PDA

View Full Version : BP's back....and confusing.....


Flight #24
02-10-2006, 03:45 PM
From today's chat.....


George (DC): Nate - why does PECOTA hate the White Sox pitchers again? Vazquez is the only guy below a 4 ERA? He's the 5th starter on this team! Last year it got them very wrong as well. What's the bias there? Does it think that US Cellular is just too tough to have any kind of sustained success. Even Buehrle looks average in PECOTA.
Nate Silver: George,

I buy into the projections for the White Sox pitching staff, with the possible exception of Contreras and maybe Bobby Jenks, each of whom have a lot of backstory going on that PECOTA won't be able to pick up on. There's really three different things going on that harms the White Sox pitchers:

1) Most of them performed significantly better in 2005 than in 2003 or 2004.

2) As you mention, it's an uphill battle to put up good ERAs in The Cell.

3) The White Sox got something like +50 runs from their defense last year, all of which finds its way into the ERAs of individual pitchers. We're projecting that their defense this year will be much closer to league average. Part of that is because they punted Aaron Rowand, but part of it is that a lot of guys like Konerko and Podsednik posted defensive numbers that were out of line with their past histories.

Of course, he follows it up with....

George (DC): Nate In response...weren't the real improvements from Garland and Contreras in 2005? And given Garland's 2005 was his age-26 season, isn't his improvement more likely to stick? Also, Podsednik moved from CF to LF last year, so I'm not surprised that his numbers moved up considerably. I wouldn't count on much of a dropoff in 2006 as he continues to play a position once manned by Carlos Lee (Horsehands, as he was known to Sox fans). Konerko was only about 10 runs better than average, so his defense isn't going to make THAT much of a difference. I'm just surprised by the pessimism for 2006, when PECOTA was so far off in 2005 (Buehrle 4.47, Garcia 4.55, Garland 5.05, Contreras 4.91, El Duque 4.35).
Nate Silver: George,

I've said that I think Contreras' forecast is low.

Garland's improvement in 2005 was the result of a fairly ordinary maturation process - he got better at figuring out which pitches he should throw on which counts, and things like that. He didn't develop a new delivery or a new pitch or something like that, and he still has some trouble missing bats. I think the comparison to Jeff Weaver is instuctive (although he has an advantage over Weaver in the durability department).


So if I understand it right, he's pessimistic on the Sox staff, but Garland's development was natural and Contreras projections are low. I guess that means Buehrle & Garcia had career years?

Oh yeah, and Podsednik can't maintain his D despite the "improvement" being due to a position change......:?:

All I know is this: If Vazquez puts up an ERA in the mid 3s, this team will be doing VERY well, because that'll give them at least 4 guys in that range.

samram
02-10-2006, 04:07 PM
(although he has an advantage over Weaver in the durability department)

And the being better at pitching department, but whatever.

lostletters
02-10-2006, 04:08 PM
We all know they are statistical idiots at BP and always underrate the white sox, and always prove themselves to be idiots. Maybe the improvement in the pitching staff has to do with a veteran catcher who knows the game and knows the league. Also Garcia and Buerhle were about on par for thier careers, niether had a career year. To think Buerhle is going to slump is absurd, largely because he is one of the most, if not the most consistant pitcher in MLB. You know exactly what to expect from him...15-16 wins. In several ways Buerhle is a left handed Maddux. A smart pitcher with an large arsenal of pitches.

Ol' No. 2
02-10-2006, 04:10 PM
From today's chat.....



Of course, he follows it up with....


So if I understand it right, he's pessimistic on the Sox staff, but Garland's development was natural and Contreras projections are low. I guess that means Buehrle & Garcia had career years?

Oh yeah, and Podsednik can't maintain his D despite the "improvement" being due to a position change......:?:

All I know is this: If Vazquez puts up an ERA in the mid 3s, this team will be doing VERY well, because that'll give them at least 4 guys in that range.Whatever. We all know it's just luck anyway.

Dan Mega
02-10-2006, 04:11 PM
If Billy Beane came out and said "hey, this White Sox starting pitching staff is unbelievable. I bet they do it next year" BP would write 25 articles raving about the staff.

MarySwiss
02-10-2006, 04:19 PM
Would someone please explain to me why BP has any credibility?:?:

santo=dorf
02-10-2006, 04:30 PM
Would someone please explain to me why BP has any credibility?:?:

Because you have to pay for the articles!!!

MUsoxfan
02-10-2006, 04:30 PM
I find it interesting how this guy dismisses that a player can improve over time

SoxSpeed22
02-10-2006, 04:49 PM
Age is very heavily taken into account. A 26 year-old who's had a breakout season will be much higher rated. A "34" year-old who's harnessed his stuff, is poised to fall off, or something like that.:kukoo:

The Wimperoo
02-10-2006, 04:49 PM
I'm pretty sure PECOTA sucks :cool:

MarySwiss
02-10-2006, 04:53 PM
Because you have to pay for the articles!!!

Ahhh, now I get it!

ANNOUNCEMENT! I WILL SHORTLY START OFFERING ON A REGULAR BASIS AN IN-DEPTH BREAKDOWN OF THE MLB SEASON WEEK BY WEEK. THIS BREAKDOWN WILL INCLUDE A "FACT SHEET" THAT WILL PROVIDE "POWERFUL RANKINGS" WHICH ARE MUCH MORE ACCURATE THAN THE TYPICAL POWER RANKS.* IT WILL ALSO CONTAIN A BOATLOAD OF MY TWO-BIT OPINIONS. I HAVE NO IDEA WHY YOU WOULD PAY MONEY FOR THIS SERVICE, BUT WHO CARES?

IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN THIS SERVICE, JUST SEND ME A CERTIFIED CHECK.

*because I said so, that's why.

Iwritecode
02-10-2006, 04:55 PM
Ahhh, now I get it!

ANNOUNCEMENT! I WILL SHORTLY START OFFERING ON A REGULAR BASIS AN IN-DEPTH BREAKDOWN OF THE MLB SEASON WEEK BY WEEK. THIS BREAKDOWN WILL INCLUDE A "FACT SHEET" THAT WILL PROVIDE "POWERFUL RANKINGS" WHICH ARE MUCH MORE ACCURATE THAN THE TYPICAL POWER RANKS.* IT WILL ALSO CONTAIN A BOATLOAD OF MY TWO-BIT OPINIONS. I HAVE NO IDEA WHY YOU WOULD PAY MONEY FOR THIS SERVICE, BUT WHO CARES?

IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN THIS SERVICE, JUST SEND ME A CERTIFIED CHECK.

*because I said so, that's why.

I bet if you put this advertisment into an informercial you could actually make money from it. :cool:

Corlose 15
02-10-2006, 05:02 PM
I find it interesting that all theses statheads dismiss Brian Anderson's defense when probably none of them have ever seen him play. Rowand had a good defensive year last year but from everything I've read,from people who have actually seen the two play, Anderson is more than capable of replacing him.

RallyBowl
02-10-2006, 05:09 PM
Ahhh, now I get it!

ANNOUNCEMENT! I WILL SHORTLY START OFFERING ON A REGULAR BASIS AN IN-DEPTH BREAKDOWN OF THE MLB SEASON WEEK BY WEEK. THIS BREAKDOWN WILL INCLUDE A "FACT SHEET" THAT WILL PROVIDE "POWERFUL RANKINGS" WHICH ARE MUCH MORE ACCURATE THAN THE TYPICAL POWER RANKS.* IT WILL ALSO CONTAIN A BOATLOAD OF MY TWO-BIT OPINIONS. I HAVE NO IDEA WHY YOU WOULD PAY MONEY FOR THIS SERVICE, BUT WHO CARES?

IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN THIS SERVICE, JUST SEND ME A CERTIFIED CHECK.

*because I said so, that's why.

Nicely done. :thumbsup:

samram
02-10-2006, 05:20 PM
I bet if you put this advertisment into an informercial you could actually make money from it. :cool:

Well, she would have to claim that YOU could make money doing your own sports fact sheet and rankings if you would just watch this video she made.

Ol' No. 2
02-10-2006, 05:24 PM
I find it interesting that all theses statheads dismiss Brian Anderson's defense when probably none of them have ever seen him play. Rowand had a good defensive year last year but from everything I've read,from people who have actually seen the two play, Anderson is more than capable of replacing him.No. Actually watching games and players is misleading. The only true understanding comes from poring over box scores in your parents' basement.

maurice
02-10-2006, 05:28 PM
it's an uphill battle to put up good ERAs in The Cell.

This cannot justify a projected increase in ERA. These pitchers played in the same home park during the 2005 season. Heck, its the only home park Buehrle and Garland have ever known in the bigs.

We're projecting that their defense this year will be much closer to league average. Part of that is because they punted Aaron Rowand, but part of it is that a lot of guys like Konerko and Podsednik posted defensive numbers that were out of line with their past histories.

The Sox should be about the same or better defensively in 2006. The personnel is identical, except Anderson (who is even better than Rowand). Nobody who actually watched the team would claim that the defense of Podsednik and Konerko was unusually strong in 2005. If anything, they should note that Dye had an unusually sub-par year on defense and that Iguchi no longer will be a rookie.

He essentially concedes that Contreras and Garland improved in 2005 for readily identifiable reasons, not because they had statistically anomalous career years. The reason for Buehrle's improvement also is readily identifiable. People forget that he's about the same age as Garland. Moreover, Garcia and Vazquez are only 29. The only old guy left in the rotation is Conteras.

MarySwiss
02-10-2006, 05:37 PM
Well, she would have to claim that YOU could make money doing your own sports fact sheet and rankings if you would just watch this video she made.

Ah, a challenge! How's this?

Introducing: AND NOW YOU CAN, TOO!

I never finished high school. Never played professional sports. But by using my foolproof system, I was able to predict the 2005 WORLD SERIES WINNER! I did it by studying the trends and analyzing the various factors that make a team a winner.

AND NOW YOU CAN, TOO!

