Who's really to blame for this bad season?
by Wreckard on Aug 28, 2009 4:15 PM CDT
126 comments
Amidst the recent Bradley-bashing that's been going on here and in the media, I keep seeing something that just didn't sit right with me: the notion being bandied about that Bradley's played a large part of the Cubs coming up short of expectations this year.
So I decided to do a little digging: using a reasonable set of expectations for the roster - something I'm sure Hendry was working with this off-season - who has underperformed the most? Especially given that even the most pessimistic of projections had the Cubs winning 90 games.
For my base set of expectations, I used ACB's excellent projections from the pre-season for the 2009 Cubs. Then I simply subtracted each player's actual WAR from their projected WAR. One caveat: remember that these projections are for a full season of baseball, while the actual WAR is based on a partial season. However, enough baseball's been played at this point that it's still a useful thing to look at.
| Player | WAR Projected | WAR Actual | War Diff |
| Soriano | 3.9 | -0.7 | -4.6 |
| Soto | 4.9 | 1 | -3.9 |
| Fontenot | 3.3 | 0.4 | -2.9 |
| Harden | 4 | 1.6 | -2.4 |
| Ramirez | 4.1 | 1.9 | -2.2 |
| Bradley | 3.3 | 1.2 | -2.1 |
| Miles | 0.2 | -1.3 | -1.5 |
| Marmol | 1.8 | 0.3 | -1.5 |
| Marshall | 1.6 | 0.5 | -1.1 |
| Hoffpauir | 0.3 | -0.7 | -1 |
| Dempster | 3.1 | 2.1 | -1 |
| Gregg | 0.7 | -0.3 | -1 |
| Zambrano | 3.2 | 2.3 | -0.9 |
| Lilly | 2.6 | 2.3 | -0.3 |
| Heilman | 0.3 | 0 | -0.3 |
| Johnson | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0 |
| Guzman | 0 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
| Hill | 0 | 0.3 | 0.3 |
| Theriot | 2 | 2.4 | 0.4 |
| Fukudome | 2.4 | 3 | 0.6 |
| Lee | 2.6 | 3.3 | 0.7 |
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
6 recs |
126 comments
Email
Print
Comments
the russians
Theriot is not clutch, he's double clutch!
by jesus christos on Aug 28, 2009 4:20 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
In Soviet Russia, Games Win You!
Visit FanIQ.com for sports news, bloggings, polls, and more!
by MrNFL on Aug 28, 2009 7:54 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Look, I know I'm hard on Bradley
but the fact is, a lot of key components on this team have underperformed, as you proved in your research. Losing Rammy for 50 games certainly didn’t help matters, either. I don’t think it’s fair to single out one player, especially after looking at the numbers above.
"Yes, dear. You're right. I'm sorry." -Bob Brenly
by ambrosiadreams on Aug 28, 2009 4:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
the thing
about Aramis is his lack of WAR is due to injury not to him under performing.
Nothing to blame there but bad lack.
Soto and Fontenot really screwed the pooch imho.
by CalCalender on Aug 28, 2009 4:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed with this
Soto and Fontenot haven’t just not lived up to expectations, but they’ve been terrible. Add in Sori’s dismal season, and you’ve got Soto ops+ at 81, Font’s at 72 (!), and Soriano’s at 82. That’s what’s to blame (along with the Aram injury).
by shoemile on Aug 28, 2009 8:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Soto has a lot of bad luck factored into his number, aside from his injury.
His BABIP is .249, despite the fact that his batted ball percentages a(LD, GB, FB) are right in line with his numbers from last year.
Soriano and Fontenot’s defenses are much more flimsy – Soriano with that nagging knee injury that he STILL hasn’t had looked at, and Fonenot possibly bringing his glove to the plate after being pressed into service at 3b. That sucks, but is much less excusable than Soto’s terrible luck (it would be great if he were in shape too)
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Aug 29, 2009 9:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also...
Mike Fontenot’s BABIP dropped from .355 last season to .266 this year. He’s also gone from being very lucky to being very unlucky.
by shawndgoldman on Aug 29, 2009 9:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What would be considered a good BABIP, then?
