Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 3:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/23/2016 2:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/22/2016 2:36:00 PM (view original):
Which is the more disastrous inning?

A: single, fly out, GIDP

or

B: strikeout, strikeout, strikeout

Inning A was worse for the offense even though zero runs scored in both innings.

If you ordered the 6 events from good to bad, they'd go:

1. Single
t2. K's & fly out
3. GIDP

SO.

*******.

STUPID.

For ****'s sake. When he explains how an inning that begins with a hit is WORSE than an inning with 3 consecutive whiffs, please quote it. I can't think of one person, BL excluded, that would take an inning with NO baserunners over one with baserunners.

Posted by Jtpsops on 6/23/2016 3:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 2:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 2:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/23/2016 2:47:00 PM (view original):
Not really. The vast majority of outs aren't "productive" and even the "productive" ones are just slightly less bad than normal outs. And since you take the good with the bad (guys who make a lot of outs in play do so in all situations), double plays more than wipe away any benefit of "productive" outs.

Which inning is preferable, i.e. had more potential to score runs?

A: single, fly out, GIDP

or

B: strikeout, strikeout, strikeout

I love it when you guys are so stupid that you make BLs point for him and you don't even realize it.

Of course A had more potential to score runs. A guy got on base. But they didn't score any runs, and the inning was just as short, in large part because of the massive negative impact of the GIDP.

All of the Ks in your scenario B occurred with the bases empty. An out in play in any of those PA would have had 0 chance of being "productive." You're illustrating clearly why GIDP are so much more harmful than Ks - most Ks come in scenarios where they are no different from outs in play, and DPs are crushing.

I think you need to provide some numbers. You keep talking about GIDP cancelling/balancing out productive outs. I can almost guarantee the average hitter has far less GIDP in a season than productive outs (sacrifices or outs that move a runner up).

Absolutely a K is better than a DP with a runner on first. But you're acting like every ball put in play in that situation will be a DP. Take Alcides Escobar for example - leading the league in outs made and sacrifice hits, yet not even top 20 in GIDP. Clearly double plays don't happen as often as you seem to think.

Sometimes, looking at things at the 40,000 level will let you see things that you can't see at ground level.

But sometimes, drawing definite conclusions from what you see (or think you see) at the 40,000 foot level may not be the best idea.

This is one of those times.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/23/2016 3:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 3:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/23/2016 2:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/22/2016 2:36:00 PM (view original):
Which is the more disastrous inning?

A: single, fly out, GIDP

or

B: strikeout, strikeout, strikeout

Inning A was worse for the offense even though zero runs scored in both innings.

If you ordered the 6 events from good to bad, they'd go:

1. Single
t2. K's & fly out
3. GIDP

SO.

*******.

STUPID.

For ****'s sake. When he explains how an inning that begins with a hit is WORSE than an inning with 3 consecutive whiffs, please quote it. I can't think of one person, BL excluded, that would take an inning with NO baserunners over one with baserunners.

BL is stuck on the Stupid-Go-Round, and can't get off.

This has to be my favorite BL thread ever.

I get not backing off the stupid, it's what BL does, but adding to it seems to take it to another level.

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 3:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 2:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 2:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/23/2016 2:47:00 PM (view original):
Not really. The vast majority of outs aren't "productive" and even the "productive" ones are just slightly less bad than normal outs. And since you take the good with the bad (guys who make a lot of outs in play do so in all situations), double plays more than wipe away any benefit of "productive" outs.

Which inning is preferable, i.e. had more potential to score runs?

A: single, fly out, GIDP

or

B: strikeout, strikeout, strikeout

I love it when you guys are so stupid that you make BLs point for him and you don't even realize it.

Of course A had more potential to score runs. A guy got on base. But they didn't score any runs, and the inning was just as short, in large part because of the massive negative impact of the GIDP.

All of the Ks in your scenario B occurred with the bases empty. An out in play in any of those PA would have had 0 chance of being "productive." You're illustrating clearly why GIDP are so much more harmful than Ks - most Ks come in scenarios where they are no different from outs in play, and DPs are crushing.

So, in your expert opinion, three whiffs in an inning is no worse than any other inning which goes three up, three down, regardless of what happened?

Yeah, you're a ******* rocket surgeon too.

I mean, the 3 Ks likely cost the pitcher more against his pitch count. In the modern game, that matters a little...

Other than that, I don't see how one three-up/three-down inning is better than the other. One was looking better until the DP massacred it. But it didn't end up better.

