What could we get for Blanton?
I want your opinion AN! With Blanton's stock at an all-time low right now, what do you think he could still bring back for us in return? I still think we can unload him to the Reds for Homer Bailey, who's stock is down right now as well. Or as Nico suggested earlier, do we swap spots with Gaudin, making Joe a long reliever and bringing Chad back into the fold. Give me your scenarios!
0 recs |
60
comments
Comments
blanton sucks. bailey sucks. a’s missed the boat with trading blanton, hopefully he comes around, and slows down his offspeed pitches.
by wd40 on Jun 29, 2008 8:11 PM PDT 0 recs
"Buy low, sell high"
It’s such a simple concept. And yet…
Right now the A’s would be lucky if Blanton fetched a bucket of warm spit and a pinch of owl dung. Which is exactly why Blanton is not going anywhere.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on Jun 29, 2008 8:46 PM PDT 0 recs
Seems to me as if one reason the Blanton-Dodgers deal
went south is that Blanton’s worst stretch of the season came in July and scared off the Dodgers from meeting Beane’s asking price. It wasn’t the only factor but it was rumored to be a factor. So you can imagine GMs aren’t lining up to offer great talent right now and as a result I’m sure Beane isn’t pushing Blanton in any talks.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on
Jun 29, 2008 10:01 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Speaking of the Dodgers
/snark/ Don’t they owe us a favor for Loaiza? /snark/
A little plumbing! Got to plumb! Plumb the depths! The depths of hell! - Larry David, CYE
by Swooney's Left Foot on
Jun 29, 2008 10:13 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Maybe they agreed,
“We’ll keep taking your pitchers once they’re done pitching well…” Next!
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on
Jun 30, 2008 9:05 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Blanton for Bailey?...
...sure, i’ll take a hit of your doob…
by oc on Jun 29, 2008 9:08 PM PDT 0 recs
GAUDIN is so much better than Blanton
I want him to take a “start” over All-Star Break against the bench to stretch out, and replace Blanton for the second half.
Can you imagine your fury if your pennant-contending team traded for chump-Blanton with an eye towards starting him in a playoff series? This guy can’t get outs against one of the worst offenses in baseball- how is he going to get outs in the playoffs?!?
by Mark Borgschulte on Jun 29, 2008 9:37 PM PDT 0 recs
In case
you didn’t get my drift- Blanton is worth diddly-squat. The man should be sent to the bullpen, and traded to a team desperate for a #4 starter in the off-season.
by Mark Borgschulte on Jun 29, 2008 9:38 PM PDT 0 recs
A pile of rocks!
(It’s catching on; I just know it is)
Brainless Automaton #439
by rubin sierra on Jun 29, 2008 10:17 PM PDT 0 recs
the market for blanton was last july
i guess we’ll ever know what prospects were offered from dodgers, mets, etc
maybe beane overrated his own player
this guy was the deal breaker from the dodgers side who they were unwilling to give up
http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?n=De%20Jesus%20%202B&pos=&sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=474443
by Asfan4ever723 on Jun 29, 2008 10:27 PM PDT 0 recs
Considering his D is supposed to be what makes him special,
I can see why the A’s wanted DeJesus so much – especially because at this time, we were all (myself included) ready to see the back of Crosby (and not in that “butt thread” way).
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on
Jun 30, 2008 9:07 AM PDT
up
0 recs
But his .687 OPS and atrocious defense have convinced you otherwise?
I have to say, I’m amazed at how much credit a couple of lucky weeks at the beginning of a season have bought Crosby. He’s as godawful as he ever was, but people have somehow had it fixed in their minds that “he’s doing good this year” and continue to believe it in defiance of all evidence.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jun 30, 2008 9:11 AM PDT
up
0 recs
You continue to rail on Crosby. Would you rather see, say, Petit given the SS job?
by mikev on
Jun 30, 2008 10:01 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Hell ****ing yes
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jun 30, 2008 11:43 AM PDT
up
0 recs
He's a doubles hitter and that's pretty much it
His OBP/SLG/OPS are not great but they are currently on pace to be his best since 2005, for what it’s worth.
