Author Topic: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2  (Read 5759 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline nats2playoffs

  • Posts: 18829
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #950: June 29, 2011, 01:32:17 AM »
Mattheus showing that he belongs in AAA like Balester.


8th   A Callaspo singled to left, V Wells scored, H Kendrick to second.   5   7
8th   M Trumbo doubled to deep center, H Kendrick and A Callaspo scored.   5   9
8th   H Conger homered to right, M Trumbo scored.   5   11

Nationals  5
Angels      11



Online PC

  • Posts: 44108
  • And then there were six...
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #951: June 29, 2011, 01:32:49 AM »
It kinda is...

Ok then explain Jose Bautista?

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 89695
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #952: June 29, 2011, 01:32:54 AM »
I'm out. See ya tomorrow, same old Nats. A chance to break through and build on their above .500 record and they crap themselves with 2 weak ass performances in a row against a mediocre Angels team.

Back to .500 and under after tomorrow's game. It was fun while it lasted. The reversion to the mean is going to suck over the second half of the season much like in '05.

Offline Sharp

  • Posts: 3583
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #953: June 29, 2011, 01:33:04 AM »
As factual as your thinking is, I just don't like it. Simplifying the way we all think with mathematical facts is just sort of.. disheartening?
Well, obviously the mathematics is only a simplification of a much more complex real-world situation, but as an approximation it seems to work pretty well.
Ok then explain Jose Bautista?
His talent increased.  I never said people were stuck the way they are forever.  But he has the peripherals to back up that a true talent change took place.  Guys like Coffey, H-Rod, Marquis... they don't.

Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #954: June 29, 2011, 01:33:44 AM »
Time for Werth to watch a couple strikes

Offline Kentucky_National

  • Posts: 4607
  • BANG ZOOM
    • My Twitter
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #955: June 29, 2011, 01:33:56 AM »
I still think we can win tomorrow and come out with a .500 road-trip which is good, as long as we have a winning record on the upcoming home-stand.

We at least play the Cubs for part of it.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 34371
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #956: June 29, 2011, 01:34:22 AM »
I was hoping we'd take 2 of 3 in this series and then kick some ass back at home.

Looking like we will be on the wrong side of a sweep after tomorrow and good bye to .500.

If they win tomorrow... they end the road trip 3-3.

I'll gladly take that.

Offline TylerDC

  • Posts: 5961
  • The Future.
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #957: June 29, 2011, 01:35:35 AM »
Well, obviously the mathematics is only a simplification of a much more complex real-world situation, but as an approximation it seems to work pretty well.His talent increased.  I never said people were stuck the way they are forever.  But he has the peripherals to back up that a true talent change took place.  Guys like Coffey, H-Rod, Marquis... they don't.
Just wondering, when do you consider a streak (such as Bernadina/Espinosa lately) true talent?

Offline MorseMythology

  • Posts: 828
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #958: June 29, 2011, 01:35:53 AM »
Tomorrow is a must-win game if they want to remain competitive into the second half of the season. Good teams slmost never get swept. You have to stave that off when you can. If you win that, you at least come home for an 11-game home stand above .500.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 34371
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #959: June 29, 2011, 01:36:01 AM »
Not only can Desmond not hit, he's back to fielding like 2010.

Paging Steve Lombardozzi and Matt Antonelli... Paging Steve Lombardozzi and Matt Antonelli.

Offline BBQ

  • Posts: 1973
  • Not Werth it.
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #960: June 29, 2011, 01:36:44 AM »
Not only can Desmond not hit, he's back to fielding like 2010.

Paging Steve Lombardozzi and Matt Antonelli... Paging Steve Lombardozzi and Matt Antonelli.
when do you think we'll see them?

Offline Sharp

  • Posts: 3583
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #961: June 29, 2011, 01:37:12 AM »
Just wondering, when do you consider a streak (such as Bernadina/Espinosa lately) true talent?
Well, if you want to do it properly, you need to regress it backwards a few years and to league average, giving more weight to recent years, according to the equations we've derived by looking at hundreds of thousands of plate appearances in professional baseball.  The hot streaks Bernadina and Espinosa have been on lately (I'm assuming you're talking about BA here?) are definitely way too small a sample size to think there's anything substantial behind them.  Morse's last year, on the other hand, is a long enough sample that we know that, at the very least, his power is for real (not that we needed stats to tell us that).  The different stats take different amounts of time to stabilize... BA takes around 500 PAs and OBP even more, if I recall correctly.

Online PC

  • Posts: 44108
  • And then there were six...
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #962: June 29, 2011, 01:37:58 AM »
His talent increased.  I never said people were stuck the way they are forever.  But he has the peripherals to back up that a true talent change took place.  Guys like Coffey, H-Rod, Marquis... they don't.

