0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I've read 91-94 and 90-93 depending on the source.
@keithlawFine. Yes. RT @morrsco: @keithlaw How has Norris' receiving looked? Can he catch in the majors?
Must've missed this yesterday - is this supposed to be demonstrating that Law is an assclown, or was it unrelated to my post?
He holds his glove weird while waiting for the sign. Usually the glove would be facing the OF, not the catcher.Odd.Looked fine pitching, though.
He holds his glove weird while waiting for the sign. Usually the glove would be facing the OF, not the catcher.
Generally a pitcher wouldn't be that upright as he takes the sign. Glove on thigh would be typical, not that it matters until the ball and hand are in glove. Purke's a different dude in general, though.
113437 - I've posted links to a great Branch Rickey article where he lays out many of the saber statistics 30 years before Bill James. Identified OBP and ISO, as well as a few other things. I think it was from Sport magazine or Sporting News in the 50s. Search for my posts mentioning Branch Rickey.
I don't think it's really that uncommon. (skip to the 1:20 mark)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U24SLYtdv6E#ws
Dave_Gershman Was asked who the most impressive or intriguing prospect(s) I saw this weekend in AZ were: Matt Purke, Nolan Arenado & Gary Brown
Good to see that he's releasing the ball above his shoulder again. All the clips from during the season, he was slinging it parallel to his shoulders, or a tad below. Positive sign.He also seems to have filled out a little bit since the season.
Purke starts Friday according to the AFL site.
Welch - you might enjoy this link to an article written by Branch Rickey:http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/btf/pages/essays/rickey/goodby_to_old_idea.htmRickey recognizes the importance to an offense of things we now recognize like OBP and isolated slugging (ISO), which is SLG - AVG. He recognized that the relationship between productive offense was tighter with OBP than AVG and that slugging (expressed as ISO) was more important than RBI. He also hit on a lower weighting of SLG than straight OPS by first focusing ISO (a smaller number than SLG) and by giving it a 3/4 weight in his formula. He attempts to capture speed and other run scoring factors at the team level with his scoring efficiency or "clutch" measure, but recognizes that it cannot be attributed to individual players because it is dependent on others on the team.He throws up his hands at defense, recognizing the fielding percentage is pretty worthless because it does not account for range (note that the WAR systems attempt to account for fielding through systematic observation of video, carving up the field into zones, and other measurement tricks that leave a lot to be desired, but are a nice try). For pitchers, he looks at batting average against, adds in a rate of walks and HBP, has an earned run per base runner stat, and a small score for Ks to come up with a rating, low score being best. He found this correlated to ERA. To my eye, I think it is a less useful measure because he is equating earned runs to pitchers effectiveness. I think he misses the fact that every time a ball is hit there is a certain likelihood it will lead to a run, regardless of whether the play is called a hit or an error. This leads to undervaluing strikeouts. I don't think his measure of defense independent pitching effectiveness is as good as FIP, tERA, or what I know through Sharp of SIERA from BP.Essentially, Rickey was on to many of the components of Fangraphs WAR 50 years before Fangraphs. All WAR does is refine the measurements.
Well, he got a guy out!
Page created in 0.18 seconds with 23 queries.