I'm certainly not going to disagree that acceleration is not really important but I don't think we should be discounting the ability to hit HRs either. Long TD runs are big Win Probability movers and are hugely valuable in their own right.
Ruben Amaro - Bad at everything, including drafting players.
http://tangotiger.com/index.php/site/comments/rise-and-fall-of-the-phillies-draft-empire?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed
Just back from my look beyond the stats. Here's my report:
Found a fat, lazy no-D guy who just got shipped to the worst park possible for his skill set.
Doesn't look good.
Would not acquire.
So are we all supposed to forget Brian Murray is terrible at his job because he's sick?
Why is he allowed to be working btw? He looks really, really ill.
Not that it matters for FIP but does his BABIP really only regress to 0.284? He only has 252 career innings and those were all in a different role (more uncertainty, more rttm typically).
For some reason I see the BB rate going up. Probably bc he'd have less dominant velo and might start nibbling a bit more. Not that you need to nibble too much when you're sitting 96.
Or maybe he becomes more comfortable as a starter as he gets into it. Point is, we don't know either way so there's no sense speculating.
I would take the over on a 2.51 FIP though.
Because it's a 7 game series and it's really just a crap shoot.
And, even though it's beside the point, they're nowhere near similar to Schilling/Johnson (2000-2002).
Your thinking is flawed.
You shouldn't be looking at World Series winners and trying to find common traits among them. That injects a destructive amount of selection bias and you lose a ton of information. Your line of reasoning follows very closely with that of Jim Collins' business books (Built to Last, Good to Great etc) which are among the worst pieces of non-fiction ever published and widely consumed.
Meh, it's a pretty understandable, tiny error on your part. The way you describe the situation is how it worked for a long, long time and I'm sure some books still operate in exactly that fashion.
That's not really true anymore. Modern books often will take a position that is not 100% market neutral because their models tell them there's a better way to maximize growth (within a certain risk tolerance).