Gom smackdown

[jacksonianmarch]

After having succeeded in my little social experiment, it is about time I lay the smackdown on Gom.

To start, as a true blue Yankee fan, I question Gom’s loyalty and love of the Yankees. Yes, you go to the games and I am glad someone is filling those seats. But just as one could throw jewelry at their beaten and cheated on wife, you can buy tickets to the game. As a fan of the Yankees, you must have the best interests of the club in mind when making comments that you parlay as being original and well thought out (more on this later). But instead, you show the complete opposite. Instead, I think you are a fan of winning only. And the fact that the Yankees had been the biggest winners through your youth may be the only true reason why you state your fandom. You have stated before that this yr is all that matters, that the present is all you care about. Is that someone who is a true fan of a team that may be in need of an overhaul? Or is that someone who doesn’t want to lose his bragging rights to his Mets and Sox buddies? I’d go with the latter. And you prove it every single day. You continue to spout negative remarks on the future of minor leaguers and rookies in our system when you have seen only glimpses of them. Guys who at 22 yrs old, you are labeling as duds. How do you know? Have you followed them? Of course not. But if they start to develop their potential into production, you'll be the first person to slap on the kneepads and start slurping.

That’s just the tip of the iceberg of course. Your “labeling” of players as being terrible from one at bat is comical to say the least. And while the level headed posters on this site say, well it was one at bat, or it was one pitch. Or even the obvious, they are kids, they are gonna be inconsistent. You go to another level. Drawing on your immense high school baseball past, you try and pretend like you know the mechanics of a major league swing or pitch to the level of an advanced scout. And when anyone dare question your prior experience, you say that you could have tried out for the Hofstra baseball team, but probably wouldn’t have made it. That’s like saying you were the shortest midget in Disney’s production of “It’s a Small World”. And in case you don’t understand that last sentence, I can put it bluntly, you sucked at baseball. And while the mantra for teachers may be, those who can’t do, teach, it isn’t the same for baseball. Those who can’t play, can’t teach or scout. So don’t draw on your own experiences, they were far too useless for you to get anything out of it, or for you to gain any credibility on this site.

Now its on to the little social experiment. I thought of it when you started the thread on Molina being better for the Yankees than Posada. And as every single sox fan told you that you were crazy, you stuck to your guns. Now, your thought isn’t very original. Michael Kay brings it up every time Molina catches. “Well, Paul, you cannot underestimate the defensive value that Molina brings to the game. He might even be more valuable than Posada.” He’s said that a few more times in the past and each time, I wanted to choke him. But he didnt go to Gom’s extreme. No, Gom chose to take his point and go one further. And aside from all evidence presented by ORS, Kilo, Me or anyone else, Gom continued to hang onto his delusions. This obviously wasn’t the first time Gom has been deluded, but it’s the most recent example. And delusions being a key word. Delusions are fixed, false beliefs. So, I decided to use that term for every post Gom made. My hope was to see if he would follow his unoriginal ways and copy me. And yes, he has. With his new phrase clueless idiot. First he tried to lure me out with feaux doc. Then, seeing as that did not work, he copied me. Something he does all the time. The lack of originality is incredible.

So in closing, I think I have touched upon three areas of contention I have with Gom. The first, Gom is not a Yankee fan, but a fan of winning. If Gom was a sox fan, I’d put him in the same boat as the pink hats, Matt Damon, and that pole smoker Ben Affleck. The second point, Gom pretends to be an expert while he was never very good in the first place and certainly is not qualified to make the scouting comments that he frequently makes (most of them being wrong anyway). And third, he lacks originality as shown by my little experiment. Good day to you all.

[a700hitter]

Uh oh! Get it on!!!

[ORS]

I disagree that someone who couldn't play can't scout or teach. Biomechanics are a field studied by a boatload of people who I suspect weren't all very good at baseball, yet their input is important to instructing people what positions to get into for maximum power. A good eye for what makes a player good does not require that one was able to do those things when they played.

Other than that, I have no argument with this post.

[jacksonianmarch]

I disagree that someone who couldn't play can't scout or teach. Biomechanics are a field studied by a boatload of people who I suspect weren't all very good at baseball, yet their input is important to instructing people what positions to get into for maximum power. A good eye for what makes a player good does not require that one was able to do those things when they played.

Other than that, I have no argument with this post.

I can agree with that point. But you are talking about people whose life is to study biomechanics. Something Gom has already said he hasnt done. Him drawing solely off his high school baseball background for scouting purposes is just downright hilarious.

[ORS]

Yeah, but he also watchezzz the gamezzzz.

[BoSox21]

he's simply a fan of winning and antagonizing. it's rare you see a Gom appearance when the Yankees aren't doing so well and the Sox are rolling

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

DAVE R0BRTSUN ROOLZ

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

After having succeeded in my little social experiment, it is about time I lay the smackdown on Gom.

To start, as a true blue Yankee fan, I question Gom’s loyalty and love of the Yankees. Yes, you go to the games and I am glad someone is filling those seats. But just as one could throw jewelry at their beaten and cheated on wife, you can buy tickets to the game. As a fan of the Yankees, you must have the best interests of the club in mind when making comments that you parlay as being original and well thought out (more on this later). But instead, you show the complete opposite. Instead, I think you are a fan of winning only. And the fact that the Yankees had been the biggest winners through your youth may be the only true reason why you state your fandom. You have stated before that this yr is all that matters, that the present is all you care about. Is that someone who is a true fan of a team that may be in need of an overhaul? Or is that someone who doesn’t want to lose his bragging rights to his Mets and Sox buddies? I’d go with the latter. And you prove it every single day. You continue to spout negative remarks on the future of minor leaguers and rookies in our system when you have seen only glimpses of them. Guys who at 22 yrs old, you are labeling as duds. How do you know? Have you followed them? Of course not. But if they start to develop their potential into production, you'll be the first person to slap on the kneepads and start slurping.

That’s just the tip of the iceberg of course. Your “labeling” of players as being terrible from one at bat is comical to say the least. And while the level headed posters on this site say, well it was one at bat, or it was one pitch. Or even the obvious, they are kids, they are gonna be inconsistent. You go to another level. Drawing on your immense high school baseball past, you try and pretend like you know the mechanics of a major league swing or pitch to the level of an advanced scout. And when anyone dare question your prior experience, you say that you could have tried out for the Hofstra baseball team, but probably wouldn’t have made it. That’s like saying you were the shortest midget in Disney’s production of “It’s a Small World”. And in case you don’t understand that last sentence, I can put it bluntly, you sucked at baseball. And while the mantra for teachers may be, those who can’t do, teach, it isn’t the same for baseball. Those who can’t play, can’t teach or scout. So don’t draw on your own experiences, they were far too useless for you to get anything out of it, or for you to gain any credibility on this site.

Now its on to the little social experiment. I thought of it when you started the thread on Molina being better for the Yankees than Posada. And as every single sox fan told you that you were crazy, you stuck to your guns. Now, your thought isn’t very original. Michael Kay brings it up every time Molina catches. “Well, Paul, you cannot underestimate the defensive value that Molina brings to the game. He might even be more valuable than Posada.” He’s said that a few more times in the past and each time, I wanted to choke him. But he didnt go to Gom’s extreme. No, Gom chose to take his point and go one further. And aside from all evidence presented by ORS, Kilo, Me or anyone else, Gom continued to hang onto his delusions. This obviously wasn’t the first time Gom has been deluded, but it’s the most recent example. And delusions being a key word. Delusions are fixed, false beliefs. So, I decided to use that term for every post Gom made. My hope was to see if he would follow his unoriginal ways and copy me. And yes, he has. With his new phrase clueless idiot. First he tried to lure me out with feaux doc. Then, seeing as that did not work, he copied me. Something he does all the time. The lack of originality is incredible.

So in closing, I think I have touched upon three areas of contention I have with Gom. The first, Gom is not a Yankee fan, but a fan of winning. If Gom was a sox fan, I’d put him in the same boat as the pink hats, Matt Damon, and that pole smoker Ben Affleck. The second point, Gom pretends to be an expert while he was never very good in the first place and certainly is not qualified to make the scouting comments that he frequently makes (most of them being wrong anyway). And third, he lacks originality as shown by my little experiment. Good day to you all.
Translation:


Gom doesn't look at Mark Melancon and Austin Jackson and see Bruce Sutter and Willie Mays. This makes him something other than a tr00-bl00 Yankee fan. lolwut

[Spudboy]

Wow. I have a lot to say but am not quite sure how to say it. I joined this board about a month ago (the first board for me) and have enjoyed most of what I've seen. Admittedly, I am an old (53) fart that is not savvy in this thread posting stuff. Initially, I was put off by The Doctor's comments (punting and punching small animals and using a bed post as an anal dilator, as examples). But I've come to appreciate his candor and general knowledge of the game. Sox fans have an almost universal dislike for Yankee fans. However, some Yankee fans are worth listening to. I haven't read to much of Gom's comments. It seems he is not too well liked. But "Jacko" has added depth and continuity most of the time.

I don't understand why there is so much venom in some of these discussions. Call me a pussy, but I think it's mostly a waste of time. I don't want to come off sounding like Rodney King, but some people should post exercising some maturity and civility.

Most everyone who posts here has something to add that we can all enjoy or learn something from.
If someone says something really stupid or antagonistic, responses should be thought out and dealt with accordingly. I'm here to have fun and share a common interest with like minded people.
I hope everyone shares that desire.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Flame wars are extremely fun. :D

[example1]

Translation:


Gom doesn't look at Mark Melancon and Austin Jackson and see Bruce Sutter and Willie Mays. This makes him something other than a tr00-bl00 Yankee fan. lolwut

Your admiration for Gom is a little off-putting, as is the text message type abbreviations I see everywhere. I mean, are you writing your post from a phone? I may just be an old fart, having recently entered my 3rd decade, but I'm in my prime damnit, and I will type the words out!

I acknowledge that it is hard to look at guys like Melancon and Jackson and see much at all one way or the other. Of course, when someone blows their top because the Sox trade for Jason Bay--a proven MLB talent who was clearly one of the best COF options in all of baseball, in his prime, affordable, type A, all of it. I can understand having mixed views about minor leaguers (in both directions, whether they become Mays or Burks), but you can do better with guys who have a track record.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

as is the text message type abbreviations I see everywhere. I mean, are you writing your post from a phone? I may just be an old fart, having recently entered my 3rd decade, but I'm in my prime damnit, and I will type the words out!

Its a mocking mechanism.

[example1]

Its a mocking mechanism.

Why not just mock on your own, instead of using a mechanism? Is mocking too hard on its own?

[RedSoxRooter]

I guess I can't really trash anyone since my most frequent posts are "GO SOX!" and :dunno: with sumthing spelt wrowng cuz the damn beer.

But I do like Jackson a whole lot more as of this moment. Well done, Sir!

[Dipre]

After having succeeded in my little social experiment, it is about time I lay the smackdown on Gom.

To start, as a true blue Yankee fan, I question Gom’s loyalty and love of the Yankees. Yes, you go to the games and I am glad someone is filling those seats. But just as one could throw jewelry at their beaten and cheated on wife, you can buy tickets to the game. As a fan of the Yankees, you must have the best interests of the club in mind when making comments that you parlay as being original and well thought out (more on this later). But instead, you show the complete opposite. Instead, I think you are a fan of winning only. And the fact that the Yankees had been the biggest winners through your youth may be the only true reason why you state your fandom. You have stated before that this yr is all that matters, that the present is all you care about. Is that someone who is a true fan of a team that may be in need of an overhaul? Or is that someone who doesn’t want to lose his bragging rights to his Mets and Sox buddies? I’d go with the latter. And you prove it every single day. You continue to spout negative remarks on the future of minor leaguers and rookies in our system when you have seen only glimpses of them. Guys who at 22 yrs old, you are labeling as duds. How do you know? Have you followed them? Of course not. But if they start to develop their potential into production, you'll be the first person to slap on the kneepads and start slurping.

That’s just the tip of the iceberg of course. Your “labeling” of players as being terrible from one at bat is comical to say the least. And while the level headed posters on this site say, well it was one at bat, or it was one pitch. Or even the obvious, they are kids, they are gonna be inconsistent. You go to another level. Drawing on your immense high school baseball past, you try and pretend like you know the mechanics of a major league swing or pitch to the level of an advanced scout. And when anyone dare question your prior experience, you say that you could have tried out for the Hofstra baseball team, but probably wouldn’t have made it. That’s like saying you were the shortest midget in Disney’s production of “It’s a Small World”. And in case you don’t understand that last sentence, I can put it bluntly, you sucked at baseball. And while the mantra for teachers may be, those who can’t do, teach, it isn’t the same for baseball. Those who can’t play, can’t teach or scout. So don’t draw on your own experiences, they were far too useless for you to get anything out of it, or for you to gain any credibility on this site.

