aggiematt235 said:
Interesting article about Jason Castro
Talks about how he may or may not have made our pitchers worse.
This article hints around my major issues with sabremetrics.
***** Official 2017 Astros Off Season Thread *****
288,094 Views |
2546 Replies |
Last: 7 yr ago by Mr.Bond
This article hints around my major issues with sabremetrics.
What are your major issues?
Quote:
This article hints around my major issues with sabremetrics.
One shouldn't be against sabremetrics. It's just the pursuit of better, more predictive stats. No sabremetrician is satisfied with what they have currently...they want to get more information.
But the article is awkward. Just looking at ERA deviation and throwing up your hands seems like an odd choice to go with.
There's some smoke that Castro wasn't a clubhouse favorite, but he didn't want to drop that conjecture into the article.
Duck Patrol said:
What are your major issues?
Ah shlt...Here we go.
Duck Patrol said:
What are your major issues?
Damnit Duck. Now Nuke is preparing a 10 page essay *****ing about the Astros.
shano0603 said:Duck Patrol said:
What are your major issues?
Damnit Duck. Now Nuke is preparing a 10 page essay *****ing about the Astros.
Eh if you've kept up you know my opinions. Sabremetrics should be viewed as a puzzle piece, not the entire puzzle. Until you can quantify human emotions, drive, momentum, thoughts, etc. - sabremetrics are not the end all be all of sports, especially baseball. What's between the ears matters.
Oh and pitch framing, even statistically, is a worthless stat when compared to numerous other things, some mentioned in this article.
Quote:
Sabremetrics should be viewed as a puzzle piece, not the entire puzzle. Until you can quantify human emotions, drive, momentum, thoughts, etc. - sabremetrics are not the end all be all of sports,
162 games solves the people issues. Humans will have ebbs and flows of confidence and insecurity. This is why the playoffs are such a crap shoot because the small sample size overvalues variance.
The reason why sabermetrics have any value is that the sample size is large enough that variance is minimized.
I know it's just my interpretation of your comments, but "sabremetrics" isn't a thing unto itself that should be looked at. It's merely the pursuit of better stats to help explain what's going on. That's it.
Quote:
Oh and pitch framing, even statistically, is a worthless stat
I don't know that it's worthless yet. I just think it's tough to assign a particular missed call as a skilled catcher move or just a miss by the ump.
I'm all for a robot strike zone though.
diehard03 said:Quote:
Sabremetrics should be viewed as a puzzle piece, not the entire puzzle. Until you can quantify human emotions, drive, momentum, thoughts, etc. - sabremetrics are not the end all be all of sports,
162 games solves the people issues. Humans will have ebbs and flows of confidence and insecurity. This is why the playoffs are such a crap shoot because the small sample size overvalues variance.
The reason why sabermetrics have any value is that the sample size is large enough that variance is minimized.
I know it's just my interpretation of your comments, but "sabremetrics" isn't a thing unto itself that should be looked at. It's merely the pursuit of better stats to help explain what's going on. That's it.
I agree specifically with your last comment. However, when every decision is made via sabremetrics, at the end of the season you're simply using sabremetrics to evaluate itself...
diehard03 said:Quote:
Oh and pitch framing, even statistically, is a worthless stat
I don't know that it's worthless yet. I just think it's tough to assign a particular missed call as a skilled catcher move or just a miss by the ump.
I'm all for a robot strike zone though.
I don't recall where I read it, but the best "pitch framers" get an insignificant amount more calls over the course of a season than the worst "pitch framers"
This stat is used to justify why catchers like castro and conger don't suck, but in reality they do.
Quote:
I don't recall where I read it, but the best "pitch framers" get an insignificant amount more calls over the course of a season than the worst "pitch framers"
Look like Jeff Sullivan (fangraphs) forgot about his January article when he wrote his November one:
End of Pitch Framing
Castro and the Twins
diehard03 said:Quote:
I don't recall where I read it, but the best "pitch framers" get an insignificant amount more calls over the course of a season than the worst "pitch framers"
Look like Jeff Sullivan (fangraphs) forgot about his January article when he wrote his November one:
End of Pitch Framing
Castro and the Twins
First article seems to further what I'm saying... the mental aspect of umpires knowing about pitch framing lessens the value of an already trivial stat.