.266 doesn’t seem that bad, considering his overall average is below that.
What’s the standard here?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Aug 29, 2009 9:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
precisely, it depends on your batted ball percentages
But an average BABIP is around .290
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Aug 29, 2009 9:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So Fontenot's isn't that bad, just a little below average.
Soto’s, though, looks pretty bad based on that.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Aug 29, 2009 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Al
Soto was the light at the end of the tunnel last season — a young, important position player, with massive talent and potential.
If you’d like my greatest disappointment this season, it’s not Fonte, Sori, Bradley, Heilmann, Miles, Lou, etc., it’s Soto. He’s from our system and appears to be a chimera.
Damn
Numbers may not lie, but they don’t tell the whole truth (and nothing but the truth), either. -- Doug Glanville
by leothelip on Aug 29, 2009 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
1000 BCB points for using "chimera" in a post.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Aug 29, 2009 7:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
.266 is better than .249
But it’s still pretty bad, not just ‘a little below average’
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Aug 30, 2009 8:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what is average
not an assumed, or appointed, but a true average in MLB currently?
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Aug 30, 2009 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
.302
Last year it was .303, the year before .306.
Most pitchers allow BABIPs very close to this average over a long time (adjusted for whether they’re fly-ball or ground-ball pitchers), while hitters have significantly more control over it. While pitchers tend to have similar BABIPs on ground balls, hitters can have vastly different ones based on how hard they hit the ball, how fast they run, whether it’s easy to play a shift against them, etc. When a pitcher’s BABIP fluctuates from season to season but he continues to allow the same ratios of grounders, flies, and liners, it’s usually attributed to luck. When the same happens to a hitter, it could be luck, or it could be because one of the above-mentioned factors has changed.
by aldimond on Aug 30, 2009 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's more relative to an individual player...
And Fontenot is far below career levels. I’d expect his to rise significantly going forward. There are HUGE error bars on that expectation, though…
by shawndgoldman on Aug 29, 2009 9:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You said "hard on"
"Who ever heard of the Cubs losing a game they had to have?" -Frank Chance
"If [Ruth] had [called his shot], I would have knocked him down with the next pitch." -Charlie Root
by Clutch16 on Aug 29, 2009 8:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was really surprised Fontenot was so bad in reference to his projections.
From everything I’ve heard, he’s been relatively injury-free and was given more than enough chances to prove himself. The exact opposite happened, basically.
by hurricane0030 on Aug 28, 2009 4:35 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Except that he was playing out of position for 50 games.
Whether that should or does have an affect on your hitting is not my place to say. But it certainly affected how much his defense could contribute.
by redward on Aug 28, 2009 6:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he still sucked after he was put back at 2b
Theriot is not clutch, he's double clutch!
by jesus christos on Aug 28, 2009 6:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder
if his confidence is shot. He looks scared at the plate sometimes.
"I’m not going to allow Al Yellon to flush this thing down the crapper without a fight." (BLOU)
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Aug 28, 2009 8:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Santo mentioned a couple weeks back that Fontenot had admitted to him that he is sometimes guessing what the pitch is going to be before it's thrown.
It certainly looks like he’s guessing out there.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Aug 28, 2009 8:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ehh
he wasnt that hot before rammy went down either .232/.338/.449 in april
Theriot is not clutch, he's double clutch!
by jesus christos on Aug 28, 2009 8:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
but he had gone to the future with Doc Brown and saw that he was going to play
3rd sometime this season, so it was already weighing on him
by Illicat on Aug 28, 2009 9:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
before he played at 3B
he was not exactly having a good season. he also didnt spend the entire 50 games Rami was down at 3B
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Aug 29, 2009 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
there is no 1 person to blame
Hendry needs some blame, Lou a minimal amount, but the majority falls on the players. Far too many under=performing culprits.
Off the top of my head as I read the subject heading, I immediately thought Sori, Soto, Rami, and Fontenot as the big culprits. I was suprised to see Harden at the top.
For me, this is just one of those years where “Murphy’s Law” resided near Murphy’s Bleachers.
by socalbob on Aug 28, 2009 4:42 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
how is rammy a cultprit?
