Texas Rangers Thread

[tko112204]

Well he is 5-0, I will take that from a bad pitcher all the time.

I never said he was bad!!

******....

 

[cowboyeric8]

I never said he was bad!!

******....

Slow your ego, I never said you did.

 

[tko112204]

Slow your ego, I never said you did.

Well I have been the one arguing "against" him for the last 3 pages of this thread.

You can see how I could take it that way...

 

[Stautner]

I'm not gonna argue anymore with a ******** who continuously insinuates that I know nothing more than what my computer tells me.

I never said he was going to "implode" just that in most circumstances, BABIP normalizes over the course of a season. There are of course exceptions to his (see Cahill, Trevor circa 2010), but I don't like to bet on exceptions, but fans do. And that's what you are, a fan of the Rangers. Whatever you want to call it, a course correction, regression to the mean, or implosion, it's going to happen. He WILL end up with a BABIP around .280 or so, and that's a lot of hits between now and August when he gets sent back to the pen to cap his innings.

You don't have to believe me, or the numbers, I don't care. But acting like I don't know what I'm talking about is dumb.

I don't know exactly what you want me to "show" you that says he is going to regress, because I showed those numbers already. His BABIP, LOB%, and xFIP all show that he hasn't pitched as well as his superficial numbers suggest and that he is due for a regression.

But guess what? It's not just the numbers we've been arguing about either. He still doesn't have a weapon to get LH batters out, he hasn't seen any team more than 1 time except for SEA and KC (not exactly the '27 Yankees or the '95 Indians), Texas is also going to be a much tougher place to pitch the next 4 months than is has so far AND his freakin' BABIP is .199.

So there ya go...

If you weren't saying he was going to implode, then how do explain suggesting that we will see him with a ERA of 8.00 in June or July?

And how do you explain your claim that you were supporting DAIF in this debate when the only point of contention between DAIF and myself was his claim that Ogando was going to implode and that he had no chance to be a quality MLB starter?

And if you aren't only wrapped up in numbers on the computer explain to me how it is that you have never spoken at all about Ogando,s makeup or his arm or his potential to develop other pitches now that he has MLB rather than Dominican Summer coaches, or his strong arm or his chances to learn more about the hitters in the American league or ........ well, you get the picture. All you can spew is numbers without taking into account the human element and the actual physical talent, mental abilities and performance on the field.

Yes, there are concerns - I have always said that. But to say that we have been arguing all that is bogus because this is the first time you have mentioined most of that.

Those things are real concerns. I can accept that it will be tougher as teams get more familiar with him, and as the long season wears on and he pitches more innings than he is used to. Those are human elements that are factors that a computer can't really judge, just like all the potentially positive human factors I mentioned above cannot be truly factored in.

As for your claim that he is certin to end with a BABIP of around .280. the very articles you cited said that BABIP can vary widely from year to year even with the same pitcher and even with top pitchers - being way up one year and way down the next. If that's the case then you are defying your own source by claiming you can say where Ogando's BABIP will end up this year.

 

[Stautner]

Here is a big thing that neither DAIF or tko consider - and it's an important one and a telling one. Even if last night was the start of Ogando tailing off, as DAIF claims (his 2nd time to make that claim this year), and Ogando ends up giving up TWICE as many runs per 9 innings as he had up to that point, which is a huge dropoff, he would still have an era of 3.62 for the remainder of the season.

Imagine that - a dropoff that equates to teams doubling the number of times they score on him, and he still is has a 3.62 era for the last 4 months of the season.

Hell, let him implode - I'll still be happy.

 

[tko112204]

Here is a big thing that neither DAIF or tko consider - and it's an important one and a telling one. Even if last night was the start of Ogando tailing off, as DAIF claims (his 2nd time to make that claim this year), and Ogando ends up giving up TWICE as many runs per 9 innings as he had up to that point, which is a huge dropoff, he would still have an era of 3.62 for the remainder of the season.

