The Bullpen Has Blown 7 Games for Trachsel

[Sports Guy]

No, I am of the opinion that past performance is not only the best predictor of future performance, it is also a pretty lousy predictor. Just because it's the best predictor we have, that does not make it trustworthy.

Furthermore, the best predictor of an individual's performance is the past performance of that very individual, not normative data about everybody. And even that is a poor predictor.

Don't turn this into something it's not. Don't turn it into some goofy "let's play Luis everyday" claim. Just be reasonable. You are looking for stats-based certainty when the actual truth is a great deal more uncertain than the conclusions you reach based on normative data about past performance.

According to the discussions around here, Jeff Kent could never happen, Steve Finley could never happen, Roger Clemens could never happen, Melvin Mora could never happen, Mike Cuellar could never happen. LOTS of things could never happen.

(Now, how long until somebody says, "Oh, you think Trax is like Clemens huh?")

This isn't really true.

Let's say a player is 35 years old....They were very good up until age 32(10 year period)...In the last 3 seasons, they have been on the decline....What do you think happens...They revert back to the form of their 20s and their prime or they keep declining as they get into their mid to upper 30s?

[Mackus]

What part of SOLELY AS INSURANCE don't you understand?

The part that costs us $5M.

[DrungoHazewood]

I love threads like these - especially when they contain ridiculous phrases like "historically unique" to explain being confounded by the great Master Traschel.

Among obvious mistakes, this has been a quality pickup by our FO. I hope we deal him soon, but I see no reason to accept any average AA arm for him.

I love comments like this - especially when they contain ridiculous phrases like Master Trachsel. You want to keep relying on players with (whatever you want to call a 45:69 K:BB ratio in 140 innings), have at it.

[BigDawg819]

The part that costs us $5M.

Well insurance rates are on the rise.....

[tim27]

I understand that you are completely wrong if you think he is insurance..If they pick up his option, he is in the rotation regardless of his or others performance until at least May, if not longer.

To think otherwise is ridiculous.

I'd be glad to pay him 4.75 next year solely as insurance because I wouldn't ever base my playing time arrangements on financial concern. To argue that the O's would is a valid point I've adressed. I'm not arguing what the O's would do but what I would do.

And in a rebuilding year, you know who is insurance for a young pitcher? ANOTHER YOUNG PITCHER!

As of now, the Orioles have these guys who should be in the majors next year:

Bedard Obviously

Loewen Injury concern, not to mention his ability to pitch 175 inn. due to ineffeciency.

DCabObviously

GuthrieI thought you weren't ready to hand him a rotation spot next year because he's a fluke.

PennInjury concern and poor major league performance.

OlsonShould probably be here and start but I wouldn't hand him a rotation spot.

BurresIMO, he shouldn't really be looked at as a serious option to start. Talk about smoke and mirrors.

LizMaybe he should be here and maybe not. He could very well benefit from another year in the high minors.

We also have guys like JJ Johnson who could be in the mix.JJ Johnson is not ML starter material. We might as well hand LF to Fio.

By my count that's two guys we can legitemately count on to give us 200 ip next year. We need to get those innings somewhere. It could be a lot worse than Steve Traschel. Now you'll make the argument that it can't be any worse but that 4.40 era begs to differ.

[BigDawg819]

I love comments like this - especially when they contain ridiculous phrases like Master Trachsel. You want to keep relying on players with (whatever you want to call a 45:69 K:BB ratio in 140 innings), have at it.

Are you trying to say that Trax is not a Jedi? Blasphemy!

<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f12/wrobel8/storm-trooper.jpg" border="0" alt="Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket"></a>

[tim27]

You're misunderstanding the predictive value of individual numbers. No one says they're a crystal ball. They just give us a likely range of what's going to happen.

If someone put a gun to my head and ask what Patterson's platoon splits would be next year I'd give them his career averages. But I'd know full well that they could vary significantly from that because that's the nature of a 200 at bat trial.

So basically you couldn't tell them anything then could you?