Actually, that's precisely what you're saying.  You said precisely that, two sentences later, about Coffey, H-Rod and Marquis.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 34371
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #963: June 29, 2011, 01:38:30 AM »
when do you think we'll see them?

Honestly, unless there's an injury or the Nats fall way out of the race... I wouldn't expect either till September... though I could see Antonelli taking Bixler/Stairs role before September.

Offline Sharp

  • Posts: 3583
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #964: June 29, 2011, 01:39:01 AM »
Actually, that's precisely what you're saying.  You said precisely that, two sentences later, about Coffey, H-Rod and Marquis.
No, I didn't say "people are stuck the way they are forever."  I said "there's no reason to believe that Coffey, H-Rod, and Marquis are actually different now than they were a month or two ago, or for their careers."  Not people in general, those guys specifically.  Because there really isn't.  And even in Bautista's case, a lot of people thought he'd regress this year, simply because 29 is pretty old for a guy to reinvent himself.  A situation like Bautista's is the exception, not the rule.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 34371
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #965: June 29, 2011, 01:39:48 AM »
And of course, Johnson pinch running for Nix did not hurt the team.

Hairston gets on base in the ninth.

Offline TylerDC

  • Posts: 5961
  • The Future.
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #966: June 29, 2011, 01:40:03 AM »
Well, if you want to do it properly, you need to regress it backwards a few years and to league average, giving more weight to recent years, according to the equations we've derived by looking at hundreds of thousands of plate appearances in professional baseball.  The hot streaks Bernadina and Espinosa have been on lately (I'm assuming you're talking about BA here?) are definitely way too small a sample size to think there's anything substantial behind them.
Yeah, BA.

So if you were to project Espinosa's BA to finish the season (as in it is .000 starting tomorrow) how do you weigh the .220 vs .300+ we've seen lately, considering he's so young.

Offline BBQ

  • Posts: 1973
  • Not Werth it.
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #967: June 29, 2011, 01:40:15 AM »
Hr

Offline Morse Code 38

  • Posts: 80
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #968: June 29, 2011, 01:41:04 AM »
Tomorrow is a must-win game if they want to remain competitive into the second half of the season. Good teams slmost never get swept. You have to stave that off when you can. If you win that, you at least come home for an 11-game home stand above .500.


Tomorrow is so far from a must-win game.  I hope they win.  I'll watch them and root for them.  But I won't believe that they can't compete in the 2nd half if they lose one more game.


Just wondering, when do you consider a streak (such as Bernadina/Espinosa lately) true talent?

When it's supported by a sample size much larger than a "streak."  A year?  Probably more (because I didn't believe Bautista would come close to replicating his '10, so I guess I don't believe a year is a large enough sample).

Edit: formatting fail!

Online PC

  • Posts: 44108
  • And then there were six...
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #969: June 29, 2011, 01:41:20 AM »
No, I didn't say "people are stuck the way they are forever."  I said "there's no reason to believe that Coffey, H-Rod, and Marquis are actually different now than they were a month or two ago, or for their careers."  Because there really isn't.

In other words, they're stuck where they are (which is no different now than a month or two ago) forever?  You said it again by saying you didn't say it!

Offline BBQ

  • Posts: 1973
  • Not Werth it.
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #970: June 29, 2011, 01:41:26 AM »
espyyyy

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 34371
  • Next year, maybe?
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #971: June 29, 2011, 01:42:19 AM »
Just got under it.

Game over.

Offline BBQ

  • Posts: 1973
  • Not Werth it.
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #972: June 29, 2011, 01:42:30 AM »
Espy hit well all game. Horrid game. freak this. Let's good through all this again tomorrow!

Offline Sharp

  • Posts: 3583
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #973: June 29, 2011, 01:43:32 AM »
Yeah, BA.

So if you were to project Espinosa's BA to finish the season (as in it is .000 starting tomorrow) how do you weigh the .220 vs .300+ we've seen lately, considering he's so young.
Plate discipline and batted ball tendencies tend to stabilize a little more quickly than BA, and Espi looks like a flyball / strikeout guy, not many line drives.  He'll never hit for super high average, I don't think.  I'd imagine he'll end up hitting around .230-.240 with that kind of batted ball profile, mostly thanks to the HRs.  But, that's a very informal diagnosis.  A proper regression analysis would be pretty time consuming.  Personally I wouldn't weight either the .220 or the .300 too highly at this point.  However, since he's a rookie and rookies do tend to exhibit improvement throughout their rookie seasons, the .300 gets a little more weight than it would coming in an established hitter.

Offline nats2playoffs

  • Posts: 18829
Re: Nationals @ Angels, Game 2
« Reply #974: June 29, 2011, 01:43:47 AM »
GAME OVER.  WE LOSE.
DAVEY JOHNSON NOW 0-2