tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37892113.post5763715789860458578..comments2024-01-26T11:14:40.053-06:00Comments on Over The Baggy: Did you know...Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37892113.post-32414559998179930192011-10-03T17:25:24.961-05:002011-10-03T17:25:24.961-05:00"the five-man rotation and larger bullpens th..."the five-man rotation and larger bullpens that have reduced the starting pitcher's workloads (outs, innings, batters faced ..."<br /><br />.. strikeouts, walks, earned runs, home runs... Of course, none of those measure "workloads", nor are they "allotted", nor are they the reason "why" pitchers haven't given up more hits. Neither is innings pitched. <br /><br />I agree with you, reduced workloads do result in reduced totals for all counting stats. Including both innings pitched and hits.TThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05093249764311819252noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37892113.post-20875700224395798522011-10-03T17:05:10.629-05:002011-10-03T17:05:10.629-05:00@TT --
*FACEPALM*
"You are arguing that the...@TT --<br /><br />*FACEPALM*<br /><br />"You are arguing that the reason pitchers have given up fewer hits is that they have got fewer outs."<br /><br />No, no...no, no, no...no, no. <br /><br />The argument is that starting pitchers have thrown fewer innings (or recorded fewer outs, however you want to phrase it) because of various reasons like the five-man rotation and larger bullpens that have reduced the starting pitcher's workloads (outs, innings, batters faced, whatever floats your boat). Hence, fewer pitchers are allowing over 260+ hits in a season. <br /><br />I understand what you are driving at (and are correct in that respect) but your direction is misguided in this case. I am not now nor was I in the original piece, using innings as a measurement. <br /><br />Is this seriously that hard for you to understand?Twins Fan c.1981https://www.blogger.com/profile/05029718081907720967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37892113.post-64710322849782385362011-10-03T16:31:27.741-05:002011-10-03T16:31:27.741-05:00"I think you are completing misunderstanding ..."I think you are completing misunderstanding my use of "allotment". What I was suggesting is that starting pitchers have worked fewer innings per season in the past few decades hence fewer overall hits"<br /><br />What you were suggesting, and clearly continue to suggest, is that innings pitched is a measure of the amount a pitcher pitched. It isn't. Its a measure of how many outs they got while pitching. In other words, its a measure of a specific achievement that is very important in the game of baseball.<br /><br /><br />"the fact that starting pitchers have worked, thrown, compiled, etc fewer innings totals so THAT'S WHY MOST PITCHERS IN THE PAST 10 YEARS HAVEN'T HAD MORE THAN 260+ HITS IN A SEASON"<br /><br />That's absurd. You are arguing that the reason pitchers have given up fewer hits is that they have got fewer outs. You might at well make the argument that the reason why pitchers have pitched fewer innings (i.e. made fewer outs) is that they have given up fewer hits.TThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05093249764311819252noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37892113.post-27920416284804673952011-10-03T13:58:27.968-05:002011-10-03T13:58:27.968-05:00@Lake Country Blogger
"Did you know ... you ...@Lake Country Blogger<br /><br />"Did you know ... you just repeated the same fallacy. Pitchers don't "work innings" or, at least, that's not what innings pitched measures. It measures how many outs they got while working."<br /><br />Did you know...I wasn't referencing the intricacies of what "innings" are actually comprised of but simply stating the fact that starting pitchers have worked, thrown, compiled, etc fewer innings totals so THAT'S WHY MOST PITCHERS IN THE PAST 10 YEARS HAVEN'T HAD MORE THAN 260+ HITS IN A SEASON. Is it really that complicated? <br /><br />"That's kind of hard to believe. Pavano threw around 100 pitches per game, most of them fastballs. Most were either balls or strikes that didn't have any immediate effect on OPS."<br /><br />Right, the concluding pitch of each series. Mostly it tells us that his fastball was hit hard as we do know that Pavano walked a very low number of individuals in 2011. <br /><br />I understand your reservations about the statistics -- particularly regarding the walk scenario -- but the walk or hit was committed on that particular pitch. <br /><br />Did you know...hitters slugged .512 off of his fastball?Twins Fan c.1981https://www.blogger.com/profile/05029718081907720967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37892113.post-5133337782263865992011-10-03T13:39:44.304-05:002011-10-03T13:39:44.304-05:00" What I was suggesting is that starting pitc..." What I was suggesting is that starting pitchers have worked fewer innings per season in the past few decades hence fewer overall hits."<br /><br />Did you know ... you just repeated the same fallacy. Pitchers don't "work innings" or, at least, that's not what innings pitched measures. It measures how many outs they got while working. <br /><br />The only measures of how much "work" pitchers did are either innings pitched or batter's faced. In this case, batters faced would indicate the opportunities hitters had to get hits. <br /><br />"Pavano's fastball had a 890 OPS against it, the worst in baseball."<br /><br />That's kind of hard to believe. Pavano threw around 100 pitches per game, most of them fastballs. Most were either balls or strikes that didn't have any immediate effect on OPS. <br /><br />I suspect what you means is the OPS of hitters where the last pitch they faced was a fastball. I'm not sure that has any meaning at all. If he threw six strikes, the last four foul balls, three curves for balls and then walked the guy on a fastball, the walk can be attributed to his fastball? I don't think so.Ross Williamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16682083921980769017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37892113.post-89213802399117825902011-10-03T11:24:39.416-05:002011-10-03T11:24:39.416-05:00@TT:
Did you know...I think you are completing mi...@TT:<br /><br />Did you know...I think you are completing misunderstanding my use of "allotment". What I was suggesting is that starting pitchers have worked fewer innings per season in the past few decades hence fewer overall hits. <br /><br />What the "runs" metric does is simply fancy up a pitcher's performance on a specific pitch. I'll agree with you, the math is not clean but, for the most part, it agrees with a lot of the raw data. For a more straightforward convention measurement, Pavano's fastball had a 890 OPS against it, the worst in baseball.Twins Fan c.1981https://www.blogger.com/profile/05029718081907720967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37892113.post-48253907390064598732011-10-03T11:14:11.144-05:002011-10-03T11:14:11.144-05:00Did you know ... innings aren't "allotted...Did you know ... <a href="http://grannybaseball.blogspot.com/2011/07/understanding-statistics-ip-k9-era.html" rel="nofollow">innings aren't "allotted"</a>. They are a measure of the number of outs a pitcher gets.<br /><br />Did you know ... a fastball can't be legitimately measured in "runs". <br /><br />Numbers are just numbers. But when people don't understand them, its easy to attach all sorts meaning to them.TThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05093249764311819252noreply@blogger.com