User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.6386 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
It is indeed, and the Braves' establishment and maintenance of that organizational culture is a driving force behind their success.
And don't look now, but they're only 5.5 out of the wildcard spot, and they're in second place behind the Mets. Teams have come back from bigger deficits than the one they have right now, too.
hehehehehehe
I get the "down there reference".
Which is to say, very little....
Nicely put! But I would hope they'd give the revived play of the team on the field a lot more consideration. There's a lot better case for being a buyer than there appeared to be a month ago, that's for sure.
That said, if "being a buyer" means "paying unbelievably outrageous prices" then I'd temper that enthusiasm for going on a shopping spree, especially given the caliber of players likely to be available. EVERYONE wants bullpen help these days, and no one who has it is willing to part with it.
I understand Smoltz wanting the team to go for it right now. He's close to the end of his career (in fact, in the unlikely event the Braves were to win the WS this year, I wouldn't be shocked to see him retire), so he wants to play like this is his last shot.
But it's not the Braves' last shot. They still have a lot of young talent, with more in the low minors. (AA and AAA are pretty weak right now.) Selling all that off for the long shot of winning the WS this year is not a good idea.
I had my dog tutored .... not sure how Braves players would respond to that.
Best Regards
John
Like two in history. I think people are getting over-excited about hte Braves "comeback. They have gone 10-2, but that's the extent of their "hotness". The Fish played better and then cooled off. The Braves have done this rallying outside of the division. They still have to play the Phillies and the Mets and the Marlins and the Cardinals three games this week. They are still 6 games under 0.500, and that could be nine as the Braves pitching faces teh Cardinal offense.
The Reds did *not* get significantly worse. The Astros are trying to get better.
Yes, the Braves are just 5.5 games out of the WC, but so are 6 or 7 other teams.
Against the division-leading Cardinals and Padres, and the wild card-leading Reds.
And most encouragingly, reports indicate that JS has about $6 million in the bank to use on a deadline deal
The Braves have a legitimately excellent offense. There's enough talent on this team to make a wild card run in a weak National League. The Braves shouldn't be giving up, say, Saltalamacchia and Jo Jo Reyes in deadline deals, simply because slipping in as the Wild Card isn't a guarantee of anything. But the playoffs are a worthy goal, especially for this organization.
If there are folks who take pleasure in dancing on this particular grave, that's fine. We all need our enjoyable pursuits. But there's cause for optimism amongst Braves fans.
They are still 6 games under 0.500, and <strike>that</strike>BUT could be <strike>nine</strike>THREE as the Braves <strike>pitching</strike>HITTING faces teh Cardinal <strike>offense</strike>"pitching".
Works just the same when you reverse it
Hey, that Cardinals pitching staff just held the second-best offense in the NL to six runs over 42 innings.
Read that carefully.
The Braves do not need to go overboard in a shot at winning this year until they've actually won more than they've lost.
Having said that, they should trade Todd Pratt to the Orioles for Leo Mazzone.
TAKE HIM FOR FREE!!!!
Before he gets deported. Or he suffers the debilitating disease we've been asking God to give him.
Hey, that Cardinals pitching staff just held the second-best offense in the NL to six runs over 42 innings."
I didnt realize that. Impressive.
OTOH, we're Braves fans. We know what it means when Jason Marquis is on your staff
It's a pretty good offense. Team EqA is .264, which is 6th in the NL. That's okay, but not "excellent".
Is it a park thing? Is Turner playing as more of a hitter's park than normal?
no, the opposite of that actually. turner PF this year is .97. Maybe because we're (read: francoeur) making so many outs? lots of extra inning games? more GP than the dodgers? i dunno.
Well, yes, but for a different reason.
I call it reitsma.
Is it a park thing? Is Turner playing as more of a hitter's park than normal?
Well, the Braves have been one of the NL's least effective base-stealing teams this year--only the Rockies have really been worse. That might have something to do with it.
Is it a park thing? Is Turner playing as more of a hitter's park than normal?"
All joking aside as RB mentioned it might be distorted that way since the Braves can hit and ANYONE can hit their non-Smoltz pitching...though i know PFs try to adjust for that i wouldnt be surprised to see that polluting things some
Whatever it is its pretty clear the EQA isnt the most accurate way to look at this O.
"Seanez would be a good pickup for the braves or another NL team, I think his style is much more suited to the NL, and his stats back that up. He'd be bascily free, and could end up being the best reliver, or even pitcher moved at the deadline."