Theriot is not clutch, he's double clutch!
by jesus christos on Aug 28, 2009 4:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's not personally responsible.
His injured body is a culprit, one that hurt him more than us. It happens.
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
by DGU on Aug 28, 2009 5:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
injury
has curtailed his expected production.
Agree or no?
by socalbob on Aug 28, 2009 5:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree
culprit made him sound like he was underperforming
Theriot is not clutch, he's double clutch!
by jesus christos on Aug 28, 2009 5:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a great
last line. (Oh, and I agree with your take on it, too.)
by Not Bruce Froemming on Aug 28, 2009 6:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
most disappointed with Sori and MB.
Counting heavily on Soto and LBR is very premature, imo. If anyone thought Harden would get throough the season injury-free, overly optimistic.
by daily2b on Aug 28, 2009 4:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Soto and Fontenot
were supposed to be regulars on a team built to win now. They failed this year and that is on them just as much as you put it on Bradley or Soriano
by CalCalender on Aug 28, 2009 5:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I always love when these get posted right after a win.
Just in case you were thinking about heading into the weekend on a high note, no, no, instead we have a whole new round of moaning and crying to keep us occupied.
by Orval Overall on Aug 28, 2009 4:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm confident Wreckard would have posted this regardless if the Cubs won or not.
Save them having a 95 winning percentage for the rest of the games, this season is over.
by hurricane0030 on Aug 28, 2009 4:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Underperforming....
…..by almost everyone who swung a bat. That and unrealistic expectations of players to perform at career bests (Miles, Bradley, et al).
But proportionately speaking, most of the blame goes to the guys whose job it was to drive-in runs: Soriano, Bradley, Lee, etc.
I like Fonzi – I know that isn’t a popular sentiment here – but I’m going to have little but rage if his “water” (and/or Bradley’s “water”) starts to find its “own level” only after any reasonable run at the playoffs started to fade.
The only bigger pain in the *ss with a player having a bad season is when they start to pile up the stats after the team is basically out of the running. Gee guys, thanks a lot!
Let’s see what can be done in the offseason, if anything. The offense clearly needs help, not just high expectations.
"Bite my shiny metal ass!" -- Bender Bending Rodriguez
"Life is just one crushing defeat after another until you just wish Flanders was dead."
by The Jade Scorpion on Aug 28, 2009 4:55 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I like Sori also
And Bradley and Marmol too.
by Mike Martin on Aug 28, 2009 5:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How do you expect Soriano, Lee and Bradley to drive in runs when guys aren't getting on base like they should be?
To even bring up Derrek Lee is ridiculous, he’s actually performed better than expectations this season. You also mention expectations of players performing at career best which just isn’t true. Their projected WAR would not have necessarily projected them to have career years.
If guys just performed to their career averages this team would have been much more productive.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Aug 28, 2009 7:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I must have imagined...
….the problems with hitting with RISP this year. Turns out, the bases were actually empty. My bad.
"Bite my shiny metal ass!" -- Bender Bending Rodriguez
"Life is just one crushing defeat after another until you just wish Flanders was dead."
by The Jade Scorpion on Aug 29, 2009 2:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
shh
logic tends to confuse him
Theriot is not clutch, he's double clutch!
by jesus christos on Aug 29, 2009 8:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you do not understand...
where the “expectations” in the above table come from. Wreckard didn’t pull them out of a hat, and they didn’t predict Miles, Bradley, et al. would have career years.
by shawndgoldman on Aug 29, 2009 8:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again,
my mistake. I must have imagine the litany of folks putting unrealistic expectations upon Milton Bradley, Miles, et al, to match career years.
Seems odd there are so many people feeling let down, considering those expectation were entirely conceived in my imagination.
"Bite my shiny metal ass!" -- Bender Bending Rodriguez
"Life is just one crushing defeat after another until you just wish Flanders was dead."
by The Jade Scorpion on Aug 29, 2009 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
um.
if Milton Bradley had hit all year like he’s hitting now, he’d be pretty close to career AVERAGES, not career HIGHs.
"I’m not going to allow Al Yellon to flush this thing down the crapper without a fight." (BLOU)
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Aug 29, 2009 7:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again, did you look at the table? Do you understand what the numbers represent?
