280 replies to this topic

[ManilaSoxFAN]

What the fuck is this? No Saber guys insist that there you should never IBB. Where'd you get that impression? There are of COURSE very isolated situations when you should.

I said "rarely". See the posts after yours, anyway.

My point is that one can't manage according to only the stats/percentages (duh). Pujols has been IBB'd twice in one game...and the two decisions TO PITCH to him are just as important to note. One can argue that these were 4 excellent decisions. One can also argue that a Saber guy would not have issued ANY IBB's to Pujols (it doesn't meet any of the "very isolated" cases which call for IBBs, I think).

I like stats; don't get me wrong. I'm not attacking. Just mentioning this a-propos to recent main board discussions.

[Dionysus]

Yep. Ball 4 to Belliard was a strike, as I thought. I can't get the image from Brooks Baseball to embed though, it says the extension is wrong. What am I doing wrong?

[Stitch01]

I said "rarely". See the posts after yours, anyway.

My point is that one can't manage according to only the stats/percentages (duh). Pujols has been IBB'd twice in one game...and the two decisions TO PITCH to him are just as important to note. One can argue that these were 4 excellent decisions. One can also argue that a Saber guy would not have issued ANY IBB's to Pujols (it doesn't meet any of the "very isolated" cases which call for IBBs, I think).

I like stats; don't get me wrong. I'm not attacking. Just mentioning this a-propos to recent main board discussions.

Luckboxing into the right result doesn't make them excellent decisions.

[Dionysus]

Luckboxing into the right result doesn't make them excellent decisions.

Exactly. It worked out for them, but it doesn't make it smart.

[Jnai]

Yep. Ball 4 to Belliard was a strike, as I thought. I can't get the image from Brooks Baseball to embed though, it says the extension is wrong. What am I doing wrong?

You can't embed from my site on SoSH. You can only upload to a site like photobucket and link from there, or paste the link.

[Stitch01]

Also, no, the decision to IBB someone doesn't always have to be based entirely on math but i would wager that with Pujols up and Holliday on deck early in a game the math would swamp any other considerations by a sizeable margin.

[GreenMountain]

Im guessing TBS doesnt have any form of Pitch FX/Amica Pitchzone type thing? Because I'd like to see Ball 4 again.

TBS is showing the pitch FX info in real time on every pitch on their HD channel. One of the few positive aspects of their coverage tonight.

[Dionysus]

Another VERY questionable strike call in that at bat to Thome. Sure, he Ked anyway, but Ball One was Strike 3. Still, fuck you TBS for having no Pitch Zone replay system.

[Dionysus]

TBS is showing the pitch FX info in real time on every pitch on their HD channel. One of the few positive aspects of their coverage tonight.

Thats actually pretty cool, but for those without HD you could at least have replay on questionable pitches.

[GreenMountain]

Thats actually pretty cool, but for those without HD you could at least have replay on questionable pitches.

I don't think they grasp the concept of "replays"

Edit: Of course now they show a replay with the strike zone graphic, suggesting that they could have been doing this all along.

Edited by GreenMountain, 07 October 2009 - 11:31 PM.

[Dionysus]

Oh my god, NOW you show a replay? You had the system and didn't use it in the Belliard or Thome at bats?

[Dionysus]

Troy Glaus? What year is this?

[Dionysus]

I really really want Lugo to get to bat

[ManilaSoxFAN]

Guys, I understand the numbers and don't disagree with any of the arguments which say that -- statistically -- IBB's (same with bunts) are rarely wise.

But -- against the large sized, based-on-averages data -- a good manager has to decide just when is the right time that the odds WILL be beaten.

When, on the one hand, it is only in "very isolated" cases that one should call for an IBB...and on the other hand, you have it called twice (with the same batters) successfully in one game, one needs to acknowledge the possibility that it this very knack for managing within the "noise", "luck", "Karma", "outlier" grey areas that may well seperate the LaRussas from the Torres (or whomever you choose to compare).

Saying that the decisions were surely bad and that the good fortune of a positive result is simply due to "luck" is actually a rather inflexible position, no?

One more consideration: The psy-ops game. It is often, purposefully anti-intuitive, unexpected; an upsetting of what is supposed to be "normal". Holliday's last whiff was noteworthy.


Rats, I wanted the Cards to score there.

edit: typos

Edited by ManilaSoxFAN, 07 October 2009 - 11:45 PM.

[Catcher Block]

Glaus sits on his ass all year with a shoulder injury, somehow makes the postseason roster over David Freese, and LaGenius bats him against a pitcher he hasn't hit in the past. Wonderful.

[Dionysus]

Glaus sits on his ass all year with a shoulder injury, somehow makes the postseason roster over David Freese, and LaGenius bats him against a pitcher he hasn't hit in the past. Wonderful.

Larussa has been an idiot all game. Shades of Leyland in the Tigers/Twins game.

