Return to Baseball Leftovers

Abreu vs. Manny

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby LBJackal » Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:19 pm

davidmarver wrote:
LBJackal wrote:
davidmarver wrote:
Secret Avatar wrote:That might be true. My point is that having an ERA of 2.27 with a WHIP of 1.20 is mathematically abnormal, and anyone who bets on a repeat is gonna be disappointed. It'd be like winning the lottery twice.


And furthermore, Carlos Zambrano had a WHIP of 1.22 and an era of 2.75. If you took the average scores of games at Wrigley and Petco, there'd be a difference of at least one run. You divide that into 1/2 a run for each team and that accounts for the difference between Zambrano's and Peavy's ERA.


What does Zambrano have to do with this? He was lucky last year too if that's what you mean... his 2.75 ERA should have been more like 2.91 but just because Peavy wasn't the only lucky one doesn't mean it will continue.


Doesn't mean it will stop either.

And how come when a pitcher is good with RISP it is considered luck, but when a batter's RBI's are up and people point out his AVG with RISP, it's a valid point. It makes no sense.


Who said BA with RISP is relevant? I didn't.
Image

"Jack, will you call me, if you're able?"

"I've got your phone number written, in the back of my Bible."
LBJackal
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Pick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 9018
(Past Year: -178)
Joined: 1 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Hotel Yorba

Postby davidmarver » Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:22 pm

LBJackal wrote:
davidmarver wrote:
LBJackal wrote:
davidmarver wrote:
Secret Avatar wrote:That might be true. My point is that having an ERA of 2.27 with a WHIP of 1.20 is mathematically abnormal, and anyone who bets on a repeat is gonna be disappointed. It'd be like winning the lottery twice.


And furthermore, Carlos Zambrano had a WHIP of 1.22 and an era of 2.75. If you took the average scores of games at Wrigley and Petco, there'd be a difference of at least one run. You divide that into 1/2 a run for each team and that accounts for the difference between Zambrano's and Peavy's ERA.


What does Zambrano have to do with this? He was lucky last year too if that's what you mean... his 2.75 ERA should have been more like 2.91 but just because Peavy wasn't the only lucky one doesn't mean it will continue.


Doesn't mean it will stop either.

And how come when a pitcher is good with RISP it is considered luck, but when a batter's RBI's are up and people point out his AVG with RISP, it's a valid point. It makes no sense.


Who said BA with RISP is relevant? I didn't.


I see it used all the time on television, hear about it on radio, I've seen it used in a few of the "who should i pick" threads from weeks past.

I'm just saying...the ability to bear down and play good, clutch baseball, is not luck.
davidmarver
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 ChampionLucky Ladders Weekly WinnerTrivia Time Trial Monthly Winner
Posts: 5826
(Past Year: -328)
Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: 5.5 Hole

Postby Secret Avatar » Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:32 pm

"I'm just saying...the ability to bear down and play good, clutch baseball, is not luck."

Agreed 100 percent. In order for that argument to work for Peavey, though, he would have to do a MUCH better job of playing clutch baseball than any other pitcher in the league. Are you saying he has super-human mental fortitude?! He's better in the clutch than RJ, Schilling, the Rocket, or Pedro?! Every other pitcher, both in 2004 and just about anytime in baseball history, with a 1.20 WHIP has an ERA considerably higher than 2.27.

That's the bottom line: in order for Peavey's 2.27/1.20 to make sense as anything other than a statistical anomaly, he had to have done something in 2004 that no other pitcher did, and no other pitcher has ever done.
I am the Master. Don't question the Master. Just do what he says and be proud.
Secret Avatar
General Manager
General Manager

Cafeholic
Posts: 3233
(Past Year: -2)
Joined: 15 Nov 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby ensanimal » Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:35 pm

davidmarver wrote:I'm just saying...the ability to bear down and play good, clutch baseball, is not luck.


uh oh, clutch :-o
ensanimal
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeHockey ModPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 10428
(Past Year: -152)
Joined: 14 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Tim Horton's

Postby Amazinz » Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:37 pm

ensanimal wrote:
davidmarver wrote:I'm just saying...the ability to bear down and play good, clutch baseball, is not luck.


uh oh, clutch :-o

Cutch pitchers. That's kinda new. Don't think we've argued about that recently. O:-)
Amazinz
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb SupporterPick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 18680
(Past Year: -120)
Joined: 16 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: in Canada, toughening up figure skaters

Postby davidmarver » Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:41 pm

Secret Avatar wrote:"I'm just saying...the ability to bear down and play good, clutch baseball, is not luck."

Agreed 100 percent. In order for that argument to work for Peavey, though, he would have to do a MUCH better job of playing clutch baseball than any other pitcher in the league. Are you saying he has super-human mental fortitude?! He's better in the clutch than RJ, Schilling, the Rocket, or Pedro?! Every other pitcher, both in 2004 and just about anytime in baseball history, with a 1.20 WHIP has an ERA considerably higher than 2.27.

That's the bottom line: in order for Peavey's 2.27/1.20 to make sense as anything other than a statistical anomaly, he had to have done something in 2004 that no other pitcher did, and no other pitcher has ever done.


Here are those pitchers stats last year in (OBA with RISP, OBA with RISP and less than two outs)

Peavy : .185, .109
Johnson : .198, .163
Rocket : .193, .143
Schilling : .221, .192
Pedro : .197, .129

So there we have it. You figure a difference in .010 is the equivalent of one run. If he posted Schilling's #'s for here, his ERA would rise to 2.92.

Have I found the magic number?
davidmarver
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 ChampionLucky Ladders Weekly WinnerTrivia Time Trial Monthly Winner
Posts: 5826
(Past Year: -328)
Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: 5.5 Hole

Postby LBJackal » Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:42 pm

Here we go... not only can Peavy keep opponents' BA down better than other pitchers, not only can he keep them from getting doubles and triples, but now he's clutch too :-o

I seriously hope you have a farm to bet Mr Marver. I hope you don't back down from your offer.
Image

"Jack, will you call me, if you're able?"

"I've got your phone number written, in the back of my Bible."
LBJackal
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Pick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 9018
(Past Year: -178)
Joined: 1 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Hotel Yorba

Postby LBJackal » Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:44 pm

davidmarver wrote:
Secret Avatar wrote:"I'm just saying...the ability to bear down and play good, clutch baseball, is not luck."

Agreed 100 percent. In order for that argument to work for Peavey, though, he would have to do a MUCH better job of playing clutch baseball than any other pitcher in the league. Are you saying he has super-human mental fortitude?! He's better in the clutch than RJ, Schilling, the Rocket, or Pedro?! Every other pitcher, both in 2004 and just about anytime in baseball history, with a 1.20 WHIP has an ERA considerably higher than 2.27.

That's the bottom line: in order for Peavey's 2.27/1.20 to make sense as anything other than a statistical anomaly, he had to have done something in 2004 that no other pitcher did, and no other pitcher has ever done.


Here are those pitchers stats last year in (OBA with RISP, OBA with RISP and less than two outs)

Peavy : .185, .109
Johnson : .198, .163
Rocket : .193, .143
Schilling : .221, .192
Pedro : .197, .129

So there we have it. You figure a difference in .010 is the equivalent of one run. If he posted Schilling's #'s for here, his ERA would rise to 2.92.

Have I found the magic number?


If anything this should tell you how lucky he was.... I can't believe you're using this as evidence to prove it wasn't a fluke :-o
Image

"Jack, will you call me, if you're able?"

"I've got your phone number written, in the back of my Bible."
LBJackal
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Pick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 9018
(Past Year: -178)
Joined: 1 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Hotel Yorba

Postby davidmarver » Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:46 pm

LBJackal wrote:
davidmarver wrote:
Secret Avatar wrote:"I'm just saying...the ability to bear down and play good, clutch baseball, is not luck."