Miles projection was a WAR of 0.2. Bradley’s projection was a WAR of 3.3.
Last season, they had WAR’s of 2.0 and 4.5 respectively. Bradley is on pace for his lowest WAR since his rookie year in 2002. Miles is on pace for the lowest WAR of his career.
So the projections weren’t doing what you were saying they were doing – they expected regressions from both players. But not even the most pessimistic of observers would have reasonably expected them to have years this bad.
by Wreckard on Aug 30, 2009 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I blame Canada for most every problem
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies." - Mike Royko
by DTJchris on Aug 29, 2009 4:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I blame the universe - it hates me
You see, wire telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat. You pull his tail in New York and his head is meowing in Los Angeles. Do you understand this? And radio operates exactly the same way: you send signals here, they receive them there. The only difference is that there is no cat. - Albert Einstein
by eths on Aug 31, 2009 6:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rec'd - good post
Here’s a question, though –
If nearly all the players are under-performing, how do you not look at something bigger than the players – chemistry, management, something?
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
by DGU on Aug 28, 2009 5:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Explain how chemistry and management can be measured down and quantified
by hurricane0030 on Aug 28, 2009 5:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is absolutely a problem to measure chemistry and management.
Just because you can’t measure something doesn’t make it worth looking at.
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
by DGU on Aug 28, 2009 5:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
In the case of Aramis we can assume he didn't meet expectations due to injury.
You can guess why other players under performed but it would be just that a guess. Soriano had a great April and has struggled ever since he banged his knee. Could it be the injury has hurt his performance and his confidence? Possibly but it’s speculation. The point of the WAR table is to show what output was expected and what was actually produced the good thing about it is that we don’t have people’s pre-conceived notions affecting the evidence.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Aug 28, 2009 7:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I get the WAR table's point and I agree with it.
I’m trying to theorize about whether or not there’s a common cause for all the players under-performing.
Injury may explain some of them, but then some of the injured players were under-performing even while appearing to be healthy.
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
by DGU on Aug 28, 2009 7:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wouldn't you think it's coincidence and that each player may have different reasons?
It’s the same concept when 2 or 3 guys have career years, sometimes it’s just random luck that can’t be reproduced. It’s hard to reproduce a career best just like it can be hard to reproduce a career low.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Aug 28, 2009 8:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But part of it is that I do think
the manager has put certain players in positions where they are unlikely to succeed – Aaron Miles who hits LHP better, hardly gets to face LHP this year; Mike Fontenot who can’t hit LHP and wasn’t a full time player last year is made a full time player this year and at a position he’s never played, etc.
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
by DGU on Aug 28, 2009 9:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fontenot was put at third out of necessity, that couldn't have been foreseen.
Who knows if it had an affect on him or not. The real point would be that playing Fontenot at third hurt because Aramis was injured. If Fontenot had his same production and Aramis was playing 3rd the team would have been fine. Miles is a bench player and he’s been awful but this team’s success or failure doesn’t hinge on his performance. Aaron Miles was never going to make up for A-Ram’s lost playing time due to injury. Very hard for a team to overcome the loss of their best hitter for 2/3 of the season. Who is Lou going to put into a position to succeed to the extent that they make up for his best hitter being out?
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Aug 29, 2009 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Positions to Succeed
No one is going to make up for Aramis, but you can make things worse if you ask Aramis’ replacement to be something he’s not and then that replacement plays poorly, too.
What if, instead of trying Fontenot at 3B v. LHP and RHP, Lou had left Mike and Aaron in a straight platoon at 2B and used Scales and Fox at 3B? Sure, Mike and Aaron still could have failed, but they’d both had success in limited rolls at 2B in the past (Miles’ “success” was very, very limited, but a .350 OBP at 2B v. LHP has its uses).
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
by DGU on Aug 29, 2009 12:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The majority of the under-performances involved injuries in some way.
Soto, Soriano, Harden, Ramirez – 4 of the top 5 underperformers have battled injuries at various points this season.
To me, the simplest explanation isn’t chemistry – it’s health.
by Wreckard on Aug 28, 2009 6:07 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
YES! YES! YES! - that's why despite
my frustration over this year, I am bullish on 2010. I’d like to retain Harden, but am not hopeful. I fear the “Randy Wells-mania” will force Hendry to let Harden walk. I can already hear Jim say, “We like our depth and Wells really came on this year. Ya know we have Samadrdzjia and Marshall too. I really like our options…..”
Injuries have hurt this team the 2nd most in the big leagues behind NYM. I think they can rebound to 90 wins easily with career norms from Rami, Sori, Lee, and Soto. Anything Riot, Dome, MB, and LBR contribute close to an average year means a huge upgrade to the offense of ’09.
by socalbob on Aug 28, 2009 6:14 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I still gotta blame Jimbo
He gave way too much money to guys coming off career years which they couldnt possibly repeat, and unfortunately, those guys were leaned upon heavily (dempster, soto, bradley etc) and failed to repeat their performances.
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
by bren on Aug 28, 2009 11:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Soto wasn't given big money and he didn't have to have a career season for this team to be good.
Soto has been bad due to injury and probably bad luck. It’s already been mentioned numerous times that Soto’s BABIP is .251 which is very low, a lot of his outs should have been hits.
Dempster and Bradley didn’t have to have career years for this team to be good either and both were given contracts that were reasonable considering their career performance up to this season. Bradley is starting to approach his career averages but he had a bad start. So far the production he’s given the team this season has matched the $5 MM they are paying him for this year. $30MM for 3 years is not a lot of money for a 32 year old with Bradley’s career numbers and he will most likely easily perform up to it over the next 2 seasons. Unfortunately he’ll probably be doing it elsewhere because Chicago media and Cubs fans are hell bent on running him out of town.
You can blame Hendry but what GM has a bench player that can replace their best hitter when he misses 2/3 of the season due to injury? Aramis’ injury plus the underperformance of Soriano, Soto and Fontenot is what’s hurt this team the most.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Aug 29, 2009 10:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I blame the fans
We just simply haven’t done enough to make the players feel welcome.
Next year, I hope we bake brownies, throw rose petals and offer up our first-born daughters as concucbines.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Aug 28, 2009 5:40 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Cute, but I haven't been impressed with the fans this year.
Booing their own players on opening day at Wrigley? This town started the season with no patience and then managed to lose it as the months went by.
Not that the Cubs did much to win it back, mind you. But the team has been absolutely plagued with injuries and still managed to limp along with the rest of the NL Central until the Cardinals decided to make a run for it.
I’ve seen Bradley’s splits home and away, and statistically it invalidates what I’m about to say. But for him—and for the rest of the team, I’m sure it’s hard to stay motivated when every game feels like you’re playing in someone else’s park. That he’s said as much should be evidence enough.
by redward on Aug 28, 2009 6:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still think the man thrives more
when he feels he’s the victim.
Of course, the home/road splits could just be Wrigley’s dimensions.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Aug 28, 2009 6:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The way Cubs fans fill up places like
Milwaukee and Cincinnati, they might feel more like “home” than Wrigley does on a lot of days.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Aug 28, 2009 6:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ahh yes... Welcome to the Friendly Concubines...
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Aug 28, 2009 8:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, there goes all over the screen
the soda I was drinking. Thanks, BH.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Aug 28, 2009 8:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Instead of the World's Largest Beer Garden
"WGN, Channel 9 Cubs Baseball, Excitingly, Importantly, Dramatically Yours." - Jack Brickhouse
by BigJohnAZ on Aug 29, 2009 3:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which preposition is fitting? ... at the friendly... ...in the friendly...
You see, wire telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat. You pull his tail in New York and his head is meowing in Los Angeles. Do you understand this? And radio operates exactly the same way: you send signals here, they receive them there. The only difference is that there is no cat. - Albert Einstein
by eths on Aug 31, 2009 6:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You make that joke, but...
Pitchers in the 60’s and 70’s still tell stories about how fans WOULD bring them cookies and stuff to the bullpen- even opposing pitchers.
by Mike Martin on Aug 28, 2009 9:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Concubines too?
