THE CRANE POOL FORUM thecranepool.net (.com)


Forum Home

Master Index of Archived Threads


A-P Thread for Minor Rants About Posts on Other Fan Boards

Rotblatt
Aug 12 2005 04:01 PM

Okay, so this might be kind of a niche thread, but I was browsing on the SoSH board, and ran across a few posts regarding the Mets that annoyed me. Now, in the past, I had been able to send a personal message to the poster, explaining why they should stick to talking about the Red Sox, but with their new setup, I can't do that anymore. So I'm sharing with y'all instead.

This is in a thread about an ESPN poll about "which stat is more useless: HR, RBI, OBP, SLG or AVG." Here were the results:

Avg: 13%
HR: 24%
OBP: 11%
RBI: 9%
SLG% : 44%

And here's the 1st Mets-related quote, in its entirety:

]I agree with Branch Rickey who once said that RBI's are the most useless and misleading stat since they depend so much on things outside of a batter's control, mainly what his teammates are doing ahead of him. Rickey said this in a major magazine article way back in the 1950's. Not surprising to see that most of the baseball world, especially its fans, haven't quite caught up to him yet. Hey, it's only been fifty years...give 'em another century or two.

And it's not just the fans. Just the other day, Met GM Omar Minaya said that the most important things that the Mets have to do in order to score more runs is cut down on their strikeouts. He flat out declared that "if we cut down on our strikeouts, we'll score more runs." Now, if he had said, if we can just focus on being more patient at the plate and getting on base, he would have made sense. But he said "cut down on our strikeouts."

Baseball is stuffed to the gills with morons.

Cherish Theo.


So Minaya probably MEANT plate discipline and I think anyone who's followed the Mets would agree that we could use more of it. There certainly seems to be a correlation to working the count and scoring runs, at least for this team.

Anyway, that annoyed me slightly, but a few Sox fans said pretty much what I said, so I could let that slide. One of those fans was dnramo, who then went on to say:

]I think the biggest problem with what Minaya said is that K's haven't been a problem for his team. His team is 10th of 16 in the NL in K's (with 16th being the fewest) and is 5th in the NL in runs. His team's offense is okay, especially for his run environment. His team's run prevention sucks.


So first off, he probably should've been looking at #P/AB instead of K's, but the biggest offense there is that he took the time to see that we were 5th in the NL in RS but didn't bother to see that we're ALSO 5th in RA.

I mean, that's just plain lazy.

Spacemans Bong
Aug 12 2005 04:06 PM

Wait, you mean SOSHers are ignorant about other teams?

Shock. Horror!

cooby
Aug 12 2005 04:14 PM

You know, it would be nice if SOSH would make it so the 95% of the members who can't post there could.

I don't understand why people go there at all. If you can't respond to stuff you are reading, it must be really bad for blood pressure, as Rotblatt illustrates.

What kind of lameass forum is that?


THere are currently 199 'members' signed on there, clicking randomly on five of them, four of them are "validating" which means, they are waiting forever for nothing.

Again, thank you KC and Edgy for a managable, free forum you can actually USE! What a concept, mutter mutter...

MFS62
Aug 12 2005 04:32 PM

I happened upon this thread from a Braves Board:

http://mb12.scout.com/fatlantabravesfrm1.showMessageRange?topicID=18052.topic&start=1&stop=20

They were generally concerned about the collision and offered prayers and best wishes for speedy recovery of both our players.
By contrast, I checked out the other boards of the NL East teams. There was not one post, muchless an entire thread, on any of them that had anything to do with yesterday's events.

Later

Rotblatt
Aug 12 2005 04:34 PM

Well, I read there because the discussion (at least about the Sox) is smart, they generally get breaking news, some of which I can't find elsewhere, sooner than I can find it, and because I'm partial to the Red Sox.

Plus, Schilling and John Henry post there sometimes, and I think that's sort of neat.

But I wholeheartedly agree with cooby--I'm REALLY glad that the CPF manages to maintain quality without limiting membership at all. Good stuff.

cooby
Aug 12 2005 04:35 PM

Rotblatt wrote:

Plus, Schilling and John Henry post there sometimes, and I think that's sort of neat.
.



lol, they're prolly still waiting...

ABG
Aug 12 2005 04:43 PM

Rotblatt wrote:
Well, I read there because the discussion (at least about the Sox) is smart, they generally get breaking news, some of which I can't find elsewhere, sooner than I can find it, and because I'm partial to the Red Sox.

Plus, Schilling and John Henry post there sometimes, and I think that's sort of neat.