As i've been pushing..i would LOVE to see Seanez back in the A. Cox is familiar with him and him with Cox and he would be cheap and can strike guys out. The Braves have plenty of live-armed C-level pseudoprospects. One of two of those plus whoever Seanezwould replace i hope would do the trick for him and a little cash
Haha! Spoken like a true believer.
Haha! Spoken like a true believer."
Well regardless of my opinion on this team its pretty clear the Braves offense is better than 6th in the league..
Why? Worse than: Mets, Cards, Reds, Padres, (select some other team).
Make an argument for why the Braves are "clearly better".
I don't see it. And even at that - they are still only going to be "above average", not "excellent".
Right now they're hitting like the '27 Yankees, so I might as well enjoy it.
Score runs --> watch pitching blow it ----> score more runs ----> watch bullpen blow it --->....(repeat) ---> score more runs and win.
That's cheating. Over 3000 PAs, 4 pts does matter. They are much closer to Milwaukee, Florida and Washington than they are to the Mets, the Reds or the Cards.
They are *clearly worse* than those other teams, or they are not "clearly better" than Washington.
And the PF at BPro is 100.3.
Right now they're hitting like the '27 Yankees, so I might as well enjoy it.
That I agree with.
Make an argument for why the Braves are "clearly better". "
Well as others have pointed out...being one run off second in runs and third in BA, HRs, SLG and OPS and 4th in OBP sure screams better than 6th and they play in a neutral park. Their EQA might not be that good but if you define "offense" as "scoring runs" they've been fine and they only look to get better with Chipper coming back, Marcus looking like he was improving (til the injury-which lets a surging Wilson Betemit play) and Francoeur learning
"Why? Worse than: Mets, Cards, Reds, Padres, (select some other team)."
The Reds play in a launching pad and the Braves lead the Cards in runs, are close to the Cards in OBP, and have a bigger edge in slugging.
"Why? Worse than: Mets, Cards, Reds, Padres, (select some other team)."
The Reds play in a launching pad and the Braves lead the Cards in runs, are close to the Cards in OBP, and have a bigger edge in slugging.
That's nice, but all of that is covered in EqA. Parks and everything. Why is EqA wrong?
They've held the Braves to 15 runs over 7 innings so far tonight, too :P
Well, in the specific case of the Reds, because they just traded away two of their best hitters for relief pitchers. They are no longer an offensive match for the Braves.
The last time they acquired pitching in a trade (Arroyo), they managed to improve offensively...
Good question but it sure looks like it is.
EQA doesn't have a perfect correlation with run scoring..merely a good/great one. It can be wrong sometimes
(and yes i know EQA adjusted for parks and rate stats, i just simply mind-farted and didnt realize the list of teams you presented were the list of teams above the Braves in EQA..i thought you were just throwing out a list of teams you thought were better off the top of your head)
I wonder if that's what is throwing the Reds number off a bit. GABP played at an odd 92 in 2004, but the last two years seems to be a pretty big hitters' park.
Turner is looking like a pitchers' park this year.
Ah, this is complicated. My point stands that I don't think there's a whole lot separating the NL offenses.
The point being rebutted was "the Braves have an excellent offense".
Congrats, you have convinced everyone it is average.
I agree, but it has much better correlation than all the things you listed combined. That's the point.
But the Braves are at least looking great with Chipper and McCann healthy again. Small sample sizes for the win.
Chipper is finally back, McCann/Renteria is proving his first half wasnt a fluke, Andruw is due for one of homer binges, and LaRoche/Thorman have done decent in the lower half of the order.
The Braves were a genuinely bad team in June, when they went on a team wide slump, and they are not as good as this current hot streak shows. somewhere in the middle, but the mediocrity is due to the pitching
I was asking in the chatter - what is Betemit's contract status? "
Probably wont be arb-elig til after 07 but might be a super-two this winter. i hope not
Everyone including Betemit knows he can start on a bunch of teams, but he has expressed happiness to stay as the infield backup.
given how injury bit the lineup has been the last 2 years, he is getting lot of playing time. Certainly none of the attitude problems he was supposed to have in the Minors
Betemit is one of those players, whose numbers go down, the longer he plays. Fitness issues?
• Braves at Cardinals, 8:10 ET: We didn't count the Braves out, did we? OK, we did, but that might have been premature now that they are 10-3 in July and only five games back in the NL wild-card race. Winners of six straight, the Braves are expected to promote Jason Shiell from Triple-A Richmond for the start.
No huddy. How far he has fallen.
This is Todd Jones! surprising article, saying he was willing to sign for a huge discount with the Braves, but JS never offered him a second year. JS is not as dumb as some people would have us believe :-)
OTOH Jones sounds like he still wants the closer job, and the Braves have 6 mil floating around. might be a fit. Though as Leyland observed, if Todd Jones has to go more than one inning, it is trouble
I never understand when people who routinely follow sabermetric analysis just completely throw it out the window with phrases likes these.
In 13 games McCann/Renteria have "proven" the first half wasn't a fluke?
Renteria's career marks have "proven" his first half was a fluke. So have McCann's career MiL stats. Andruw is "due"? Ooof.
I don't mind commentary that says "I hope" or "Andruw looks like he's swinging better to me", but gosh, "due" and 40 PAs outweigh 2000?
but the mediocrity is due to the pitching
Is that why their EqA is mediocre?
couple of things here. What is the range of error on MiL stats, esp for a young hitter? While MiL might be a good indicator when someone has gone through the entire 5-6 yr development process, it is less of a surety for someone who has been rushed up to the major leagues and is learning his craft here.
Renteria's career stats have him pegged as a 300/400/470 hitter ( taking his year with Boston out ). The question going into the season was whether he hadd established a new level of talent reflected by his year in Boston or whether he was still capable of producing at an above average rate for a SS. His first half pointed towards the latter, and the way he has started the second half ( line drives to all fields, no bloops falling and good patience ), you expect him to continue his pre-boston career production.
Can McCann/Renteria absolutely suck in august..go thru a 1/30 stretch? sure. But anytime a hitter shows patience, and is driving the ball with power to all fields, you are likely to expect better things from them.
Andruw is "due"? Ooof.
So expecting McCann/Renteria to be "due" to slip down is not charlatanry, but expecting Andruw to pick up his numbers to his estalished level of power is somehow mindbending?
but the mediocrity is due to the pitching
Is that why their EqA is mediocre?
I was talking about the team, not the offence. On re-reading my post, it is open to interpretation, so I will let that pass. Hmm EqA is used as predicting tool now? Are you saying the Braves offence is going to be in the middle of the pack because their first half EqA is middle of the pack?
Huh? If Hudson starts tonight, he's starting on short rest, Shiell pitching tonight puts Hudson back onto 4 days rest.
Renteria's career stats have him pegged as a 300/400/470 hitter ( taking his year with Boston out ).
I mean this as nicely as possible. That's the dumbest thing ever posted on this site.
Renteria has *NEVER* hit that in a single season. That's higher than his peak (his Age 27 season was close). WTF are you talking about????
So expecting McCann/Renteria to be "due" to slip down is not charlatanry, but expecting Andruw to pick up his numbers to his estalished level of power is somehow mindbending?
Wow. Yes, McCann and Renteria are expected to regress toward their career norms.
Andruw is expected to produce somewhere similar to his actual stablished level, not his peak season (which you seem to think is his established level). Andruw should hit about .266/.345/.520 based on his last three/four seasons.
(checks Andruw's stats)
.272 .353 .513
You are, with all due respect, looking at this with some crudded over rose-colored glasses.
Yes. I am saying Chipper is awesome. McCann is playing out of his head. Renteria is having his second best (if not his best) season ever.
The rest of the guys are playing about as expected. So, yes, I think their offense is about right. Mind you, I don't think their offense will be middle of the pack *because* their first half EqA is middle of the pack, I say it because I think that's a good description of about how good they are. Braves team EQA in 2005: 0.264
Look, surely McCann isn't a true talent .350 hitter yet. No one thinks that. But I think he could be a .310 hitter having a +2 SD season. Subjectively, he looks completely in control at the plate right now. His plate coverage is terrific, so is his discipline, he's not getting fooled, and he's driving pitches in his hitting zone. He is 10 times the hitter that Francoeur is.
guess I gave hime 60 pts on OBP somehow...and if thats the dumbest thing that has been said over here, I say I stumbled onto a very intellectual site.
Andruw should hit about .266/.345/.520 based on his last three/four seasons.
I still don't see why you think Andruw isn't primed for a big binge anytime soon. After a slugtastic april, his power cooled down till he picked it up this last week. 4 year averages are very good for a base prediction, but are not the gospel truth. I would expect Andruw to demolish his 4 yr average based on the fact that I think he is entering his peak years, and the fact even when he went through his power slump, he still has maintained decent numbers. Am I saying he is going to slug 575 this year? He may, but I am definitely saying he is going to outperform his 4 year average this year..
