Jump to content

Grade the Gausman Deal

Frobby

By Frobby
in Orioles Talk

Grade the Gausman Deal  

187 members have voted

  1. 1. What’s your grade for the Gausman deal

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 08/11/18 at 01:24

Recommended Posts

drjohnnyfeva Major Leaguer Cup of Coffee

drjohnnyfeva

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, drjohnnyfeva said:

It doesn't bother you that OUR team, one that has been absent (re. clueless) from this market, suddenly, now, with a mere change of "who's in charge" knows enough to invest in trading a controlled asset - AND a salary dump - to acquire money to invest where they have NO presence? 

Come on.  This ownership is clueless about how to run a MLB team.  They change course like the wind.  Old Pete has always had final say, after all.  Now the son(s)...  I think trading assets is the way to go, but this one, in particular, could have been done in the winter like Cobb and Cashner will be.  Ultimately, it is a salary dump. 

What kind of international money and a prospect or two would have been gained w/o O'Day in the deal?  Sometimes you gotta eat bad investments................

 

11 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

My estimation is that taking on O'Day lowered the total package value by 9M

It would not have been my preferred strategy.

That's fair enough and I accept that view.  I don't think ownership knows strategy.  I think they blow like the wind with (their) feelings about this or that.  It's not the way to run a club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 795
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Ohfan67 Hangout Grand Counsel

Ohfan67

Posted
Posted
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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, drjohnnyfeva said:

It doesn't bother you that OUR team, one that has been absent (re. clueless) from this market, suddenly, now, with a mere change of "who's in charge" knows enough to invest in trading a controlled asset - AND a salary dump - to acquire money to invest where they have NO presence? 

Come on.  This ownership is clueless about how to run a MLB team.  They change course like the wind.  Old Pete has always had final say, after all.  Now the son(s)...  I think trading assets is the way to go, but this one, in particular, could have been done in the winter like Cobb and Cashner will be.  Ultimately, it is a salary dump. 

What kind of international money and a prospect or two would have been gained w/o O'Day in the deal?  Sometimes you gotta eat bad investments................

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ohfan67 Hangout Grand Counsel

Ohfan67

Posted
Posted
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? ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ohfan67 Hangout Grand Counsel

Ohfan67

Posted
Posted
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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcard Hangout Grand Counsel

wildcard

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

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. 

It is early to know but the Braves telling him to throw up in the zone instead on low and away.  And changing where he is on the rubber could be making a difference.   They shown him on tape how he looked when he was pitching well.   He says it made a difference.  Sounds simple but apparently the O's did not show him that video on when he was doing well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frobby Hangout Grand Counsel

Frobby

Posted
  • Author
Posted
31 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

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. 

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.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ohfan67 Hangout Grand Counsel

Ohfan67

Posted
Posted
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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hallas Hangout Grand Counsel

Hallas

Posted
Posted
Just now, Ohfan67 said:

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. 

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.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ohfan67 Hangout Grand Counsel

Ohfan67

Posted
Posted
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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Luke-OH Hangout Grand Counsel

Luke-OH

Posted
Posted
1 minute 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.)

 

Always a good excuse to post this from xstats.org. Check out the site, it's worth it. 

 

Dribble Balls

Year BIP H 1B 2B 3B HR AVG SLG BABIP wOBA
All 107,594 13,385 12,528 834 21 2 .128 .137 .124 .112
2015 35,630 4,465 4,179 279 5 2 .130 .138 .125 .114
2016 33,555 4,088 3,852 228 8 0 .126 .133 .122 .110
2017 34,150 4,321 4,023 292 6 0 .130 .139 .127 .114
2018 4,259 511 474 35 2 0 .123 .133 .120 .111

Dribble balls consist of weakly hit ground balls, and bloops that rarely leave the infield. They typically have low exit velocity and/or extremely low launch angles. These batted balls are reasonably prevalent, consisting of about 25% of all batted balls, but have limited value given their extremely low extra base hit rate and low batting average. This stat may be represented as a fraction of total Balls In Play (DB%).

