Cease vs everyone else

[Tony-OH]

2 hours ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

Daniel Cabrera once went 12-8 in a season for us.

He had a 5.00 ERA and 1.59 WHIP that year.

Pitcher Wins just isn't a very useful stat.

I'm not saying it's a useful stats by itself and should be used to evaluate pitchers, but I do think a guy who wins games as a starter, does tell you a few things. 

A high win total tells us that he gives his team a chance to win more times than not, and perhaps pitches to the scoreboard. 

The season you are speaking about with Cabrera was his rookie year when he came in 3rd in the ROY award. His 91 ERA+ made him a below average pitcher if you just go by that stats, but the Orioles went 17-10 in his 27 starts on a team that went 78-84.

So was he just lucky with run support? 

Well, he was 8-0 in games where he received 6 or more runs (12 times). But, in his 12 wins, he pitched to a 1.98 ERA and held batters to a .183/.297/.267/.564 slash line. In his 8 losses he had a 10.95 ERA and batters slashed .375/.441/.566/1.007 off him. So basically he was either very good or very bad.

Pitching in a very offensive ERA, he went 6 or more innings in 15 of his 27 starts and gave his team a chance to win more times than not. 

Basically Cabrera that year was a solid 5th starter on a good team because he gave his chance a team a chance to win more times than not and ate innings. 

Wins, although highly dependent on the offensive output of his team, does give us an idea how often a starter pitcher keeps his team in a game and gives them a chance to win. It's something to put in the equation when looking at your back of rotation candidates, but I would agree with you that you don't make any decision based off the stat alone.

 

[DrinkinWithFermi]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

It's a counting stat so they get credit for throwing more innings.

Ah, well there ya go.

Reliable mediocrity literally does have value to fWAR lol.

Thanks for the clarification.

[O's84]

In 2023, the league avg in runs scored per game was 4.62.

Kyle Gibson's run support was 5.27.

So he clearly had quite a bit of help in amassing those 15 W's.

He still was a useful pitcher in 2023, and provided us with innings, but we should have, and certainly this year should aim higher. 

The fact that Angelos holds the purse strings so tight doesn't help, as it takes away an avenue of opportunity.  That should not be the case.  Now that doesn't mean I would expect him to outbid the Dodgers or Yankees for an ace in FA, but it does forgo more reasonable options that could help in FA.   Since we can't do even that, we need to acquire help via the trade market, as our farm system lacks pitching at the upper levels.  If Elias gets shutout of the trade market we'll be running a similar rotation that we had last year and that worries me quite a bit.

[banks703]

12 hours ago, RZNJ said:

No one is “wasting away in the minors”.  It’s just a bogus argument at this point.

AAA games

Westburg 158

Norby 147

Ortiz 114

Cowser 114

Kjerstad 76

Mayo 62

 

 

The older a prospect is the less valuable they are. I’m not sure if you’re not comprehending that, disregarding it or just being argumentative. 
 

A 26 year old Joey Ortiz is less valuable than a 23 year old or 24 year old Joey Ortiz. 
 

Citing games played is only one piece. We all know their promotion process requires prospects to hit every stop through the minors. Slow playing a prospect is very much wasting their value. If you don’t agree that’s fine but know that you’re wrong. 

[Tony-OH]

1 hour ago, Moose Milligan said:

Nah I think ERA+ tells it like it is. 

ERA+ tells you how the ERA from a pitcher is in comparison to the average ERA of the league. That's it.

If you knew a pitcher was going to give up two or less runs over 6 innings in two out of three starts, would you take that?

So let's runs this scenario with pitchers over three starts.

Pitcher A:

1st start: Allows 1 runs over 6 IP (win)
2nd start: Allows 1 run over 6 IP (win)
3rd start: Allows  6 runs over 3 IP (loss)

The pitcher is 2-1 with a 4.80 ERA

Pitcher B: 
1st start: Allows 4 runs in 5 innings (loss)
2nd start: Allows 4 runs in 4 innings (loss)
3rd start: Allows 0 run over 6 IP (win)

The pitcher is 1-2 with a 4.80 ERA

I'll take the guy that in 2 out of 3 starts pitches very well vs the one that pitches well 1 out of 3 times. 

All of these stats really have to be taken into consideration. Relievers will sometimes have high ERAs because they a few meltdown appearances, but if a I know a reliever is going to be darn good 90%+ of the time, I'll take that even if it comes with a few bad appearances vs the guy who may have lower ERA but who consistently gives up runs more often.

 

 

[Tony-OH]

1 minute ago, banks703 said:

The older a prospect is the less valuable they are. I’m not sure if you’re not comprehending that, disregarding it or just being argumentative. 
 

A 26 year old Joey Ortiz is less valuable than a 23 year old or 24 year old Joey Ortiz. 
 

Citing games played is only one piece. We all know their promotion process requires prospects to hit every stop through the minors. Slow playing a prospect is very much wasting their value. If you don’t agree that’s fine but know that you’re wrong. 

There is a little doubt that the older a prospect gets, there becomes a lessening of value once a player hits 24-25 years old. That doesn't mean they don't have value, but unless there are extenuating circumstances of why a player is still in the minors at that age, there value will take a bit of a hit. 

