Reds Postseason Thread

[XU 87]

Does anyone have DC's phone number? I think LH broke into his computer.

[DC Muskie]

This has been covered.

[Kahns Krazy]

Does anyone have DC's phone number? I think LH broke into his computer.

That used to happen to Muskieman sometimes.

[Porkopolis]

Just to chime in on the wins debate. Based on this year, tell which pitcher you'd rather have on your 2011 staff:

1) Felix Hernandez.

or

2) Bronson Arroyo.

[chico]

All right, one more since you asked nicely...

You can take a month as a sample size if you want, but in general it's been pretty much proven that wins is not a good indicator of performance. There are much better stats like ERA, WHIP, and a bunch of sabermetric stats that I don't understand. But wins are fickle and you can pitch a great game and lose it, but then give up 7 runs and still win.

Again, no one is arguing that Hamels is an ace. He had an off year in 09 but bounced back nicely this year. The fact that Jamie Moyer was in their rotation says more to me about why they got Oswalt than anything. Plus, you need those guys to win in October, and if you can get a Cliff Lee you go get him. Again, getting Lee and Oswalt is not a knock on Hamels but a knock on the depth of the rotation.

The Brady Quinn thing was an obscure reference to that bad Myoplex commercia (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTqgp6jKbqE)l he did where he drank the stuff after a workout then very seriously looked into the camera and said "now I'm done!" No slight to Cleveland meant (besides, I'm a lifelong Irish fan).

[GoMuskies]

I suspect that anyone who uses wins as a serious statistic to evaluate pitchers probably thinks batting average is the most important metric in evaluating hitters.

[JimmyTwoTimes37]

Does anyone have DC's phone number? I think LH broke into his computer.

LH/GeorgeRemus may be one of the most interesting characters I've ever encountered on a message board. There's opinionated people and then there's LH/Remus.

I just finished reading the argument between you and him. Unbelievably unbelievable

[DC Muskie]

Just to chime in on the wins debate. Based on this year, tell which pitcher you'd rather have on your 2011 staff:

1) Felix Hernandez.

or

2) Bronson Arroyo.

What if you had Felix Hernandez on the reds and he only won 12 games?

I mean he won 13 for a team that won 61. He won 19 last year for a team that won 85.

Cole Hamels won 12 for a team that won 97.

I think the point here is I want Felix Hernandez on my team. And Cole Hamels will win you 12 game no matter who is on his team.

[Porkopolis]

I suspect that anyone who uses wins as a serious statistic to evaluate pitchers probably thinks batting average is the most important metric in evaluating hitters.

Exactly the point I was trying to make with my Arroyo/Hernandez post. I actually heard someone argue C.C. Sabathia is a better pitcher than King Felix because he won more games. Won more games? Well, no $#!+ Sherlock...I'd win more games if I had the Yankees behind me instead of the Mariners, too.

Edit: I think a few people seriously misinterpreted which side I'm on on the pitching wins debate. :)

[DC Muskie]

All right, one more since you asked nicely...

You can take a month as a sample size if you want, but in general it's been pretty much proven that wins is not a good indicator of performance. There are much better stats like ERA, WHIP, and a bunch of sabermetric stats that I don't understand. But wins are fickle and you can pitch a great game and lose it, but then give up 7 runs and still win.

Again, no one is arguing that Hamels is an ace. He had an off year in 09 but bounced back nicely this year. The fact that Jamie Moyer was in their rotation says more to me about why they got Oswalt than anything. Plus, you need those guys to win in October, and if you can get a Cliff Lee you go get him. Again, getting Lee and Oswalt is not a knock on Hamels but a knock on the depth of the rotation.

The Brady Quinn thing was an obscure reference to that bad Myoplex commercia (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTqgp6jKbqE)l he did where he drank the stuff after a workout then very seriously looked into the camera and said "now I'm done!" No slight to Cleveland meant (besides, I'm a lifelong Irish fan).

You know Jamie Moyer got hurt right? Are you telling me if he hadn't, they wouldn't have made a move because Hamels who was 7-7 and three no decisions when they traded for Oswalt was just fine? Are you seriously telling me that?

I can't keep saying that the Phillies did not lock up a playoff spot in July. They just didn't. The Braves got hurt, the Phillies picked up Oswalt and took off.

Does everyone who make the playoffs now get to make the playoffs every year? Is that how baseball works?

[DC Muskie]

Exactly the point I was trying to make with my Arroyo/Hernandez post. I actually heard someone argue C.C. Sabathia is a better pitcher than King Felix because he won more games. Won more games? Well, no $#!+ Sherlock...I'd win more games if I had the Yankees behind me instead of the Mariners, too.