Ground Balls

Year BIP H 1B 2B 3B HR AVG SLG BABIP wOBA
All 81,285 29,943 27,262 2,510 169 2 .368 .404 .368 .337
2015 27,171 10,080 9,188 829 61 2 .371 .406 .371 .340
2016 26,323 9,627 8,776 805 46 0 .366 .400 .366 .333
2017 24,428 9,048 8,226 765 57 0 .370 .406 .370 .338
2018 3,363 1,188 1,072 111 5 0 .353 .389 .353 .329

Ground Balls fall somewhere between Dribble Balls and Low Drives, both in terms of exit velocity and launch angle and in terms of value. These are a common class of batted ball, composing about 20% of all batted balls, and they are largely composed of sharply hit balls on the ground, but some of them may be softer hit bloops that just barely clear the infielder's reach. They rarely result in extra base hits, except when hit down the line and into the corner. This stat may be represented as a fraction of total Balls In Play (GB%).

Low Drive

Year BIP H 1B 2B 3B HR AVG SLG BABIP wOBA
All 68,420 51,962 41,589 9,526 837 10 .763 .928 .760 .727
2015 22,161 16,765 13,349 3,121 291 4 .760 .928 .757 .729
2016 21,852 16,562 13,350 2,923 288 1 .761 .922 .758 .723
2017 21,554 16,441 13,119 3,086 231 5 .766 .932 .763 .727
2018 2,853 2,194 1,771 396 27 0 .772 .930 .769 .745

Low Drives have very high success rates and overall value, but are largely composed of singles as opposed to extra base hits. Low Drives can have low exit velocity and higher launch angle, or a higher exit velocity and a lower launch angle. Just about 17% of batted balls fall into this class, but this number may not be stable or predictive for any given batter. In essence, this is a class of batted ball that embodies the "BABIP is luck" aspect of DIPS theory. Batters with high or low LD% will likely regress towards the mean. This stat may be represented as a fraction of total Balls In Play (LD%).

High Drive

Year BIP H 1B 2B 3B HR AVG SLG BABIP wOBA
All 39995 27256 1131 9140 1135 15850 .691 2.186 .472 1.154
2015 11901 7958 309 2758 395 4496 .677 2.127 .468 1.147
2016 13016 8934 382 3052 372 5128 .697 2.193 .483 1.156
2017 13078 9162 391 2902 323 5546 .710 2.274 .480 1.178
2018 2000 1202 49 428 45 680 .612 1.915 .396 1.037

High Drives are the highest quality batted balls. They only represent about 10% of batted balls, but 90% home runs and 34% of doubles. High Drives should be seen as a measure of power, and give good insight on the raw skill of a batter. The number of High Drives is largely driven by exit velocity, but it is constrained by the launch angles most likely to produce high value batted balls. Increases of batted balls in this class represent either an increase in these ideal launch angles, an increase in exit velocity, or both. This stat may be represented as a fraction of total Balls In Play (HD%).

Fly Ball

Year BIP H 1B 2B 3B HR AVG SLG BABIP wOBA
All 41,535 9,724 3,997 3,574 474 1,679 .242 .480 .202 .291
2015 13,346 2,944 1,168 1,133 166 477 .229 .454 .192 .277
2016 13,160 3,132 1,340 1,120 145 527 .246 .481 .206 .293
2017 13,276 3,263 1,298 1,184 147 634 .254 .517 .208 .307
2018 1,753 385 191 137 16 41 .227 .400 .201 .260

Fly Balls represent batted balls that are close to having high value, but don't quite hit the mark, either due to exit velocity being a tough too low or launch angle being a touch too high. When pulled down the lines, these batted balls can supply solid value, but when hit towards the middle third of the field they will often turn into easy outs. About 10% of batted balls fall into this class. This stat may be represented as a fraction of total Balls In Play (FB%).

Pop Up

Year BIP H 1B 2B 3B HR AVG SLG BABIP wOBA
All 70,771 1,515 595 749 100 71 .022 .039 .020 .025
2015 22,119 457 188 222 27 20 .021 .037 .020 .024
2016 22,680 459 184 225 24 26 .021 .037 .019 .023
2017 22,913 539 199 273 43 24 .024 .043 .023 .027
2018 3,059 60 24 29 6 1 .020 .035 .019 .023

Pop Ups represent the weakest class of batted balls. These are balls that either lack the exit velocity to enter the High Drive section, and thus fall into the "dead zone", or they have launch angles that exceed the acceptable range for batted balls. About 17% of batted balls fall into this class. This stat may be represented as a fraction of total Balls In Play (PU%).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


  • Posts

    • interloper
      9/26: A Weak Effort In New York

      By interloper · Posted

      Yeah both Burnes and Hyde said after the game it's because Burnes is going on regular rest to start the first WC game and so he was shortened up a bit. 
    • Frobby
      The Achilles heel for this team is the bullpen