[DrungoHazewood]

According to the discussions around here, Jeff Kent could never happen, Steve Finley could never happen, Roger Clemens could never happen, Melvin Mora could never happen, Mike Cuellar could never happen. LOTS of things could never happen.

This is the fatal flaw in your argument. None of those players had a season where his peripherals were so fundamentally, completely in conflict with his results.

This is all about playing the odds, and I'm not betting the 2008 Orioles season on Trachsel bucking massive odds against him.

[Sports Guy]

I'd be glad to pay him 4.75 next year solely as insurance because I wouldn't ever base my playing time arrangements on financial concern. To argue that the O's would is a valid point I've adressed. I'm not arguing what the O's would do but what I would do.

By my count that's two guys we can legitemately count on to give us 200 ip next year. We need to get those innings somewhere. It could be a lot worse than Steve Traschel. Now you'll make the argument that it can't be any worse but that 4.40 era begs to differ.

How many staffs have more than 2 guys who throw 200 innings a year.

I pretty much disagree with your entire post but it is a waste of my time to get into it....Just answer that question.

[DrungoHazewood]

So basically you couldn't tell them anything then could you?

About exactly what Corey Patterson was going to do in 2008? Nope. If I could I'd be a very rich man. But I could give them a range of outcomes with varying liklihoods that would almost certainly encompass what he'll actually do.

[Old#5fan]

Why not use all of the information at your disposal, weighting it by what makes sense for each individual case? There are players for whom a statistical analysis makes sense, players with less of a track record for whom scouting reports should hold more weight, and players for whom other information could be invaluable.

Actually I think a combination of all of the above should be used on every player. Even if there are stats available you still need to get a reliable scouting report.

[Old#5fan]

About exactly what Corey Patterson was going to do in 2008? Nope. If I could I'd be a very rich man. But I could give them a range of outcomes with varying liklihoods that would almost certainly encompass what he'll actually do.

So what I take from this is stats really just aren't very reliable to predict what will occur in the future as there are just too many variables. I distinctly recall a few years ago on this forum many posters were all hyped up about Kurt Ainsworth because he had a great ERA in pre-season and looked like a future Cy Young. I commented at the time that I thought this guy looked like there was something wrong with him (based on observation) and he was damaged goods when the Orioles got him.

I was pretty much derided for that view because of his great "stats." Well, we all know who turned out to be right on that now don't we? I don't care about being right or wrong, but I do think way too much emphasis is placed on stats which overall are not reliable enough to accurately predict much of anything other than general possibilities. In other words they are a better history of a players performance than a future indicator, hence not very reliable regarding future performance?

Would you agree with my take expressed thusly?

[DrungoHazewood]

I'd be glad to pay him 4.75 next year solely as insurance because I wouldn't ever base my playing time arrangements on financial concern.

You have a luxury that the Baltimore Orioles most certainly don't.

[tim27]

How many staffs have more than 2 guys who throw 200 innings a year.

I pretty much disagree with your entire post but it is a waste of my time to get into it....Just answer that question.

I'd say most good staffs have more than two guys throw 200 innings. The Red Sox this year will have 3, and that's with nominal ace Schilling hurt. The LAA will have three. The Tigers will have three, or be close. I think you need AT LEAST 850-900 innings from your starters, ideally another 100.

I love it how it's a waste of time for you to explain yourself. If it's such a waste of time then why do you have 45,000 posts?

[Sports Guy]

So what I take from this is stats really just aren't very reliable to predict what will occur in the future as there are just too many variables. I distinctly recall a few years ago on this forum many posters were all hyped up about Kurt Ainsworth because he had a great ERA in pre-season and looked like a future Cy Young. I commented at the time that I thought this guy looked like there was something wrong with him (based on observation) and he was damaged goods when the Orioles got him.

I was pretty much derided for that view because of his great "stats." Well, we all know who turned out to be right on that now don't we? I don't care about being right or wrong, but I do think way too much emphasis is placed on stats which overall are not reliable enough to accurately predict much of anything other than general possibilities. In other words they are a better history of a players performance than a future indicator, hence not very reliable regarding future performance?

You were right because he got hurt...Had nothing to do with his talent.