DrungoHazewood
-
Posts
31002 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
138
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by DrungoHazewood
-
-
7 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:
No, you're not alone.
I also want to see Adley hit .300.
Waiting for @DrungoHazewoodto come in and admonish me for enjoying stats that are archaic and random and don't mean anything.
Here's a live look-in at me not caring:
You can be nostalgic about anything you want. I still want to see somebody hit .400 in my lifetime. But that doesn't mean that's best way to assess runs and wins.
I only get a little upset when people turn their nostalgia into "We knew better in the old days than they do now, stop all this xwOBA, WAR gobbeldygook and go back to stuff that matters like pitcher wins and RBI!"
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, clapdiddy said:
Without "THE" guy in the bullpen, I like the idea of matchups. That being said, I'd still like to see them add another reliable arm. I'll actually be surprised of they don't.
I'd be surprised if they didn't. But I would be surprised if they traded one of the big prospects (and perhaps it would take more) for a closer.
-
I have a question. Why would the A's trade Miller? Why would the A's trade Miller for another player who has five years of control left, when they could just keep the high-performing young guy they have locked up through 2028? If you're a team that is looking to build for the future don't you build around players like Miller?
And if you're waiting for some point in the future where you're the Las Vegas A's, I'm still not sure you're making any moves because there are no very young players who're likely to be both more valuable than Miller and need 3-4 years in the minors.
-
1 minute ago, Just Regular said:
Mason Miller and David Forst have said as much in interviews I've seen this spring, but the Red Sox probably said the same stuff about Papelbon back in the day.
Sigbot first wants to see if he's healthy after the MLB draft.
I think this is unlikely. How often do you see successful closers transition back to the rotation? How often does that succeed? You often see starters move to the pen, but the other way? Very unusual.
I'm trying to think of an example in the last 30-40 years... there were some in the 80s-90s. Like David Wells, Kenny Rogers, Curt Schilling, Derek Lowe. Smoltz moved to the pen and back after an injury. But very infrequent in the last 20-30 years. Jeff Samardzija, I guess.
I have my doubts that someone who throws 103 is going to be more valuable/healthy going five innings every five days, and probably having to throw a wider variety of pitches and maybe try to not throw as hard.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
The 2021 Rays won 100 games and 14 different pitchers had saves, no one with more than 14. The 2022 Rays won 86 games and nobody had 10 saves. The 2020 Rays, in just 60 games, had 12 pitchers get saves in 40 wins and they had a .667 winning percentage.
You don't have to have one guy be the closer.
-
4
-
1
-
2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:
So what do you want to do with him? Do you just want to DFa him in hopes you can trade him? Do you want to lose him for free? Do you think that’s the best way to use your resources?
Urias is an average MLB player. On the free agent market he'd likely get 2/20 or 2/15 or something like that. I think it's unlikely that Elias releases an average MLB player and gets nothing out of the deal. If they're thinking about making a move I have to assume they're trying to find a trade.
-
50 minutes ago, Bahama O's Fan said:
Right now, which would do more for the major league team? Would Mayo go through an adjustment period like Gunnar, Cowser and Stowers did where they weren't very good their first time up? Will Urias come back around to his career average? Also, should we risk DFA Urias and losing him completely?
1) Mayo appears to be a better player, and would likely do more for the major league team.
2) It's entirely plausible that he goes through an adjustment period. Unless he doesn't. Or he's hot to start, then pitchers adjust and he slumps in June.
3) Yes, it's likely Urias comes back to his career averages.
4) I would be careful risking losing an asset for nothing, especially as a panic reaction to one or two games.
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:
Well with Miller you get both.
IMO if he makes it through this year (given his projectable performance with absolute elite stuff) and next year when Felix is back, before his arm blows up, that’s enough.
That might be 1/2 championships. IMO none of those 3 prospects mentioned (top ones not named Holliday) is worth 1/2 World Series. Because in truth I simply cannot see us winning a pennant let alone a WS with Craig Kimbrel closing games in the postseason. At this point in his career, he is no longer a lock down reliever. And you are going to need that at some point in the Fall.
I’m not saying that we need a pen as good as the Yanks (likely our closest competitor in the AL) but we do need the talent at the backend to give ourselves a reasonable chance if we get into a bullpen battle in the playoffs.
Miller isn't the only reliever in the world. And any one player is no more than a piece of a contribution to a potential title. If the O's have a 8% chance at winning the Series right now (or 92% chance of not, which is actually very good), the addition of Miller and subtraction of whatever it takes to get him might make that 8.5%.
-
11 hours ago, Sports Guy said:
Well if you told me that he will be elite level high leverage reliever for the next 5 years, I wouldn’t hesitate to trade Kjerstad for him. That’s extremely valuable in todays game.