Kjerstad obviously does have that will being out so long with Myocarditis as well as the COVID year. Saying that, I do think this is the last year he will have significant value if he doesn't start getting major league production.

 

[banks703]

3 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

There is a little doubt that the older a prospect gets, there becomes a lessening of value once a player hits 24-25 years old. That doesn't mean they don't have value, but unless there are extenuating circumstances of why a player is still in the minors at that age, there value will take a bit of a hit. 

Kjerstad obviously does have that will being out so long with Myocarditis as well as the COVID year. Saying that, I do think this is the last year he will have significant value if he doesn't start getting major league production.

 

Right. This is my point about the more these higher level prospects age, the less valuable they become to the major league team and more so, an acquiring team. 
 

If Joey is stuck in the minors until he’s 30 years old, he’s obviously not as valuable as he was at 25 years old.

So, in this way the org is in fact wasting their youth = value 

Kjerstad is obviously an exception and of course losing the minor league season to Covid adds to it but the point remains. 

Edited January 13 by banks703

[Guest]

1 hour ago, owknows said:

I wouldn't disagree that it would be tough to expect the draft good fortune of Adley, Gunnar and Holliday year are year.

But a couple things...

Gunnar Henderson was taken in the 2nd round with the 42nd overall pick.

Additionally if this strategy plays out as I expect it to, few if any of these players will be kept through their arb years. So we will be trading in peak year Adley, Gunnar, and Holliday type players for their equivalent talent mass in the mid to high majors.

I think that is a sustainable process.

And I think in fact that it is the only sustainable process for small or mid market team to be a perpetual contender. I suspect it is the path that the Orioles will follow. And its success is completely contingent on having a front office that is better than average at identifying talent.

 

Which teams have actually become perpetual contenders by doing this? Not the Rays, who rebuilt before this run.

They do reload like that though. Of course they also have zero fans.

[Malike]

1 minute ago, brooooksy said:

Which teams have actually become perpetual contenders by doing this? Not the Rays, who rebuilt before this run.

They do reload like that though. Of course they also have zero fans.

That's not an indictment of the team, Florida is a horrible baseball state. Too many transplants and the stadium is awful and really annoying to get to.

[RZNJ]

48 minutes ago, banks703 said:

The older a prospect is the less valuable they are. I’m not sure if you’re not comprehending that, disregarding it or just being argumentative. 
 

A 26 year old Joey Ortiz is less valuable than a 23 year old or 24 year old Joey Ortiz. 
 

Citing games played is only one piece. We all know their promotion process requires prospects to hit every stop through the minors. Slow playing a prospect is very much wasting their value. If you don’t agree that’s fine but know that you’re wrong. 

A 22,  23, and 24 year old Joey Ortiz were all less valuable than the current 25 yo Joey Ortiz.    Why?  Development.   He hasn't been slow played to this point.  That's a pretty simple concept you're having trouble with.   Sure, Joey Ortiz would be even more attractive if he was 23 instead of 25.  So what?  He's 25.  Never said he wouldn't lose value if he's a year older and still in the minors.  He's been handled just fine to this point.  That phrase, "to this point" seems to give you trouble.  What you call slow playing has gotten Cowser, Kjerstad,  Ortiz etc. to peak value but you must be smart enough,  I hope,  to know this.

Edited January 13 by RZNJ

[owknows]

3 minutes ago, brooooksy said:

Which teams have actually become perpetual contenders by doing this? Not the Rays, who rebuilt before this run.

They do reload like that though. Of course they also have zero fans.

Which teams had relief pitching before 1904?

Which ones used Sabermetrics before a couple decades ago?

 

[Number5]

4 hours ago, Frobby said:

 It’s nothing personal.  

 

[wildbillhiccup]

2 hours ago, Roll Tide said:

******Pauses and waits for insult to Tony by @wildbillhiccup about number of posts and to tell you that you ought to know better than putting any value in win totals by a starting pitcher 

Perhaps you should spend less time trying to stir the spot and more time trying to make a compelling argument for why we should use an antiquated team stat like wins to evaluate a pitcher's worth. 

[wildbillhiccup]

1 hour ago, RZNJ said:

A 22,  23, and 24 year old Joey Ortiz were all less valuable than the current 25 yo Joey Ortiz.    Why?  Development.   He hasn't been slow played to this point.  That's a pretty simple concept you're having trouble with.   Sure, Joey Ortiz would be even more attractive if he was 23 instead of 25.  So what?  He's 25.  Never said he wouldn't lose value if he's a year older and still in the minors.  He's been handled just fine to this point.  That phrase, "to this point" seems to give you trouble.  What you call slow playing has gotten Cowser, Kjerstad,  Ortiz etc. to peak value but you must be smart enough,  I hope,  to know this.

25 seems like the sh*t or get off the pot age for a decent prospect. I'd also argue that Ortiz's value has peaked and has no where to go but down at this point unless we play him regularly at the MLB level and he produces. 

[RZNJ]

3 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

25 seems like the sh*t or get off the pot age for a decent prospect. I'd also argue that Ortiz's value has peaked and has no where to go but down at this point unless we play him regularly at the MLB level and he produces. 

I never argued that his prospect value hadn’t peaked.  I argued that he hasn’t been wasting his time in the minors.    He didn’t lose value last year.  From the beginning of the season until the end he gained value just like everyone else.