Now its on to the little social experiment. I thought of it when you started the thread on Molina being better for the Yankees than Posada. And as every single sox fan told you that you were crazy, you stuck to your guns. Now, your thought isn’t very original. Michael Kay brings it up every time Molina catches. “Well, Paul, you cannot underestimate the defensive value that Molina brings to the game. He might even be more valuable than Posada.” He’s said that a few more times in the past and each time, I wanted to choke him. But he didnt go to Gom’s extreme. No, Gom chose to take his point and go one further. And aside from all evidence presented by ORS, Kilo, Me or anyone else, Gom continued to hang onto his delusions. This obviously wasn’t the first time Gom has been deluded, but it’s the most recent example. And delusions being a key word. Delusions are fixed, false beliefs. So, I decided to use that term for every post Gom made. My hope was to see if he would follow his unoriginal ways and copy me. And yes, he has. With his new phrase clueless idiot. First he tried to lure me out with feaux doc. Then, seeing as that did not work, he copied me. Something he does all the time. The lack of originality is incredible.

So in closing, I think I have touched upon three areas of contention I have with Gom. The first, Gom is not a Yankee fan, but a fan of winning. If Gom was a sox fan, I’d put him in the same boat as the pink hats, Matt Damon, and that pole smoker Ben Affleck. The second point, Gom pretends to be an expert while he was never very good in the first place and certainly is not qualified to make the scouting comments that he frequently makes (most of them being wrong anyway). And third, he lacks originality as shown by my little experiment. Good day to you all.

That post is about to explode with WIN.


Wow. I have a lot to say but am not quite sure how to say it. I joined this board about a month ago (the first board for me) and have enjoyed most of what I've seen. Admittedly, I am an old (53) fart that is not savvy in this thread posting stuff. Initially, I was put off by The Doctor's comments (punting and punching small animals and using a bed post as an anal dilator, as examples). But I've come to appreciate his candor and general knowledge of the game. Sox fans have an almost universal dislike for Yankee fans. However, some Yankee fans are worth listening to. I haven't read to much of Gom's comments. It seems he is not too well liked. But "Jacko" has added depth and continuity most of the time.

I don't understand why there is so much venom in some of these discussions. Call me a pussy, but I think it's mostly a waste of time. I don't want to come off sounding like Rodney King, but some people should post exercising some maturity and civility.

Most everyone who posts here has something to add that we can all enjoy or learn something from.
If someone says something really stupid or antagonistic, responses should be thought out and dealt with accordingly. I'm here to have fun and share a common interest with like minded people.
I hope everyone shares that desire.

All of the above, is, in fact, true, however, sometimes a little insult here and there can spice things up, but Gom takes it a bit to the extreme and he just flat out annoys people.

That being said, i think he's just a little immature, but he's a nice guy deep,deep,deep,deep,deep inside, and a lot of his ideas do have some or a lot of originality to them, and they would be much more respected if he didn't try to shove them down our throats as if they were universal truths.


Your admiration for Gom is a little off-putting, as is the text message type abbreviations I see everywhere. I mean, are you writing your post from a phone? I may just be an old fart, having recently entered my 3rd decade, but I'm in my prime damnit, and I will type the words out!

I acknowledge that it is hard to look at guys like Melancon and Jackson and see much at all one way or the other. Of course, when someone blows their top because the Sox trade for Jason Bay--a proven MLB talent who was clearly one of the best COF options in all of baseball, in his prime, affordable, type A, all of it. I can understand having mixed views about minor leaguers (in both directions, whether they become Mays or Burks), but you can do better with guys who have a track record.

Still, so much pessimism can sometimes wear on others, and about the slang, don't take it as an insult, but you're being a douche by calling J_E out on that, he does it on good fun, as sometimes does Kilo, CD, or myself, posting styles is something that should be respected.

[BoSox21]

I don't understand why there is so much venom in some of these discussions. Call me a pussy, but I think it's mostly a waste of time. I don't want to come off sounding like Rodney King, but some people should post exercising some maturity and civility.

It's not venom as much as it's passion. And with all due respect, you tend to spend most of your time in the GTs it seems and that's a place for spur of the moment, reactionary posts. I think there's a ton of well-thought out discussion that takes place here and it's why a lot of people stick around. Flame boards are only fun for so long.

Hell, the post that started this thread was extremely well thought out.

[Spudboy]

It's not venom as much as it's passion. And with all due respect, you tend to spend most of your time in the GTs it seems and that's a place for spur of the moment, reactionary posts. I think there's a ton of well-thought out discussion that takes place here and it's why a lot of people stick around. Flame boards are only fun for so long.

Hell, the post that started this thread was extremely well thought out.

I admire the passion exhibited on the board. That's why I'm here. I agree, Jackson's post was well thought out and he made his points "diplomatically". I have a lot to learn about this process. I recognize that some of the insults are interesting and in a lot of cases good natured. I'm just not accustomed to hearing what I interpret as anger towards others in this type of forum. It gets tedious. You gave me shit one night when I was reluctant to stand behind what I said (I believe I had called J.D. Drew Nancy). I survived and now look forward to your input, as I do others who I don't really agree with sometimes. That's life.

Anyway, I want to continue to have fun. I'll just filter out some of what I perceive as ill will and move on.

[Dipre]

I admire the passion exhibited on the board. That's why I'm here. I agree, Jackson's post was well thought out and he made his points "diplomatically". I have a lot to learn about this process. I recognize that some of the insults are interesting and in a lot of cases good natured. I'm just not accustomed to hearing what I interpret as anger towards others in this type of forum. It gets tedious. You gave me shit one night when I was reluctant to stand behind what I said (I believe I had called J.D. Drew Nancy). I survived and now look forward to your input, as I do others who I don't really agree with sometimes. That's life.

Anyway, I want to continue to have fun. I'll just filter out some of what I perceive as ill will and move on.

There is a lot of love for J.D Drew in this board.

Get.With.The.Program.

[Spudboy]

There is a lot of love for J.D Drew in this board.

Get.With.The.Program.

As I remember, that night I did a lot of back peddling. I was new to the thread and used the "Nancy" card unwittingly. I was used to hearing Drew referred to as that and other uncomplimentary things on WEEI.

I actually like Drew as a player. He hits well, is reasonably clutch, and plays a strong right field. I still believe 12.5 million a year is too much for a player of his skills that SEEMS to miss a lot of games.

As an aside, I have not referred to him on this board as Nancy since that night.

[Dipre]

As I remember, that night I did a lot of back peddling. I was new to the thread and used the "Nancy" card unwittingly. I was used to hearing Drew referred to as that and other uncomplimentary things on WEEI.

I actually like Drew as a player. He hits well, is reasonably clutch, and plays a strong right field. I still believe 12.5 million a year is too much for a player of his skills that SEEMS to miss a lot of games.

As an aside, I have not referred to him on this board as Nancy since that night.

A) It was a joke.

B ) He's making 14.5 mill, maiking him the highest paid Sox player.

[TheKilo]

This thread gets results.

[yeszir]

Internet. Serious business.

[Spudboy]

A) It was a joke.

B ) He's making 14.5 mill, maiking him the highest paid Sox player.

A.) Oh!

B.) Drew's salary was a big bone of contention that night. We went back and forth. I originally said he was making 15 mil a year (75 mil/5years). I was called on it. So I looked it up. I believe he is making (70mil/5 years).

[Dipre]

Internet. Serious business.

Hey.

Nothing is more important than the interwebz.

@Spudboy.

70/5=14.

The .5, if i remember correctly, which i'm probably not and will be called out on my FAIL, is due to signing bonus,

[example1]

Still, so much pessimism can sometimes wear on others, and about the slang, don't take it as an insult, but you're being a douche by calling J_E out on that, he does it on good fun, as sometimes does Kilo, CD, or myself, posting styles is something that should be respected.

I find that it contributes little to the discussion and haven't once found that it really helped prove a point. If you guys enjoy doing it, that's fine, but expect to be called out on it if it is the only substance of your post, or if it is meant to deflect people from paying attention to an otherwise shitty argument.

[Dipre]

I find that it contributes little to the discussion and haven't once found that it really helped prove a point. If you guys enjoy doing it, that's fine, but expect to be called out on it if it is the only substance of your post, or if it is meant to deflect people from paying attention to an otherwise shitty argument.

Board would be boring with only outright stats and formal discussion.

Face it, you are OLD.

[TheKilo]

Board would be boring with only outright stats and formal discussion.

.

His point is that he should bring both, not just the mockery, to the table.

[Dipre]

His point is that he should bring both, not just the mockery, to the table.

I know.

My point is he does, but it gets lost sometimes inside the jokes, but you'd actually had to be looking past his offensive stance to see it.

[Coco's Disciples]

Its a mocking mechanism.

This caused inexplicable lulz from me.



Still, so much pessimism can sometimes wear on others, and about the slang, don't take it as an insult, but you're being a douche by calling J_E out on that, he does it on good fun, as sometimes does Kilo, CD, or myself, posting styles is something that should be respected.

wut wut

Good read here. You guys are all delusional and don't get nearly as much results as me or jacko.

[BoSox21]

so we all realize this board is a cool place to post at and now we're trying to dissect why? we have protagonists, antagonists, funny people, people trying to be funny, informed posters, uninformed posters, people who throw out opitions based on facts and people who throw on opinions based on emotion.........and Dojji

it works, leave it at that

[RedSoxRooter]

Sukc it.

[yeszir]

I should have written my dissertation on the social dynamics of Talksox!

[Soxfan#1]

I still see no Gom.

[example1]

His point is that he should bring both, not just the mockery, to the table.

You got it. Per usual.

[example1]

Board would be boring with only outright stats and formal discussion.

It wasn't before that stuff showed up. Again, I've said I'm not going to harp on people using it as long as they have stuff to contribute as a baseline. If its all you've got, and if you're getting it from someone else on the board to begin with, then it seems pretty weak to me.

[Dipre]

It wasn't before that stuff showed up. Again, I've said I'm not going to harp on people using it as long as they have stuff to contribute as a baseline. If its all you've got, and if you're getting it from someone else on the board to begin with, then it seems pretty weak to me.


so we all realize this board is a cool place to post at and now we're trying to dissect why? we have protagonists, antagonists, funny people, people trying to be funny, informed posters, uninformed posters, people who throw out opitions based on facts and people who throw on opinions based on emotion.........and Dojji

it works, leave it at that

Two basic choices:

No. 1: Epic Fail.

No.2: Epic Win.

[example1]

Two basic choices:

No. 1: Epic Fail.

No.2: Epic Win.

Epic Yawn.

[Dipre]

Epic Yawn.

See, you're getting with the program.

Glad to have you aboard, old timer.

[example1]

See, you're getting with the program.

Glad to have you aboard, old timer.

You will be 30 someday, god willing, and you will realize that you feel as young as you did at 18, you're just smarter and more patient. Find me then and we can see whether you still want to use the word "old" to describe 30.

[Dipre]

You will be 30 someday, god willing, and you will realize that you feel as young as you did at 18, you're just smarter and more patient. Find me then and we can see whether you still want to use the word "old" to describe 30.

Are you serious?

I thought you were 50+ like Spudboy.........

[Gom]

After having succeeded in my little social experiment, it is about time I lay the smackdown on Gom.
Got under your skin, didn't I, douchebag? I'll go through your post, point by point to show your idiocy.


To start, as a true blue Yankee fan, I question Gom’s loyalty and love of the Yankees.
Idiot.

Yes, you go to the games and I am glad someone is filling those seats.
How come you're not?

But just as one could throw jewelry at their beaten and cheated on wife, you can buy tickets to the game. As a fan of the Yankees, you must have the best interests of the club in mind when making comments that you parlay as being original and well thought out (more on this later).
Something you've never done.

But instead, you show the complete opposite. Instead, I think you are a fan of winning only.
Non-sensical.

And the fact that the Yankees had been the biggest winners through your youth may be the only true reason why you state your fandom.
As if you knew...I started following the Yankees in 1983, as an 11 year old kid. I went through one of the longest stretches this team ever had before they won a World Series, 13 years.

You have stated before that this yr is all that matters, that the present is all you care about. Is that someone who is a true fan of a team that may be in need of an overhaul?
You're a clueless idiot if you think a team that enjoys a TREMENDOUS fiscal advantage needs an overhaul. We aren't the Twins, or the Marlins.


