Sep
10

Open Thread: The roster, restored

By

It always makes for a dull night when the Yankees are off, but having a day off with a nine game lead sure beats the alternative. Anyway, Matthew Pouliet at NBC Sports is running a series where he takes a look at what roster a team could field if you could only use players the club originally signed. Sorry that it’s from last weekend, we kind of pulled a LaRussa and fell asleep at the wheel on this one. Here’s the team the Yanks could field:

Rotation: Andy Pettitte, Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughes, Chien-Ming Wang, Jose Contreras

Bullpen: Mariano Rivera, Russ Springer, Phil Coke, Tyler Clippard, Manny Acosta, David Robertson, Jeff Karstens

Lineup: SS Derek Jeter, 1B Nick Johnson, C Jorge Posada, DH Hideki Matsui, LF Alfonso Soriano, 2B Robinson Cano, RF Juan Rivera, 3B Mike Lowell, CF Melky Cabrera

Bench: INF Cristian Guzman, OF Brett Gardner, OF Marcus Thames, C Dioner Navarro

Obviously the lineup is pretty damn good, and if nothing else the pitching staff has some promise. I guess there’s no room for Brad Ausmus, though. It’s pretty amazing that most of the pitching staff is made up of guys who came through the system pretty recently. It just goes to show that you can spend all the money in the world on pitching, but you still need to develop some of your own to contend.

* * *

Here’s your open thread for the off night. The Mets play the Fish at 7pm, but more importantly, my domination of the RAB Fantasy Football League starts tonight. The Steelers and Titans kick off the 2009 NFL Season tonight in Steeltown, so your days are numbered, tsjc. Anything goes here, just be cool.

Categories : Open Thread

447 Comments»

  1. Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

    That’s a damn good team.

  2. So apparently my blog was on Sportscenter this morning. I haven’t been able to confirm this myself, but I’m pretty stoked anyway.

  3. J.R. says:

    Mike any thoughts of bringing back the RAb radio show? Maybe just in the offseason?

  4. Andy In Sunny Daytona says:

    Steelers magic number for clinching their division is 9.

  5. I hate nights without baseball.

  6. Mike Axisa says:

    Can you see V-Tek retiring at the end of this year? I hate to say it, but I feel that Martinez is the better player.
    – Moss R., New Orleans

    That comes from the Ian Browne mailbag I linked to at MLBTR earlier. I laughed.

  7. countryclub says:

    Steelers, baby!

  8. Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

    Fantasy football here…should I start Braylon Edwards or Greg Jennings? Jennings is the superior player, but Braylon is playing the Vikings defense, which ranks worset in the league against the pass.

    Ideas?

  9. Since this is an open thread–I’m doing a live chat on my blog–Mike Ashmore is joining, too. we’re starting at 8 and going till kick off if you’re interested.

    Could be fun =)

  10. Mike Pop says:

    Man, alex gonzalez gets it bad for every comment he makes. Lol @ that.

    Every time this dude makes a comment, there’s like 5 or 6 replies within a minute.

  11. Steve H says:

    So alex gonzalez, I never got your answer from last night. In another attempt to show the uselessness of judging a pitcher based on wins and losses, please tell me which of these pitchers went 19-7, and which went 10-13, in the same league, same year.

    Pitcher #1
    ERA IP SO WHIP H/9 HR/9 BB/9 SO/9 SO/BB
    4.35 182.0 94 1.445 8.3 1.4 4.7 4.6 0.99

    Pitcher #2
    ERA IP SO WHIP H/9 HR/9 BB/9 SO/9 SO/BB
    4.36 169.1 91 1.506 9.9 1.0 3.6 4.8 1.34

    • Mike Axisa says:

      I’m guessing pitcher #1 went 19-7. I’m just basing that on the IP though.

    • alex gonzalez says:

      what decade are we talking about, then i will tell you. its a lot different if we are talking pitchers in the 80′s or 00′s.

      • Steve H says:

        Really, two almost identical pitching lines from the same season, and you think there would be a difference in W/L record due to the era????? Before I tell you, please tell me what difference it makes which decade this was in. Remember, they were the same year, same league.

