moonslav59

The percentage of actual players who have wildly different playoff ERAs than regular season ones is nearly identical to the computer generated samples. If only a tiny percentage of actual pitchers have massive disparities, like Kershaw, then so does the randomly generated one. That's the point. They mirror each other almost exactly the same. The computer comes up with maybe 3 guys who have ERAs way higher than their norm, and in reality, there are 3 guys who fit the model. That's, at least, what I understand the studies have shown.

Yes, Cordero needs to play everyday, and he ain't getting that here.

So, DH game 1 and RF game 2?

He'll certainly be on the 40, next season. Our roster crunch is not all that severe.

This past winter, many of my BTV trade suggestions centered on us trading Vaz. Some were 3 team deals where Vaz went to a contender and we got Stallings from PItt.

The weird thing is, most scouting reports said Wong would or might not stick at the catching position going forward.

Seems very trustworthy.

He, himself had a season of 4.26 and 3.39. He's had many bad starts. You don't think randomly choosing any 30 starts (the amount he's had in the P.O.s might generate one with an ERA near 4.19 and maybe one near 1.19?

We don't seem to be getting to as many balls as we should or as other teams seem to do vs us. Our pitching suffers from the worst BAbip in the league, and it's not even close. DRS has about in the middle. Our D sucks. It's not even close.

Ronald Hernandez might, but his stock seems to be slipping since the trade.

I'm quickly losing faith in that stat. I apologize for defending it so much in the past.

From mlb.com: INF Christian Arroyo (left hamstring strain) Expected return: Aug. 20 Arroyo has had a good rehab week and ran the bases again on Aug. 15. The plan is for him to start a Minor League rehab assignment on Aug. 17. If all goes well, Arroyo could be activated for the Aug. 20 game against the Rangers. Arroyo’s right-handed bat would give manager Alex Cora more flexibility against lefty starters. He is also a good pinch-hitting option against lefties. (Last updated: Aug. 15) LHP Darwinzon Hernandez (right oblique strain) Expected return: September It has been slow going for Hernandez in his return from a right oblique strain, and it now looks as if he won’t return until September. The move of Martín Pérez to the bullpen has helped fill the void left by Hernandez. But getting Hernandez back for the stretch run could make a difference for the Red Sox. “It's slow a little bit,” Red Sox manager Alex Cora said on Aug 15. “He played catch to 80 feet, he'll do the same thing today. I don't expect him to start a rehab assignment soon. He's not behind. He's where he should be with his process, so little by little he's getting better, but nothing off the mound for a while.” (Last updated: Aug. 15) RHP Matt Andriese (right hamstring tendinitis) Expected return: Aug. 17-18 Andriese will make the third appearance of his Minor League rehab assignment on Saturday for Triple-A Worcester. The Red Sox will reassess where he’s at on Monday and there’s a chance he could be activated for the series at New York on Tuesday. (Last updated: Aug. 14) 1B/OF Danny Santana (left groin strain) Expected return: Aug. 20-24 Santana is on a similar timetable to Christian Arroyo and could go on a rehab assignment by Aug. 17. (Last updated: Aug. 13) 60-day IL RHP Ryan Brasier (concussion) Expected return: Late August Brasier’s second appearance of his rehab assignment didn’t go nearly as well as the first. Pitching for Triple-A Worcester on Aug. 13, the righty allowed five hits and five runs. However, Red Sox manager Alex Cora didn’t sound concerned. “I think the stuff was the same," Cora said. "I think he threw 18 pitches and they swung at 15 of them, so that’s part of the process. That’s part of rehab assignments. The stuff, the numbers that we got, they’re good. We’re still on the same path.” Cora added that Brasier will pitch again for Worcester on Aug. 15. (Last updated: Aug. 14)

Do they rank the Red Sox and other teams?

It doesn't make any sense to go that computer generated models based on random numbers based on regular season numbers comes out to look nearly identical to what real life sample sizes variances show means nothing?

What ranking service do you respect the most? Let's see what they say, this winter.

You lost value by trading away much of your "middle talent," and your top guys did not progress like ours did. We added Mayer. You did not. Do you really think the Yankee system is better than ours? How many low to middle guys make serious impacts compared to top 35 ones? Face it: your farm is regressing, and ours is progressing. We do have a gap between the top and bottom, but the big advantage you had their was weakened by your trades.

The Yanks are 5-3 in their last 8 games and 4-1 in their last 5. We are 5-3 in our last 8 games and 4-1 in our last 5.

If a computer generated random samples of playoff results based on regular season numbers and specific sample sizes, it would generate a sample nearly identical to Kershaw's playoff line. How can anyone not think that maybe Kershaw's line is just a result of being that one guy that came out with bad numbers. It may have nothing to do with pressure or clutch. Players slump and streak all the time for reasons unknown to anyone, even themselves. Wouldn't one think players might slump during the playoffs for reasons having nothing to do with the fact that there is extra pressure on them and everyone in those games? Why do we, all of a sudden, pretend to know the specific reason Kershaw slumped at these times but not the others? If Kershaw does great, this October, will you guys say he gained the skill of handling pressure better? If he does poorly, I'm sure we'll here the, "See, I told you so's." Over Kershaw's career, he has allowed a .582 OPS against, but when it counts, during the regular season, sometimes in big games that determine making the playoffs or not, he has these numbers in high pressure situations: .547 Late & Close .502 RISP, 2 outs .582 RISP .585 Men on Base .599 High Leverage Nothing here indicates he comes up short, when it counts, but because of a scattered 189 IP sample size over a 14 year career where his WHIP is 1.072 as compared to a 1.002 regular season one, we are supposed to believe it HAS TO BE BECAUSE HE's A CHOKE! There can be no other explanation. It's a fact, because the numbers speak for themselves. He couldn't have just had the bad luck of slumping too many times in October, instead of September or May. Look, I know I can't prove clutch & choke are not real, and it does make some sense to think some players handle pressure better or worse than others, but it can't be proved the reason Kershaw's ERA is 4.19 in the playoffs is because he chokes or is NOT clutch. It just can't. In 8 of his 20 playoff series, he had an ERA of 3.00 or less, including 2 with a 0.00 ERA, which included an 8 inning WC shutdown. You can't get anymore clutch than a shutdown in an elimination game, but I guess that was just luck- not skill. My point is, if a computer generated the same amount of sample sizes as there are in the history of MLB playoffs, there would be some samples that jump out as being way lower and higher than the norm. It's just the way randomness works. Players often do real good for some stretches and real bad in others. There may or may not be any rhyme or reason for it. Why should the playoff samples, often spread over many seasons be any different? In fact, they are no different from computer generated outcomes. Coincidence or just randomness playing itself out?

It appears some just wanted Bloom to appear to try doing something. Robles & Davis did not count.

Random samples would produce the exact amount of Kershaws as there are. How do you explain that away without ever addressing that clear fact?

So, surprise people?

Looks like we are leaving one roster spot open for Taylor, who did NOT test positive for COVID. Houck will start one game. Wong was also demoted.

Maybe David Robertson will do the same.

The Yanks and Rays won, but the night did bring some good news: The CWS beat Oak, which moves us into the WC1 slot, and the Royals beat the Astros, which may not matter at all. Updated AL Standings 72-47 TBR 70-48 HOU 69-50 CWS 69-51 BOS (.5 from 3rd best record and 3.5 from ALE lead) 68-51 OAK WC2 (tough schedule catching up) 66-52 NYY -1.5 from WC2 and -2.0 from us. 63-54 TOR -4.0 WC2 63-56 SEA -5.0 WC2

Scattered small sample sizes are similar.