Texas Rangers Thread

[TellerMorrow34]

Got my seats for June's Rangers vs Braves series here in Atlanta!! Dugout seats, all three days. I am now poor but I haven't seen my Rangers in person in damn near 18 years so it's worth every penny.

That's awesome man. Congrats on that. I'm really hoping to go to another game this year if at all possible. Went to one last year, against the Angels, and had an absolute blast.

 

[tko112204]

I never thought I'd say this, but in defense of DIAF...

Alexi Ogando is dodging raindrops in a thunderstorm right now.

BABIP: .199
LOB%: 92.4 (!)
xFIP: 3.75 (+2 runs from his actual ERA)

He has a nice enough k/bb, but his K rate isn't high enough to sustain a sub 3 ERA.

He only threw 70 innings last year, not sure how many you can realistically expect him to throw this year before his arm falls off.

I don't think he's horrible, not at all. But he isn't a staff ace. Not right now anyway.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I never thought I'd say this, but in defense of DIAF...

Alexi Ogando is dodging raindrops in a thunderstorm right now.

BABIP: .199
LOB%: 92.4 (!)
xFIP: 3.75 (+2 runs from his actual ERA)

He has a nice enough k/bb, but his K rate isn't high enough to sustain a sub 3 ERA.

He only threw 70 innings last year, not sure how many you can realistically expect him to throw this year before his arm falls off.

I don't think he's horrible, not at all. But he isn't a staff ace. Not right now anyway.

I'm not saying Ogando is an ace, (though he could end up being one) but those are three stats that have minimal actual value. xFIP is an theoretical and highly experimental stat at that. btw, his LOB% if 92.4 is an abnormally high number. (higher is better you know!) Basically 92.4% of his base runners do not score! Generally the less base runners you have, the higher your LOB% will be. The reasoning being, if you have a lot of base runners, chances are more will get on during the same inning which makes it much more likely that one will score.

As for his k rate, it's 6.5 and he is doing that with basically two pitches in a starting role on top of it! (that is amazing to do with only two pitches as a starter) He currently has two other pitches in development. As for his arm, he is 27, not 21. Physically he is mature and should be able to handle throwing more pitches. Granted, he hasn't thrown many innings in his career (he used to be an outfielder just a couple of years ago) the Rangers say they aren't to worried about him. They say he is outstanding physically, but like all pitchers, they will keep a close eye on him.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Holland had control problems again and of course the bullpen did it's job. :bang2:

At least the offense was able to put up 6 runs. I went to bed during the rain delay so I didn't see the entire game.

 

[Stautner]

I never thought I'd say this, but in defense of DIAF...

Alexi Ogando is dodging raindrops in a thunderstorm right now.

BABIP: .199
LOB%: 92.4 (!)
xFIP: 3.75 (+2 runs from his actual ERA)

He has a nice enough k/bb, but his K rate isn't high enough to sustain a sub 3 ERA.

He only threw 70 innings last year, not sure how many you can realistically expect him to throw this year before his arm falls off.

I don't think he's horrible, not at all. But he isn't a staff ace. Not right now anyway.

The first thing you need to realize is that you would have some room to defend DAIF to some degree if what DAIF had said was merely that he was concerend about Ogando's ability to sustain his level of pitching over the long haul or that Ogando may prove to be a quality starting pitcher but he probably won't be the ace he is looking like now. But that's not what he said. He denied there was even any room for optimism with Ogando as a starter, and claimed he simply didn't have the ability to do anything other than relieve.

As for the rest of your post. nyc already addressed much of this, but I'll put in my 2 cents.

Not sure what your point is about LOB%. Having a high LOB% doesn't in any way indicate a guy is allowing a ton of baserunners and is constantly dodging bullets, and in fact Ogando has a phenomenol WHIP so we know this isn't the case at all. What it simply means is that when he does allow a baserunner he doesn't allow more walks and hits to follow. Like nyc said, that's actually a very good stat in Ogando's favor.

As for xFIP, you are going to have to help me with that one because I don't even know what that is. I'm not aware of that being used as a primary indicator. In fact, the 2 most significant indicators of how a pitcher is performing is and and has always been how many baserunners you allow, and how many runs you allow. On those counts Ogando has been nothing short of outstanding.

That said, I certainly don't expect him to keep up the same pace all year - that would be a big burden for even the top established pitchers in MLB, much less one that has only been pitching a little over 5 years and who has less minor league experience than any starting pitcher in the major leagues. His ERA and WHIP will almost surely drop, we just don't know to what degree. Your point about him facing a much greater workload this year is a valid one. I've made the same point in this discussion - that was actually something I brought up as a concern instead of DAIF. But to say there isn't even room for optimism ............ come on! That can't be defended.

