Jump to content

Tracking Ex Oriole Thread


Rene88

Recommended Posts

https://yanksgoyard.com/posts/brewers-spurning-yankees-in-corbin-burnes-trade-wasnt-so-ridiculous-after-all-01j1tdyyfv64

Quote

According to OAA, Ortiz has been the best defensive third baseman in the game. Offensively, he's more than held his own, posting an .817 OPS, .373 OBP and meriting All-Star consideration (though he hit the IL on Wednesday, likely eliminating him from the festivities). Despite Jones' surge in June, it's tough to justify placing him above Ortiz in any power ranking of either future or current impact. If you're going to trade Burnes and try to stay atop the Central, adding Ortiz seems like a pretty thoughtful way to accomplish your goals. No "Yankees Tax" to be found here.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/6/2024 at 10:32 AM, Tony-OH said:

Poor Ryan McKenna, after going hitless in his 6 PAAs with the Giants then slashing  .174/.310/.217/.528 in 28 PAs in AAA for them, they sent him to AA where he looks pretty lost against Baysox pitching. 

He was leading off in last night's game and struck out looking from a 94 MPH Peter Van Loon fastball and they showed how walking back to the dugout and he looked like a man defeated. No sweat ban, no swagger, just looking like a guy who may be realizing his career is about over. 

He's only 27 so never say never, but the poor guy looked defeated last night. 

Yeah, I had the game playing in the background and just listening and they said "McKenna".  At that point I did a doubletake on the lineup in the event there was another McKenna and it was former O Ryan.  I'm sure he felt more at home in the O's minor league system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • It’s kind of amazing, but Bowman has thrown 207.2 innings in his career, while Perez has thrown 207.1.   Perez has allowed fewer hits (183/188), fewer runs (101/105), fewer homers (15/18) and has struck out more batters (191/167).   The only place where Bowman has the advantage is walks (108/75).  Perez is five years younger.   I prefer Perez every day and twice on Sunday.  
    • I don't want to hijack this thread but for those that are interested: Underestimating the Fog (Bill James)-or the original title-The Problem of Distinguishing Between Transient and Persistent Phenomena When Dealing with Variables from a Statistically Unstable Platform.  https://sabr.org/research/article/underestimating-the-fog/ Excerpt: " Dick Cramer, in the clutch-hitting study, did the same thing, and catcher-ERA studies, which look for consistency in catcher’s impact on ERAs, do the same thing; they compare one comparison offshoot with a second comparison offshoot. It is a comparison of two comparison offshoots. When you do that, the result embodies not just all of the randomness in two original statistics, but all of the randomness in four original statistics. Unless you have extremely stable “original elements” — original statistics stabilized by hundreds of thousands of trials — then the result is, for all practical purposes, just random numbers. We ran astray because we have been assuming that random data is proof of nothingness, when in reality random data proves nothing. In essence, starting with Dick Cramer’s article, Cramer argued, “I did an analysis which should have identified clutch hitters, if clutch hitting exists. I got random data; therefore, clutch hitters don’t exist.” Cramer was using random data as proof of nothingness — and I did the same, many times, and many other people also have done the same. But I’m saying now that’s not right; random data proves nothing — and it cannot be used as proof of nothingness. Why? Because whenever you do a study, if your study completely fails, you will get random data. Therefore, when you get random data, all you may conclude is that your study has failed. Cramer’s study may have failed to identify clutch hitters because clutch hitters don’t exist — as he concluded — or it may have failed to identify clutch hitters because the method doesn’t work — as I now believe. We don’t know. All we can say is that the study has failed. Dealing now with the nine conclusions listed near the start of the article, which were: -Clutch hitters don’t exist. -Pitchers have no ability to win, which is distinct from an ability to prevent runs. -Winning or losing close games is luck. -Catchers have little or no impact on a pitcher’s ERA. -A pitcher has little or no control over his hits/innings ratio, other than by striking batters out and allowing home runs. -Base running has no persistent impact on a team’s runs scored, other than by base stealing. -Batters have no individual tendency to hit well or hit poorly against left-handed pitching. -Batters don’t get hot and cold. -One hitter does not “protect” another in a hitting lineup. On [1), it is my opinion that this should be regarded as an open question. While Dick Cramer is a friend of mine, and I have tremendous respect for his work, I am convinced that, even if clutch-hitting skill did exist and was extremely important, this analysis would still reach the conclusion that it did, simply because it is not possible to detect consistency in clutch hitting by the use of this method." He goes on to question the other conclusions.  It's a very interesting read. Here is Birnbaum's response:  https://sabr.org/journal/article/response-to-mapping-the-fog/  
    • Yeah, this is sort of what I see. He’s not a true relief ace or anything, but he’s pretty good for the most part. Not a bum. He’s given up 24 ERs this season. Almost half of those (11) came in a one-week span from 7/29 to 8/6, which also encompassed the trade. He had a 29.45 ERA over those 6 appearances. 2 of his 3 HRs allowed are during that week, as are (oddly enough) both of his SBs allowed. Outside of that one horrific week, it’s a 2.68 ERA for the season. Sure, everybody looks better if you take out their worst week — but that’s pretty good performance over the other 95% of the season.
    • Just drilling down on our schedule vs the Yankees’ the rest of the way.  Series by series, BAL then NYY: TBR 3, at CHC 3 at BOS 3, KCR 3 at DET 3, BOS 4 SFG 3, at SEA 3 DET 3, at OAK 3 at NYY 3, BAL 3 at MIN 3, PIT 3 It’s interesting that whenever the O’s are at home, the Yankees are on the road and vice versa.  The Yankees have the marginally easier schedule and 3 fewer road games.  Looks to me like the Yankees are likely to miss Paul Skenes when they play the final series of the season. 
    • That's why you go hard like Moisés Alou.
    • The 5 hits allowed are what cost him.   2 points deducted for each hit.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...