2022 Spring Training

[S5Dewey]

Also I didn’t “attack the veracity” of the James’ quote. I provided the citation. I added the footnote and put it in the bibliography. You were a teacher, right? (For some reason I think you were, but maybe it’s someone else.). Would you look at a citation and source as an “attack on the veracity? Heck, it’s closer to being a stamp of authentication…

 

What??? I've never tried to hide where the quote came from. Im the one who providedthe link to it!!

'If you can't convince them with facts then baffle them with ********'

Haha

[Bellhorn04]

JBJ with another dinger.

 

Spring OPS of 1.042.

[notin]

That's true. The 10-year-olds on the team I coached years ago counted FC's as hits and their long-division was shaky. The 13 yr-olds were probably the first ones really to know and care about their 'stats.' (Although no one knew their fielding % or ERA). But BA? and no. of HR's? Oh yeah. Most knew.

 

And the worst thing is to correct.

 

“Well, Timmy, that actually wasn’t a hit because they got the guy out at second.”

 

“But I hit the ball and got on base. That’s good, right?”

 

“No, see, because you made an out and that didn’t help us. In fact it hurt us.”

 

“You’re a big meanie and my name isn’t Timmy. It’s Caleb!”

[notin]

JBJ with another dinger.

 

Spring OPS of 1.042.

 

A resurrected version of WAPM has JBJ hitting .268/.335/.414 with 13 HRs in 500 PA.

 

Even I am having a little doubt there. At least on the BA…

[notin]

What??? I've never tried to hide where the quote came from. Im the one who providedthe link to it!!

'If you can't convince them with facts then baffle them with ********'

Haha

 

Ok fine, but explain how I attacked its veracity.

 

And you didn’t provide the link until after I provided the quote’s origin…

Edited April 3, 2022 by notin

[jad]

And the worst thing is to correct.

 

“Well, Timmy, that actually wasn’t a hit because they got the guy out at second.”

 

“But I hit the ball and got on base. That’s good, right?”

 

“No, see, because you made an out and that didn’t help us. In fact it hurt us.”

 

“You’re a big meanie and my name isn’t Timmy. It’s Caleb!”

 

Ha ha! You're right! Why with my failing memory am I completely clear about that kid some 60 years ago (I even remember his damn name!)--good ball-player, athlete, not good hitter--coming up to me triumphantly "I had TWO singles!" (two FCs). Can't remember my response--but we were on pretty good terms and maybe even played together on some team later (there my memory is less clear.

[S5Dewey]

Are you saying that you don’t fret about payroll limitations several years down the road? How is that enjoyable?

Sorry, but I don't! I've been a baseball fan and a Sox fan all my life and I've learned that whatever will be will be, and I have no control over it.

I just sit back and enjoy the ride, some years more than others.

 

One more home game and ST season is over. Let's hope we can make it down at the same time next year!

[S5Dewey]

Ok fine, but explain how I attacked its veracity.

 

And you didn’t provide the link until after I provided the quote’s origin…

Nit-picking: The last bastion of someone who realizes that he's on the losing end of a discussion.

 

I think my position on things is pretty clear as is my conscience. You have a nice day now, bless your heart.

[notin]

Nit-picking: The last bastion of someone who realizes that he's on the losing end of a discussion.

 

I think my position on things is pretty clear as is my conscience. You have a nice day now, bless your heart.

 

 

Right. I was nit-picking. Not the guy who tried to turn the defense of “old school vs new school” stats into a debate about a misapplied quote.

 

This post may contain sarcasm…

[Old Red]

Right. I was nit-picking. Not the guy who tried to turn the defense of “old school vs new school” stats into a debate about a misapplied quote.

 

This post may contain sarcasm…

 

Wha, wha, wha.

Edited April 3, 2022 by Old Red

[notin]

Wha, wha, wha.

 

Crying noises?

[moonslav59]

How about Danish for a cup of coffee?

[cp176]

Pivetta with a solid outing, Bradley with another dinger and here we are - I love the game and what takes place during the actual playing of the game. I love hearing directly from the players who play the game. I keep my statistics simple but in my mind it doesn't make me old school. I guess what has turned me off actually to many of the "advanced metrics" is that in some discussions I have had with people I have come away thinking that although they were good with data interpretation their actual knowledge of how to play the game seemed limited. I think that as an individual, we get to decide what we like and dislike about the game today. If advanced metrics is what floats your boat, so be it. Personally I am much more into what is actually happening on the field.

[vegasbob]

Begs the question, are you a player who can do it when it counts or only count what you did, after the fact? In baseball , how well does advanced metrics predict success at varying rates for different players in specific situations , all of which are by definition small samples . Keep in mind the differrence between 200 base hits and 150/season is just under 2 hits a week of full time play.

[notin]

Begs the question, are you a player who can do it when it counts or only count what you did, after the fact? In baseball , how well does advanced metrics predict success at varying rates for different players in specific situations , all of which are by definition small samples . Keep in mind the differrence between 200 base hits and 150/season is just under 2 hits a week of full time play.

 

Don't go there!!! We just left that one!!

[notin]

Begs the question, are you a player who can do it when it counts or only count what you did, after the fact? In baseball , how well does advanced metrics predict success at varying rates for different players in specific situations , all of which are by definition small samples . Keep in mind the differrence between 200 base hits and 150/season is just under 2 hits a week of full time play.

 

And to answer your question, no metric, old school or advanced, has shown actual accuracy in predicting the future. And if you expect them to, you will be disappointed often enough.

