6/11 Sox go fishing (vs Marlins)

[evilhand]

Really now do they? That's why the formula has been updated frequently (generally by changing the exponent) to match empirical results. Convenient don't you agree?

 

Care to explain what you mean here? I'm unaware of changes to the exponent as the formula has been (runs scored^2)/(runs scored^2+runs allowed^) since its inception.

 

Maybe you're referring to the use of 1.83 instead of 2 as the exponent by baseball-reference.com in an attempt to make the formula more accurate, but why is that a bad thing? And why does it have to be "convenient" instead of an effort to improve it?

 

Formulas are tweaked all the time in an effort to improve their functionality. That's a good thing.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Right now' date=' Pods and Nava have replaced Crawford and Ellsbury rather well. You have gotten nearly nothing out of RF since Sweeney got concussed, so Ross may be a help. I am not saying they will continue that, but you have actually gotten good production out of them. Your problem is that Pedroia is hurt, Youkilis is awful, AdGon cannot hit, and Aviles has fallen off a rock[/quote']

 

And when Pods and Nava were hitting well, how were the Red Sox doing? They were 16-6.

 

Then Podsednik started OPS'ing .750 in June, Nava has OPS'd .713 since June 2nd, and the Red Sox are 1-7 in the past 8. They're getting less than zero power from their OF. In fact, I can't remember the last time one of their OF hit a HR.

 

Guys like Ellsbury and Ross can hit 20+ HR, and Crawford can hit 12-15 with 7-10 triples.

[SoxFanForsyth]

But I do agree about Aviles. If we're going to get pure s*** production from our SS, I would rather have Iglesias come out and play elite defense.

[jacksonianmarch]

The Yankees pitching is on an unsustainable tear right now' date=' kind of like the Sox pitching was on during their 16-6 run. They're not going to keep throwing to a sub-2.30 ERA by any means. If you don't think that the Red Sox are very capable of going on a 13-3 or 15-4 run and the Yankees are capable of going on a 2-9 run, then you're delusional.[/quote']

 

The Yankees arent going on a 2-9 run. I'd be very surprised if that happened. Also, the Yankees starters had UNDERACHIEVED up until this recent run. Hughes had an ERA near 7 before he started throwing harder. Nova was running an ERA in the 6 range before his last few starts. CC has been CC. Pettitte has picked up where he left off when he retired in 2010. And Kuroda is pitching about where you expect, a little worse than his 2011 line in the NL West. It's not like our staff is over their head this yr, they are just correcting down to what they should be doing.

 

Also, I do not think the sox are going on a 13-3 run until they get their offense straightened out. And that means getting players who are playing straightened out AND getting their injured players back AND having them play at a high level. I think a lot of people are underestimating the fact that the rehabbing players will likely not come back on fire. The rotation hasnt been bad lately, to be honest with you. Doubront and Bard threw up stinkers last time out, but Buchholz has been good, Lester and Beckett havent been bad either.

[jung]

And all that "hasn't been bad pitching" has gotten them how many wins? Their pitching is improving but you have to look at their pitching in relation to the other staffs around the league. It is not like they are pitching in a vacuum. They are being out-dualed in pitching duals against teams with incredibly weak hitting that have dynamite pitching.

[SoxFanForsyth]

The Yankees arent going on a 2-9 run. I'd be very surprised if that happened. Also, the Yankees starters had UNDERACHIEVED up until this recent run. Hughes had an ERA near 7 before he started throwing harder. Nova was running an ERA in the 6 range before his last few starts. CC has been CC. Pettitte has picked up where he left off when he retired in 2010. And Kuroda is pitching about where you expect, a little worse than his 2011 line in the NL West. It's not like our staff is over their head this yr, they are just correcting down to what they should be doing.