Posted by Jtpsops on 6/23/2016 3:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 2:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 2:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/23/2016 2:47:00 PM (view original):
Not really. The vast majority of outs aren't "productive" and even the "productive" ones are just slightly less bad than normal outs. And since you take the good with the bad (guys who make a lot of outs in play do so in all situations), double plays more than wipe away any benefit of "productive" outs.

Which inning is preferable, i.e. had more potential to score runs?

A: single, fly out, GIDP

or

B: strikeout, strikeout, strikeout

I love it when you guys are so stupid that you make BLs point for him and you don't even realize it.

Of course A had more potential to score runs. A guy got on base. But they didn't score any runs, and the inning was just as short, in large part because of the massive negative impact of the GIDP.

All of the Ks in your scenario B occurred with the bases empty. An out in play in any of those PA would have had 0 chance of being "productive." You're illustrating clearly why GIDP are so much more harmful than Ks - most Ks come in scenarios where they are no different from outs in play, and DPs are crushing.

I think you need to provide some numbers. You keep talking about GIDP cancelling/balancing out productive outs. I can almost guarantee the average hitter has far less GIDP in a season than productive outs (sacrifices or outs that move a runner up).

Absolutely a K is better than a DP with a runner on first. But you're acting like every ball put in play in that situation will be a DP. Take Alcides Escobar for example - leading the league in outs made and sacrifice hits, yet not even top 20 in GIDP. Clearly double plays don't happen as often as you seem to think.

I did that a day or 2 ago in a response to Mike.

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/21/2016 3:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/21/2016 2:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by sjpoker on 6/21/2016 2:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/21/2016 12:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by toddcommish on 6/21/2016 12:36:00 PM (view original):
So waitaminnit... "An out is an out", unless....
- hitter reaches on an error (and possibly advances a runner)
- hitter reaches on a strikeout that the catcher doesn't catch
- hits a grounder that advances a runner
- hits a flyball that advances a runner
- hits into a double-play (worse than a plain old out)

And we have ROE data since the 70's which makes all sorts of historical significance.... aside from the first 90 years of the game.

Do we need to go back to the start just for you?

Roll back however many pages to the start of this and see where I said:

1) My argument is that when you look at X player's stats, how he made his outs doesn't matter. How often he made them is what matters.

2) You seem to be arguing that there are situations where a certain type of out would be preferable to another type. Example deep fly ball to score a runner vs pop up. I've never denied that these situations exist but they just don't matter much in the big picture. Teams that strikeout less don't score more runs. Teams that make all outs less frequently do score more runs.

Or maybe you'll believe it from MikeT23:

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/16/2016 1:35:00 PM (view original):
For ****'s sake. This has been done time and time again.

By and large, the type of out is irrelevant. For every advanced runner or sacrifice fly to score a run, there is a double play grounder.

By and large, the type of out is irrelevant to what?

Over the course of a season/career, the type of out made is irrelevant. It could be a groundout, flyout or strikeout. If a guy made 7000 outs, odds are he advanced a runner about as often as he hit into a double play when he got out.

This isn't technically correct. It's not the numbers that even out, it's the value. If you assume that about 80% of all errors put a guy who should have been out on base (I don't know anywhere that differentiates between errors which put a runner on and errors which give up extra bases, but I've seen 80% as a decent estimate), then since 1990 the average teams hits into about 37.5 more DPs than it makes errors. Assuming a fairly random distribution of errors, that means an average team has -37.5 total 'extra outs' on outs in play. Over the same time frame, the average team has ~99 SH + SF. So they get 99 intentional free bases, plus some additional unintentional sacrifice groundballs. Outs are definitely more costly than free bases are valuable.

Here.

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 3:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 3:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 2:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 2:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/23/2016 2:47:00 PM (view original):
Not really. The vast majority of outs aren't "productive" and even the "productive" ones are just slightly less bad than normal outs. And since you take the good with the bad (guys who make a lot of outs in play do so in all situations), double plays more than wipe away any benefit of "productive" outs.

Which inning is preferable, i.e. had more potential to score runs?

A: single, fly out, GIDP

or

B: strikeout, strikeout, strikeout

I love it when you guys are so stupid that you make BLs point for him and you don't even realize it.

Of course A had more potential to score runs. A guy got on base. But they didn't score any runs, and the inning was just as short, in large part because of the massive negative impact of the GIDP.

