2008 WORLD SERIES discussion- WE'RE IN! WE'RE IN!

by **philliesphhan** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 15:54:23

FTN wrote:I think OPS+ only adjusts within the league. So AL teams are compared to AL teams. At least thats always been my interpretation.

The thing I read said it adjusts for league difficulty though it said for the player and didn't mention if that applied to team ops+

by **TenuredVulture** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:02:05

You know what would make a great fan outing? Get dressed up in Eagles gear, go to various malls in the Dallas/Ft Worth Metroplex, and boo their fucking Santa Claus. And the little Dallas brats trying to get their pictures with them.

by **Houshphandzadeh** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:07:55

Kinda crazy how all these guys think Myers, Blanton, and Moyer don't have a shot of winning a single game. As if the Rays pitching is so good they never screw up.

by **JayBallz** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:08:04

Warszawa wrote:Another Philly Santa story
[url=http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8701610/On-the-Mark:-Philly-fans-will-be-singing-the-boos?CMP=OTC-K9B140813162&ATT=49]On the Mark: Philly fans will be singing the boos
[/url]

you know what? F Santa. Its really really getting old.

Why don't we ever hear about the Chicago fans that attacked a first base coach? Or wasn't it the A's fans who fought the Rangers bullpen? And remember the Pistons brawl? Nah....those are too factual and updated for the media. The media would rather tell old played out stories that reek of originality.
:?
Those Dogers fans who swarmed, taunted, threatened and threw things at the Phillies phaithful last week only seemed to get mentioned on local phan blogs and msg boards.

"They booed McNabb as a draft pick." "They booed Santa." "They eat their own babies." "Philthadelphia."
What-the hell-ever!

by **Houshphandzadeh** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:11:03

Warszawa wrote:
Warszawa wrote:I wonder which World Series discussion will win?

It might be time to merge these suckers.

by **TenuredVulture** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:13:03

Houshphandzadeh wrote:
Warszawa wrote:
Warszawa wrote:I wonder which World Series discussion will win?

It might be time to merge these suckers.

I was thinking about starting a third thread. It is the world series.

by **scottdg** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:13:39

Houshphandzadeh wrote:Kinda crazy how all these guys think Myers, Blanton, and Moyer don't have a shot of winning a single game. As if the Rays pitching is so good they never screw up.

This is exactly what I thought. The Rays are good, we get it. But this idea that Hamels needs to pitch four games for them to win is ridiculous.

by **TenuredVulture** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:15:47

28 Hours. OMG.

by **CFP** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:23:41

They're showing the '93 highlight video on CSN right now. Tears. It's gonna be different this year.

by **smitty** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:30:17

Both Law and Sheehan are saying the same thing pretty much. The AL is much better so the Rays will win in 6. Only Hamels can beat the Rays.

I'm not so sure the AL was all that great this season. The White Sox lost their best hitter and their pitching wasn't that great. I don't think they were so hot.

The Red Sox were kinda going on fumes there at the end. Beckett hadthat oblique thing and was really laboring. Varitek looked cooked all season. Big Papi has slowed down considerably. They had Mark Kotsay manning first base. Jed Lowerie isn't all that great. Their bullpen was pretty shaky.

The AL is better than the NL. But this year it didin't seem like they were THAT much better by the end of the season. And that's what counts right now.

The Rays are certainly good. Solid starters. Good bullpen. Great defense. Some good power bats. Will take a walk.

But they really depended on the home run in the post season. If they continue to hit bombs like they did in the first two rounds they will be very tough. But they might return to their mean and then where do the runs come from?

Blanton and Moyer might be the Phils' Achilles Heel in this series. But you never know. The World Series is interesting in that a lot of times big stars aren't all that good and unheralded guys make a big difference. Pretty much anyone can have a hot series. Even Carlos Ruiz or someone like that.

Interesting interpretation regarding Lidge. Pitching scared? Trying to be too fine? I don't know. He kinda pitched the same way all year. He's successful when his stuff is crackling and guys chase the slider and fastball out of the strike zone. He didn't really seem to be pitching scared to me.

by **Squire** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:36:32

Frankly, I think all of the analysis is a waste of time. 7 games is pretty statistically insignificant and playoff outcomes are random.

SQUIRE

by **smitty** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 16:44:48

Squire wrote:Frankly, I think all of the analysis is a waste of time. 7 games is pretty statistically insignificant and playoff outcomes are random.

SQUIRE

I agree to a certain extent. But how do you explain the old Yankee Dynasties? They won nearly every year until they all got old at the same time in 1965.

Different eras and different game. But I do think the best team does win most of the time. This year I don't think there is a clear cut best team. But your main point is correct I think. This series could go seven or either team can sweep. I think that both teams are close enough that it should be a 6 or 7 game series. But the randomness factor can lead to a blow out.

by **stevemc** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 17:03:32

Too bad Iguchi can't be on the roster.

His history against Kazmir:

4-8, .500/.600/1.250/1.850 with 2b, 3b, HR

:shock:

by **Squire** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 17:05:27

smitty wrote:
Squire wrote:Frankly, I think all of the analysis is a waste of time. 7 games is pretty statistically insignificant and playoff outcomes are random.

SQUIRE

I agree to a certain extent. But how do you explain the old Yankee Dynasties? They won nearly every year until they all got old at the same time in 1965.

