metafour

"Bad luck" yo.

97 mph Sanchez fastball misses down the middle to Texeira, all he can do is foul it back. That is the buffer zone that certain pitchers have over others.

What my numbers support is the fact that Sanchez has a significantly better fastball, hence why for him "missing his spots" is nowhere near as detrimental as it would be to someone like Hutchison. Its like having a 10-inch dick. Even if you have no idea WTF you're doing, you'll still impress.

Sanchez can get away with it, because he's really really lucky.... ... ... ... ... ... J/K, he can get away with it because the primary fastball comparison is as follows: Sanchez: 95.32 mph, -9.51 inches horizontal movement (in towards RHB) .233 BAA, .331 SLG, 0.098 ISO, .252 BABIP Hutchison: 93.15 mph, -4.40 inches horizontal movement (in towards RHB) .280 BAA, .466 SLG, .0.186 ISO, .329 BABIP http://www.bluejaysplus.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/SanchezApr22K.gif

I remember my first time reading Moneyball....

Its common sense, but hard for statistics to quantify. What is more hittable? A ~92mph meatball hanging up in the zone (Hutchison) or a 96mph heavy sinking ball (Sanchez)? Even if Sanchez misses with his fastball down the middle of the plate, the pitch is harder to hit well. Well hit balls are more likely to actually result in hits, are they not? FIP tries to categorize every ball put in play as equal when the reality of the situation is that good pitches are obviously going to produce worse contact, which will lead to more outs. It is why regardless of strikeouts, the best pitchers in the league always give up less hits than the worst pitchers, year in and year out. Hutchison actually strikes more guys out than Stroman did last season, yet he gives up way more hits and ultimately more runs. Its not because Stroman is "more lucky" on balls put in play, its because Huthison throws way more poor pitches due to his poor command, and those poor pitches get hit. All it takes is ONE poor pitch in an at bat for a hit to occur. Hutchison strikes guys out because he generally has good stuff; but in the real world it doesn't matter if he throws two perfect pitches which result in swinging strikes, if he then follows that up with a horrendous pitch that is lined for a double. That is why FIP thinks that he's a "good" pitcher: it has no way of accounting for his inconsistency from pitch to pitch.

This is why teams still have heavy scouting departments and don't just employ a bunch of stat nerds. The game of baseball isn't played in a computer simulated environment. The problem is that FIP has zero ability to recognize the quality of a pitcher's stuff coming out of his hand; which is why "fielder independent pitching" is flawed. A guy who constantly hangs flat fastballs up over the heart of the plate will give up hits. The idea that a pitcher has zero control over balls put in play is erroneous: good pitches, even if they are hit, are far less likely to actually land as hits than poor pitches. FIP has no way of accounting for this. Its comical that FIP actually rates Estrada and Hutchison as essentially equal this season. Actually watching the game paints a much different picture.

Jays President?

Does a real man also not understand the difference between your and you're?

Volquez needs to spend more time worrying about his hairline than he does about what other players are doing on the field.

"Nobody wants Alberto Tirado" - Said like 4 days ago.

He hasn't really been throwing incredibly hard for a while now. He's low 90's, touching mid 90's right now as he appears to have dialed it back in order to improve control.

It would be up to the area scout and scouting staff to get him signed. AA really isn't negotiating with any 3rd round pick.

...which is exactly why trading him would be an absolutely retarded idea. BRB draft him Top 10, sell him a year later for terrible return when he hasn't played a single game.

We have beat lots of good pitchers this year. "Good/great" pitchers are typically going to beat most teams, otherwise they wouldn't be "good/great". You don't rock a ~2-3 ERA and pitch 6-7+ innings a start if you're getting beat around on a consistent basis.

It was Goins. Why would Travis be fielding a relay at the shortstop position?

Yup. Terrible throw by Goins.

Well, according to FIP, its just bad luck. Those meatballs right over the plate are just unluckily being hit to positions of the field that the fielders cant reach.

"None of the shows you listed are particularly good, but I probably haven't seen half the shows you listed".

Then why are you even commentating?

Arrested Development was the best comedy series in god knows how many years.

Was this trade made for 3-4 years into the future? When you make a deal under the notion that it is to improve your team NOW, and it does exactly that (to a degree even greater than you expected), worrying about what happens 3-4 years into the future is stupid. As long as you scout and draft players well, those minor league pieces are replaceable. 3-4 years from now we may have prospects even better than Barreto, at which point are you going to be crying that he was dealt for a 7+ WAR third baseman? If you want to argue semantics, theoretically we could actually trade Donaldson now for even more than what we gave up for him. Why? Because he's actually gotten better, and while I'm sure that when we acquired him there still might have been some doubt around the league that he was "playing over his head", his season this year likely cemented the notion the he is in fact a true superstar player on a hilariously team friendly contract. The point? Not only are we "winning" this trade NOW (Donaldson's value greatly outclasses the value produced by what we gave up), we could very realistically move him for assets that are "expected" to outproduce the package that we gave up for him. Under that scenario, we'd be winning in the "future" as well (as long as those said players actually produced at/near expectation). That is even looking past the fact that Donaldson in "3-4 years" could still easily be outproducing what we gave up for him by himself. Trying to paint this trade in any sort of negative light is flat out stretching to find some sort wart. You can find a "wart" in any good situation if you dig deep enough. You won the lottery? Maybe you get so caught up in your new lifestyle that you die of a cocaine overdose which was fueled by your new-found wealth, I guess winning the lottery wasn't so good after all?

I fail to see how it is a good trade for the A's. They had no reason to trade Donaldson, an MVP caliber player making peanuts. Just another example of crazy old Billy Beane overreacting. Given Donaldson's contractual standing, I don't even think they got enough in return.

By the way; I wouldn't beat your chest about Lawrie "proving us all wrong". His ISO power is down, his BB rate is down, his strikeout rate is way up, and even his defense is down. The only thing different is that his jump up to a .290 BA is being fueled by a ridiculous .379 BABIP. It is infinitely more likely that he reverts back to hitting like s*** in the future than it is that Donaldson suddenly falls off a cliff. He's literally striking out 8-10% more this season than he ever did in Toronto.