All of the Ks in your scenario B occurred with the bases empty. An out in play in any of those PA would have had 0 chance of being "productive." You're illustrating clearly why GIDP are so much more harmful than Ks - most Ks come in scenarios where they are no different from outs in play, and DPs are crushing.

So, in your expert opinion, three whiffs in an inning is no worse than any other inning which goes three up, three down, regardless of what happened?

Yeah, you're a ******* rocket surgeon too.

I mean, the 3 Ks likely cost the pitcher more against his pitch count. In the modern game, that matters a little...

Other than that, I don't see how one three-up/three-down inning is better than the other. One was looking better until the DP massacred it. But it didn't end up better.

Exactly. They both ended up at the same place but the DP was so costly.

But this is why specific examples are pointless. We could all come up with scenarios that argue one side or another.

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 3:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 3:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 2:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 2:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/23/2016 2:47:00 PM (view original):
Not really. The vast majority of outs aren't "productive" and even the "productive" ones are just slightly less bad than normal outs. And since you take the good with the bad (guys who make a lot of outs in play do so in all situations), double plays more than wipe away any benefit of "productive" outs.

Which inning is preferable, i.e. had more potential to score runs?

A: single, fly out, GIDP

or

B: strikeout, strikeout, strikeout

I love it when you guys are so stupid that you make BLs point for him and you don't even realize it.

Of course A had more potential to score runs. A guy got on base. But they didn't score any runs, and the inning was just as short, in large part because of the massive negative impact of the GIDP.

All of the Ks in your scenario B occurred with the bases empty. An out in play in any of those PA would have had 0 chance of being "productive." You're illustrating clearly why GIDP are so much more harmful than Ks - most Ks come in scenarios where they are no different from outs in play, and DPs are crushing.

So, in your expert opinion, three whiffs in an inning is no worse than any other inning which goes three up, three down, regardless of what happened?

Yeah, you're a ******* rocket surgeon too.

I mean, the 3 Ks likely cost the pitcher more against his pitch count. In the modern game, that matters a little...

Other than that, I don't see how one three-up/three-down inning is better than the other. One was looking better until the DP massacred it. But it didn't end up better.

This is retarded.

While the result may have been the same, the opportunity was not. EVERYBODY, except BL and now you, will take the better opportunity to score even if scoring doesn't happen.

As I told BL, even his precious WAR counts non-scoring accomplishments.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/23/2016 3:31:00 PM (view original):
I get not backing off the stupid, it's what BL does, but adding to it seems to take it to another level.

You agree with me that an out is an out.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/23/2016 3:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 3:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 3:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 2:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 2:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/23/2016 2:47:00 PM (view original):
Not really. The vast majority of outs aren't "productive" and even the "productive" ones are just slightly less bad than normal outs. And since you take the good with the bad (guys who make a lot of outs in play do so in all situations), double plays more than wipe away any benefit of "productive" outs.

Which inning is preferable, i.e. had more potential to score runs?

A: single, fly out, GIDP

or

B: strikeout, strikeout, strikeout

I love it when you guys are so stupid that you make BLs point for him and you don't even realize it.

Of course A had more potential to score runs. A guy got on base. But they didn't score any runs, and the inning was just as short, in large part because of the massive negative impact of the GIDP.

All of the Ks in your scenario B occurred with the bases empty. An out in play in any of those PA would have had 0 chance of being "productive." You're illustrating clearly why GIDP are so much more harmful than Ks - most Ks come in scenarios where they are no different from outs in play, and DPs are crushing.

So, in your expert opinion, three whiffs in an inning is no worse than any other inning which goes three up, three down, regardless of what happened?

Yeah, you're a ******* rocket surgeon too.

I mean, the 3 Ks likely cost the pitcher more against his pitch count. In the modern game, that matters a little...

Other than that, I don't see how one three-up/three-down inning is better than the other. One was looking better until the DP massacred it. But it didn't end up better.

This is retarded.

While the result may have been the same, the opportunity was not. EVERYBODY, except BL and now you, will take the better opportunity to score even if scoring doesn't happen.

As I told BL, even his precious WAR counts non-scoring accomplishments.

If you think everybody would take one 3-up/3-down over another you must have really stupid friends.

I'd take the individual accomplishments of A over B, but on a team basis they are identical.

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 3:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/23/2016 3:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 3:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 3:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 2:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 2:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/23/2016 2:47:00 PM (view original):
Not really. The vast majority of outs aren't "productive" and even the "productive" ones are just slightly less bad than normal outs. And since you take the good with the bad (guys who make a lot of outs in play do so in all situations), double plays more than wipe away any benefit of "productive" outs.

