Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

65 Low A-Ball

About Filmstudy

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 5/31/1963

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks for the tweet-worthy thought, @now
  2. In terms of slow, slower, slowest, the recent pitcher he reminds me of is Sergio Romo. But Sergio Romo maintained an impressive K/BB ratio for many years and Valdez has done it for the last 9 innings of his career. Incredibly, Sergio Romo is just 2 years older than Valdez.
  3. I appreciate you researching, but you should certainly expand the range in both directions, not try to find the first wining percentage at which there was a 5% occurrence of a 10-7 start. That's statistical cherry picking. Also, do you think it's compelling that 1 of 46 teams that finished with a winning percentage between .320 and .339 began the season 10-7? That observed probability is actually 2.2%, lower than the 2.3% expected from random binomial draws of a .325 team. If we assumed .330 was the average win percentage of the group, we'd expect 2.5% to start with a record of 10-7 or better with games decided by random draws. DH, you obviously have some understanding of the math involved here. What level of statistical significance are you looking for? And how would you propose modeling in what we know from observing the 2020 Orioles to beginning-of-season expectations?
  4. Good to see the math approach. First step in determining if the model is reasonable is to determine if .325 can be a reasonable estimate for a team that goes 10-7 in the first 17 games. The chance of a .325 team going 10-7 or better in the first 17 games of a season is only 2.3%, so I'd argue we've already seen a level of statistical significance that the Orioles do not truly have a team with .325 talent. Said otherwise, the hypothesis that the Orioles are a .325 winning percentage team can already be rejected at the 90%, 95%, or even 97.5% confidence level. Taking another approach, you have the Orioles jumping from a .325 expected win probability at season's beginning to a .450 winning percentage as a playoff team. That doesn't seem unreasonable, but after 17 games of a 60-game season, shouldn't the Orioles have already "credibility graded" towards whatever they will be entering the playoffs from .325? It's not an uncommon approach in actuarial work to have a standard you begin with (.325 is probably reasonable) and another based on actual experience to allow such grading (10/17 might be reasonable). If you use something like that you'd estimate their current win probability at .325 X (43/60) + .588 X (17/60), which makes the Orioles a .400 (.3995) expected win probability team from this point forward. That feels like a more reasonable number based on what we've seen so far from this team. If I plug that back into the binomial theorm, I get: 30+ wins: 23.6% 29 wins: 10.4% 28 wins: 11.9% Based on projections I'm seeing, the Orioles will probably be in with either 28 or 29 wins, but let's say it's 30, since the September Effect will split haves and have nots after the trade deadline. As I understand the playoffs, they would then face (probably) the 1 or 2 seed in a 3-game wild card series. In a way that's an ideal format for a bad team (toughest opponent in shortest series). Then 7 game series the rest of the way.
  5. This is in stark contract to Fangraphs including the 8/13 win: https://www.fangraphs.com/standings/playoff-odds Where the Orioles are shown with a 16.0% chance to make the postseason, worst in the AL East. Further fascinating is that Fangraphs estimates their probability of a WS win at 0.0%. For that to be true (assuming rounding is handled normally), they would have to have less than a 1 in 320 shot of winning the WS if they make the playoffs. In my estimation, the Fangraphs model is not granting credibility to 2020 play at a fast enough rate nor capturing the chance a team like the Orioles may make decisive moves to improve via trade, promotion of Mountcastle, AR, a pitcher, or just jettisoning some less productive players. In the mean time, Why Not enjoy the underdog role, ponder the significance of each passing game, and party like it's 1989.
  6. For the season now: 49 IP, 25 H, 13 BB, 59 Ks, 0.78 WHIP, 4 HRs, .148 opp BA. Rutschman did allow a steal while he was pitching, so we know he can't hold runners on (sarcasm). Anyone looking at his stats would note terrific progression from 2018, so some of the "no progression" comments must be qualitative. His age dif is -0.4 for Aberdeen this season, so he's still a little young for the league.
  7. On June 27th, the Orioles had a 3-25 record in games decided by 5+ runs. Since then, they are 8-6 in such games. The stretch began with the most lopsided consecutive shutout wins in MLB history on 6/28-29 and included the longest streak of consecutive multi-HR games in MLB history. Fans of the 1916 Giants could probably relate, but they are all gone now.
  8. Rebuilding means the question must be asked for each player...Can he contribute to the next Orioles champion (or contender if you like). Villar will probably be at least 31 when the Orioles next contend (assumes 2022 or later). At that point, he won't be nearly as good a player and he's just an average player right now (.500 162WAA this season). I think part of the misunderstanding of Villar's value is in difficulty of using WAR arising from its arbitrary replacement level. The 1.7 WAR means only that a team that would otherwise play .294 ball would improve by 1.7 wins given his contributions to date. An otherwise .500 team would not improve at all with Villar (per 162WAA). BTW, in terms of 162 WAA, Mancini and Villar are virtually identical (Villar .500, Mancini .499) and both are 28, but since Villar plays on the left side of the defensive spectrum and the Orioles have a logjam of LF/RF/DH/1B, it probably makes more sense to keep Villar of the 2.
  9. I agree entirely with the notion that wins later are worth more than wins now or in 2020, so I think 10 for 8 would make sense and 10 for 10 would be terrific. However, I think there is some overvaluation of Mancini here (meaning in the thread i general, not from @Can_of_corn who I believe asked a hypothetical question. He's a likable player, but he has a decent but unspectacular OBP, plays on the far right of the defensive spectrum where the Orioles have accumulated a logjam of players, and has negative defensive value. What's worse, his OPS is his strongest category and most of that 1) comes from slugging and 2) isn't park adjusted. WAA162 provides a better estimate of Mancini's value and by that metric, adding Trey to an otherwise .500 team makes them a .498 team over 162 games. He's also 27 now, so it's optimistic to project future growth as an offensive player from this local high. Mancini is inexpensive, which I'd love in a sport like football with a hard cap, but I don't like the idea of his salary ballooning with arbitration on a bad team while his value depreciates and he holds a spot which could be used to test some of the logjam players. He could play a supporting role on a champion, but not a lead role. For the Orioles, I don't believe there is hope he'll do either before the sand runs out.
  10. Not in his case specifically, but it's a due diligence item for prospects born outside the US. If you saw Brooks play, then you know about all the BS with ages from the Dominican Republic that messed up expectations for a generation of position players. My original post was a legitimate question, not an accusation.
  11. I did not read through all 20 pages of responses here, but I have 1 major question with the trade; How certain are the Orioles of Diaz's age? At 21, the deal looks decent with a couple of OBP prospects with power. However, if Diaz were really 23, he'd be a hell of a lot less of a prospect. Does anyone know if the media has questioned the Orioles on this topic?
  12. The 125 DP was one of the key plays in this game and they are extremely rare to say the least. Per @Yoshi2052, That was the first in the major leagues since 5/7/06, when David Eckstein hit into one with Sidney Ponson being the out at the plate (weirdly, for outs #2 and #3 of the inning): https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/FLO/FLO200605070.shtml Also per @Yoshi2052, Rick Dempsey hit into a 125 DP on 7/27/83: https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CAL/CAL198307270.shtml In other words, they are far rarer than cycles, no-hitters, 3-HR games, etc.
  13. Filmstudy

