Orioles and the 2019 ASG (Mancini out, Means in)

[DrungoHazewood]

2 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

Another way of saying this is rWAR fits reality better whereas fWAR attempts to predict reality. I'll take the 3.1 actual WAR all day and twice on Sunday.

rWAR says "I'll credit you for all the stuff you do and half or three-quarters of what your fielders do, and for your luck in where the balls land, too."

fWAR says "You control basically all of walks, homers and strikeouts.  We're not giving you credit for the stuff other people have heavy influence over."

I think halfway is a good compromise.  rWAR takes a team outcome and assigns almost all of the credit to the pitcher.  Which is the comfortable choice because ERA has done that for a century-plus.  But one of the reasons ERA fluctuates a lot is that it's not primarily measuring a single player's ability or skill.

[LookinUp]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

rWAR says "I'll credit you for all the stuff you do and half or three-quarters of what your fielders do, and for your luck in where the balls land, too."

fWAR says "You control basically all of walks, homers and strikeouts.  We're not giving you credit for the stuff other people have heavy influence over."

I think halfway is a good compromise.  rWAR takes a team outcome and assigns almost all of the credit to the pitcher.  Which is the comfortable choice because ERA has done that for a century-plus.  But one of the reasons ERA fluctuates a lot is that it's not primarily measuring a single player's ability or skill.

I get it, but I don't buy these stats, not with precision. For example, you just essentially credited the Orioles' defense for Means' rWAR. I know luck with batted balls is real, and small sample sizes skew these types of stats all the time. There's no denying that stuff, but the FIP is coming to the ERA, not the other way around. That has to mean something too. 

[atomic]

1 hour ago, TonySoprano said:

Means has an ERA+ of 183, which ranks him 3rd in the entire league behind only Mike Minor (209) and Charlie Morton (184).   His 3.1 rWAR ranks him 5th.

 But you be you.

What?  I like how your response has nothing to do with what I posted.  

[sportsfan8703]

It's hard to go with a SP that doesn't even have enough IP to qualify for the ERA title.  I think taking Means over Mancini had more to do with roster construction issues.  

[atomic]

1 hour ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

Don't throw your back out with all of the contortions you are doing to negate Means and Mancini's performances this year...

How am I negating Means performance.  I am stating that rookie pitchers making the all-star game were usually cultural phenomenons.  If there wasn't a requirement for each team to have a player most likely Means would not be on the team. 

[TonySoprano]

15 minutes ago, atomic said:

What?  I like how your response has nothing to do with what I posted.  

OK then explain what you meant by this "Just an awful team with a requirement that every team gets a player that Means is an All Star."

Sounds to me like you're saying he isn't good enough to be an All Star if the Orioles didn't have to send a representative.

[atomic]

23 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

rWAR says "I'll credit you for all the stuff you do and half or three-quarters of what your fielders do, and for your luck in where the balls land, too."

fWAR says "You control basically all of walks, homers and strikeouts.  We're not giving you credit for the stuff other people have heavy influence over."

I think halfway is a good compromise.  rWAR takes a team outcome and assigns almost all of the credit to the pitcher.  Which is the comfortable choice because ERA has done that for a century-plus.  But one of the reasons ERA fluctuates a lot is that it's not primarily measuring a single player's ability or skill.

Exit velocity could help.  So it is true ERA doesn't tell the whole story and is missing defensive adjustments but then they come up with a solution that is missing even more.   It is a complex problem and simplistic solution is not the answer (FIP) .

Like I said if FIP is so great why not use it for hitters?  

[Ohfan67]

33 minutes ago, TonySoprano said:

OK then explain what you meant by this "Just an awful team with a requirement that every team gets a player that Means is an All Star."

Sounds to me like you're saying he isn't good enough to be an All Star if the Orioles didn't have to send a representative.

I’m not trying to be pessimistic and am not dogging either guy, but there’s a strong argument that neither Mancini or Means  deserve to be on the team. I’m happy with Mancini’s performance and thrilled with what Means has done, but there’s a good chance Means would have not been selected if it wasn’t a requirement that every team is represented (the Orioles would have zero players on the team).  

