Ohfan67
-
Posts
5259 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Ohfan67
-
-
16 minutes ago, Il BuonO said:
Confused as to why posting a pitching line garners a downvote.
Hopefully tin hit the wrong button. That’s weird.
-
1 minute ago, Frobby said:
I am a statistically-aware guy, but there are some things I will just never believe, and one of them is that quality of contact has little or no relationship to how well a guy is pitching. If that makes me an ignorant old fart, so be it. It’s contrary to everything my eyes tell me and have told me for 50+ years while watching games.
Glad to see you are admitting it.
A .238 BABIP is luck. Greg Maddux’ career BABIP was .281. That’s about as good as controlling the outcome as it gets. The vast majority of pitchers range .290 to .310. I always thought Maddux could actually induce weak contact in critical situations. That stuff is hard to tease out with stats even with all the data because it may just be a play or two a game or even less frequent. But Gausman didn’t become Greg Maddux overnight.
I’m also only slightly kidding about you admitting to being an ignorant old fart. You are a lawyer so you should know that eyewitness testimony is often wrong. “ I saw it with my own eyes” has proven to be pretty terrible in a ton of studies. When we watch a game, we are really dissecting an outlier, unless it’s the most average game ever played. We root for teams that play a game where the winner is often the team with the most beneficial outliers. I love it when my pitcher induced a bunch of weak outs. It’s a beautiful game. But the harsh reality is that it was more than likely just a string of random outcomes around his true ability. But we can believe it’s because we knocked on wood, wore our lucky underwear, ate chicken before the game, sacrificed the chicken to the voodoo god, or changed position on the pitching rubber.
-
2
-
-
14 minutes ago, Hallas said:
Of course not, my point is that quality of contact does matter, and BABIP isn't the best indicator of this in small samples. That said, even if his BABIP was something a little more sustainable, his stats would still be better than they were in Baltimore, as his FIP is quite a bit better. You could argue about his HR/FB rate as well. I believe this is attributable to park effects, as SunTrust park, and every park he's pitched in has had a large suppressive effect on HRs (OPACY is 1.19, the 3 parks he's played in are between .71 and .81.)
So I would concede that his true skill level hasn't changed *that* much. That said, it's not entirely luck, unless you consider it to be good fortune that his biggest weakness is probably giving up too many HRs, and he's pitched 4 straight games in extreme HR-suppressing stadiums.
A pitcher can reduce home runs, but I don’t think the changes that Gausman has made are going to reduce home runs long term. I think it’s stadiums, weak lineups, and luck. And the data to date support that opinion a lot more than the magic coaching that some seem to believe in.
-
3 minutes ago, Hallas said:
There is a definite relationship between BABIP and launch angle, though. pop-ups suppress BABIP by a lot, and groundballs suppress them by a little bit (though they mostly suppress SLG.)
So you think the Braves coaches were able to coach Gausman to induce a .238 BABIP? If so, then they should be fired for not coaching their entire pitching staff to do likewise.
-
23 minutes ago, Frobby said:
I really hate the use of BABIP in very small sample sizes. Let’s say Gausman has a game where he induced 20 soft fly balls and weak grounders. Well, then his BABIP is going to be low, and it’s not necessarily related to luck or chance. In another game, he might allow 10 screaming liners that happen to go right to fielders. In that case, he’s gotten lucky. Over a long season that stuff tends to wash out, but in 3-4 games it may not. And unless you’ve watched his four starts, you wouldn’t really know why his BABIP was low.
There are new analyses showing incredibly weak relationships between exit velocity and other associated variables and BABIP. Weak contact and screaming outs turn out to be pretty randomly distributed. A start with weak contacts may look better, but it ultimately actually says nothing more about a pitchers ability than the one with screaming outs. What do you think about ERA in small sample sizes? That and comments to reporters about a few good starts with a new organization are the justification for a coaching-induced change in Gausman.
P.s. BABIP is actually a great stat to keep evaluations more accurate with small sample sizes. Study after study shows that pitchers have little to no control on what happens after the bat leaves the ball, especially if it is not a home run or a ground ball. If a pitcherhas unusually good results and doesn’t strike out more hitters, doesn’t walk fewer hitters, but has an unusually low BABIP then that tells you a lot about the future. I think you have the small sample size thing totally backwards.
-
6 minutes ago, wildcard said:
Gausman talks about he adjustments the Braves have him make. Just needed a better pitching coach.
This may have been posted in these 35 pages but I did not see it.
https://www.mlb.com/cardinals/video/new-brave-gausman-on-mlb-central/c-2380127383?tid=7417714
Kevin's good years with the O's Wallace was the pitching coach. He did not do as well when McDowell was coaching.
Did the Braves coach up that .238 BAPIP? I'm not trying to defend McDowell, but there's no evidence that Gausman is really pitching much better with the Braves. His K% is lower than it was earlier in the season, his walk % is the same, etc. He has allowed fewer home runs with Atlanta and balls are being hit at defenders. Part of the reduction in BABIP could be better defense, but most of it is probably luck. He is a little bad luck away and about one home run a week away from being the same ole Gausman.
-
2 minutes ago, weams said:
Many people say the Orioles can't afford to eat investments. Many people say the Baltimore part of the Baltimore/Washington market is not sustainable.
Does “many people” refer to your multiple personalities?
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, weams said:
Adam Jones had been a full time MLB outfielder for two seasons by the age that Mullins made the majors. He had 31 home runs and ~.750 OPS by that time too.
I think everyone sees the difference. If Mullins has a career that’s close to Jones’, then he overperformed expectations quite a bit. Jones was a much more elite prospect than Mullins and I’m not even sure the big colleges even looked at him. He went to a very small school.
