Jump to content
Talk Sox
  • Create Account

iortiz

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    17,498

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Profiles

Boston Red Sox Videos

2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking

Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker

News

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by iortiz

  1. iortiz
    You are asking this because you are clueless of what we are talking about. And no, his HR/FB% is really awful hence his HR%.
  2. iortiz
    LOL do you even know what the discussion is about?
  3. iortiz
    As I said, you haven’t followed the discussion. The first paragraph refers to the fact that HRs in short samples are fluke outcomes. The seconds refers to large samples.
  4. iortiz
    Nope, I didn’t say that moon. His career HR/FB% is not a fluke and is very awful. I think you haven’t followed me well. I suggest you to reread my posts.
  5. iortiz
    A HR is a fluke outcome in short samples, BUT in large samples it is not. HR/FB works and can be used as LOB and BABIP in order to determine whether your rate is luck or not moving forward. In Porcello’s case, in his eleven career years of service his HR/FB is really awful hence not a fluke.
  6. iortiz
    Well fWAR has a different chart. The later applies for ERA and RPE. At the fWAR chart, fanfraphs calls Porcello a Solid Player which is the 5th level out of seven —kind of average I would say.
  7. iortiz
    LOL it doesn’t work that way in ERA and run prevention estimators charts, bell. This is my chart: Under 3 — No. 1 (Ecxellent) 3-3.5 — No.2 (Very Good) 3.5-4 No. 3 (Good) 4-4.5 No. 4 (Average/Mediocre) Above 4.5 (Bums) Based on the above, Porcello was an Average/Mediocre pitcher. Fangraphs’ chart is something similar 3.2 Excellent 3.5 Great 3.8 Above Average 4.2 Average 4.4 Below Average 4.7 Poor 5.00 Awful Based on the above, Fangraphs sees Porcello as a Below Average pitcher.
  8. iortiz
    A No 3 pitcher in my book is not average. He is a good pitcher. A pitcher who sports something around 3.5 - 4.0 ERA. That’s the definition of a No. 3 pitcher to me.
  9. iortiz
    I didn’t say that. I said he was all-in-all a mediocre/average pitcher (a No. 4 in my book), BUT regarding his HR/FB rate, he certainly sucked and very hard. If his HR/FB rate had been at least average (around 9%), he probably could have been a No 3 pitcher. But again, his command of his pitches, specially the sinker wasn’t good hence that awful career HR/FB.
  10. iortiz
    Sure. A pitcher probably could have a bad month or even a year in terms of HR/FB, but not an awful career rate like Porcello. i.e. In large samples if your HR/FB is awful, then it is not a fluke, you simply suck.
  11. iortiz
    Couldn’t catch the game but seems this was a tough one.
  12. iortiz
    Yeah but they are still above 4 which it is a figure for No. 4s pitchers in my book. The reason his run prevention metrics are bit lower, is due the fact he threw a lot of innings which is his best value. People often demonize ERA, but ERA in large samples is a pretty good metric and tells you very accurate what kind of pitcher are you. OTOH Run Prevention Estimators in large samples sometimes don’t tell you the true and are unfair specially in contact pitchers since most of them love Ks.
  13. iortiz
    Yeah it was a bold prediction but still I see more power in Duran’s bat.
  14. iortiz
    HR% most of the times are fluke outcomes, but HR/FB tries to predict —as BABIP and LOB do— whether it was a fluke or not. As I said, in Porcello’s case, when you watch his FB/HR rate through 11 years, you can assume with 100%% certainty, that he’s been a prone HR pitcher due his poor command of his sinker.
  15. iortiz
    … but yeah, that rate is awful as well specially for contact pitchers like Porcello. Contact pitchers often have runners on base but DPs are their allies, but when those bombs come with runners on bases, it turns catastrophic while taxing your ERA like in Porcello’s. To put it in context, a great contact pitcher like Orel Hershiser has a career 0.68 HR/9. There’s no a surprise Orel’s career ERA is way better than Porcello’s, and a great part of that successful career is because his HR/9 rate was way lower —because the command of his sinker was way better.
  16. iortiz
    HR/FB is a better peripheral stat to look at when you are evaluating HRs allowed because it can tell you about the luck of a pitcher allowing bombs. In Porcello’s case, allowing HRs wasn’t a luck thing. The sample is large. He was/is a prone HR pitcher due his command of his sinker. It didn’t sink very often hence that awful HR/FB rate.
  17. iortiz
    A 12% HR/FB is pretty awful, yes.
  18. iortiz
    It’s way early but IMO he has Betts’ potential but with higher pop.
  19. iortiz
    Allowing such awful rate of HRs through 11 years, speak volumes of your command of your main pitch type which in Porcello was the sinker.
  20. iortiz
    I’m loving what I have seen in Duran. He seems he belongs here. He could easily be a 5 tool player. His athleticism is really impressive. Also, I think he has been doing oks at defense. He has read the ball pretty well.
  21. iortiz
    Throwing at the strike zone doesn’t necessarily mean you have a good command. Rick Porcello pitched a lot of meatballs because he didn’t have command of his sinker. Those meatballs cost him a lot of HRs, reflected in his career 12% HR/FB which is pretty awful.
  22. iortiz
    This was probably the most mysterious pull out ever.
  23. iortiz
    I think you are right but he deserves that kind of money.
  24. iortiz
    MVP was (is) the greatest fan of Devers in this board.
  25. iortiz
    Can we lock down Devers already?
×
×
  • Create New...