Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

Recommended Posts

Posted
The 2010 AL ERA was 4.14' date=' and a good amount of innings for a SP should, at a minimum, be 150.[/quote']

 

I am very interested in the trend of 2010 as the "Year of the pitcher" and how the end of the steroid era brought in such a monstrous year for pitching last year, so I was looking at some of the yearly statistics from baseball reference, and I think you are a little off-base with this argument. Using ERA average for AL pitchers instead of AL starters is very misleading to begin with, and besides 2010, there really isn't a trend.

 

2007: 4.61, 2008: 4.48, 2009: 4.62, 2010: 4.26. I think one year is a little too soon to assume that this dropoff is going to continue.

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Old-Timey Member
Posted
I am very interested in the trend of 2010 as the "Year of the pitcher" and how the end of the steroid era brought in such a monstrous year for pitching last year' date=' so I was looking at some of the yearly statistics from baseball reference, and I think you are a little off-base with this argument. [b']Using ERA average for AL pitchers instead of AL starters is very misleading to begin with[/b], and besides 2010, there really isn't a trend.

 

2007: 4.61, 2008: 4.48, 2009: 4.62, 2010: 4.26. I think one year is a little too soon to assume that this dropoff is going to continue.

Please justify the point in bold. I don't see why you would arbitrarily drop such a large portion of the data.

 

It's interesting that you state an interest in seeing the effect of the steroid era without including any years from the tail end of that era in your data chain. Of course, if you did, that's where you see the recent trend. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that you've come rushing in to defend Jacko so frequently lately, and you came in half-cocked again. Maybe it's something else, either way, it's wrong.

 

Glad Pal can show some accuracy to ORS' inaccurate statements. Thanks

Again, no investigation of your own, and a solid lapping up of the ideas of others. If you had looked into this, you would have seen Palodios' errors, but you weren't looking for a correct answer, only self-serving affirmation.

 

Newton once said he was able to see so far (in the advancement of science) by standing on the shoulders of giants (the scientists that preceded him). I guess you are content to stand on the shoulders of midgets (Sterling and Palodios).

Posted

I'm not usually one to applaud insults, but sometimes you have to just give credit where credit is due ... and the following is the best one I've ever seen on this site (not that it's necessarily true either, not offering an opinion there) ...

 

"Newton once said he was able to see so far (in the advancement of science) by standing on the shoulders of giants (the scientists that preceded him). I guess you are content to stand on the shoulders of midgets (Sterling and Palodios)."

Old-Timey Member
Posted
You are so quick to pounce on others predictions' date=' how bout you belly up and give us what you think will be Nova's line ORS?[/quote']

I'm not foolish enough to think this is a game that can be predicted.

Posted
Please justify the point in bold. I don't see why you would arbitrarily drop such a large portion of the data.

 

I don't understand how comparing a starting pitcher to other starting pitchers is arbitrary. They often have different skills sets, and do different things.

 

It's interesting that you state an interest in seeing the effect of the steroid era without including any years from the tail end of that era in your data chain.

 

I was more talking about my interests, rather than going into those numbers, which are much higher. I used 2007-2010 simply because they're recent, and probably a lot less tainted by power numbers. 2010 was a significant dropoff, but compared to the other recent years, its somewhat of an outlier.

 

I didn't mean to put you on the defensive, as I said, its definitely something I enjoyed reading about last year. I think that it was simply a good year for pitching. Injuries, an influx of young arms, off years from some players, maybe even weather. Despite the .297 BABIP on the year, I do wonder if it was influenced by a good deal of luck simply from the anecdote of the no-hitters.

Posted
I'm not usually one to applaud insults' date=' but sometimes you have to just give credit where credit is due ... and the following is the best one I've ever seen on this site (not that it's necessarily true either, not offering an opinion there) "[/quote']

 

No offense taken. I appreciated it as well :lol:

Posted
So you pounce on others' predictions like you know all, but don't have thesack to step up and say what you think will happen. That's a bush move there. A bush move. Gives you all the freedom to blast away with no accountability. No balls
Old-Timey Member
Posted
So you pounce on others' predictions like you know all' date=' but don't have thesack to step up and say what you think will happen. That's a bush move there. A bush move. Gives you all the freedom to blast away with no accountability. No balls[/quote']

No, your machismo BS won't float here. I think it's silly to try and predict the outcome of a baseball season and even sillier to tout yourself if/when you are correct. It's guesswork, at best. However, it's not like I've shared no opinion on the matter. You set a number, I disagreed with it. Stop pretending like I'm running from something. I'm on the hook for my disagreement.

 

Oh, and let's not forget since this seems to be a running theme with you lately, when you get backed into a corner you start lashing out against my manhood. I had the sack to serve in an active duty USMC infantry unit. You went to Med School. That should take care of this nonsense.

Posted
Jeter has the range of a dead ox. That ball was hit about 2 steps from him and he didnt even come close

 

3 years! 15 million! Captain Clutch!

 

And Tex is raking.

Posted
I don't even know why the Twins bother making the trip. They could cut some expenses and give their guys rest by just skipping the Yankees series.
Posted
It's the long ball again for this team. 4 homers in the last 2 games and only 8 runs. We gotta get more runners on for these long balls. Regardless, Tex looks VERY good right now and ARod doesnt look too bad himself. That was the biggest disappointment last yr was that our #3 and #4 spots had down yrs.
Verified Member
Posted
I don't even know why the Twins bother making the trip. They could cut some expenses and give their guys rest by just skipping the Yankees series.

 

It's a long game.

Posted
CC looks alright tonight. He still isnt his usual dominant self' date=' but he's around the zone better than he has been in the past 2 Aprils[/quote']

 

Better than 2009, sure. But at times last year, he was pretty damn good early on.

Posted
I don't even know why the Twins bother making the trip. They could cut some expenses and give their guys rest by just skipping the Yankees series.

 

It would actually cost them more to skip playing the Yankees due to the loss of sold out stadium ticket sales and TV revenue.

Posted
It would actually cost them more to skip playing the Yankees due to the loss of sold out stadium ticket sales and TV revenue.
The tickets are already sold. No refunds for a forfeit.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund
The Talk Sox Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Red Sox community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...