Petition

[TyCobb]

You trying to set me up?

You know I can't answer that as I have no idea of what I'm supposed to compare the ERA to.

Yea I was thinking what he meant? I wonder if you look at ERA 1 / ERA 2 and ERA 2 / DIPS 1. The closest to 1 would be the better judge.

[olehippi]

The DIPS Dips have taken over this thread.......

[bryanman8]

You trying to set me up?

You know I can't answer that as I have no idea of what I'm supposed to compare the ERA to.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you try to figure out what the best predictor of next year's ERA was?

So wouldn't you plug in last year's ERA and see if that was closer to this year's ERA than DIPS and the other things you used? Did it prove that DIPS was a better predictor of next year's ERA than ERA itself, which is generally accepted in sabermetric circles?

Thanks for sharing your results, btw.

[mweb]

What you are saying makes no sense. Bruce Chen was one of our WORST PITCHERS last season. No FO with any statistical background would ever let him start the year in the Rotation unless they didn't care at all about performance and only cared about clubhouse-ness. He had a freaking DIPS over 5. .

So I assume you wouldn't give Josh Beckett a chance next year?

[mweb]

You're so freaking ignorant. Your job is to get the BEST IDEA of what's going to happen next year. I know that no stat is 100% perfect. There are stats that give you a very good idea of what's going to happen though and it's far better to base decisions on the historically accurate stats than absolutely nothing.

I was 99.9% sure Bruce Chen would stink this season, Kevin Millwood would be a bad signing for the Rangers, Jon Garland would have a huge fall-off...

...and the White Sox were a fluke and we'd see a big dropoff this year.

[bryanman8]

So I assume you wouldn't give Josh Beckett a chance next year?

Beckett's ERA is over 5 too, so if that applies to me, it should apply to you as well.

The only reason I might take a flier on Beckett is if he comes extremely cheap, only because he's still very young, had some excellent years, and could have just had some mechanical flaws Mazzone could fix. A lot different from an aging, team-hopping, never really been any good before, guy that even the scouts don't think has dominant stuff or any real reason for hope in Bruce Chen, if that's what you're implying.

Beckett's had an awful year, which no one can deny. Not all of my hope is based on DIPS--it's possible that guys had an off year in that department as well. Not for guys like Chen though, when those peripherals are in line with his career peripherals, when his stuff isn't in the least bit dominating...

I would've traded Chen, btw. Therefore, any of the people who would be screaming about the outrage of not giving your best pitcher last year a shot would get to see him stink for another team and I would then look like a genius.

[bryanman8]

...and the White Sox were a fluke and we'd see a big dropoff this year.

Not based on DIPS, and that's not a field of predicting I display great confidence in. The White Sox avoiding a big fall off this year was in large part due to Jermaine Dye and Jim Thome each OPSing like 200 points higher than they should be--either way, I don't really care. I don't think they're going to make the playoffs still.

Again, nothing to do with my original, long post to Paul.

[mweb]

Beckett's ERA is over 5 too, so if that applies to me, it should apply to you as well.

The ERA part does apply to me although I do look at others things more than ERA, but his past and talent would be what would most apply to me, meaning, I think he will probably be better than what DIPS would predict.

[TyCobb]

I did some excel stuff with Last years DIPS and ERA and this year DIPS and ERA. It is only a small sample(10 pitchers from the AL). The ones I did where the top 15 DIps from the AL. WEll I did Dips/ERA2 and ERA2/ERA1, with this very very small sample it had ERA2/ERA1 as a better indicater. I am going to do the sample of all the starts of last season for a larger sample, but later.

[mweb]

Not based on DIPS, and that's not a field of predicting I display great confidence in. The White Sox avoiding a big fall off this year was in large part due to Jermaine Dye and Jim Thome each OPSing like 200 points higher than they should be--either way, I don't really care. I don't think they're going to make the playoffs still.

Again, nothing to do with my original, long post to Paul.

Ok, if you want to go back to DIPS, why not respond to TyCobb's(?) post that showed that about 40% of the top 20 pitchers in DIPS last year(that are qualified on ESPN) are not having good seasons?

The guy I just mentioned is in that list.

I'm not arguing against DIPS, it's a good predicter, but not nearly as reliable as you have made it seem on here.

And back to Paul post, he's right that Sam P was most likely not the reason why Chen began the year in our rotation. That's more of a front office decision.

