Is John Means one of the top six starters in the AL East in 2022?

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, Pickles said:

Just because you can't prove something doesn't mean it isn't true.

Now, I'm not defending the original statement, because I believe that while it probably is true in a micro level, over the course of 162 games it's pretty non-existent.

But I hate to see the logic of "Well, you can't prove it is true, so that proves it is false."

I can get behind the point of your post.  But at the end of the day, evidence has to exist.  
 

Baseball is a sport defined by stats, much more than any other sport.  If this is true, there would be stats that say, players who play for top 5 offenses tend to put up better numbers (not talking wins and losses) than players who play on bad teams.  We would know these numbers.  They would be reported.

Instead, all we are hearing is a lot of cliches and “well this is obviously true” stuff.

Heres the thing..common sense can play well quite often…but this isn’t a case of that. 

[Pickles]

14 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I can get behind the point of your post.  But at the end of the day, evidence has to exist.  
 

Baseball is a sport defined by stats, much more than any other sport.  If this is true, there would be stats that say, players who play for top 5 offenses tend to put up better numbers (not talking wins and losses) than players who play on bad teams.  We would know these numbers.  They would be reported.

Instead, all we are hearing is a lot of cliches and “well this is obviously true” stuff.

Heres the thing..common sense can play well quite often…but this isn’t a case of that. 

In this case of the original claims I agree with you.  I don't think it holds up under scrutiny.  

 

[Frobby]

10 hours ago, Pickles said:

Just because you can't prove something doesn't mean it isn't true.

Now, I'm not defending the original statement, because I believe that while it probably is true in a micro level, over the course of 162 games it's pretty non-existent.

But I hate to see the logic of "Well, you can't prove it is true, so that proves it is false."

But this is something you should be able to prove if it’s true.  Here’s the last 10 years of ERA data for starting pitching with 0-2 runs of support, 3-5, and 6+ runs:

2012: 4.29, 4.01, 4.32

2013: 4.10, 3.85, 4.11

2014: 3.84, 3.76, 3.89

2015: 4.10, 4.03, 4.18

2016: 4.26, 4.28, 4.48

2017: 4.54, 4.49, 4.44

2018: 4.05, 4.26, 4.25

2019: 4.64, 4.39, 4.62

2020: 4.75, 4.49, 4.19

2021: 4.64, 4.21, 4.23

10 year average: 4.32, 4.18, 4.27

If you see an obvious and significant pattern there, let me know.   

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

But this is something you should be able to prove if it’s true.  Here’s the last 10 years of ERA data for starting pitching with 0-2 runs of support, 3-5, and 6+ runs:

2012: 4.29, 4.01, 4.32

2013: 4.10, 3.85, 4.11

2014: 3.84, 3.76, 3.89

2015: 4.10, 4.03, 4.18

2016: 4.26, 4.28, 4.48

2017: 4.54, 4.49, 4.44

2018: 4.05, 4.26, 4.25

2019: 4.64, 4.39, 4.62

2020: 4.75, 4.49, 4.19

2021: 4.64, 4.21, 4.23

10 year average: 4.32, 4.18, 4.27

If you see an obvious and significant pattern there, let me know.   

Nice research.  I’m sure @Philip will say this is bs, overlook it and say there is something the stats aren’t telling us.

[Pickles]

6 hours ago, Frobby said:

But this is something you should be able to prove if it’s true.  Here’s the last 10 years of ERA data for starting pitching with 0-2 runs of support, 3-5, and 6+ runs:

2012: 4.29, 4.01, 4.32

2013: 4.10, 3.85, 4.11

2014: 3.84, 3.76, 3.89

2015: 4.10, 4.03, 4.18

2016: 4.26, 4.28, 4.48

2017: 4.54, 4.49, 4.44

2018: 4.05, 4.26, 4.25

2019: 4.64, 4.39, 4.62

2020: 4.75, 4.49, 4.19

2021: 4.64, 4.21, 4.23

10 year average: 4.32, 4.18, 4.27

If you see an obvious and significant pattern there, let me know.   

Oh, as I stated, I didn't agree with the original claim.  Good on you for the research here.

I do stand by my post however, which, imo, merely advocates for process and was divorced from the specifics of this thread.

[Can_of_corn]

32 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Oh, as I stated, I didn't agree with the original claim.  Good on you for the research here.

I do stand by my post however, which, imo, merely advocates for process and was divorced from the specifics of this thread.

I'm not sure how saying I think something is true so I'm going to state it as a fact without bothering to provide supporting data when questioned counts as a process.

 

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm not sure how saying I think something is true so I'm going to state it as a fact without bothering to provide supporting data when questioned counts as a process.

 

Again, I wasn't referring to the original claims, but the manner with which they were immediately rejected.  That's bad process.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Again, I wasn't referring to the original claims, but the manner with which they were immediately rejected.  That's bad process.

I disagree.

I think questioning someone's unsupported claims is good process.

I think refusing to support your claims by stating that it's common knowledge is bad process.

[Pickles]

17 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I disagree.

I think questioning someone's unsupported claims is good process.

I think refusing to support your claims by stating that it's common knowledge is bad process.

Again, you seem to be very hung up on this specific claim, which was not my point.

I objected to the sentiment that because it couldn't be proven true, that is proof that it is false.

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Again, you seem to be very hung up on this specific claim, which was not my point.

I objected to the sentiment that because it couldn't be proven true, that is proof that it is false.

Sure, and I similarly object to posters deciding that since they personally believe something is true that they have no need to defend their statement.

If you say A is true and I ask for supporting evidence and you refuse to provide it I'm going to assume A isn't true.  How is that a bad process?

I think it is, in general, better to be skeptical of claims made on the internet than to not.

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Sure, and I similarly object to posters deciding that since they personally believe something is true that they have no need to defend their statement.

If you say A is true and I ask for supporting evidence and you refuse to provide it I'm going to assume A isn't true.  How is that a bad process?

I think it is, in general, better to be skeptical of claims made on the internet than to not.

Agreed.

I'm not defending the original statement or its support in any way, shape, or form.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Agreed.

I'm not defending the original statement or its support in any way, shape, or form.

I'm aware that you are not.

[Oriole1940]

I wonder if there any concerns about his stamina, durability?  If I recall correctly, he pitched a complete game and promptly went on the DL.  I never heard anyone express concerns about that, so maybe it was just some fluke happening.   I hope anyway.  

 

[Aristotelian]

12 minutes ago, Oriole1940 said:

I wonder if there any concerns about his stamina, durability?  If I recall correctly, he pitched a complete game and promptly went on the DL.  I never heard anyone express concerns about that, so maybe it was just some fluke happening.   I hope anyway.  

 

Career high is 155 IP. He definitely needs to push that higher to be considered elite.