Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 18 of 19 FirstFirst ... 816171819 LastLast
Results 256 to 270 of 275
  1. #256
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    11,733
    Quote Originally Posted by StayOnBoard View Post
    Sorry I'm a bit late getting back to the party, things have been CRAZY.

    Between banging my 3 wives, drag racing with Lewis Hamilton and working on a new album with Jay-Z, it's a wonder I have any time to reply at all! I'll use it as a convenience excuse when I don't want to reply to something though, so please everyone... just keep that in mind for the future.

    Billy McKinney just got waived. Serious question, if he turns into a star now in Milwaukee, was it a terrible move to cut bait? Cause that's the argument that's being made about Hendricks here.

    Similar to Edwin actually, we got extremely lucky to still have him when he turned into a star hitter. Before that he was waived, multiple times and any team in baseball could have had him. Sometimes people don't break out immediately, sometimes they are just AAAA players, sometimes they need a change of scenery and sometimes it just clicks at a random time like it did with Edwin and Bautista (and Hendricks). It has nothing to do with #scoutseyes.

    And lol that multiple days and many posts later, hanton still doesn't know how to read stats :laughs:
    3 wives only on a good day haha! (We actually have a date with a 3rd girl this coming weekend but I donít think itll be anything serious. - sheís too young).

    But no it would take a miracle if mickenney turned into a star. He hasnít shown anything.

    The EE comparison is much better for Hendrix. Because at least EE flashed that power potential before he learned to keep both hands on the bat. Hendrix flashed serious potential the year before he was traded. Hence me being so surprised by the trade.

    But yes - Teams screwed up by not holding onto EE when he was available before his break out.
    The EE situation takes some hindsight, but the Liam breakout is something I called when the trade was made, so I get to brag about being right now.

  2. #257
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    16,178
    Quote Originally Posted by ChongInc. View Post
    3 wives only on a good day haha! (We actually have a date with a 3rd girl this coming weekend but I donít think itll be anything serious. - sheís too young).

    But no it would take a miracle if mickenney turned into a star. He hasnít shown anything.

    The EE comparison is much better for Hendrix. Because at least EE flashed that power potential before he learned to keep both hands on the bat. Hendrix flashed serious potential the year before he was traded. Hence me being so surprised by the trade.

    But yes - Teams screwed up by not holding onto EE when he was available before his break out.
    The EE situation takes some hindsight, but the Liam breakout is something I called when the trade was made, so I get to brag about being right now.
    If that's what makes you feel better about yourself (hey look everyone, I got one right after so many wrong!) then that's cool, enjoy it. Sure you predicted a Hendricks breakout, that's great and good for you. I predicted a Mookie Betts breakout when he was in AA and didn't even sniff a top 100 list, but you don't see me running to the forums to beat my chest on how good of a scout I am lol. I could have easily be as wrong as I was right, and that's okay.

    Just don't be upset if everyone reminds you that you are wrong everytime that comes up. It goes both ways, but either way enjoy your breakout #scoutseyes.

  3. #258
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    11,733
    Quote Originally Posted by StayOnBoard View Post
    If that's what makes you feel better about yourself (hey look everyone, I got one right after so many wrong!) then that's cool, enjoy it. Sure you predicted a Hendricks breakout, that's great and good for you. I predicted a Mookie Betts breakout when he was in AA and didn't even sniff a top 100 list, but you don't see me running to the forums to beat my chest on how good of a scout I am lol. I could have easily be as wrong as I was right, and that's okay.

    Just don't be upset if everyone reminds you that you are wrong everytime that comes up. It goes both ways, but either way enjoy your breakout #scoutseyes.
    Thanks!

  4. #259
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Shore
    Posts
    11,279
    Quote Originally Posted by hanton View Post
    K's, Walks and Home Runs are events. Where as LOB% is a formula, Strand Rate is another formula. They are not the same formula. It's why I keep bringing this back to LOB%

    "One of the statistics that Shandler invented and tracks is called ďStrand Rate.Ē We have our own version of Strand Rate at THT, called LOB% (percent of baserunners left on base). Our formula differs a bit from Strand Rate; ours is (H+BB+HBP-R)/(H+BB+HBP-(1.4*HR)). Essentially, itís the number of baserunners who didnít score divided by the total number of baserunners (except those who scored on a home run). We exclude home runs from the base because we want to measure things a pitcher is less likely to control."

    https://tht.fangraphs.com/left-on-base/
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenny Powders View Post
    Ok, supply me with the formula for both if they have different formulas
    Didn't think that would happen

  5. #260
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenny Powders View Post
    Didn't think that would happen
    It's right there in my post Kenny and in the site that I posted. I always reply to posts.

  6. #261
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Shore
    Posts
    11,279
    Quote Originally Posted by hanton View Post
    It's right there in my post Kenny and in the site that I posted. I always reply to posts.
    No, you gave one formula. You claim they are different and said they have different formulas. Where's the formula for strand rate?

    I mean, I could link a half dozen articles or so that say they are the same thing if you would like.
    Last edited by Kenny Powders; 09-17-2020 at 09:58 AM.

  7. #262
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenny Powders View Post
    No, you gave one formula. You claim they are different and said they have different formulas. Where's the formula for strand rate?

    I mean, I could link a half dozen articles or so that say they are the same thing if you would like.
    Come on Kenny.

    Our formula differs a bit from Strand Rate; ours is (H+BB+HBP-R)/(H+BB+HBP-(1.4*HR)). Essentially, itís the number of baserunners who didnít score divided by the total number of baserunners (except those who scored on a home run).

    so Strand Rate <> LOB % because one includes HR's and the other doesn't. You claimed they were the same and they are not.

    Strand Rate = (H+BB+HBP-R)/(H+BB+HBP)
    LOB % = (H+BB+HBP-R)/(H+BB+HBP-(1.4*HR))

  8. #263
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Shore
    Posts
    11,279
    Quote Originally Posted by hanton View Post
    Come on Kenny.

    Our formula differs a bit from Strand Rate; ours is (H+BB+HBP-R)/(H+BB+HBP-(1.4*HR)). Essentially, itís the number of baserunners who didnít score divided by the total number of baserunners (except those who scored on a home run).

    so Strand Rate <> LOB % because one includes HR's and the other doesn't. You claimed they were the same and they are not.

    Strand Rate = (H+BB+HBP-R)/(H+BB+HBP)
    LOB % = (H+BB+HBP-R)/(H+BB+HBP-(1.4*HR))
    No, I don't want your interpretation of what strand rate is. I want a link to someone reputable explaining the formula for strand rate because I've got a bunch of links stating they are the same. You have one article, not even from fangraphs btw, from 2005

  9. #264
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Kenny Powders View Post
    No, I don't want your interpretation of what strand rate is. I want a link to someone reputable explaining the formula for strand rate because I've got a bunch of links stating they are the same. You have one article, not even from fangraphs btw, from 2005
    Someone reputable? How about the inventor

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Sh...20the%20future.

    The link that I posted is directly linked from the LOB% definition on Fangraphs. It's an old stat, Fangraphs took that stat and modified it and came up with their own version and named it LOB%. It's clearly stated in my post

  10. #265
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Omnipresent
    Posts
    485
    Quote Originally Posted by StayOnBoard View Post
    Sorry I'm a bit late getting back to the party, things have been CRAZY.

    Between banging my 3 wives, drag racing with Lewis Hamilton and working on a new album with Jay-Z, it's a wonder I have any time to reply at all! I'll use it as a convenience excuse when I don't want to reply to something though, so please everyone... just keep that in mind for the future.

    Billy McKinney just got waived. Serious question, if he turns into a star now in Milwaukee, was it a terrible move to cut bait? Cause that's the argument that's being made about Hendricks here.

    Similar to Edwin actually, we got extremely lucky to still have him when he turned into a star hitter. Before that he was waived, multiple times and any team in baseball could have had him. Sometimes people don't break out immediately, sometimes they are just AAAA players, sometimes they need a change of scenery and sometimes it just clicks at a random time like it did with Edwin and Bautista (and Hendricks). It has nothing to do with #scoutseyes.

    And lol that multiple days and many posts later, hanton still doesn't know how to read stats :laughs:
    I get busy for a few days with my four wives, played Golf with Tiger Woods and was partying on Cristiano Ronaldo's yacth and find out someone has filled in admirably for me. Where have you been hiding?

  11. #266
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    6,281
    I had said ryu and Roark contracts should have been frontloaded as Budget seemed to allow it. Weíd be in better shape if we had. Roark would be easier to move.

  12. #267
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    6,281
    Quote Originally Posted by StayOnBoard View Post
    If that's what makes you feel better about yourself (hey look everyone, I got one right after so many wrong!) then that's cool, enjoy it. Sure you predicted a Hendricks breakout, that's great and good for you. I predicted a Mookie Betts breakout when he was in AA and didn't even sniff a top 100 list, but you don't see me running to the forums to beat my chest on how good of a scout I am lol. I could have easily be as wrong as I was right, and that's okay.

    Just don't be upset if everyone reminds you that you are wrong everytime that comes up. It goes both ways, but either way enjoy your breakout #scoutseyes.
    -so ****ing annoying as usual.

  13. #268
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Omnipresent
    Posts
    485
    Quote Originally Posted by wamco View Post
    I had said ryu and Roark contracts should have been frontloaded as Budget seemed to allow it. Weíd be in better shape if we had. Roark would be easier to move.
    Roark is a 2 year deal, not hard to dump him and eat his contract next year either in a trade or DFA (especially since we are only paying Tulo 4 Mil next year for the the last year as opposed to 20 million) Ryu @20 has earned his contract thus far.

    I would agree about front loading more of Ryu's 4/80 for different reasons, to something like (23/3 11/1) only because it would have allowed for more money to be spent on other areas of the roster as most of our rookies are on pre arb deals.
    Last edited by Chaotic98; 09-17-2020 at 07:32 PM.

  14. #269
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    11,733
    Quote Originally Posted by wamco View Post
    -so ****ing annoying as usual.
    I know right. Who discusses poor asset management from this FO in a conversation about asset management.
    Or brings up liam Hendrix trade for a useless player in a conversation about Liam Hendrix.

    Oh the humanity!

  15. #270
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    11,733
    Quote Originally Posted by Chaotic98 View Post
    Roark is a 2 year deal, not hard to dump him and eat his contract next year either in a trade or DFA (especially since we are only paying Tulo 4 Mil next year for the the last year as opposed to 20 million) Ryu @20 has earned his contract thus far.

    I would agree about front loading more of Ryu's 4/80 for different reasons, to something like (23/3 11/1) only because it would have allowed for more money to be spent on other areas of the roster as most of our rookies are on pre arb deals.
    For sure would have been better. I think theyíll just eat Roark and cut ties. At least I hope. If they add another Ryu then this rotation has some life.

    I was wrong about ryu, I didnít think he would be this good. But damn was I right about Roark. I never saw the upside of that signing. Best case scenario he is taking innings away from someone with upside.

    Money people (corporations, financing companies etc) hate front loaded contracts because they believe if the money is invested properly they can basically earn that last year in interest before then. Thatís why the Mets are still paying so many retired players.

Page 18 of 19 FirstFirst ... 816171819 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •