Dipre

DREW SUCKS, HE SHOULD'VE LEAPED AND MADE THAT CATCH IN MID-AIR!!! NO TUFF, NO GRIT!!!!

Scott f***ing Schoenweis.

I think Beckett has somehow unlearned the basics of pitching just for tonight's game.

Cameron is excellent at keeping the line moving.

It's Drew's fault! Drew sucks! f*** Drew!111!!!

Beckett needs to not top out at 94 and not throw it down the middle. Beltre is productive. PWNdroia needs to STFU.

It should count, but not nearly as much as prolonged regulasr season dominance, because in the end, no matter how much you play in the post-season, it's a microscopic sample much more given to fluctuation and flukeyness when compared to an overall regular season body of work.

Andy Pettite was not better than David Cone in 1997. He threw more innings, but Cone's statistics were superior, even if it was by a slight margin. In 2003, he was third best. Both Clemens and Mussina were superior pitchers. The Yankees did not win the WS. The Astros did not win the WS in 2003. The Yankees did not win the WS in 2007. They didn't even reach it. He was the best pitcher and second best pitcher of one championship team respectively. Being part of a Championship team was the initial ground of your argument.

Dice-K was extremely lucky in 2008. There's really no other way to see it.

For all the rave the Rangers are getting, that team's pitching is an adventure. While that bullpen is awesome, there's an epic potential for suck in that rotation. Specially if Feldman can't replicate his fluky 2009 and Harden can't stay healthy. Pencil me in with Seattle (offense allowing) and Anaheim as the biggest threats.

Opening Night snacks are done. Either Beltre or Cameron take CC deep tonight. Called it now.

In the end, without regular-season dominance, his post-season resume is not of integral importance.

Interest on your part, sir.

You said it wasn't objective because "it was people taking notes" which is incorrect. UZR has two flaws, number one is the overvaluing of park factors and range for SS and number two is the potential for fluctuation due to sample size for 1B. Therefore why people call it "unreliable" when dealing with SS or 1B, but not with other positions, if they understand the statistic, that is.

Correct.

Pitcher A: 216-146 (597 W%), 3,261 IP, 3.46 ERA, 3,116 K's, 1.13 WHIP, 4.38 SO/BB. Pitcher B: Assuming he throws 190 IP of 3.98 and wins 15 while losing 6 games ball with his career peripherals. 244-141 (.635 W%) 3,116 IP, 3.92 ERA, 2,308 K's, 1.36 WHIP, 2.33 SO/BB. Pitcher A, who has better statistics than pitcher B, is a borderline HOF case, so pitcher B, regardless of his post-season accolades, seems like a very long shot. But stranger things have happened.

Ah, sarcasm. Usable when the fact that one's opinion about something is incorrect/incomplete and has been called out on it. "Lol". When accounting for hit ball "zones" and their corresponding RF or "Range Factor", a computer program is used. If you check out the UZR primer posted on fangraphs.com, you'll notice: For each zone, the computer keeps track of the following on a league-wide (for a particular year) basis: The number of hits in that zone. The average run value of a hit in that zone (using traditional lwts hit values). The number of outs recorded in that zone for each fielding position. At the same time, the computer keeps track of the total number of fielding errors for each fielding position, but not for each zone individually. Actually it compiles fielding errors in two separate categories: One, ROE errors, are fielding errors that result in an ROE. All other errors, such as on a hit, or a second error on an ROE, are called non-ROE errors. For example, here is the 2002 league-wide data for zone 56 (the area between the third baseman and the SS): Zone 56 Hits Outs Run Value per Hit All Plays 1055 1419 .472 SS 294 3B 1125 For each player at each fielding position (e.g. Rey Sanchez at SS is one entity and Rey Sanchez at 2B is another entity), and for each zone, the computer also compiles the following information: The number of hits in that zone while the player was on the field at that position. The number of outs recorded by that player, at that position, in that zone. ROE and non-ROE fielding errors are compiled separately for each player, but again, not by individual zones. For example, the 2002 data in zone 56 for Mike Bordick, while playing SS, looks like this: Zone 56 Hits Outs Bordick 79 18 The data "a bunch of people taking notes at games" compile, is just used as a comparison for the data that the video-analysis program they use provide, which divides the field into 74 areas (only 68 used for UZR actual purposes). That's the true "voice of reason". The people that created the statistic and compile the data.

ORS has stated his opinion on UZR multiple times. Flawed statistic, but more reliable than anything else out there. Besides, i think you have an aspect of the actual UZR formula wrong. Not trying to be a dick here, so no boxing gloves.

I'm not saying Brackman doesn't have the potential to be an elite bullpen arm. I'm saying most of Bard's issues didn't stem from mechanical problems, but a lack of focus and stamina. That's it. Remember, the most important thing for a pitcher is confidence. Bard didn't have confidence in his secondary pitches, and on came the over-reliance and wildness of the fastball. It's a domino effect.