Cashner signing

[DrungoHazewood]

2 minutes ago, cimota said:

But those formulas aren't the same as FIP are they?   

They're similar.  What we're trying to get to is the underlying characteristics that influence less granular outcomes like batting average and slugging and runs allowed.  Pitchers' outcomes are more heavily reliant on the defense than batters are.  That's why FIP and related metrics are more/differently valuable than batter's BABIP.  Significant deviations from average for a pitcher are more likely to be because of things that are out of his control and may not recur.  If a batter hits a ton of line drives it's usually because he's good at hitting line drives.

[atomic]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

They're similar.  What we're trying to get to is the underlying characteristics that influence less granular outcomes like batting average and slugging and runs allowed.  Pitchers' outcomes are more heavily reliant on the defense than batters are.  That's why FIP and related metrics are more/differently valuable than batter's BABIP.  Significant deviations from average for a pitcher are more likely to be because of things that are out of his control and may not recur.  If a batter hits a ton of line drives it's usually because he's good at hitting line drives.

No No No.  Batters are effected by defense as well. If you want to use some complicated formula for batters than use it on pitchers to.  Your arguments follow no logic.  Fanagraphs throws out useless stats and you just believe them. 

[DrungoHazewood]

3 minutes ago, cimota said:

Your argument is not logical.  Pitchers don't control how hard the ball is hit or where it is hit but batters do?  Hilarious.  

Pitchers exhibit far less control over the outcomes of contact than batters.  That is a fact, backed up by reams of data available freely online.  You can choose to accept it, do some more digging and come to the conclusion yourself, or laugh at it.  But it doesn't alter the fact that it is true.

[DrungoHazewood]

Just now, cimota said:

No No No.  Batters are effected by defense as well. If you want to use some complicated formula for batters than use it on pitchers to.  Your arguments follow no logic.  Fanagraphs throws out useless stats and you just believe them. 

Yes, batters are effected by defense.  Of course they are.  But if you actually read and digested the data from Fangraphs and other sites you'd realize that batters have far more control over the outcome of batted balls than pitchers.  This is not in dispute. 

[Luke-OH]

7 minutes ago, cimota said:

Your argument is not logical.  Pitchers don't control how hard the ball is hit or where it is hit but batters do?  Hilarious.  

Giancarlo Stanton can hit the ball 120mph against Kershaw or against Ubaldo. Ben Revere can't hit a ball 110mph in batting practice.

3 minutes ago, cimota said:

No No No.  Batters are effected by defense as well. If you want to use some complicated formula for batters than use it on pitchers to.  Your arguments follow no logic.  Fanagraphs throws out useless stats and you just believe them. 

It's truely laughable if you think this is a "Fangraphs" thing, look at the people MLB teams are hiring, are you saying you know more about this than the entirety of professional baseball?

[atomic]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Guys, I'm pretty sure Cimota is just trolling at this point. 

No I am not. I have taken multiple college courses on statistics. I have no idea why you don't want to rate batters on FIP.  If it is important stat for pitchers it should be for hitters as well. It makes zero sense.

[atomic]

1 minute ago, Luke-OH said:

Giancarlo Stanton can hit the ball 120mph against Kershaw or against Ubaldo. Ben Revere can't hit a ball 110mph in batting practice.

It's truely laughable if you think this is a "Fangraphs" thing, look at the people MLB teams are hiring, are you saying you know more about this than the entirety of professional baseball?

No but I doubt successful teams are looking at FIP as to the reason to sign a pitcher or not.  It is a simplistic stat.  If you are going to use something so simplistic for something so complicated you are going to fail. 

[Luke-OH]

1 minute ago, cimota said:

No but I doubt successful teams are looking at FIP as to the reason to sign a pitcher or not.  It is a simplistic stat.  If you are going to use something so simplistic for something so complicated you are going to fail. 

Again, no one is saying FIP is a perfect tool or that it's the only thing someone should look at, that's not an argument that's being made. That argument is that ERA is problematic for multiple reasons (dependent on sequencing, allowing defensive quality to leak into the valuation of a pitcher, not park or league adjusted).