 

[Stautner]

That said, I certainly don't expect him to keep up the same pace all year - that would be a big burden for even the top established pitchers in MLB, much less one that has only been pitching a little over 5 years and who has less minor league experience than any starting pitcher in the major leagues. His ERA and WHIP will almost surely drop, we just don't know to what degree. Your point about him facing a much greater workload this year is a valid one. I've made the same point in this discussion - that was actually something I brought up as a concern instead of DAIF. But to say there isn't even room for optimism ............ come on! That can't be defended.

Sorry, meant to say they will go up.

 

[YosemiteSam]

FYI: Rangers are playing now.

 

[Stautner]

FYI: Rangers are playing now.

Thank you - didn't realize. I'll get it up on my computer.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Feliz is on the verge of blowing another game.

He can't throw a strike.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Popped up, lucky. Feliz was well on his way to blowing that.

Rangers win 2-1.

 

[Stautner]

Popped up, lucky. Feliz was well on his way to blowing that.

Rangers win 2-1.

Feliz has struggled lately. Good win though - another good start by CJ, and the middle relief actually held up. 3 hits is kind of pathetic though, but that's the way the Rangers offense is - feast or famine.

 

[tko112204]

To clarify the point on his LOB%...

If you look at his .199 BABIP, that is a completely unsustainable number. He doesn't really have enough of a history to say he has a "career BABIP" yet, and the league average is ~.300. So when that goes up, his LOB% goes down.

Fact is, a 92% LOB is unsustainable, and when you combine that with his .199 BABIP and the bullpen behind him, that number is sure to go down.

On his xFIP, that is a tool for determining how well a pitcher has pitched based only on what he can control. For example, his k/9, his bb/9 are worked together with a normalized BABIP and HR/FB rate to show an "expected ERA".

xFIP= Expected Fielding Independent Pitching

And no, it is not "experimental". It may not be perfect, but it is the way more predictive than ERA or WHIP are.

Also, a 3.75 xFIP is still very good, and I do think there is reason for optimism with Ogando, even if he isn't necessarily going to help much in the pennant race this year.

 

[Stautner]

To clarify the point on his LOB%...

If you look at his .199 BABIP, that is a completely unsustainable number. He doesn't really have enough of a history to say he has a "career BABIP" yet, and the league average is ~.300. So when that goes up, his LOB% goes down.

Fact is, a 92% LOB is unsustainable, and when you combine that with his .199 BABIP and the bullpen behind him, that number is sure to go down.

On his xFIP, that is a tool for determining how well a pitcher has pitched based only on what he can control. For example, his k/9, his bb/9 are worked together with a normalized BABIP and HR/FB rate to show an "expected ERA".

xFIP= Expected Fielding Independent Pitching

And no, it is not "experimental". It may not be perfect, but it is the way more predictive than ERA or WHIP are.

Also, a 3.75 xFIP is still very good, and I do think there is reason for optimism with Ogando, even if he isn't necessarily going to help much in the pennant race this year.

Doesn't what a person actually does outweigh what he is predicted to do? If we had some history with Ogando it would be different. We would have a good sense from his past what an expected range might be for him. But in the absence of any history, ERA and WHIP are as good as we have to go by for now, and we just have to be relaistic about the likiilihood that the picture is still developing and things may and probably will look different over time.

Look, here's the bottom line. I think everyone understands that Ogando is unlikely to maintain the pace he is on. That would really be too good to be true. Nobody is arguing that he is the next coming of Roy Halliday.

But DAIF's point was never simply that Ogando's pace is too scorching to sustain, it was that there was no room for optimism at all with him as a starting pitcher, and that he simply cannot be effective as anything other than a reliever. That belief rules him out not only as the kind of ace he is pitching like now, but even rules out the possibility of being a strong middle or bottom of the rotation guy. Given his performance since he became a starter, that's an absolutely absurd belief.

 

[tko112204]

Doesn't what a person actually does outweigh what he is predicted to do? If we had some history with Ogando it would be different. We would have a good sense from his past what an expected range might be for him. But in the absence of any history, ERA and WHIP are as good as we have to go by for now, and we just have to be relaistic about the likiilihood that the picture is still developing and things may and probably will look different over time.

Look, here's the bottom line. I think everyone understands that Ogando is unlikely to maintain the pace he is on. That would really be too good to be true. Nobody is arguing that he is the next coming of Roy Halliday.