        • alex gonzalez says:

          it makes a huge difference, teams were a lot different between eras in makeup.

          • Steve H says:

            It makes no difference as these two seasons both happened in THE SAME YEAR. Whichever one you choose will be a 100% guess, there is nothing in those statistics that can help you determine. I will tell you, not that it matters, that it was during the 1980′s.

            • Steve H says:

              Ok, 2 more minutes for you to search thru some 1980′s pitching statistics trying to get the answer until I post it.

            • alex gonzalez says:

              not true at all, era is extremely important in how pitchers were built and how they performed. wins are critical to a pitcher being good. i would bet that pitcher #2 was the one who won the most games, but i also bet based on the numbers that he wasn’t very good after that year.

              • Steve H says:

                Ok, why do you think #2 won more games? What in his statistics would give that away? Mike, in his educated guess, guessed pitcher #1 because he pitched more innings. What leads you to believe it’s pitching #2. Obviously you are just guessing, but please enlighten me if there was any analysis used, or was just a guess.

                • alex gonzalez says:

                  look at his strikeout per walks, then the low innings i bet are because he started to suck later on as his career went on. probably never a pitching horse. pitcher 2 let more people on base, but knew how to get them out. pitcher 1 probably just let them on and couldn’t get outs when critical. so who are they and what were there records.

                • What does his career have to do with one year?

                • alex gonzalez says:

                  if a guy goes 50 Ip over the course of a year, sometimes things wont look good for him in the future. just a guess, just tell me who they are. i made my prediction.

                • But we’re not talking about how he did for his career. We’re talking about how he did in one year.

                • Steve H says:

                  Yes, you made your “prediction” without any reasonable basis. That is fine, because there was no reasonable basis to guess who won more games, because the pitching lines were almost identical.

                  In 1989 Charlie Hough went 10-13, while Storm Davis went 19-7 despite pitching at and almost identical performance level. If Hough pitched for the 1st place A’s, and Davis pitched for the 4th place Rangers, their W/L records would have been flipped.

                • alex gonzalez says:

                  no, storm davis was better then charlie hough. who are these guys? bunch of nobodies? you have to be able to pitch to scores and get wins when it matters. storm davis obviously knew how to do that.

                • Steve H says:

                  And your theory about which pitcher pitched better and worse with runners on base? With RISP Hough held batters to a .191/.342/.229 line. Davis was .269/.344/.375.

                • What were the run support numbers?

                • Steve H says:

                  Storm Davis had a better record than Charlie Hough because he pitched for a dominating, WS winning team.

                  He did not pitch better than Charlie Hough.

                • alex gonzalez says:

                  its not all about RISP. its about when they let hits with runners in scoring position.

                • Steve H says:

                  Storm Davis 5.61 runs per game run support.

                  Charlie Hough 3.97 runs per game run support.

                  Ding ding ding!!!!

                • alex gonzalez says:

                  well i think the records speak for themselves. this was a fun game though.

                • No, they don’t. The records speak to luck and the team who had a better offense.

                • alex gonzalez says:

                  we will just have to agree to disagree. i know that is what you think, but it is wrong. this was still a fun time though. even without the understanding of just how important wins are to a pitcher.

                • Former RAB Lurker says:

                  Guys, was alex right? I don’t want to look up the records because it’s 3 AM where I am, but if he was right you might as well admit it and maybe accept that he has a point. You disagree with him, but if he proved you wrong he proved you wrong, simple as that.

                • alex gonzalez says:

                  they already answered that. i was indeed correct with my prediction.

              • Steve H says:

                Oh, and pitcher #2 wasn’t any good that year either.

    • Rocky Road Redemption (formerly RAB poster) says:

      Actually wins/losses don’t mean NOTHING…if you’re really high in either one that, with exceptions is indicative of at least being above or below average. It’s also indicative, normally, of lots of innings pitched (if you have lots of wins).

  12. Mike Pop says:

    Bobby Parnell is begging to go back in that pen.

    I’m a fan of Parnell though.

  13. Drew says:

    Are you readyy for some football!!??