Imagine that - a dropoff that equates to teams doubling the number of times they score on him, and he still is has a 3.62 era for the last 4 months of the season.

Hell, let him implode - I'll still be happy.

You and I are NEVER going to agree on this. Can we just drop it? I don't even think we disagree that much, the 8.0 ERA comment was off-hand and made to illustrate that that could happen and it wouldn't mean he was a worse pitcher than he is today. Because in my opinion, ERA doesn't do a very good job of showing how well someone pitched. Just like win-loss record, or WHIP. I believe there are better metrics to use to judge pitchers and you don't. That's fine. I was never going to "convert" you to sabermetrics (if that's even what you want to call it) anyway. It's fine.

Bottom line, he's an interesting pitcher worth following and worth dreaming on for a fan of the team he plays for. Case closed.

 

[DIAF]

I swear to God, someone needs to grab Holland and shake him like they were a British nanny.

 

[Stautner]

You and I are NEVER going to agree on this. Can we just drop it? I don't even think we disagree that much, the 8.0 ERA comment was off-hand and made to illustrate that that could happen and it wouldn't mean he was a worse pitcher than he is today. Because in my opinion, ERA doesn't do a very good job of showing how well someone pitched. Just like win-loss record, or WHIP. I believe there are better metrics to use to judge pitchers and you don't. That's fine. I was never going to "convert" you to sabermetrics (if that's even what you want to call it) anyway. It's fine.

Bottom line, he's an interesting pitcher worth following and worth dreaming on for a fan of the team he plays for. Case closed.

That's the funny thing - i sometimes get the feeling that we really aren't that far apart, and I have tried to explain to you what the point of contention was several times and that much of what you were saying was actually in agreement with me and not DAIF.

I just think you got so intent on convincing me of the value of BABIP that you quickly started to ignore the point of contention and ended up purporting to disagree with me when what you were saying often actually supported what I was saying.

As far as I can tell we both agree that Ogando has done an outstanding job so far, that he will eventually drop off the pace he is on now, and that he has a good chance to be a quality starting pitcher. We also agree that it may not be as an ace of a staff, but at least a quality starter in the rotation. As I recall you said somethig about feeling he was at least capable of being a solid middle of the rotation guy.

I've tried to say this before, but I have never claimed Ogando was going to be an ace or maintain the torrid pace he has been on. The entire point of contention was only about whether there was reason for optimism about his chances to be a quality starting pitcher.

DAIF said no, Ogando simply cannot be a quality starting pitcher, and even though you started out saying you were defending him, I don't think you actually do believe as he does.

 

[Stautner]

You and I are NEVER going to agree on this. Can we just drop it? I don't even think we disagree that much, the 8.0 ERA comment was off-hand and made to illustrate that that could happen and it wouldn't mean he was a worse pitcher than he is today. Because in my opinion, ERA doesn't do a very good job of showing how well someone pitched. Just like win-loss record, or WHIP. I believe there are better metrics to use to judge pitchers and you don't. That's fine. I was never going to "convert" you to sabermetrics (if that's even what you want to call it) anyway. It's fine.

Bottom line, he's an interesting pitcher worth following and worth dreaming on for a fan of the team he plays for. Case closed.

I've never said ERA is the best possible indication of how someone has pitched, and certainly over a short time frame I would agree that it has to be taken with a grain of salt - a big grain at that. But over a longer time frame, if the ERA is low, a guy has to have pitched well. You can pass off a few games or a few weeks as getting by on luck, but it's much harder to pass off 2 months as mere luck, and if it goes to 3 or 4 months it will be harder still.

The thing about ERA is much the same as with batting average. When viewed over a short time frame it really doesn't tell you much. A few good or bad breaks here and there can have a big effect on a short sample. But when viewed over a longer time period it becomes very meaningful. Same applies to WHIP and really any statistic that is based on an average.

We all know that over the long haul Ogando's stats - ERA, WHIP, BABIP and others will average out to something closer to the league average than they are now. