Yankees: Objects in Mirror are Closer then they Appear

[Imran Siddiqui]

so if during t he span of one week, you never get within 1 run of the other team in the final inning you should not bring in your ace closer?

Um... no. I don't think anyone said that. I said that the value of a reliever ace is much higher in saving a run when teams are within a run rather than in the 9th inning when you are up by 3. Yes, that sometimes mean your relief ace may enter the game in the 7th inning if need be.

and yeah, the expected average is that, but if you know that your batter will not get a hit, then its better to have runner on 2nd, no outs, then runner on first with 1 out.

If you know your batter will not get a hit, I challenge why you'd have him in your lineup. No one's defense is that good. But as I edited in my previous post, if you have an extreme situation like that, then go ahead and bunt. Sabermetrics doesn't want you blindly follow the findings they have found. In fact James cautions against that and tells his readers to ask questions about the data for themselves. If you find yourself in an outlier situation do what you think best, BUT BASED ON THE NUMBERS AND FACTS (not 'gut'). No sabermatrician wants to see the abolition of managers.

look under team luck totals, the yanks are the luckiest (+28.9) , while the red sox have one the top 10 unluckiest pitchers.

I don't think anyone is disputing that.

[Vlad Antlerkov]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
so if during t he span of one week, you never get within 1 run of the other team in the final inning you should not bring in your ace closer? doesnt bill realize the closer will get rusty, lose his edge etc?

IIRC, James does say that the team should test the relief ace occasionally in non-close games. The quote:

The answer that I am going to offer is a guess, albeit a guess informed by research. The very optimal usage pattern, I believe, would be to use the relief ace:
--Two innings when the game is tied
--Two innings in a game when you have a one-run lead
--One inning at a time in other games when the game is close at the end and the relief ace hasn't been used for a day or two.

In other words, bring in your man when you're ahead by one after seven innings, when you're tied after seven innings, or when the game is close and the relief ace isn't tired.

If a reliever pitched two innings two days in a row, he would need to rest the third day.

IMHO, I'd change the job around so that instead of going two innings an outing in most outings, the relief ace would go one inning when with a one-run lead (i.e. coming in in the ninth) and to compensate would come in during innings to get out of big jams (bases loaded with one out and the like).

And yes, the reason why I drafted Keith Foulke so high was the hope that Burrito Francona would use him in this pattern. Foulke might not have saved 50 games-- but on the other hand, he could have recorded 15+ wins and 25+ saves in this pattern.

(on that note, I really need to work on my literature paper. Damn you Iliad, why do you have to be so boring? )

[Imran Siddiqui]

Vlad, I thank you . Anyone who has read James realizes that he doesn't argue for an all-or-nothing approach, but to make educated decisions based on the stats. All that he does is to explain the stats further and to offer further insights on to what wins games.

It's kind of like the Creationism/Evolution debate. James is an evolutionist. He wants you to use the facts to decide, not rely on 'traditional notions' with no basis in fact.

(God, I hope I didn't turn this into a Creationism debate )

[Lawrence of Arabia]

If you know your batter will not get a hit, I challenge why you'd have him in your lineup. No one's defense is that good. But as I edited in my previous post, if you have an extreme situation like that, then go ahead and bunt. Sabermetrics doesn't want you blindly follow the findings they have found. In fact James cautions against that and tells his readers to ask questions about the data for themselves. If you find yourself in an outlier situation do what you think best, BUT BASED ON THE NUMBERS AND FACTS (not 'gut'). No sabermatrician wants to see the abolition of managers.

who said he wont get a hit all game long. his marginal average would be 0 in that at bat, so why let him swing if you know this?

[Imran Siddiqui]

who said he wont get a hit all game long. his marginal average would be 0 in that at bat, so why let him swing if you know this?