Or is that someone who doesn’t want to lose his bragging rights to his Mets and Sox buddies? I’d go with the latter. And you prove it every single day. You continue to spout negative remarks on the future of minor leaguers and rookies in our system when you have seen only glimpses of them.Not true. I like Coke, I like Gardner. From what I've SEEN of them. Not press clippings. Also, I think Austin Jackson could be decent from what little I've seen of him in spring training. Sorry, I'm not high on Kennedy like you are. Or Edwar Ramirez, who I think you believe will be the next Mariano. I temper my enthusiasm...which is abhorrent to you because I don't believe everything in the Yankee media guide.


Guys who at 22 yrs old, you are labeling as duds. How do you know? Have you followed them? Of course not. But if they start to develop their potential into production, you'll be the first person to slap on the kneepads and start slurping.
I'd be happy to admit I'm wrong. Something, apparently you've never done. Admit that you're wrong. It's an ego defect.


That’s just the tip of the iceberg of course. Your “labeling” of players as being terrible from one at bat is comical to say the least. And while the level headed posters on this site say, well it was one at bat, or it was one pitch. Or even the obvious, they are kids, they are gonna be inconsistent. You go to another level. Drawing on your immense high school baseball past, you try and pretend like you know the mechanics of a major league swing or pitch to the level of an advanced scout.
Coached, umpired, and I taught myself baseball, since my parents came here and knew nothing of the game and how it's played. I learn about the game every day. You, on the other hand, were born with this innate logic. I bow to your genetic disposition to baseball. Idiot.


And when anyone dare question your prior experience, you say that you could have tried out for the Hofstra baseball team, but probably wouldn’t have made it. That’s like saying you were the shortest midget in Disney’s production of “It’s a Small World”. And in case you don’t understand that last sentence, I can put it bluntly, you sucked at baseball. And while the mantra for teachers may be, those who can’t do, teach, it isn’t the same for baseball. Those who can’t play, can’t teach or scout. So don’t draw on your own experiences, they were far too useless for you to get anything out of it, or for you to gain any credibility on this site.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Everyone here laughs at you for your belief that EVERY PLAYER in the Yankees system as being a potential star..and you're to obtuse to realize it. What a clueless idiot.


Now its on to the little social experiment. I thought of it when you started the thread on Molina being better for the Yankees than Posada. And as every single sox fan told you that you were crazy, you stuck to your guns.
In respect to my friends here, they don't see as much of Posada as we do. Also, they don't watch it from the same point of view. They are watching their players and their hitters. It's human nature. ORS or Kilo is more likely to catch something Varitek is doing, because I'm watching what Jeter or Arod is doing.


Now, your thought isn’t very original.

I never said I was the first one to come up with the idea. However, I called it last year when Posada got injured, BEFORE Michael Kay started harping on it. I said that it could be a blessing in disguise. See, unlike you, I don't have to wait until something becomes mainstream before I believe it, or say it. Want proof, dumbass? The following post is from last year.
http://www.talksox.com/forum/damn-yankees/10547-whoevers-playing-yankees-2008-game-thread-post341030.html?highlight=blessing+disguise#post34 1030


Michael Kay brings it up every time Molina catches. “Well, Paul, you cannot underestimate the defensive value that Molina brings to the game. He might even be more valuable than Posada.” He’s said that a few more times in the past and each time, I wanted to choke him.
Why? Because he disagrees with your viewpoint? You really are a clueless idiot. What a fucking moron.


But he didnt go to Gom’s extreme. No, Gom chose to take his point and go one further. And aside from all evidence presented by ORS, Kilo, Me or anyone else, Gom continued to hang onto his delusions. This obviously wasn’t the first time Gom has been deluded, but it’s the most recent example. And delusions being a key word. Delusions are fixed, false beliefs.

You mean like your belief that the Yankees were better off not trading Melky, Kennedy, Hilligoss and Marquez for Santana? This is getting better and better.

So, I decided to use that term for every post Gom made. My hope was to see if he would follow his unoriginal ways and copy me. And yes, he has. With his new phrase clueless idiot. First he tried to lure me out with feaux doc. Then, seeing as that did not work, he copied me. Something he does all the time. The lack of originality is incredible.

So, I came up with something before you heard it. That makes me a copycat. Your defense of your point come to "You are delusional". Since you couldn't defend your position, I decided to stoop to your level, and play "I know you are, but what am I". I figured you'd finally get the point. Apparently not. Oh, and by the way, learn how to spell. It's faux, not feaux.


So in closing, I think I have touched upon three areas of contention I have with Gom. The first, Gom is not a Yankee fan, but a fan of winning.

Only an arrogant shithead like you would make an assumption of someone's fandom. As if you know. That's like me saying that you are a fan of young boys in the farm system and you don't care about what happens, but what MIGHT happen. Get real.


If Gom was a sox fan, I’d put him in the same boat as the pink hats, Matt Damon, and that pole smoker Ben Affleck. The second point, Gom pretends to be an expert while he was never very good in the first place and certainly is not qualified to make the scouting comments that he frequently makes (most of them being wrong anyway). And third, he lacks originality as shown by my little experiment.
Last I saw, you weren't in the box score last night. Neither was anyone else here. So we all sucked at baseball playing. You know what? Your prized idiot GM never played baseball. Didn't go as far as you or I did. What does that mean? You get dumber by the second.


Good day to you all.
Does this mean you're leaving?

Ok, now that I've had my retort, here is what I want to know about you.

Why can't you ever admit you're wrong? You have been wrong so far about the Santana deal, about Edwar, about Veras, about Hughes, about Kennedy. You're wrong in saying that Wang is back to where he was. He threw 94-96. He was between 88-92 in his minor league start from what I've heard. He's not the same pitcher yet he was the last few years. Players can dominate in the minors for one reason. Anyone who's any good is up at the major league level.

My problem with you is your ignorance. You cannot admit when you are wrong, most likely because it's an ego defect. You cannot see anything outside of what is in your little brain. When I'm wrong, I admit it. You never have as far as I recollect. That makes you a clueless idiot.

Let me illustrate. The Yankees have a team ERA of HALF what it is when anybody but Posada catches. Please explain. If you say it's a small sample size, then I will say that Posada's hitting is also a small sample size. Can't have it both ways..."doc".

Here is another question: Have you actually tried to look at what I've been saying? Have you ever noticed Posada dropping his glove BEFORE the umpire makes the call? Honestly? Can you explain why the Yankees have had EIGHT games with Posada out in which they gave up 3 runs or less..and only FOUR with him catching ALL SEASON so far?

You can't. It's why you resorted to delusional comments. It's your only defense. Either that, or you'd have to back-track, and that would just KILL you. It's like your infantile sig. Kilo gets pissed at his players because he's a fan. You take such joy in it, you put it in your sig. As if no one ever cursed out his team's players because they failed in a big spot. It's childish and infantile, and you do it, well..because your mind is childish and infantile. There is nothing wrong with learning from others. Trust me on this point. Try it sometime. Sorry, I regressed to your level for a moment. Back to my point...

See, here is my point about watching the games. That is the raw data. All the formulas, the tracking of hits and pitches, etc. is based on the same raw data that you and I see every time we watch a game. Do our eyes deceive us sometimes? Of course. However, and this is basic science, something that you of all people should realize, is that you form a hypothesis based upon your observation and then go about proving [or disproving it]. The stats don't make the game. It's the other way around. Most statistics are indicators.

What I'm trying to say is this:

It's all there. It's right in front of us. We may not have developed a formula for something, but it's there. OPS is nothing more than adding OBP and SLG. However, before someone came up with the formula, no one understood it. Did the game change? No. Our understanding of the game changed. Remember Moneyball? One of the big tenements was that fielding didn't matter. Now, most baseball pundits will tell you it is a large part of the game. It's why Abreu and Dunn didn't score big deals this past off-season.

Our understanding of the game based only upon statistics is limited by our statistical model at the time. I'm sure that one day, probably very soon, a legitimate statistic about the effect a catcher has on a team will be determined. Until then, you won't believe it because you simply can't see it.

There are fallacies intrinsic to each mode or style of analysis.

However, I embrace both sides. I see something I believe, then I look to see if the statistics back it up. If they do, then I was right. If they don't, then either I'm wrong, or the statistical model is inaccurate. I thought Jeter was a decent fielder. I'd been so used to seeing him, I had forgetten what another shortstop looked like. When Jimenez came up when Jeter was hurt, I started to realize I could be wrong. Then I started to pay attention to the other team's shortstop, and I realized the statistics were in contradiction to what I saw. Jeter had a good arm, and is sure-handed, but has terrible range.

I saw the same thing with Posada. The Yankees were losing strikes every time he caught, and the team ERA was terrible when he caught, but the same pitchers were dominating when Molina caught. So I went and looked it up. Lo and behold, the stats backed me up.

I'm not afraid to admit I'm wrong. I also don't put anywhere near the faith you do in minor league stats that you do. If you don't do it up here, I don't really care.

So here is what I ask you to do, because, to be honest, this is tiresome. Pay close attention to Cervelli. I'll tell you what I've seen him do. Before the pitcher goes into the windup, he puts his glove down, giving a big target. He also frames the pitch well. Then watch when Posada comes back. He puts the glove down while the pitcher starts his windup. Also, when he catches the glove, he drops his glove BEFORE the umpire makes the call.

I know you'll never agree with anything I say, whether I'm right or wrong because of your ego defect. Just tell me if you see what I see. Whether you agree on the value of this with me is irrelevant. I just want to see if you can see it.

Or should I wait for another "delusional" comment?

[Dipre]

This thread delivers.

[jacksonianmarch]

I can admit when I am wrong. The fact is, you try to judge these players before they declare what kind of players they become.

The Santana deal looks bad for us right now, BUT, Hughes is 22 and we have seen what he can do when he is on. Thing is, at 22, he isnt ready yet. If he went to college, he would be in this yr's draft as a senior. Melky is putting together a pretty good start. Marquez was integral in the Swisher deal. And Hilligoss has fallen off the map. I absolutely will make a call on this when the time comes. Right now, it is firmly in Santana's favor. But you cannot predict the career of someone who has such good stuff at the age of 22.

Robertson is 23 or 24. He isnt done yet either. Neither is Melancon.

Now onto your idea with Posada. The ERA could just be the fact that Burnett and CC are known to be slow starters. And yes, it is a ridiculously small sample size. He went down in April. You never make judgements in April. And to say that Posada's offense is a small sample size, look at his career.

Watching the games is not raw data. Do you know what raw data is? Raw data is hits, walks, at bats, etc. That is easily measureable data. Watching the games as a fan biases you toward the most recent event. And while you can pick up flaws over time, it is not the most accurate way to evaluate a player.

Your comment on your biases being proven wrong by stats is just funny. Statistics are meant to prove or disprove a hypothesis. In order to prove or disprove a hypothesis, you need to have a sufficient n (number of patients in my field, and a number of at bats when you are talking about baseball) to have your "study" be powered enough. You seem to like "studies" with very low N's, which essentially means that most of your ideas cannot be proven with the power you selected. Then you present what you have in a high and mighty way and smack down anyone that disagrees. Anything that would require a longer term study period, you refuse to do. I have challenged you in the past. Go back through Molina's career with the yankees and calculate the CERA with every pitcher he has caught. Then go through those same pitchers with Posada. I will assure you, that the slight if any difference in ERA from pitcher to pitcher will not make up for his D. If you wish to make that effort, then I'll believe you. But instead, you call us all idiots for not believing your unoriginal idea.

Your comment on being proven wrong by stats is comical too. Either I am wrong (which you also never admit) or the "statistical model is inaccurate." Good one, that made me laugh.

I do find it funny, though, that you don't actually take me to task on your lack of yankee fandom. A retort coming perhaps?

[TheKilo]

"I liked them when they sucked too, ya know," is the mating call of the Yankee Stadium Bleacher Creature, who is identifiable by his pin-striped jersey with either the number 2 or 13 on the back, and his hatred/love of Alex Rodriguez depending upon whether or not he has just grounded into yet another inning-ending double play with the bases loaded or homered to put the Yankees up 14-3 over the Rays in mid-May.

When quizzed upon which players, besides Don Mattingly, played for the Yankees in the mid-80s, the average Yankee fan will usually respond with a blank stare followed by a "Who's Your Daddy" chant.

[jacksonianmarch]

shall we secure a pink pinstripes hat for Gom? That would work, right?

[jacksonianmarch]

GOM

http://janeheller.mlblogs.com/YANKEES-PINK-CLEANUP.jpg

[Dipre]

This thread has so much WIN.....