You have to compare him to other Major League shortstops. Currently he’s tied for 5th in doubles, 3rd in RBI, 9th in total bases, 10th in walks, about 16th in OBP among those with 200+ ABs (MLB.com lists everyone), 13th in SLG (same criteria) and 16th in AVG (again, same criteria).
The errors are too high (4th most compared to 9th most chances), but his putout and assist totals are also in the top third in the league and the double plays turned are in the top 5.
Looking at it that way, some of those numbers are average to better than you seem to want to admit.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site
jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on
Jun 30, 2008 11:23 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Wow, Flashfire. It sounds like you're saying PT has it fixed in his mind
that Crosby’s “doing bad this year” – and is continuing to believe it in defiance of all evidence.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on
Jun 30, 2008 11:25 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I might be suggesting that.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site
jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on
Jun 30, 2008 11:32 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I figured - see, idiots understand each other
It’s kind of like a cult thing.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on
Jun 30, 2008 11:33 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Heh
If he wants to make the argument that Crosby’s not approaching the potential he first showed, that’d probably be a better approach to take.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site
jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on
Jun 30, 2008 11:36 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Bobby Crosby for MVP!
sorry….just doing a little Paul Baiting.
"I'm seeing more and more Paul-baiting these days."
by OptimistPrime on
Jun 30, 2008 1:03 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Certainly not "as godawful as he ever was."
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site
jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on
Jun 30, 2008 11:33 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I care very little about the counting stats
since his Iron Man act pretty much guarantees they’ll be better than those of a lot of teams’ shortstops.
His offense appears to be about league-average for a shortstop this season. Given his career stats, it is likely to regress downward, not upward. But let’s be generous and say he’s actually a league-average hitter for a shortstop.
Then you look at defense, and find that Crosby is essentially the worst shortstop in the league this season. In RZR, he’s the second-worst ahead of only Julio Lugo, with fewer OOZ plays than almost anyone. Dewan’s system had him on pace for a 20 runs season a few weeks ago. This is likely to get better- very few players are that bad, even Jeter, and he’s been solid in the past—but calling his defense fringe-average at this point is being really optimistic.
Add up the total package and you get a guy whose super-happy-optimistic-best case scenario is a league-average player. His real value is closer to replacement level. As long as he is playing for the A’s, he will be a serious drag on their playoff chances. And to make matters worse, him playing every game prevents anyone else from getting a look at the position.
If Crosby had his hand broken again tomorrow, I have not the slightest hesitation in saying that it would improve the A’s long term chances.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jun 30, 2008 11:56 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I kind of figured you'd actually try to use the fact he's healthy for once against him
As for the rest of your opinions about him, I’ll just agree to disagree. He is not as bad as you believe and an average shortstop on most teams is not going to make or break a team’s playoff chances.
To put it another way, Bobby Crosby is not among the issues the A’s are stuck dealing with this year.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site
jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on
Jun 30, 2008 12:05 PM PDT
up
0 recs
He's not average
That’s my point. He’s closer to replacement level than average. The value the A’s receive from him taking the field is very close to zero.
The A’s had damn well better deal with this issue this year. It’s not impossible to make the playoffs with a boat anchor like Crosby hanging around your neck, but it sure helps if you have Ortiz and Ramirez in your lineup.
This offseason is the time to buy a new shortstop if there ever was one. I’d sure rather see what the A’s actually have in Petit and Pennington than go into that offseason knowing only that Crosby is dismal.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jun 30, 2008 12:30 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Cool. I'm not going to waste my time on this topic with you any further.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site
jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on
Jun 30, 2008 12:49 PM PDT
up
0 recs
So if we were to "buy a new shortstop" this offseason, which one of these do you actually seeing us going out and getting:
The following is a list of the potential free agents at shorststop next year:
Orlando Cabrera, CWS, Alex Cintron, CWS, Royce Clayton, BOS, Alex Cora, BOS, David Eckstein, TOR, Adam Everett, MIN, Rafael Furcal, LAD, Cristian Guzman, WAS, Cesar Izturis, STL, Ramon Martinez, LAD, Juan Uribe, CWS, Chris Woodward, NYY,
Craig Counsell, MIL, *Edgar Renteria, DET, *Omar Vizquel, SF () denotes team or player option for ‘09.
"Mount it? I already did. Oh! You meant on the wall?!!
by rickey939 on
Jun 30, 2008 10:30 PM PDT
up
0 recs
What am I, clairvoyant?
I don’t know who the A’s are or would be getting. What I do know is that there are shortstops available at every price level from filler (Izturis) to All-Star (Furcal) and that does not happen very often. Last year Eckstein was the best available player on the market.
Whatever the A’s feel their needs are and budget will allow, they can obtain it this offseason.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jun 30, 2008 11:47 PM PDT
up
0 recs
If all those shortstops are going free agent next year
Doesn’t that also mean there will be an unusually high number of teams looking to buy, too?
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on
Jul 1, 2008 9:56 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Probably
I doubt Los Angeles will be buying, though, so that’s one down… Washington, who knows, Bowden could do anything… Minnesota isn’t a serious player given their ownership.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 1, 2008 10:59 AM PDT
up
0 recs
A Membership at the 24-Hour Fitness.
Oh wait, what we could get in return for him.
still Swish Fan #1.
by ChrisCEIT on Jun 29, 2008 10:52 PM PDT 0 recs
That IS NOT your picture is it?!
Good God I’ll trade 2 Joe Blantons and 5 Jack Custs for whoever is in ChrisCEIT’s picture!
by petitceebee on
Jun 29, 2008 11:01 PM PDT
up
0 recs
Why not:
A dozen bats and money for Chavvy’s medical bills.
by hyphybeast on Jun 29, 2008 11:13 PM PDT 0 recs
Blanton's "value"
I wouldn’t be surprised if Blanton isn’t trade this July, this offseason, or even right up until he hits free agency. Having him around for the next couple of years, and the draft picks the A’s will get as compensation when he leaves, will probably be more valuable than whatever he can fetch via trade.
Why? Because the rest of the rotation consists of two significant injury risks and two young guys headed for a career high in innings. In short, we’re counting on a lot of guys who haven’t cracked 200 IP in years, if ever, and the situation will probably be similar for the next couple of years. A guy like Blanton who has a track record of going well over 200 innings will be crucial.
What about Haren? Of course he’s better, and that’s why Beane got six prospects for him, 3 of which are already paying off. And having Blanton to fall back on made trading Haren easier, I’d imagine.
"We've come a long way, and I'm not talking about Virginia Slims, either." - Art Howe
by EastCoastA on Jun 30, 2008 12:02 AM PDT 0 recs
I don't see Blanton turning into draft picks
I don’t know the exact formula, but the basic idea is you only get draft picks if the guy you lose had good numbers. Blanton isn’t getting good numbers right now.
Also, it only happens if we offer him arbitration and he refuses it, which doesn’t seem very likely either.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on
Jun 30, 2008 3:07 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Carlos Silva was a Type A free agent
even after having a wretched 2006.
And Blanton’s numbers from this year won’t factor into the calculus in any event. (The Elias ranks only use the last two years’ data.) So unless you think he’s a true-talent 5 ERA starter, there’s little reason to worry about his ability to return comp picks.
I think you’re panicking based on a couple of bad starts.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jun 30, 2008 9:15 AM PDT
up
0 recs
What concerns me is the Silva-esque PATTERN
- High hits, very low BBs, overall success (Silva 2005, Blanton 2007),
- Then high hits, BBs up, not as successful but still useful (Silva 2007, Blanton 2008), followed by
- A stretch that looks more like…this year’s rendition of Silva (eew).
The good news is…Blanton is 27, not 39.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on
Jun 30, 2008 11:02 AM PDT
up
0 recs
For now, I’d swap him with Gaudin, at least until the All Star Break. Blanton needs a mental break from being ace on a staff where he receives minimal run support.
I don’t think we should pull the trigger on Blanton unless we get fair value. He is VERY valuable for what he saves the bullpen alone. He’s never hurt, is a given for 200+ IP, and when pitching as a #3 or lower, is a lock for 12+ wins.
Rotation:
Harden
Duke
Eveland/Smith
Gaudin
Eveland/Smith
by BillMoresi on Jun 30, 2008 12:17 AM PDT 0 recs
Rotation:
I’m not confortable penciling Harden in every 5th day just yet!
