The Blanton Ripoff

viper · Post by **viper** » Sat May 16, 2009 3:18 am

I was at the game last evening only 5 rows from the field pretty much in line from the SS & 1B down the 1B side. Now I am not a scout nor claim be have there skills in evaluating players but I would not want Blanton on my fantasy team based on my personal observations from last evening. And I have watched baseball enough to have attended a game where, as best I recall, it was Don Drysdale going against Lou Burdette.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Sat May 16, 2009 3:22 am

Originally posted by Buster:

So is Blanton. sorry, blanton's numbers don't indicate that. however, you post indicates your analysis is

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Sat May 16, 2009 3:24 am

Originally posted by viper:

I was at the game last evening only 5 rows from the field pretty much in line from the SS & 1B down the 1B side. Now I am not a scout nor claim be have there skills in evaluating players but I would not want Blanton on my fantasy team based on my personal observations from last evening. And I have watched baseball enough to have attended a game where, as best I recall, it was Don Drysdale going against Lou Burdette. using a one game sample size (based on your personal observations from last evening) is lUnAcY! you and buster should get a room!

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Sat May 16, 2009 3:29 am

Originally posted by Buster:

I realize the value of the K/BB and the K/IP statistics. i don't think you do. sorry buster. that IS the foundation for having a good pitcher. if u don't realize that, you are a lost cause...like most owners (so you'll have company)

Buster · Post by **Buster** » Sat May 16, 2009 3:52 am

One game may be an anomoly. Seven games is a trend.

In the categories that count:

Blanton 1 win, 0 saves, 33Ks, 1.68 WHIP, and 6.86 ERA.

Keep starting him. That K/BB ratio would really be valuable if that category was part of this competition. Alas, it is not.

Buster

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Sat May 16, 2009 6:02 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by Buster:

I realize the value of the K/BB and the K/IP statistics. i don't think you do. sorry buster. that IS the foundation for having a good pitcher. if u don't realize that, you are a lost cause...like most owners (so you'll have company)

[/QUOTE]The ability to avoid allowing hard contact isn't captured in those two stats, thus I think your foundation is a little shaky.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Sat May 16, 2009 6:03 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by Buster:

I realize the value of the K/BB and the K/IP statistics. i don't think you do. sorry buster. that IS the foundation for having a good pitcher. if u don't realize that, you are a lost cause...like most owners (so you'll have company)

[/QUOTE]I never understood the value of the K/BB stat honestly. For one thing, you are counting strikeouts twice if you use these two stats together. I would further argue that it is far more valuable to know the exact K/9 and BB/9 rates rather than an arbitrary comparison of the two. A guy who has a 12/4 rate has a much different value than a guy who has a 6/2 rate, but they both come up as 3.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Sat May 16, 2009 9:12 am

Originally posted by Buster:

One game may be an anomoly. Seven games is a trend.

In the categories that count:

Blanton 1 win, 0 saves, 33Ks, 1.68 WHIP, and 6.86 ERA.

Keep starting him. That K/BB ratio would really be valuable if that category was part of this competition. Alas, it is not.

Buster buster - i will, as long as his k/9 and bb/9 dictate it. i'm guessing you are the type of owner that must look for pitchers with bad k/9 and bad bb/9? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

some of you guys make no sense when you sit down and think about it.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Sat May 16, 2009 9:13 am

Originally posted by bjoak:

quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by Buster:

I realize the value of the K/BB and the K/IP statistics. i don't think you do. sorry buster. that IS the foundation for having a good pitcher. if u don't realize that, you are a lost cause...like most owners (so you'll have company)

[/QUOTE]I never understood the value of the K/BB stat honestly. For one thing, you are counting strikeouts twice if you use these two stats together. I would further argue that it is far more valuable to know the exact K/9 and BB/9 rates rather than an arbitrary comparison of the two. A guy who has a 12/4 rate has a much different value than a guy who has a 6/2 rate, but they both come up as 3. [/QUOTE]yes, k/bb shouldn't be looked at. it's k/9 and bb/9.

Gordon Gekko II · Post by **Gordon Gekko II** » Sat May 16, 2009 9:14 am

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

The ability to avoid allowing hard contact isn't captured in those two stats, thus I think your foundation is a little shaky. wrong. k/9 and bb/9 tell me (for the most part) what type of pitcher i'm getting. there are other variables i look at, but there is no need to make them public.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Sat May 16, 2009 10:04 am

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

The ability to avoid allowing hard contact isn't captured in those two stats, thus I think your foundation is a little shaky. Perhaps it is counter-intuitive or better said "wicked hard" to believe, but as far as I know, there is no evidence that avoiding hard contact is indeed an ability -- aka a skill.

At minimum, it is not measurable, predictable or most important sustainable.

Regression analysis by my site partner suggests a pitcher can affect if a batter hits a ground ball or a fly ball while the batter controls if he hits a line drive or something else.

That said, I have done some real preliminary work that shows a pitcher has some control over his BABIP, which is the best measure we have for hard contact.

The BABIP for pitchers batting is lower than a regular player.

The BABIP of a LHB vs. a LHP is lower than a RHB vs. a LHP and vice versa.

The collective BABIP with bases empty is lower than with runners on (which can be a way to look at windup vs. stretch).

That said, several years back, my site motto was sabermetric analysis blended with scouting and a little gut instinct.

In absence of the first, we need to sometimes rely on the last two.

[ May 16, 2009, 04:06 PM: Message edited by: ToddZ ]

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Sat May 16, 2009 10:10 am

Originally posted by bjoak:

I never understood the value of the K/BB stat honestly. For one thing, you are counting strikeouts twice if you use these two stats together. I would further argue that it is far more valuable to know the exact K/9 and BB/9 rates rather than an arbitrary comparison of the two. A guy who has a 12/4 rate has a much different value than a guy who has a 6/2 rate, but they both come up as 3. As a stand alone stat, K/BB is not telling, but when used as part of a filter with other stats like HR/9 or GB% (which can be argued looks at the same thing as HR/9) it can be useful.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Sat May 16, 2009 10:56 am

Originally posted by ToddZ:

quote:Originally posted by bjoak:

I never understood the value of the K/BB stat honestly. For one thing, you are counting strikeouts twice if you use these two stats together. I would further argue that it is far more valuable to know the exact K/9 and BB/9 rates rather than an arbitrary comparison of the two. A guy who has a 12/4 rate has a much different value than a guy who has a 6/2 rate, but they both come up as 3. As a stand alone stat, K/BB is not telling, but when used as part of a filter with other stats like HR/9 or GB% (which can be argued looks at the same thing as HR/9) it can be useful. [/QUOTE]Mm, I just don't see how it is more useful than looking at the BB/9 and K/9 by themselves. I guess if you don't have a way to measure their value it is easier to compare players and just see who has the better K/BB, but for me it seems useless, which is another way of saying it is worthless when trying to make the most accurate pitcher projections.

[ May 16, 2009, 04:56 PM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

DOUGHBOYS · Post by **DOUGHBOYS** » Sat May 16, 2009 11:00 am

Originally posted by ToddZ:

That said, I have done some real preliminary work that shows a pitcher has some control over his BABIP, which is the best measure we have for hard contact. Really? This doesen't seem right. Avg and BABIP can be misleading in how we arrive at the figure.

Some hitters are downright lucky with bloop hits. Some hitters benefit from their speed, while getting 75 foot infield hits. I would think gathering data for hard contact using BABIP would be tough.

Somebody was measuring, not only home runs, but other hits by mph, figuring in trajectory, wouldn't this be a better measure for hard contact?

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Sat May 16, 2009 11:02 am

Originally posted by ToddZ:

quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:

The ability to avoid allowing hard contact isn't captured in those two stats, thus I think your foundation is a little shaky. Perhaps it is counter-intuitive or better said "wicked hard" to believe, but as far as I know, there is no evidence that avoiding hard contact is indeed an ability -- aka a skill.

At minimum, it is not measurable, predictable or most important sustainable.

Regression analysis by my site partner suggests a pitcher can affect if a batter hits a ground ball or a fly ball while the batter controls if he hits a line drive or something else.

That said, I have done some real preliminary work that shows a pitcher has some control over his BABIP, which is the best measure we have for hard contact.

The BABIP for pitchers batting is lower than a regular player.

The BABIP of a LHB vs. a LHP is lower than a RHB vs. a LHP and vice versa.

The collective BABIP with bases empty is lower than with runners on (which can be a way to look at windup vs. stretch).

That said, several years back, my site motto was sabermetric analysis blended with scouting and a little gut instinct.

In absence of the first, we need to sometimes rely on the last two. [/QUOTE]BABIP tends to be higher for rookie pitchers.

BABIP tends to be lower for knuckleballers.

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Sat May 16, 2009 11:05 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

That said, I have done some real preliminary work that shows a pitcher has some control over his BABIP, which is the best measure we have for hard contact. Really? This doesen't seem right. Avg and BABIP can be misleading in how we arrive at the figure.

Some hitters are downright lucky with bloop hits. Some hitters benefit from their speed, while getting 75 foot infield hits. I would think gathering data for hard contact using BABIP would be tough.

Somebody was measuring, not only home runs, but other hits by mph, figuring in trajectory, wouldn't this be a better measure for hard contact? [/QUOTE]I think Todd's point is that hard contact is pretty worthless if it doesn't affect BABIP; therefore you don't need a more accurate measure.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Sat May 16, 2009 11:09 am

Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

That said, I have done some real preliminary work that shows a pitcher has some control over his BABIP, which is the best measure we have for hard contact. Really? This doesen't seem right. Avg and BABIP can be misleading in how we arrive at the figure.

Some hitters are downright lucky with bloop hits. Some hitters benefit from their speed, while getting 75 foot infield hits. I would think gathering data for hard contact using BABIP would be tough.

Somebody was measuring, not only home runs, but other hits by mph, figuring in trajectory, wouldn't this be a better measure for hard contact? [/QUOTE]I am admittedly using a rather loose definition of hard contact.

Line drive = hard contact

LD% drives BABIP, though there are other factors, more of which are coming to light.

FWIW, hit trajectory, speed off the bat and the like is being measured.

[ May 16, 2009, 05:09 PM: Message edited by: ToddZ ]

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Sat May 16, 2009 11:14 am

Another one: BABIP tends to be much lower for closers, which I assume is an artificial effect created by the fact that they sometimes come in in the middle of an inning with guys on base and get a free out via the double play.

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Sat May 16, 2009 11:19 am

Originally posted by bjoak:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

quote:Originally posted by bjoak:

I never understood the value of the K/BB stat honestly. For one thing, you are counting strikeouts twice if you use these two stats together. I would further argue that it is far more valuable to know the exact K/9 and BB/9 rates rather than an arbitrary comparison of the two. A guy who has a 12/4 rate has a much different value than a guy who has a 6/2 rate, but they both come up as 3. As a stand alone stat, K/BB is not telling, but when used as part of a filter with other stats like HR/9 or GB% (which can be argued looks at the same thing as HR/9) it can be useful. [/QUOTE]Mm, I just don't see how it is more useful than looking at the BB/9 and K/9 by themselves. I guess if you don't have a way to measure their value it is easier to compare players and just see who has the better K/BB, but for me it seems useless, which is another way of saying it is worthless when trying to make the most accurate pitcher projections. [/QUOTE]Never said it was MORE useful.

I'm actually not saying what I want to say very well, which is going to end up being an argument that K/BB is rather useless.

The only point I wanted to make was a 9:4.5 is different than 5:2.5, the effect of which depends on the HR/9.

