Josh Johnson out 4-5 weeks with 'strained right forearm'

[TBJ12]

It actually makes me feel better about the FO's decision now that he's hurt. It means there was probably something on his medical report that scared them (hence why he only got $8M).

 

Johnson has never had poor performance. His worst xFIP- in his career was 95 in 2012.

 

Are you seriously trying to say Johnson didn't perform poorly last season?

[GD]

Here we go again

[Terminator]

It actually makes me feel better about the FO's decision now that he's hurt. It means there was probably something on his medical report that scared them (hence why he only got $8M).

 

Johnson has never had poor performance. His worst xFIP- in his career was 95 in 2012.

 

Of course it makes you feel better...hindsight is 20/20.

[John_Havok]

Are you seriously trying to say Johnson didn't perform poorly last season?

 

All depends how you define performance and whether you separate results from that definition. Johnson got piss poor results, but didn't actually perform any worse than his usual career numbers from the standpoint of Ks, walks, etc, while suddenly more than doubling his hr/FB rate...

[eastcoastjaysfan]

Yes.

 

lol

 

Look man, you're an asset to this forum but if you want a lot of the traditional fans to bend a little to see where you're coming from, you have to do the same with them.

 

You can't be SO hardlined with the outputs from your models. Was he unlucky with a super high BABIP? Of course he was. But you cannot sit there and f***ing tell me that a guy who threw 81 s***** innings while getting paid 14M dollars didn't pitch poorly. He completely s*** the bed. Is this sustainable going forward? Probably not, but he was absolutely awful last year.

[GD]

lol

 

Maybe it'll occur to you that he defines performance as skill display and you define it as results and rather than bashing him for that you'll realize that your definitions differ to the point that it's not worth it.

 

Maybe.

[Chappy]

Maybe it'll occur to you that he defines performance as skill display and you define it as results and rather than bashing him for that you'll realize that your definitions differ to the point that it's not worth it.

 

Maybe.

 

The results are all that matter. JJ had horrific results, but hey he did great, lol.

[TBJ12]

All depends how you define performance and whether you separate results from that definition. Johnson got piss poor results, but didn't actually perform any worse than his usual career numbers from the standpoint of Ks, walks, etc, while suddenly more than doubling his hr/FB rate...

 

So do you just ignore the sudden spike in hr/fb rate? I realize he was unlucky, but luck wasn't his only problem.

[Chappy]

lol

 

Look man, you're an asset to this forum but if you want a lot of the traditional fans to bend a little to see where you're coming from, you have to do the same with them.

 

You can't be SO hardlined with the outputs from your models. Was he unlucky with a super high BABIP? Of course he was. But you cannot sit there and f***ing tell me that a guy who threw 81 s***** innings while getting paid 14M dollars didn't pitch poorly. He completely s*** the bed. Is this sustainable going forward? Probably not, but he was absolutely awful last year.

 

Bingo.

[TBJ12]

Johnson had the second unluckiest BABIP with min 80 IP (to Wade Davis) and the 4th unluckiest HR/FB. Both stats take over 8 years to 50% stabilize. K, BB, and FB take under half a year. Which should we use to evaluate a 80 IP sample?

 

And of course I can tell you he didn't pitch poorly. His pitching quality did not directly result in the runs scored.

 

This just sounds absurd.

[Angrioter]

It may sound absurd but it's true. Pitching is really weird in the sense that they have very limited control over some aspects of the game. A batter hitting their pitch down the line for a double is all because of luck and the batter. Nothing to do with the pitchers' pitch.

 

JJ pitched like s*** and you know that.

[GD]

It amazes me that none of you realize that this isn't going to go anywhere because you are managing to argue over entirely separate things.

[FireAlexAnthopoulos]

100% supported Alex not giving him the QO.

 

This overgrown POS is made of glass.

Agreed. This was actually a good move by AA. Not sure why everyone wanted him back when he was awful and made of glass.

[G-Snarls]

JJ pitched like s*** and you know that.

 

Yes

 

Even when he was pitching his performance was affected by injuries. He was bad, no statistical apologies can counteract that. He got unlucky on top of it too with more hits per ball in play, but he sucked by any measure.

[GD]

but he sucked by any measure.

 

Not by xFIP lol

 

I bet half of the posters in here minus Moogy were begging AA to QO him. This thread's gonna be another 35 pages of ridiculousness.

[FireAlexAnthopoulos]

BTW, I agree that JJ was unlucky. He also did himself no favors with his poor performance in addition to the bad luck.

[G-Snarls]

Agreed. This was actually a good move by AA. Not sure why everyone wanted him back when he was awful and made of glass.

 

The argument for him is high ceiling and ability to retain him on a 1 year deal (his agent even came out and said he would accept a QO)

 

But yeah his health history rightfully scared them off. Especially when you only had two dependable guys in the rotation as it stood. Not worth the risk.