Agreed 100 percent. In order for that argument to work for Peavey, though, he would have to do a MUCH better job of playing clutch baseball than any other pitcher in the league. Are you saying he has super-human mental fortitude?! He's better in the clutch than RJ, Schilling, the Rocket, or Pedro?! Every other pitcher, both in 2004 and just about anytime in baseball history, with a 1.20 WHIP has an ERA considerably higher than 2.27.

That's the bottom line: in order for Peavey's 2.27/1.20 to make sense as anything other than a statistical anomaly, he had to have done something in 2004 that no other pitcher did, and no other pitcher has ever done.


Here are those pitchers stats last year in (OBA with RISP, OBA with RISP and less than two outs)

Peavy : .185, .109
Johnson : .198, .163
Rocket : .193, .143
Schilling : .221, .192
Pedro : .197, .129

So there we have it. You figure a difference in .010 is the equivalent of one run. If he posted Schilling's #'s for here, his ERA would rise to 2.92.

Have I found the magic number?


If anything this should tell you how lucky he was.... I can't believe you're using this as evidence to prove it wasn't a fluke :-o


I don't think there is a single way I could ever convince you the contrary, but I have provided numbers after numbers to support Peavy's continuance, while there have been very little numbers to the contrary.

You cannot argue against the RISP numbers. That is a measure of how clutch a player is.
davidmarver
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 ChampionLucky Ladders Weekly WinnerTrivia Time Trial Monthly Winner
Posts: 5826
(Past Year: -328)
Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: 5.5 Hole

Postby LBJackal » Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:59 pm

davidmarver wrote:
LBJackal wrote:
davidmarver wrote:
Secret Avatar wrote:"I'm just saying...the ability to bear down and play good, clutch baseball, is not luck."

Agreed 100 percent. In order for that argument to work for Peavey, though, he would have to do a MUCH better job of playing clutch baseball than any other pitcher in the league. Are you saying he has super-human mental fortitude?! He's better in the clutch than RJ, Schilling, the Rocket, or Pedro?! Every other pitcher, both in 2004 and just about anytime in baseball history, with a 1.20 WHIP has an ERA considerably higher than 2.27.

That's the bottom line: in order for Peavey's 2.27/1.20 to make sense as anything other than a statistical anomaly, he had to have done something in 2004 that no other pitcher did, and no other pitcher has ever done.


Here are those pitchers stats last year in (OBA with RISP, OBA with RISP and less than two outs)

Peavy : .185, .109
Johnson : .198, .163
Rocket : .193, .143
Schilling : .221, .192
Pedro : .197, .129

So there we have it. You figure a difference in .010 is the equivalent of one run. If he posted Schilling's #'s for here, his ERA would rise to 2.92.

Have I found the magic number?


If anything this should tell you how lucky he was.... I can't believe you're using this as evidence to prove it wasn't a fluke :-o


I don't think there is a single way I could ever convince you the contrary, but I have provided numbers after numbers to support Peavy's continuance, while there have been very little numbers to the contrary.

You cannot argue against the RISP numbers. That is a measure of how clutch a player is.


Wow.... you're not getting my point. I know what Peavy did LAST YEAR, but he won't do taht NEXT YEAR which is the point. He probably won't have the same LUCK.

I don't know why you argue that he didn't benefit greatly from luck.... have you done studies to see the control pitchers have over the stats you mention? Do you have reason to believe it? I'm finished discusiing Peavy... once you name your price for a wager, I'll continue again. Let's see how confident you really are in him.
Image

"Jack, will you call me, if you're able?"

"I've got your phone number written, in the back of my Bible."
LBJackal
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Pick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 9018
(Past Year: -178)
Joined: 1 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Hotel Yorba

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron