3rd Third III

[sk7326]

Pablo has tied the major league lead for errors by a 3rd baseman with Escobar with 4 and we are only 15 games in. Add to that a limited range and his defense is an issue. The season is early of course but he is hitting 224 at this juncture. Because of his contract, I believe the Sox will stay with him well into May and hope for improvement. The team has issues with the offense so it is hard to hide a guy like Pablo, meaning we meed him to produce like a player in his prime, otherwise we should investigate good looking options.

 

15 games in ... might not make another error for 85 games - this is not linear. And errors mostly aren't helpful as indicators of anything.

[Kimmi]

15 games in ... might not make another error for 85 games - this is not linear. And errors mostly aren't helpful as indicators of anything.

 

A voice of reason.

[S5Dewey]

15 games in ... might not make another error for 85 games - this is not linear. And errors mostly aren't helpful as indicators of anything.

 

Uhhh... errors are a good indication of a player who's making a lot of mistakes and in the process giving away a lot of outs. I know I keep railing about this but I guess I have to: Giving a team an extra 1/3 of an inning is HUGE.

[Spudboy]

A voice of reason.

 

I think Pablow looks more athletic than what I remember of him in SF. A small sample sized subjective assessment to be sure.

 

I think that he just needs a lot more reps. At least that is my hope.

[Spudboy]

Uhhh... errors are a good indication of a player who's making a lot of mistakes and in the process giving away a lot of outs. I know I keep railing about this but I guess I have to: Giving a team an extra 1/3 of an inning is HUGE.

 

And if he continues to screw up he will be replaced.

[jad]

How are errors "not indicative of anything"? Or is this the Frank Malzone theory of old: he made the most errors because he got to the most balls.

[Spudboy]

How are errors "not indicative of anything"? Or is this the Frank Malzone theory of old: he made the most errors because he got to the most balls.

 

I think he may have meant that a small sample size of errors may not be indicative of anything. Still, Pablow needs to do much better in the field without trying to do too much.

[jad]

I think he may have meant that a small sample size of errors may not be indicative of anything. Still, Pablow needs to do much better in the field without trying to do too much.

 

OK. Fair enough. as in "these particular 4 or 5 errors" don't mean much. I'm not sure what else we have to go on, though. I've seen him make some decent plays, no spectacular ones (although I can't say they haven't existed).

[notin]

Uhhh... errors are a good indication of a player who's making a lot of mistakes and in the process giving away a lot of outs. I know I keep railing about this but I guess I have to: Giving a team an extra 1/3 of an inning is HUGE.

 

Yes and no.

 

Not all errors are equal, and while many are obvious, plenty more are borderline judgment calls. If one of these errors is ruled a hit, did the fielder still give an extra out or not?

 

Not to mention, errors are only awarded if the player touches the ball. There are a huge number of defensive miscues when no one touches the ball. And worse yet, since someone had to touch a ball to be charged with an error, the system actually rewards players with less range. How on earth oohs that a good system?

[Kimmi]

Uhhh... errors are a good indication of a player who's making a lot of mistakes and in the process giving away a lot of outs. I know I keep railing about this but I guess I have to: Giving a team an extra 1/3 of an inning is HUGE.

 

Errors are far too subjective. You think UZR is subjective? Errors are 100 times worse in terms of subjectivity.

[Bellhorn04]

Errors fall into 2 categories, subjective and no-doubters.

[notin]

Errors are far too subjective. You think UZR is subjective? Errors are 100 times worse in terms of subjectivity.

 

It does seem odd to rail against WAR and UZR based upon their variability while advocating eye test for defense, yes?

[Kimmi]

It does seem odd to rail against WAR and UZR based upon their variability while advocating eye test for defense, yes?

 

Absolutely. The biased decision of one official scorer is far more subjective than UZR.

[jad]

Sprained right knee for Pablo. Not going to help.

[S5Dewey]

Yes and no.

 

Not all errors are equal, and while many are obvious, plenty more are borderline judgment calls. If one of these errors is ruled a hit, did the fielder still give an extra out or not?

 

There's a red herring if I ever saw one! Honestly now dear reader, how often do you disagree with the official scorer in regards to hit/error? Most of us who have watched any quantity of baseball know 9 times out of 10 when a player muffs a play whether the official scorer is going to rule it a hit or an error. There's certainly more room for discussion regarding clutch/non-clutch than there is for hit/error.

Edited April 23, 2017 by S5Dewey

[S5Dewey]

It does seem odd to rail against WAR and UZR based upon their variability while advocating eye test for defense, yes?

 

So is this going to get personal? Are you going to start stalkng me again?