I mean, you don't even know,man!

You don't even know!

[Gom]

I can admit when I am wrong. The fact is, you try to judge these players before they declare what kind of players they become.
Funny shit. You anoint them as superstars before they do anything.


The Santana deal looks bad for us right now, BUT, Hughes is 22 and we have seen what he can do when he is on. Thing is, at 22, he isnt ready yet. If he went to college, he would be in this yr's draft as a senior. Melky is putting together a pretty good start. Marquez was integral in the Swisher deal. And Hilligoss has fallen off the map. I absolutely will make a call on this when the time comes. Right now, it is firmly in Santana's favor. But you cannot predict the career of someone who has such good stuff at the age of 22.

Finally, an admission that the Yankees should have done the dieal. Do you have any idea how many times you called me out on this? Do you also remember that the Twins offered to take Kennedy instead of Hughes...and you called me an idiot for it? You are truly delusional.


Robertson is 23 or 24. He isnt done yet either. Neither is Melancon.
About all three pitchers...I just haven't seen much I like. All three have low 90s fastballs with little movement. Hughes has the most upside, but he has no idea where the pitch is going, and that will probably improve. His cutter, which is a new pitch, along with his curve, when he finally can throw it for strikes, will probably make him a back of the rotation starter. Can't ever trade him for the best pitcher on the planet at the time. Nah...that would be too easy.


Now onto your idea with Posada. The ERA could just be the fact that Burnett and CC are known to be slow starters. And yes, it is a ridiculously small sample size. He went down in April. You never make judgements in April. And to say that Posada's offense is a small sample size, look at his career.
Let's see how the Yankees team ERA is when he gets back then, shall we? Then will you shut up?


Watching the games is not raw data. Do you know what raw data is? Raw data is hits, walks, at bats, etc. That is easily measureable data. Watching the games as a fan biases you toward the most recent event. And while you can pick up flaws over time, it is not the most accurate way to evaluate a player.

You see the raw data. How about a player's line drive percentage? Doesn't someone have to chart that? Or pitch location? Where the player hits the ball, and how hard? None of this is raw data? Someone is sitting there with a chart or some sort of computer program and determines this information...or does it magically appear?


Your comment on your biases being proven wrong by stats is just funny. Statistics are meant to prove or disprove a hypothesis. In order to prove or disprove a hypothesis, you need to have a sufficient n (number of patients in my field, and a number of at bats when you are talking about baseball) to have your "study" be powered enough. You seem to like "studies" with very low N's, which essentially means that most of your ideas cannot be proven with the power you selected. Then you present what you have in a high and mighty way and smack down anyone that disagrees. Anything that would require a longer term study period, you refuse to do. I have challenged you in the past. Go back through Molina's career with the yankees and calculate the CERA with every pitcher he has caught. Then go through those same pitchers with Posada. I will assure you, that the slight if any difference in ERA from pitcher to pitcher will not make up for his D. If you wish to make that effort, then I'll believe you. But instead, you call us all idiots for not believing your unoriginal idea.
You are truly lost. Case in point. Molina HAS had a better CERA than Posada since he got here. It's not even that close.


Your comment on being proven wrong by stats is comical too. Either I am wrong (which you also never admit) or the "statistical model is inaccurate." Good one, that made me laugh.

Ok dumbass. Time to show you how much of an idiot you really are.

Taken from Baseball-Reference.com:

2008:
Posada's CERA: 4.61
Molina's CERA: 3.70
Difference: 0.91 ERA

Not even close. Let's try it another way.

Posada's RC per game per per game [assuming five at bats per game, to give Posada a fighting chance]: [(5.1 RC)/(27 outs) x (5AB per game)]: 0.94 runs a game.

Molina's RC per game per game, same parameters: [(2.4 RC)/(27 outs) x (5AB per game)]: 0.44 runs a game.

So offensively, on average, Posada was exactly half a run better a game offensively. Makes sense, right? Except that he had a 0.91 ERA that was higher. Do the math..and guess what you find?

Molina results in a net gain of -0.41 ERA a game in 2008.

But wait...there's more.

Let's take a look at Total fielding Runs above average, which is assumed the number of runs he costs/saves behind the plate per 135 games [approx].

2008 Posada: -20.5
2008 Molina: 14.7

Now..let's divide it by 135 to figure out what it is per game:

2008 Posada: -0.16
2009 Molina: 0.11

So...lets take it all into effect.

2008 Posada:
CERA: 4.61
RC/G/G: 0.94
FR/G: -0.16

2008 Molina:
CERA: 3.70
RC/G/G: 0.44
FR/G: 0.11

So...Posada's total contribution is 0.78 runs a game in 2008. Molina is 0.55. The difference, per game, is 0.23. That means, in simple terms, that the difference is one measly run per 4 games. So basically, two runs a week.

Is it worth a 0.91 difference in ERA...PER GAME?

Without the discussion, we'll do the same thing over 2009. The fielding information is unavailable...so we'll ignore it, even though anyone who actually watches Posada will tell you that he costs the team behind the plate, were Molina adds to it.

2009 Posada:
CERA: 7.71
RC/G/G: 1.64

2009 Molina:
CERA: 3.59 ERA
RC/G/G: 0.70

The difference, with the smaller sample size is as follows:

4.12 ERA
RC/G/G: 0.96

So, Posada gives you an extra run a game, but the pitchers pitch worse to a tune of four runs a game. I do realize that it is a small sample size, and is not entirely accurate. I expect the ERA gap to drop significantly. I also believe that Posada won't continue at a .987 OPS clip. So the gap offensively will decrease, and then we need to factor in the defense.

Is that proof enough Jacko?


I do find it funny, though, that you don't actually take me to task on your lack of yankee fandom. A retort coming perhaps?
Defending my fandom? Are you fucking serious? As far as I'm concerned, you're a fan. A stupid, clueless one, but you're still a fan. Being a fan has nothing to do with any logic or intelligence, or baseball knowledge. It's short for fanatic. My girlfriend is a fan, albeit a very new one. I spent ten minutes explaining a balk to her last night. She still doesn't know the terms that mean single, double, triple. She tries. She's learning. However, she watches, and very seriously. She is just as much a fan as you and I are. We were all beginners once. Just because we have been fans for longer doesn't mean anything. It's like me saying you're not a fan since you don't go to the games. They are irrelevant points, and you know it. She's trying to learn, something you've forgotten how to do. Learning about the game is something we all do in every game we watch, if we choose to.

Questioning fandom is idiotic. Considering you are a young "doctor", we're probably about the same age, in our 30's. We both went through lean times in the 80's and 90's. I presume both of us were fans in the Stump Merrill years. You've resorted to arguing things that can't be proven, like fandom.

Going back to the point at hand. All this I saw without the benefit of statistics, which have shown exactly what I'm saying. Could I quantify it? Of course not, not visually. However, I could see there was a difference. Only now did I actually prove it when I went looking for the numbers.

I don't take any real pleasure in showing you that you're wrong [ok, I lied, a little pleasure]. You're one of the few Yankee fans here, and if you take off your pinstripe glasses and get rid of your prejudices, we'll get along fine. You have a lot to add to this site, but try thinking for yourself instead of spouting press clippings. You know what will happen if you do that?

You're smart, which is obvious from your postings. I just think you're a little naive. This isn't meant as insult, it's actually a compliment. If you use your intelligence and your own thought process instead of depending on others..well, maybe one day, I'd learn something from you. That would be a welcome thing, from my end at least.

[YAZMAN]

LOL-Olympics!

http://www.rofl.name/asciiart/lolympics.gif

[yankees228]

Gom, my problem with your Posada vs. Molina (or other Yankee catchers) is that you're only using stuff from 2008 and 2009.

The first year Posada caught the majority of the games was 1998, and he really became the full time catcher in 2000. From both of those years on, the Yankees have been the most successful team in baseball.

[jacksonianmarch]

Wow, you are a fucking moron.

First of all, you need to correct for the pitcher. Molina last yr caught every game that Mussina threw. And when you have a pitcher who goes 20-9 with a sub 4 ERA, then you are going to have skewed results.

Second, you are using a season in which Posada barely played. He only caught 30 games.

Third, I have told you what you need to do to prove this theory and control for any confounders. You need to take all the pitchers from 2007 on and compare the ERA's with Posada to the ERA's with Molina. If you do that, then you might have something. Until then, you dont know how to win an argument using stats. Remember, YOU WATCH THE GAMES!!

[Spudboy]

I guess I now understand the meaning of "Flame Thread".

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Why not just mock on your own, instead of using a mechanism? Is mocking too hard on its own?
No, but my way (actually its Crespo's, I stole it) is much more entertaining.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

His point is that he should bring both, not just the mockery, to the table.
I do something besides mock...



Don't I?

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

As for the topic at hand, here's what it boils down to for me:


Gom is FAR more entertaining than jacko. Gom can create laughs by doing something other than annoiting Yankees MiLeaguers future hall-of-famers.

Gom is more objective than jacko.

Gom is more realistic than jacko (this and the last one kind of go together).

Gom, I think, is more knowledgable than jacko.



Well, sweep. I'll take Gom's side. :D

[Dipre]

As for the topic at hand, here's what it boils down to for me:


Gom is FAR more entertaining than jacko. Gom can create laughs by doing something other than annoiting Yankees MiLeaguers future hall-of-famers.

Gom is more objective than jacko.

Gom is more realistic than jacko (this and the last one kind of go together).

Gom, I think, is more knowledgable than jacko.



Well, sweep. I'll take Gom's side. :D

Are you trying to destroy the continent of awesome that is this thread!?

Stop taking sides and let us enjoy the battle of titanic proportions between the champion of Yankee Gnob-gobbling and the gold medalist of uncalled insults and prospect flaming!

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

What's wrong with prospect flaming?

[jacksonianmarch]

As for the topic at hand, here's what it boils down to for me:


Gom is FAR more entertaining than jacko. Gom can create laughs by doing something other than annoiting Yankees MiLeaguers future hall-of-famers.

Gom is more objective than jacko.

Gom is more realistic than jacko (this and the last one kind of go together).

Gom, I think, is more knowledgable than jacko.



Well, sweep. I'll take Gom's side. :D


you are entitled to your opinion. That being said, if you are on the side of Gom, then I can feel even more validated. You are the village idiot from a village of idiots.

[TheKilo]

I do something besides mock...



Don't I?

One of the most improved here.

[Dipre]

you are entitled to your opinion. That being said, if you are on the side of Gom, then I can feel even more validated. You are the village idiot from a village of idiots.

As far as i'm concerned, Jacko, my dear friend, you are, by consensus, the village idiot here, so wield your title with pride and try not to anoint it unto someone else.

Good day, sir.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

you are entitled to your opinion. That being said, if you are on the side of Gom, then I can feel even more validated. You are the village idiot from a village of idiots.
If I interpreted this correctly (I did, but you will change the meaning after this response, I'm sure of it), you just called me the foremost idiot out of a website full of idiots (according to you). Those other 'idiots' own your shit and show just how little baseball knowledge you have outside of the Yankees organization every fucking day. Actually even your general Yankee knowledge is shaky, considering the incredible bias that leads you to annoit so many of their prospects future stars. Ultimate pom-pom waving dipshit, that is you.

Now me, I don't debate with you often if ever, because your posts are very rarely worth anything more than cheap laughs. Just like the one I'm quoting, I only responded because it was specifically addressed to me and showed just how much of a hypocritical bag of cat urine you are.

You're probably just mad because I said Gom was funnier than you are. Its okay, go cry.

[castigs850]

balls

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

One of the most improved here.

Why thank you. I feel validated.

[castigs850]

yea me too, orlando sharks on the clock

[Gom]

Gom, my problem with your Posada vs. Molina (or other Yankee catchers) is that you're only using stuff from 2008 and 2009.

The first year Posada caught the majority of the games was 1998, and he really became the full time catcher in 2000. From both of those years on, the Yankees have been the most successful team in baseball.

Ah..a Yankee fan who actually thinks. Sir, I'll make my points to you.

In 1996, Girardi was the starting catcher, with Leyritz as the backup.
In 1998, although Posada was the main catcher during the season, in the playoffs, Girardi started 7 games, Posada started 6.
In 1999, Posada was the main catcher...but guess what? Girardi started 7 games, Posada started 5 games.
In 2000, Posada was the main catcher in both the regular season and the playoffs.

