suddenly overrated.

    I agree that Vmart was not ideal from a CERA perspective, but why then did Buchholz have a great year with him? A tremendous year. I'm aware that he was considered lucky, and I'm sure he was, but the bottom line is given 2 pitchers of approximate CERA value, tabulated by the manager's evaluation who is aware of the nuances and relationships, respect between the players etc...I'd generally take the one hitting .300 as compared to .200 all other factors being equal. 

    I don't have time to give more time to CERA. I just don't. It's nothing personal of course. We probably agree more than you think if you really look at what I'm saying.  

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Nope, been here the whole time. But I'm not really a "doubter" as much as I am a "realist". And, realistically, the sawx are a very expensive, very flawed team. Spin it however you like in your usual fashion, but the bottom line is you are what your record says you are...

    Every team is flawed.

    Record isn't everything at this point of the season.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Devildad, it's a marriage, not cause and effect. Adjustments, lucky rabits food and personality confilicts are not the same thing as cause and effect.

    This discussion needs to be closed, just like a lot of other threads. That cuts down on spam and bumping, and drivel.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    A lot of the problems we are experiencing can be just defined from the hitting with RISP stat. We are hitting under .210 so far. In comparison, Baltimore and Cleveland are hitting much closer to .290 or .300. That explains a lot right there of why Cleveland is in first and why we are struggling so much. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]A lot of the problems we are experiencing can be just defined from the hitting with RISP stat. We are hitting under .210 so far. In comparison, Baltimore and Cleveland are hitting much closer to .290 or .300. That explains a lot right there of why Cleveland is in first and why we are struggling so much. 
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]I agree. The good news is that over 162 games that tends to sort itself out and the team hits closer to its average when runners are in scoring position.

    Last April the Rays hit a much higher average with RISP than the team average and put up a lot of wins (16-5). But as things do that evened itself out, they could not buy a hit with RISP for a time and they came back to the pack. One can only hope that the same applies in reverse for the 2011 RS. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Let's be clear on Tek's sudden one-game retirement:
    The first "passed ball" was a wild pitch, created by a signal cross-up. My guess is that Tek assumed Bard knew the signals change once a guy got to 2nd base.

    The only passed ball didn't get away far enough to do any damage. In fact, Tek retrieved it and enabled Bard to cut down the key run. Bard did a nice job blocking the plate.

    Tek bashers need little excuse to put him out to pasture.
    Try catching Bard sometime when he's wild in the dirt.

    Katz: If the team did not have Tek backing Salty, they could very well be 5-18 by now. Tek is here because of the gamble with Salty.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Boom: It wasn't a matter of pitching-catcher combinations. I don't have time to separate this into years right now, but this is a quick example from the CADDY thread showing IP to both catchers over three years (2007-9).

    Lackey w/Mathis:          261 IP     3.21 ERA
    Lackey with Napoli
    :     279 IP     3.79 ERA

    J. weaver w/Mathis:       322 IP     3.63 ERA
    J. WEAVER W/NAPOLI: 213 IP     4.56 ERA

    E. SANTANA W/MATHIS  315 IP     3.80 ERA
    E. Santana w/Napoli:       118 IP     4.59 ERA

    From 2007-9, the ANGELS went 129-66 (.661) with Mathis.
    They were 141-94 (.600) with Napoli.

    Scioscia deployed a tandem. What he meant by "marriages" is that he looks at each example separately. He analyzes how each pitcher does with each catcher.
    I'm showing you the same thing.

    Why was Buch so good with VMART? Well, how do you know he wouldn't have been better with Tek? There's no frame of reference. Buch had a damn good year. Period.
    So did Lester. But there is a frame of reference with Lester. And he did much better with Tek/Cash than he did with VMART. As did just about everyone else.

    As did the pitchers in Cleveland when there was a credible analogy to be drawn.

    That's why VMART in the position he's currently in.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    This discussion needs to be closed, just like a lot of other threads. That cuts down on spam and bumping, and drivel.

    I guess we could close a lot of other discussions as well...

           Cherry-Picking Small Sample Size Scoreboard Time

    1) Opinion: "Crawford should be the leadoff guy."
         Facts: Crawford .160/.202/.234/.536
                      Ellsbury  .264/.326/.471/.797

    2) Opinion: "Scutaro should start at SS, and Lowrie should be dealt." 
         Facts: Scutaro .189/.283/.226/.509
                      Lowrie  .390/.413/.610/1.023

    3) Opinion: "Beckett is an overpaid fat union slugs."
         Facts: 2-1  2.65 (0.853 WHIP)

    4) Opinion: "Old man VTek should retire."
         Facts: Opps vs our Staff
             with VTek .199/.263/.290/.552 (3.17 K/BB)  
                   Staff with VTek: 6-5  2.50 ERA
             with Salty .278/.356/.507/.863 (1.71 K/BB) 
                   Staff with Salty: 5-8  6.14 ERA

    5) Opinion: "Potato Salad Wake should retire so others could play more."
         Facts: Wake (11.1) 5.56  (0.970 WHIP)
                   Lackey (22.2) 6.35 (1.456 WHIP)
               Doubront  (2.2)  6.75  (2.250 WHIP)
                      Jenks  (7.1)  7.36  (1.901 WHIP)
                 Wheeler  (7.1)  9.82  (1.500 WHIP)
                     Reyes  (1.2) 16.20 (2.400 WHIP)
                 Okajima  (1.0) 27.00 (3.000 WHIP) 

    Just the tip of the iceberg, but it's no wonder softy chose to change his identity.
     
         
      
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I wish he'd change his country as well.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Harness, maybe the RS would have been in deep do-do if they did not bring back Tek but perhaps they could signed Ramon Hernandez, who is well regarded as a great in game catcher as he was non-tendered by the Reds, who eventual resigned him for $3M versus the $3.25 option they held. He is 34 and I am sure once the Reds non-tendered him he might have been receptive because he knew the Reds were going to try and go with Hanigan more in 2011.

    There isn't much drop of between those guys as game managers and Ramon is hitting .289/.360/.489 in 15 games versus .091/.189/.121 in 12 games.

    I don't fault Tek for being 39 but I am also aware that gravity has its affects on players as they age. Going with a question mark and having a 39 year old as the back up plan was IMO just poor planning. 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I may be wrong about Hernandez as I am trying to piece it together on the internet but I think he was non-tendered and then resigned. If I am wrong I stand corrected but he would have perfect as a back-up.

    I have defended Tek as a back-up last year when people melted down about him but catching 100 games or more, that just isn't sensible to me.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    katz, I think both harness and I had hoped we'd have gotten another solid catcher for this year. Solid in terms of game-calling history, defense, and hopefully better offense.

    We both recognize VTek's FT status is over. Maybe for short stretches h could handle it, but he is basically a 2/5 to 3/5 game catcher now.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    3 out 5 over 162 is 97 games and frankly I don't think Tek will hold up and I don't think it makes sense to have his bat in the line-up for 97 games.

    That is why i say if the RS weren't going to get a clear number one they were willing to ride it out with, it was incumbent on them to get a younger back-up. The two catchers the RS brought to the dance with them were a very bad combination IMO.

    I hope I am wrong but if the RS don't give plenty of rest to Varitek he is going to be an issue that will be big enough that his handling of a pitching staff will be dwarfed by it.


     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    I advocated carrying 3 catchers, with Salty doubling as a back-up first-bagger if he hit. I also think Theo was foolish not to sign Rob Johnson as insurance. But I do agree that this gamble was made without fully acknowledging the importance of the catching position.

    The timing, considering what's at stake, may be an historic worst for taking such as gamble.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Katz: I don't think the brass has any intentions of having Tek catch that many games. They will either ride it out with Salty, using some kind of tandem until he "gets it", or they'll replace him.