    Shit I can’t believe football is already here.

  14. Someone just called Nadal a “grinder”. That really has been ESPN’s buzzword this whole calender year.

  15. Steve H says:

    Another great knocking of W/L as a good indicator of how well someone is pitching. Anthony Young went 1-16 with a 107 ERA+. For his career, his ERA+ was 100, yet he was 15-48.

    • JobaWockeeZ says:

      1-16? He sucks. If you are good then you’re offense will be good so you’ll be a good pitcher. ERA is too complicated. Wins and losses are the only things that matter when evaluating a pitcher’s success.

    • Accent Shallow says:

      I dunno, as a reliever in 1993, he allowed the following line: .291/.379/.392, compared to a league average of: .264/.327/.399. So he was walked and singled to death, rather than being a home run dispenser. That’s not particularly stellar.

      (Of course, that doesn’t mean he deserved to lose 16 games. That’s the Mets’ fault for deploying him as they did. He only had one really good appearance over that become a loss, an 8 inning complete game where he allowed 3 hits and 2 runs. The Mets were shut out)

      • Steve H says:

        Yes he was bad. But while looking his triple slash line may be a great indicator for future performance, but in looking a single year, his era was better than league average and he was 1-16. So even if singled to death, he wasn’t giving up runs at a high pace. Even his FIP was a respectable 4.07.

  16. Dela G says:

    Hey you guys, help a brotha out. I am about to take a girl to the movies tonight, but i don’t know what’s good. The only thing i will say no to is final destination.

    thanks

  17. Drew says:

    Okay, now that shitty music hour is over, time for some football.

    Nothing gets me more pumped than black eyed peas and country music!!!

  18. Mike Axisa says:

    I never realize how much I miss football until I watch a meaningful game. Same thing with every sport, year after year.

  19. Drew says:

    Did you guys like Madden? I loved him, I thought it should be a rule that he was in the superbowl booth.

    Obviously he lost a couple ticks off the ol’ fastball as he got older, but I could always listen to him. BOOM!

  20. pat says:

    Harry Connick Jr. pride of Nawlins!

  21. VO says:

    Hey guys, first time playing fantasy football. I should also put in that I didn’t know I could only spend up to 200 points in the draft. I just finished picking up some players rated high on SI’s list (Although for the most part their own% on ESPN is very low), how bad is it?

    QB Drew Brees
    RB Michael Turner
    RB Clinton Portis
    RB/WR Leon Washington
    WR Lary Fitzgerald
    WR Nate Washington
    TE Kevin Boss
    D/ST Dolphins
    K Lawrence Tynes

    Bench
    QB Trent Edwards
    RB TJ Duckett
    RB Justin Fargas
    WR Mushin Muhammad
    WR Michael Crabtree
    TE Anthony Fasano
    D/ST Chargers

  22. Drew says:

    Conick jr ftw. That was a good one.

  23. Got some great stuff from Ashmore in my chat tonight. Check it out if you’re interested. Don’t if you’re not.

  24. pat says:

    O god, back to the stress of rooting for specific players during games I don’t care about.

  25. The Artist says:

    Biggest response today over at TYU today was the Wang question.

    Do you bring him back? Easy answer is ‘Yes’ but it would be a minor league deal and he possibly could get a MLB deal elsewhere. Yanks would have a much easier time cutting him loose if he’s signed to a minor league deal, he might not even break camp with the team.

    But the bigger question is where does he pitch? Here’s next year’s rotation:
    CC
    AJ
    Pettitte
    Joba
    Hughes

    I think the Yanks bring Andy back coming off this season. For 6th starter types, you have Aceves, IPK, maybe Mitre and Z-Mac as well. Do we really even need him? If you think he’s healthy, then yes. His upside is terrific. But I don’t think we’ll know one way or the other till the middle of next year.

    • Mike Pop says:

      Do we really even need him?

      Yeah. Depth is never a bad problem, I think you have to give him one more year. You also have Gaudin, but Wang is better than all those 6th starter types you listed. Also, with innings limit on Hughes, a possible Burnett or other SP injury. I bring him back if I’m Cash. But obviously, going about it is the hard part. Just try to work something out with him.

      • The Artist says:

        OK, I’ll make it a little harder then. Has to be a MLB deal (he has another offer) so you kill a roster spot for him, which means you will lose someone in the Rule 5 draft.

      • Accent Shallow says:

        Agree with this. If Wang can get back to what he was, he’s the second best starter in the rotation. If he can’t, he could still possibly be a solid back-end option, or in the pen.

        And while the 2010 rotation looks pretty solid even without him, it’s the old adage: “You can never have too much pitching.”

        • The Artist says:

          “If Wang can get back to what he was”

          That’s a big if, and we really won’t know until he gets back on a mound, which is mid next year.

          Considering the timing of it, is there really any rush? Is anyone going to sign him before next year, knowing he won’t be ready till July? You would think teams will take the Freddy Gardcia/Ben Sheets approach, and wait to see him back on a mound.

          • Accent Shallow says:

            True, I’d just rather him have his rehab work under the Yankees umbrella, where they can control what he’s doing, rather than Wang just doing his thing.

      • JobaWockeeZ says:

        Right. I know we all don’t want a Mitreish guy pitching due to injuries and/or wasting resources so I’d like as much pitchers that can pitch effectively as possible.

        Not saying Wang is automatically coming back to form but he has a chance. And if he becomes ownage Wang then that would be helpful.

        or Mo forbid they stick him in the bullpen…

  26. Charlie says:

    fuck roy oswalt. i can’t believe i had him in my lineup today for fantasy. how the hell can you even give up that many hites?

  27. alez gonzalez here is one for you.

    W L W-L% ERA G GS CG SHO IP H R ER HR BB IBB SO

    12 11 .522 3.22 28 28 6 2 192.2 182 83 69 17 44 3 172

    19 6 .760 3.63 34 33 2 1 218.0 233 92 88 12 52 4 76

    Which pitcher would you rather have?

    • alex gonzalez says:

      are they the same year? if so, for that year the guy who won 19 games. long term though i bet the guy who won 12 games will improve. i like the strikeouts that he has. much more dominate where he may turn into a better game winner than pitcher 2.

      • Steve H says:

        You almost get it, and then you don’t. The guy who won 12 games was better that year, he’s no more likely to improve his pitching performance than anyone else , but his win total likely will improve. His performance could be exactly identical the next year and he could go 19-6. That doesn’t mean he pitched any better, simply had more luck, better team around him, more run support, better bullpen, etc.

      • Same year.

        Don’t you see how arbitrary wins and loses are? You would choose the guy with more wins, Pitcher 2, even though his stats are worse. If you put Pitcher 1 on the same team, odds are that he puts up a better win/loss record than Pitcher 2.

        Pitcher 1 by the way had a 140 ERA+, Pitcher 1, 126 ERA+.

        • alex gonzalez says:

          who are they? wins are not arbitrary, they have a lot to do with how the pitchers pitch in certain situations. you gotta pitch to scores and know how to rally your team behind you.

          • Zack says:

            you cant be serious

          • JobaWockeeZ says:

            So what if your bullpen or offense fucks it up for you? Is that the pitcher’s fault for not going for the perfect game?

          • Steve H says:

            “rally your team behind you”

            So did the 12-11 pitcher become a better rallyer when his record improved to 19-7 the next year?

            Seriously, that’s your argument?!?!?!

            • alex gonzalez says:

              some years pitchers now how to win, others that don’t make the right moves. a lot also has to with the catcher. a good defensive catcher can often help a pitcher to be better. the only thing i see different between two pitchers with similar stats is wins. the guy who gets more wins was more valuable to his team. forget about what all there fancy stats look like. at the end of the day it is about taking the ball and getting wins. even if that means you gotta get your offense a spark. you pitch well they do well, you pitch bad they pick up. it is all about chemistry.

              • Steve H says:

                So CC knew how to win as a 20 year old rookie but not as a 5 year veteran?

                • Mike Pop says:

                  I dunno why you keep going with this guy.

                  He won’t admit he’s wrong.