So, the myth of Posada is getting exposed. He wasn't there in 1996. He was the main catcher during the regular season, but Torre, who knows a thing or two about catching, didn't trust him when the games counted, and went to Girardi the majority of the time in the post-season. In 2000, Posada was the main catcher and won it all. So Posada has been the main catcher in one championship run...and been the loser in the others. In fact, if a better catcher had been behind the plate, and Dave Roberts got thrown out, The Red Sox would have had to wait until 2007, not 2004.

I'm comparing the two years, and only those years, because of the fact that we never had decent defensive catcher since Girardi until we got Molina, and also because Posada caught so many games. When Posada went down, it was our chance to see another catcher, and I was skeptical myself until I saw it, time and time again. When I looked at the stats, I realized how great the difference really was.

Posada is one of the greatest hitting catchers I've ever seen. His bat is a good bat, no matter the position. Having Posada as the DH, and once a week catcher, with Molina/Cervilli handling most of the duties behind the plate, would be a great asset to this team. Few can argue against Cervelli, as a third catcher, having more value than Berroa. I see no purpose to Berroa, or Veras, or Ramirez, or Albaladejo, over Cervelli.


Wow, you are a fucking moron.

First of all, you need to correct for the pitcher. Molina last yr caught every game that Mussina threw. And when you have a pitcher who goes 20-9 with a sub 4 ERA, then you are going to have skewed results.

Second, you are using a season in which Posada barely played. He only caught 30 games.

Third, I have told you what you need to do to prove this theory and control for any confounders. You need to take all the pitchers from 2007 on and compare the ERA's with Posada to the ERA's with Molina. If you do that, then you might have something. Until then, you dont know how to win an argument using stats. Remember, YOU WATCH THE GAMES!!
You're lost. How many games did Posada catch of Mussina's? In his career? Oh, I'm sorry. I should throw out Mussina's stats? Ok..I'll humor your small brain.

Molina caught 737 innings last year. He had an CERA of 3.70, which means he was behind the plate for 303 earned runs.

Now...lets make some assumptions. Let's say that Molina caught EVERY SINGLE inning of Mussina. Mussina threw 200 innings last year, which means...according to this statistical model, Mussina threw a whopping 27% of all the innings he caught. Which means that Mussina pitched ever four days, and went 7 innings every time? Fair enough?

Guess what...subtracting Mussina's IP [200] and earned runs [75]...guess what? You end up with a CERA of...get this....3.82. Which is still less than Posada by 0.79 ERA per game.

I'm TRYING to skew the stats in your favor, you failed abortion. You still don't get it. Even when I TRY to show your point, it's impossible.

I get it now. The stats are only worth it if they can prove what you want them to prove. If they don't, then they aren't worth shit. How could I not see that?

You stupid, fucking imbecile. I compared two catchers from the same team, who were catching pitchers on the same staff. Sorry, I don't have the time to go through every single pitcher/catcher matchup for two seasons. Maybe you, who claims to be a Doctor, but has all this free time to debate with me, can do it. The stats, which you love to spout, are thrown right in your face.

Three matrices, and they all claim the same thing. The Yankees are a better team with Molina behind the plate.

Dumbass...prove to me that your point is correct. Use any stat you want. Win/loss, catcher ERA, anything. You never have. You never will. I'm waiting for your statistical response. Just like I'm waiting for the Santana non-deal to validate your position.

You're dumber then JHB ever was. Go find a Yankee board where they will believe your shit. I don't. It's losers like you who give Yankee fans a bad name. An idiot who thinks he's a know it all, and in reality, you don't know shit.

You know what I've realized? That all you do is watch the game! You see a Yankee pitcher miss the corner, or not get a borderline pitch, and you bitch and moan the umpires are squeezing your pitcher. You're not intelligent enough to realize that how the catcher catches the ball makes a difference. Then you see Posada get a double and you think he's great...well..because the TV says so! He's got a good average! He has a good OPS! You don't delve into it any deeper than John Sterling or Michael Kay tell you. I take a comment back. You WATCH the game. I ANALYZE it.

Never compare your baseball knowledge to mine. You're just embarrassing yourself.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

You're lost. How many games did Posada catch of Mussina's? In his career? Oh, I'm sorry. I should throw out Mussina's stats? Ok..I'll humor your small brain.

Molina caught 737 innings last year. He had an CERA of 3.70, which means he was behind the plate for 303 earned runs.

Now...lets make some assumptions. Let's say that Molina caught EVERY SINGLE inning of Mussina. Mussina threw 200 innings last year, which means...according to this statistical model, Mussina threw a whopping 27% of all the innings he caught. Which means that Mussina pitched ever four days, and went 7 innings every time? Fair enough?

Guess what...subtracting Mussina's IP [200] and earned runs [75]...guess what? You end up with a CERA of...get this....3.82. Which is still less than Posada by 0.79 ERA per game.

I'm TRYING to skew the stats in your favor, you failed abortion. You still don't get it. Even when I TRY to show your point, it's impossible.

I get it now. The stats are only worth it if they can prove what you want them to prove. If they don't, they don't.

You stupid, fucking imbecile. I compared two catchers from the same team, who were catching pitchers on the same staff. Sorry, I don't have the time to go through every single pitcher/catcher matchup for two seasons. Maybe you, who claims to be a Doctor, but has all this free time to debate with me, can do it. The stats, which you love to spout, are thrown right in your face.

Three matrices, and they all claim the same thing. The Yankees are a better team with Molina behind the plate.

Dumbass...prove to me that your point is correct. Use any stat you want. Win/loss, catcher ERA, anything. You never have. You never will. I'm waiting for your statistical response. Just like I'm waiting for the Santana non-deal to validate your position.

You're dumber then JHB ever was. Go find a Yankee board where they will believe your shit. I don't. It's losers like you who give Yankee fans a bad name. An idiot who thinks he's a know it all, and in reality, you don't know shit.

You know what I've realized? That all you do is watch the game! You see a Yankee pitcher miss the corner, or not get a borderline pitch, and you bitch and moan the umpires are squeezing your pitcher. You're not intelligent enough to realize that how the catcher catches the ball makes a difference. Then you see Posada get a double and you think he's great...well..because the TV says so! He's got a good average! He has a good OPS! You don't delve into it any deeper than John Sterling or Michael Kay tell you. I take a comment back. You WATCH the game. I ANALYZE it.

Never compare your baseball knowledge to mine. You're just embarrassing yourself.

Legion of WIN.

[Dipre]

http://www.funnyforumpics.com/forums/This-Thread-Delivers/1/thread-delivers.jpg

[yankees228]

Girardi starting more postseason games than Posada in 1998 and 1999 can be attributed more to Torre always preferring his veterans more than anything else, in my opinion. I don't think that's relevant to our discussion, because we both know that was how Torre liked to operate.

Now, in terms of how they both did last year, Jacko does make a good point. I think it's unfair to judge Posada on his performance at the catching position in 2008 because of how few games he played at the position. The amount of games he started last year is not a large enough sample size to truly make a judgment. On top of that, Molina catching for the team's best pitcher last year is going to also skew the statistics.

[Gom]

Girardi starting more postseason games than Posada in 1998 and 1999 can be attributed more to Torre always preferring his veterans more than anything else, in my opinion. I don't think that's relevant to our discussion, because we both know that was how Torre liked to operate.

Now, in terms of how they both did last year, Jacko does make a good point. I think it's unfair to judge Posada on his performance at the catching position in 2008 because of how few games he played at the position. The amount of games he started last year is not a large enough sample size to truly make a judgment. On top of that, Molina catching for the team's best pitcher last year is going to also skew the statistics.
Which is why I took all of Mussina's stats out. Let's not forget, Molina caught the immortals Ponson, Giese, Rasner, et al. You can make the argument that the worst staff the Yankees have had in a decade was last year. In fact, there is little doubt, that when you take out Mussina, it was the worst staff in over ten years....and Molina outperformed Posada. As for the veterans in the post-season, he played Jeter. He went to Mo. Maybe he just went with who he thought was a better player at crunch time.

I only compare last year and this year because that's when Molina came here. If you compare Cervelli to Posada at year's end, my guess is that you'll see the same thing.

[yankees228]

Well Posada will be back soon enough, and will probably catch most of the games this season if he can say healthy. We'll see how the Yankees do.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

How about downsizing the picture a little, champ.

[BoSox21]

Why thank you. I feel validated.

I LOOOOOOOVE ME SOME ME

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.tmz.com/media/2008/07/0721_terrell_owens_fm.jpg

[jacksonianmarch]

You still dont understand what I am saying. I am trying to control for the pitcher. If you can show without a shadow of a doubt that season by season, Molina is better in terms of ERA for every pitcher, then I will subscribe to your theory. You dont understand confounders, and I have a feeling you never will. A confounder is, well, lets say Posada catches every inning Sean Henn throws in a season, then one could expect the ERA to be worse. What you dont understand is that there are so many confounders that a case you are trying to make is not provable. In order to try and prove something as ludicrous as you are trying to prove, you must make a clear case without inherent bias or confounders. You havent. Case closed.

[Dipre]

JFC Castig, you are messing with the awesomeness that is this thread!

Fix that picture!

[jacksonianmarch]

Ah..a Yankee fan who actually thinks. Sir, I'll make my points to you.

In 1996, Girardi was the starting catcher, with Leyritz as the backup.
In 1998, although Posada was the main catcher during the season, in the playoffs, Girardi started 7 games, Posada started 6.

lets me stop you there. Posada was a rookie, Girardi was the veteran. As a former catcher, dont you think he had a preference towards a veteran? It didnt matter if Joe Mauer was the catcher, he was going with Girardi, period.


In 1999, Posada was the main catcher...but guess what? Girardi started 7 games, Posada started 5 games.
In 2000, Posada was the main catcher in both the regular season and the playoffs.

Holy shit, we WON SOMETHING WITH POSADA!!!!


So, the myth of Posada is getting exposed. He wasn't there in 1996. He was the main catcher during the regular season, but Torre, who knows a thing or two about catching, didn't trust him when the games counted, and went to Girardi the majority of the time in the post-season. In 2000, Posada was the main catcher and won it all. So Posada has been the main catcher in one championship run...and been the loser in the others. In fact, if a better catcher had been behind the plate, and Dave Roberts got thrown out, The Red Sox would have had to wait until 2007, not 2004.

He was exposed? By winning a championship? By being the main catcher through the season of a team destined for greatness? Listen fuckface, I am not trying to say Posada is a good defensive catcher. And in the playoffs, I can understand Torre going with the veteran seeing as, well, its Torre. But you are blowing this way out of proportion. As usual.


I'm comparing the two years, and only those years, because of the fact that we never had decent defensive catcher since Girardi until we got Molina, and also because Posada caught so many games. When Posada went down, it was our chance to see another catcher, and I was skeptical myself until I saw it, time and time again. When I looked at the stats, I realized how great the difference really was.

And if we go by your criteria, the only season that Molina actually caught full time, we didnt make the playoffs. So, therefore, he must suck a bag of dicks.

Listen man, if you wont do it, I will. And I will prove to you overall, that Posada's D deficiency is well worth his O. Its amazing how little you know about anything in life. Go back to your cab before your medallion gets suspended.

[Coco's Disciples]

castigs, please downsize/delete the image. It's fucking enormous.

[Gom]

You're going to prove that the Yankees are better with Posada behind the plate than Molina? This I have GOT to see.

On a side note...I released a client of mine today. An internal medicine Doctor. I do admit, I feel much better firing Doctors knowing that you are one. God, I'd love to have you as my client. I'd eat you for lunch.

You know Jacko...when DipreG comes to my defense, it must kill him to do so...that should just go to show you how stupid you really are.

I'm waiting Jacko. Prove to me since 2008 that the Yankees are better with Posada behind the plate. I'm going to make the assumption that if you don't post any relevant stats, then the statistics back me up.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

castigs, please downsize/delete the image. It's fucking enormous.
You do it, you lazy shit. ;)

EDIT: you can't, nvm

[castigs850]

ok i'll delete the post, but let the record show that i fucked with dipreg

[Coco's Disciples]

You do it, you lazy shit. ;)

EDIT: you can't, nvm

<_<

[Teddyballgame10]

This is hilarious.

[Spudboy]

I guess I've had Passion redefined for me on this thread!

[RobiForMVP]

Holy shit this thread is full of WIN

[Dipre]

ok i'll delete the post, but let the record show that i fucked with dipreg

You, sir, lack the awesomeness to fuck with me.

Let the record show that.

[Gom]

Still waiting on you Jacko. Where is your proof?

[castigs850]

You, sir, lack the awesomeness to fuck with me.

Let the record show that.

what if i post a few more cat pictures? will i be awesome then dipreg?