Edit: I think a few people seriously misinterpreted which side I'm on on the pitching wins debate. :)

Yes and Cole Hamels had the 2009 and 2010 Philadelphia trash and won one game less then Felix.

He's a Cy Young type pitcher isn't he?

[Porkopolis]

Yes and Cole Hamels had the 2009 and 2010 Philadelphia trash and won one game less then Felix.

He's a Cy Young type pitcher isn't he?

Really? Why are you so fixated on the "Cy Young" thing? Just because one Reds fan called him a "Cy Young" type pitcher doesn't mean we all did. Hamels is one hell of a good #3, but I would never accuse him of being a TOR guy. He is what he is: a very good pitcher who has periodic stretches of greatness.

[chico]

I know Moyer got hurt. I also know that the fact that they had to use a guy like Moyer was the reason they got Oswalt. They also got Blanton back. Had Moyer stayed healthy they still would've gotten Oswalt. That's my point - didn't realize it so so difficult to comprehend.

[DC Muskie]

I suspect that anyone who uses wins as a serious statistic to evaluate pitchers probably thinks batting average is the most important metric in evaluating hitters.

Winning games is not serious?

How in the world do people decide who makes the playoffs?

Barry Zito sucks ass. He won 9 games this season. He won once since he struck out 10 people on July 16th. He wasn't pitching well although he did beat the Brewers in August. he went from 8-4 to 9-14 in a span of two months.

And batting averages don't matter either?

What does matter in baseball anymore? Obscure stats no one understands? Is that how the Trash won 97 games?

[XU 87]

And batting averages don't matter either?



According to the stats guys, not much. OBP is much more important. It doesn't matter how you get on base as long as you do get on base.

But OPS (on base plus slugging percentage) is probably the most important.

[DC Muskie]

I know Moyer got hurt. I also know that the fact that they had to use a guy like Moyer was the reason they got Oswalt. They also got Blanton back. Had Moyer stayed healthy they still would've gotten Oswalt. That's my point - didn't realize it so so difficult to comprehend.

You sir should run a baseball team. And when your pitcher goes 12-10 and asks for a billion dollars you should give it him.

Moyer was their 5th starter had been on the team for 4 years Won 16 game sin 2008 with an era under 4.00. Must have been luck. You're right Oswalt is no reflection on Hamels. Everyone knew the Reds would hit Oswalt in October, but couldn't touch Hamels.

Hilarious.

[GoMuskies]

Winning games is not serious?


As a stat to evaluate pitchers, it ranks right up there with saves in irrelevance.

[DC Muskie]

Really? Why are you so fixated on the "Cy Young" thing? Just because one Reds fan called him a "Cy Young" type pitcher doesn't mean we all did. Hamels is one hell of a good #3, but I would never accuse him of being a TOR guy. He is what he is: a very good pitcher who has periodic stretches of greatness.

Because a few guys here want to make Cole Hamels into a Cy Young caliber pitcher that's why. I'm pulling this out of no where for crying out loud.

And how does one become a hell of a three if your number 5 starter is not any good?

[DC Muskie]

As a stat to evaluate pitchers, it ranks right up there with saves in irrelevance.

Well then, the Nats pitching staff is totally awesome. Don't try and argue otherwise. I don't care if the team lost 93 games, the pitching staff is really, really really good.

[GoMuskies]

And batting averages don't matter either?



Well, it matters as a component of a statistic that actually does measure the ability of a hitter to produce runs (which is pretty important). On a standalone basis, its usefulness is pretty limited.

[GoMuskies]

Well then, the Nats pitching staff is totally awesome. Don't try and argue otherwise. I don't care if the team lost 93 games, the pitching staff is really, really really good.

Excellent logic.

I agree with you that Felix Hernandez had a mediocre season.

[Porkopolis]

Well then, the Nats pitching staff is totally awesome. Don't try and argue otherwise. I don't care if the team lost 93 games, the pitching staff is really, really really good.

The Nationals have pretty lousy pitching stats across the board. They rank in the lower half of the league in every meaningful category. I'm not sure anyone would argue they have a good staff. If the Nationals offense suddenly started putting up 11 runs per game and the pitchers won 100 games, they would still suck...wins mean nothing in evaluating a pitcher, they are a team stat.

[DC Muskie]

I agree with you that Felix Hernandez had a mediocre season.

His mediocre season was still better than Cole Hamels.

[DC Muskie]

The Nationals have pretty lousy pitching stats across the board. They rank in the lower half of the league in every meaningful category. I'm not sure anyone would argue they have a good staff. If the Nationals offense suddenly started putting up 11 runs per game and the pitchers won 100 games, they would still suck...wins mean nothing in evaluating a pitcher, they are a team stat.

So Cole Hamels didn't have any effect on the Reds then?

I like how they are "meaningful" categories. Wins, however are not one of them.

[GoMuskies]

I like how they are "meaningful" categories. Wins, however are not one of them.

You are catching on.

[DC Muskie]

Well, it matters as a component of a statistic that actually does measure the ability of a hitter to produce runs (which is pretty important). On a standalone basis, its usefulness is pretty limited.

If anyone comes close to hitting .400 for a season I hope everyone understands how incredibly limited an accomplishment it was and is no reflection of how good a hitter was.

[XU 87]

I like how they are "meaningful" categories. Wins, however are not one of them.

I recommend that you read "Moneyball". It will probably change your view on which baseball statistics are important and which ones are not important.

[GoMuskies]

If anyone comes close to hitting .400 for a season I hope everyone understands how incredibly limited an accomplishment it was and is no reflection of how good a hitter was.

That .400 BA will be part of an excellent OBP.

[Porkopolis]

That .400 BA will be part of an excellent OBP.

Exactly. No one is saying the traditional stats are meaningless. What those of us who prefer sabermetrics are saying is that folks need to dig deeper to get a true understanding of what is going on.

[chico]

You sir should run a baseball team. And when your pitcher goes 12-10 and asks for a billion dollars you should give it him.

Moyer was their 5th starter had been on the team for 4 years Won 16 game sin 2008 with an era under 4.00. Must have been luck. You're right Oswalt is no reflection on Hamels. Everyone knew the Reds would hit Oswalt in October, but couldn't touch Hamels.

Hilarious.

Now I'm completely confused. Yeah, I'll give the 12-10 guy a billion and you give the 47 year old 2 billion. For the last time, and this time I really mean it - wins are not a good stat to determine a pitcher's talent.

Why do you think they got Pedro in the past? You know the adage "you can never have enough pitching?" It applies here with the Phillies. The fact that Moyer won 16 games while Hamels won 10 again proves my point about wins. But you'd rather have 47 year old Jamie Moyer than Cole Hamels. Now that's hilarious.

Wins is a meaningful stat - for a team. For a pitcher, not so much.

[DC Muskie]

I recommend that you read "Moneyball". It will probably change your view on which baseball statistics are important and which ones are not important.

I couldn't finish Moneyball, it was making my head spin.

I understand the basic concepts, what I find funny is how dismissive wins and batting averages are. You literally can't have baseball without these two stats. And I'm a baseball nerd.

I can dig as deep down into stats as I need to to find the answer I am looking for. I could look at a pitcher's WHIP for night games on the road in the central time zone. At the end of the day, if I want to rank Cole Hamels a little lower of a pitcher then others, I can find the stats to support it.

[DC Muskie]

Exactly. No one is saying the traditional stats are meaningless. What those of us who prefer sabermetrics are saying is that folks need to dig deeper to get a true understanding of what is going on.

Not to be a dick, but this is eaxctly what you are arguing. That wins and batting averages are meaningless.

[GoMuskies]

What those of us who prefer sabermetrics

And that's not really even me. I don't go too much further than OBA and OPS on the hitting side and ERA and WHIP on the pitching side. Some of the other stuff I think is interesting (BABIP, isolated ERA, win shares, WAR), and some of it I think is basically worthless (any defensive metric). But even a part of the SABR resistence such as myself can see how stats like wins, saves, batting average and RBIs are of limited usefulness and that much better statistics are available to measure a player's effectiveness.

[Porkopolis]

Not to be a dick, but this is eaxctly what you are arguing. That wins and batting averages are meaningless.

When it comes down to it, I do think wins are a terrible measure of a pitcher; I much prefer WHIP, FIP, etc. I don't think anyone in their right mind would argue batting average is meaningless--just that is is inferior to OPS.

[DC Muskie]

Now I'm completely confused. Yeah, I'll give the 12-10 guy a billion and you give the 47 year old 2 billion. For the last time, and this time I really mean it - wins are not a good stat to determine a pitcher's talent.

Why do you think they got Pedro in the past? You know the adage "you can never have enough pitching?" It applies here with the Phillies. The fact that Moyer won 16 games while Hamels won 10 again proves my point about wins. But you'd rather have 47 year old Jamie Moyer than Cole Hamels. Now that's hilarious.

Wins is a meaningful stat - for a team. For a pitcher, not so much.

No Cole Hamels won 14 games in 2008 which along with Jamie Moyer winning 16 propelled the Phillies to win 92 games that season.

In 2010 Cole Hamels won 12 games and the team won 97. What do you think changed? Was Cole the same pitcher?

Jamie Moyer is supposed to win 12-14 games a season on that team. Do you agree with that? And since you think so highly of Hamels, do you think Cole should have the same record as 47 year old Moyer?

Please explain that logic. Who got these 97 wins for this team? The Fanatic?

[GoMuskies]

Who got these 97 wins for this team?

King Felix has asked me to remind you that the offense plays a slight role in these matters. Wildly, the pitchers don't have much control over that.

[Porkopolis]

No Cole Hamels won 14 games in 2008 which along with Jamie Moyer winning 16 propelled the Phillies to win 92 games that season.

In 2010 Cole Hamels won 12 games and the team won 97. What do you think changed? Was Cole the same pitcher?

Jamie Moyer is supposed to win 12-14 games a season on that team. Do you agree with that? And since you think so highly of Hamels, do you think Cole should have the same record as 47 year old Moyer?

Please explain that logic. Who got these 97 wins for this team? The Fanatic?

http://rob.nu/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/facepalm2.jpg

[DC Muskie]

King Felix has asked me to remind you that the offense plays a slight role in these matters. Wildly, the pitchers don't have much control over that.

Halladay won 20 games when he had one player with an OPS over .800.

Mike Mussina won 20 games that same year with a team that featured four guys with OPS over.800.

The Yankees won 3 more games then the Blue Jays that year.

Halladay's wins don't matter?

[GoMuskies]

They both won 20 games. Do you think they were equals that year (as the number of wins suggests)?

[DC Muskie]

Both are impressive and Halladay 20 wins were an important factor in getting to 86 wins, don't you agree?

[GoMuskies]

Both are impressive and Halladay 20 wins were an important factor in getting to 86 wins, don't you agree?

Assuming Halladay had good peripherals (which I am sure he did), I would assume that his performance was big in getting that team to 86 wins. I don't think the fact that he was credited with 20 wins is all that relevant. In fact, it probably understates how good he actually was when he was only able to tie the relatively ordinary Mussina in wins.

[Porkopolis]

One more quick thing about wins. A pitcher that blows a save and then sees their team score and win the next inning is credited with a win. Both Cordero and Masset had several of those in recent years. Poached wins such as those are quite common for relievers. Does that type of "win" give value to the pitching performance that blew the lead in the first place?

[DC Muskie]

He had 9 complete games and two no decisions, which were both losses; to the Reds and Pirates.

He pitched fewer than 6 innings twice.

If he wasn't on that team, does Toronto win 86 games?

If Pettite hadn't lost 14 games that year, would the Yankees have won more games?

[DC Muskie]

One more quick thing about wins. A pitcher that blows a save and then sees their team score and win the next inning is credited with a win. Both Cordero and Masset had several of those in recent years. Poached wins such as those are quite common for relievers. Does that type of "win" give value to the pitching performance that blew the lead in the first place?

Captain Kirk, are you now arguing that wins by relievers are now the same as wins by starters? That's the next argument you are going to make that "wins" are meaningless?

Jesus Christ, thank god I have a 2:30 meeting.

[GoMuskies]

No one said he wasn't a good pitcher that was an extremely important part of that Toronto team. It's just that wins isn't the right stat to prove that point. I mean, was he better than Mike Mussina?

[DC Muskie]

It's just that wins isn't the right stat to prove that point.

What stat would you have used?

[GoMuskies]

ERA, WHIP and K/9 are all much better indictors of effectiveness. I'd even look at opponent batting average/OBP/OPS before I'd look at wins.

[nuts4xu]

I'm just sayin' don't go overboard in the expectations- but if you want to, be my guest.

Where did Reds fans go overboard on the expectations? Where did anyone say that we were going to win a series next year?

You and DC are railing on the perspective of Reds fans, yet I am not sure you are even accurate about what the fan base thinks of this season.

Good gripes, I am glad DC found something to channel is anger. The fact that our fan base thinks we had a good season, completely shit the bed in the playoffs, and may have a chance to visit the playoffs again next year is just plain...what was the word he used..."wierd".

We are all thankful for his 2:30 meeting.

[Juice]

Captain Kirk, are you now arguing that wins by relievers are now the same as wins by starters? That's the next argument you are going to make that "wins" are meaningless?

Jesus Christ, thank god I have a 2:30 meeting.