 

Also, I do not think the sox are going on a 13-3 run until they get their offense straightened out. And that means getting players who are playing straightened out AND getting their injured players back AND having them play at a high level. I think a lot of people are underestimating the fact that the rehabbing players will likely not come back on fire. The rotation hasnt been bad lately, to be honest with you. Doubront and Bard threw up stinkers last time out, but Buchholz has been good, Lester and Beckett havent been bad either.

 

Wow. How quickly we forget, huh? Weren't the Yankees just on a 2-7 slump just a couple weeks ago??

 

You actually think that the Yankees are going to really throw to a sub 2.30 ERA the rest of the season, that's hilarious. You talk about the Yankees pitching underachieving. Hm. I guess Lester and Buchholz haven't been underachieving, but you wouldn't want to mention that.

 

So what about when the Sox were 1-8 over a 9 game span. Would you have said "I don't think the Sox are going on a 13-3 run" at that point? Because they did just that. And the offense can get straightened out in any given game. It's not like it's a gradual build up.

 

The Red Sox aren't playing well because they're hitting .130 with RISP. That normalizes. After watching the Yankees do the exact same thing, you should know that as well or better than anyone.

[FredLynn]

Eck just said what no one else has said thus far. Our offense is mediocre. It's getting exposed.

 

Thats a bold quote and flies in the face of the facts. Yes, its been mediocre over the short term. But last I checked we were second in runs and OPS, even with all those position players out. Eck made a mistake: its our pitching, and its always been our pitching, at least for the last few years.

[Elktonnick]

Care to explain what you mean here? I'm unaware of changes to the exponent as the formula has been (runs scored^2)/(runs scored^2+runs allowed^) since its inception.

 

Maybe you're referring to the use of 1.83 instead of 2 as the exponent by baseball-reference.com in an attempt to make the formula more accurate, but why is that a bad thing? And why does it have to be "convenient" instead of an effort to improve it?

 

Formulas are tweaked all the time in an effort to improve their functionality. That's a good thing.

 

It is convenient that one keeps changing a formula to match empirical results. That means a formala is not predictive but rather reactive. I can always come up with a formula the explains past results. It is quite another to come up with a formula that predicts future results. "A commonly held belief about pythagorean expectation is that its function is to predict wins and losses given the runs scored/runs allowed data. This is not true: it is merely a statement of a relationship, and it’s very important not to forget that. "

 

If BTW you are suggesting that the Red Sox are better than their record that is more a philosophical than empirical discussion.

[jacksonianmarch]

Wow. How quickly we forget' date=' huh? Weren't the Yankees just on a 2-7 slump just a couple weeks ago??[/quote']

 

That's 2-7, not 2-9

 

You actually think that the Yankees are going to really throw to a sub 2.30 ERA the rest of the season, that's hilarious. You talk about the Yankees pitching underachieving. Hm. I guess Lester and Buchholz haven't been underachieving, but you wouldn't want to mention that.

 

I never said the Yankees would throw to a 2.30ERA. Just that they were due for a correction from the s*** they were throwing. Also, Buchholz is an unknown due to injury and Lester has been this mediocre since the All Star break. Look it up

 

So what about when the Sox were 1-8 over a 9 game span. Would you have said "I don't think the Sox are going on a 13-3 run" at that point? Because they did just that.

 

Their best run was 10-3. They did not go 13-3

 

And the offense can get straightened out in any given game. It's not like it's a gradual build up.

 

The Red Sox aren't playing well because they're hitting .130 with RISP. That normalizes. After watching the Yankees do the exact same thing, you should know that as well or better than anyone.

 

The Yankees are still not hitting with RISP. They are just hitting enough homers with runners on 1st to win games. If we go by that philosophy then the Yankees are due to start hitting in a big way. I doubt it happens, to be totally honest. Also, the whole straightened out thing may happen, but you need a lot of dominoes to fall correctly. If they dont, they the slump continues.

 

To be honest with you, I think the sox do make a little run here. Maybe a 7-3 run, get over .500 and start pulling you back in.

[jung]

I will say this about the Sox offense since that seems to be a topic people are more interested in discussing tonight....the Sox are not well adapted to playing small ball...they never have been.

