PDA

View Full Version : Beware the Importance of Sample Size


jeremyb1
04-26-2004, 11:30 PM
Originally posted by Unregistered
Yep. Typical Dan Wright - Just enough to lose.

Haha. People on this board just don't give any thought towards the long term it seems like. Wright's a failure based on three starts, Schoeneweis is the new Loaiza, Uribe is the steal of the century. All three threads have surfaced in the last week.

Stop and think about stretches of three good or bad starts by pitchers over the years (John Snyder looked like Cy Young for more than three way back when) or good or band months by positions players (Lofton's April and May in '02). We've got a long way to go.

RichFitztightly
04-26-2004, 11:40 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
Haha. People on this board just don't give any thought towards the long term it seems like. Wright's a failure based on three starts, Schoeneweis is the new Loaiza, Uribe is the steal of the century. All three threads have surfaced in the last week.

Stop and think about stretches of three good or bad starts by pitchers over the years (John Snyder looked like Cy Young for more than three way back when) or good or band months by positions players (Lofton's April and May in '02). We've got a long way to go.

I'd agree with you on everybody but Danny Wrong. His 0-fer last year that continues this year is very disheartening. That being said, I'd much rather have him in the bullpen and think he'll do very well there. Keep him in the starting lineup and who knows, maybe he'll catch a few breaks and be OK.

Unregistered
04-26-2004, 11:55 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
Haha. People on this board just don't give any thought towards the long term it seems like. Wright's a failure based on three starts, Schoeneweis is the new Loaiza, Uribe is the steal of the century. All three threads have surfaced in the last week.

Stop and think about stretches of three good or bad starts by pitchers over the years (John Snyder looked like Cy Young for more than three way back when) or good or band months by positions players (Lofton's April and May in '02). We've got a long way to go. Come on, Jeremy - gimme a little more credit than that. I'll be one of the first to start my posts with "It's still early,", but we're talking about DAN FRIGGIN' WRIGHT. Let me know when he starts looking good as a starter. In the meantime, the "sample size" will get bigger and bigger until people who aren't somehow completely sick of Wright and his painful mediocrity finally come to terms with the fact that he just isn't a starter.

I don't forget when he came into that Yanks game last year when Cotts imploded in the first inning and held the Yankees off for 6 or so innings, which is why I think he's a servicable bullpen guy. But I think the sun has set on his career as a WINNABLE starter.

Mohoney
04-26-2004, 11:57 PM
Dan Wright's career line:

W L ERA G GS CG SHO SV SVO IP H R ER HR HBP BB K
20 25 5.54 69 63 1 1 1 1 363.2 384 243 224 63 13 164 223

63 starts and 363.2 IP is enough of a sample size for me. 63 long balls, a WHIP of 1.5, and an ERA of 5.54 all looks strikingly similar to what he's doing this year. He's the same Dan Wright he's always been.

Name one thing in this career line that gives you hope that he will pan out as a Major League caliber starter.

munchman33
04-27-2004, 12:00 AM
When talking about sampling, one must remember the cental limit theorem, which states that if all possible random samples of size N are drawn from a population, then as N becomes larger, the sampling distribution becomes approximately normal. Statisticians and sociologists will tell you that 50 is an adequate number to produce a sample distribution that is normal. Here's Danny Wright's numbers, through 69 career games.

20 W 25L 363innings 5.54era

What were you saying about sample size?

batmanZoSo
04-27-2004, 12:02 AM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
Haha. People on this board just don't give any thought towards the long term it seems like. Wright's a failure based on three starts, Schoeneweis is the new Loaiza, Uribe is the steal of the century. All three threads have surfaced in the last week.

Stop and think about stretches of three good or bad starts by pitchers over the years (John Snyder looked like Cy Young for more than three way back when) or good or band months by positions players (Lofton's April and May in '02). We've got a long way to go.

I think you're taking that quote out of context. The majority of us aren't being swept away by the Schoeneweis/Uribe hooplah. Myself, I'm just happy they're both playing so well. As for Wright, 0 for 10 starts is a big enough sample size for me. To the pen with thou, Danny boy.

Lip Man 1
04-27-2004, 12:08 AM
Here's all the sample size you need to know. Wright has lost ten of his last eleven decisions. He hasn't received a win in his last 18 starts. We're beginning to talk Anthony Young here folks.

Lip

Mohoney
04-27-2004, 12:09 AM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
I think you're taking that quote out of context. The majority of us aren't being swept away by the Schoeneweis/Uribe hooplah. Myself, I'm just happy they're both playing so well. As for Wright, 0 for 10 starts is a big enough sample size for me. To the pen with thou, Danny boy.

