Sign Marco Estrada to an extension

[JaysFan4Ever]

That doesn't mean I haven't liked what I've seen. He's done a lot better than I thought and some of those games were amazing but how and will he be able to keep it up for the rest of the year and the next 1-3 years is the question.

[BTS]

I'm interested in hearing what the "he's done great so far" crowd are looking at. Guy has a 4.50 xFIP. Is it just run prevention people are looking at? You can make a pretty sound argument that he's only had three good starts all season.

[Laika]

[Atothe]

Mods

[labadee]

im in the countryside with unreliable internet and i had to wait like 7 minutes for this page to load and now i know why. fysmc

[Laika]

im in the countryside with unreliable internet and i had to wait like 7 minutes for this page to load and now i know why. fysmc

 

[nextyear]

Estrada currently is a good pitcher and he has the potential to become even better.

 

I hope the Blue Jays management can believe their own eyes instead of relying on an overwhelming array of stats.

[Laika]

Estrada currently is a good pitcher and he has the potential to become even better.

 

I hope the Blue Jays management can believe their own eyes instead of relying on an overwhelming array of stats.

 

I think he's pretty much maxing out his toolset right now.

[Boxcar]

Can we ban this NJH *******?

[Boxcar]

I think he's pretty much maxing out his toolset right now.

 

Willful ignorance is hard to fight

[Deadpool]

Estrada currently is a good pitcher and he has the potential to become even better.

 

I hope the Blue Jays management can believe their own eyes instead of relying on an overwhelming array of stats.

 

Okay, confirmed my earlier thoughts...

[jaysblue]

Estrada currently is a good pitcher and he has the potential to become even better.

 

I hope the Blue Jays management can believe their own eyes instead of relying on an overwhelming array of stats.

 

You should purchase a Marco Estrada jersey!

[nextyear]

Okay, confirmed my earlier thoughts...

 

 

Then why don't you just put me on ignore and save yourself the aggravation of reading and responding to my posts?

 

Try to remember Mr. Deadpool, baseball is just a game for the enjoyment of fans. I doubt that you are going to make a living being the protector of information on a baseball forum.

[nextyear]

You should purchase a Marco Estrada jersey!

 

Probably not, since I don't have any player jerseys for any sport.

 

Unfortunately, I have a feeling that Estrada might not be around very long; not because he isn't a good pitcher but because the Blue Jays seem to go through a lot of pitchers.

[jaysblue]

Then why don't you just put me on ignore and save yourself the aggravation of reading and responding to my posts?

 

Try to remember Mr. Deadpool, baseball is just a game for the enjoyment of fans. I doubt that you are going to make a living being the protector of information on a baseball forum.

 

http://www.jaysshop.ca/iSynApp/productDisplay.action?sid=1101081&productId=159195

[GD]

lool jaysblue

[TwistedLogic]

Yes. He's the obvious comparison. We need to stop falling in love with players that have stretches of playing above their heads. He's a good #5. But nothing that can't be replaced rather easily. There's no reason to commit to him with anything extensive. 2 years max. Ideally, 1 plus and option. If he can do better elsewhere, good for him.

 

Not that I disagree with you, but Estrada has been better than a "good #5" in the past (his 2012 was brilliant), which probably means that there's a higher chance (than someone like Villaneuva) that he can become that again.

 

Regardless of how we feel about him, he's been the Jays third best starter, and unless/until he suddenly crashes down to embrace his xFIP, they need to continue milking whatever they can get out of him.

 

It's Dickey that needs to f***ing go away. God, I hate that guy.

 

Estrada currently is a good pitcher and he has the potential to become even better.

 

I hope the Blue Jays management can believe their own eyes instead of relying on an overwhelming array of stats.

 

Ah I get it, this is a satire account.

[nextyear]

http://www.jaysshop.ca/iSynApp/productDisplay.action?sid=1101081&productId=159195

 

Thank you. I wonder if I could get a Larry Walker Montreal Expos jersey? I have followed the Blue Jays for 35 years now but I am still hoping for another expansion team in Montreal.

 

I root for the humble, quiet players on the Blue Jays such as Encarnacion, Estrada, Buehrle, Goins, and Navarro. They are just players that I want to see do well, if not in Toronto then somewhere else.

[nextyear]

.

.

.

 

Ah I get it, this is a satire account.

 

 

Maybe I am too old for this baseball forum. I have been following baseball for 40 years since I was a young teenager. When I started following it in the early 1970's, pitchers were rated by walks, ERA, wins-losses and not much else. Batters were rated by runs scored, RBI's, steals, walks and not much else.

 

I started following the MLB when the Montreal Expos team was Canada's team.

 

I really don't get the younger generation that is so into baseball stats. Maybe it has always been this way, but there weren't a hundred (or hundreds) of stats to keep track of.

 

Can someone tell me, how many stats are there, is it over a hundred?

[closetjaysfan]

Maybe I am too old for this baseball forum. I have been following baseball for 40 years since I was a young teenager. When I started following it in the early 1970's, pitchers were rated by walks, ERA, wins-losses and not much else. Batters were rated by runs scored, RBI's, steals, walks and not much else.

 

I started following the MLB when the Montreal Expos team was Canada's team.

 

I really don't get the younger generation that is so into baseball stats. Maybe it has always been this way, but there weren't a hundred (or hundreds) of stats to keep track of.

 

Can someone tell me, how many stats are there, is it over a hundred?

 

 

http://www.fangraphs.com

 

have a look and groan a little inside.

[nextyear]

http://www.fangraphs.com

 

have a look and groan a little inside.

 

Thank you. At times I think I need to go back to university to understand baseball stats.

 

I am going to keep it simple and just pick up a few of the new ones such as WAR and the like.

[TwistedLogic]

Maybe I am too old for this baseball forum. I have been following baseball for 40 years since I was a young teenager. When I started following it in the early 1970's, pitchers were rated by walks, ERA, wins-losses and not much else. Batters were rated by runs scored, RBI's, steals, walks and not much else.

 

I started following the MLB when the Montreal Expos team was Canada's team.

 

I really don't get the younger generation that is so into baseball stats. Maybe it has always been this way, but there weren't a hundred (or hundreds) of stats to keep track of.

 

Can someone tell me, how many stats are there, is it over a hundred?

 

I gotta be honest, I truly believed you were being satirical when you wrote the words "I hope they can believe their own eyes over an overwhelming array of stats". I don't see how that isn't satire, you're basically writing a comic about yourself.

 

"We should discard all this overwhelming scientific research and evidence that this procedure is terrifying and immoral and it just doesn't work. Lobotomies are love. Lobotomies are life."

[Captain Adama]

Thank you. At times I think I need to go back to university to understand baseball stats.

 

I am going to keep it simple and just pick up a few of the new ones such as WAR and the like.

 

Don't go straight into WAR, look at how it's calculated, take a bottom up approach, understand how offensive stats are calculated, then look at defensive stats are calculated, then you understand why a certain player's WAR is why it is. Wax on, wax off grasshopper.

[nextyear]

I gotta be honest, I truly believed you were being satirical when you wrote the words "I hope they can believe their own eyes over an overwhelming array of stats". I don't see how that isn't satire, you're basically writing a comic about yourself.

 

"We should discard all this overwhelming scientific research and evidence that this procedure is terrifying and immoral and it just doesn't work. Lobotomies are love. Lobotomies are life."

 

 

I find you to be rather comical also. You seem to think that baseball stats define a baseball player. Obviously, it is the other way around; baseball players play baseball and depending on their performance the stats are created based on their performance. Since stats resulted from the baseball player's performance the stats can change over time (as they often do).

 

I have used statistical methods to model chemical processes and that experience allows me to understand the limitation of stats and also that you have a very limited understanding of them. So when you and others start telling me that a player has limited potential based on their past stats, all I can do is smile and shake my head.

 

You might be a more logical person in another 20 - 30 years once you finally have a lot more real life experience. In another 20 - 30 years you will have a chance to mix some common sense with your obsession with stats.

 

The misuse of stats on this forum is mind boggling. I have a feeling that the same people who think they can (accurately) predict the future performance of baseball players also think they can predict the performance of stocks on the stock market and will lose a lot of money in the future doing so.

[TwistedLogic]

I find you to be rather comical also. You seem to think that baseball stats define a baseball player. Obviously, it is the other way around; baseball players play baseball and depending on their performance the stats are created based on their performance. Since stats resulted from the baseball player's performance the stats can change over time (as they often do).

 

I have used statistical methods to model chemical processes and that experience allows me to understand the limitation of stats and also that you have a very limited understanding of them. So when you and others start telling me that a player has limited potential based on their past stats, all I can do is smile and shake my head.

 

You might be a more logical person in another 20 - 30 years once you finally have a lot more real life experience. In another 20 - 30 years you will have a chance to mix some common sense with your obsession with stats.

 

It's ironic that you make that post, because I'm one of the few people on this forum that doesn't religiously subscribe to one school of thought or another. Just because I can appreciate and respect advanced statistics doesn't mean I have an obsession with them. I often get into disagreements with people here who do put all of their stock in statistics, because I don't believe stats always tell the entire story. I understand that stats have limitations, that psychology plays a big role in baseball, and that the best way to look at the game is to understand and respect all sides of it, whether it be statistics, scouting or whatever intangibles we can't currently put a number on.

 

That being said, you accuse me and many others here of looking only at statistics, when you very much hold the exact same blind and rigid thought process, except on the opposing extreme. Your exact words were "I hope the Blue Jays management can believe their own eyes instead of relying on an overwhelming array of stats." So while you mock the people that discredit the "eye test" and look only at stats, you choose to throw away statistics entirely, and rely solely on what your eyes tell you.