Beating LAA or wherever the fu*k they are, Priceless!
by MMunoz33 on
Jun 30, 2008 7:03 AM PDT
up
0 recs
No kidding! How quickly we forget.
Perhaps the one tactical error was not switching Harden’s and Blanton’s spots in the rotation early on, so that Harden could beat a bunch of pitchers 1-0 while Blanton won a few 5-4 games. Even though you wouldn’t think it would matter by May, Blanton really did seem to draw the other team’s ace an awful lot early on.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on
Jun 30, 2008 9:10 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Yes! Agreed.
While Harden is NOT hurt, why not have him pitch as the “ace”?
by BillMoresi on
Jun 30, 2008 2:29 PM PDT
up
0 recs
If we had the rotation set up to go
Harden, Duke, Blanton, Smith, Eveland, and Blanton faced the other team’s #3 starter some, sometimes the #2 or #4, and Harden/Duke tended to draw the top of the rotation, I wonder what our record would be.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on
Jun 30, 2008 2:35 PM PDT
up
0 recs
not sure why BB done what he done,
by putting Blanton into the #1 spot to start the season. Blanton’s not an ace, he’s a solid #3 at best, so why not market him as that. Doesn’t seem to be any point in “dressing him up” like that. Having him face other teams aces only brings down his W/L record. Granted, his ERA would probably be roughly the same. However, there probably a Bavasi or Sabean who would bite on a deal just because of a (more) respectable W/L record, ERA aside.
Relax. Alright, don't try to strike everybody out. Strike outs are boring, besides that, they're facist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
-- Crash Davis, from Bull Durham
by Kallus on Jun 30, 2008 10:37 AM PDT 0 recs
a realistic option (that we probably wouldn't want to do)
Trade Blanton to the Dodgers for Jeff Kent, with the Dodgers covering some reasonable share of Kent’s remaining ‘08 contract (approx $4.5M for the second half). We use Kent as a part-to-full-time RH DH, with an occasional start at 1B against LHSPs (thereby allowing Sweeney the elder, if he ever comes back, to avoid playing D).
Kent pretty much sucks this year, but he could have some value if he focuses 99% on hitting and is plugged in when he has promising pitcher matchups (of course, the switch to the AL could mitigate against that).
Honestly, though, that’s probably the best we could with Blanton.
Can an aging lemur suffer from dementia? @('.')@
by monkeyball on Jun 30, 2008 10:47 AM PDT 0 recs
I imagine the Yankees would give something up for Blanton
Same with Detroit, and several other clubs that are pretty close to 1st place and would love to swap their #5 starter for Blanton the last 81 games.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on
Jun 30, 2008 11:04 AM PDT
up
0 recs
possibly, sure
But Kent’s probably a better return than we’d get from either DET or NYY.
Kent’s half as expensive as Abreu, and Abreu’s a lefty. I don’t want the remainder of Giambi’s contract (and he’s starting to hit well, anyway; plus, again, lefty). I sure as shit don’t want Johnny Damon. I don’t really want Matsui (declining, injury-prone, not cheap, lefty). What’s more, they just signed Ponson, who was essentially free and can pretty much provide Blantonesque production for far less.
As for Detroit … well, Sheffield is kind of the twice-as-expensive (and more injury-prone and euqally-as-”done”) Kent on the Tigers roster.
I just don’t see how Beane would be able to finagle any pre-arb talent for Blanton at this point. Do you?
Can an aging lemur suffer from dementia? @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Jun 30, 2008 11:21 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Melky Cabrera, I suppose -
other than the fact that:
- They just lost Matsui
- We seem to have 3-4 Melky-clones right now already
- His name is Melky – what’s up with that?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on
Jun 30, 2008 11:26 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Good lord, would this be a bad idea
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jun 30, 2008 11:57 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Agreed
Jeff Kent would not be of any value to us. We already have basically three DH’s (although it seems like Cust is actually improving a tad in left field) that will be just as if not more productive than Jeff Kent. If we’re going to trade Blanton for anyone, it should not be an aging veteran with no future value o the organization.
by VORP is too nerdy on
Jun 30, 2008 12:11 PM PDT
up
0 recs
I mean, it goes beyond that
Kent is retiring—no comp picks. It would literally be trading 2 1/2 years of Blanton and the possibility of compensation for a half year of Kent’s corpse.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jun 30, 2008 12:32 PM PDT
up
0 recs
yeah, I didn't say it would be a good one
Just illustrating the point that trying to trade Blanton right now is a bad idea.
Can an aging lemur suffer from dementia? @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Jun 30, 2008 12:12 PM PDT
up
0 recs
See monkies and crabs from a $5 hooker
Which would be better than Jeff Kent in this case. As the dead line approaches I see some team(s) making an offer for Blanton. Will it be as good as it would have been this past off-season, most likely not, will it be as good as it could be if Joe picks it up the second half probably not. Any deal for just Blanton alone will not get the A’s back what they are giving up or the right handed bat that they need. But NY, Detroit, or another pitching starved team will be looking/hoping to fleece Joe at the deadline, but BB won’t let himself get fleeced.
by A'sfaninNC on Jun 30, 2008 1:08 PM PDT 0 recs
Ace vs Ace
There’s a lot of discussion on this thread about how Blanton, as our “ace”, has to match up against the other team’s ace. Elsewhere it’s been mentioned that after a few weeks into the season, the rotations get mixed up anyway, so our #1 won’t necessarily face their #1. Not knowing how true this is, I decided to do a little research.
Here is a list of the opposing starters Blanton has faced this season, with their ERA and where they rank on their team’s staff. The rank is somewhat subjective, so I defined it simply as how they placed when the team’s regular starters are ranked by their ERA as of right now.
3/25 v BOS - Matsuzaka - 3.21 - 1 4/01 v BOS - Matsuzaka - 3.21 - 1 4/06 v CLE - Lee - 2.34 - 1 4/11 @ CLE - Sabathia - 3.78 - 4 4/16 v SEA - F Hernandez - 2.83 - 1 4/22 v MIN - L Hernandez - 5.22 - 5 4/27 @ SEA - F Hernandez - 2.83 - 1 5/02 v TEX - Padilla - 4.13 - 1 5/07 v BAL - Guthrie - 3.50 - 1 5/14 @ CLE - Sabathia - 3.78 - 4 5/19 v TB - Shields - 3.76 - 2.5 5/25 v BOS - Lester - 3.48 - 2 5/31 @ TEX - Ponson - 3.50 - 1 6/06 v LAA - Lackey - 1.44 - 1 6/12 v NYY - Pettitte - 3.98 - 3 6/18 @ ARI - Haren - 2.85 - 1 6/24 v PHI - Moyer - 4.13 - 2 6/29 v SF - Sanchez - 3.79 - 2
Shields is listed as 2.5 because he and Garza have identical ERAs at the moment. Ponsons pitched for Texas when Blanton faced him but is with the Yankees now. Since Ponson’s current ERA is better than that of any starters for the Rangers or the Yankees, I figure that makes him a #1 (in spite of the fact that Padilla also counts as #1 for Texas, since his ERA is better than that of any current Ranger).
Your mileage may vary. Change the ranking numbers if you like; that’s why the names are there.
My conclusion: Blanton really does face the opposing team’s best pitchers. In 10 games out of 18 he’s faced the other team’s #1. And in the 8 games where he didn’t, for half of those he faced the #2 (or tied for #2).
The four times he didn’t face the #1 or #2, his opponents were C.C. Sabathia (twice), Andy Pettitte, and Livan Hernandez — all experienced veterans with more than 100 career wins.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on Jun 30, 2008 7:34 PM PDT 0 recs
Awesome list.
When Sabathia is listed as a 4, and by the ranking system is the “worst” pitcher Blanton has pitched against this year, you know Blanton is pitching a touch match up EVERY time haha.
Two pitchers with ERAs above 4, one with an ERA above 5…. the rest 3 and under. Blanton has had his work cut out for him.
His next start is against Buehrle (6-6, 3.79), who has been pitching brilliantly as of late. The good news, to my recollection: we give him fits at the Colesium.
by BillMoresi on
Jun 30, 2008 10:16 PM PDT
up
0 recs
hunh?