                • alex gonzalez says:

                  he knew how to win that year with that chemistry. then he clearly didn’t do as well pitching to scores and keeping runners from scoring. that is why the later season he didn’t get as many wins. it goes beyond age. some seasons a pitcher knows how to maintain leads and get his offense behind him, other years he just isn’t a winner. the fewer wins in a year the worse you are. that is why i believe cy young awards should be completely based on wins. that is the most value to teams. who cares about strikeouts or innings. just go out there and avoid a loss and get a wins.

                • alex gonzalez says:

                  i will admit i am wrong. only if that is true.

                • Steve H says:

                  Ok. I give up. No mas.

                • It’s not about chemistry though. His team scored more runs. That isn’t due to chemistry.

                • Mike Pop says:

                  i will admit i am wrong. only if that is true.

                  My man, you’re wrong. You’re saying a pitcher needs to will his team to win. This is just batshit insane. Jake Peavy on the Padres could of tried as hard to motivate or ‘willed’ his team to win as motherfuckin’ Vincente Padilla on the Rangers. Do they have magic powers? Is Chase Headley going to hit that Lincecum breaking ball for a hr @ Petco just as easily as Ian Kinsler would off Sean Gallagher on the A’s?

                  This shit is just batshit insane.

                  Peavy: Hey Chase, hit that home run for me team player. I’d love ya for it. I know Lincecum has struck you out twice on 6 pitches but I know if I say this, it might help you hit that 2-run homer I need.

              • For lack of a more creative name... Alex says:

                So Scott Feldman with his 16 wins> over Tim Lincecum with his 13 wins?

              • JobaWockeeZ says:

                Wow. I give up after this.
                How the hell do pitchers not know how to fucking win IF THE OFFENSE IS A HUGE PART WHETHER THE PITCHERS GETS A WIN OR NOT.

                These stats aren’t fancy at all. All you need is ERA for a crude deduction!

                As far as I know the catcher and the defense are not apart of pitching. The pitcher CANNOT control the defense or the offense. Even in the NL pitchers sucks at hitting.

                And I don’t know how chemistry links to this because chemistry is the most overrated thing that is not Jason Varitek. If a team wins a lot then the chemistry will be good.

                Wins do not define how talented a pitcher is. The pitcher is supposed to pitch not to rally his whole team so they can give him the win.

                • JobaWockeeZ says:

                  As far as I know the catcher and the defense are not apart of pitching.

                  And when I mean the catcher isn’t apart of pitching I mean he isn’t the one throwing the pitches.

        • Also, FWIW, Pitcher 1′s team did not make the playoffs that year. However, the next year, his team won the division.

          W L W-L% ERA G GS CG SHO IP H R ER HR BB IBB SO
          19 7 .731 3.21 34 34 4 1 241.0 238 94 86 20 37 1 209

          Oh, and his ERA+ was 143.

    • For lack of a more creative name... Alex says:

      19-6 is Wang of ’06 rite?

  28. Drew says:

    damn polamalu is good.

  29. Mike Axisa says:

    Troy Polamalu is out of his mind.

  30. Mike Pop says:

    Januz is probably getting pissed right about now.

  31. Mike bk says:

    scranton up 4-1 in the 9th. nova with an excellent outing.

  32. Accent Shallow says:

    Did any of you guys see this Was Watching post?

    http://waswatching.com/2009/09.....-in-draft/

    I don’t necessarily agree with Steve’s conclusions (that Cashman is a dope who should be fired), or Manuel’s initial comment that sparked the post, but the Yankees have spent a lot of money for very little return on those guys (up to this point. Any one of them could make Manuel look like he jumped the gun in 2010). As to whether that speaks to poor scouting/drafting, I suppose we’d have to look at the rates for the rest of the league. Still, ugly for the time being, no?

    • pat says:

      the Yankees have spent a lot of money for very little return on those guys (up to this point.Any one of them could make Manuel look like he jumped the gun in 2010

      He’s writing off kids that are in their early twenties. Sounds pretty stupid to me.