      By Frobby · Posted

      You seem to pine for guys in AAA and then (with one notable exception) judge them very harshly if they don’t perform well instantly in the majors.  This is not the time to start experimenting with Young, and that’s no reflection on him at all IMO.
    • Bemorewins
      The Achilles heel for this team is the bullpen

      By Bemorewins · Posted

      I agree with the part about Elias. He needs to operate with a little more humility (regarding his bullpen approach) and pivot in the offense regarding how he puts a pen together. He needs to get away from the arrogant thinking in believing that we are always "the smartest guys in the room" and can fix other teams junk/unwanted parts. That is fine to do some time (regardless of how much you spend). But you can't construct an entire pen made of castoffs and almost no guys with elite/power/strikeout stuff. Yes it worked great with Felix, Perez/Lopez in 22', Cano in 23'. But the problem is that we are in '24. And some of those lightening in the bottle guys have reverted back to what their talent says that they are - mediocre. We have a pen full of decent/league average/mediocre arms. That's not what you really want heading into October.
    • e16bball
      DH - O'Hearn v. Kjerstad

      By e16bball · Posted

      Also, since there’s another interesting discussion going on here, I think it’s time for Hyde to have an uncomfortable conversation with Adley. I hate everything I’m about to say, because Adley is my favorite Oriole. But we have to acknowledge where we are.  Over the last few months, the only sensible approach with Adley — other than the IL, which apparently he hasn’t been eligible for — has been to keep penciling him into the lineup almost everyday and hoping he figures it out. He has a track record of consistent lifelong excellence, so it’s felt like just a matter of time before he busts the slump and rights the ship.  But he hasn’t. Adley’s line over the last 3 months, almost half a season now, is so bad that it requires a double check to be sure it’s right: .186 / .274 / .278 / .552. A 61 wRC+. And -0.2 fWAR. He has been a below replacement player for 3 months now. He has been the 3rd-worst qualified hitter in baseball over that span, and the 7th-worst overall qualified player. The “qualified” part does make it a little misleading — most of the guys who’ve been this bad have long since been benched. I think you have to consider McCann, at least in Burnes’s starts. He’s been hitting a bit (114 wRC+ since the ASB), and even if he wasn’t on a bit of a heater, his normal baseline is still better than a .552 OPS. If you do continue to play him full-time, you just can’t treat him like he’s *Adley* anymore. You have to treat him like the bad backup catcher he’s been. He has to hit at the bottom of the order. The very bottom. There’s really no reasoned basis upon which you could want to have him get more ABs than guys like Mullins or Urias right now. And you have to PH for him liberally — whichever of Kjerstad/O’Hearn doesn’t start should be looking at Adley’s slot as their most likely opportunity.  As I said, I love Adley. It’s been brutal watching him. But there are 25 other guys on the team who deserve the best shot to win a ring. And that means you can’t just keep stubbornly handing all the ABs to a guy who is desperately lost, on the blind hope that he’ll suddenly find it. 
    • Fiver6565
      The Achilles heel for this team is the bullpen

      By Fiver6565 · Posted

      I didn’t post it in the game thread no, but I’m also not looking for credit. I thought it was a bad move at the time to remove Burnes in the first place, and choosing Cano at that point after he’d been bombed by those exact hitters, felt odd and off to me. The only real defense I could come up with was who if not Cano?  But taking Burnes out is essentially admitting that winning that night wasnt your top priority anyway, so why not also rest Cano, who you absolutely need in the playoffs and has pitched a lot?  I just didn’t get it in real time, and I still don’t. 
    • Tony-OH
      9/26: A Weak Effort In New York

      By Tony-OH · Posted

      I was at a meeting and came out to the Orioles down 1-0. I looked away for what seemed like a minute and it was 5-0, then 7-0. Do we know why Burnes was lifted after just 69 pitches after 5 innings? Was he hurt? Do we know why Cano was brought into the game in the 6th (Have to imagine his adrenaline may not have been as flowing at that stage of the game)?  Obviously the bullpen was pretty horrific last night, but could some of this be because Hyde was using guys who typically are late in game relievers in the 6th inning?  
    • cboemmeljr
      9/26: A Weak Effort In New York

      By cboemmeljr · Posted

      GAME RECAP

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...