MLB: Opening Day!

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Wrong. James says steals are worth less than people think they are. A successful steal creates 1/3rd greater probabillity of a run, while a caught stealing leads to 2/3rd lesser probability of a run. So the lesson is don't steal all the time for no reason.

And Francona didn't send Roberts either. He went himself, as a Red Sox fan should know

so in other words, since the cost is greater then the benefit, it shouldnt be done. but it had to be done to win, and thats where bill james fails.

do you think that francona brought in roberts because he could have a more interesting conversation with tony clark at first?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

No, you want them to not make an out. If they get a good pitch to hit, slam it. However, if not, then take the walk. There is no point in the 'clutch' player swinging away and hitting at a bad pitch and making an easy out. After all, in baseball, if you hit safely only 3 out of 10 times, you are considered good.

thats right, you dont want them to make an out either. you want them to get a hit. no walk, and no out. and its weird.
if you are a .260 hitter, you only get 4% less hits then a .300 hitter. out of a 100 AB, a .260 hitter gets 26 hits and a .300 hitter gets 30, a difference of 4 measly hits. but a .300 hitter gets into the hall, and a .260 hitter had better be a gold glover.

[Imran Siddiqui]

so in other words, since the cost is greater then the benefit, it shouldnt be done.

It means you have to take the cost into account and thus be more selective, when you know that the steal has a high likelihood of success (if the pitcher isn't good at holding runners and the catcher isn't good at throwing out baserunners).

There are NO hard and fast 'rules' in James' work. In fact, his whole conclusion is that you shouldn't hold yourself to 'rules', but to those things that work. And how do you prove they work? Statistical analysis.

You should like James. He is reportedly the one who told Epstein to bring in Ortiz and Bellhorn.

do you think that francona brought in roberts because he could have a more interesting conversation with tony clark at first?

Having speed doesn't mean he necessarily wanted him to steal on that play. Having a fast man on 1st means going from 1st to 3rd on a single to left field, whereas a slow man would have to stop at 2nd.

you dont want them to make an out either. you want them to get a hit. no walk, and no out. and its weird.

No, that's ridiculous. Getting a walk is a GOOD thing. No one said it was dumb for Miller to take a walk in that Game 4. Getting base runners is never a bad thing. You want your 'clutch' hitters to, above all, not make an out. If they can get a good ball to hit, then they should go for it, but if not, then the walk is just as good.

if you are a .260 hitter, you only get 4% less hits then a .300 hitter. out of a 100 AB, a .260 hitter gets 26 hits and a .300 hitter gets 30, a difference of 4 measly hits. but a .300 hitter gets into the hall, and a .260 hitter had better be a gold glover.

Are you trying to make my point that BA is a useless measure and OBP is far more important?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

It means you have to take the cost into account and thus be more selective, when you know that the steal has a high likelihood of success (if the pitcher isn't good at holding runners and the catcher isn't good at throwing out baserunners).

and since rivera only throws hard stuff, you wouldnt wanna steal on him (plus hes good at holding runners, very good)

You should like James. He is reportedly the one who told Epstein to bring in Ortiz and Bellhorn.

bellhorn blows. bring up pedroia. pitchers have figured out that he doesnt swing at the close stuff, so they just nibble at the edges of the strikezone and eventually they get one right on the edge that he watches go by. he hasnt heard of a defensive swing.
bill james was also probably the guy who told theo to put manny ramirez on WAIVERS at the end of 2003. and then tried to trade him for magglio ordonez and arod.

Having speed doesn't mean he necessarily wanted him to steal on that play. Having a fast man on 1st means going from 1st to 3rd on a single to left field, whereas a slow man would have to stop at 2nd.

theres a reason why they didnt start him in right field for the still-injured trot nixon.