For my money, I'd rather have Wunsch in the bullpen when he's healed. A reliever that doesn't throw strikes is just as bad as a starter that doesn't throw strikes.

Wright has got until Wunsch heals to dazzle me, otherwise he has to go.

batmanZoSo
04-27-2004, 12:17 AM
Originally posted by Mohoney
For my money, I'd rather have Wunsch in the bullpen when he's healed. A reliever that doesn't throw strikes is just as bad as a starter that doesn't throw strikes.

Wright has got until Wunsch heals to dazzle me, otherwise he has to go.

I don't agree, because 1.) Wunsch is not that good, 2.) We already have a good middle relief corps, 3.) Wright is young, and we can't send him down, 4.) We don't know that he'll be bad in the bullpen, he seems to me that he's a reliever and has good stuff so there's no reason he can't be a good one. Maybe he'll even become a good starter down the road, who knows. But my god he hasn't won a game in like 2 years and Cotts is getting guys out. If you ask me, there's no choice.

Fisk72
04-27-2004, 12:46 AM
We really should blame Bossard for Danny Wright's loss the other day. The pitching rubber was angled a foot to the left of homeplate.

SoxxoS
04-27-2004, 01:07 AM
jeremy, you are better than this. Wright is not a rookie. Look at his career stats.

:threadsucks

SoxxoS
04-27-2004, 01:12 AM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
I don't agree, because 1.) Wunsch is not that good, 2.) We already have a good middle relief corps, 3.) Wright is young, and we can't send him down, 4.) We don't know that he'll be bad in the bullpen, he seems to me that he's a reliever and has good stuff so there's no reason he can't be a good one. Maybe he'll even become a good starter down the road, who knows. But my god he hasn't won a game in like 2 years and Cotts is getting guys out. If you ask me, there's no choice.

How is Wunsch not that good?

His last 4 years he has pitched 150 innings, giving up 114 hits, striking out 122. The only problem is he can't stay healthy.

But if he is, he is a good pitcher and should be a welcome addition to our bullpen.

batmanZoSo
04-27-2004, 01:54 AM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
How is Wunsch not that good?

His last 4 years he has pitched 150 innings, giving up 114 hits, striking out 122. The only problem is he can't stay healthy.

But if he is, he is a good pitcher and should be a welcome addition to our bullpen.

You already mentioned one reason, he can't stay healthy. And he's one batter and done. We don't have a shortage of lefties on this team. I also think we can get a valuable utility player for Wunsch as he's valuable to a team that doesn't have any lefties in their pen. So there's no spot for him unless you get rid of Wright. What can we get for Wright? I heard the Dodgers have a good prospect in their system...his name is Jack Squat.

mweflen
04-27-2004, 02:00 AM
yeah, i don't know where the "wunsch is not that good" comes from.

i mean, the guy had a 2.75 ERA last year, with a 33/25 SO/BB ratio.

is 43 games an inadequate sample size?

I'd rather have Wunsch pitching than Billy Botch... regardless of matchup.

fquaye149
04-27-2004, 02:04 AM
Originally posted by Mohoney


Name one thing in this career line that gives you hope that he will pan out as a Major League caliber starter.

1. He's quite young
2. He won 14 games two years ago
3. His down year was allegedly the result of an injury which he is over
4. His stuff is decent and he has a good build to handle the workload of a starter
5. Cooper is a good coach.

SoxxoS
04-27-2004, 03:11 AM
Originally posted by fquaye149
1. He's quite young
2. He won 14 games two years ago
3. His down year was allegedly the result of an injury which he is over
4. His stuff is decent and he has a good build to handle the workload of a starter
5. Cooper is a good coach.

1. He isn't that young anymore. Age was a positive 2 years ago.

2. You should know that wins and losses are not the right statistics to gauge a pitchers performance.

3. The injury has been fully healed this season, and his numbers suck.

4. The good "stuff" everyone talks about is no good if he can't spot it. Plus, he doesn't show the 97 mph heater he allegedly featured in the minors, and he can't spot his curve worth crap.

5. And...

jeremyb1
04-27-2004, 03:41 AM
I seem to be horribly misunderstood in this thread and it's my own fault for failing to be more clear I suppose. My point was not to suggest that Dan Wright is a good starter by any means. I simply get the impression that people are evaluating him mostly based on his last three starts. Otherwise there should've been more outrage that he made the rotation in the spring which there was not with a few clear exceptions. If you were at all open minded about Wright coming out of the Spring two poor starts is not sufficient to deem him hopeless.