    • JMK says:

      I agree with what Pat said. Brackman fell to us because of medical and signability issues. I know people have pretty heated feelings toward Brackman but this is his first real year pitching full-time, and he’s healthy. That itself is an accomplishment and his potential is immense, even if his probability is small. It’s worth it, in my opinion. Let’s see what he does next year and the year after that and then make a determination (even though that may still be a bit early).

      As for some of the others, Angelini has been a huge disappointment thus far, no question. Still, he’s young. It’s not over yet (though next year might be his last). Betances has pitched well in the minors, overall, but he’s often injured. IPK cruised through the minors, and had a slip-up in the majors–tons of pitchers do that but doesn’t mean it’s a terrible pick or investment. And then he had a freakin’ aneurysm! No way to predict that. As for Suttle, it would be nice if he were healthy every now and then, but THIS HAPPENS TO ALL TEAMS. It’s a crap shoot; there are no crystal balls.

      Dumb article.

  33. Mike Pop says:

    Anyone notice how noMaas just skipped right over A.J.’s start. Funny thing.

  34. Steve H says:

    Here’s a good one. Randy Johnson once had a 4 game stretch with the following line:

    32 innings. 54 strikeouts. 1.41 ERA. 0.90 WHIP. .517 OPS against. 3 complete games.

    Would this be considered good pitching or bad pitching?

  35. Accent Shallow says:

    RAB Accountings Department:

    I apparently owe the Big Three of this site a drink. Whoops.

    http://riveraveblues.com/2008/.....nues-5321/

    (Of course, if Zambrano makes someone’s playoff roster and pulls a Jeff Suppan, all bets are off!)

  36. Colin says:

    Ted Lilly over Contreras all the way.

  37. Mike Pop says:

    Jennifer Aniston is a dime piece.

  38. Zack says:

    hey someone finally scored.

  39. Mike Pop says:

    Oh how I wish Corteland took that back.

  40. Mike Pop says:

    Madden 10 strikes !

    Polamalu was sidelined.

  41. alex gonzalez says:

    how many wins do the yankees finish with? I am going with 103.

  42. Chris says:

    Here’s a pitcher:

    3 games, 26IP, 0.35 ERA, 16H, 1 Win, 2 Losses

    I think that’s a pretty good 3 game stretch, even with the two loses.

    • For lack of a more creative name... Alex says:

      One would think that anyone who knows anything about baseball agrees with you but..
      “a pitcher who goes 6 IP and allows 6 runs and wins did a better job than a pitcher who goes 9 IP and allows 1 runs for the loss.” -according to Alex Gonzalez

    • alex gonzalez says:

      once again, it is all about winning. you gotta get wins that is what it is all about. that looks old, what is that from the 1930′s.

      • Mike Pop says:

        What if a guy has a 1.30 ERA for the entire season and has a 5-8 record?

        200 innings but he never got decisions, but the team won in the 10 of his 13 no decisions. Is that a good season?

        • alex gonzalez says:

          who did that?

          • Steve H says:

            Why would it matter who did it? If it happened, is it a good season. Simple yes or no question.

            • Here’s why it matters who did it:

              alex gonzalez is incapable of conceiving of the theoretical. Wins and losses are tangible and understandable. Theoretical seasons designed to test a hypothetical argument, like the argument of “Wins and Losses are the only things that matter”, well, those hypothetical seasons could potentially undermine that ridiculously stupid hypothetical argument.

              We can’t venture too far from the realm of the shit I believe in, because I might be proven to be an idiot. So I’m going to need to verify the realness of the datasets you give to me, mmmmmkay?

              • alex gonzalez says:

                i believe in teams getting wins. if a pitcher gets a win that means a team walks away with a win. if the pitcher loses that means the team loses. i dont think that wins are the only things that matter for a pitcher. i am just saying it shows who is a good pitcher. all i want are team wins. if that means pitchers getting the wins then they are doing there jobs. the offense still matters. there are three parts to baseball. offense defense and pitching. for all these things to be in synch is what matters. i just know that pitching wins show that a team won, and that is what i like. team wins is what counts.

                • There are clearly many things you believe. You have listed several of them on this board over the past few days.