No, that's ridiculous. Getting a walk is a GOOD thing. No one said it was dumb for Miller to take a walk in that Game 4. Getting base runners is never a bad thing. You want your 'clutch' hitters to, above all, not make an out. If they can get a good ball to hit, then they should go for it, but if not, then the walk is just as good.

its not ridiculous at all - everyone thinks that a walk by millar is good because his AVG+SLUG (ill abbreviate is as ALUG) is low. he is not a clutch hitter. if ortiz is up, and behind him is millar, would you rather have ortiz walk and let millar bring him in, or hav ehim swing away and end the game?

Are you trying to make my point that BA is a useless measure and OBP is far more important?

nah, just like with ALUG, im a creater, an inventor, a see-er of patterns. im always looking at everything from funny angles.

[Imran Siddiqui]

and since rivera only throws hard stuff, you wouldnt wanna steal on him (plus hes good at holding runners, very good)

And perhaps Roberts saw something in Rivera's delivery on film which led to know when he was going to throw over and when not?

bellhorn blows

Yeah, try to win the WS last year without Bellhorn. You couldn't have done it.

its not ridiculous at all - everyone thinks that a walk by millar is good because his AVG+SLUG (ill abbreviate is as ALUG) is low. he is not a clutch hitter. if ortiz is up, and behind him is millar, would you rather have ortiz walk and let millar bring him in, or hav ehim swing away and end the game?

If Millar hit a HR there, HE'D be called the clutch hitter. Indicating how BS it is. If Ortiz is up and he's not getting anything good to hit, I'd rather he talk the walk than try to force a bad hit which may lead to an out, or worse, a double play.

And your ALUG is crap. You made totally made it up without any statistical analysis & backing for it (not even a spreadsheet ). Basically, it's a BAM. Though I don't expect anything less from you .

[Lawrence of Arabia]

And perhaps Roberts saw something in Rivera's delivery on film which led to know when he was going to throw over and when not?

nope, read the interview. roberts thought that rivera would only throw over twice, and go home. but rivera went to first three times in a row. roberts didnt know when he was going home and when he wasnt.

Yeah, try to win the WS last year without Bellhorn. You couldn't have done it.

why did you selectivly quote?

If Millar hit a HR there, HE'D be called the clutch hitter. Indicating how BS it is. If Ortiz is up and he's not getting anything good to hit, I'd rather he talk the walk than try to force a bad hit which may lead to an out, or worse, a double play.

he might be called clutch, but they would be wrong. millar has a low ALUG, and hasnt proved himself in late inning situations (ALUG in late /close situations, the only spot where ALUG can be applied both efficiently and correctly) and obviously if the pitch is a mile outside the strikezone, ortiz shouldnt swing. but in late innings, pitchers dont want to put anyone on, so a hitter has plenty of pitches in the strikezone for him to hit.

And your ALUG is crap. You made totally made it up without any statistical analysis & backing for it (not even a spreadsheet ). Basically, it's a BAM. Though I don't expect anything less from you

why is ALUG crap? because bill james didnt come up with it? you need to walk your own road imran. like all great things, it is first ridiculed, then rejected, then accepted. i have no doubt that ALUG will be adopted eventually as the standard for clutchness.

but at least you are one of the more challenging arguers around here. standards have really slipped lately. (at least at things i feel comfortable and interested enough to argue, mainly sports, and economics)

(even though i win everytime )

[Imran Siddiqui]

nope, read the interview. roberts thought that rivera would only throw over twice, and go home. but rivera went to first three times in a row. roberts didnt know when he was going home and when he wasnt.

How many times he went to first, Roberts may have been wrong in, but he could have picked up something in when he throws over.

why did you selectivly quote?

The rest of it wasn't worth responding over.

he might be called clutch, but they would be wrong.

When it is such a SUBJECTIVE measure, how could they be wrong?! You could call anyone clutch and make some argument based on some clutch hit somewhere.

but in late innings, pitchers dont want to put anyone on, so a hitter has plenty of pitches in the strikezone for him to hit.