Also, while Wright is not a good pitcher he's not the atrocity most posters seem to be suggesting in the Wright thread (again where is the thread suggesting we cut him from spring training?). He had a strong second half and a pretty impressive K/BB rate in '02. Last year he was injured to start the season and that obviously had some impact on his lack of success if only in that it didn't give him as much of an opportunity to pitch at the big league level.

I'm not saying Wright is a strong addition to the rotation or that people were perfectly happy with him coming into the season but there's been a definite change in rhetoric if you read threads from several weeks ago opposed to now and three starts is not a good basis for that.

Mohoney
04-27-2004, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by fquaye149
1. He's quite young
2. He won 14 games two years ago
3. His down year was allegedly the result of an injury which he is over
4. His stuff is decent and he has a good build to handle the workload of a starter
5. Cooper is a good coach.

I have serious issues with reasons #2, #4, and #5.

Those 14 wins came with 12 losses and an ERA of over 5. 14-12 with an ERA over 5 does not impress me. I want more than mediocrity, and I'm willing to bet that this anomaly is the BEST season we'll ever get from this guy.

A look at his career line does not suggest "decent" stuff. The fact is, he allows 1.5 runners per inning and 5.5 earned runs per 9 innings. If that's decent, please let me know. In my opinion, decent is a WHIP around 1.2 and an ERA of anywhere from 4.00 to 4.50.

I think Cooper is highly overrated. He calls WAY too many fastballs, and that's a big reason why we give up the long ball. He has very little confidence that our pitchers can throw offspeed pitches for strikes when they're down in the count. If you NEVER mix in offspeed stuff on 2-0 or 3-1, Major League caliber hitters will feast on the steady diet of fastballs. If Cooper is going to call games like he's scared to death of the occasional walk, maybe it's time to just let the catcher call the pitches. Walks are better to give up than 2 run and 3 run homers.

jeremyb1
04-27-2004, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by Mohoney
A look at his career line does not suggest "decent" stuff. The fact is, he allows 1.5 runners per inning and 5.5 earned runs per 9 innings. If that's decent, please let me know. In my opinion, decent is a WHIP around 1.2 and an ERA of anywhere from 4.00 to 4.50.

Stuff isn't really a reflection of how many runs or baserunners you allow, it's how dominant your pitches are which is best measured by strikeouts. Wright K'd 136 batters in 196 innings in '01 which is not bad and in the minors he struck out near a batter an inning. His problem has been the long ball, 32! in '02 and 16 in limited action last season and less them stellar control.

RichFitztightly
04-27-2004, 03:21 PM
Originally posted by Mohoney
Walks are better to give up than 2 run and 3 run homers.

You're correct, but 2 run and 3 run homers are worse than solo shots.

fquaye149
04-27-2004, 05:38 PM
Originally posted by SoxxoS
1. He isn't that young anymore. Age was a positive 2 years ago.

2. You should know that wins and losses are not the right statistics to gauge a pitchers performance.

3. The injury has been fully healed this season, and his numbers suck.

4. The good "stuff" everyone talks about is no good if he can't spot it. Plus, he doesn't show the 97 mph heater he allegedly featured in the minors, and he can't spot his curve worth crap.

5. And...

I don't necessarily think wright will be a good starter. In fact, I would tend to think he won't. However, I merely put forward those five points to show that there is reason to think he COULD be.

He's nowhere near over the hill, he is CAPABLE of winning games when he gets run support (as he showed in 2002). . .and winning is all I ask of a fifth starter. . .not ERA WHIP or any of those.

Also, his horrible numbers (which are certainly horrible) are most definitely inflated by his God-awful 2003 season which was certainly injury fueled. Now, his numbers now aren't great, and there's little indication they will get better, but they are nowhere near as bad as last year's numbers. The fact is, Wright has potential to start, but like everyone else in baseball, whether his potential is realized is anyone's guess. My guess is no, but I have my fingers crossed.

A. Cavatica
04-27-2004, 08:33 PM
5. Whether Cooper is good or bad doesn't matter. He coaches every pitcher on the staff. If he can get more out of Danny Wright, then he can get more out of Cotts or Diaz or Rauch or Grilli.

fquaye149
04-27-2004, 08:43 PM
Originally posted by A. Cavatica
5. Whether Cooper is good or bad doesn't matter. He coaches every pitcher on the staff. If he can get more out of Danny Wright, then he can get more out of Cotts or Diaz or Rauch or Grilli.


that's not the point.

I was just listing reasons why danny wright could be a good pitcher, not why he would be better or worse than any other pitcher on the squad