Renteria might be a regression candidate ( a bigger one than i initially thought ), but by the same token, Giles is due to pick up the slack. There is going to be a dropoff from McCann and Francouer, but again IMO, nothing that Chipper/Andruw shouldn't be able to pick up after their slack May/June.
As for McCann, are you saying 2 years at A and High A have established his career norms? I can see him hitting 300/350/450 ASB onwards( which is just a slight improvement over the line he put up last year btw )
You are, with all due respect, looking at this with some crudded over rose-colored glasses.
Oh my all means, I am being optimistic, but not unduly so. I think this lineup is realistically one of the best 3 in the league.
As I posted above, I think the Braves should be able to be one of the top 3 offences in the NL in the second half, and am willing to bet on it. By EqA even. 2005 EqA is 265. I think they outperform that this year.. Their offence will win them some games, the question is how many games their pitching will blow for them?
I do.
Well. They are Mets fans, always reactionary...just like their FO. I was more sure Jose Reyes still had some superstar in him than bout any Met fan on this site before this May since God knows if your walk rate is subpar at22 youre ###### for life
Yes Chris, McCann's minor league numbers prove he is not this good.
followed by:
Look, surely McCann isn't a true talent .350 hitter yet. No one thinks that.
WTF? Isn't that what I said?
But I think he could be a .310 hitter having a +2 SD season. Subjectively, he looks completely in control at the plate right now. His plate coverage is terrific, so is his discipline, he's not getting fooled, and he's driving pitches in his hitting zone.
I agree with this completely. *Could be*.
Given that, Kyle, is it more likely that McCann maintains a +2 SD season, or that he regresses toward his true talent?
The problem is 4-yr averages (and I didn't take an average, I just eyeballed it) are more likely than anything else.
Could Andruw hit .270/.350/.550? Sure. But that's not really much better than what he's hit thus far, is it? I mean, I wrote an .865 OPS and if he gets hot he can have a .900? How much, over 2.5 months do you think that'll raise the EQA?
If I predict that AJ would hit 266/.345/.520 and he hit 270/350/550, I'd say that was a damned good prediction - wouldn't you? Heck, he's hitting almost *EXACTLY* what I said based on a 4-yr eyeball. Do you think that's just chance? It *isn't*. Because what I wrote is what he is *likely* to hit.
Could he do better? Of course. What is *likely*? It is *likely* that Andruw will end up about where he is. Might he be somewhat better? Sure. Will be be a lot better? Not very likely. He sure as heck isn't "due" to. And if he gets homer happy for a month like April, then he gets suck happy like June. Players don't hit their averages all year - there are peaks and valleys.
but by the same token, Giles is due to pick up the slack
Why? Have you seen Giles' numbers since the collision with Prior? I think that concussion affected his vision -OOOOH so slightly, but at his level, that is all it takes to go from "best 2B" to "okay player".
Renteria might be a regression candidate ( a bigger one than i initially thought ), but by the same token, Giles is due to pick up the slack. There is going to be a dropoff from McCann and Francouer, but again IMO, nothing that Chipper/Andruw shouldn't be able to pick up after their slack May/June.
Overall, though, I agree with this. And that's pretty much what I have said above (except I don't see Andruw improving very much, nor do I see Francoeur dropping off very much) And to me that says "some increase, some decrease" means that the Braves will end up about where they are. What a .266 EQA? Okay, whatever. Mike A is pressing hard to declare that a 0.268 EQA is approx the same as .264. They won't post a 0.284 EQA like they did in 2003, which was an *excellent* offense.
As for McCann, are you saying 2 years at A and High A have established his career norms? I can see him hitting 300/350/450 ASB onwards( which is just a slight improvement over the line he put up last year btw )
Geez. You just said above that Mccann's 350 BA wasn't a fluke, and when I said he'd regress (which hitting 300/350/450 would be - duh) you and the rest of the crowd thought I was making disparaging remarks. You *AGREE* with me. WTF is wrong with you people?
Those guys weren't right all the time.
I will bet you the Braves do not end up with one of the top 3 NL Team EQAs in 2006.
No, I said there's not a *huge* gap between .264 and .268, and luck/noise could still be a factor even over 3000 PAs. The Braves have made up 2 points on that gap in 2 days.
LA .271
Mets .269
Reds .267
Padres .267
Braves .266
Florida .263
With Chipper and McCann healthy again (did anyone notice the numbers Pratt put up?), and a possible boost from Thorman...the Braves could stick around the top. Francoeur has gotten better, if slightly.
Not to mention no Brian Jordan, without whom the Braves would have a .300 EqA. At least that's what it felt like.
McCann hitting 300/350/450 + for the second half is not regression imo.
As for Andruw, I agree with you on the whole, except to say that he is more likely to slug closer to 575 than 515 IMO, and also that one of his huge power binges is coming up.
You are saying the Braves offence will be average, i say it will be one of the best in the NL. Can we isolate second half EqAs? Because I am saying that they will have the top 3 in that..for 2006 as a whole, they have to make up significant ground to get up there, but I am willing to consider it. $10 / pitcher on second half EqAs though if you are game.
No, but you are mis-reading.
Here's the conversation:
Post 53 godot:
McCann/Renteria is proving his first half wasnt a fluke,
Post 60 Dial:
In 13 games McCann/Renteria have "proven" the first half wasn't a fluke?
Renteria's career marks have "proven" his first half was a fluke. So have McCann's career MiL stats.
What that says is that McCann's first half (~.350 .450 .530) is a fluke, and that he should produce something in line with his minor league numbers. It sure as #### doesn't say " because of the way you brought up his minor league numbers, implying that THEY represent his true talent level.".
His MLB numbers will be closer to his MiLB numbers than 350/400/530. His minor league numbers, while there is room for improvement indicate HIS FIRST HALF IS A FLUKE. Which is *precisely* what I stated and *precisely* what each of you criticized me for, while now you are saying that exact thing - that he won't hit 350/400/520.
Godot, I am not being "overly simplistic" Do you realize that the drop you are projecting for McCann is much larger than the increase you project for anyone else? That will make a large impact on the bottom line.
McCann is hitting 350/410/535. You say (in post 78):"McCann hitting 300/350/450 + for the second half is not regression imo."
Well, you've topped your post about Renteria. WTF do you think going from 350 to 300 is??????
I agree that if the Braves score 10+ runs per game the rest of the season, they can increase their EQA significantly (note, the Mets scored a bunch to raise their EQA as well).
That's a *really* bad bet. And there isn't that much noise - it takes a bunch of runs to raise EQA.
Dial, you need to clarify what you are saying. What do you mean by a fluke??? a fluke is a Brady Anderson year, something which the player can't ever replicate. So when I say I expect him to his 300/350+ over half a year, it makes his 350/420 a fluke? I am saying he is not a 350 hitter, but a 300+ hitter who in a good year hits 350. How on ###### earth does that qualify as a fluke? When Pujols hit 360 one year and 330 the next year, was his 360 a fluke?!
when I say he is going to hit 300+, it is because it is where I believe his base talent level to be...so in a literal sense, a regression to his true talent level..however people on this site use regression to the mean, which means you expect him to hit 250-ish for the rest of the year. So start by clearing stating what you mean by fluke and regression before crowing that you are right
And I am saying 300+. do you understand what that means? I am saying 300 is the lower edge of the spectrum for him going through the second half. while the upper end of the spectrum is 350-360 ish. Does that clarify why the interval is that big?
Actually, I use it, and I think most use it that he will regress to his true talent level.
Which you seem to think is a 300 BA. I'm okay with that (I doubt it, but it's possible). If he's hitting 350 and his true talent is 300 and he nhits 300 he has regressed to his true talent. He's also *greatly* dropped in production.
A true 300 hitter isn't going to fluctuate between 250-350 very much. It's going to be a smaller window than that without starting to be "fluky". Kyle called it outside 2SDs (90%). So yes, I think something with a 10% or less chance is kind of fluky. Don't you?
When Pujols hit 360 one year and 330 the next year, was his 360 a fluke?!
It depends on what Pujols true talent is. If Pujols hits with a 330 average as his true talent, and 360 is within 2 SDs, then no, it isn't a fluke. If his true talent is a 300 BA and he hits 360, then yes, it is. Is it *as fluky* as a 250 hitter hitting 360? No, but when you draw some lines, and 2 SDs is a pretty good one, then you cna call them "flukes".
Several people said "no one thinks McCann is a 350 hitter". Given that you think that, that means you *expect* him to regress to his tryue talent level (regardless of where you put it). By saying, and you have, that McCann isn't a 350 hitter and you don't expect him to "keep it up", you are saying you expect McCann to regress to his true ability (and you have said 300 BA).
That's regression, whether it is your opinion or not.
*I* do? Read what you wrote in #68. there's no "+" in there. Read what Kyle wrote in #77.
I'll say this - you move the target often enough.
If you want to see the dumbest thing ever posted, scroll up to where you claimed "[EqA] has much better correlation [to runs scored] than all the things you listed combined," when RUNS SCORED was one of the things listed.
Maybe, but you're getting that hyper little tweak in your voice and your left eye is starting to do that thing that comes on when you get worried. And _that_ is terribly amusing.
s/
at least you are staying out of the substance of the debate. Smart men.
The substance of the debate? You mean the bit where you geeks are whinging over whether or not EQA adequately reflects a team's ability to score runs while ignoring the actual number of runs the team has scored? Yeah, I'm avoiding that. Remember back in the day when you were trying to convince people that sac flies really are better than other outs because, you know, a run scores and stuff. It's like that, only with goofy assed acronyms.
I doubt the Braves will continue to score 13 runs per game. I doubt the Braves will actually run down the Mets. Not because the Mets are _that much better_ than the Braves, but because a 6-438 June is really difficult to dig out from under. Still, should they even begin to chase down the Mets, the season is worthwhile for me, as it's more entertaining to make Mets fans verklempt than anything else, and as hung up as most of you guys are on "beating the Braves" even making it a less than double-digit lead suffices.
s/
Ah so teh Rockies really were great teams. My bad.
s/
The Far Side was great.
Through 7/17, the Braves have scored 5.28 runs per game. What the heck, here is the top end of the list:
NYN 5.37
ATL 5.28
LAN 5.16
CIN 5.04
STL 5.04
2006 Park factors courtesy of ESPN (where greater than 1.00 favors the hitter)
NYN 0.938
ATL 0.917
LAN 1.079
CIN 1.107
STL 0.885
EqA overvalues multi-year park factors when retrospectively comparing how good the offenses have been. By runs scored, the Braves have the second best performance. And they are hurt more by their park than the #1, #3, and #4 clubs.
I was ridiculed for ignoring this. So I hold up an example of *WHY* we don't just look at runs scored, and I get ridiculed for that.
Delightful.
It's incredible what 6 games of 10+ runs will do for you.
At the ASB, the Braves averaged 4.94 R/G.
Because your example was ridiculous. Duh. You're comparing same-season offensive numbers between teams with historically and currently similar parks and no monumental "gotcha" relating to offensive production in the discussion thread, but you're "example" of why you can't just look at their actual runs scored is the most abberant offensive-perk environment in the history of the game. And you wonder why I'm mocking you? Come on son, you're smarter than that. You want me to stop ridiculing you, stop saying stupid ####.
Why are the raw runs scored numbers of the Braves, Mets and Cardinals (just as "examples", wherein "example" means a similar case that isn't bare-fistedly stupid in its inapplicability) not valid for comparing those three teams ability to "score runs?"
s/
Well, I guess those 60+ runs from the last week or so just don't count, huh?
s/
No, they came from out of division, and most of them came against a team that lost 3 in a row.
Well, we were comparing their ability as offenses. That they have scored a lot of runs isn't necessarily a good indication they will continue to do so. If the construct of those runs is higher than their expected output (clutch hits or whathaveyou), then it isn't likely they will continue to score runs with similar offense events. Sorry, I thought you already understood this part.
Yes, those 60+ runs count, but you just said you don't expect them to keep that up.
Oh! They came from out of the division against a team that had lost 3 in a row. Now it all makes so much sense!
So the 37 runs the Mets scored vs. Arizona June 8-11? Take 'em off the board! After all, they came from out of the division against a team that had lost 3 in a row. And what about those 20 runs NY scored against Pittsburgh from July 3-6? I mean, technically the Bucs won the first game of that series, so they hadn't "lost 3 in a row", but on the other hand they're the freakin' Bucs and they've lost virtually every other game this year and 97.45% of all of their games for the past 13 years, so surely _they_ don't count either?
Am I missing anything else? Do games against Californian teams count, or is that only if they're played before 10PM Eastern, so they get credit for being on the "right" time zone?
'Cause clutch hits don't count? Come on. Please, don't play this crap with me. What exactly should we "expect" the team to produce going forward? 4.68 runs per game? 5.24? Who's the poor schmuck that has to score that fractional run? Does he have to stand between home and third all night, exactly .68 of the way there?
Yes, those 60+ runs count, but you just said you don't expect them to keep that up.
No, I don't. I don't expect _any_ team to score 13+ runs per game from here on out. I expect the Braves, in particular, to score 10+ here or there, 5 or 6 with regularity, and occasionally be shut out. Just like what I expect from the Mets and Cardinals. Because all three of those teams have almost identical offenses.
s/
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main