[Stitch01]

Guys, I understand the numbers and don't disagree with any of the arguments which say that -- statistically -- IBB's (same with bunts) are rarely wise.

But -- against the large sized, based-on-averages data -- a good manager has to decide just when is the right time that the odds WILL be beaten.

When, on the one hand, it is only in "very isolated" cases that one should call for an IBB...and on the other hand, you have it called twice (with the same batters) successfully in one game, one needs to acknowledge the possibility that it this very knack for managing within the "noise", "luck", "Karma", "outlier" grey areas that may well seperate the LaRussas from the Torres (or whomever you choose) to compare).

Saying that the decisions were surely bad and the the good fortune of a positive result is simply due to "luck" is actually a rather inflexible position, no?

One more consideration: The psy-ops game. It is often, purposefully anti-intuitive, unexpected; an upsetting of what is supposed to be "normal". Haliday's last whiff was noteworthy.


Rats, I wanted the Cards to score there.

I guess I could acknowledge that its possible the guy that hits on 17 and draws a 3 is psychic too.

Its far, far, far more likely it was just a shitty decision that worked out.

Edited by Stitch01, 07 October 2009 - 11:44 PM.

[budcrew08]

Tomorrow we'll probably get a "Hangin' With Mr Cooper" rerun with just the pitch trax graphic for three innings.

Fuck, man! take that back!

[Stitch01]

One more math point.

If you walked Rich Garces in front of Ted Williams circa 1947, we'd all agree that was nuts right?

Well, if you did that twice, 25% of the time it would "work".

So no, the fact that walking Pujols worked twice doesnt make me reconsider much of anything.

[Dionysus]

It feels like the Cardinals haven't retired a leadoff man in a million years.

[Dionysus]

One more math point.

If you walked Rich Garces in front of Ted Williams circa 1947, we'd all agree that was nuts right?

Well, if you did that twice, 25% of the time it would "work".

So no, the fact that walking Pujols worked twice doesnt make me reconsider much of anything.

Precisely.

[Catcher Block]

Holy hell, where was that one....?

[budcrew08]

Lets show the replay of Molina's junk... fucking tbs.

[GreenMountain]

Thanks TBS, I really needed that close-up replay of Molina's groin.

[Dionysus]

I hate TBS so very much.

[Dionysus]

Had he been with the Sox, Lugo would have thrown that into the stands.

[Catcher Block]

Lugo did his best to throw it away on that one. So happy he's in the postseason.

[Adirondack jack]

What do you do if you can't retire Wolf?

His numbers don't really reflect it, but Wolf is one of the toughest outs in the NL. For pitchers at least. Not to invoke, Darlings style today, but Wolf is a gamer. I kind of like him. Just got caught up here and wanted pipe that in. Anyways.

The A's really missed with Ethier. That's one they must want back

Edited by Adirondack jack, 08 October 2009 - 12:01 AM.

[Dionysus]

Sherrill's whole facing me thing freaks me out.

[ManilaSoxFAN]

Oh, I still agree with the numbers. And yes, hitting on a 17 is most likely just dumb...because ONLY math plays a role. No humans, no varying situations. And yes, winning that hand is dumb luck.

I'm not so sure that if the same player got 4 hands in a row...all of them with 17...and then chose to stay twice and hit twice...and win all 4 times...well, I'm not so sre you wwouldn't start to wonder if he IS psychic.

But baseball has a lot more variables than the large-sample-size, based-on-averages statistics. It's kinda like the diff between Blackjack and Texas Hold 'Em...with all the extra non-stat dimensions on top of fundamental mathematics (if we stay with the cards analogies).

[Max Power]

You could project a movie on Broxton's gigantic ass.

[Adirondack jack]

Broxton's 3.93 K/BB doesn't completely scream how nasty he is until you consider it's with a relatively high BB's/9 of 3.9. They have to make him throw strikes if they stand a chance

Nice matchups here though, shit

edit: or not

Edited by Adirondack jack, 08 October 2009 - 12:11 AM.

[Catcher Block]

Ugh, what a waste. Best hitter in the game going up there and convincing himself he's going to swing no matter where the pitch is.

[Stitch01]

Oh, I still agree with the numbers. And yes, hitting on a 17 is most likely just dumb...because ONLY math plays a role. No humans, no varying situations. And yes, winning that hand is dumb luck.

I'm not so sure that if the same player got 4 hands in a row...all of them with 17...and then chose to stay twice and hit twice...and win all 4 times...well, I'm not so sre you wwouldn't start to wonder if he IS psychic.

But baseball has a lot more variables than the large-sample-size, based-on-averages statistics. It's kinda like the diff between Blackjack and Texas Hold 'Em...with all the extra non-stat dimensions on top of fundamental mathematics (if we stay with the cards analogies).

Change 4 to 400 and yeah, I might. 4 is not a big enough sample size, and the sample size here isnt even really four unless you consider pitching to Pujols instead of walking him to lead off a freaking inning a decision.

The issue is the math on this decision is so clear that its pretty hard for me to conceive of some super genius Joe Torre insight that would change it from a bad move into a good move.

Its far more likely that Torre made a shitty move based on some thought process that went like "Pujols hits this guy pretty well and I dont want him to beat us, lets walk him" which makes sense intuitively.

But that's why you have the numbers, because human intuition is often wrong.

EDIT: and yeah I can think up like five other completely non-numerical arguments why you might walk Pujols, but walking someone in front of a dude that's OPS'd about 1.050 since the trade is so horrible mathematically that it doesnt matter.

Edited by Stitch01, 08 October 2009 - 12:13 AM.

[shawnrbu]

Sensational D by Pujols.

[strek1]

When are these dopes gonna learn sliding slows you down!!

[Stitch01]

Pujols being that good at defense too is so unfair

[Adirondack jack]

Martin is safe if he doesn't slide

Edited by Adirondack jack, 08 October 2009 - 12:25 AM.

[zeraza]

A new record for men LOB in a 9 inning playoff game and the 8th isn't even over

[ManilaSoxFAN]

I predict a bad AB here for Holliday.

[Sprowl]

You could project a movie on Broxton's gigantic ass.

Pair him with CC Sabathia, and you could show a simultaneous double feature, wide enough for two full letterbox versions.

[shawnrbu]

Love the Ironman riffs after each Broxton strike.

[ManilaSoxFAN]

"Its far more likely that Torre made a shitty move based on some thought process that went like 'Pujols hits this guy pretty well and I dont want him to beat us, lets walk him' which makes sense intuitively."


I agree that the math is against the move. By a lot. Holliday hits the same pitchers just as successfully, it's early, etc.

But Torre knows that too. And, although I hate him for his Skankeeism, I believe is is far from stupid, baseball-wise (and math-wise in these cases).


I bet you can think of some reasons to call for the IBB in those situations if you detach yourself from the math chains. As I mentioned, psychology -- especially in playoffs (Opener, to boot) -- weighs plenty.

Pujols + Holliday = 0-7, 0 R, 0 RBI. 2 K, 2 BB. Is Holliday gagging a bit?

[ManilaSoxFAN]

Now that OF D, now THAT'S dumb. Just block it.

No effect anyway.

Dodgers-Sox coming soon.

[shawnrbu]

Pujols + Holliday = 0-7, 0 R, 0 RBI. 2 K, 2 BB. Is Holliday gagging a bit?

Holliday did have a single and HBP.

[Adirondack jack]

3:52 minutes is the longest LDS game ever? We must be conditioned to that shit. That's just another April showdown hardly mentionable.

Pretty bad decision there by Kemp in just not keeping that ball in front of him. Looked to his UZR/150 #'s out of curiosity because he seems more like a corner outfielder. Career in CF is .8 and this year it has him at 3.9

[shawnrbu]

3:52 minutes is the longest LDS game ever? We must be conditioned to that shit. That's just another April showdown hardly mentionable.

Must be for 9 innings since Braves @ Astros went 18 innings and 5:50 in Game 4 of the 05 NLDS.

[ManilaSoxFAN]

Holliday did have a single and HBP.

Yes, of course...that is the truth.

I wasn't too clear. My meaning was:

1. Did Torre get into Holliday's head? (Pertaining to the talks of why a smart Torre would have two IBBs vs Pujols)
2. The end result of how Pujols + Holliday HIT (or didn't hit) was impactless; i.e it's arguable that this lack of production was due to the manner they were pitched (or not) to..

The hit and HPB -- when/how they occured -- may not have changed the nature of the challenge Torre seemingly laid to Holliday...if indeed that was what he was doing.

(edit: Clarify number 2 above)

Edited by ManilaSoxFAN, 08 October 2009 - 12:47 AM.

[SemperFidelisSox]

And Jeff Weaver qualifies for the win. Outstanding.

[Stitch01]

"Its far more likely that Torre made a shitty move based on some thought process that went like 'Pujols hits this guy pretty well and I dont want him to beat us, lets walk him' which makes sense intuitively."


I agree that the math is against the move. By a lot. Holliday hits the same pitchers just as successfully, it's early, etc.

But Torre knows that too. And, although I hate him for his Skankeeism, I believe is is far from stupid, baseball-wise (and math-wise in these cases).


I bet you can think of some reasons to call for the IBB in those situations if you detach yourself from the math chains. As I mentioned, psychology -- especially in playoffs (Opener, to boot) -- weighs plenty.

Pujols + Holliday = 0-7, 0 R, 0 RBI. 2 K, 2 BB. Is Holliday gagging a bit?

I told you I can think of some reasons, none of them are good enough.

As for the stat line...well, it worked when Grady left in Pedro to finish a CG game against the Angels late in 2003 and it worked when he left Burkett despite getting hammered in during Game 4 of the ALDS. We won the World Series that year right?