 

Statistics in baseball (all of them) are really just a measure of accomplishments, and while we all like to think those accomplishments readily translate into ability, they don't. They are a record of the past. It's a past we like to think can predict the future. but it really can't. You can hope to spy consistency and trends, but at the end of the day, you are trying to predict the actions of human beings, and even those who are the best at what they do have their weaknesses, frailties, shortcomings, and stumbling blocks that can skew any sample size.

 

Many have tried with varying degrees of success. But when it does come to small sample sizes, some of the old (other website) folks will attest, nothing predicts the future like a WAPM...

[Larry Cook]

What is out 28 man roster going to look like on a few days?

[moonslav59]

What is out 28 man roster going to look like on a few days?

 

It looks like we may need to pick 1-2 players not currently on the 40.

 

I think the league should have increased to 40 to 42, when they went from 26 to 28.

[notin]

It looks like we may need to pick 1-2 players not currently on the 40.

 

I think the league should have increased to 40 to 42, when they went from 26 to 28.

 

And then after the first month, would everyone team have to DFA two players?

[S5Dewey]

And then after the first month, would everyone team have to DFA two players?

 

I was wondering that same thing. Or can they just send them back to AAA? And if they do that does that make 2022 an option year for the player(s)?

[notin]

I was wondering that same thing. Or can they just send them back to AAA? And if they do that does that make 2022 an option year for the player(s)?

 

 

Well, for the hypothetical 42 man roster, nothing, since it only exists in this thread.

 

For the league-wide 28 man roster, each team is likely to demote two players who each have an option year remaining. Although it is possible some players (I’m looking at you, Austin Davis) could play their way into a DFA after one month…

[mvp 78]

Pivetta with a solid outing, Bradley with another dinger and here we are - I love the game and what takes place during the actual playing of the game. I love hearing directly from the players who play the game. I keep my statistics simple but in my mind it doesn't make me old school. I guess what has turned me off actually to many of the "advanced metrics" is that in some discussions I have had with people I have come away thinking that although they were good with data interpretation their actual knowledge of how to play the game seemed limited. I think that as an individual, we get to decide what we like and dislike about the game today. If advanced metrics is what floats your boat, so be it. Personally I am much more into what is actually happening on the field.

 

I think you need to be able to juggle the on field aspects of the game with the advanced metrics. There is value in things like WAR and value in things like the dreaded eye test. I think you also have to be aware of what scouts are saying around the game about the players we are talking about.

[mvp 78]

It looks like we may need to pick 1-2 players not currently on the 40.

 

I think the league should have increased to 40 to 42, when they went from 26 to 28.

 

There's a good chance the last two guys are Arauz and someone who opts out or is DFA'd from another team.

[S5Dewey]

Well, for the hypothetical 42 man roster, nothing, since it only exists in this thread.

 

For the league-wide 28 man roster, each team is likely to demote two players who each have an option year remaining. Although it is possible some players (I’m looking at you, Austin Davis) could play their way into a DFA after one month…

 

That's my question. Since the 28 man roster is "special' in that it's only for one month, do we know whether those players sent down will have an option year counted against them because of it? Is that covered in the "fine print" of the CBA?

I can see owners manipulating this to prevent some of their marginal players from coming up for that one month to keep control over them for one more year.

[notin]

That's my question. Since the 28 man roster is "special' in that it's only for one month, do we know whether those players sent down will have an option year counted against them because of it? Is that covered in the "fine print" of the CBA?

I can see owners manipulating this to prevent some of their marginal players from coming up for that one month to keep control over them for one more year.

 

I think they did cover that.

 

I also think there is a good chance that the bulk of the 27th and 28th man roster spots go to players already on the 40 man that most teams don’t really worry about years of control over. Like Arauz and, say, Bazardo…

[cp176]

I think you need to be able to juggle the on field aspects of the game with the advanced metrics. There is value in things like WAR and value in things like the dreaded eye test. I think you also have to be aware of what scouts are saying around the game about the players we are talking about.

 

yup - I think that the most successful programs understand how important it is to give weight to all available information and also to understand it if they are planning to stay successful. I know that as a fan I tend to lean toward just the enjoyment of watching the game and how it is played. i would see things differently I think if my employment depended on the success or failure of what i was doing.

[mvp 78]

That's my question. Since the 28 man roster is "special' in that it's only for one month, do we know whether those players sent down will have an option year counted against them because of it? Is that covered in the "fine print" of the CBA?

I can see owners manipulating this to prevent some of their marginal players from coming up for that one month to keep control over them for one more year.

 

Hard to say. The new agreement hasn't been posted online yet.

[mvp 78]

I think they did cover that.

 

I also think there is a good chance that the bulk of the 27th and 28th man roster spots go to players already on the 40 man that most teams don’t really worry about years of control over. Like Arauz and, say, Bazardo…

 

Agree.

[mvp 78]

That's my question. Since the 28 man roster is "special' in that it's only for one month, do we know whether those players sent down will have an option year counted against them because of it? Is that covered in the "fine print" of the CBA?

I can see owners manipulating this to prevent some of their marginal players from coming up for that one month to keep control over them for one more year.

 

I would say that it does burn an option year whenever a guy is called up to be the 27th man in a doubleheader.

[mvp 78]

@PavlovicNBCS

MLB announced previously reported rule changes (28-man roster in April, ghost runners, etc.). Any options used while rosters are expanded won't count toward limit of five.

 

@nightengalejr

MLB announced rule changes for the 2022 season:

 

-28-man rosters through May 1. Maximum of 13 pitchers on 26-man roster afterward.

 

-10-day IL for pitchers until May 2.

 

-Players can be optioned a max. of 5 times, but any options before May 2 don't count toward that number.