MLB Off-Topic

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Britton has been near unhittable, I think he should be in serious consideration for it.

I certainly agree that he should be in the conversation. Ultimately I think a starter should get it for amassing 3-4x as many innings and a lot more value as a result. I also think it's a slippery slope with relievers. For example, Britton's been great, but why isn't Andrew Miller getting the same hype? They've been just about as good.

My favorite Britton stat is his 80% ground ball rate. I mean, he almost doesn't need outfielders.

My favorite Miller stat is his 99.4% LOB rate. Nuts.

[Jr.]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I certainly agree that he should be in the conversation. Ultimately I think a starter should get it for amassing 3-4x as many innings and a lot more value as a result. I also think it's a slippery slope with relievers. For example, Britton's been great, but why isn't Andrew Miller getting the same hype? They've been just about as good.

My favorite Britton stat is his 80% ground ball rate. I mean, he almost doesn't need outfielders.

My favorite Miller stat is his 99.4% LOB rate. Nuts.

While SP may accrue 3-4x more innings, relievers affect 2-3x more games. So I can balance that out in my head.

[BleacherBum2310]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Yes on Papelbon.

Also what do you guys think of Zach Britton as an AL Cy Young candidate?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He should be in consideration but in the end it has to go to a SP they are just more valuable.

[AC]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I think Ross Atkins said something to the effect that 2 innings of high leverage is equal to 5 innings from a starter. That sounds like the most reasonable stance.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I think Ross Atkins said something to the effect that 2 innings of high leverage is equal to 5 innings from a starter. That sounds like the most reasonable stance.

Seem pretty arbitrary. So many issues that make it impossible to genuinely compare.

RP winning the Cy Young has happened 4 or 5 times in each league over the past 50 years, so definitely not impossible.

[AC]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Seem pretty arbitrary. So many issues that make it impossible to genuinely compare.

Not really. I would assume if it's a general manager that they've done the calculations. It wouldn't be that hard with the right WPA-style-ish stat.

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Once again, Pirates-Giants game: intentional walk was called, they threw an intentional ball... then talked about it in a conference, decided to pitch to the guy, and got him to pop out.

Giants likely lost because of it, and that's perfectly okay with me.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Not really. I would assume if it's a general manager that they've done the calculations. It wouldn't be that hard with the right WPA-style-ish stat.

If that were the case, I'd figure that teams would be paying top closers $20-30MM per season like they pay top starters. I mean if 70 IP of a very good closer are actually equal to 180 IP of a very good starter. It doesn't really add up when you consider the paychecks.

[AC]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

If that were the case, I'd figure that teams would be paying top closers $20-30MM per season like they pay top starters. I mean if 70 IP of a very good closer are actually equal to 180 IP of a very good starter. It doesn't really add up when you consider the paychecks.

No, not a very good starter. 5 average innings.

Kimbrel and Miller get like 10m a year and Chapman, Jansen and probably Melancon subsequently are going to blow that out of the water this year. Who do you think is going to get paid more this offseason, Jeremy Hellickson or Kenley Jansen? In 2018, Jason Hammel or Wade Davis (assuming he's not dead)?

The rough math would be 70 IP / 50 xFIP- / 3 Li or whatever => 180 IP / 95 xIP- / 1 Li or whatever. Those numbers make sense to me.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

No, not a very good starter. 5 average innings.

Kimbrel and Miller get like 10m a year and Chapman, Jansen and probably Melancon subsequently are going to blow that out of the water this year. Who do you think is going to get paid more this offseason, Jeremy Hellickson or Kenley Jansen? In 2018, Jason Hammel or Wade Davis (assuming he's not dead)?

The rough math would be 70 IP / 50 xFIP- / 3 Li or whatever => 180 IP / 95 xIP- / 1 Li or whatever. Those numbers make sense to me.

So you're amending your position to 2 innings of high leverage from a top reliever equal 5 innings of a mediocre starter? That I can buy, but it doesn't advance the view that a RP is worthy of winning the Cy Young.

I think it makes sense that an elite closer is about as valuable as a #4 starter.

[AC]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

So you're amending your position to 2 innings of high leverage from a top reliever equal 5 innings of a mediocre starter? That I can buy, but it doesn't advance the view that a RP is worthy of winning the Cy Young.

I think it makes sense that an elite closer is about as valuable as a #4 starter.

I don't wanna use labels, I find I rarely line up with what people think. I'd say a very good closer (75 xFIP- or so) is probably as good as a mid-rote starter (2 WAR), and that the elite of the elite (30-50 xFIP-... Edwin Diaz, Andrew Miller, Zach Britton) are as valuable as mid-top rote starters (~3.5-4 WAR).

It's easy to see the argument for Britton this year. No one has stood out. The AL xFIP- leaders are guys like Pineda and Price and Stroman to some extent who have been BABIP'd to death, and Kluber and Sanchez who aren't having super elite years. There's no Keuchel or Price type this year for voters. Happ has traditionally great stats but a 94 xFIP-. There's no one stand out pitcher. So if there's no ace, and you have a guy like Britton with a 0.5 ERA who we know could be as valuable as a mid-top rote guy.

