1/10th of the way through O's on pace for 61-101

[Frobby]

11 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Haven't you heard.  SSS are in.   Hyde makes out his lineup based on matchups which are almost always SSS.  If SSS are all the is available, that is what is used. 

But of course, when it comes to predicting how Cashner will do this year, the three-game sample you chose is not all that is available.   

As to making out lineups, I’ve always found it an interesting question whether to go with bigger trends vs. smaller samples.    Let’s say a guy is a .190 hitter vs. lefties, but in three previous starts against David Price, over a two year stretch, he’s gone 4 for 9.    Do you play him against Price the next time?    I think in that situation the manager has some latitude to judge why the player has gone 4 for 9 against Price in making that decision.   Is it just luck of the draw in the small sample, or is there a reason why the hitter sees Price’s stuff better than other lefties?

[TonySoprano]

40 minutes ago, foxfield said:

there should be a study of all men over 50.  There are but two questions:

 

1)  John or Paul

2)  Mary Ann or Ginger

 

John unquestionably....

And yes.

 

 

Ok Mary Ann

46 minutes ago, bobmc said:

Just a bunch of "silly love songs" - well except for Blackbird (but even that was overrated, right @TonySoprano?).  John WAS the walrus!  Loving the humor and camaraderie here boyz!

 

Back to the topic at hand - does anyone really believe that we can lose only 101?  Poll not coming!  Man that Hyder can manage NL-style!  This team is terrible on paper.  But they bring it every day and make us proud!

1) Sorry, @bobmc , it's Paul !!   The only reason they kept recording the last couple years was because of Paul.  In fact, post-Beatles, I'd put George ahead of John.  Don't get me started on how vastly overrated "Imagine" is compared to "Blackbird."  The former, unfortunately with a heavy dose of wacky Yoko pseudo-philosophy, has achieved paean status amongst the uneducated.    
2) Mary Ann - eight days a week.

[DrungoHazewood]

17 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Haven't you heard.  SSS are in.   Hyde makes out his lineup based on matchups which are almost always SSS.  If SSS are all that is available, that is what is used.

Sure, if the choice is between randomly picking a lineup out of a hat and using exceptionally low-fidelity data, you'll use the latter.  But don't pretend that's giving you anything but a trivial advantage.

All April data is approaching meaningless.  Statements like "the offense has improved" 16 games in is like saying Usain Bolt has declined because he's a half-step behind eight steps into a 100m dash.

[wildcard]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Sure, if the choice is between randomly picking a lineup out of a hat and using exceptionally low-fidelity data, you'll use the latter.  But don't pretend that's giving you anything but a trivial advantage.

All April data is approaching meaningless.  Statements like "the offense has improved" 16 games in is like saying Usain Bolt has declined because he's a half-step behind eight steps into a 100m dash.

I think Hyde would take any advantage.  Trivial or not.

[DrungoHazewood]

11 minutes ago, Frobby said:

But of course, when it comes to predicting how Cashner will do this year, the three-game sample you chose is not all that is available.   

As to making out lineups, I’ve always found it an interesting question whether to go with bigger trends vs. smaller samples.    Let’s say a guy is a .190 hitter vs. lefties, but in three previous starts against David Price, over a two year stretch, he’s gone 4 for 9.    Do you play him against Price the next time?    I think in that situation the manager has some latitude to judge why the player has gone 4 for 9 against Price in making that decision.   Is it just luck of the draw in the small sample, or is there a reason why the hitter sees Price’s stuff better than other lefties?

There's basically no predictive value in individual situational matchup data.  Maybe if a guy is 3-for-100 off a specific pitcher with 47 strikeouts.  But that really doesn't happen.

[DrungoHazewood]

Just now, wildcard said:

I think Hyde would take any advantage.  Trivial or not.

This could be the thing that pushes them from 56 wins to 57, if enough other things break his way.

[HowAboutThat]

45 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

He was projected as a swingman/long relief type in the majors. High probability, low ceiling. He has changed the usage and quality of his changeup significantly. That has brightened the outlook, but I think the optimism is getting a little overheated. He's maybe a 4 ERA type guy, #5 SP, with some risk that he won't be able to handle more than 2x through the order once the book is out on him.

So in this case, no, no one missed anything. He developed in a way that's not easily predictable, at an age where significant development is uncommon. He's also not nearly as good as his gaudy early season ERA represents. 

Thank you very much for the clearheaded explanation. I appreciate it.While we are on the subject, do you have any updates on the other guys we’ve had come up so far? Or is it too early to comment on any of them?

[Luke-OH]

1 minute ago, Philip said:

Thank you very much for the clearheaded explanation. I appreciate it.While we are on the subject, do you have any updates on the other guys we’ve had come up so far? Or is it too early to comment on any of them?

Anyone in particular you are curious about? 

[BRobinsonfan]

1 hour ago, Philip said:

I think that you are the prospects guy on this board. Can you tell me why John Means was ranked so low on the prospect list? Is he not as good as he’s shown so far? Or did the evaluators miss something? Or is this just an example of sometimes a guy does better than expected?

There are much better "stat guys" on here than me... but a cursory look at his record in the minors shows that in 622 innings pitched hitters put up a .275 batting average against him... also he allowed almost 10 hits per 9 innings pitched.  Those aren't horrible numbers but they're not top tier prospect numbers either. His record in the minors suggests he's pitching better than should be expected.  It doesn't mean that he won't continue to pitch well... it just means that the probability of him continuing this performance level is not high.  

[LookinUp]

wildcard's posts about trade possibilities are very rosy, but it's fair to talk about what could happen if we hit our 90% upside (as opposed to 100%) compared to what could happen if we hit our 50% upside. Wildcard just needs to differentiate between the two possibilities, which he hasn't really done in this thread.
 