[Chappy]

Not by xFIP lol

 

I bet half of the posters in here minus Moogy were begging AA to QO him. This thread's gonna be another 35 pages of ridiculousness.

 

At some point people need to stop using stats as the be all and end all, because it's not. JJ was horrific and his RESULTS reflect that. All that matter are the results, not excuses.

[GD]

At some point people need to stop using stats as the be all and end all, because it's not. JJ was horrific and his RESULTS reflect that. All that matter are the results, not excuses.

 

What was horrific about JJ aside from his results? Serious question. His results were horrific, obviously. But what was horrific about him? Was he not striking guys out? Was he walking too many guys? What is it, Chappy?

[Chappy]

What was horrific about JJ aside from his results? Serious question. His results were horrific, obviously. But what was horrific about him? Was he not striking guys out? Was he walking too many guys? What is it, Chappy?

 

11.6 H/9 IP. JJ threw those pitches and was hit around. Luck may have played it's part, but let's not kid ourselves.

[GD]

11.6 H/9 IP. JJ threw those pitches and was hit around. Luck may have played it's part, but let's not kid ourselves.

 

JJ was playing with an infield of Bonifacio, Izturis, Reyes and EE, and no Lawrie for a while too. That + bad luck, plus pitchers not having a ton of control over balls in play, really don't speak to Johnson's ability, good or bad, very much at all.

[GD]

Just wait until the new video evidence comes forward, and illuminates the subject of quality of contact beyond "fly ball, line drive, ground ball." Current BABIP assumptions will be antiquated.

 

I'm gonna have so much fun pouring over all the new data in my mom's basement.

[GD]

That's not something one should take pride in reposting.

[eastcoastjaysfan]

Maybe it'll occur to you that he defines performance as skill display and you define it as results and rather than bashing him for that you'll realize that your definitions differ to the point that it's not worth it.

 

Maybe.

 

When did I bash him? Did I call him a dork or an idiot?

 

In the first line of my post I credited him for being an asset to the forum you f***ing clown.

 

Stop being so insecure.

[TBJ12]

I have nothing but respect for what JFaS has accomplished, but this was pretty good.

[Chappy]

JJ was playing with an infield of Bonifacio, Izturis, Reyes and EE, and no Lawrie for a while too. That + bad luck, plus pitchers not having a ton of control over balls in play, really don't speak to Johnson's ability, good or bad, very much at all.

 

The same infield Dickey and Buehrle pitched with and they didn't see an increase of 3 hits per 9 innings. Both saw an increase of about 1 hit per 9 innings which seems reasonable considering the butchers in the field.

 

As for not having control over pitches put into play, he has every bit of control where he throws those pitches and which pitch he selects.

[GD]

When did I bash him? Did I call him a dork or an idiot?

 

In the first line of my post I credited him for being an asset to the forum you f***ing clown.

 

Stop being so insecure.

 

You ridiculed his opinion based on making fun of his models. Then you call me a f***ing clown and say I'm insecure lol.

 

ECJFnevergonnabehappy. Less fighting in this thread, more watching Demar's long twos slay the Hawks.

 

The same infield Dickey and Buehrle pitched with and they didn't see an increase of 3 hits per 9 innings. Both saw an increase of about 1 hit per 9 innings which seems reasonable considering the butchers in the field.

 

As for not having control over pitches put into play, he has every bit of control where he throws those pitches and which pitch he selects.

 

Dickey is famous for inducing weak contact and Buehrle is Buehrle. You can't compare them to JJ.

 

ATM yourself. It's bloody brilliant.

 

Don't want to know.

[Chappy]

Dickey is famous for inducing weak contact and Buehrle is Buehrle. You can't compare them to JJ.

 

Ah ok, so those extra 3 hits per 9 innings were just due to poor luck, lol.

 

I got an idea, let's not hold anyone accountable for god awful results.

[GD]

Ah ok, so those extra 3 hits per 9 innings were just due to poor luck, lol.

 

I got an idea, let's not hold anyone accountable for god awful results.

 

Now you're taking my argument out of proportion. It all comes down to looking at results vs process and in the end, DIPS theory. I don't believe in 80 IP of ERA luck but if you do, that's your prerogative. I have better things to do with my Sunday afternoon than have my argument stretched.

[Chappy]

Now you're taking my argument out of proportion. It all comes down to looking at results vs process and in the end, DIPS theory. I don't believe in 80 IP of ERA luck but if you do, that's your prerogative. I have better things to do with my Sunday afternoon than have my argument stretched.

 

Stretched? Lol, ok. You are basing your argument on only specific stats and ignoring others. I don't disagree that he had good peripherals, but he was not right last season. Anyways, I have no desire to further discuss this either.