Tribe @ A's

• HitsRus

  

  Murphy and Moss are gone... Lonnie is recalled...and Carrasco is supposed to be on the hill tonite. I will feel better when I see him throw a pitch, meaning he probably won't be traded.
  
  Since the season is down the tubes, I figured I'd start this thread anyway.
• Commander of Awesome

  

  lol who cares? Fuck the dolans
• BRF

  

  Go Tribe.
• BR1986FB

  HitsRus;1743483 wrote:and Carrasco is supposed to be on the hill tonite. I will feel better when I see him throw a pitch, meaning he probably won't be traded.

  Who cares? This "you can't have enough good pitching" myth is bullshit. The starters have been very good but when you can't score runs, what does it matter? Unless every starter has a 0.00 ERA you need to hit. If the Tribe can get a haul, in the way of hitting, trade his ass.
  
  Now, as I say this, after the trades, watch these losers go on a 10 game winning streak.
• Mulva

  

  They're due to run off 6 or 8 in a row at some point. I still expect around a .500 finish.
• Crimson streak

  

  Francona teams are known for playing great in august and September. So ya never know.
  
  
  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
• TBone14

  

  3 straight complete games is absurd.
  
  This season reeks of shoulda, woulda, coulda and being the one that got away.
• Gardens35

  7-31-15
  
  Go Tribe.
• Al Bundy

  BR1986FB;1743530 wrote:Who cares? This "you can't have enough good pitching" myth is bullshit. The starters have been very good but when you can't score runs, what does it matter? Unless every starter has a 0.00 ERA you need to hit. If the Tribe can get a haul, in the way of hitting, trade his ass.
  
  Now, as I say this, after the trades, watch these losers go on a 10 game winning streak.

  It is a bit of myth about our starting pitching. Their ERA is 4.24 which is 20th best in baseball (below average). It is only 9th best in the American League (below average). It reminds me of last season how everyone said the Browns defense was good, but the stats showed a different story.
• Mulva

  

  That's because we have the worst defense in baseball. The FIP has to be top 10, if not top 5.
• lhslep134

  

  Al Bundy;1743611 wrote:It is a bit of myth about our starting pitching.

  No, it's not. We're 8th in baseball in FIP and 3rd in xFIP. Until Lindor and Urshela provided stability, our defense was atrocious too.
  
  http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2015&month=0&season1=2015&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=17,a
  
  Our starting pitching has been among the best in baseball.
• lhslep134

  

  Mulva;1743619 wrote:That's because we have the worst defense in baseball. The FIP has to be top 10, if not top 5.

  Good post--see my contemporaneously posted one with the linked stats.
• Al Bundy

  lhslep134;1743621 wrote:No, it's not. We're 8th in baseball in FIP and 3rd in xFIP. Until Lindor and Urshela provided stability, our defense was atrocious too.
  
  http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2015&month=0&season1=2015&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=17,a
  
  Our starting pitching has been among the best in baseball.

  We're 10th in team defense. The made up stats are fun to look at sometimes, but the bottom line is our starting pitching has given more earned runs than most other teams.
• lhslep134

  

  Al Bundy;1743626 wrote: The made up stats are fun to look at

  So you're completely disregarding fielding-independent pitching stats and then want to make a claim about our pitching staff?
  
  Great logic there chief.
• lhslep134

  

  And we're actually 25th in team defense, I have no idea where you're getting 10th from.
  
  http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=fld&lg=all&qual=0&type=1&season=2015&month=0&season1=2015&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0
• Laley23

  

  10th in team defense? Since when?
  
  And lol at made up stats. Better technology and smarter people have evolved...but let's stick to the archaic shit that simple minded people came up with and call THAT the bottom line.
  
  We are third in WAR as well.
• lhslep134

  

  Here's Bundy's logic:
  
  His narrative: our pitching staff hasn't been as good as people think
  His support: Higher ERA than league average (18th)
  His support: 10th in defense*
  Our counter-point: 3rd in X-Fip, 8th in FIP
  Our counter-point: 25th in advanced defensive metrics
  Our conclusion: our pitching staff has been good, if not great; defense is killing us
  His conclusion: "Advanced metrics are made up stats"
  
  
  
  
  *no idea where this number comes from. It's probably a list based on fielding percentage. Talk about archaic.
• Al Bundy

  Laley23;1743632 wrote:10th in team defense? Since when?
  
  And lol at made up stats. Better technology and smarter people have evolved...but let's stick to the archaic shit that simple minded people came up with and call THAT the bottom line.
  
  We are third in WAR as well.

  We can all pick and choose whatever stats we want and make up conclusions. Sure, we can guess how someone may compare to his replacement, but it is all hypothetical. I have a math background, but I know that there are stats that actually happened and stats that are just guesses as to what might have happened. I think the Tribe's starters have potential, but they are not a great staff yet. The hypothetical stats are fun to look at, but Billy Beane still hasn't won anything after he made them popular in baseball.
• lhslep134

  

  Billy Beane might not have won anything, but he was also more financially constrained than any other successful GM in baseball.
  
  But let's completely ignore the fact that in recent memory the analytically inclined Rays made the World Series with among the lowest payroll in baseball and won multiple AL East titles, the analytically inclined (and early movers, along with the A's) Red Sox won multiple World Series, the analytically inclined Giants have won multiple titles, and so on and so on.
  