 

I have been saying for a long time now that the post steroid era is bring baseball closer to the 70's in the way the game is played. This team really does not know how to play the game a rally at a time...a run at a time....it gives up runs to easily and it tries to make them up to quickly.

 

We don't move runners along...we don't get TIMELY hitting. The teams we are playing make more out of a walk and a hit than we can make out of three hits even if one is for extra bases. We let a utility infielder play SS because as an organization we don't have enough respect for what defense can really do for you.

 

I have said this for a year now...this whole organization is in for a post steroid shock because if you look at the "success" or lack of success the Sox had before the steroid era....unless they change their game, they are headed back to that sort of performance as a team and as an organization.

[kapsis21]

I am at a loss of words right now. And I really hope they cone out of this funk soon otherwise we are going to stay at the bottom all year

[jacksonianmarch]

Thats a bold quote and flies in the face of the facts. Yes' date=' its been mediocre over the short term. But last I checked we were second in runs and OPS, even with all those position players out. Eck made a mistake: its our pitching, and its always been our pitching, at least for the last few years.[/quote']

 

Boom or bust. The offense has been the problem over this little spell. In the last 8 games, the O has scored 25 runs. That is entirely the reason you arent winning since the SP has actually not been horrible in that run

[FredLynn]

It is' date=' but the Yankees and Rays are winning with pitching and that leads to less slumps and more runs of sustained dominance. You take a look at the teams who are realistically going to be in the playoffs, and the only team without reliable pitching is the Rangers. Holland and Feliz on the DL, Darvish pitching well, Oswalt trying to pitch in the AL, Harrison doing well, etc. The other teams in the running (CWS, ANA, NYY, TB, DET) all have solid pitching. That means falling behind and catching up is going to be a lot harder to do[/quote']

 

Unfortunately, what you say is true. Its very tough to bash your way into the playoffs without decent pitching. And there are so many teams now that we are chasing. Possible to do; not easy to do.

[FredLynn]

Boom or bust. The offense has been the problem over this little spell. In the last 8 games' date=' the O has scored 25 runs. That is entirely the reason you arent winning since the SP has actually not been horrible in that run[/quote']

 

That happens to all offenses, as you know. Small sample sizes skew stuff like that. Right now, for the season, we are second in runs scored and third in OPS. I am not at all concerned about scoring runs. We will snap out of this; you know that is true. Whether we do it now or when it is too late is up for debate. But as you said earlier, its nearly impossible to do without at least decent pitching. We are still at #13 in ERA in the AL. That is the issue.

[jung]

V is making a fool out of himself now....."pitchers are now throwing pitches with so much late breaking stuff that humans can no longer successfully call balls and strikes"....are you out of you f***ing mind V.

 

Please shut up and get your team under control cause pretty soon you guys are going to make enemies of the umps and you don't like the calls now....wait till you cross that bridge...shut up and play ball.

[Bellhorn04]

Thats a bold quote and flies in the face of the facts. Yes' date=' its been mediocre over the short term. But last I checked we were second in runs and OPS, even with all those position players out. Eck made a mistake: its our pitching, and its always been our pitching, at least for the last few years.[/quote']

 

It was mostly pitching but our offense is hurting us lately too. The last 3 games we lost 4-2, 4-3 and 4-1. With good offense we could have won 2 of those games anyway.

[jung]

Decent pitching won't get it done either....we are going back to the kind of baseball that has been played for most of the history of pro baseball and teams will generally need better pitching than what we have gotten by with in recent memory or said another way, we are going back to a period that favors pitching and defense again. Many baseball fans have never even seen that kind of baseball and I am not at all sure that Uncle Bud is going to be thrilled. But it is what it is.

 

The number of starters you see pitching 100+ per game is just the start. Although the changes in power number should already be obvious.