“Cmon, sweetie… you need to take one for the team”
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
by Worf on Aug 28, 2009 9:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I found this online today (don’t ask) and immediately thought of this BCB
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHsQpTbQ9Uo
Numbers may not lie, but they don’t tell the whole truth (and nothing but the truth), either. -- Doug Glanville
by leothelip on Aug 28, 2009 6:11 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
LOL
I used to have that game!
"Fasten your seatbelts"-Pat Hughes
by katie casey on Aug 29, 2009 8:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A myriad of reasons...
…contributed to this season’s failure, and some of those things were lying dormant and just waiting for the circumstances to rear their ugly head.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
by MPH73 on Aug 28, 2009 10:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
does this prove
that projections are nice, but dont hold them too close to the heart?
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Aug 29, 2009 7:47 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It shows you what can be reasonably expected and if players exceed or fall short of those expectations, nothing more.
by Acapulco Taco Pie on Aug 29, 2009 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
also shows that
projections mean nothing when reality kicks in
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Aug 29, 2009 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They mean nothing more than they were meant to mean.
They’re an expectation, a prediction. Predictions are sometimes wrong, expectations sometimes fall short.
This doesn’t mean that the projection systems still aren’t the best way we have of approximating future performance; if you look at all the players in baseball these things are probably more often right than they are wrong.
by Wreckard on Aug 30, 2009 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and when wrong
those who live and die by them come up with so many excuses for why they are wrong, that they completely make it a joke IMO.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Aug 30, 2009 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's a difference between reasons and excuses
No projection system claims to have 100% accuracy. It’s simply a best guess.
The people who cite them and use them seem to understand this. It’s the people who don’t who seem to think that’s their goal.
by Wreckard on Aug 30, 2009 4:43 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
You said above...
if you look at all the players in baseball these things are probably more often right than they are wrong.
Got any data showing that?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al on Aug 30, 2009 4:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shawn or Harry or Berselius can find this better than I can,
but I’m fairly certain the data is very real. I’ll leave it a that and see if anyone has the data on hand before I start searching for it on the interwebs.
Monopoly, twenty-one, checkers, and chess...
by Buzz on the Moon on Aug 30, 2009 5:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
See
here for something that’s now 3 years old.
Projection systems are an important guide post when making baseball decisions. Their great benefit for people like us is that they are easily available, whereas direct scouting data is not. To get scouting data, we have to use a digest system like Baseball America, and then we’re only getting minor leaguers. Although, maybe someone knows of a provider for ML scouting report digests.
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
by DGU on Aug 30, 2009 6:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not that they're right more than wrong...
it’s that they’re right way, way, way, way more often than you are. Or than I am, for that matter. Or anyone else that posts on this blog.
You should use the projections because you don’t know enough about baseball to do better than them. Very few do, and I’d wager that even they use the projections as a starting point.
by shawndgoldman on Sep 1, 2009 12:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's a link for 2007 data, comparing various projection systems
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=564
The real problem is how we define ‘right’ vs ‘wrong’ when we’re talking about statistics.
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Sep 1, 2009 9:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some more links
http://statspeak.net/2009/04/testing-the-projection-systems-strengths-and-weaknesses.html
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/so-how-did-tht-projections-do/
The first link gives RSME (essentially, average error) for hitters OPS
OPS RMSE
CHONE .0737
PECOTA .0753
OLIVER .0753
MARCEL .0763
ZIPS .0769
So, essentially, you would expect a players OPS to be within 7 points on either side of the projected value. (There’s a ton more stuff – splits and parsing the data etc in that first article – good stuff).
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Sep 1, 2009 9:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd consider a r > .75 to be "more right than wrong"
I knew that the systems were all highly significant (statistically speaking) but couldn’t remember the exact numbers. Thanks B.
by Wreckard on Sep 1, 2009 9:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
So this isn't misinterpreted
The numbers above are errors, not correlation coefficients. For 2007, Nate’s numbers in the link above give
PECOTA .627
ZiPS .622
CHONE .599
Marcel .591
RotoWire .582
ESPN .581
THT .579
RotoTimes .574
Which seems a lot lower than I remember, but I suspect that the more rigorous comparisons use a better stat than OPS (wOBA?).