 

You say that your alleged usage of statistical methods in the past allows you to understand the limitations of stats, but at the same time, you don't understand the limitations of simply basing your opinions on what your eyes tell you? That's a pretty hilarious seat to sit in, considering your superiority complex against people who have an opposing view of baseball evaluation than you.

 

You look down on younger people and their willingness to learn and seek higher knowledge, and maybe that's because it clashes with your old-timey tendencies of always doing things the same way, but just like everything else in the world, the way we evaluate baseball has evolved, and it's time you and your people accepted that. The 20-30 years of experience that you have on me has only served to make you jaded, blinded and closed-minded. You might think that there are people in baseball that feel the same way that you do, and in essence unfortunately you are right, but the people in baseball that are dumb enough to believe that their eyes tell them all they need to know are quickly and deservedly reaching their expiry dates.

[Boxcar]

I find you to be rather comical also. You seem to think that baseball stats define a baseball player. Obviously, it is the other way around; baseball players play baseball and depending on their performance the stats are created based on their performance. Since stats resulted from the baseball player's performance the stats can change over time (as they often do).

 

I have used statistical methods to model chemical processes and that experience allows me to understand the limitation of stats and also that you have a very limited understanding of them. So when you and others start telling me that a player has limited potential based on their past stats, all I can do is smile and shake my head.

 

You might be a more logical person in another 20 - 30 years once you finally have a lot more real life experience. In another 20 - 30 years you will have a chance to mix some common sense with your obsession with stats.

 

The misuse of stats on this forum is mind boggling. I have a feeling that the same people who think they can (accurately) predict the future performance of baseball players also think they can predict the performance of stocks on the stock market and will lose a lot of money in the future doing so.

 

Uh oh, he played the "I'm old, so I know more than you" card.

[Deadpool]

Uh oh, he played the "I'm old, so I know more than you" card.

 

http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb127/ganhyun/GAF/pepperidge%20farm.png

[nextyear]

It's ironic that you make that post, because I'm one of the few people on this forum that doesn't religiously subscribe to one school of thought or another. Just because I can appreciate and respect advanced statistics doesn't mean I have an obsession with them. I often get into disagreements with people here who do put all of their stock in statistics, because I don't believe stats always tell the entire story. I understand that stats have limitations, that psychology plays a big role in baseball, and that the best way to look at the game is to understand and respect all sides of it, whether it be statistics, scouting or whatever intangibles we can't currently put a number on.

 

That being said, you accuse me and many others here of looking only at statistics, when you very much hold the exact same blind and rigid thought process, except on the opposing extreme. Your exact words were "I hope the Blue Jays management can believe their own eyes instead of relying on an overwhelming array of stats." So while you mock the people that discredit the "eye test" and look only at stats, you choose to throw away statistics entirely, and rely solely on what your eyes tell you.

 

You say that your alleged usage of statistical methods in the past allows you to understand the limitations of stats, but at the same time, you don't understand the limitations of simply basing your opinions on what your eyes tell you? That's a pretty hilarious seat to sit in, considering your superiority complex against people who have an opposing view of baseball evaluation than you.

 

You look down on younger people and their willingness to learn and seek higher knowledge, and maybe that's because it clashes with your old-timey tendencies of always doing things the same way, but just like everything else in the world, the way we evaluate baseball has evolved, and it's time you and your people accepted that. The 20-30 years of experience that you have on me has only served to make you jaded, blinded and closed-minded. You might think that there are people in baseball that feel the same way that you do, and in essence unfortunately you are right, but the people in baseball that are dumb enough to believe that their eyes tell them all they need to know are quickly and deservedly reaching their expiry dates.

 

 

I am sure that you think that you hit the nail on the head, but unfortunately your post shows your lack of real world experience.

 

Do you really think that a competent pitching coach will rely on statistical data to evaluate the effectiveness of a pitcher who has pitched 95 innings on his own team? Do you need statistical data to decide if Estrada pitched well on Sunday versus Chris Archer? Maybe if you study the statistical data from Sunday's game you will decide that Estrada didn't pitch as well as your own eyes perceived him to have pitched.

 

Many stats can be determined exactly from past data such as RBI's, ERA, walks, strikeouts and numerous others. Some are not absolute such as WAR, which uses an algebraic equation to determine wins over replacement (but it might be useful to some). However, future values are different since they must be predicted based on some predictive model (the model might be a statistical equation or based on a manager's evaluation of future performance).

 

It seems that some people on this forum don't differentiate between values that can be determined exactly from past data (such as RBI's per game) and future values that must be predicted. In the case of Estrada, and a competent pitching coach, the best prediction will be based on their own eyes of how he has performed this year. Anyone who can't understand this concept needs a reality check.

[Trouba95]

oops Edited July 21, 2015 by Trouba95

[Spanky99]

"Cooler Heads Prevail"