[Dipre]

what if i post a few more cat pictures? will i be awesome then dipreg?

Learn to use capitals, correct your grammar, stop being annoying, don't post cat pictures, stop talking about your sex life, it's too much info and i still get more ass than you, and don't fuck with the big boys, and you'll be well on your way to being cool.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Learn to use capitals, correct your grammar, stop being annoying, don't post cat pictures, stop talking about your sex life, it's too much info and i still get more ass than you, and don't fuck with the big boys, and you'll be well on your way to being cool.
Black ass, too. You bastard, I'm stuck with farm bitches.

[Dipre]

Black ass, too. You bastard, I'm stuck with farm bitches.

Latin ass, sir, and big.

Just the way i like it.

I'd like to experience pleasure in the arms of a true white woman though, i need to bring my act to the states or Canada ASAP.

[castigs850]

dipreg, why do you and dojji get to post cats but not me? I LOVE CAT PICS!!

[jacksonianmarch]

Still waiting on you Jacko. Where is your proof?

this will take a long time. In order to prove or disprove your point, I need to go through every game over the last 2 seasons

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

I'd like to experience pleasure in the arms of a true white woman though, i need to bring my act to the states or Canada ASAP.

New Hampshire is the ideal place for that. Nothing but whiteys everywhere, assuming you can hold your water long enough to survive the two month period it will take for your pupils to adjust.

[Dipre]

dipreg, why do you and dojji get to post cats but not me? I LOVE CAT PICS!!

Begin starting your sentences with capitals and also, use capitals when mentioning people's names and maybe i'll think about it.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

dipreg, why do you and dojji get to post cats but not me? I LOVE CAT PICS!!
You post the unfunny ones.

[castigs850]

CAT = WIN
DOG = FAIL
HORSE= EPIC FAIL
HORSE SEX = EPIC WIN

lolz balls and epic falls

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

CAT = WIN
DOG = FAIL
HORSE= EPIC FAIL
HORSE SEX = EPIC WIN

lolz balls and epic falls
Leave.

[Dipre]

Leave.

My thoughts exactly.

[castigs850]

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/128348547016718750udontluvme.jpg

WAIT! DOES THAT MAKE ME COOL NOW?? LOLZZ

[Dipre]

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/128348547016718750udontluvme.jpg

WAIT! DOES THAT MAKE ME THE ULTIMATE AND UNDISPUTED MASTER OF FAIL NOW?? LOLZZ

Fixed it for ya.

[jacksonianmarch]

I dont even know what this thread started as. Wow.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/128348547016718750udontluvme.jpg

WAIT! DOES THAT MAKE ME COOL NOW?? LOLZZ
Not entirely.

[castigs850]

oh yea sorry, you and gom were shittin on each other

but dipreg, we're cat pic brothers, we gotta stick together man

[Dipre]

oh yea sorry, you and gom were shittin on each other

but dipreg, we're cat pic brothers, we gotta stick together man

That's about as much FAIL and SUCK as you can fit in a single sentence.

[RobiForMVP]

What the fuck? lol

[YAZMAN]

ok i'll delete the post, but let the record show that i fucked with dipreg

Thank you, Judge Judy.

[Gom]

I dont even know what this thread started as. Wow.

Don't worry, I remember. I'll wait for your proof.

By the way...I can save you a lot of trouble...and all because of simple logic, something you don't have. All you have to do is go to baseball reference.com, and click on advanced fielding statistics. It will show you CERA. No matter what you do or try to determine, when you average it out, you will see that Molina will have a CERA that is about 1 run a game lower than Posada's. Why? Because that's the total.

For example, if Player A hits .50 points higher than player B over the course of the season, no matter how you break it down, whether it's by month, or pre/post All-Star break, etc., guess what? The end result will be .50 points higher. Due to a smaller sample size, you will find that there will be bigger discrepancies, but since I dealt with the total aggregate amount, that is what it will average. Simple mathematics. I know you'll look for these discrepencies, and show for example, how Pitcher X pitched better say..with Posada, because Posada caught him for 1/3 of an inning and he got the player out. You'll ignore innings totals, or find some other method. The only method that really counts is the full season totals. Just try to finish it before Posada comes back next week, only because they are both out, so current games will not affect your data.

Knock yourself out if you want to. I already know the end result. You'll validate my point. I went so far as to credit Molina for every single inning that Mussina pitched and removed those totals from his data..and he still schooled Posada. According to my intentional error, 27&#37; of Molina's catching innings were from Mussina. I have that luxury. You don't. I also gave five at bats per game, when the real total is less than five, therefore inflating Posada's value. Still, Molina beat him. I only hope that all this statistical searching will teach you a lesson and hopefully keep you off the board for a few days.

After that, we should change the title of the thread to "Jacko is a clueless idiot".

[RobiForMVP]

Don't worry, I remember. I'll wait for your proof.

By the way...I can save you a lot of trouble...and all because of simple logic, something you don't have. All you have to do is go to baseball reference.com, and click on advanced fielding statistics. It will show you CERA. No matter what you do or try to determine, when you average it out, you will see that Molina will have a CERA that is about 1 run a game lower than Posada's. Why? Because that's the total.

For example, if Player A hits .50 points higher than player B over the course of the season, no matter how you break it down, whether it's by month, or pre/post All-Star break, etc., guess what? The end result will be .50 points higher. Due to a smaller sample size, you will find that there will be bigger discrepancies, but since I dealt with the total aggregate amount, that is what it will average. Simple mathematics. I know you'll look for these discrepencies, and show for example, how Pitcher X pitched better say..with Posada, because Posada caught him for 1/3 of an inning and he got the player out. You'll ignore innings totals, or find some other method. The only method that really counts is the full season totals. Just try to finish it before Posada comes back next week, only because they are both out, so current games will not affect your data.

Knock yourself out if you want to. I already know the end result. You'll validate my point.

After that, we should change the title of the thread to "Jacko is a clueless idiot".The problem I have with your theory Gom is, Molian can Never deliver.
He is a good defensive catcher that's true
I've only see him have 2 Big hits this year
The Grand Slam and the Double vs Boston

[Dipre]

hey fat ass dont hate on my brother. I love you gom just not as much as cocos disciples

HAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Who the fuck is this troll?

[jacksonianmarch]

So, got through 2007. Not really helpful

202 of Pettitte's 215 innings were caught by Posada, with no significant change in ERA (Posada 4.12, season ERA 4.05)

173 of Wang's 199 innings were caught by Posada with another insignificant change in ERA (Posada 3.84, season 3.70)

In terms of Mussina, Posada caught less than half of his games and was significantly worse than Nieves, at an ERA of 6.12. But Molina was significantly worse than Posada on this one with an ERA of 7.61.

On the other end, Hughes was the opposite. For Posada, Hughes ERA was 5.05. For Molina, it was 3.60.

The only other player who had a big dose of Molina was Henn. And he was terrible for Henn. His ERA for Henn was 12.75 (5.60 for Posada).

Otherwise, Molina only caught Kennedy for more than 10 innings. The rest arent statistically significant.

So, there is a reason why I chose 2007. In 2008, Posada was hurt and his arm contributed to a significant detriment on the defensive end in his 30 games. In 2009, Posada's arm is back, so he will be better evaluated when the yr ends. For 2007, there isnt much difference. For Wang and Pettitte, there isnt much difference due to statistical significant. For Mussina, Molina was torture. For Hughes, Molina was gold. I think this should show the null hypothesis rather well.

[Gom]

So, got through 2007. Not really helpful

202 of Pettitte's 215 innings were caught by Posada, with no significant change in ERA (Posada 4.12, season ERA 4.05)

173 of Wang's 199 innings were caught by Posada with another insignificant change in ERA (Posada 3.84, season 3.70)

In terms of Mussina, Posada caught less than half of his games and was significantly worse than Nieves, at an ERA of 6.12. But Molina was significantly worse than Posada on this one with an ERA of 7.61.

On the other end, Hughes was the opposite. For Posada, Hughes ERA was 5.05. For Molina, it was 3.60.

The only other player who had a big dose of Molina was Henn. And he was terrible for Henn. His ERA for Henn was 12.75 (5.60 for Posada).

Otherwise, Molina only caught Kennedy for more than 10 innings. The rest arent statistically significant.

So, there is a reason why I chose 2007. In 2008, Posada was hurt and his arm contributed to a significant detriment on the defensive end in his 30 games. In 2009, Posada's arm is back, so he will be better evaluated when the yr ends. For 2007, there isnt much difference. For Wang and Pettitte, there isnt much difference due to statistical significant. For Mussina, Molina was torture. For Hughes, Molina was gold. I think this should show the null hypothesis rather well.
Ok...so lets deal with a catcher that came to a new team with new pitchers in a trade on July 21st, 2007 and let's completely ignore 2008 and 2009 so far. Is that it? Because if it is, you're basing it on on just two months, but I'm basing it on over a year. Keep going. Do 2008. Then 2009. 2009 is just as significant, in fact...last I looked, it's 2009. Not 2008. Definitely not 2007. You have the audacity to complain about sample size? Are you for real?

You picked 2007 because it suits your purposes. Not because of statistical relevance. So...you're saying that a two month span, two years ago, are more relevant than what happened last year or this year. Change the thread, dude. The sad thing...JHB, who I think is a complete and utter moron, is ten times smarter than you are.

Tell you what..you're complaining about Posada's arm injury. Fine. Delete his Fielding Runs. Guess what? Molina still wins. I'll give you 2007 as fair game, but only if you do 2008 and 2009. Otherwise, you've failed...miserably...again.

[Frosted Flakes]

THERE MOREEEEEE THEN GOOD, THERE GREAT

[jacksonianmarch]

Don't worry, I remember. I'll wait for your proof.

By the way...I can save you a lot of trouble...and all because of simple logic, something you don't have. All you have to do is go to baseball reference.com, and click on advanced fielding statistics. It will show you CERA. No matter what you do or try to determine, when you average it out, you will see that Molina will have a CERA that is about 1 run a game lower than Posada's. Why? Because that's the total.

For example, if Player A hits .50 points higher than player B over the course of the season, no matter how you break it down, whether it's by month, or pre/post All-Star break, etc., guess what? The end result will be .50 points higher. Due to a smaller sample size, you will find that there will be bigger discrepancies, but since I dealt with the total aggregate amount, that is what it will average. Simple mathematics. I know you'll look for these discrepencies, and show for example, how Pitcher X pitched better say..with Posada, because Posada caught him for 1/3 of an inning and he got the player out. You'll ignore innings totals, or find some other method. The only method that really counts is the full season totals. Just try to finish it before Posada comes back next week, only because they are both out, so current games will not affect your data.

Knock yourself out if you want to. I already know the end result. You'll validate my point. I went so far as to credit Molina for every single inning that Mussina pitched and removed those totals from his data..and he still schooled Posada. According to my intentional error, 27% of Molina's catching innings were from Mussina. I have that luxury. You don't. I also gave five at bats per game, when the real total is less than five, therefore inflating Posada's value. Still, Molina beat him. I only hope that all this statistical searching will teach you a lesson and hopefully keep you off the board for a few days.

After that, we should change the title of the thread to "Jacko is a clueless idiot".

Once again, you do not understand the idea of confounders. Do you know what a confounder is? How bout this. In 2007...

Kei Igawa threw every pitch to Posada. You have said before that Kei Igawa sucks. So for Posada, that is a massive knock on his CERA as Molina hadnt caught an inferior starter. Igawa's ERA was 6.25
Matt DeSalvo threw all but 4 innings of his 27.2IP to Posada. None to Molina. His ERA was 6.18. Here's another one.
Edwar Ramirez Molina caught 3 innings of Edwar in 2007. Posada caught the other 20 or so and Edwar's ERA was 8.18. I have another one.
Jeff Karstens did not throw one pitch to Molina in 07. But he had an ERA of 11 over 20 innings


This is why your moronic CERA doesnt tell the whole fucking story. Molina did not catch those shitbags from 07. Posada did. Those skew the numbers significantly. But you wouldnt understand that. Hell, you dont understand much.

[jacksonianmarch]

So your excuse for 2007 was Molina learning. Well, 2008 is skewed because Posada had an injury that significantly changed the defensive game.

[jacksonianmarch]

I am giving you 2008. He was hurt and teams ran on him like crazy. He did hurt the team in 2008, and I admitted that.

2009 is 40 games in or so and both are injured. Plus, the fact that CC and Burnett are both slow starters and all Posada has is 3 weeks in April makes 2009 extremely unreliable.

[Spudboy]

I can't believe you're still at it. You both have much more statistical "knowledge" than I. I'll say this, though. As a Sox fan, it is my observation that Posada has done more damage to the Sox over a protracted period than has Molina. What else really matters?

[ORS]

But he framezzzzzzzzzzzz space zeeee zzzzz teh pitchezzzzz.

[Frosted Flakes]

lol this site is the shit

[Gom]

Once again, you do not understand the idea of confounders. Do you know what a confounder is? How bout this. In 2007...

Kei Igawa threw every pitch to Posada. You have said before that Kei Igawa sucks. So for Posada, that is a massive knock on his CERA as Molina hadnt caught an inferior starter. Igawa's ERA was 6.25
Matt DeSalvo threw all but 4 innings of his 27.2IP to Posada. None to Molina. His ERA was 6.18. Here's another one.
Edwar Ramirez Molina caught 3 innings of Edwar in 2007. Posada caught the other 20 or so and Edwar's ERA was 8.18. I have another one.
Jeff Karstens did not throw one pitch to Molina in 07. But he had an ERA of 11 over 20 innings


This is why your moronic CERA doesnt tell the whole fucking story. Molina did not catch those shitbags from 07. Posada did. Those skew the numbers significantly. But you wouldnt understand that. Hell, you dont understand much.
First of all, it's 2009, not 2007. Secondly, I said 2007 was fair game if you included 2008 and 2009, which you refuse to do.

Secondly, most players have a transition period when the come here, but I am willing to count just the stats. According to the numbers, for the two months that Molina was here in 2007, Posada had better numbers.

Now...again...do 2008 and 2009. If we're not going to excuse Molina as a new catcher coming to the team, then we shouldn't count Posada's weak arm, then should we? Exactly how much of a cushion do you need to make your numbers work.

Do 2008 and 2009, then come back to me, as you've failed. You're basing stats of 2007, over a period of two months, and claiming it to be relevant. Try again.

By the way...the Yankees team ERA post-All-Star break in 2007 was 4.64. Molina's was 4.61 CERA. Guess who had a higher CERA from DAY ONE of Molina's regime here? Posada.

[Frosted Flakes]

First of all, it's 2009, not 2007. Secondly, I said 2007 was fair game if you included 2008 and 2009, which you refuse to do.

Secondly, most players have a transition period when the come here, but I am willing to count just the stats. According to the numbers, for the two months that Molina was here in 2007, Posada had better numbers.

Now...again...do 2008 and 2009. If we're not going to excuse Molina as a new catcher coming to the team, then we shouldn't count Posada's weak arm, then should we? Exactly how much of a cushion do you need to make your numbers work.

Do 2008 and 2009, then come back to me, as you've failed. You're basing stats of 2007, over a period of two months, and claiming it to be relevant. Try again.
Well why does molina get a break and Posada doesn't? I think thats a bullshit. how many world series have the yankees won wiht posada? how many with Molina?

See if you ear cereal like me you realize the facts

[jacksonianmarch]

You just dont get it. I am not trying to prove statistical superiority. I am trying to prove null to slight statistical inferiority. I am giving you 2008. Posada WAS hurting the team on the defensive end in 2008. 2009 is in progress. 2007 is all you have. And 2007 shows that there really wasnt much difference.

[jacksonianmarch]

First of all, it's 2009, not 2007. Secondly, I said 2007 was fair game if you included 2008 and 2009, which you refuse to do.

Secondly, most players have a transition period when the come here, but I am willing to count just the stats. According to the numbers, for the two months that Molina was here in 2007, Posada had better numbers.

Now...again...do 2008 and 2009. If we're not going to excuse Molina as a new catcher coming to the team, then we shouldn't count Posada's weak arm, then should we? Exactly how much of a cushion do you need to make your numbers work.

Do 2008 and 2009, then come back to me, as you've failed. You're basing stats of 2007, over a period of two months, and claiming it to be relevant. Try again.

you are a fucking moron. Learn to read.

[Jasonbay44]

This site is so awesome.

[RobiForMVP]

This site is so awesome.
I know.
This thread is full of WIN

[Gom]

You just dont get it. I am not trying to prove statistical superiority. I am trying to prove null to slight statistical inferiority. I am giving you 2008. Posada WAS hurting the team on the defensive end in 2008. 2009 is in progress. 2007 is all you have. And 2007 shows that there really wasnt much difference.

LOL! 2007 is all I have? Let's ignore an ENTIRE SEASON OF STATISTICS!!! Let's ignore the first two months of this year! In fact...let's ignore everything that doesn't fit into Jacko's little brain!

Clueless idiot is an insult to most idiots. You're in a class all by yourself.

you are a fucking moron. Learn to read.
That's the Jacko we know. When you've been ass-reamed, you're reduced to single-line insults.

To recapitulate...I used 2008 and 2009 as my database, you used 2007. You wish to discount the numbers of Posada due to injury, but do not wish to excuse Molina coming to a new team and a new system and new pitchers. You claim that Posada caught pitchers like Igawa, et al, when last year, the Yankees had Ponson, Rasner, Giese, etc., in what was the worst staff they had since 1993.

You choose two months two years ago and want it to hold water. Guess what...two years ago, Pedroia was nothing compared to Cano. Wang was a potential Cy Young winner.

I give you 2007. There are factors involved, but fair is fair. Posada outperformed Molina. Even though Molina's CERA was lower over the same time period, Posada greatly outperformed him at the plate.

Now, if you're a man, and not a little bitch, do the same thing for 2008 and/or 2009.

You know why you won't? You can't. Because I'm right, and you and I and everyone here knows it.

Put up or shut up. My guess is that you'll do neither.

[Dipre]

That's the Jacko we know. When you've been ass-reamed, you're reduced to single-line insults.

Doctor, we need to find some way to alleviate the pressure, otherwise, it might explode with WIN!

[Gom]

Well why does molina get a break and Posada doesn't? I think thats a bullshit. how many world series have the yankees won wiht posada? how many with Molina?

See if you ear cereal like me you realize the facts

He doesn't. I'm saying that if we count 2007, then we should count 2008 and 2009. Jacko refuses to do this.


Doctor, we need to find some way to alleviate the pressure, otherwise, it might explode with WIN!

LOL!!!

[Soxfan#1]

This thread has so much WIN.....

I mean, you don't even know,man!

You don't even know!

Curious to know, how old are you?

[castigs850]

23

[Soxfan#1]

Must be the country...

[example1]

This is one of those days for both Gom and Jacko where they each type 10 1000 word posts, and each simultaneously wishes their post is the be-all and end-all, while being unable to resist any disagreeing retort from the other. Its a vicious circle.

That said, I can't believe you're both arguing about the merits of CERA on the value of your catchers.

In Posada I see a catcher who finished 6th in the MVP voting in 2007 and who has posted OPS .867 .970 .775 and (so far) .987 over the past 4 years, one of them an injury plagued year.

In Molina I see a catcher who, in 417 PAs in NY, has amassed a .627 OPS. His .283 OBP is nearly .100 points lower than Posadas for each of those seasons.

In the Yankees I see a team that has had a very poor pitching team for the past few years and which has needed every ounce of Posada's production to get where they did.

Honestly, this discussion is much too long and intense for me to re-read the whole thing. But if you ask me, Posada is the better catcher overall the past few years, except for when he was hurt which he can't be blamed for.

If the discussion is about who is the better bet NOW, and your answer is Molina with the 2008 .576 OPS, then you're talking about shit and shittier. Posada's ability to draw walks alone should put him in the lineup above Molina, no matter how shitty his defense is.

In 2008 Molina had a WARP of 1.2 and Posada had a WARP of .5

In 2007 Posada was second on the team with a 7.9, while Molina had .8.

So far in 2009 Molina is at 0.1 WARP, and Posada is 3rd on the team at 1.2, ahead of Johnny Damon.

WARP is constructed to take defense into account, as well as playing time. Although Posada played a lot more than Molina in 2007, the fact that he was 2nd on the team--among a team full of players who played all the time--and the fact that he's 3rd on the team this year--again, ahead of guys who play all the time--tells me that he's more valuable.

Of course, I'm biased because I'm a huge Yankee fan... :rolleyes:

[jacksonianmarch]

Dont tell Gom these things. He's got one stat that is completely flawed and he's sticking to it. Dont try to prove him wrong. He watches the gamezz!!!!

[example1]

I liked where Gom cited this article:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1489

and it's conclusion:

"For now, at least, the hypothesis most consistent with the available facts appears to be that catchers do not have a significant effect on pitcher performance."

I mean, Keith Woolner and Bill James don't know as much as Gom, but they give it a good shot.

To be honest, they both say basically that the differences between catchers is nearly undetectable. I don't think they mention specifically whether the difference in value between a catcher with a .600 OPS and a catcher with a .900 OPS is detectable, but I think we all know the answer.

[Gom]

Dont tell Gom these things. He's got one stat that is completely flawed and he's sticking to it. Dont try to prove him wrong. He watches the gamezz!!!!

Where are the stats for 2008 and 2009? Still waiting.

Example, using CERA between catchers on opposing teams is useless. Using them on the same team, when they catch the same pitchers isn't. You need a control. The control is the same pitchers on the team.

Funny how the Yankees are pitching well now, and on a roll, and their pitching overacheived last year according to conventional wisdom when Posada was out. Really strange. I mean this coincidence just KEEPS happening.

Look, I don't knock Posada's bat. It's one of the best for catchers in the game. It's just that I value defense behind the plate, because it directly relates to ERA in my mind. Posada is one of the best behind the plate when it comes to his bat, and one of the worst, if not the worst behind the plate defensively. In comparing positions, he makes Jeter look like Ozzie Smith.

Jacko, try watching the games instead of relying on someone else to hold your hand. As far as I'm concerned, until you bring up the stats from 2008 and 2009, you have lost the argument [which you already have] and have no credibility.

Example..there is not a single team that would benefit more from Posada's bat when you factor in what they'd lose behind the plate. Look at Abreu. He couldn't find a job and his numbers dwarf Posada's. Yet, because it's easier to quantify an outfielder than a pitcher, he got signed for a pittance in today's market. Abreu's defense is less important than Posada's by a long shot. He gets what...3-4 plays a game on average? Of which how many are anything but routine? How many borderline pitches does a catcher catch in a game? The difference is staggering.

Example, the next time the Yanks and Sox play, just look for it. You don't have to look at Molina, you have a decent catcher in Varitek. Just compare Varitek and Posada, and you'll see it.

Jacko, I'm still waiting. I watch the gamezz...wow. Talk about immature. You have had your ass handed to you. I'd be suprised if you found one person who thinks you made your case better than I have. Not whether they agree with me or not, just how we present our information.

Do yourself a favor, especially if, like a little bitch, you refuse to bring up the stats from 2008 and 2009. Stick to hyping Yankee prospects. One day, by random luck, you'll get one right.

If a thousand Jackos make a thousand predictions on Yankee prospects for a thousand years...he'll probably get one right.

Just in case you forgot, I'm waiting on 2008 and 2009.

[Gom]

By the way...here is a quote from Pettitte from two days ago.

He said his stuff was so bad tonight that “I don’t know how I got anyone out” and praised Francisco Cervelli for helping him battle through. Cervelli is definitely impressing both in dealing with the pitchers and handling the bat.

When was the last time any pitcher credited Posada? Not in this decade.

[Dipre]

Curious to know, how old are you?

Not only are you a bastion of FAIL from what i've read on this site.

It's also a reference you're probably not old enough to catch.

So if you don't get the joke, then STFU and stop bringing your suck and fail into this awesome thread.

Good day to you, sir.

[Gom]

Jacko...we are still waiting. Or have you admitted defeat yet?

[castigs850]

YEA JACKOFF YOU BITCH, LETTSSSSSS GOOOOO

[Gom]

I think it's fair to say that Jacko has given up. I figured. What a douche.

[BoSox21]

you're delusional

[RobiForMVP]

you're delusional
:lol:

[yankees228]

I think it's fair to say that Jacko has given up. I figured. What a douche.

Gom, he has a ton of data to go through...

[Gom]

Gom, he has a ton of data to go through...

It won't make a bit of difference.

[yankees228]

It won't make a bit of difference.

If you're not going to give his research a chance, then you have a closed mind on the matter.

And if you have a closed mind on the matter, then you're not being as intelligent as I give you credit for.

[Dipre]

Here comes the WIN.

Wait for it, wait for it.......

[yankees228]

Here comes the WIN.

Wait for it, wait for it.......

What have I said that isn't factual?

[YAZMAN]

Here comes the WIN.

Wait for it, wait for it.......

You're touching yourself, aren't you?

