Jump to content

Cease vs everyone else


Sports Guy

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, deward said:

A process designed around finding Gunnar Hendersons in the 2nd round with any degree of regularity is a process doomed to failure. Good fortune has had a part to play here. 

What about Mayos in the 4th, Hernaiz’ in the 5th, and Ortiz’ in the 4th? Dumb luck? 

Edited by emmett16
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, brooooksy said:

A. We tanked to get here

B. Tampa and Cleveland have been trying to do this, but they always have down years to reload and have never had real success

Since 2008 Tampa has been played to a .548 winning percentage with 9 playoff appearances despite having basically no payroll. I wonder, what do you consider real success? That sure screams a successful org to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, banks703 said:

He should have replaced Jorge on the roster in 23.

I agree.  But they gave Gunnar the long leash and he used it all before turning the corner.  The Rookie Integration Plan is a program under the Liftoff feature.  Raise the floor surrounded by stability.  And 101 wins later Ortiz is still a depth chart body count.  Still some time on the clock though…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, emmett16 said:

Making playoffs 5 years in a row and the WS in One of those 5 is not “real success”? 

No, apparently. I guess only one team is successful each season by the logic of that poster, which is dumbfounding, but hey, we get a lot of that around here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, brooooksy said:

I thought we were trying to win the World Series here like the other teams I mentioned

Sure.  Thats the goal.  But if you deem the team not successful if they don’t win the WS, not sure what to tell you.  WS is a roll of the dice.  Making the playoffs is success.  Making the WS is incredible success.  Winning the  WS is luck.  I love watching good baseball night after night.  Not gonna say they aren’t successful if they don’t with the WS.  Maybe if I were a dodgers fan and my team had won the division a million times in a row and went out and spent $2BB I’d say it’s WS or bust, but I watch the Baltimore team.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Malike said:

Since 2008 Tampa has been played to a .548 winning percentage with 9 playoff appearances despite having basically no payroll. I wonder, what do you consider real success? That sure screams a successful org to me.

They haven’t won anything.

they rebuilt 2014-2018. What this poster is arguing is that what the orioles are doing now will somehow not require a rebuild

They’re obviously successful, but limited by their payroll from making a sustained run or winning it all. 

BTW - their most recent run is inflated by the tanking orioles throwing games (8-32)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, emmett16 said:

Sure.  Thats the goal.  But if you deem the team not successful if they don’t win the WS, not sure what to tell you.  WS is a roll of the dice.  Making the playoffs is success.  Making the WS is incredible success.  Winning the  WS is luck.  I love watching good baseball night after night.  Not gonna say they aren’t successful if they don’t with the WS.  Maybe if I were a dodgers fan and my team had won the division a million times in a row and went out and spent $2BB I’d say it’s WS or bust, but I watch the Baltimore team.  

If you feel this way (I do) you should be fundamentally opposed to tanking.

however, the orioles went ahead and tanked to give themselves a competitive advantage and making their team difficult to watch for years. So in context no, shooting to average 88 wins is not good enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Malike said:

No, apparently. I guess only one team is successful each season by the logic of that poster, which is dumbfounding, but hey, we get a lot of that around here.

We’re talking about sustained success, because the guy I’m talking to thinks the orioles are going to reload forever without ever rebuilding, apparently, which no team has done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, brooooksy said:

We’re talking about sustained success, because the guy I’m talking to thinks the orioles are going to reload forever without ever rebuilding, apparently, which no team has done.

Yankess have managed decade long stretches.  Cards just had a 15 year stretch at or above .500.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yankess have managed decade long stretches.  Cards just had a 15 year stretch at or above .500.

Yeah, and they spend money. They don’t do it by trading away their arb eligible players 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, brooooksy said:

We’re talking about sustained success, because the guy I’m talking to thinks the orioles are going to reload forever without ever rebuilding, apparently, which no team has done.

If they keep doing what they are doing both in the draft and internationally, which we're really not used to this team being competent at for the past couple of decades, it should help mitigate a full rebuild. Yes, we suffered through horrible seasons, we drafted well and hit on players we had to hit on, but that doesn't mean we'll be in full rebuild mode in the upcoming future if they keep doing what they are doing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

😂. Ok he performed admirably 

Ok Captain Hindsight, so every minor leaguer that doesn't perform right out of the gate is considered "rushed"? Cowser had nothing left to prove at AAA and using a sample size of 61 MLB ABs to judge a player is almost as silly as using wins to evaluate a pitcher's ability/skill set. Almost. 

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

    • dWAR is just the run value for defense added with the defensive adjustment.  Corner OF spots have a -7.5 run adjustment, while CF has a +2.5 adjustment over 150 games.    Since Cowser played both CF and the corners they pro-rate his time at each to calculate his defensive adjustment. 
    • Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.
    • Wait a second here, the reason he's -0.1 in bb-ref dwar is because they're using drs to track his defensive run value.  He's worth 6.6 runs in defense according to fangraphs, which includes adjustments for position, which would give him a fangraphs defensive war of +0.7.
    • A little funny to have provided descriptions of the hits (“weak” single; “500 foot” HR). FIP doesn’t care about any of that either, so it’s kind of an odd thing to add in an effort to make ERA look bad.  Come in, strike out the first hitter, then give up three 108 MPH rocket doubles off the wall. FIP thinks you were absolutely outstanding, and it’s a shame your pathetic defense and/or sheer bad luck let you down. Next time you’ll (probably) get the outcomes you deserve. They’re both flawed. So is xFIP. So is SIERA. So is RA/9. So is WPA. So is xERA. None of them are perfect measures of how a pitcher’s actual performance was, because there’s way too much context and too many variables for any one metric to really encompass.  But when I’m thinking about awards, for me at least, it ends up having to be about the actual outcomes. I don’t really care what a hitter’s xWOBA is when I’m thinking about MVP, and the same is true for pitchers. Did you get the outs? Did the runs score? That’s the “value” that translates to the scoreboard and, ultimately, to the standings. So I think the B-R side of it is more sensible for awards.  I definitely take into account the types of factors that you (and other pitching fWAR advocates) reference as flaws. So if a guy plays in front of a particular bad defense or had a particularly high percentage of inherited runners score, I’d absolutely adjust my take to incorporate that info. And I also 100% go to Fangraphs first when I’m trying to figure out which pitchers we should acquire (i.e., for forward looking purposes).  But I just can’t bring myself say that my Cy Young is just whichever guy had the best ratio of Ks to BBs to HRs over a threshold number of innings. As @Frobby said, it just distills out too much of what actually happened.
    • We were all a lot younger in 2005.  No one wanted to believe Canseco cause he’s a smarmy guy. Like I said, he was the only one telling the truth. It wasn’t a leap of faith to see McGwire up there and Sosa up there and think “yeah, those guys were juicing” but then suddenly look at Raffy and think he was completely innocent.  It’s a sad story. The guy should be in Hall of Fame yet 500 homers and 3,000 hits are gone like a fart in the wind cause his legacy is wagging his finger and thinking he couldn’t get caught.  Don’t fly too close to the sun.  
    • I think if we get the fun sprinkler loving Gunnar that was in the dugout yesterday, I don’t think we have to worry about him pressing. He seemed loose and feeling good with the other guys he was with, like Kremer.
    • I was a lot younger back then, but that betrayal hit really hard because he had been painting himself as literally holier than thou, and shook his finger to a congressional committee and then barely 2 weeks later failed the test.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...