-
By the way, Gausman is not really pitching better for the Braves. His SO/9 is lower, his SO/W is lower, etc. He's gotten lucky* with home runs. He's a couple of gopher balls away from looking like himself.
*lucky includes bigger parks, no DH, weak lineups, etc.
p.s. Additional fun Gausman stat: His BABIP for August is .238.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Frobby said:
His dad was a major leaguer who made $18 mm as a pro. My guess is the money was well invested.
I always forget about his dad.
-
Geez. I hope he invested his bonus. Not being snarky, I seriously hope he was smart with the money. Looks like baseball is unlikely to work out for him.
-
3 hours ago, Frobby said:
Actually, the Bud Norris trade is a pretty good comp for the Gausman trade. Norris had 2+ years of control remaining, same as Gausman. He had a 4.33 career ERA (91 ERA+) in 689.2 IP. He was having a good year at the time of the trade, 3.87 ERA, 103 ERA+. He also was already under contract through 2015, at $3 mm (1/3 paid by the Orioles), $5.3 mm and $8.8 mm. Gausman had a 4.22 ERA (100 ERA+) in 763.2 career innings, and this year was at 4.43 (95). He is being paid $5.6 mm this year ($1.9 mm by Atlanta), and we can assume he’ll be significantly more expensive than Norris over the next two years.
Norris netted LJ Hoes (one of our top 5 prospects, fully baked, but not a top 100 guy by any means), Josh Hader (having a very good season at Delmarva at 19, probably considered a top 10 guy in our system but not top 5 at that point), and a 1st round supplemental pick that turned out to be the no. 37 pick.
So, putting aside the hindsight on Hader, how good was that package compared to what the O’s got for Gausman? I’d say they’re very similar, not knowing how Encarnacion etc. will turn out. Gausman is probably considered to be a bit better than Norris, and I’d say the package we got was a bit better, too (again, setting aside how Hader has turned out and just considering what he was at the time).
The comparison to Bud Norris is painful. Painful because I want to defend Gausman and tell you that you are crazy, but a hard look at the numbers paints a harsh portrait of Gausman. He's much closer to being Bud Norris than I wanted to believe. Gausman has pitched 780+ innings in the bigs and is sporting a 100 ERA+. That kind of says it all. He's an average pitcher by almost all measures. The radar gun says he should be better, but the results speak for themselves.
-
1 hour ago, 99ct said:
Yeah, fair enough, but how do you reconcile that with the fact that he just got an MLB start, despite being younger than most (or all?) of the dudes on your list? To me, his promotion is evidence that he was not, in fact, the 8th man down, as you believe.
Promotions are a terrible way to judge prospect status/level. Just look at who the Orioles promote to make scratch starts, etc. Geez, they promoted Jeff Fiorentino in 2005 from Frederick to play a few games in the outfield...and that definitely wasn't because he was the top prospect in the system. Teams do weird things regarding promotions and they are often most conservative with some of the better prospects, especially now that teams think about service time issues.
-
47 minutes ago, Ruzious said:
That's much more a negative for Jones than a positive for Nunez.
Yes, yes it is. And it was meant that way. Weak and off target joke attempt on my part.
-
Gausman's current or future performance is irrelevant for "grading" the trade for the Orioles. It's all about how the prospects develop and what they do with the money. Gausman was going to continue to be Gausman on a losing Orioles team for the next two years. It's irrelevant if he was going to have a 4.75 ERA or a 2.75 ERA. The Orioles are going to lose a ton of games the next two years. Whether or not it was a good trade for the Orioles is all about what happens with the prospects and saved cash. If the prospects fail and the Orioles don't really spend money on developing the minor leagues, international scouting, etc., then it was a bad trade. But it would be a bad trade regardless of how Gausman performs. Just like it will be a good trade if the prospects develop and contribute and the Orioles really do invest in the future of the organization regardless of how well Gausman performs for the Braves. Too many posters listen to and read the goofy sports media "winners versus losers" baloney.
-
Thinking out loud: I think there's a high probability that the Orioles will not use all of their pool money. The explosion on the board will be enormous as everyone re-assesses the bonus slot money that was thrown into the summer trades, possibly just to make the trades look better. Hmmm.
-
2 hours ago, LA2 said:
Brewers are flush with good infielders. He's 8 for 48 with one walk and 18 Ks. No homers, two doubles. Villar's OPS is almost twice as high, post-trade.
The Brewers Hangout must be going crazy.
-
I hope Gausman has a great career. I hope he pitches better. I think he’s who he is and will have a good career, but I would enjoy seeing him improve. No hard feelings now that he’s an ex-Oriole.
-
3 hours ago, Number5 said:
I'm sorry, but I'm not really seeing what's so unusual about 7 walks in 76 plate appearances. What am I missing?
The contrast between the two players “amused” me.
-
Fun Nunez related factoid: Nunez has 7 walks with the O's in 76 plate appearances. Adam Jones has 18 in 480 PA.
-
He might develop into a cheap DH if they can get rid of Trumbo next year. I'm not optimistic about the defense developing.
-
Looks safe to me.
Wynns has hit better than I thought he would. SSS, but still refreshing.
-
Probably the O's best piece for a 2019 deadline deal. I hope he pitches great during the rest of his Orioles tenure and they get a nice player for him next summer.
p.s. I forgot it was a four year deal. I was thinking three. That might throw a wrench into a 2019 trade.
-
Ahh. So he’s not even a brand new acquisition from the trades.
Alex Cobb Once Saved a Stray Dog that was Running in Traffic
in Orioles Talk
Posted
I hope Cobb pitches this well next year. I’m not sure what his trade market will be like next year because of the length of his deal, but if the Os have to pay him then I sure hope he is a respite from the pitching frustration that we are likely to endure next year. And I also hope he’s one mentally tough cookie. He’s in line for more L’s on well pitched games next year.