But I wholeheartedly agree with cooby--I'm REALLY glad that the CPF manages to maintain quality without limiting membership at all. Good stuff.

I love both boards. But any comparison is apples and oranges.

Elster88
Aug 12 2005 05:06 PM

MFS62 wrote:
I happened upon this thread from a Braves Board:

http://mb12.scout.com/fatlantabravesfrm1.showMessageRange?topicID=18052.topic&start=1&stop=20

They were generally concerned about the collision and offered prayers and best wishes for speedy recovery of both our players.
By contrast, I checked out the other boards of the NL East teams. There was not one post, muchless an entire thread, on any of them that had anything to do with yesterday's events.

Later


]Not even the Mets deserve to lose their entire outfield in one game.


Cute.

Spacemans Bong
Aug 12 2005 05:31 PM

I don't think the discussion is very smart at all. Lots of very vindictive, bitter people there (especially towards former players, like Nomar and Pedro).

Best one I heard was someone posting that Jim Bowden was trying to get Barry Larkin to return to the field, and someone else replied why would he come back when the Reds aren't going anywhere.

:roll:

Rockin' Doc
Aug 12 2005 08:51 PM

Rotblatt - "But I wholeheartedly agree with cooby--I'm REALLY glad that the CPF manages to maintain quality without limiting membership at all. Good stuff."

You mean, we're no longer elitist?

That's it, I quit!

Rotblatt
Sep 19 2005 02:22 PM

A few peeps over at SoSH are trying desperately to find ways of minimizing Petey's excellent season, thus justifying not signing him. The latest:

]Pedro has certainly faced weaker batting this year.

2004: 269/340/431
2005: 257/326/404


In answer, I give you Petey's average batter in 2003 (2.22 ERA, 1.04 WHIP):

.262/.328/.414/.742

and 2002 (2.26 ERA, 1.04 WHIP):

.260/.331/.417/.748

Both signifcantly worse than his average batter in 2004. So REALLY, if this dude is going to use that stat, he should be arguing was that 2004 was a fluke season where Petey happened to face a disproportionally high number of good hitters, which resulted in his substandard year--or was at least a partial explanation for it--rather than chalking up Petey's success this year to being in the weak NL. Which, as it turns out, isn't much weaker on average than the AL, going by averages, despite us batting pitchers, which brings us to the next attempt to knock down Petey:

]Strangely, most of the difference between Pedro this year and Pedro last year (statistically) is due to success versus the number 8 and 9 spots in the lineup. Or at least it was a couple weeks ago, when I broke down the numbers on here. I'm afraid the breakdown was lost in the apocolypse, though. There's something in Hardball Times about it, too. Maybe that's a fluke and maybe it'll change enough in September that it won't look like a compeling explanation when it's all said and done---I'll redo the analysis after the season at some point and see. It's neither here nor there, but it was quite interesting given the focus on the effect of the league change for many of us.


Now, OF COURSE Petey is going to dominate pitchers who bat and that should be considered when trying to predict how Petey would do in the AL. What I find laughable is the inclusion of the #8 hitter, as if somehow by magic all NL #8 guys are vastly inferior to those in the AL.

The whole premise is flawed, because instead of comparing the quality of #8 batters in the AL & NL, he's only looking at their results against one pitcher. 90 some-odd at bats is pretty much meaningless. I mean, are we to assume that in 2003, AL cleanup batters were worse than the #8 guys because they could only manage the following line against Petey:

.165/.221/.241/.461

compared to

.268/.316/.394/.710

from the #8 guys?

Of course not. If he really thinks there's a meaningful difference between #8 hitters in the NL & the AL, he should see how NL & AL #8 hitters performed the last couple of years.

And if he comes up with any meaningful difference, he should THEN apply that information to his analysis of Petey's performance this year.

To do it his way makes pretty much no sense at all.

Edgy DC
Sep 19 2005 02:30 PM

Good work.

Pedro is probably the fourth-best starting pitcher in the National League this year. That's not because he's had a better deal of the cards than other National League pitchers.

Rotblatt
Sep 19 2005 05:38 PM

Edgy DC wrote:
Pedro is probably the fourth-best starting pitcher in the National League this year. That's not because he's had a better deal of the cards than other National League pitchers.


Right? I mean, I suppose it's hard for them to watch Pedro dominate in another league and everything, but it's weird that some of them respond to that by saying, "The NL must really suck!" instead of giving credit to one of the guys who defined their franchise for the last 5 years.