    They just don't want to make a rash decision after their winter commitment.
    If they pull the plug on Salty, why not on CC as well?
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Critter23. Show Critter23's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II


    Boom, I see your point on VMart and his offense but don't think you should mix that with the Crawford direction.  Seems like two different things.  Whether we agree on VMart or not, I think Theo decided he did not want him catching this staff in the future and he did not want to give him 10 mil a year to be a DH or play 1st when he preferred others in those spots.  I think he took a gamble on Salty, and right now that gamble doesn't look so good.  The whole catching situation doesn't look so good actually.  However, I think we still need to give this some more time.  In a month this situation might stabilize and we might start to see Salty improve.  Remember when Buch threw a no hitter then the next year he lost his first seven or eight games and got sent down?  This happens with young players and patience is required even if it's difficult. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    They absolutely wanted Gonzalez and probably wanted the big Crawford splash as well and basically blew every penny they had.  In order to do that they rolled the dice bigtime with Salty and Tek. They probably thought they could carry them with a big offensive output from other guys. The verdict certainly isn't in yet but it isn't looking good to me. I said in spring training that I didn't like rolling the dice with Salty/Tek and so far I don't think that concern couldn't be more on target. They gambled. So far they've lost big time at the catcher position and I see no indication that is going to change.

    Hopefully Salty will live up to his promise but there have been a lot guys who burst on the scene their first few years and then tanked. Hermida. Hinske...etc. It happens sometimes. If I'm wrong I will happily, even joyously, admit it.  
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    It looks to me like the fix at catcher is most likely to be done by trade. We don't have the cash to do a salary dump. It is difficult to do such a trade now but we have a lot of farm talent doing well so far.

    Not that I'm recommending trading him, but Reddick has 8 HR so far in 80 AB. He's drawing over twice as many walks as last year also. The ideal solution for the Sox is for him to work out as a solution for RF next year. He has one of the best arms in the minors and would be great in RF for the Sox defensively.

    The Yanks look like their offense is gearing up for another big season. If you pitch Arod outside he just knocks it over that short RF fence. All their LH hitters just swing for that porch. An entire lineup of sluggers except for Gardner and he does a great job also. They are going to be tough.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaseballGM. Show BaseballGM's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Slav, I can't speak for what an old poster actually said, but your own cognitive limitations would indicate a high probability of error.

    Fact, Slav, it's April.

    Katz: If the team did not have Tek backing Salty, they could very well be 5-18 by now. Tek is here because of the gamble with Salty

    Opinion, Harness, which can't ever be proven on any level.

    Fact: Salty has only allowed 2 runs in his last two pitching starts

    Fact: Varitek has a costly passed ball in his last pitching appearance

    Fact: Varitek has allowed 9 runs in his last two pitching starts

    Fact: Crawford's Career OBP Leading off an Inning is .335

    Fact: Ellsbury's Career OBP Leading off an Inning is .307

    Fact: Scutaro's Career OPS v. RHP is  .712

    Fact: Lowrie's Career OPS v. RHP is .680 

    Fact: Every Wakefield Outing has been mop-up down 3 or more runs

    Fact: Wakefield has given up 3 homers in  7 pen outings

    Fact: Varitek's 2011 BA is .091 and his OBP is .189

    Slav Opinion: Ortiz should sit v. most LH starting pitching

    Fact: Ortiz v. LHP in 2011  BA .360  OBP .500  OPS 1.020

    Slav, clumsy can be funny, so you are good for a laugh. You should change your moniker to "Outtolunch".................... 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Question is, how many runs that NY staff will surrender once things heat up.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from broph18. Show broph18's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    This a good take on the Sox road back to .500 that you all may enjoy.

    http://thebostonsportslist.com/2011/04/20/20-20-foresight-for-the-red-sox/
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    Fact, Slav, it's April.

    You say this, then go on to spout "facts" based on even smaller sample sizes.

    You've been roasting Sox players on one AB or batter faced all April. All year.

    Slav, I can't speak for what an old poster actually said, but your own cognitive limitations would indicate a high probability of error.

    Yes, you can not speak "for him", you are him.  
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    m
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from law2009a. Show law2009a's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    m
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II

    In Response to Re: A Realistic Look at 2011: Part II:
    [QUOTE]Question is, how many runs that NY staff will surrender once things heat up.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Or how many of them will get hurt. Counting on Colon types is chancy but it's working well so far. I'm not worried about Nova as I think he's hittable. The reliability of that staff is the potential problem for them but they do have that young left hander on the farm who could probably step in and do well for them.
     

Share