[Sports Guy]

Ok, if you want to go back to DIPs, why not respond to TyCobb's(?) post that showed that about 40% of the top 20 pitchers in DIPS last year(that are qualified on ESPN) are not having good seasons

I just read through this thread and this is the post i was waiting the whole time to see Bryan answer and he never did. I am curious what he has to say about this.

And Bryan, not even you felt Chen would be this bad. You thought he would have a 5 ERA. We would be in much better shape if he had a 5 ERA and i am sorry but there is no way you could have not had him in the rotation to start the year(remember, he performed well in the wbc and ST as well).

Now, what his future predictors showed was that he should have been traded, although he probably wouldn't have fetched much. But it would have been idiotic to take him out of the rotation just because DIPS predicted he wouldn't be good.

[Mark Carver]

So, bryanman8, why the negative reputation on this posting? Or was it payback for when I gave you a negative reputation point when you stated "You're so freaking ignorant." in a posting, which was a clear violation of one of the rules on this board.

And now we know the rest of the story... I'm Paul Harvey, good day.

From Orioles MLB.com

The Orioles did suffer a loss Wednesday. Their bench, already strained by injuries to outfielder Corey Patterson and catcher Chris Widger, took another hit when starting catcher Hernandez was lifted in the ninth with a strained intercostal muscle in his right rib cage.

Hernandez received an injection Wednesday night and will likely miss a couple of games. With Widger at less than 100 percent because of a pinched nerve in his shoulder, the starting job now falls to Ardoin, who was claimed off waivers before Wednesday's game.

[mweb]

I kind of answered it in one of my posts.

First, DIPS is better at predicting an increased ERA than it is at predicting a decreased ERA.

Second, did DIPS predict an increase for the pitchers in question? Yes, it did correctly predict increased ERAs for Willis, Beckett, Patterson, Buehrle, and Johnson. So it was correct on 5 of the 7 mentioned. What's the problem?

The argument is that comparing DIPS to ERA is a good way of predicting an increased or decreased ERA the following season. Nothing more, nothing less. No one has ever said that a low DIPS one season will mean a low ERA the following season.

I think what the DIPS number actually has been made out to be quite important by Brian. It hasn't just been about DIPS being higher or lower than ERA. And shouldn't the actual number be important. I think there's a big difference between a pitcher who has a DIPS slightly above their ERA than a pitcher whose DIPS is well above his ERA.

So the problem I have with the top 20 from last year is DIPS predicted much better seasons from Peavy, Willis, Pettitte, Burnett, Beckett, Loaiza, Buerhle, and RJ than what they've produced.. Patterson shouldn't even be considered since he's barely pitched.

[mweb]

I guess I look at things differently than most people.

DIPS% is just one indicator. While I think it is a pretty good indicator, it definitely isn't perfect. I'm assuming HR allowed is still in the formula. The obvious problem with this is that pitchers don't have nearly the control over whether a flyball becomes a HR as was once thought. The primary reason Beckett's DIPS ERA is so high is because of the very high number of HRs he's allowed. 16.1% of all flyballs hit against him this year have become home runs. I'm sure some will leap to the conclusion that this percentage is so high because of his jump to the AL, but I don't believe that. Yes, that probably has something to do it, but not nearly as much as many will believe.

I'll go on record as predicting a much better ERA for Beckett next year than his DIPS% may indicate. The reason for this is that I expect his HR/FB% to be a lot lower next year - and that will have a major impact on his ERA.

I agree. Wouldn't the same be true of Chen for next year then? His hr's allowed have been absurd this year.

[Mark Carver]

I personally have no problem bunting with 1 one and no one out if we didn't have the top of the order up. I coudl be wrong but wasn't it a lefty out there to face Markakis? Maybe it was somebody Markakis never saw. Maybe the pitcher shut downs lefty so Sammy thought he would have a better chance at getting a run by bunting Markakis. Markakis does hit a lot of hard balls to 1st-2nd base area where double play is possible. I didn';t like the call but if I had all the infor Sammy had at the time I could think differently.

But as Palmer said, at that time -

1) By bunting Markakis, it leads to -

2) The Rangers walking Tejada, which leads to -

3) Gibbons facing a lefty (who hasn't hit lefties good for the year).

Markakis hasn't seen many of the lefties he's had for the year, but he's still hitting them better than Gibbons, especially in the 2nd half of the year. Against lefties for the year -

Markakis - 302/346/417/763

Gibbons - 236/259/400/659

I'd rather have Markakis facing the lefty than Gibbons...