Around Baseball 2023

[Captain_Obvious]

Well, if they had told him he made the team, no coming back from that, right.

 

They can easily delay a couple of months with some BS reasons. The Orioles likely lost over $15M in value by being stupid.

 

The whole point here is that this CBA rule is counterproductive to teams and players. It incentivizes teams to keep good players in the minors for at least half of the season if they do not start on the MLB roster. It should be fixed so that teams are rewarded or not penalized for doing the right thing.

[Laika]

They can easily delay a couple of months with some BS reasons. The Orioles likely lost over $15M in value by being stupid.

 

The whole point here is that this CBA rule is counterproductive to teams and players. It incentivizes teams to keep good players in the minors for at least half of the season if they do not start on the MLB roster. It should be fixed so that teams are rewarded or not penalized for doing the right thing.

 

Yeah but it incentivizes teams to put top prospects on the roster day 1

 

I dunno. have to draw the line somewhere

[Jimcanuck]

Yeah but it incentivizes teams to put top prospects on the roster day 1

 

I dunno. have to draw the line somewhere

 

Can keep the line and increase the incentives beyond ROTY. Add in benefits for teams with a player finishing 2nd and 3rd in ROTY voting, increase the odds that guys like Rutschman get promoted instead of kept down for control reasons

[Terminator]

They can easily delay a couple of months with some BS reasons. The Orioles likely lost over $15M in value by being stupid.

 

The whole point here is that this CBA rule is counterproductive to teams and players. It incentivizes teams to keep good players in the minors for at least half of the season if they do not start on the MLB roster. It should be fixed so that teams are rewarded or not penalized for doing the right thing.

 

Well on the other hand the Orioles tried to play games and they got burnt. They should have called him up much sooner.

[Spanky__99]

They can easily delay a couple of months with some BS reasons. The Orioles likely lost over $15M in value by being stupid.

 

The whole point here is that this CBA rule is counterproductive to teams and players. It incentivizes teams to keep good players in the minors for at least half of the season if they do not start on the MLB roster. It should be fixed so that teams are rewarded or not penalized for doing the right thing.

 

Likely more than that, anyhow it's what they agreed to, I don't think they can revise anything until the next CBA, as Laika mentioned there's give and take to what they agreed upon. They couldn't make up any BS reasons if they told the kid he made the team, it would just strain their relationship.

[Laika]

Can keep the line and increase the incentives beyond ROTY. Add in benefits for teams with a player finishing 2nd and 3rd in ROTY voting, increase the odds that guys like Rutschman get promoted instead of kept down for control reasons

 

Not sure they need more incentives. Most top prospects who should have made opening day rosters did in 2022.

[Laika]

Well on the other hand the Orioles tried to play games and they got burnt. They should have called him up much sooner.

 

He was hurt though

 

I mean if Baltimore was going to just give him a short rehab and call him up maybe they should and could have done something like put him on the opening day rosters then DL him? Then they remain eligible for the rewards. Haha I have no idea

[BTS]

So gross

 

[connorp]

So gross

 

 

Why would they have basically Marlins trim? That is indeed very bad.

[Laika]

Here is a great idea:

 

Get rid of the competitive balance picks and all other little equalizer things and instead only let the "small market" teams sell ad space on jerseys. That's your economic equalizer.

 

Then the draft is fair again and only teams like the Cardinals get uglier on camera

[Jimcanuck]

Here is a great idea:

 

Get rid of the competitive balance picks and all other little equalizer things and instead only let the "small market" teams sell ad space on jerseys. That's your economic equalizer.

 

Then the draft is fair again and only teams like the Cardinals get uglier on camera

 

Less revenue, never happen

[Dick_Pole]

RE: Pitching wins

 

I know this rant will come out of nowhere but I got into it with some dumbass Fangraphs/Savant zombie who thinks he's smart enough to be a baseball stat gatekeeper. I know similar sentiment is shared by some on here so I'll blast my opinion here too.

 

Of course, pitching wins is not a very useful stat to evaluate a pitcher going forward for the next year. Except maybe durability since you have to be able to go late innings when it matters to rack up a lot of wins. But it is a stat to look back at as a baseball fan and appreciate. It's a stat that should never be eliminated. Over the long term, it most definitely can be used as a stat to evaluate a pitcher. The perfect example is Roy Halladay. He went 148-76 on a team that was .500 for his time with the Jays. You know he was a damn good pitcher just from that.