[LookinUp]

35 minutes ago, atomic said:

How am I negating Means performance.  I am stating that rookie pitchers making the all-star game were usually cultural phenomenons.  If there wasn't a requirement for each team to have a player most likely Means would not be on the team. 

I half agree with this. Of the guys who had less than 100 innings, it's no doubt that Dontrelle Willis and Fernando had massive star power at the time. Means could walk into ESPN studios with an Orioles uniform on and they would think he was the bat boy.

With that said, his WAR (r or f) is impressive as are his results. He's a deserving All Star, rookie, <100 innings, terrible team or cultural phenomenon be damned.

[TonySoprano]

4 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

I’m not trying to be pessimistic and am not dogging either guy, but there’s a strong argument that neither Mancini or Means  deserve to be on the team. I’m happy with Mancini’s performance and thrilled with what Means has done, but there’s a good chance Means would have not been selected if it wasn’t a requirement that every team is represented (the Orioles would have zero players on the team).  

As I pointed out, Means' numbers put him in the top 5 in the entire league in ERA+ and rWAR.   There are 12 pitchers on the AS roster, probably half won't make an appearance, but the recognition is still deserved.  Yes, I'm well aware that several years Ripken was selected on popularity and not on merit, but I am happy merit applied in Means' case.

[Ohfan67]

2 minutes ago, TonySoprano said:

As I pointed out, Means' numbers put him in the top 5 in the entire league in ERA+ and rWAR.   There are 12 pitchers on the AS roster, probably half won't make an appearance, but the recognition is still deserved.  Yes, I'm well aware that several years Ripken was selected on popularity and not on merit, but I am happy merit applied in Means' case.

You made the case for means, but I think you would admit that others could make a similarly strong case against. That’s my point. 

[BohKnowsBmore]

56 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

It's hard to go with a SP that doesn't even have enough IP to qualify for the ERA title.  I think taking Means over Mancini had more to do with roster construction issues.  

He’s a couple innings away if I’m not mistaken and would be in qualified territory now if he hadn’t missed a start (again, if I’m not mistaken). 

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, atomic said:

Exit velocity could help.  So it is true ERA doesn't tell the whole story and is missing defensive adjustments but then they come up with a solution that is missing even more.   It is a complex problem and simplistic solution is not the answer (FIP) .

Like I said if FIP is so great why not use it for hitters?  

Because hitters have a far greater degree of control (and spread in outcomes) of balls in play than pitchers. 

Greg Maddux had a career BABIP of .286.  Chris Tillman had a career BABIP of .287.  Ubaldo had a .301.  Daniel Cabrera a .297.  Randy Johnson a .295.

But Trey Mancini has a .322, Roberto Alomar also .322 (these are as an Oriole), Nick Markakis a .315, Larry Sheets a .279, Kevin Millar a .273, Dempsey a .261, Tony Batista a .250, and Mark Belanger a .234.  Mike Trout is at .351, Bucky Dent .244.  Paul Goldschmidt is over .350, Ken Phelps was at .246.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, atomic said:

How am I negating Means performance.  I am stating that rookie pitchers making the all-star game were usually cultural phenomenons.  If there wasn't a requirement for each team to have a player most likely Means would not be on the team. 

If there was no requirement for each team to have a player then multiple teams wouldn't have one.  They'd probably just put in 80% Yanks/Sox/Dodgers/Cubs to maximize eyeballs on the game.  But since it's a totally meaningless exhibition* why not make it somewhat enjoyable for the maximum number of teams?  

If this was a real game half the players on the roster wouldn't make it, because you really only need about 15 players to get through a single game.  30-something man rosters is ridiculous overkill.

This should be your new thing: Advocate relentlessly and tirelessly for 15-man all star rosters, just the 15 best players regardless of team.  Most years half the teams won't have a rep, and that's fine, they should just try harder.  

* Don't even start on that home-field thing.

[El Gordo]

20 hours ago, Big Mac said:

Abreu over Mancini seems like a poor and lazy selection in my opinion.  Means deserves it though. 

Mancini is 100 points higher in OPS and at 1.8 WAR to Abreu's 0.7. Trey is hurt by splitting time between 1B,RF and DH, IMO.