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Sep 1, 2009 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Whoops I totally misread your post.
That’s what I get for skimming.
I too remembered the correlation coefficients as being slightly higher – in the .7-.75 range. I’m not sure where I got that. Obviously ~.6 is still extremely significant.
by Wreckard on Sep 1, 2009 1:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's fantastic
If anyone here can do better than that, they should consider quitting their day job, unless their day job is in the front office of a MLB team. I’m not kidding.
by shawndgoldman on Sep 1, 2009 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The problem we have in projecting
is that we tend to find – consciously or not – one or two players who are similar to the player we are talking about. So we compare Jake Fox to Casey McGehee and Jason Dubois, without recognizing all the better comparisons there are to him. That’s what makes PECOTA so compelling. It takes dozens of factors to compare players in the baseball universe to see players we never saw and players we forgot and compares the best ones to Jake Fox.
Randy Wells - You continue to astound me.
by DGU on Sep 1, 2009 3:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right.
And the projections above include PECOTA’s numbers… i think.
by shawndgoldman on Sep 2, 2009 8:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
RMSE, means that would you expect that 67% of each player is withing .070 points of their OPS, which is a pretty braod range.
Smoltz.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 1, 2009 11:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
/facepalm at me
can’t remember how to read decimal points…
People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. -- Bruce Bartlett
by berselius on Sep 1, 2009 11:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That doesn't take away from his main point...
which is that the team has under-performed to degrees that were unpredictable given the data on hand at the time. Possible? Obviously. But likely or expected? No.
by shawndgoldman on Sep 2, 2009 8:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wasn't disagreeing with him
Just clarifying.
Smoltz.
by vivaelpujols on Sep 2, 2009 5:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right.
Those that take umbrellas with them when the forecast calls for rain are shown to be fools when it turns out to be sunny. Furthermore, the degree to which they take those predictions seriously undermines their usefulness.
What a silly argument.
by shawndgoldman on Sep 1, 2009 12:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
blame game
whos to blame? hendry for trading very usefull players to free up money for milton bradley? lou for managing like a senior citizen? injuries? many of the players having really bad seasons? this team was in 1st place and just totally fell apart the last 3 weeks to let the cards wrap up the central.that was surprising considering they stayed in it without aramis for 2 months. maybe this winter hendry will have some money to spens.
by NOMAR on Aug 29, 2009 7:55 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It's all my fault.
I ran out of lucky t-shirts and caps with this team.
"Fasten your seatbelts"-Pat Hughes
by katie casey on Aug 29, 2009 8:03 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yabbut who is to blame...
for the Mets!
by shawndgoldman on Aug 29, 2009 8:44 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The baseball gods cursed the Mets
It’s the Curse of the Broken Bat, which was on the 100th anniversary of Merkle’s Boner. It was the requirement for breaking the Curse of Billy Penn.
If you can’t tell I’m being facetious, you need another beer.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
by Ace Venom on Aug 29, 2009 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Cubs are to blame for the bad season.
End of discussion. Next question?
Blue mountains high .. Blue valleys low
I don't know which way we will go ..
One summer dream .. one summer dream ..
coda
ELO, 1975
by cubnational on Aug 29, 2009 1:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I blame
Riggleman, Baylor and Baker
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Aug 29, 2009 1:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
As a Cardinal Fan
I would blame Hendry. He has saddled you guys with to many bad contracts.
by FlimtotheFlam on Aug 29, 2009 1:21 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
kudos on the shirt
well done BTW
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Aug 29, 2009 1:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
I was really happy how they turned out. I didn’t even do they actual design. We had a T-shirt contest and everyone put their ideas in. I just touched the image up and changed a few things. Than made the actual screen print.
I have been contemplating making T-shirts for other SBNation blogs. It is somewhat difficult though to make a sports shirt with the official logo.
by FlimtotheFlam on Aug 29, 2009 1:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what does the 67 represent?
anything in Cards history?
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Aug 29, 2009 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The 1967 World Series Champion Cardinals
Whose nickname was the “El Birdos” where the name of the Cardinal Blog site came from
by FlimtotheFlam on Aug 29, 2009 3:24 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
i knew the WS
was not aware that El Birdos comes from that season as well. Thanks for the bit of history.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Aug 30, 2009 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Always wondered where the name came from.