    Lee May

    RIP, Lee. Gone way too young at 74. My favorite Lee May memory isn't one of his grand slams with the Orioles, it was his sac bunt versus Jim Kern 6/10/79. That was the key to a 3-run rally vs. the Rangers to win 5-4, the first of 3 straight home games won with 3-run, 9th-inning comebacks. His bunt and Kern's throw to the vacated 3rd base was the start of the magic that season for me, although Decinces' HR would come 12 days later in the next home game vs. the Tigers. https://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/BAL/BAL197906100.shtml
  14. This is a really good point repeated by several posters. The Orioles have played 32 games against teams with a weighted .560 winning percentage in games NOT against the O's. That's a murderous opening schedule and as FRobby says, no one can take that away from us, no matter how anomalous the results might be to date. I think it's reasonable to project an improvement in relative OPS going forward. Maybe the O's will be .010 better than opposition the rest of the way after being .004 worse than the quality competition they have faced to start the season. That still is unlikely to result in as good a run differential (per game) as we've seen to date, because the relative clutch statistics simply won't be maintained at the current level. If the Orioles can outscore opponents by 20 runs the rest of the way (130 games, let's say 600/580 in RS/RA), they project to a .515 winning percentage (67-63 the rest of the way, to finish 89-73). That will probably be good enough for the 2nd Wild Card spot. As of right now, that's my expectation of their finish. To finish with 95 wins, they will need to play .561 baseball the rest of the way. That will require them to outscore their opponents by approximately 80 runs (630/550 has a pythagorean .561) or continue to outperform their pythagorean expectations. Either of those things could happen, but it's not how I'd bet the chips will fall. This is an entertaining team and I look forward to watching them every night, but I think it's a borderline WC team and probably not the division winner.
  • Create New...