Rule V draft is over. The Astros do not draft anyone during the major league phase, and only lose Michael Hauschild to the Rangers. He will be 27 at the start of next season and will have to make his MLB debut or be sent back.
http://www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?player_id=623434#/career/R/pitching/2016/ALL
http://www.milb.com/player/index.jsp?player_id=623434#/career/R/pitching/2016/ALL
The Rangers are obsessed with taking our players.
I think we still only have 39 players on the 40 man roster. Leaving the last spot open for a SP it would seem...
I agree with Jeff.Quote:
8:34pm: The Astros did, in fact, talk to the White Sox about Quintana, but have found the White Sox' price to be too steep, Jake Kaplan of the Houston Chronicle writes. Kaplan notes that it's unclear whether the Astros would have to give up Bregman to get Quintana, but notes that he doesn't want to part with players who could help the Astros next season. "We're just not prepared to trade away players that are core to our production in 2017, and those are sometimes the players that are required to get these deals done," says GM Jeff Luhnow.
Quintana for bregman...... Buahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Mr.Bond said:
Quintana for bregman...... Buahahahahahahahahahahahaha
What else would they be giving us for Bregman?
How about Abreau
No. Bregman will hit as well or better than Abreu.aggie1906 said:
How about Abreau
Sounds like Chicago is trying to sell Quintana as a consolation prize to the teams that didn't get Sale...and asking for about the same in return.
I think he was saying we get Quintana and Abreau for Bregman.
Would be a decent trade for us I think. Sox would never go for it though.
Would be a decent trade for us I think. Sox would never go for it though.
Quote:
Sounds like Chicago is trying to sell Quintana as a consolation prize to the teams that didn't get Sale...and asking for about the same in return.
In this market, I don't blame them. But it's not like hes that bad a consolation prize and the drop off after him is significant.
Ahhh...sorry, bros!
8 year olds dude.Mr.Bond said:
Quintana for bregman...... Buahahahahahahahahahahahaha
If Bregman is half as good as y'all think he is we will be in good shape.
aggiematt235 said:
I think he was saying we get Quintana and Abreau for Bregman.
Would be a decent trade for us I think. Sox would never go for it though.
That trade plus we throw in a young arm would be a tough trade for both sides.
This is my problem with Jeff Lunhow
Then who the hell is expecting to deal if he wants a top of the rotation stud like Sale, Quintana, or Archer? At some point he needs to take a leap of faith and turn prospects into assets.
I may be mistaken, but while these guys are solid prospects he's crazy if he thinks they can be legit contributors in 2017. Yeah they me on the squad but they'd be rookies with no ML experience, and I'm not seeing them as major pieces till at least 2018.
Quote:
- The Astros prefer not to move upper-level prospects in their search for rotation upgrades, GM Jeff Luhnow tells MLB.com's Brian McTaggart. Houston has been asked about top prospect Francis Martes on numerous occasions, McTaggart writes, though Luhnow downplayed the possibility of dealing the right-hander. "The players we're staying away from are the players that are probably going to start the year on the big league club and are key parts of the 2017 plan," said the Houston GM. "Martes is a very valuable player, and very valuable players that are close to the big leagues get asked about a lot. That's no different with him. It would take something significant for us to move him." McTaggart also notes that outfield prospect Kyle Tucker is "generally considered untouchable."
Then who the hell is expecting to deal if he wants a top of the rotation stud like Sale, Quintana, or Archer? At some point he needs to take a leap of faith and turn prospects into assets.
I may be mistaken, but while these guys are solid prospects he's crazy if he thinks they can be legit contributors in 2017. Yeah they me on the squad but they'd be rookies with no ML experience, and I'm not seeing them as major pieces till at least 2018.
Not sure why you're upset with that comment. I like it. He says itd take something significant, not that it's impossible.
Just seems like way too many guys are becoming untouchable.
I think that's GM speak more than anything else.