I mean, if Piazza goes to the AL and hits 40 home runs as a DH, I'm not going to be all "No way he would have hit 40 against NL pitchers!" I'd be a little jealous but mostly just happy for the guy.

Kind of makes me want the All-Star game to count next year.

And for St. Louis to beat the pants off the Red Sox--if the Sox make it that far.

By the by, I bet Piazza rakes as a DH if given the chance next year. Since the All-Star Break, when he started getting more rest, he's hit a home run in 7.5% of his at bats--his best ratio for a half season since 2001.

Of course, it's a really small sample size (93 AB) but he's clearly got some pop left. I'd love to see him become the right-handed Ortiz for some scrappy AL team.

MFS62
Sep 20 2005 07:31 AM

This really isn't a Rant, Its a Rave.
An Indians Fan on another board posted this.
I roared.
Enjoy.
Later
*******************************************************************************
At Least Casey Blake Isn't Accused of Causing Gonorrhea...

...yet.

With runners in scoring position and two outs this year, Casey Blake is hitting .056.

For every time he comes through, there are nearly 18 times that he fails... or to put it in a little different perspective, let's look at some things that are more likely to happen than Casey Blake coming up with a 2-out hit with a runner on 2nd and/or 3rd:

There's a better chance the next e-mail you receive will contain a virus.
There's a better chance you have asthma.
There's a better chance you have diabetes.
There's a better chance you'll develop colon or rectal cancer.
There's a better chance your home contains a radon level at or above the EPA action level.
There's a better chance you will be killed or seriously injured in an auto accident.
There's a better chance you'll develop a brain aneurysm.

For the women reading this...
There's a better chance you're morbidly obese.
There's a better chance you'll get kidney stones.
There's a better chance you'll suffer from a major depressive illness this year.

For the kids...
There's a better chance the fire department will have to visit your school this year.

For the law enforcement...
There's a better chance you'll be assaulted this year.

For the male caucasions...
There's a better chance you'll spend part of your life in prison (of course, if you're not caucasion, the odds are much, much higher).

So I think it's rather obvious that if you see Casey Blake come up with a hit the next time there are two out and runners in scoring position that you should probably call your doctor.

********************************************************************************

This reminded me of some of the more creative Rey Ordonez posts.

Rotblatt
Sep 23 2005 11:37 PM

More Petey knocking from the SoSH.

]Have you ever thought that there is a reason the A.L. pitchers suck? The case could be made that the top 6 teams in the A.L. are better than St. Louis, the runaway best team in the N.L. Someone in the NL has an ERA under 2! And he pitches in a park with a porch that makes the green monster blush. Pedro also moved to a division that has Shea Stadium, Turner Field, Dolphins Stadium, and RFK stadium. All stadiums that range from slight pitchers park to dominant pitchers parks. I'm not saying Pedro hasn't earned his numbers. But its definitely arguable that he could come anywhere close to those numbers in the AL.


Those woeful & crappy NL batters average 4.44 runs per game, as opposed to those Wonderful, Awe-Inspiring Dynamos in the AL, who average 4.78 runs per game (with the benefit of a DH. Pussies.). That's a 7% difference, which would bring Petey's ERA ALL THE WAY UP to 3.02 and Clemens's to a 2.02.

I mean, seriously, people. Leaving aside all the cross-pollination between leagues (which should REALLY have nipped this idea in the bud) the difference in runs scored accounts for the DH but that's about it.

.262/.330/.414/.744 OPS
.268/.333/.425/.758 OPS

The difference is even SMALLER when looking at OPS--a whopping 1.8% difference in OPS.

Not to mention the fact that the Cards ("7th-best AL team" my ass) kicked the shit out of the Sox twice in a three-game series this year.

And let's see how the all-mighty AL batters (including the FIRST-PLACE Yankees twice) fared against Petey this year, shall we?

3.21 ERA, 1.18 WHIP

How about Clemens?

0.69 ERA, 1.08 WHIP

Suck it up and deal: Petey had a great year--period. And your pitching rotation would suck big hairy moose balls even if it pitched in the NL. And with the exception of Timlin, your entire relief staff isn't fit to carry Braden Looper's jock strap.

You'd think being in second place for a few days would have tought them some humility. Sadly, I expect this is the kind of shit a lot of them are going to keep peddling until Petey turns into a pumpkin, upon which they'll shake their condescending little heads sadly and say, "See? It's a good thing we didn't re-sign him."

I've gone from hoping that the Cards tear their heads off and use them as soccer balls to hoping they don't make the post-season.