[Dipre]

You're touching yourself, aren't you?

Nearly.

But don't interrupt history.

[Gom]

If you're not going to give his research a chance, then you have a closed mind on the matter.

And if you have a closed mind on the matter, then you're not being as intelligent as I give you credit for.
I'm not close-minded on the issue. Believe it or not, I was a big Posada supporter. My brother never was, and asked me to do the same exact thing...watch a game that he caught and count the number of strikes the pitcher lost. I admit, I was skeptical..but it only took one game for me to realize he was right. This was in 2007. Now I actively look for it.

The reason why I believe it won't matter is that the ERA difference between them is nearly one run a game in 2008, and over 4 runs in 2009. That isn't even taken into effect of how much better Molina is at throwing out runners. I'll give him a fair chance to make his point.

However, logic aside....

This is Jacko, the resident village idiot. He couldn't prove gravity. When he finds open condoms on the floor of his girl's room, he believes her when she tells him they're party favors. He lives in an alternate reality, not in this one.

Watching him try to make his point is going to be as fun as watching retarded people play bumper cars at the amusement park. They take that shit seriously, but in the end, they're still retarded. My favorite is the one who can't figure out how to back out of the corner. That one is Jacko.

[yankees228]

He tends to look at things with rose colored glasses on at times, but he does know his stuff pretty well. I'm willing to give it a chance, because what's the worst that could happen...

[example1]

If I were Jacksonianmarch--and I might be--I wouldn't waste my time with this argument.

Not only is Gom relying on a statistic that most sabermatricians have dismissed long ago, but he's also completely discounting the offensive difference of these players.

First, here's the children's version of the findings:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catcher's_ERA

Then the big boy's versions:

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=432#conclusions

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1489

The conclusions are two-fold. First, the difference between one catcher's game calling ability and another is nearly impossible to detect statistically, and very difficult to isolate. When isolate, it shows virtually no difference.

Second, this does not mean that there isn't a difference. The author relates it to "clutch" hitting, which is also very difficult to isolate, which also means it is virtually impossible to prove.

So, to me, that means that there is room for Gom to argue that there is a marginal difference between Posada and Molina if he wants to; there is also room for Jacko to say that Gom can't prove it. Consequently, the argument that Jacko can always make ("SHOW ME THE OPS!") will be a much stronger one indeed.

Gom, I agree that you have put together a series of solid posts that really try to prove your point, but they use a statistic that reputable people (Woolner and Bill James, to be specific) have shown is kind of bunk. To be fair though, the wikipedia article mentions that many Japanese managers DO use catcher ERA as an evaluation tool, so you're not completely on an island.

Personally, I would trust Bill James more than your brother or the Japanese managers who do things very differently than we do here, but that's just me.

In all seriousness, bravo to you for putting up the good fight, but the research simply doesn't back your hunch. It doesn't disprove it, but the numbers show that the best you'll get is that it is a hunch.

As a Red Sox fan, I will hope that the Yankees play Molina over Posada every day of the week. Not only is he a much worse hitter, but he also doesn't drastically improve the shitty arms that the Yankees have. He doesn't make their FB faster or their curveballs go over for strikes. The old addage is that if you can hit your spots and paint the black while changing speed, you'll be fine. The Yankee pitchers tend to grab too much plate and work from behind in the count. You should worry more about that than whether the catcher behind the plate is a chess master or a baffoon--especially when that baffoon puts up a .900+ OPS.

[Gom]

Example...I have never once made the contention of game-calling. Not once. Please go back and re-read my salient points. The very premise of your rebuttal is incorrect.

However, I made the contention of of framing pitches. I also think CERA is a very limited statistic, and only has relevance in comparing catchers on the same team. However, it is a very telling statistic for two catchers on the same team. Comparing CERA between say, Saltalamachia and McCann will yield results that are of no significance. Different leagues, teams, opponents, etc. This is why the stat has not not become mainstream. However, using it to compare two catchers on the same team is a different story. That is the strength in this statistic.

I've already tackled the OPS question. There is no question that Posada brings more offensively, to the tune of about half a run a game. Outside of Mauer, Posada is probably the best hitting catcher in baseball. I have no problem with him AT the plate. However, what he costs behind the plate is nearly 1 run a game, resulting in a net loss of half a run a game. I've shown this.

You say that the Yankees live on the corners. This is not true this season. They Yankees have 3 bonafide strikeout pitchers on their team in CC, Burnett, and Joba, and two in the pen in Rivera and Bruney. That argument doesn't hold water, at least this season.

I don't trust Bill James anywhere near as much as you do. He's a statistician. One of the best in the game. However, statistical analysis of this game has always been nothing more but trial and error. I don't put the blind faith in statistics that a lot here do. Those people are generally too lazy or lack the knowledge of what they see. Using both in conjunction is the best way to go about it. However, this is another topic for another thread.

This is the same guy who predicted a 3.35 ERA for Hughes this year. Japanese managers use CERA to determine their catchers as one of their parameters. Eventually, so will we. In this case, they are ahead of us, but we will catch up. This will happen when someone comes up with a better way to evaluate the effect catchers have on the game. Until then, idiots like Jacko will continue thinking offense is more important at baseballs most important defensive position. The problem with this is that we simply haven't developed a formula yet that can validate it. Until then, we are struck with the limitations of what we CAN quantify easily. Keep in mind, that only recently have we been able to quantify certain things, like line drive percentage, etc. It's only a matter of time until someone much smarter than any of us in mathematics figures something out. Keep in mind, it was only a few short years ago that Moneyball came out, and the premise of that book was OBP, and to hell with defense. Our knowledge of the game changes over time.

I'm still waiting on Jacko's results of 2008 and 2009, by the way. I guess I'll be waiting a long time.

The reality of the matter is that Posada adds about 1-2 runs a week over Molina offensively. The statistics show that. He costs them about the same PER GAME.

No contest Example. None whatsoever.

If we play Posada every game, with his inability to get pitches on the black, especially to teams like the Red Sox, who have patient hitters, we've lost the game before it even begins more than 50&#37; of the time.

The fact remains as follows: In 2008, Molina posted a CERA of 0.91 lower than Posada. Show me how Posada's offense makes up for that. In 2009, it's 4.12 as the difference, and I will acknowledge that the sample size is small enough to be taken into consideration, and I'm willing to work with just the 0.91 of 2008 [of course, our village idiot will go back to claiming 2007, and the two months that Molina was there as the backup...and not realizing that in those two months, Molina's CERA was lower than Posada's, lol].

I'm still waiting Jacko. Show me how Posada's bat makes up the difference.

[castigs850]

what up now bitch

[Spudboy]

This issue is tired. It has been amusing, but is now a bore. Let it go Gom and Jacko. It's just not of consequence.

[example1]

Example...I have never once made the contention of game-calling. Not once. Please go back and re-read my salient points. The very premise of your rebuttal is incorrect.


Game calling seems a bigger part of allowing or disallowing runs than pitch framing. A pitcher and catcher pick and deliver a pitch hundreds of times a game, in every leverage situation possible. A catcher successfully frames only a few pitches every game, and his framing depends both on the umpire being wrong and the pitcher making a framable pitch that a batter takes.

If game calling between catchers is shown to be statistically elusive, then pitch framing is definitely going to be a hard one to show.



However, I made the contention of of framing pitches. I also think CERA is a very limited statistic, and only has relevance in comparing catchers on the same team.

It is probably a better comparison on the same team because you control a little bit for that variable as well, but...

I do not like it here, or there.



However, it is a very telling statistic for two catchers on the same team.


I do not like it anywhere.




This is why the stat has not not become mainstream.

CERA has been around since 1989. There's been plenty of chance for it to become mainstream. It just isn't a good measurement of a particular catcher's impact because there is too much 'noise' in the data.



I've already tackled the OPS question. There is no question that Posada brings more offensively, to the tune of about half a run a game. Outside of Mauer, Posada is probably the best hitting catcher in baseball. I have no problem with him AT the plate. However, what he costs behind the plate is nearly 1 run a game, resulting in a net loss of half a run a game. I've shown this.


I don't agree that CERA is a good measure of their value behind the plate. Neither do a lot of other people. Intuitively it doesn't seem right, and you acknowledge yourself that it sucks. It's conclusions are easily misleading.



I don't trust Bill James anywhere near as much as you do. He's a statistician. One of the best in the game. However, statistical analysis of this game has always been nothing more but trial and error.

I'm not sure what you mean by trial and error. In the sense that statistical analysis has historically come from watching the game and hypothisizing about how something could be measured, I guess it is trial and error; in the same way Chemistry is trial and error. It doesn't mean you don't eventually get something right.

The more variables you control for, and the stronger the correlation across a large sample, the stronger the argument. That's what it is. CERA doesn't usually control for enough variables, because the more variables you control for the lower the sample size, and there isn't much room for reducing sample size.



This will happen when someone comes up with a better way to evaluate the effect catchers have on the game.


But it won't be someone like Bill James...


Keep in mind, that only recently have we been able to quantify certain things, like line drive percentage, etc. It's only a matter of time until someone much smarter than any of us in mathematics figures something out.

Is this a scout or a person who does their thinking through trial and error?



Keep in mind, it was only a few short years ago that Moneyball came out, and the premise of that book was OBP, and to hell with defense. Our knowledge of the game changes over time.


The premise of that book was OBP and to hell with average, IF other teams in the league are undervaluing OBP and overvaluing AVG. If other teams start undervaluing something else--power arms, draft picks, LOOGYS--then those things should be exploited with the goal of attaining a sabermetrically predetermined run differential over the course of a season. That's how teams that are at a financial disadvantage, like the A's, can create successful teams.

People read too much into the OBP stuff if they think that OBP is the crux of Bill James' work or the goal of sabermetrics. It was one strongly supported belief among many.



The fact remains as follows: In 2008, Molina posted a CERA of 0.91 lower than Posada.


But Posada only had 234 INN. Molina had 3 times that amount.



Show me how Posada's offense makes up for that.




In 2009, it's 4.12 as the difference, and I will acknowledge that the sample size is small enough to be taken into consideration, and I'm willing to work with just the 0.91 of 2008

[of course, our village idiot will go back to claiming 2007, and the two months that Molina was there as the backup...and not realizing that in those two months, Molina's CERA was lower than Posada's, lol].

From what I see, 2007:

Molina, 29 G with NYY, CERA: 13.39 (169 INN)
Posada, 138 G with NYY, CERA: 4.50 (1111 INN)

Where am I going wrong? :dunno:


Long story short, Posada is the 3rd most valuable player on the Yankees this year according to WARP, and was 2nd in 2007. Molina hasn't cracked a WARP over 2 in his career.

Stupid argument, but I commend your passion. CERA just doesn't cut it for alot of people.

[YAZMAN]

The doc must be in surgery.


"errr...snake a tube down her nose and I'll be with her in, uh, 4 or 5 hours..."

[jacksonianmarch]

I know you and I dont always get along example. But I agree wholeheartedly. Maybe if you tell him, he'll listen. Cause he sure as heck doesnt listen to me when I tell him.

[ORS]

The reason CERA is such a weak stat is that many teams have the backup catcher play with one particular pitcher, and therefore the catcher's CERA is tied directly to that one pitcher's performance, whether for the good or bad. While Posada wasn't the backup, he only caught a backup's share of games last year, and almost none of their best pitcher, Mussina. That's what makes CERA so misleading. I mean, look at a team like the Sox. Varitek's CERA compared to his backup is dependent on Tim Wakefield and how he pitches, and virtually nothing else. It tells you nothing about how well the other catcher is performing relative to Varitek. Then add in how even the best starters can vary from game to game regardless of who is catching, and when you do get an equal mix you still have such a huge compenent (the pitcher) muddying the waters to a point that the stat is virtually useless.

The framing pitches argument has yet to address what I brought up in a gamethread about missed ball and strike calls. Over the whole league, in other words the average for all pitchers, both good and bad, the OPSAfter difference from 0-1 to 1-0, on the first pitch, is greater than .200. From each count after that, the difference is increased. If framing pitches and getting calls your way was such a repeatable skill, then you'd be able to identify who was good at it through the results. The findings of those attempting to isolate catcher impact on pitchers would not be "immeasureable" or "insignificant", not with that much of a gap after the first pitch.

[castigs850]

I know you and I dont always get along example. But I agree wholeheartedly. Maybe if you tell him, he'll listen. Cause he sure as heck doesnt listen to me when I tell him.

make your picks shit dick

[Gom]

Bumped....

Because what this board needs is more GOM SMACKDOWN!

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Forgot how awesome this thread was.