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, cimota said:

No I am not. I have taken multiple college courses on statistics. I have no idea why you don't want to rate batters on FIP.  If it is important stat for pitchers it should be for hitters as well. It makes zero sense.

 

2 minutes ago, cimota said:

No but I doubt successful teams are looking at FIP as to the reason to sign a pitcher or not.  It is a simplistic stat.  If you are going to use something so simplistic for something so complicated you are going to fail. 

See this is how I know you are trolling.

No one other than you is suggesting that teams are using FIP as a reason to sign a pitcher or not.  Aside from maybe a we have a hundred things we are looking at and this is number 72.

 

[DrungoHazewood]

1 minute ago, cimota said:

I have no idea why you don't want to rate batters on FIP.

You have no idea why you don't want to rate batters on Fielding Independent Pitching? 

If you really mean do we want to look at batter's outcomes on balls in play... of course we do.  We do that all the time.  Your much-maligned Fangraphs has every batter's flyball, line drive, ground ball rates. Their pull and opposite field rates.  Their percentage of hard and poorly-hit balls. You should look at the data.  You'll eventually come to the conclusion that the spread, or standard deviation, of many of these numbers is much higher among batters than pitchers.  This reflects the underlying ability of a batter or a pitcher to influence these numbers. 

Look at... I don't know.. Chris Davis and Juan Pierre.  They have wildly different ball in play percentages, and those differences carry over year to year.  But in any given year the reigning Cy Young winner might have a higher BABIP than some guy with a 5.70 ERA.

[Frobby]

19 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

He's only hit 160 innings three times in eight seasons.  Last year he reached it but just barely (166.2).  His career high for innings in consecutive seasons is 316.2.

I hear you.    I didn’t mean to suggest that 160 innings is a sure thing.    But some of the incentives kick in as low as 10 starts and 110 innings.   That’s why I said he’s almost sure to reach some of his incentives.   By the same token, he probably won’t reach some of the incentives that kick in between 170-200 innings.    160 just seemed like a reasonable midpoint of where he’d likely be if he stayed healthy.   

[DrungoHazewood]

5 minutes ago, cimota said:

No but I doubt successful teams are looking at FIP as to the reason to sign a pitcher or not.  It is a simplistic stat.  If you are going to use something so simplistic for something so complicated you are going to fail. 

So I'm assuming you never look at such pedestrian numbers as ERA, wins, home runs, slugging percentage, walks, strikeouts per nine. 

Plato, Socrates, Aristotle?  Morons.

[Babypowder]

3 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

Giancarlo Stanton can hit the ball 120mph against Kershaw or against Ubaldo. Ben Revere can't hit a ball 110mph in batting practice.

It's truely laughable if you think this is a "Fangraphs" thing, look at the people MLB teams are hiring, are you saying you know more about this than the entirety of professional baseball?

You mean Fanagraphs.

And all these silly analytics are ruining the game, these people working at fangraphs getting hired to work for MLB teams is just further evidence of its decay. These nerds have probably never even watched an entire baseball game, much less played in one.

I work too damn hard to let you nerds talk to me like this! I am a regional manager in charge of 49 people! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

or something like that.

[DrungoHazewood]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

 

No one other than you is suggesting that teams are using FIP as a reason to sign a pitcher or not.  Aside from maybe a we have a hundred things we are looking at and this is number 72.

 

I think teams use FIP and other ball in play metrics to inform their decisions on potential signings.  I'm sure the Orioles know all about Cashner's delta between ERA and FIP or xFIP, and know and accept that he's very likely to regress this year in ERA terms.  Otherwise why weren't they offering him a richer contract based mostly on his 3.40 ERA?

[DrungoHazewood]

3 minutes ago, Babypowder said:

You mean Fanagraphs.

And all these silly analytics are ruining the game, these people working at fangraphs getting hired to work for MLB teams is just further evidence of its decay. These nerds have probably never even watched an entire baseball game, much less played in one.

I work too damn hard to let you nerds talk to me like this! I am a regional manager in charge of 49 people! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

or something like that.

Fangraphs is just a plant from the MLB deep state.  Purposely spreading fake stats to try to get nerds to take over otherwise manly pursuits.