moonslav59

Nobody doubts his playoff numbers are radically different from his regular season numbers. You keep acting like that is what is being debated. What is being debated is why they are much worse. I'm just asking for one shred of evidence or just a plain old reason why you think it is beyond any doubt because he reacts poorly to pressure. Just because pressure is present for many of the PAs in the playoffs, does not mean that has to be the reason he has done poorly in that 189 IP sample size. Give me something other than , "Because that's the way it is, " or "the stats show he is a choke." Something. Anything.

I was always pretty good in Math in high school. I prided myself on never needing to take my math book home from school. All this new math is killing me!

It will never happen, but yes. If you want to try a new role, you don't just throw someone into it, unless you have to do it.

If you fed Kershaw's numbers into a random generator and set the parameters to create 1,000 sample sizes of 189 IP (his actual amount), you'd get a range of results that would include some sample numbers that match nearly identically, what Kershaw actually produced. Of course, many more would show better and much better results- some even better than his regular season results, but you would find some samples like the one he actually had. Now, of course, there are not 1,000 Kershaw-type pitchers that have 189+ IP in the playoffs, so you cannot prove the actual results match evenly with computer generated results, but studies have shown when you enter all the regular season data and generate a random sampling of expected results, it matches up with reality. The actual amount of pitchers who far exceed their regular season numbers in reality match up with the same amount in the randomly generated sample size, and same with barely better, the same, barely worse and much worse. The random samples mirror the reality samples. Did I explain it well enough?

Does that mean they were all AAAA players, or is my math wrong again?

Not a "fact."

If you're going to try it, do it when up by 8.

I knew what you meant, and of course both teams could keep playing like the last 2-3 weeks, like the first 100+ games, or somewhere in between.

I remember that, now that you mentioned it, but does this means there was no way he could be back before August 13th, because Bloom said this? He did start working out shortly after the trade, then stopped after the groin injury. It looks like the new/groin injury may have hastened his return. WOW! (Just kidding) BTW, once he did return, he only played in 3 of the next 7 days. Was none of that was because of the groin? He also has yet to play 1B, again, because of the groin or hammy? (or both?)

Our starters average 5.1 IP per start (not 5 1/3 but 5 and 1/10th), not 4 IP. BTW, the league average is 5.1, as well. 6.2 Eovaldi 5.3 Pivetta 5.0 ERod, Richards, Sale 4.5 Perez 4.4 Houck FYI Pitches per start 92 Eovaldi, Pivetta 86 Richards, ERod (84 League average) 80 Sale 75 Houck 74 Perez QS% 40 Eovaldi 33 Pivetta 25 ERod 18 Richards, Perez 0 Houck, Sale Team Record (RS per GS) 2-0 Sale (12.4) 15-9 Pivetta (5.5) & ERod (5.1) 12-10 Perez (4.4) 13-12 Eovaldi (5.7) 11-11 Richards (5.2) 3-4 Houck (3.1)

Again, saying it's "not coincidence" is not adding anything to your point. There is no evidence that proves or even implies it can't be a coincidence. On top of that, your point is also dead wrong. Kershaw has shown he does very well under pressure over a much greater sample size than his playoff one: His career OPS against is an astounding .582. A number that is not easy to obtain and maintain, yet look at these sample sizes and numbers under pressure: .502 2 outs RISP (853 PA sample size) .547 Late & Close (712 PAs) There very definition of Clutch Pitching .577 in September (1517 PAs) .581 within 1 run (60115 PAs) .582 RISP (1890 PAs) .582 Tie game (3378 PAs) .585 Men on Base (3482 PAs) .599 High Leverage (1604 PAs) His playoff sample size is under 750 PAs, yet you choose that much smaller sample size to "prove" it's all about him wilting under pressure, and not only that, it can't possibly be for any other reason, except he's not clutch. Show me some proof that is the reason. Just showing he did poorly in the playoffs does not prove the reason- just the event. You'd think some proof might be he also sucks under pressure during teh year, but in fact, the opposite is true. You'd a think some proof might be that it can't be random, because randomly generated numbers would show his results are statistically impossible, yet the facts actually prove that not only is it possible, but it's right in line with what to expect. Show me something other than he sucked under pressure, but only playoff pressure, so that proves he is not clutch.

Not really. Sale never played in 2021, until after the deadline. Houck missed a lot of time before the deadline. He's back FT, now. Schwarber is a major get. The delay of him joining the team made some forget or minimize the addition.

As far as I remember, nobody said 10 days minimum.

I never heard a definitive date for his return- just vague timelines. I do know, he started to workout, then had to stop. He may have only been set back 3-5 days, but I think it mostly affected his ability to play 1B, and maybe not getting a few more days off after his game one with us than what might have happened with no groin injury- a new injury. Not being able to play 1B hurt, too. If force Dalbec into the line-up and JD into the OF.

You still have yet to answer why it has to be the pressure and the impossibility there could be any other reason, including just random bad luck. I won't wait, because I've asked dozens of times with no on point response.

I get that, but we might have brought in Ottavino after Barnes started to implode, and we'd still have Whitlock for today. (Maybe Ottavino loses the game.)

Yes. I keep telling you that. He was on the IL for a hammy and pulled a groin in rehab- maybe learning 1B.

I didn't know Rigor Mortis sets in at age 26.

I don't care, if every game is a one run win. Not looking ahead, but we need to sweep.

Agreed. The annoying thing about those 18 errors are that half are throwing errors, that people keep saying can be improved upon more than range or the steadiness of glove work. As The Smiths so aptly sang, "How Soon is Now?"

Of course, they are capable of playing .600 ball, but much of what annoyed you when they sucked is still out there on the field, everyday, including Boone. Odor and others are still playing FT. You were talking about trading Voit, not long ago, now he's your savior. A few of your farm arms have looked good out of the gate, but let's see how they adjust to the league's adjustment to their weaknesses. I'm not predicting doom for the Yanks. I said all along, I viewed them as our top competition. The Rays have impressed, but the Yanks are still the team we need to beat, and anything can happen. You saw the Sox & Yanks turn on a dime. What makes you think it can't happen in reverse, or that both team will continue as they have the past 2-3 weeks, when all year, it hasn't worked out that way? I don't blame you for feeling high and confident, but much of this team and its character is the same as the team that went about 100 games earning your wrath.

He seemed okay there in the minors, which normally translates to being able to do well at 1B over a certain learning curve time period that in no way should have lasted this long. Could he still be better at 3B than 1B? We'll never find out.

That's the line-up I envisioned when we got Schwarber, and I think Bloom did, too. The groin injury to Kyle not only delayed his joining the line-up, it further delayed his use at 1B- our highest need area. Dalbec's brief hot streak masked the need for a bit, but clearly, this line-up is deadly. While the defense at 1B looks scary, it already has been, and we improve at 2B and CF by playing Arroyo & Kike at their right positions. This line-up is KILLER!

Why assume this will continue? You, yourself called this team every imaginable name in the book- and meant all of it. Now, suddenly, these players, coaches and managers are new people?

Maybe he'll pull a Steve Pearce with us.