If you get a pitch to hit, you should hit it. But if you don't, you should bide your time, waiting for the good pitch. If you walk, you walk. And in late innings, pitchers try to prevent giving up a fat pitch more.

why is ALUG crap? because bill james didnt come up with it? you need to walk your own road imran. like all great things, it is first ridiculed, then rejected, then accepted. i have no doubt that ALUG will be adopted eventually as the standard for clutchness.

Because there is NO STATISTICAL ANALYSIS. You made it up and are promoting it without any facts. It's a BAM. You've made a bald assertion and STILL haven't proven its value, and especially not by statistics.

even though i win everytime

Dude, you get PWNED, time and time again, post by post, point by point. Have you ever not been PWNED against me? Hell, you wanted to keep the far inferior Cabrera instead of Renteria. You were not happy with Epstein when he first got there.

You've been wrong time and time again, and you don't back anything up with stats. I do not know any poster who has been proven wrong more than you have.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

The rest of it wasn't worth responding over.

how convienient. maybe it was because it refutes your point?

When it is such a SUBJECTIVE measure, how could they be wrong?! You could call anyone clutch and make some argument based on some clutch hit somewhere.

again, you must refer to their ALUG in close/late situations to figure out their clutchness.

If you get a pitch to hit, you should hit it. But if you don't, you should bide your time, waiting for the good pitch. If you walk, you walk. And in late innings, pitchers try to prevent giving up a fat pitch more.

if a pitcher puts three pitches in the strikezone, at least one will be good to hit. more so if you foul off in the zone pitches that were unhittable (down and away, up and in) so you can get a fatter one.

Dude, you get PWNED, time and time again, post by post, point by point. Have you ever not been PWNED against me? Hell, you wanted to keep the far inferior Cabrera instead of Renteria. You were not happy with Epstein when he first got there.

You've been wrong time and time again, and you don't back anything up with stats. I do not know any poster who has been proven wrong more than you have.

hell nah, ive been right a lot more then ive been wrong, especially with you imran. using splits, my average against you is higher then my total average against other posters in win percentage. its clear. for $2 million less, yes I woulda kept cabrera (infact it would have prolly been more since renteria would have signed for less then $10 million with the cardinals.) then we coulda signed someone at 2B instead of that has-been bellhorn.

yeah, i wans t happy at first when they brought in cabrera, but i changed my mind. which is totally normal and logical.

[Imran Siddiqui]

how convienient. maybe it was because it refutes your point?

I see absolutely nothing there that refutes my point.

again, you must refer to their ALUG in close/late situations to figure out their clutchness.

Maybe if it was more than the BAM.

if a pitcher puts three pitches in the strikezone, at least one will be good to hit. more so if you foul off in the zone pitches that were unhittable (down and away, up and in) so you can get a fatter one.

Maybe, maybe not. The pitches could be in an area where the batter is not good at hitting in.

ive been right a lot more then ive been wrong, especially with you imran.

It must be nice for you to live in your world. Especially when stats are unheard of in your world.

for $2 million less, yes I woulda kept cabrera (infact it would have prolly been more since renteria would have signed for less then $10 million with the cardinals.) then we coulda signed someone at 2B instead of that has-been bellhorn.

Please... like Boston is hurting for money! And Renteria is doing a Hell of a lot better than Cabrera right now, and you can't even make a 'protection' argument, because the Angels have great hitters up and down the lineup.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Maybe, maybe not. The pitches could be in an area where the batter is not good at hitting in.

so foul them off. wait for you pitch. the pitcher will make at least one mistake pitch in your at bat. thats where clutch hitters take advantage and win the game.

Please... like Boston is hurting for money! And Renteria is doing a Hell of a lot better than Cabrera right now, and you can't even make a 'protection' argument, because the Angels have great hitters up and down the lineup.

its about being smart with your money. if its not there one year, wait until next year. besides, we have a good shortstop in AA who will go to AAA by the end of the year. hes our #1 prospect (and i think in the top 10 across the country, but im not certain) we coulda gotten another left in the bullpen, instead of embree.