What if I told you that he's going to be an elite high-level reliever for three of the next five years, but also out with a torn UCL for 18 months, and sort of hurt/rehabbing/not very effective for the other six months?
To me that's the mostly likely case, although the exact time periods could change.
-
Yes (they should be starting).
-
38 minutes ago, wildcard said:
That is just a side benefit. I gave no thought to how you would think of it when aI wrote it.
Ha! I knew you weren't actually a real person. Has ChatGPT just been using you as a test platform for years?
-
2
-
-
39 minutes ago, wildcard said:
You are speculating and I am just questioning what happens next.
Yes, in the way you always do: Luis Hernandez is five for his last 16. We should monitor the situation closely to see if he's really going to be a .312 hitter over the rest of his career (despite no other evidence that this is in any way likely).
-
11 minutes ago, Jim'sKid26 said:
Here's a good primer for you:
"Walks are an essential part of any successful offense. They lead to higher OBP, more pitches per plate appearance, force the opposing team to throw more strikes, and are a sign of a disciplined approach at the plate. While they are not the only factor that contributes to a team's success, they are undoubtedly a crucial component. Teams that are patient at the plate and willing to take walks put themselves in a better position to score runs and win games."
The challenge would be to define a metric for run scoring consistency. I'm not sure there is one as yet defined. The fact is that getting more guys on base while causing a pitcher to throw more pitches is beneficial to the hitting team. So conventional wisdom is more baserunners leads to more runs. More runs are better.
Run scoring consistency is pretty easy: either a team's standard deviation of runs scored, or maybe coefficient of variation of runs scored. Take all the O's runs scored for the year and dump them into a spreadsheet and run the STDEV calculation.
The O's this year have scored 5.1 runs/game, and the standard deviation of their runs scored is 3.3. The coefficient of variation or variance (3.3/5.1) is 0.64. One standard deviation of O's runs is between 1.8 runs and 8.4 runs.
The Astros, with the fewest Ks in the league, average 4.4 runs/game, with almost exactly the same standard deviation as the O's at 3.3. Their variance therefore is higher at 0.75. One standard deviation of Astros runs is between 1.1 runs and 7.7 runs.
So with this very small sample of just two teams (which you should never use to draw any broad conclusions), you could argue that the Orioles and all their strikeouts have been more consistent in scoring runs than the relatively contact-prone Astros.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, wildcard said:
Mountcastle has had trouble hitting righties for his last 600 PAs. You left that out. The question is will that continue going forward this season.
Given enough time almost everyone ends up with a platoon split that's roughly average. I would bet that Mountcastle is no different, and when all is said and done his career splits will be something like his career marks right now: around .850 against lefties, .750 against righties. Year to year that will be influenced by random variation.
-
2 hours ago, Tony-OH said:
It seems not everyone understands that any more. It's baseball. The Nats pitchers threw well. But dang, it looks like Elias and company gave up on Hunter Harvey a little too early. For all the finds off the DFA or trades, they sure did miss with Hunter Harvey and Evan Phillips. Guess you win some and lose some.
But I'll take Harvey at the back end of our bullpen right now.
Hunter Harvey was in the Orioles system for nine years, and he threw a grand total of 23.2 innings in the majors, and 262.1 innings in the minors. That's 32 innings a year for nine years.
Maybe he becomes the new Rudy Seanez, and pitches 17 years with his arm held together with bailing wire and chewing gum and sometimes has a year like Seanez did with the Padres in '05. But I don't blame the O's at all for moving on after nine years (!) of almost never being healthy.
When Harvey was drafted my oldest kid was in the first grade, and his first 40-inning season in the majors was the year my kid got his driver's license.
-
2 hours ago, Jim'sKid26 said:
https://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/majors/2024.shtml
Team BA: .254 10th in MLB
Team HRs: 54 1st in MLB
Team RBIs 174 4th in MLB
Team Hit 197 12th in MLB
Team Runs 180 6th in MLB
Team OBP .306 17th in MLB
Team SLG .441 2nd in MLB
Team OPS .747 3rd in MLB
Team OPS+ 117 2nd in MLB
Team Walks 89 one more than last place CWS
Roy, I think they are hitting the ball just fine. But this team has a problem with getting on base and specifically taking a walk. Free swinging clubs are streaky.
Are they? Or is that just something people say? Does anyone have any links to studies that show that teams with more walks/fewer Ks are more consistent (i.e. have a lower standard deviation of runs scored) than teams with less walks/more Ks but similar overall runs scored?
I don't know of any such studies, but I'd love to read one. Do we have any aspiring saberists here who'd like to do some data mining?
-
9 minutes ago, wildcard said:
I can see your reading comprehension is challenged. Read the OP again. I made no conclusion. In fact went out of my way to say I made no conclusion.
Sure, you were perhaps absent-mindedly musing about whether a small sample of information should be used to draw wide-ranging conclusions. We'll have to keep track of this before doing anything rash, like suggesting this is a Developing Situation.
Similar to how if Dan Hammer's 0.00 ERA for the BaySox were to continue for months or years, then perhaps we've found our closer for the next decade. Or how I'm sure Mike Elias is closely monitoring Ryan McKenna's slugging, and if he keeps it over 1.000, like it is right now, maybe he's the next Barry Bonds. We'll have to keep an eye on all of this before forming any kind of conclusions at all.
-
2
-
-
59 minutes ago, Mooreisbetter27 said:
So Willson Contreras has a broken forearm because catcher's are now moving up on the plate to try and frame/steal pitches. JD Martinez (who stands way far back in the box), crushed him, swinging at a pitch.
If it was automated strikes, there would be no reason for him to stay so far up and this wouldn't have happened. I know this is a weird outlier, but I thought it interesting nonetheless.
Oooh... maybe with robot umpires we could go back to how catchers used to position themselves 100+ years ago. More-or-less standing up, five feet or more behind the plate. In the 1800s they'd stand even farther back, just kind of smothering pitches if there were less than two strikes. Trying to save themselves from pitches and foul tips, since they had primitive protective gear. Might save wear and tear on catchers, especially their knees.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Explosivo said:
Ding ding ding. The union is the problem. It is the impediment to incentivized behavior in the sense that if you don’t do well at your job, you get fired.
What happens if you're already to the far right of the talent distribution curve and there is a scarcity of people who can perform at the desired level? Don't you just get into a continuous cycle of firing the worst performing X%, and replacing them with similarly- or lower-performing people?
Like, for example, if you wanted everyone on the team to hit .330, and you fired everyone who couldn't hit .330. But there's no pool of readily available .330+ hitters to replace them with. So you end up replacing "under-performing" .300 hitters with other .250, .270, .300 hitters, who'll soon also be fired.
I'm not convinced that incentives will do much of anything to improve umpire performance, nor that there are a bunch of umps in the minors (or elsewhere) who're better.
-
1 minute ago, Malike said:
MLB is not helping the transition to the ML by using the MiL as a testing ground. Train the kids, then bring them up and everything they've been taught turns out to be a lie. Doesn't make sense from where I'm sitting and I hope they fix it sooner than later.
I like the try it in the minors approach. Nobody really cares at all how minor league games end up, so you have a perfect testing ground for new ideas. Far better than the old method, which was to pretend nothing is ever wrong with baseball and they never fixed anything.
But at some point you have to flip the switch and use it in the games that matter.
-
4 minutes ago, RVAOsFan said:
I think the solution to this whole issue is going to some what hybrid model.
Keep an umpire behind home plate with an ear piece in telling him whether to call a ball or a strike. All he does is repeat what the computer tells him. Other than that he calls the rest of the game on his own.
This seems so simple to me I really can't understand why any side would not be in favor.
Right. Ear piece, buzzer, whatever. And the ump is there for the inevitable but rare occurrence where the system fails or calls a ball 9' off the plate a strike because a pigeon flew by at just the right moment. Why would they not do this, instead of some complicated challenge system where you have to guess when they're wrong in a second or two and hope you don't run out of challenges in the most key moments of the game?
Have a challenge system long enough and there will be a very important game decided by an ump calling a ball 6" off the plate a strike and nobody has any challenges left.
-
10 minutes ago, Malike said:
Personally, I'm for full robo umps, I know some people like the "human element" they bring to the game and was trying to appeal to the "purists". I'm not convinced that it's a great thing that kids in the MiL are learning the true strike zone as defined by the robots, then they come up here and a ball in the MiL is now a strike every 2nd day in the ML.
I'm convinced it's a bad thing that minor leaguers know balls 3" off the plate are balls, except that when you get to the Majors and then youneverknow.
-
1
-
-
Roy, we love you and your enthusiasm. But if you propose something after a loss its almost by definition a panic move.
-
3
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Malike said:
It just seems stupid when you have the means (technology) to make something more accurate that you have to deal with this type of game calling. Even if you don't want full robo umps, there should be a challenge situation.
Or instead of challenges, where you'll inevitably run out of challenges in a key spot, you just have the home plate ump with a little hand buzzer that tells him if a pitch was a ball or strike in near-real time?
Is anyone still sentimental about the pitcher win?
in Orioles Talk
Posted
On 17 different occasions Greg Maddux got a win in a game where he allowed five or more runs. Another 38 times he took the loss in a game where he allowed two or fewer runs.