[sk7326]

Uhhh... errors are a good indication of a player who's making a lot of mistakes and in the process giving away a lot of outs. I know I keep railing about this but I guess I have to: Giving a team an extra 1/3 of an inning is HUGE.

 

errors don't say anything about the ability to get to balls - which is the important thing (i.e. creating error chances) ... from a range perspective, Pablo has actually been sort of average so far

[mvp 78]

errors don't say anything about the ability to get to balls - which is the important thing (i.e. creating error chances) ... from a range perspective, Pablo has actually been sort of average so far

 

For Pablo, "sort of average" is a big deal considering where he was 2015-16.

[Northern Star]

 

Good lord.

[notin]

There's a red herring if I ever saw one! Honestly now dear reader, how often do you disagree with the official scorer in regards to hit/error? Most of us who have watched any quantity of baseball know 9 times out of 10 when a player muffs a play whether the official scorer is going to rule it a hit or an error. There's certainly more room for discussion regarding clutch/non-clutch than there is for hit/error.

 

Not if you're paying attention.

 

I've seen numerous plays ruled as errors and wondered why, and countless more where I thought an error should have been charged but the play was ruled a hit.

 

And that's not even getting into the completely awful guidelines used to attribute throwing errors.

 

If you're watching baseball at all, none of this should sound unfamiliar. Oddly, even as a denier you admit 10% of them are subjective. .

Edited April 23, 2017 by notin

[S5Dewey]

Not if you're paying attention.

 

I've seen numerous plays ruled as errors and wondered why, and countless more where I thought an error should have been charged but the play was ruled a hit.

 

And that's not even getting into the completely awful guidelines used to attribute throwing errors.

 

If none of this even sounds familiar, maybe you're thinking about errors in high school basketball games. In baseball, this happens daily...

 

or maybe you're just being your usual condescending.

[notin]

So is this going to get personal? Are you going to start stalkng me again?

 

Explain how that's personal. Also, is it a valid point that eschewing UZR and WAR due to variability while advocating eye test as valid might be a bit, to be polite, silly?

[notin]

or maybe you're just being your usual condescending.

 

Touche.

 

Interesting you got that response in while I was actually editing out the condescending parts. Even I felt a tad guilty there...

[notin]

or maybe you're just being your usual condescending.

 

Also, you failed to address the issue of the subjectivity of errors. Now it is a fact that you do have a very long history of doing just that, going all the wsy back to BDC...

[S5Dewey]

Also, you failed to address the issue of the subjectivity of errors. Now it is a fact that you do have a very long history of doing just that, going all the wsy back to BDC...

 

and you haven't addressed your continued stalking me all the way back to BDC.

[a700hitter]

or maybe you're just being your usual condescending.

At least he hasn't called you anti-stat or anti-stathead. LOL!! He is just calling you a "denier." He likes to pin labels on people even though he misunderstands their positions.

[Slasher9]

Robot Box Scorers Now!

[notin]

and you haven't addressed your continued stalking me all the way back to BDC.

 

 

Umm.. because all I do is comment on some of your commentary I disagree with. If you view that as stalking, maybe message boards and the internet are no the proper venue for you.

 

Hey, if it bothers you, go to freeforums. I never go there anymore...

[notin]

At least he hasn't called you anti-stat or anti-stathead. LOL!! He is just calling you a "denier." He likes to pin labels on people even though he misunderstands their positions.

 

 

Oooh. Can I obfuscate on this like you would?

 

"I never said you were anti-stathead or a denier. I have no idea what point you are trying to make. When I call out statheads as being soft and obese, that's not an insult. My best friend is soft and obese."

 

All I need to do now is call you out for some random generic comment as predicting misery for some completely unnamed group of people, and I'll have the whole act down pat...

[S5Dewey]

Umm.. because all I do is comment on some of your commentary I disagree with. If you view that as stalking, maybe message boards and the internet are no the proper venue for you.

 

Hey, if it bothers you, go to freeforums. I never go there anymore...

 

No. I think it's a little more than that, and I think you think so too. Otherwise how would you reconcile what you said today with what you said some time ago on "BDC2"

 

Aug 5, 2016 at 4:04pm dannycater said:

notin has been on my ass going back to BDC. I'm basically sick of his holier than thou attitude...

Notin’s reply:

 

Huh? On your ass? Unless you're andrewmitch or S5 (now s5dewey) or Schumpetr's Ghost, hardly the case....

 

Also I feel really bad for not mentioning georom and ADG. And there was another Serial Whiner whose name began with "A" I used to ride a lot, but I stopped when I noticed every time he responded to me he was polite and even complimentary

 

Probably you have an "alternate definition" of stalking than I do, but when someone admit's that they're intentionally 'on my ass', or they "ride people a lot" I'd consider that to be stalking.