Cool.
by shawndgoldman on Sep 1, 2009 12:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have a theory on this...
…that will come with an extremely long-winded, self-serving fanpost. If I ever finish it. Regardless, keep a lookout.
Before each game, please remember to feed the bats.
by Cool Hand on Aug 29, 2009 1:22 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Everyone
Everyone shares a share of the blame for this season from Hendry on down. Now to quantify who deserves how much is to debate.
I personally mostly blame Al. Not Al Yellon. Weird Al. I went to one of his concerts in 04 and one this year. Coinkidink?
I may be the only who on one weekend will go to a Weird Al concert and a Steve Goodman memorial concert.
I had to delete my twitter account. But you can still find me at fanfiction.net under puckish prosecutor.
by cubstoseriesby100 on Aug 29, 2009 3:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I would do that...
…if there were any Steve Goodman memorial concerts around here.
Before each game, please remember to feed the bats.
by Cool Hand on Aug 30, 2009 12:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
too bad Weird Al doesnt do a
GO CUBS GO POLKA
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Aug 30, 2009 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if either were in Austin
I would be at them happily.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
by Cubbie-Tim on Aug 30, 2009 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bad luck and injuries. Bad luck and injuries. Bad Luck and injuries.
Why does someone have to take the blame? This sees like one of those times going into a season where everything was done right and bad luck and injuries happened.
If ever player on this roster played up to career norms, nothing better, nothing worse, this would have been a 91 win team. Everything simply went to hell and thats how it goes.
It’s really no ones fault. It seems like they all are trying hard. No need to blame anyone there doesn’t need to be a scapegoat.
SHIT HAPPENS!
Monopoly, twenty-one, checkers, and chess...
by Buzz on the Moon on Aug 30, 2009 12:25 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Buzz, you've had some sort of transfomation
I agree with this 100 percent.
As a Cubs fan, it totally sucks. As a baseball fan, you know stuff like this happens all the time.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Aug 30, 2009 2:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is becuase my early "identity"
was simply a joke. Few thought it was funny, a few thought it was bad, but I was trying to make the point of how absurd some of the reactionary fans on this website and others like it are.
Anyways yeah it sucks. I wish it didn’t happen this way, but it did and it really is just injuries and luck. Baseball is one of the few sports where a good player can try as hard as he can and still suck for a good portion of the season.
Monopoly, twenty-one, checkers, and chess...
by Buzz on the Moon on Aug 30, 2009 3:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Last year I always had the sneaky feeling that...
this is too good to be true. There was many a game last season where I felt, boy were they lucky that >>insert a call, play or other event within the game<< went their way, because otherwise they would have lost.
After last year many of the players and people in the organization suffered from hubris leading to extreme overconfidence. This coupled with unlucky trades and acquisitions during the off season, set the Cubs up with a complacent team, who never really grew together. When things then started to go wrong, the chemistry of supporting each other wasn’t there and the smugness from 2008 blinded them to their weaknesses. If the cookie had crumbled their way, like it did in 2008, this team would psychologically be breaming with confidence instead of suffering from a putrid angst of failing.
But what do I know…
You see, wire telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat. You pull his tail in New York and his head is meowing in Los Angeles. Do you understand this? And radio operates exactly the same way: you send signals here, they receive them there. The only difference is that there is no cat. - Albert Einstein
by eths on Aug 31, 2009 6:32 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Really interesting stuff.
This really helps put things in perspective. (And if I may quote the great Spinal Tap: “Too much focking perspective!”) The top three names certainly appear to be the main culprits for the Cubs lack of run scoring. Man, I was really hoping to see big things from LBR this season.
Anyway, the one name at the top of the list that surprises me a little is Rich Harden. I know he’s been bit by the home run ball and had a few really bad starts earlier in the season. But it seems like he’s settled down and pitched well for some time now. Looks like he’ll get a chance to perhaps get a little bit closer to his projected WAR, though I’d assume it’s a little too late for him to meet the projection.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
by dat cubfan daver on Aug 31, 2009 2:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