Cobb: 90% - someone takes his full contract and throws in two young, pretty high upside prospects. 50% - the O's keep him or eat a bunch of his salary for lower rated prospects with some upside.

Cashner: 90% - someone takes his full contract (not much) and gives us a couple of lower rated prospects with some upside. 50% - O's eat half or more of his remaining salary for a low rated prospect or two. Little upside.

Villar: 90% - we're seeing it, I think. He has value, but how much will depend on the needs of contenders. I think he can net us a nice prospect or two but we're not talking about Robbie Alomar here. 50% - not getting that much, but his speed and versatility does have some value.

Mancini: we don't talk about him getting traded much, but he's cheap for years and hitting the snot out of the ball. He has value at his 90% pace. At 50%, not that much and probably worth keeping at his price.

Givens: 90% is a very good reliever who could bring a nice return. 50% might still return something. He needs to improve to get to 50% though. 

Others: Need to hit 90% for value coming back. 

[wildcard]

1 hour ago, LookinUp said:

wildcard's posts about trade possibilities are very rosy, but it's fair to talk about what could happen if we hit our 90% upside (as opposed to 100%) compared to what could happen if we hit our 50% upside. Wildcard just needs to differentiate between the two possibilities, which he hasn't really done in this thread.
 

Cobb: 90% - someone takes his full contract and throws in two young, pretty high upside prospects. 50% - the O's keep him or eat a bunch of his salary for lower rated prospects with some upside.

Cashner: 90% - someone takes his full contract (not much) and gives us a couple of lower rated prospects with some upside. 50% - O's eat half or more of his remaining salary for a low rated prospect or two. Little upside.

Villar: 90% - we're seeing it, I think. He has value, but how much will depend on the needs of contenders. I think he can net us a nice prospect or two but we're not talking about Robbie Alomar here. 50% - not getting that much, but his speed and versatility does have some value.

Mancini: we don't talk about him getting traded much, but he's cheap for years and hitting the snot out of the ball. He has value at his 90% pace. At 50%, not that much and probably worth keeping at his price.

Givens: 90% is a very good reliever who could bring a nice return. 50% might still return something. He needs to improve to get to 50% though. 

Others: Need to hit 90% for value coming back. 

Cobb - I think I have a difference with some here on who Cobb is.   He has won double figures 4 times.  His career ERA is 3.74.  That would have made him the 30th best starter in the baseball last year if he had of put up an average season.   He can pitch 27 starts and 160 IP in a season in an average year.   That means is worth his 14-15m salary with a average year.   Now if a team is in a pennant race as needs a starter that is good they made send a pretty good prospect to get him.   Granted he has to have an average season or better.

Cashner - Come late July he will cost a team 2.7m plus maybe 500k in performance bonuses.   If he pitches as he has with Brocail has his coach before and with a better defense than last season he will benefit several contender's rotations.  They can have for a extra year if the want or leave him go FA.   He is worth a good prospect if he is pitching well.

Villar - July is probably prime time to trade him if he is playing well.  He will have 1 year, 2 months left of team control before FA.    1.6m remaining in salary in late July   .325 career OBP is not great but good when his steals are considered. 28 year old player that can steal 30+ bases and play 2B and SS well.  He should bring back a good prospect or two. 

Givens -  If someone want this guy they better to prepared to pay big time.   He will have 2 year, 2 month left of team control.  He will cost 717k in salary in late July.   He will be 29.   He has a strong arm that can close or set up.   I doubt he is traded but someone might pay.

Bleier -  If he gets healthy and keep his ERA around 2.00 he could bring a young prospect in return.  But he has to be pitching as well as he has in the past.   He will be 32, and is making the league minimum.  He has 3 year on team control left before FA.

Straily -  Probably available and cheap.  Could bring back a mid level prospect if he is pitching well.

Trumbo - Salary relief at the most if the knee shows it is ok.    Probably does not get traded.

[LookinUp]

I just think most of your expectations are at the 75-90% production level. If those guys are what you seem to think they'll be, I agree that they could net some nice prospects. However, I think the probabilities are lower for Cashner, Givens and Bleier than you seem to think. Givens, in particular, just hasn't hit his stride yet. I agree though, if he gets light's out for an extended period before the deadline like he has been at times in the past, he will have value.

[HowAboutThat]

4 hours ago, TonySoprano said:

1) Sorry, @bobmc , it's Paul !!   The only reason they kept recording the last couple years was because of Paul.  In fact, post-Beatles, I'd put George ahead of John.  Don't get me started on how vastly overrated "Imagine" is compared to "Blackbird."  The former, unfortunately with a heavy dose of wacky Yoko pseudo-philosophy, has achieved paean status amongst the uneducated.    
2) Mary Ann - eight days a week.

John had more talent. Paul was more showy. Although I love Blackbird.

for pure lyric genius though it’s Paul Simon all day long. The guy who wrote Bridge over troubled water, the Boxer, Scarborough Faire, and “For Emily” takes a back seat to no one.

[HowAboutThat]

4 hours ago, Luke-OH said:

Anyone in particular you are curious about? 

Well, I think Phillips sucks, Castro sucks, Wright sucks, but I’m pretty high on Fry.

im mainly interested in who’s the most likely to come up and stay up as the shuttle moves into the summer.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

Bleier -  If he gets healthy and keep his ERA around 2.00 he could bring a young prospect in return.  But he has to be pitching as well as he has in the past.   He will be 32, and is making the league minimum.  He has 3 year on team control left before FA.

Bleier would have to throw 27 consecutive scoreless innings to get his ERA down to 2.00.    If his ERA gets below 3.00 at any point this season I will be extremely surprised.    I don’t like the way he’s looked at all, and the math is not in his favor even if he gets things turned around.