Well for one, they only had to play one playoff series each year - the World Series instead of three. That cuts down the randomness of playoff outcomes quite a bit.

by **smitty** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 17:45:44

Squire wrote:
smitty wrote:
Squire wrote:Frankly, I think all of the analysis is a waste of time. 7 games is pretty statistically insignificant and playoff outcomes are random.

SQUIRE

I agree to a certain extent. But how do you explain the old Yankee Dynasties? They won nearly every year until they all got old at the same time in 1965.

Well for one, they only had to play one playoff series each year - the World Series instead of three. That cuts down the randomness of playoff outcomes quite a bit.

True. But when you get to the World Series itself, the better team wins most of the time. But I agree there is still randomness.

I think these two teams are close enough in talent that the analysis is probably a waste of time except that it's fun. But you're right. It doesn't really mean all that much.

My FG articles · by **MattS** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 17:56:44

The Red Tornado wrote:
MattS wrote:Sheehan really is sloppy. Obviously, I'm biased for the Phillies, but third-order wins don't adjust for everything. Clay Davenport made up 3rd order wins, I think, and applying those in addition to other factors important in the playoff, he has the Phillies at 52%. I don't get why you would ignore the upgrade Davenport made from 1st to 3rd order wins to adjust for other factors, presumably with nearly no understanding of how that was done, and ignore the upgrade to the upgrade.

The Phillies had a better pythagorean record than the Rays. The reason that the third order wins are different is primarily because the Phillies let up fewer runs than would be expected given their opponents' batting line against, and the Rays underscored what would have been expected given their own batting line. Why is this true? Is it noise? If so, then the 2nd and 3rd order records are better. Or is that the Phillies have a specialized bullpen and can leave guys on base a lot late in the game? Wouldn't that affect be amplified in the playoffs? It seems like that's a large part of the reason, though Hamels and Moyer both stranded more baserunners than you'd expect.

Still, Sheehan completely ignored Davenport's explanation for the Phillies at 52%-- the lefty issue. While Hamels and Moyer both have no defined platoon advantage, and platoons do seem to be somewhat more of a pitcher effect than a hitter effect, the fact is that the Rays have a team SLG against LHP of .396. That's Iwamura, Crawford, Pena, and Floyd all in the top of their lineup, all not hitting lefties very well. Longoria, their righty masher has a reverse platoon split even, though looking through his numbers, I expect that's just noise-- his BB/K is still better against lefties.

All in all, Hamels beating Kazmir twice probably makes the Phillies champions. The game 1 odds are 50% meaning that the game 5 odds will probably be about around 59% for that game. Take those two games, and it'll be tough for the Rays to win. While we are underdogs at 43% on Vegas, Baseball Prospectus' number guys (NOT Sheehan) do tend to beat Vegas pretty often, and I'm inclined to think it's closer to 50%. Sheehan repeatedly shortcuts his math, and it shows. He picked the Phillies to be .500 this year, on the basis that they were bound to have some regression to the mean after a few guys had career years. Silver predicted we'd be 10 games over .500-- obviously accounting for regression to the mean, but considering all factors. Sheehan remembers rules of thumb and goes with them. The point of sabermetrics is to go against rules of thumb and actually structurally understand what's going on. He's obsessed with Lidge's homerun/flyball rate being low-- undoubtedly, that's true, but he's ignored the fact that since he started blowing that horn so loud, Lidge's groundball rate has risen, making him less of a "flyball pitcher" as Sheehan calls him. And he's not a flyball pitcher. Many of his balls in play are flyballs (though not really this year, only like 1/3 IIRC), but too few of his opponents put the ball in play. Flyball pitchers are guys like Blanton. He may have the same flyball% of balls in play of Hamels, but he's more of a homerun risk but Hamels gets Ks. A high K rate limits the number of homeruns as much as a high groundball rate does.

Translation for the PhilaPhans lurkers:

$#@! Sheehan!!- he's a lazy asshat!! Phils in 6 baby- WOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

PRECISELY!

by **Barry Jive** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 17:58:58

Why the fuck do sports writers care about Santa Claus so much? If fans in Cleveland or where-the-hell-ever threw snow balls at Santa, I'd laugh my ass off, because it'd be funny.

HE'S NOT FUCKING REAL
HE'S JUST A GUY IN A SUIT

by **CrashburnAlley** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 18:00:04

Barry Jive wrote:Why the $#@! do sports writers care about Santa Claus so much? If fans in Cleveland or where-the-hell-ever threw snow balls at Santa, I'd laugh my ass off, because it'd be funny.

HE'S NOT $#@! REAL
HE'S JUST A GUY IN A SUIT

Think about the children222!!!!1!

by **ReadingPhilly** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 18:09:12

good thing we aren't playing the orioles, they are undoubtedly better since they played in the american league. that might be the dumbest argument i've ever read.

by **FTN** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 18:14:10

NL: .260/.331/.413
AL: .268/.336/.420

NL: 4.30 ERA -- 1.38 WHIP
AL: 4.36 ERA -- 1.39 WHIP

Really not much of a difference, to be honest. The AL has the DH. If you look at the average batting line, the discrepancy really isn't that huge. Pitchers in the NL got a slight break in ERA and WHIP, but the WHIP is nearly identical.

I understand the argument, but I don't necessarily buy into it.

Archived

2008 WORLD SERIES discussion- WE'RE IN! WE'RE IN!