If he would get a hit early in the game, why wouldn't he get a hit later in the game? Besides, that doesn't change anything. If he can't get a hit because he's that bad, then go ahead and bunt him, but only if the numbers support it (ie, OBP vs. that pitcher, etc).

[The Emperor Fabulous]

****...this is bring baseball to the lowest form of determination I've ever seen: mathematics.

If you have to bring it down to that level, either pro-yankees or pro-sox, you shouldn't be a baseball fan.

Its like saying how well will Lynard Skynard or Dave Matthews play from a mathematical point of view.

[Imran Siddiqui]

****...this is bring baseball to the lowest form of determination I've ever seen: mathematics.

In a sport which is so based on stats, that's the only form you can bring the sport down to if you want to know how to win. You have to deconstruct the elements that lead to victory and math is the tool to do it.

If you have to bring it down to that level, either pro-yankees or pro-sox, you shouldn't be a baseball fan.

If you ignore the central role of math and stats in determining baseball strategy then you shouldn't be a baseball fan, no matter what team you back.

Its like saying how well will Lynard Skynard or Dave Matthews play from a mathematical point of view.

Lynard Skynard or Dave Matthews don't directly compete against other bands (they indirectly do so through sales). There are not measured by wins and losses or stats. Baseball, OTOH, is.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

If he would get a hit early in the game, why wouldn't he get a hit later in the game? Besides, that doesn't change anything. If he can't get a hit because he's that bad, then go ahead and bunt him, but only if the numbers support it (ie, OBP vs. that pitcher, etc).

because his average means that he wont get a hit everytime up - in fact if you hit once every game, you go to the hall of fame

[Arrian]

Not if you don't have much power and don't walk much. Then you're going 1/4 each game. You're a .250 singles hitter. You're not even the equal of Miguel Cairo. Yay! No HOF for you.

-Arrian

[asleepathewheel]

Miguel Cairo

I was sad to see him leave the cards.


Speaking of the Cards

guess who is gonna be added to their roster?

[Arrian]

I do like Cairo, btw. It's just that he's a long, long way from being a HOF'er. I was happy to see us pick him up, and unhappy to see that it did not result in the release of one Enrique Wilson.

Who are the Cards adding? Is Rick Ankiel making a comeback?

-Arrian

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Arrian
I do like Cairo, btw. It's just that he's a long, long way from being a HOF'er. I was happy to see us pick him up, and unhappy to see that it did not result in the release of one Enrique Wilson.

Cairo is a fantastic utility man, as everyday? I dunno.

Originally posted by Arrian
Is Rick Ankiel making a comeback?

Its like the heady days of 1999. Let's just hope he can find the zone and not the backstop.

Here's his line from a start a few days ago at AAA Memphis:

6 innings, 1 hit, 1 BB (HBP), 0 ER, 5 K, 53 pitches, 44 strikes


I'm not sure if he will be called up in time for the postseason roster (which would probably lead to another meltdown) orjust the expanded callups.

[Imran Siddiqui]

because his average means that he wont get a hit everytime up

Anyone's average means they won't get a hit everytime up. You can't predict when you'll get a hit. Even the people with low averages have games where they go 4 for 4. That's the great thing about baseball.

---

I'm glad that Ankiel is going to rejoin the Cards. I liked him when he was a rookie and felt bad for him when he had his problems. I've been rooting for him to come back ever since.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Not if you don't have much power and don't walk much. Then you're going 1/4 each game. You're a .250 singles hitter. You're not even the equal of Miguel Cairo. Yay! No HOF for you.

since you average 3.1 AB per game, going 1 for 3 means you're batting .322

[Lawrence of Arabia]

wilson: AB 223 271 AB 9 2B, 0 3B, 6 HR, 31 RBI, 14 BB, .264 OPB, .345 SLG, .244 AVG, 1 E

cairo 271 AB, 15 2B, 3 3B, 4 HR, 32 RBI, 12 BB, OBP .315, .402 SLG, .273 AVG, 0 E