  It's not picking and choosing, it's calling a spade a spade and foregoing archaic statistical analysis in favor of more accurate and modern statistical analysis: ERA vs FIP, X-FIP; RBI's vs WRC+; fielding percentage vs UZR, Def.
  
  The only ones who "pick and choose" are the ones like you who are choosing to ignore the more modern analysis because it doesn't fit your narrative. You don't "choose" to cite to more modern statistics like Laley and I are, we do it because it provides a more accurate picture than the archaic stats. Which is the whole reason they exist in the first place.
  
  And with you harking on Beane, it's almost like you're choosing to ignore that the baseball playoffs are a crapshoot and the best you can do is to just get your team there, which Beane does.
• Al Bundy

  lhslep134;1743642 wrote:Billy Beane might not have won anything, but he was also more financially constrained than any other successful GM in baseball.
  
  But let's completely ignore the fact that in recent memory the analytically inclined Rays made the World Series with among the lowest payroll in baseball and won multiple AL East titles, the analytically inclined (and early movers, along with the A's) Red Sox won multiple World Series, the analytically inclined Giants have won multiple titles, and so on and so on.
  
  It's not picking and choosing, it's calling a spade a spade and foregoing archaic statistical analysis in favor of more accurate and modern statistical analysis: ERA vs FIP, X-FIP; RBI's vs WRC+; fielding percentage vs UZR, Def.
  
  The only ones who "pick and choose" are the ones like you who are choosing to ignore the more modern analysis because it doesn't fit your narrative. You don't "choose" to cite to more modern statistics like Laley and I are, we do it because it provides a more accurate picture than the archaic stats. Which is the whole reason they exist in the first place.
  
  And with you harking on Beane, it's almost like you're choosing to ignore that the baseball playoffs are a crapshoot and the best you can do is to just get your team there, which Beane does.

  Here is a list of teams and their use of advance stats. https://sistemaperalta.wordpress.com/2014/06/24/ranking-all-30-mlb-teams-by-use-of-sabermetrics/ There is no correlation between using them and winning. The top 4 teams have combined for one title since the use became common with Beane in 2002. The team with the most titles in that time span, the Giants, ranks 20th. The Indians rank 3rd, and they have made horrible player decisions in that time period. Some of the sabermetrics are fun to look at, but they have no correlation to winning.
• lhslep134

  

  Whatever you say Bundy. You're right, we should all be using archaic stats, and every baseball writer who uses advanced metrics is wrong.
  
  Thank you so much for enlightening us as to the error in (all of) our ways. We should definitely value ERA over FIP and xFIP; we should definitely value RBIs over WRC+, and we should definitely look at fielding percentage and # of errors instead of stats that take into account how tough a play is to make.
  
  And you're definitely right that there's no link between use of analytics and winning :rolleyes:
• lhslep134

  

  And Bundy, you have yet to refute this accurate summary of your argument:
  

  lhslep134;1743634 wrote:Here's Bundy's logic:
  
  His narrative: our pitching staff hasn't been as good as people think
  His support: Higher ERA than league average (18th)
  His support: 10th in defense*
  Our counter-point: 3rd in X-Fip, 8th in FIP
  Our counter-point: 25th in advanced defensive metrics
  Our conclusion: our pitching staff has been good, if not great; defense is killing us
  His conclusion: "Advanced metrics are made up stats"
  
  
  
  
  *no idea where this number comes from. It's probably a list based on fielding percentage. Talk about archaic.

  Please explain how your stats somehow tell a more accurate story than ours do. This should be entertaining.
• Al Bundy

  lhslep134;1743650 wrote:Whatever you say Bundy. You're right, we should all be using archaic stats, and every baseball writer who uses advanced metrics is wrong.
  
  Thank you so much for enlightening us as to the error in (all of) our ways. We should definitely value ERA over FIP and xFIP; we should definitely value RBIs over WRC+, and we should definitely look at fielding percentage and # of errors instead of stats that take into account how tough a play is to make.
  
  And you're definitely right that there's no link between use of analytics and winning :rolleyes:

  It just depends whether you want objective or subjective stats. "How tough a play is to make" is a subjective stat. I'm sorry this is so confusing to you, but then again, you had to go all the way to Arizona to find a law school that would take you. We can all make up whatever stats we want. The stats that you worship were made up by a security guard who was killing time while working night duty. Bob Feller, who knows more baseball than any of us, always argued that wins was the most important stat in baseball because it factored in the pitcher's ability to limit a team when it was really needed. If the moneyball teams had won more championships, maybe it should be studied more. The team that uses them the most, has not even been close to the World Series. They only made it out of the first round once, and they were swept in the ALCS.
• Al Bundy

  lhslep134;1743652 wrote:And Bundy, you have yet to refute this accurate summary of your argument:
  
  
  
  Please explain how your stats somehow tell a more accurate story than ours do. This should be entertaining.

  If you want me to pick a simple stat, I'll take run differential. The teams with best run differential are in first in 5 of the 6 divisions, and it is a very accurate measure of division winners historically. The Yankees are the only outlier this season.
• lhslep134

  

  Al Bundy;1743654 wrote:If you want me to pick a simple stat, I'll take run differential. The teams with best run differential are in first in 5 of the 6 divisions, and it is a very accurate measure of division winners historically. The Yankees are the only outlier this season.

  Please stop the irrelevant deflection and answer the question: how do your stats tell a more accurate story than the ones cited by Laley and I?