Matt Boyd stud thread

[Boxcar]

^ doesn't understand the fundamentals of pitching. Womp womp.

[King]

Go jerk off to spreadsheets.

 

O2 this is your chance

[o2cui2i]

O2 this is your chance

 

for what?

[LTR]

Getting outs is a pretty big one I think.

 

Actually that has to do with luck and team defense, for the most part.

[King]

for what?

 

lol

[theblujay]

Sanchez will be a good pitcher. He will improve.

[o2cui2i]

lol

 

once again you are late for the party and you're not getting in with those sneakers on.

[saskjayfan]

This is hilarious.

 

Sanchez xfip in his last 4 starts were 3.56, 4.32, 3.2 and 3.71.....the kid is showing improvement. He posted a 3.56 xfip in a start where he threw 40 consecutive fastballs. What if he ever learns to throw a change up? What will happen to those stats you joyfully jerk off to before going to bed.

 

Stats nerds hate qualitative assessment. When baseball analysts who were pitchers in the big leagues say that Sanchez' fastball and movement is special, the stat nerds scoff and say those guys know nothing about baseball. Give me a f***ing break. Does Sanchez need to improve...sure. He needs better control and commad of his fastball, he needs to improve his changeup, polish his curve, develop a cutter or a slider. If he can do a couple of these things, the stats will eventually come match the abilities and results...stats will look good, the eye test will look good and the kid will win games. There is a chance he never develops these skills, but for a kid who turned 23 a couple days ago it's way to early to give up on the kid.

 

I find it hilarious that the stat nerds are infuriated that Sanchez has only given up more than 3 earned runs in any of his starts. Their heads are about to explode because Sanchez is SOOOOOO FUCCCKKINNNGGG LUUUCKKKKKKY!!!!!!!

[TheHurl]

O2 this is your chance

 

I've said 100 times worse about 50 straight posts. I'll take my banning now

[Boxcar]

Getting outs is a pretty big one I think.

 

What are the odds of a batter not getting out if:

 

a) there's a fairly decent chance he won't make contact with the ball and

 

if he can't just lay off pitches and take a free base

 

Missing bats is important. Having good command is important. You can wish all you like that those two things are inconsequential but you're wrong. Source: Entire history of baseball.

[o2cui2i]

I've said 100 times worse about 50 straight posts. I'll take my banning now

 

it's not alway what is said, it can be more of how it's said and how many times. just saying the same thing over and over just to irritate everyone else is just sad and I don't want to read the s***. ban worthy just so I dont have to read it.

[LTR]

You mean to tell me there are other players on the field???

 

Not if you count Reyes, he's kind of like an apparition (not really there, not really doing anything).

[o2cui2i]

Not if you count Reyes, he's kind of like an apparition (not really there, not really doing anything).

 

there was a lot of bad play for the jays tonight, both teams actually and if the jays didn't get lit up for 8 in the first they might have been able to win it.

[Boxcar]

Sanchez xfip in his last 4 starts were 3.56, 4.32, 3.2 and 3.71.....the kid is showing improvement. He posted a 3.56 xfip in a start where he threw 40 consecutive fastballs. What if he ever learns to throw a change up? What will happen to those stats you joyfully jerk off to before going to bed.

 

Stats nerds hate qualitative assessment. When baseball analysts who were pitchers in the big leagues say that Sanchez' fastball and movement is special, the stat nerds scoff and say those guys know nothing about baseball. Give me a f***ing break. Does Sanchez need to improve...sure. He needs better control and commad of his fastball, he needs to improve his changeup, polish his curve, develop a cutter or a slider. If he can do a couple of these things, the stats will eventually come match the abilities and results...stats will look good, the eye test will look good and the kid will win games. There is a chance he never develops these skills, but for a kid who turned 23 a couple days ago it's way to early to give up on the kid.

 

I find it hilarious that the stat nerds are infuriated that Sanchez has only given up more than 3 earned runs in any of his starts. Their heads are about to explode because Sanchez is SOOOOOO FUCCCKKINNNGGG LUUUCKKKKKKY!!!!!!!

 

No one is giving up on him. That is just a narrative you and your ilk run with to justify your confusing rage.

[LTR]

there was a lot of bad play for the jays tonight, both teams actually and if the jays didn't get lit up for 8 in the first they might have been able to win it.

 

Q: udrunk?

[Boxcar]

Cool. Now every time there's an out that doesn't result from a strikeout I can tell at the TV, "you lucky sonofabitch."

 

Intent on being obtuse or would you actually care to debate the merits of this argument?

[Boxcar]

Of course they're important. I'm just not discounting a pitchers ability to miss barrels. Doc's entire strategy was based on that. Could he miss bats? Yes. But he also had the ability of induce a lot of weaker contact. If you choose to not believe that that's a thing then OK... But some of us do.

 

Roy Halladay also didn't walk anyone, and he threw a ton of innings. His best years also came when he was able to tick his k-rate up to 7-8. He is not an apt comparison, he has over 2700 innings of tangible results and impeccable command, two things Sanchez doesn't have.

[Boxcar]

Missing bats doesn't always result in a strikeout.

 

Here's the pitch... Swing and a miss strike one... Here's the 0-1 pitch... Weak grounder to short... One down.

 

It doesn't always have to end in a strikeout.

 

How about you check the correlation for swinging strikes with k-rate and see if your little example holds true in the broader picture.

[saskjayfan]

Roy Halladay also didn't walk anyone, and he threw a ton of innings. His best years also came when he was able to tick his k-rate up to 7-8. He is not an apt comparison, he has over 2700 innings of tangible results and impeccable command, two things Sanchez doesn't have.

 

Yes Halladay's command was impeccable at the age of 23. His pitched did exactly what he wanted them to do at that age

[saskjayfan]

How about you check the correlation for swinging strikes with k-rate and see if your little example holds true in the broader picture.

 

someone tell buehrle that unless he starts getting more swinging strikes, he will never be an effective pitcher..lol. Did you ever consider the fact that Sanchez might at one stage in his career improve his swinging strike rate?

[Boxcar]

Yes Halladay's command was impeccable at the age of 23. His pitched did exactly what he wanted them to do at that age

 

Here we go again.

 

Time to abandon thread.

[o2cui2i]

Here we go again.

 

Time to abandon thread.

 

just agree to disagree.

[Daniel Labude]

Hey I'm not giving up on him. I hope he does figure those things out. What I don't understand is why is his leash so much bigger than lets say Norris for example?

 

If Norris had not had dead arm and control issues I think he would have had a longer leash

[o2cui2i]

someone tell buehrle that unless he starts getting more swinging strikes, he will never be an effective pitcher..lol. Did you ever consider the fact that Sanchez might at one stage in his career improve his swinging strike rate?

 

MB is an exception to most of those rules. there are not many outliers in the numbers, but he is one of them

[saskjayfan]

That has nothing to do with Boxcar's point.

 

This is why using Hall of Famers for comparisons is dangerous.

 

I understand this, but my point was simply that we've heard so many times by the boxcar's of the board what Sanchez is and the reality is you didn't know what Halladay was at 23 and you don't know what Sanchez is either. Sanchez' stats could change over time

[Boxcar]

someone tell buehrle that unless he starts getting more swinging strikes, he will never be an effective pitcher..lol. Did you ever consider the fact that Sanchez might at one stage in his career improve his swinging strike rate?

 

Any more non-relevant examples you'd like to pull out? Maybe put the final nail in the coffin by condescendingly mentioning Greg Maddux?

[JFD]

No one is giving up on him. That is just a narrative you and your ilk run with to justify your confusing rage.

 

you called him "one of the worst pitchers in baseball" a few posts ago. sort of sounds like you might be giving up on him.

[o2cui2i]

I understand this, but my point was simply that we've heard so many times by the boxcar's of the board what Sanchez is and the reality is you didn't know what Halladay was at 23 and you don't know what Sanchez is either. Sanchez' stats could change over time

 

Halladay got sent down to A ball to rebuild his entire deliver. he wasn't the Halladay that he later become until he was broken down and started over.

[King]

you called him "one of the worst pitchers in baseball" a few posts ago. sort of sounds like you might be giving up on him.

 

insert strawman image here

[o2cui2i]

I've never liked Buehrle. His repertoire always scares me and he just looks like he should get destroyed every time out there.

 

The results are undeniable... But talking pure "stuff", he's not how I like my pitchers constructed.

 

there are some guys who do just enough to drive hitters absolutely nuts. Maddux was another one. didn't throw hard, but by changing speeds and making the hitter uncomfortable he made it to the hall of fame, throwing about the same style as MB, but GM was a little more accurate and could carve up hitters.