                  All of them have been easily the dumbest things a person could possibly believe in. Your complete and total adherence to shockingly stupid positions is appaling. Nobody, and I mean nobody on the history of this board has ever entered with such a massive and total flourish of ineptitude better than you have, and that’s saying a lot.

                  You quite literally have no clue at all what you are talking about. None. You could roll Ben Kabak, Johnnie Cochran, Alan Dershowitz, William Jennings Bryan, Socrates, and Jesus all into one, and that mythical super-advocate would not be able to defend your position. He’d tell you to throw yourself on the mercy of the court.

                • Tom Zig says:

                  What if a guy goes 20-0 and has an 8.00 ERA and never makes it out of the 5th inning, ever, and has a 5.00 WHIP…

                  Is he good at pitching?

                • Tom Zig says:

                  Correction: Never goes more than 5 innings, ever

                • alex gonzalez says:

                  im still waiting to know who pitched with that low of an era

                • im still waiting to know who pitched with that low of an era

                  IT DOESN’T MATTER. It’s a philosophical question. It requires you to defend your theory in the abstract by using your philosophical imagination. Who did it or when it happened or if it even happened at all is immaterial.

                • alex gonzalez says:

                  so they don’t even exist? i dont understand the point then. find me someone that does exist.

                • Steve H says:

                  In 1992, Jim Abbot had a 2.77 ERA the fifth lowest among AL qualifiers that year, but he went 7-15 that year due to the 2.5 runs of run support he recieved while pitching.

                  In 2008, Jake Peavy, had a 2.85 ERA, good for sixth best in the majors but a sub .500 winning percentage, with a 10-11 record, because his run support of 3.5 runs per game was sixth-worst in the Majors.

                  In 2004, Shawn Estes had a 5.84 ERA and went 15-8 just because his offense produced 5.6 runs per game.

                  A pitchers win-loss record shouldn’t be used to justify that one pitcher is better than another, due to the variables that go into a win or a loss.

                  http://bleacherreport.com/arti.....misleading

                • find me someone that does exist.

                  No.

                  The idea, YOUR IDEA, that “Wins and Losses should be the only thing that really counts when evaluating whether or not a pitcher has done his job” is not a real thing that exists, it’s an abstract idea.

                  You should be able to defend that abstract idea by testing it with similarly abstract premises. You shouldn’t need real-world examples, even though dozens of such examples have been offered to you in this thread, to defend your abstract idea.

                • Steve H. is blowing me away with that Shawn Estes reference.

                • Estes went 15-8 with a 5.84 ERA and didn’t get a single Cy Young vote, but Ben Sheets came in tied for eigth in the balloting even though that losing jerkface went 12-14 with a 2.70 ERA and 264 strikeouts in 237 innings.

                  What a travesty of justice. SHAWN ESTES WAS ROBBED!!!!

      • VO says:

        It’s not about the individual persons wins. It’s about how many wins the team itself gets and how each player on that team contributed to that win. Just because CC goes 6 innings lets up 8 runs and gets the ‘win’ but Jeter goes 5-5 doesn’t mean CC was more important. The team is the one that gets the wins the players help them get the wins.

  43. pat says:

    Just stop with the idiot baiting. This person either has no idea what they’re talking about or is clearly trolling the shit out of everybody.

  44. Zack says:

    thats why scaife wanted a long term deal and not just the 4.5m franchise tag

  45. V says:

    Ugh. Sometimes I hate consulting. Just got done prepping a spreadsheet (8:30-10:30 at night) for a client, lol.

  46. V says:

    Wow. What a fumble.

  47. Dudes… So I just perused this thread… A-Gonz has to get some sort of award or at least his own meme or something. I’ve been around here for a while and I don’t know that anyone has ever single-handedly taken over threads like this guy. This is an open thread on an off-night, and this guy’s got heads spontaneously combusting to the tune of 430 comments and counting. Seriously… However frustrating it is to any sentient being, it’s pretty incredible.

  48. Moshe Mandel says:

    I hate NFL overtime rules. Win the coin toss and gain about 50 yards, and you win. Both teams need to get the ball.

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.