And I used to LIKE the Red Sox, too . . .

Edgy DC
Sep 24 2005 12:09 AM

I think the problem is not so much a denial of Martinez's goodness --- though that is certainly present --- but a denial that last year was a down year, but not the beginning of an irreversible downturn.

I think once we start reading about new statistical analyses, we feel smart, get excited, and lose sight of the notion that a better grasp of different likelihoods guarantees nothing. That this is still a game filled with unpredictable things --- and human beings. The Sox bet last year that Pedro was a poor investment for their money. All things considered, it may well have been the smartest bet before the dice were thrown.

But now that they have been thrown, all the rationalization in the world won't make it the correct bet --- which it hasn't been, so far, for the Sox, but has been for the Mets.

Spacemans Bong
Sep 24 2005 08:43 AM

You guys would be surprised to the lengths they ballwash a guy who built a club that is blowing the division.

Pedro = 5 games up.
:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

Also, Edgy, stats would tell you that historically great power pitchers often have off years, when they lost the Grade A++ fastball. They then learn to deal with it and bounce back to have very good seasons - it's part of what makes them great.

MFS62
Sep 24 2005 10:15 AM

Ok, so maybe their bitterness about Pedro is at least part because he's no longer there. And deep down in their hearts they wish they still had him. And you know they really need him.
But is that any different from the way Mets fans discuss Jeff Kent?
Do you think the team would have been more, or less, successful on the field if they had kept him?
But bash away they do.

What do you think?
It it the same kind of feeling, or not?

Later

ScarletKnight41
Sep 24 2005 10:25 AM

Not. Jeff Kent was and is an asshole.

Additionally, Kent was traded, while Pedro left Boston as a free agent. We don't feel abandoned by Kent the way Boston feels abandoned by Pedro. We just don't like the guy.

Rotblatt
Sep 24 2005 11:04 AM

Leiter might be a good comparison. How would we have felt if Leiter went to the Fishies and did well, while our rotation & bullpen were among the worst in the league? And by did well, I mean great ERA, WHIP, K/9, K/BB, HR/9, etc.--solid results and solid peripherals.

I'd be pissy at management for not doing a better job in the offseason, and jealous as hell, but I'd be happy for him.

If I was happy for him when he shut down the Sox as a MFY, I think I'm big enough to not be all "Well, if Al had to deal with the media in NY again, he wouldn't have been nearly as good."

And I suspect most of us would have felt the same way. We probably would have argued incessantly about whether or not we should have re-signed him, but I doubt any of us would try to belittle Leiter's season.

Edgy DC
Sep 24 2005 12:02 PM

Nobody's distorting reason to say that Jeff Kent's success since leaving the Mets is illusory.

What some Met fans do try to do is reason that Kent showed none of that ability while he was with the Mets, which is obviously false.

MFS62
Oct 08 2005 04:05 PM

Its that time of the year again.
The Junior GMs on the other boards have begun their mental masturbation.
And when that happens, they have traditionally done something that is as useless as a third nostril.

When they propose a trade of Player A for Player B, they get this urge to then post the entire 25 man roster with player A in it and player B not.

I guess this is their way of proving to others on those boards how much they know about baseball. But it is a pure waste of computer resources.

I'll climb down off my soapbox now.

Later

Rotblatt
Nov 18 2005 04:50 PM

Okay, so the speculation on the SoSH board about the Manny trade is just ludicrous. Some trade proposals floated about recently:

Manny (without ANY discount, which was specifically stated by the poster) for Floyd, Milledge & Heilman.

Manny for Matsui, Milledge, Petit & Humber. Presumably, Matsui was in there so that the Sox wouldn't have to pay any of Manny's salary.

Laughable.

Another incredibly annoying post:

]I am not as high on Petit as some--I don't think he's better than Arroyo long-term


So I figured I'd check out Arroyo's minor league stats, thinking maybe underneath Arroyo's career ERA of 4.59 lay a guy who dominated the minors at a young age.

It didn't.

3.80 ERA, 1.28 WHIP, 6.94 K/9, 2.36 BB/9

compared to Petit's

2.76 ERA, 0.94 WHIP, 11.16 K/9, 1.95 BB/9

Arroyo didn't reach AA until he turned 21. Petit turns 21 next year, having already made 23 AA starts and 4 AAA starts (including one playoff game).

I mean, Petit's a crapshoot (although less of one than most pitching prospects, IMO) but saying he's not likely to be any more valuable than Arroyo is just shockingly ignorant.