[evilhand]

It is convenient that one keeps changing a formula to match empirical results. That means a formala is not predictive but rather reactive. I can always come up with a formula the explains past results. It is quite another to come up with a formula that predicts future results. "A commonly held belief about pythagorean expectation is that its function is to predict wins and losses given the runs scored/runs allowed data. This is not true: it is merely a statement of a relationship' date=' and it’s very important not to forget that. "[/quote']

 

I didn't say it would predict wins and losses, I said it would correlate with future performance. There's a very important difference there. A team under performing their Pythagorean record can be expected to play better going forward. That is not the same thing as saying a Pythagorean record of 12-8 will always (or often) mean a 12-8 record in reality. There is an inherent amount of variation to be expected (typically +/-3 wins).

 

That's why they aren't used for anything other than trying to figure out if a team is under performing or over performing their peripherals.

 

If BTW you are suggesting that the Red Sox are better than their record that is more a philosophical than empirical discussion.

 

Yes, it is. That's typical of many of the more advanced metrics, though. They're not measuring real world results. They're telling us things like whether a player is performing at sustainable levels, or is a player in the process of a break out versus a simple hot streak?

 

And that's the point. We should be trying to determine if the Sox are really as bad as their record or if we can expect them to perform better going forward. Isn't that what you and others are trying to do regarding Youk? You're just using the old eyeball test rather than these stats.

 

These stats do a better job that people's eyes in almost every instance, though. So I'm wondering why you would discard these tools so vehemently.

[redsoxbeatz]

We have the most runs scored in our division and the most allowed.

 

pitching problem.

[jacksonianmarch]

I didn't say it would predict wins and losses, I said it would correlate with future performance. There's a very important difference there. A team under performing their Pythagorean record can be expected to play better going forward. That is not the same thing as saying a Pythagorean record of 12-8 will always (or often) mean a 12-8 record in reality. There is an inherent amount of variation to be expected (typically +/-3 wins).

 

That's why they aren't used for anything other than trying to figure out if a team is under performing or over performing their peripherals.

 

 

 

Yes, it is. That's typical of many of the more advanced metrics, though. They're not measuring real world results. They're telling us things like whether a player is performing at sustainable levels, or is a player in the process of a break out versus a simple hot streak?

 

And that's the point. We should be trying to determine if the Sox are really as bad as their record or if we can expect them to perform better going forward. Isn't that what you and others are trying to do regarding Youk? You're just using the old eyeball test rather than these stats.

 

These stats do a better job that people's eyes in almost every instance, though. So I'm wondering why you would discard these tools so vehemently.

 

Evil, you have to also look at the offense actually correcting. There is no earthly way the sox offense should be putting up the runs they are when really only two guys are overachieving or achieving what they should. You have Ellsbury and Crawford hurt. You have AdGon and Youkilis underperforming in a big way. You have Pedroia underperforming. You have Aviles playing like s***. The only guys actually playing well are Salty and Ortiz. WMB has started off well, but he has even tailed off of late. You assume Ells and Crawford arent coming back for another 2-4 weeks. My guess is the offense is coming back to earth and with it go the sox losses.

[jung]

I just don't know that it matters relative to Youk. We have a player that is cost controlled ready to move into that position. Youk has to be traded. The most interesting element relative to his value is that nobody appears willing to give anything for him and the Sox are very likely going to have to eat salary to move him. So none of these predictors appear to be helping his perceived value in the only place where it matters, in the market place.

 

I doubt the baseball team that has James on its payroll is not already using every advanced statistical variable it has to help enhance the value of a player that they are actively shopping. Yet, the market place does not appear to be buying it.

[example1]

I don't have much to add to any threads these days. The Sox generally look pathetic and listless recently. They need to be winning 3 out of every 5 games now, and they are barely getting 2 out of 5. 1-5 during a Baltimore/Nationals homestand is weak-sauce.

 

Not sure what can be done. I've got better things to do with my time than watch losses to s***** teams. I hope they win, I really do, but with two young kids at home and 10 hour workdays, I find myself checking the scores instead of watching the game on DVR at home.

 

I'm always the optimist, but a loss is much easier to stomach if it only takes 2 minutes of checking the scoreboard.

[jacksonianmarch]

The sox need to play .604 ball from here on out to win 90 games this yr

[jacksonianmarch]

btw Bard converted back to relief. See his thread for an update

[evilhand]

V is making a fool out of himself now....."pitchers are now throwing pitches with so much late breaking stuff that humans can no longer successfully call balls and strikes"....are you out of you f***ing mind V.

 

Please shut up and get your team under control cause pretty soon you guys are going to make enemies of the umps and you don't like the calls now....wait till you cross that bridge...shut up and play ball.

 

He actually has a point. Here are the strike zone plots from tonight.

 

LHH

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/cache/fastmap.php-pitchSel=all&game=gid_2012_06_11_bosmlb_miamlb_1&sp_type=2&s_type=7.gif

 

RHH

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/pfxVB/cache/fastmap.php-pitchSel=all&game=gid_2012_06_11_bosmlb_miamlb_1&sp_type=3&s_type=7.gif

 

The solid box is the actual strike zone. The dotted one is the typical zone called for a hitter on that side. Green are called balls, red are called strikes. Only called pitches show up on the graph.

 

Looking at them I count 9 clear missed calls versus lefties, 6 versus righties and 7 between the two that could have gone the other way and a lot of inconsistency calling the same zone all game.

 

Umpiring, especially pitch calling is atrociously bad in MLB and would benefit greatly from the introduction of technology to assist (or even replace) umpires for that role.

[evilhand]

Evil' date=' you have to also look at the offense actually correcting. There is no earthly way the sox offense should be putting up the runs they are when really only two guys are overachieving or achieving what they should. You have Ellsbury and Crawford hurt. You have AdGon and Youkilis underperforming in a big way. You have Pedroia underperforming. You have Aviles playing like s***. The only guys actually playing well are Salty and Ortiz. WMB has started off well, but he has even tailed off of late. You assume Ells and Crawford arent coming back for another 2-4 weeks. My guess is the offense is coming back to earth and with it go the sox losses.[/quote']

 

Sure, but assuming none of that will get better isn't really realistic. Ross is about to start his rehab, Kalish is mashing and may get called up soon, history suggests Youk won't continue to struggle. Gonzalez is a bit of a mystery, but even if his power doesn't come back this year, he can be an effective hitter and we should expect at least some improvement going forward.

 

And while the offense may drop a bit until at least Ellsbury and Ross get back and Pedroia starts feeling better, the pitching has been improving (especially the starting rotation) which should mitigate some of that.

[jung]

It does not matter that ball and strike calling is atrociously bad. I think it is atrociously bad and I think MLB should do something about it. That and a dime might buy me a cup of coffee. While I have outlined in general some of the things I think MLB should do, I have not even broached the topic of an automated system because it will never happen.

 

V should shut up cause umps are what we have and umps are what we are going to have. We are not going to some automated system or software based process for calling balls and strikes. It is not going to happen. It might have a chance to happen if you could do away with umps completely but you can't. Since you can't that is the umps trump card. They will never allow a system to replace them as the arbiters of balls and strikes.

 

The point is, if he does not shut up he will make enemies of the umps. He is putting himself squarely on the side of an argument he cannot win and for which the Sox may suffer mightily if he is not careful. I doubt he will like that result if he makes enemies of the umps and that is the only thing he is going to accomplish going down this road.

[evilhand]

Just because a broken system is controlled by a corrupt and incompetent group of people, that doesn't mean people affected by that system being sub par shouldn't complain. Umpires need to be held accountable for horrible performance. The only way they will be is if enough negative attention is sent their way. MLB doesn't want a ton of bad publicity regarding their officiating like the NBA has.

 

Besides, a system being broken is no reason for Bobby or the players to simply shut up and take it. When calls are bad, they should absolutely get upset about it. Mentioning it in press conferences is frowned upon by the league, but is a great way to continue to draw attention to it.