But DAIF's point was never simply that Ogando's pace is too scorching to sustain, it was that there was no room for optimism at all with him as a starting pitcher, and that he simply cannot be effective as anything other than a reliever. That belief rules him out not only as the kind of ace he is pitching like now, but even rules out the possibility of being a strong middle or bottom of the rotation guy. Given his performance since he became a starter, that's an absolutely absurd belief.

That part is not true. The rest is very reasonable. My point was only that he has been very, very lucky up to now and as such, is not actually pitching as well as his results would indicate. If that makes sense.

Remember, baseball is the simplest, most complicated game of them all.

 

[Stautner]

That part is not true. The rest is very reasonable. My point was only that he has been very, very lucky up to now and as such, is not actually pitching as well as his results would indicate. If that makes sense.

Remember, baseball is the simplest, most complicated game of them all.

How has he been very very lucky? He's not allowing baserunners and he's not allowing runs to score. Is the "luck" you are talking about that bats mysteriously are missing pitches?

Of course it's unreasonable to expect him to have a sub .200 era for the season, but as I said before, it's not as if he is allowing a lot of baserunners and is dodging bullets all the time.

Baseball is complicated because there are a lot of nuances to the game that the average fan doesn't understand, but statistics can reach the point of being burdensome and more complicated than they need to be. If a pitcher isn't allowing baserunners, and if when he does allow a baserunner he doesn't allow follow up hits and walks that will allow that baserunner to score, then he is pitching effectively. There really is no way to deny that.

 

[tko112204]

How has he been very very lucky? He's not allowing baserunners and he's not allowing runs to score. Is the "luck" you are talking about that bats mysteriously are missing pitches?

Of course it's unreasonable to expect him to have a sub .200 era for the season, but as I said before, it's not as if he is allowing a lot of baserunners and is dodging bullets all the time.

Baseball is complicated because there are a lot of nuances to the game that the average fan doesn't understand, but statistics can reach the point of being burdensome and more complicated than they need to be. If a pitcher isn't allowing baserunners, and if when he does allow a baserunner he doesn't allow follow up hits and walks that will allow that baserunner to score, then he is pitching effectively. There really is no way to deny that.

He isn't allowing baserunners because he has a .199 BABIP. There is no other way to describe that as other than "lucky". When more of those balls in play fall for hits, which they no doubt will. He will give up more baserunners and more runs. That's just how it works.

No one, not Cy Young, not Greg Maddux, not Old Hoss Radbourn can sustain a .199 BABIP.

 

[DIAF]

To illustrate the point about BABIP...

Greg Maddux had a career BABIP of .281
Roy Halladay has a career BABIP of .292
Randy Johnson had a career BABIP of .291
Nolan Ryan had a career BABIP of .265
Steve Carlton had a career BABIP of .279
Tim Lincecum has a career BABIP of .294

 

[DIAF]

arrrrggghhhhhh bullpennnnnnnnnnnnnnn

 

[cowboyeric8]

Feliz better fix it, or I'm almost ready to try someone else. He has been like this all year.

 

[Stautner]

He isn't allowing baserunners because he has a .199 BABIP. There is no other way to describe that as other than "lucky". When more of those balls in play fall for hits, which they no doubt will. He will give up more baserunners and more runs. That's just how it works.

No one, not Cy Young, not Greg Maddux, not Old Hoss Radbourn can sustain a .199 BABIP.

Wow - you are actually claiming it is the stat that is causing him to prevent baserunners rather than him preventing baserunners being what causes the stat to be what it is. Come on ...

Nevertheless, nobody said he can sustain a .199 BABIP. You keep arguing as if I am saying Ogando is going to maintain the same pace all year despite the fact that I have said over and over that I do not expect that. That has NEVER been the point of contention in this thread.

The point of contention is and has always been whether what Ogando is doing is reason to be optimistic about his ability to be a quality starting pitcher in MLB. If you are disputing that we have a point of contention. If you are not, then you are arguing for no reason.

Besides all that, the fact that he is on a pace that isn't sustainable does not in any way indicate he is not pitching well. It's a ridiculous notion to suggest that if a guy is performing too well that means he is really performing poorly and we just don't know it yet.

The fact is players go through very good stretches and bad stretches all the time. Even Cy Young, Greg Maddox etc. Good pitchers aren't made out of keeping exactly the same level of BABIP at all times - its all an ebb and flow, and the difference with the good or very good and the ones is that they have fewer and shorter bad spells, and more and longer good spells.

Ogando is having a very good spell, and the fact remains his stats could drop off quite a bit and they would still be very good and well within the range of what a quality MLB pitchers stats would be.

Bottom line is you can't call it sheer luck when players go they go through very good spells anymore than you can call it sheer bad luck when they go through bad spells and it seems like every weak ground ball finds a hole.