Orioles messing with Gausman again what's new.

[CA-ORIOLE]

So you are taking the side of the geek over Buck, Dave Wallace and Rick Peterson. I think you are on the wrong side of this one. Once more Buck is in control on the situation so he is going to win the argument.

Russell Carleton ? a clinical psychologist who formerly published the blog Baseball Psychologist[62] and developed the blog Statistically Speaking,[63] Carleton is a well-known sabermetrician under the nom de plume "Pizza Cutter" and has contributed to numerous on-line baseball blogs. He claims that sabermetrics saved his dissertation.[64] In December 2009, he inaugurated a "Baseball Therapy" weekly column on BP. On May 3, 2010, he announced that he was departing BP.[65] He returned to BP in July 2012.

Kind of pales in comparison to Buck, Wallace and Peterson. Some psychologist who writes about stats on his computer. I wonder if he ever played baseball. If you know if he has please share.

Ouch !!!! The "Doesn't know better than Buck" and "probably never played the game" double whammo !!!! Devestating !!!

[DrungoHazewood]

So you are taking the side of the geek over Buck, Dave Wallace and Rick Peterson. I think you are on the wrong side of this one. Once more Buck is in control on the situation so he is going to win the argument.

Russell Carleton ? a clinical psychologist who formerly published the blog Baseball Psychologist[62] and developed the blog Statistically Speaking,[63] Carleton is a well-known sabermetrician under the nom de plume "Pizza Cutter" and has contributed to numerous on-line baseball blogs. He claims that sabermetrics saved his dissertation.[64] In December 2009, he inaugurated a "Baseball Therapy" weekly column on BP. On May 3, 2010, he announced that he was departing BP.[65] He returned to BP in July 2012.

Kind of pales in comparison to Buck, Wallace and Peterson. Some psychologist who writes about stats on his computer. I wonder if he ever played baseball. If you know if he has please share.

That's one of the worst justifications I've ever read. It's ridiculous in almost every way. You're actually, really, in public, using the "he never played the game" rationalization for, of all things, a defense of the debunked Verducci effect?

Heck, does Buck or anyone in the Orioles organization defend the Verducci effect? Have they ever said anything about it?

Have you ever been a professional baseball player? And if not, why should we give any weight to anything you say?

[wildcard]

Turning this into a "Buck vs some geek psychologist" is a complete farce, and flies in the face of critical thinking. If Buck adheres to the "under 25 over 30" arbitrary innings increase that was postulated (and not even defended) by Verducci, then yes, I will trust almost anyone with solid reasoning skills over him.

Let's not pretend Buck is infallible, or that it is not possible for someone that knows less about baseball than him to be right when disagreeing about specific decisions. If not, then none of us would ever question his choices, correct?

In other words, there is a reason "Call to Authority" is a logical fallacy.

Wait a minute here. I didn't turn it into a geek vs Buck. You made it a geek vs the O's organization when you wrote this- "Gah! Can we kill this myth once and for all?" Then point to the article. You think people are going to read the article and not check who wrote it? What kind of research is that?

It's not just Buck, it Dan Duquette, the O's pitching staff including Rick Peterson who is cited in the article.

[Frobby]

I know Jim Palmer. He says whats on his mind and doesn't really care what anyone thinks.Thats what he's paid to do. He doesn't have to apologize to anyone for saying" I hate what they're doing with Gausman". Thats how he feels.He feels Gausman needs to pitch regularly and on a strict rotation to pitch in the major leagues,and he knows what he's talking about. Is he wrong? We will see. I'm guessing 3 Cy Young Awards and the HOF give him some credentials.

He may also have some views on drastic increases in IP for young pitchers, considering his own experience:

1965 (age 19) -- 92 IP

1966 (age 20)-- 208 IP

1967 (age 21) -- Developed arm injury and missed the next year and a half

[DrungoHazewood]

Wait a minute here. I didn't turn it into a geek vs Buck. You made it a geek vs the O's organization when you wrote this- "Gah! Can we kill this myth once and for all?" Then point to the article. You think people are going to read the article and not check who wrote it? What kind of research is that?

It's not just Buck, it Dan Duquette, the O's pitching staff including Rick Peterson who is cited in the article.

You're actually going to stick to your guns here? It's pretty ballsy to discard a piece of research based on the fact you don't like the author's resume, be called out on it, and instead of outlining why you disagree with the evidence you go right back to attacking the author.

Did you even read the article, or did you go immediately to Carleton's bio?

[wildcard]

That's one of the worst justifications I've ever read. It's ridiculous in almost every way. You're actually, really, in public, using the "he never played the game" rationalization for, of all things, a defense of the debunked Verducci effect?

Heck, does Buck or anyone in the Orioles organization defend the Verducci effect? Have they ever said anything about it?

Have you ever been a professional baseball player? And if not, why should we give any weight to anything you say?

I still haven't heard an answer. What does this writer (Russell Carleton) know about baseball? Why should we believe what he says?

As far as me. I am a fan on sports message board. I don't hold myself up to be anything more than that. That doesn't mean I can't question the source of someone that is being held up as an authority on a subject.

I think we all have to consider the source. That is why when Bruce talks about pitching I listen. He's done it. He knows something about it and he has credibility.

[wildcard]

You're actually going to stick to your guns here? It's pretty ballsy to discard a piece of research based on the fact you don't like the author's resume, be called out on it, and instead of outlining why you disagree with the evidence you go right back to attacking the author.

Did you even read the article, or did you go immediately to Carleton's bio?

Did you read enough of the article to see that the Author called out Rick Peterson in the article?

I read enough to understand what the guy was saying and then I wanted to know who was saying it. What credibility should I give to it? I am still asking that question. And no one is answering why I should believe what he wrote.

[Redskins Rick]

I know Jim Palmer. He says whats on his mind and doesn't really care what anyone thinks.Thats what he's paid to do. He doesn't have to apologize to anyone for saying" I hate what they're doing with Gausman". Thats how he feels.He feels Gausman needs to pitch regularly and on a strict rotation to pitch in the major leagues,and he knows what he's talking about. Is he wrong? We will see. I'm guessing 3 Cy Young Awards and the HOF give him some credentials.

if I remember right, when Palmer was in his playing days, not everybody including Earl was on the same page with him.

Yes, the man has pitched, yes the man is a HOF, but that doesn't make him the ultimate authority on pitching.

This was the guy known as Cakes in the locker room, because he only ate pancakes before pitching.

[Ohfan67]

Did you read enough of the article to see that the Author called out Rick Peterson in the article?

I read enough to understand what the guy was saying and then I wanted to know who was saying it. What credibility should I give to it? I am still asking that question. And no one is answering why I should believe what he wrote.

Credibility? He's really freaking good at statistics/analyzing patterns. He has been a published baseball writer for years. Etc., etc. You're being silly...and I am saying that and I am skeptical of his conclusions. I've never played professional baseball, but I sure as heck "play" professional statistics.

[Guest]

He may also have some views on drastic increases in IP for young pitchers, considering his own experience:

1965 (age 19) -- 92 IP

1966 (age 20)-- 208 IP

1967 (age 21) -- Developed arm injury and missed the next year and a half

Gausman wont have a jump like this. He was throwing 140 innings at LSU.

Orioles he's got 28 innings

Norfolk he's got 43 innings

79 Games to play might get 14 starts with all off days. 14 starts lets say he goes 7 innings every start= 98 innings.

The kid can handle 169 innings in 2014.

He was throwing 140 at LSU.

[LoyalBirdFan]

Gausman wont have a job like this. He was throwing 140 innings at LSU.

Orioles he's got 28 innings

Norfolk he's got 43 innings

79 Games to play might get 14 starts with all off days. 14 starts lets say he goes 7 innings every start= 98 innings.

The kid can handle 169 innings in 2014.