The stat "wins" used for pitchers is pretty meaningless. Try ERA, ERA+, xFIP, WHIP, K/BB ratio, BAPIP, etc. and you will find out how good a pitcher is.

[DC Muskie]

What is xFIP?

[DC Muskie]

Where did Reds fans go overboard on the expectations? Where did anyone say that we were going to win a series next year?

So you're not going to win one now?

What exactly do you Red fans get excited about? Just the possibility of having a good year?

[Kahns Krazy]

What is xFIP?

I have a handy link for you, since you seem to be new to this internet thing. It's what the kids a calling a "search engine". It has kind of a funny name, but you know these kids today.

www.google.com

Check it out!

[waggy]

Being a fan of Cincy teams this weekend was the lowest of lows, so it's good timing for DC to remind us what real torture looks like.

[DC Muskie]

Being a fan of Cincy teams this weekend was the lowest of lows, so it's good timing for DC to remind us what real torture looks like.

See how I help out?

[waggy]

Thank you. Now get some for yourself. ;)

[DC Muskie]

Thank you. Now get some for yourself. ;)

Women are unfortunately, my personal Cole Hamels.

[waggy]

Unhittable. Well played.

[Masterofreality]

My Gawd. 8 pages added to this thread since this morning at about 9am.

Is that a new messageboard record?

[DoubleD86]

Just a quick comparison:

Cole Hamels:
12-11, 208 IP, 3.06 ERA, 1.179 WHIP, 132 ERA+, 9.1 K/9, 3.26 K/BB, .237 BAAgainst, .693 OPSAgainst, 4.7 WAR

Jonathan O. Sanchez:
13-9, 193 IP, 3.07, 1.231 WHIP, 133 ERA+, 9.5 K/9, 2.14 K/BB, .204 BAA, .650 OPSA, 3.4 WAR

Yet, somehow, Jonathan Sanchez is a great #3 and Cole Hamels sucks? In almost every meaningful stat (uh-oh, now I am going to piss DC off) Hamels is either equal to or better than Sanchez. In possibly the most important stat (Wins Above Replacement player, or WAR) Hamels is good for 1 more win per season than Sanchez.

You are right, that one more win makes Sanchez better than Hamels......

[Porkopolis]

Just a quick comparison:

Cole Hamels:
12-11, 208 IP, 3.06 ERA, 1.179 WHIP, 132 ERA+, 9.1 K/9, 3.26 K/BB, .237 BAAgainst, .693 OPSAgainst, 4.7 WAR

Jonathan O. Sanchez:
13-9, 193 IP, 3.07, 1.231 WHIP, 133 ERA+, 9.5 K/9, 2.14 K/BB, .204 BAA, .650 OPSA, 3.4 WAR

Yet, somehow, Jonathan Sanchez is a great #3 and Cole Hamels sucks? In almost every meaningful stat (uh-oh, now I am going to piss DC off) Hamels is either equal to or better than Sanchez. In possibly the most important stat (Wins Above Replacement player, or WAR) Hamels is good for 1 more win per season than Sanchez.

You are right, that one more win makes Sanchez better than Hamels......

:)

[DC Muskie]

That actually wasn't my point about Sanchez and Hamels, but good work on breaking down the stats and sticking up for the Phillies.

It's going to be a great series.

[DoubleD86]

That actually wasn't my point about Sanchez and Hamels, but good work on breaking down the stats and sticking up for the Phillies.

It's going to be a great series.

Your point wasn't to suggest the SF Giants' top three in response to someone saying the Phillie's top three was the best in baseball/playoffs?

It isn't sticking up for the Phillies if I just think its correct. You are allowed to analyze the sport without emotion.

[DC Muskie]

Your point wasn't to suggest the SF Giants' top three in response to someone saying the Phillie's top three was the best in baseball/playoffs?

It isn't sticking up for the Phillies if I just think its correct. You are allowed to analyze the sport without emotion.

Nope. My point between those two pitchers specifically was that people weren't talking about how amazingly awesome Sanchez is. I'm pretty sure the Phillies will hit him, even though he has beaten them twice. If not, I'm pretty sure Phillie trash fans won't be pointing out how incredible a pitcher Sanchez is.

Are we finished here? Or do you need to point out that Hamels pitched better on the road during day games when the opposing teams wear off colored white uniforms?

If you're unemotional about the subject, why in the world do you care about two things:

1. Bringing it up a day later when it's obvious the thread had died.
2. Whether or not you thought were going to piss me off

You obviously wanted to show me Hamels has an awesome WHIP. To which I respond, AWESOME.

Consider me put in my place Double. High five brother.