GOD Loves You · Post by **GOD Loves You** » Sat May 16, 2009 2:04 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by bjoak:

quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:

quote:Originally posted by Buster:

I realize the value of the K/BB and the K/IP statistics. i don't think you do. sorry buster. that IS the foundation for having a good pitcher. if u don't realize that, you are a lost cause...like most owners (so you'll have company)

[/QUOTE]I never understood the value of the K/BB stat honestly. For one thing, you are counting strikeouts twice if you use these two stats together. I would further argue that it is far more valuable to know the exact K/9 and BB/9 rates rather than an arbitrary comparison of the two. A guy who has a 12/4 rate has a much different value than a guy who has a 6/2 rate, but they both come up as 3. [/QUOTE]yes, k/bb shouldn't be looked at. it's k/9 and bb/9. [/QUOTE]Also, do not forget to look at the ER/K. These should be about equal if you want to establish an even better foundation.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Sat May 16, 2009 2:50 pm

Originally posted by ToddZ:

quote:Originally posted by DOUGHBOYS:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

That said, I have done some real preliminary work that shows a pitcher has some control over his BABIP, which is the best measure we have for hard contact. Really? This doesen't seem right. Avg and BABIP can be misleading in how we arrive at the figure.

Some hitters are downright lucky with bloop hits. Some hitters benefit from their speed, while getting 75 foot infield hits. I would think gathering data for hard contact using BABIP would be tough.

Somebody was measuring, not only home runs, but other hits by mph, figuring in trajectory, wouldn't this be a better measure for hard contact? [/QUOTE]I am admittedly using a rather loose definition of hard contact.

Line drive = hard contact

LD% drives BABIP, though there are other factors, more of which are coming to light.

FWIW, hit trajectory, speed off the bat and the like is being measured. [/QUOTE]I would consider HRs and deep flyouts hard contact as well as line drives. But I'm also a skeptical of the LD% stat since that is an objective measure by someone - and I assume that someone is probably a different person for different games.

And not all is easily measurable even if it were objectively consistent, which is why watching games is critical.

I forget the measured figures, but the human mind can take in X amount of observations per second which is equal to many supercomputers. Only a tiny % of those observations are processed consciously, but they exist and with repetition can aid in decision processes ... such as "drop Joe Blanton before he kills my team".

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Sat May 16, 2009 3:01 pm

"... such as "drop Joe Blanton before he kills my team".

"

Great lead in before this hammer!

Crazy Like a Fox · Post by **Crazy Like a Fox** » Sat May 16, 2009 6:09 pm

I guess all these stats are "contrary" to an alarming trend here for Blanton. Horrible last year, horrible this year, next year, he'll be more a study of who not to draft instead of sabermetrics.

How's that for analysis? And it really didn't take much thought. I'm not sure why he was intriguing for somebody to draft him. Not sure why he was intriguing to analyze after his aweful start/career. Not sure why we're even talking about him.

When has he ever been good?? Draftable? Apparently for some. Difficulty sitting him or dare I say, dropping the guy who is killing your team?

I don't get it.

I guess I look at Joe Blanton and see Joe Blanton. Others look at Joe Blanton and see Cliff Lee 2008? That's fine if people look at K/BB ratio and all those other numbers (I do too) to try and determine future success out of a pitcher, but if the guy has never shown a propensity to be even a 5th starter in a 15 team league format (maybe 3 years ago in a great pitcher's park) and he's got a 6.80 e.r.a. and 1.70 whip to start the year (apparently still not disproving how bad he is) then it's time to take the clouds out of your eyes.

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Sun May 17, 2009 10:42 am

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

"... such as "drop Joe Blanton before he kills my team".

"

Great lead in before this hammer!

I just bid -1 on him....

Glenneration X · Post by **Glenneration X** » Sun May 17, 2009 11:09 am

Five pages of posts on this guy??

Who are we talking about.....Joe Blanton or Tom Seaver?