He was throwing 140 at LSU.

:agree: and if he doesn't throw 165-175 innings, something isn't right.

[MrOrange82]

He may also have some views on drastic increases in IP for young pitchers, considering his own experience:

1965 (age 19) -- 92 IP

1966 (age 20)-- 208 IP

1967 (age 21) -- Developed arm injury and missed the next year and a half

Gausman's currently 23 years old.

Jim Palmer's IP once he returned from injury...

1969 (age 23) -- 181.0 IP

1970 (age 24) -- 305.0 IP

1971 (age 25) -- 282.0 IP

Palmer's early career output isn't a great comp for Gausman. Gausman recorded 129.2 IP last year between Baltimore and the minors, and 138.2 IP between LSU and the minors in 2012. Ratcheting up his IP this year wouldn't be akin to asking Palmer to go from 92.0 IP to more than 200.0 IP, and regardless...Palmer threw a ton of innings once he came back from injury (at Gausman's age and slightly older).

[CA-ORIOLE]

Did you read enough of the article to see that the Author called out Rick Peterson in the article?

I read enough to understand what the guy was saying and then I wanted to know who was saying it. What credibility should I give to it? I am still asking that question. And no one is answering why I should believe what he wrote.

Your initial response did not mention any specific criticism or point in the article. It was just general/typical strawman nonsense for you. A typical reply for you countering analysis/statistics that you don't agree with, just don't like, and/or are too lazy to research and respond with anything meaningful.

We get that you are not much of an stats/analysis guy (and I do appreciate that you usually make outstanding posts). Stats/analysis are not your thing. You are entitled to voice your opinion as such. Just don't get flustered when people call you out for lacking critical thinking and depth to your opinions and arguments in these cases. They are often weak, as is the case here.

If you want to address the analysis and the critique of Peterson (or anything else in the article) fine. Do it. But I would guess a lot of people don't come here to listen to the "Buck knows better" parrots and many of us appreciate detailed analysis and critical thinking by "guys who never played the game".

DD looks like he may never have played the game. Maybe he got beat up as a kid. Maybe Dr. Andrews never played the game. Tom Tango. Bill James. I would guess many GM's (and managers) are now utilizing analysis and ideas developed by guys like this and others who probably never played the game.

it is nonsense and you know it.

[terps19]

I really don't consider having Gausman pitch in a MiL game closer to home than Norfolk "messing" with Gausman. It's just a way to get his work in between big league starts. Also, he had to spend 10 days in the minors after he was sent down. His time as the 26th Oriole for the double header did not eliminate that requirement. If he has to be down for 10 days, why not get his work in at Aberdeen. I think we make too much out of things that lots of teams do, in this case actually for a good reason.

Because people like to btch and moan. I mean it makes total sense to have a guy sit on the bench for 10 days and not pitch while he HAS to be off the ML roster right? And I seriously doubt Gausman's last start had anything to do with the Os "messing" withim. He isnt going to go out and throw 6-7 innings with 1 run allowed in all his starts. PLUS he needs to have his innings limited. I mean doesnt it make sense that they limit his innings early, and have him for all the playoff push?

That being said I like it when Chen gets some extra rest though. And I am sure that the front office has figured that out too, hence the 6 man rotation.

[wildcard]

Gausman wont have a jump like this. He was throwing 140 innings at LSU.

Orioles he's got 28 innings

Norfolk he's got 43 innings

79 Games to play might get 14 starts with all off days. 14 starts lets say he goes 7 innings every start= 98 innings.

The kid can handle 169 innings in 2014.

He was throwing 140 at LSU.

Please explain why you think Gausman pitched 140 innings at LSU in a season. The LSU site says he pitched 123.2 IP in 2012 and that includes the NCAA finals. I must be missing something.

http://www.lsusports.net/fls/5200/assets/docs/bb/12stats/teamcume.htm