 

If some pitcher goes 20-5 with a 6 WAR, I see no great crime if he wins the Cy Young over some other pitcher that went 15-10 with a 7 WAR. They both had great seasons deserving of consideration. The pitcher with 20 wins had a slightly more memorable season because he did something that not a lot of pitchers do nowadays. Did he get luckier than the other guy? Yeah probably. Is society a perfect meritocracy or do people get awarded over others due to more luck in absolutely every other facet of life? Definitely the latter.

 

The issue I take with the obsession over advanced stats and the condemnation of old school stats like pitcher wins and RBI is that advanced stats try to peel away luck and team mates to try determine an individual's worth. In a sport that is inherently lucky and team-based. Advanced stats obviously do have their place in projections or trades or salary determination. Old school stats shouldn't be completely abandoned though. And just because someone appreciates or values those stats doesn't make them dumb.

[BTS]

RE: Pitching wins

 

I know this rant will come out of nowhere but I got into it with some dumbass Fangraphs/Savant zombie who thinks he's smart enough to be a baseball stat gatekeeper. I know similar sentiment is shared by some on here so I'll blast my opinion here too.

 

Of course, pitching wins is not a very useful stat to evaluate a pitcher going forward for the next year. Except maybe durability since you have to be able to go late innings when it matters to rack up a lot of wins. But it is a stat to look back at as a baseball fan and appreciate. It's a stat that should never be eliminated. Over the long term, it most definitely can be used as a stat to evaluate a pitcher. The perfect example is Roy Halladay. He went 148-76 on a team that was .500 for his time with the Jays. You know he was a damn good pitcher just from that.

 

If some pitcher goes 20-5 with a 6 WAR, I see no great crime if he wins the Cy Young over some other pitcher that went 15-10 with a 7 WAR. They both had great seasons deserving of consideration. The pitcher with 20 wins had a slightly more memorable season because he did something that not a lot of pitchers do nowadays. Did he get luckier than the other guy? Yeah probably. Is society a perfect meritocracy or do people get awarded over others due to more luck in absolutely every other facet of life? Definitely the latter.

 

The issue I take with the obsession over advanced stats and the condemnation of old school stats like pitcher wins and RBI is that advanced stats try to peel away luck and team mates to try determine an individual's worth. In a sport that is inherently lucky and team-based. Advanced stats obviously do have their place in projections or trades or salary determination. Old school stats shouldn't be completely abandoned though. And just because someone appreciates or values those stats doesn't make them dumb.

 

None of this is unreasonable or contentious. I'll always like seeing 100 RBI or R on a player's final line for the season. Counting stats are fun.

[jaysblue]

Chad Kuhl to Washington on a MiLB deal. If he's fully recovered, probably wins a spot in their rotation.

[jaysblue]

RE: Pitching wins

 

I know this rant will come out of nowhere but I got into it with some dumbass Fangraphs/Savant zombie who thinks he's smart enough to be a baseball stat gatekeeper. I know similar sentiment is shared by some on here so I'll blast my opinion here too.

 

Of course, pitching wins is not a very useful stat to evaluate a pitcher going forward for the next year. Except maybe durability since you have to be able to go late innings when it matters to rack up a lot of wins. But it is a stat to look back at as a baseball fan and appreciate. It's a stat that should never be eliminated. Over the long term, it most definitely can be used as a stat to evaluate a pitcher. The perfect example is Roy Halladay. He went 148-76 on a team that was .500 for his time with the Jays. You know he was a damn good pitcher just from that.

 

If some pitcher goes 20-5 with a 6 WAR, I see no great crime if he wins the Cy Young over some other pitcher that went 15-10 with a 7 WAR. They both had great seasons deserving of consideration. The pitcher with 20 wins had a slightly more memorable season because he did something that not a lot of pitchers do nowadays. Did he get luckier than the other guy? Yeah probably. Is society a perfect meritocracy or do people get awarded over others due to more luck in absolutely every other facet of life? Definitely the latter.

 

The issue I take with the obsession over advanced stats and the condemnation of old school stats like pitcher wins and RBI is that advanced stats try to peel away luck and team mates to try determine an individual's worth. In a sport that is inherently lucky and team-based. Advanced stats obviously do have their place in projections or trades or salary determination. Old school stats shouldn't be completely abandoned though. And just because someone appreciates or values those stats doesn't make them dumb.

 

Yeah exactly, in my view have to look at the whole picture. Just not one stat and think its the be-all and end-all. That includes advanced stats as well.

 

There is nothing wrong with looking at pitcher wins when evaluating a starting pitcher. It shouldn't be the only stat to look at obviously, though it can be useful like you said. Someone like Halladay, who pitched on a .500 Blue Jays team most of the time, his pitching wins definitely help show how he was an amazing pitcher, pitching deep into games like 7 to 8 innings each time out or even throwing complete games. You don't see that anymore from arms today. Game has definitely changed where elite starters only pitch into the 6th or 7th and the bullpen closes out the game.

 

I guess a lot of baseball nerds take issue when someone casual says "How many wins can this pitcher get?" or "He won 15 games last season, he's really good." There are people like that haha.

 

Halladay was never a huge strikeout pitcher. Career 6.93 K/9. So if you just looked for a high K rate, you probably wouldn't think Doc was one of the best pitchers. Lets say if we compared Halladay in 2003 to lets say an arm like Spencer Strider today, I bet most would say Spencer Strider is a way better arm. But again, shows you not just to look at high K/9 as an only stat to evaluate a pitcher.

[connorp]

Yeah MVP and CY Young are for what happens on the field and a little bit lesser, in the standings. It’s not meant to mean who the best player in a vacuum is. Though many times it goes hand-in-hand

[jaysblue]

None of this is unreasonable or contentious. I'll always like seeing 100 RBI or R on a player's final line for the season. Counting stats are fun.

 

Yeah it's fun seeing a player reach a certain milestone in those stats or to put up some crazy video game numbers in certain categories when the final day of the season rolls around.

[TheHurl]

None of this is unreasonable or contentious. I'll always like seeing 100 RBI or R on a player's final line for the season. Counting stats are fun.

 

Agreed. In most cases there is still a solid correlation between the top hitters by advanced stats and counting stats. Guys like Trea Turner show how better lineups, better spots in the order (and a DH in the NL) can change an RBI situation. Arguably a better season in 2021 than 2022 (142 wRC+ vs. 128) but 23 extra RBI's last year. But both are still great seasons and the extra RBI's make 2022 a little sexier.

 

If you really want to get into a fun old school vs. advanced stats conversation, bring up Dante Bichette 1999.

[The Cats Ass]

2005 Cy Young Award. Bartolo colon and his 21 Wins had no right winning. Johan Santana(16 Wins) topped him in every single other stat.

[Laika]

Bartolo deserved it

 

Santana had 139 career wins and didn't even pitch after 33

 

Bart had almost 250 wins and pitched 146 innings at 45 years old

 

I think the voters in 2005 could just SMELL the incoming greatness from Bartolo

[Brownie19]

Agreed. In most cases there is still a solid correlation between the top hitters by advanced stats and counting stats. Guys like Trea Turner show how better lineups, better spots in the order (and a DH in the NL) can change an RBI situation. Arguably a better season in 2021 than 2022 (142 wRC+ vs. 128) but 23 extra RBI's last year. But both are still great seasons and the extra RBI's make 2022 a little sexier.

 

If you really want to get into a fun old school vs. advanced stats conversation, bring up Dante Bichette 1999.

 

Oh god, this was highlighted by MLB or TSN or something on Facebook last week. Comments just full of people who've seemingly been bottling up their rage to let everyone know "ThAt'S whY WAR iSn'T A ReeeeL sTaT" and "NErdS hAvE RUiNEd BaSEBaLl"

 

I mean this shouldn't be complicated. When evaluating players, you should look at all the information/stats; however, some of the more advanced stats deserve a little more weight and if you need a very quick, high level analysis/comparison - you should use WAR.

[John_Havok]

Pitcher wins "may" be an idicator that a pitcher is good, and lets be honest, generally the more wins you have, the more skill you have as a pitcher, but it lacks precision and context. It's just a weird thing to award to a single player in a team sport like baseball. it makes only marginally more sense in hockey.

 

It's like looking at batting average, it's a very easy stat to look at and say "oh he hits over .300 therefore he must be a great hitter"... when they guy hits .310/.320/.350 and cant hit his way out of a paper bag, vs the next guy who hits .270/.350/.500 is obviously a far better hitter. It's just a stat that lacks precision and context.

[jaysblue]

2005 Cy Young Award. Bartolo colon and his 21 Wins had no right winning. Johan Santana(16 Wins) topped him in every single other stat.

 

Roy Halladay would have won the 2005 Cy Young if it wasn't for Kevin Mench.

[The Cats Ass]

Bartolo deserved it

 

Santana had 139 career wins and didn't even pitch after 33

 

Bart had almost 250 wins and pitched 146 innings at 45 years old

 

I think the voters in 2005 could just SMELL the incoming greatness from Bartolo

 

That's the Mets fault, they broke him.

[jaysblue]

Pitcher wins "may" be an idicator that a pitcher is good, and lets be honest, generally the more wins you have, the more skill you have as a pitcher, but it lacks precision and context. It's just a weird thing to award to a single player in a team sport like baseball. it makes only marginally more sense in hockey.

 

It's like looking at batting average, it's a very easy stat to look at and say "oh he hits over .300 therefore he must be a great hitter"... when they guy hits .310/.320/.350 and cant hit his way out of a paper bag, vs the next guy who hits .270/.350/.500 is obviously a far better hitter. It's just a stat that lacks precision and context.

 

I think what you said really applies to casual fans. They're the ones mostly using Pitcher Wins, batting average and RBI as the only indicators. You might have some fans this season at the Dome or call in on Jays Talk complaining Varsho is only hitting .240 and that he's awful.

[Laika]

That's the Mets fault, they broke him.

 

And then Bartolo took his rotation spot

 

all one big conspiracy?

[jaysblue]

Also, is there really a big difference between a .300 hitter vs. someone who hits .240-.250? It's like an extra 5 or so hits per month/per 100AB.

 

Obviously, you want that .250 hitter contributing in other areas like getting on-base at a high clip, hit for power, good baserunner, good defensively etc.

[Brownie19]

I think what you said really applies to casual fans. They're the ones mostly using Pitcher Wins, batting average and RBI as the only indicators. You might have some fans this season at the Dome or call in on Jays Talk complaining Varsho is only hitting .240 and that he's awful.

 

Unpopular opinion, but this is why I used to be a Wilner supporter. Fielding calls from angry neck breathing causal fans who know next to nothing about baseball is brutal. He could have just gone along with their outdated views - but I think more often than not, he tried to help educate fans by explaining that hitting .240 doesn't mean Varsho is a s***** hitter or that Gausman's 12-10 season doesn't necessarily mean he's underperformed.

 

That said - he often came off as condescending - but most days, the collective IQ of the callers was like -4, so f***'em.

[John_Havok]

Also, is there really a big difference between a .300 hitter vs. someone who hits .240-.250? It's like an extra 5 or so hits per month/per 100AB.

 

Obviously, you want that .250 hitter contributing in other areas like getting on-base at a high clip, hit for power, good baserunner, good defensively etc.

 

Yeah, that old rant from Crash Davis in Bull Durham rings true. over 600 PAs (only like 13 players had more than 600 At bats last season, so just using it as a reference point) , the difference between .250 and .300 is 30 hits if we assume walk rates and the other stuff that dont count as At bats are about the same.

 

.250 avg = 150 hits, 1.08 hits per game assuming all 162 games are played

300 avg = 180 hits, 1.11 hits per game assuming all 162 games are played.

 

Baseball season is 26.3 weeks this year... basically 1 extra hit per week.

 

Doesnt seem to be a huge skill gap does it.

Edited February 6, 2023 by John_Havok

[connorp]

Yeah, that old rant from Crash Davis in Bull Durham rings true. over 600 PAs (only like 13 players had more than 600 At bats last season, so just using it as a reference point) , the difference between .250 and .300 is 30 hits if we assume walk rates and the other stuff that dont count as At bats are about the same).

 

.250 avg = 150 hits, 1.08 hits per game assuming all 162 games are played

300 avg = 180 hits, 1.11 hits per game assuming all 162 games are played.

 

Baseball season is 26.3 weeks this year... basically 1 extra hit per week.

 

Doesnt seem to be a huge skill gap does it.

 

That’s sports, man.

Think about the sports where 1/10 of a second means something significant lol. Not only racing but like a football player that runs a 4.2 40 rather than a 4.6. Huge diff is value if all other things are the same