JRC0811 said:
I'm mostly a lurker, but, does Nuke LaLoosh normally respond to his own comments and semi-talk to himself?
It is best to just let Nuke be...Hinch does not want him to get rattled or angry.
JRC0811 said:
I'm mostly a lurker, but, does Nuke LaLoosh normally respond to his own comments and semi-talk to himself?
JRC0811 said:
I'm mostly a lurker, but, does Nuke LaLoosh normally respond to his own comments and semi-talk to himself?
Ag_07 said:
You guys make way too big a deal about umpires.
To me 14 bad calls per game isn't that bad. That's 14 out of what about 300 pitches per game. Not a big deal in my eyes.
Plus at the end of the day the best teams end up playing each other for the championship every year. I don't think it makes that much of a difference. Frustrating during the game yes but not a big deal in the big picture.
I know...Roast me. But I think y'all are making a mountain out of a molehill.
mathguy86 said:
That umpire bad call article is flawed. There was a much better one last year on fangraphs. I can find it right now but if I do I will link it in Its not so much the % of wrong calls but the consistency. Basically its a variation issue. Missing wide or wide and high isn't as bad as it sounds if the ump is internally consistent and always calling that every time. Some guys are internally consistent and some are just random goat ****ers. If I recall, Angel was one of the random bad guys
Nuke LaLoosh said:JRC0811 said:
I'm mostly a lurker, but, does Nuke LaLoosh normally respond to his own comments and semi-talk to himself?
YOU PEOPLE SHOULD CARE MORE ABOUT THIS ARTICLE
You sure about that?rosco511 said:
Considering the amount of pitches for which there is really no question that it is a ball or strike, there is a foul ball, or the ball is otherwise put in play, I personally think that 1.5-2.5 missed pitches each inning is eye opening and a concern and is not really an immaterial amount.
W said:
checking in with the Chris Sale extension...shelled again today in the Fenway opener.
only reaching 91 with his fastball
Ags #1 said:
Mike Clevinger is not that special
JRC0811 said:
Big blow to my fantasy team.
Im not throwing it out but I am suggesting there is more to it than "right" or "wrong" Umpires have tendencies. If you know he gives the call wide to right handed hitters you know you have to protect that side and can work with that. Its the wrong call but if he is consistent you can deal with that. I'm not talking about 10" wide but just off he black wide. A pitcher will exploit it and a hitter will protect it. That's fine until the ump gets random. If he only calls that a strike half the time now guys are pissed because he's inconsistent. The fangraphs article looked at the variance/inconsistency. They rated umps based on both correctness of call and internal variance. Correct and consistent is ideal. Incorrect and inconsistent is Angel Hernandez. Or Ron Kulpa the other night.Nuke LaLoosh said:mathguy86 said:
That umpire bad call article is flawed. There was a much better one last year on fangraphs. I can find it right now but if I do I will link it in Its not so much the % of wrong calls but the consistency. Basically its a variation issue. Missing wide or wide and high isn't as bad as it sounds if the ump is internally consistent and always calling that every time. Some guys are internally consistent and some are just random goat ****ers. If I recall, Angel was one of the random bad guys
You're throwing out a lot of valid analysis on this article. We aren't talking "good or bad" calls, we are talking "right and wrong" calls. The strike zone is specifically defined.
How does your theory explain the variance in young vs old umps? Are you suggesting that young umps just have a better handle of the actual strike zone? If so, they should be the ones calling games.
Nuke LaLoosh said:
It's just silly to me that we are now saying "wrong is okay if you're consistent about the wrongness"
A strike zone is right and wrong, black and white. If you consistently give 2" on the corner, you're consistently wrong. Crazy.
I didn't say its ok. I said you can plan for it. What you cant plan for is inconsistent. ML players say all the time that all they want is consistent.Nuke LaLoosh said:
It's just silly to me that we are now saying "wrong is okay if you're consistent about the wrongness"
A strike zone is right and wrong, black and white. If you consistently give 2" on the corner, you're consistently wrong. Crazy.