Which inning is preferable, i.e. had more potential to score runs?

A: single, fly out, GIDP

or

B: strikeout, strikeout, strikeout

I love it when you guys are so stupid that you make BLs point for him and you don't even realize it.

Of course A had more potential to score runs. A guy got on base. But they didn't score any runs, and the inning was just as short, in large part because of the massive negative impact of the GIDP.

All of the Ks in your scenario B occurred with the bases empty. An out in play in any of those PA would have had 0 chance of being "productive." You're illustrating clearly why GIDP are so much more harmful than Ks - most Ks come in scenarios where they are no different from outs in play, and DPs are crushing.

So, in your expert opinion, three whiffs in an inning is no worse than any other inning which goes three up, three down, regardless of what happened?

Yeah, you're a ******* rocket surgeon too.

I mean, the 3 Ks likely cost the pitcher more against his pitch count. In the modern game, that matters a little...

Other than that, I don't see how one three-up/three-down inning is better than the other. One was looking better until the DP massacred it. But it didn't end up better.

This is retarded.

While the result may have been the same, the opportunity was not. EVERYBODY, except BL and now you, will take the better opportunity to score even if scoring doesn't happen.

As I told BL, even his precious WAR counts non-scoring accomplishments.

If you think everybody would take one 3-up/3-down over another you must have really stupid friends.

I'd take the individual accomplishments of A over B, but on a team basis they are identical.

Did BL hack your account?

Seriously, which situation produced the better scoring opportunity? If you get this wrong, throw away your Orioles **** and buy some Man U soccer shirts.

You know what tec, you're right, both of those innings are equally bad for the offense.

I guess how you make outs really doesn't matter.

PICK A SCENARIO!!!!


A: FOURTH INNING, METS UP 4-1: SINGLE, POP OUT, LINE OUT, TORNADO SWEEPS THROUGH STADIUM, PICKS UP DAVID WRIGHT AND SLAMS HIM AGAINST A WALL, RENDERING HIM UNABLE TO PLAY FOR MONTHS

B: SAME THING EXCEPT SIXTH INNING

OBVIOUSLY B IS PREFERABLE!!! GAME IS ALREADY OFFICAL AND METS WIN!!!!!! M-E-T-S!!!!!!

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/23/2016 3:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 3:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/23/2016 3:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 3:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 3:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/23/2016 2:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 6/23/2016 2:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/23/2016 2:47:00 PM (view original):
Not really. The vast majority of outs aren't "productive" and even the "productive" ones are just slightly less bad than normal outs. And since you take the good with the bad (guys who make a lot of outs in play do so in all situations), double plays more than wipe away any benefit of "productive" outs.

Which inning is preferable, i.e. had more potential to score runs?

A: single, fly out, GIDP

or

B: strikeout, strikeout, strikeout

I love it when you guys are so stupid that you make BLs point for him and you don't even realize it.

Of course A had more potential to score runs. A guy got on base. But they didn't score any runs, and the inning was just as short, in large part because of the massive negative impact of the GIDP.

All of the Ks in your scenario B occurred with the bases empty. An out in play in any of those PA would have had 0 chance of being "productive." You're illustrating clearly why GIDP are so much more harmful than Ks - most Ks come in scenarios where they are no different from outs in play, and DPs are crushing.

So, in your expert opinion, three whiffs in an inning is no worse than any other inning which goes three up, three down, regardless of what happened?

Yeah, you're a ******* rocket surgeon too.

I mean, the 3 Ks likely cost the pitcher more against his pitch count. In the modern game, that matters a little...

Other than that, I don't see how one three-up/three-down inning is better than the other. One was looking better until the DP massacred it. But it didn't end up better.

This is retarded.

While the result may have been the same, the opportunity was not. EVERYBODY, except BL and now you, will take the better opportunity to score even if scoring doesn't happen.

As I told BL, even his precious WAR counts non-scoring accomplishments.

If you think everybody would take one 3-up/3-down over another you must have really stupid friends.

I'd take the individual accomplishments of A over B, but on a team basis they are identical.

Did BL hack your account?

Seriously, which situation produced the better scoring opportunity? If you get this wrong, throw away your Orioles **** and buy some Man U soccer shirts.

Hey look everybody, it's mike arguing that singles are better than strikeouts.