The rank is somewhat subjective, so I defined it simply as how they placed when the team’s regular starters are ranked by their ERA as of right now.
OK, we’re arguing two different things entirely here: No one, myself included, can successfully argue that Joe hasn’t faced mostly quality opposing pitchers so far this year. That’s self-evident. It’s also, in the first 2-4 weeks of the season, due to the way rotations line up; and thereafter, due mostly to luck.
However, to create an ex post facto definition of what constitutes an “ace” (not being the first in a team’s rotation, but leading it in ERA, which isn’t necessarily even the clearest indicator of performance) in an attempt to further investigate the supposed effect of rotation-alignment matchups is utterly specious.
And you can’t argue that you’re simply looking at the quality of pitching that Joe’s faced:
Elsewhere it’s been mentioned that after a few weeks into the season, the rotations get mixed up anyway, so our #1 won’t necessarily face their #1. Not knowing how true this is, I decided to do a little research.
You state that you’re testing the hypothesis that rotations don’t align in the regular season—and then, after you do your research, you change the definition of what constitutes an ace.
Sure, yes, your conclusion - Blanton really does face the opposing team’s best pitchers - is unassailable. But that wasn’t what you stated you were out to prove or disprove.
I fail to see how this assessment - that Joe’s been unlucky in who he’s faced by way of opposing pitchers, with regard to his W/L record - differs from “Emil Brown was carrying our team in April!”
He's a very personable, sweet, nice chimp. He's not going to be aggressive unless he's provoked. @('.')@
by monkeyball on
Jul 1, 2008 7:07 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Clarification
OK, I don’t know what sort of freaky argument I’ve accidentally stepped into here, but it sounds like you’re spoiling for a fight that I have no interest in.
No one, myself included, can successfully argue that Joe hasn’t faced mostly quality opposing pitchers so far this year. That’s self-evident.
Maybe it was “self-evident” to you, but I honestly did not know whether Blanton had faced really good opposing pitchers or it just seemed like that. I thought it was an interesting question, and I wanted to know the answer. I haven’t memorized all 18 of his starts, and even if I had, when I see the other guys’ names I don’t always know how good they are. I had to look it up. I looked it up because I didn’t already know and I wanted to find out. If I already knew what I was going to find, I wouldn’t have wasted my time.
Maybe the rest of you look at data for a different reason. Maybe you’ve already decided what your argument is, and you’re looking for numbers to back you up so you can say that you’re right and someone else is wrong. Personally, I think that’s stupid.
Sure, yes, your conclusion – Blanton really does face the opposing team’s best pitchers – is unassailable. But that wasn’t what you stated you were out to prove or disprove.
Dude, you just don’t get it. I wasn’t out to “prove or disprove” anything. I didn’t know, I wanted to find out, so I looked it up. Then I thought the information was interesting so I shared it with others.
I don’t mean to pick on you personally, Monkeyball, but this whole attitude pisses me off. These stats discussions could be interesting, but when people are less interested in finding out what the numbers really tell us than in scoring points in the meta-argument, I just hate that.
Go fling your “ex post facto definition”, “utterly specious” and “testing the hypothesis” at somebody else.
"Dispatch knuckleheadedness with Bond-like aplomb." –74mk
by iglew on
Jul 1, 2008 10:31 AM PDT
up
0 recs
Trading Blanton now would be foolish
I don’t think he should be traded but if he were to be traded, this certainly isn’t the time to do it. Knowing how wildly the pendulum swings at the site, when he reaches the point where a trade should be considered, we’ll hear screams of, “Blanton’s on a roll! We can’t trade him now.”
Root for the Giants? Not even if they're playing al-Qaeda!
by Monday Fan on Jul 1, 2008 12:04 AM PDT 0 recs
Best way to judge whether to trade a player?
Poll the fanbase on whether he should be traded or not, then do the opposite of what they think.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jul 1, 2008 10:54 AM PDT
up
0 recs
I've considered your idea, and decided to do the opposite!
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
by Nico on
Jul 1, 2008 11:53 AM PDT
up
0 recs