But I don't understand why Sanchez and Kluber aren't getting more attention. Even Marco Estrada, at least he's probably an xFIP beater (although not to this extent). Hell, I don't even think Britton is the best reliever this year. Miller has pitched in every situation he's been asked and isn't that far off the best xFIP- of all time, he's tied with Dellin Betances who's also been better than Britton. Miller has walked fewer AND struck out more. Britton's SIERA is the lowest by 2 points, but it's not fair that he's the only one getting attention.

I'd probably vote 1. Kluber 2. Sanchez 3. Miller 4. Britton 5. Betances or something like that. I just don't get why Kluber hasn't gotten more attention. Sanchez too. Just cause they're not putting up insane Kershaw-esque seasons doesn't mean they aren't Cy worthy.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I don't wanna use labels, I find I rarely line up with what people think. I'd say a very good closer (75 xFIP- or so) is probably as good as a mid-rote starter (2 WAR), and that the elite of the elite (30-50 xFIP-... Edwin Diaz, Andrew Miller, Zach Britton) are as valuable as mid-top rote starters (~3.5-4 WAR).

It's easy to see the argument for Britton this year. No one has stood out. The AL xFIP- leaders are guys like Pineda and Price and Stroman to some extent who have been BABIP'd to death, and Kluber and Sanchez who aren't having super elite years. There's no Keuchel or Price type this year for voters. Happ has traditionally great stats but a 94 xFIP-. There's no one stand out pitcher. So if there's no ace, and you have a guy like Britton with a 0.5 ERA who we know could be as valuable as a mid-top rote guy.

But I don't understand why Sanchez and Kluber aren't getting more attention. Even Marco Estrada, at least he's probably an xFIP beater (although not to this extent). Hell, I don't even think Britton is the best reliever this year. Miller has pitched in every situation he's been asked and isn't that far off the best xFIP- of all time, he's tied with Dellin Betances who's also been better than Britton. Miller has walked fewer AND struck out more. Britton's SIERA is the lowest by 2 points, but it's not fair that he's the only one getting attention.

I'd probably vote 1. Kluber 2. Sanchez 3. Miller 4. Britton 5. Betances or something like that. I just don't get why Kluber hasn't gotten more attention. Sanchez too. Just cause they're not putting up insane Kershaw-esque seasons doesn't mean they aren't Cy worthy.

I haven't put too much thought into my Top 5 because I think the next month and a half will be critical in letting someone stand out a bit more, but I agree with the bolded part. I actually brought up both Miller and Betances a page or two back in this thread as examples of guys that should be getting Britton hype but aren't. As to why Britton gets all the hype: 1. His ERA is microscopic (people still aren't on the FIP/xFIP trains); 2. Teh Saves; and 3. He has that signature sinker/death pitch that defies everything we know about physics.

If no starter does stand out after another month or so, the conditions will be favorable for a RP (Britton) to win it.

[slickdtc]

MLB Off-Topic

Didn't Kluber start off rough this season? Could be a reason why. I was kinda surprised to see that he's turned it around so severely.

Sanchez plays in TO.

Both of those aren't good reasons, but they are reasons. I don't agree with either, FWIW.

For as many people who don't think a RP should win a Cy Young, there's an equal or more legion who love the chance to vote for one. They've identified Britton as their candidate, and that's how it's gonna be. He's getting a major boost being on a surprise team that has had the heat on them pretty much all summer.

Crazy that there's a handful of RP's having downright historic years all at the same time.

[Jr.]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Here's a great video of Josh Donaldson talking about his swing on MLB Central. He goes against a few "truths" of hitting (hitting down on the ball, landing closed, etc.) and talks about what he's trying to do mechanically.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NyWNCrxVzPU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

That's a nice video, and I don't disagree with a single thing that he said at all. I really just think that when some coaches say these things, they misinterpret what it really meant and take it completely the wrong way.

"Hitting down on the ball" and "staying on top of the ball" are not terms that represent attempting to hit a ground ball. Hitting down on the ball means that when you meet with the ball, you came from above it and when doing down your hands were going into the forward direction. That way you are not Nike swooshing (and Donaldson is not Nike swooshing in his swing in the video... he is hitting down on the ball in the video). It has nothing to do with making ontact on a downward plane. That's downright stupid.

Staying on top of the ball doesn't mean hitting the top half of the ball. Who would want to do that? Even with a line drive, that's just going to produce top spin. Staying on top of it is the same thing, it's regarding hand position. Your hands shouldn't ever sink below the ball, or make you create dip-and-lift action like Donaldson exemplified in that video.

I also land with an open foot stride, but I'm not leaking my body open at all... it's just a result of my back hip beginning to create torque. Yes, I have a gif but I'll refrain from showing it hah.

I think Donaldson said some great things in that video and I didn't disagree with any of it. The only thing I'm slightly confused on is whether he was saying that hands don't go to the ball or whether he was just saying that he doesn't think about it when batting. If it's the former, I think he just has to rethink it... he can watch that video and clearly see that his barrel is an extension of his hand direction. If it's the latter, I not only agree with him, but I'd add that the last thing you should be doing when up to bat is thinking about mechanics. That's what the tee and BP are for. That's what on-deck is for. That's what between pitches is for. You should really only be thinking about: what to swing at and when to swing at it. Let muscle memory take care of the rest, and just hope you're very good at it. He just so happens to be.