My system cannot be bought in any store. But my video will show you how you too can be a winner. It features tips on how to recognize a terrific pitching staff. How to predict which teams in your division will fold like a cheap suit. I taught myself how to recognize a winner when I saw one.

AND NOW YOU CAN, TOO!

Just order my foolproof system. It offers a no-money-back guarantee. If you are not completely satisfied, just return the system.

samram
02-10-2006, 05:43 PM
Ah, a challenge! How's this?

Introducing: AND NOW YOU CAN, TOO!

I never finished high school. Never played professional sports. But by using my foolproof system, I was able to predict the 2005 WORLD SERIES WINNER! I did it by studying the trends and analyzing the various factors that make a team a winner.

AND NOW YOU CAN, TOO!

My system cannot be bought in any store. But my video will show you how you too can be a winner. It features tips on how to recognize a terrific pitching staff. How to predict which teams in your division will fold like a cheap suit. I taught myself how to recognize a winner when I saw one.

AND NOW YOU CAN, TOO!

Just order my foolproof system. It offers a no-money-back guarantee. If you are not completely satisfied, just return the system.

Sounds good. I'll try it out. I'm pretty sure I saw the words "money-back guarantee" in there, so there's really no risk.

MarySwiss
02-10-2006, 05:50 PM
Sounds good. I'll try it out. I'm pretty sure I saw the words "money-back guarantee" in there, so there's really no risk.

Er, look again; that'd be "no-money-back" guarantee!

samram
02-10-2006, 05:55 PM
Er, look again; that'd be "no-money-back" guarantee!

I know, but I did see the words "money-back guarantee" in there. Eh, it's dry wit fallen flat.:smile:

SoxSpeed22
02-10-2006, 06:14 PM
Er, look again; that'd be "no-money-back" guarantee!"It just says 'Volcano Insurance' over and over, and in the fine print, it says, He's signing it, he's signing it, I can't believe he's signing it!"

Taliesinrk
02-10-2006, 06:36 PM
In several ways Buerhle is a left handed Maddux.

Maddux who?

Ol' No. 2
02-10-2006, 07:25 PM
Ah, a challenge! How's this?

Introducing: AND NOW YOU CAN, TOO!

I never finished high school. Never played professional sports. But by using my foolproof system, I was able to predict the 2005 WORLD SERIES WINNER! I did it by studying the trends and analyzing the various factors that make a team a winner.

AND NOW YOU CAN, TOO!

My system cannot be bought in any store. But my video will show you how you too can be a winner. It features tips on how to recognize a terrific pitching staff. How to predict which teams in your division will fold like a cheap suit. I taught myself how to recognize a winner when I saw one.

AND NOW YOU CAN, TOO!

Just order my foolproof system. It offers a no-money-back guarantee. If you are not completely satisfied, just return the system. It's not very convincing unless you add some alphabet soup BS statistics. Sprinkle in GOBLE, VURP and BRAAP and you're golden.

caulfield12
02-11-2006, 08:38 AM
From today's chat.....



Of course, he follows it up with....


So if I understand it right, he's pessimistic on the Sox staff, but Garland's development was natural and Contreras projections are low. I guess that means Buehrle & Garcia had career years?

Oh yeah, and Podsednik can't maintain his D despite the "improvement" being due to a position change......:?:

All I know is this: If Vazquez puts up an ERA in the mid 3s, this team will be doing VERY well, because that'll give them at least 4 guys in that range.

Let me guess....Paul Byrd is going to more than adequate replace Kevin Millwood, who will be the most disappointing FA pitcher signing (other than Burnett)

Jason Johnson will inexplicably mirror Jon Garlandīs 2005 breakthrough season

Somehow, despite losing two of their key short relievers, they will find a way to replace them

Bob Wickman will improve upon last yearīs success, even against the White Sox

Sean Michaels will have a career year offensively and make Indians fans forget about Albert Belle, Kenny Lofton and Alex Cole.

Andy Marte will replace A. Boone after a late April hamstring injury and go on to win ROY at 3B

illinibk
02-11-2006, 11:01 AM
1) Most of them performed significantly better in 2005 than in 2003 or 2004.
Wait a minute, a player is supposed to peak when he first enters the league, and not when he has a few years under his belt and is approaching his prime? Damn, I need to change my logic patterns, as I do not have the higher level thinking capabilities that those at BP do.

ma-gaga
02-12-2006, 12:13 AM
So if I understand it right, he's pessimistic on the Sox staff, but Garland's development was natural and Contreras projections are low. I guess that means Buehrle & Garcia had career years?

By VORP, The W.Sox top 5 starters rank within the top 46 pitchers in baseball. That's really damn good, and easily the best in baseball. McCarthy comes in as the 58th best pitcher. So, I think George from DC is paying too much attention to ERA's and not accounting for park factors, and to finish the thought, here's the projected ERA's:

Vazquez: 3.96
Buerhle: 4.02
Garcia: 4.24
Conteras: 4.29
Garland: 4.53
McCarthy 4.43
Jenks 4.25

:cool: ERA is important, but if you have that kind of top shelf pitching, it's not going to matter.