 

I wish more teams would do it... and some have. It's a huge issue that needs to be fixed. As for pitchfx systems being used to assist or replace umps in pitch calling... there was a time where people insisted instant replay would never be used in a million years. Progress is slow and sometimes difficult to implement, but it does happen.

[jung]

Besides, a system being broken is no reason for Bobby or the players to simply shut up and take it

 

The point is again not whether the umps should draw fire. If V insists on attacking the system itself in such a way that ultimately means fewer umps or less work he is doomed. He is pissing into the wind and making enemies of a group that can only hurt him. Should the league do something...no question.

 

However, V should stop at pointing out the problem and should leave it to the league to come up with the process for change. That is not his function and suggesting that humans can no longer do that job is the same thing as trying to direct the process for change. Trying to guide that process for change such that the implication is to limit the amount of game activity the umps control is the same thing as taking food out of their mouths. Even the NBA has not addressed its issues in such a manner that there are fewer man hours of ref's work. There are more refs per game than ever, not fewer.

 

A team manager is in no position to fight the fight V is fighting especially in the public forum of the press.

 

You are still missing the point. It is not whether V should or should not point out that there is an issue. It is whether he sticks his neck and more importantly his organization's neck into the noose by suggesting a solution that implies taking food out of the umps mouths. He turns them into enemies in a battle he cannot win and that is stupid! Aa usual V does not know which fights to fight and which to leave alone because it is more important to him that he show off his intellectual prowess which is also usually lacking as is the case here as well. V has the political sensitivities of an earth worm, not quite the skill set that suggests he should be sticking his team's neck in the noose like this.

 

While he pisses into the breeze of implying solutions that should be offered from other quarters he has allowed the whole situation with his team in its interaction with the umps to get completely out of control. That mess is now off the hook. You have players screaming at umps all the way off the field and into the dugout and down the ramps to the clubhouse and umps screaming back as they leave the field with both groups close to coming to blows. Are you as crazy as V is? Do you actually think that allowing the thing to boil over into something close to a barroom brawl does this team any good what-so-ever?

 

If V wanted to actually be part of the solution he would go about this in such a manner that would get him selected to what will surely be some sort of blue ribbon investigative effort by the league as a means of coming up with a solution. If there is going to be any activity at all directed at resolving this issue, that will be the first step. V has all but assured that he does not have a snowballs chance in hell of becoming part of that blue ribbon committee. The league is not going to appoint one of the combatants to the judicial panel!

[Elktonnick]

I didn't say it would predict wins and losses, I said it would correlate with future performance. There's a very important difference there. A team under performing their Pythagorean record can be expected to play better going forward. That is not the same thing as saying a Pythagorean record of 12-8 will always (or often) mean a 12-8 record in reality. There is an inherent amount of variation to be expected (typically +/-3 wins).

 

That's why they aren't used for anything other than trying to figure out if a team is under performing or over performing their peripherals.

 

 

 

Yes, it is. That's typical of many of the more advanced metrics, though. They're not measuring real world results. They're telling us things like whether a player is performing at sustainable levels, or is a player in the process of a break out versus a simple hot streak?

 

And that's the point. We should be trying to determine if the Sox are really as bad as their record or if we can expect them to perform better going forward. Isn't that what you and others are trying to do regarding Youk? You're just using the old eyeball test rather than these stats.

 

These stats do a better job that people's eyes in almost every instance, though. So I'm wondering why you would discard these tools so vehemently.

 

Because while they are a uesful tool, they obscure the real issues afffecting performance and results. The Red Sox are a prime example. Their over devotion and worship at the shrine of sabermtrics has led to the disaster that is the 2012 team. I have James's book and several others and am quite familar with all the sabermetric tools. I just think in the end baseball teams win or lose because of factors that over devoltion to stats obscure. Youk previous stats are meaningless because he is not the player he was. Watching him play every day tells me that.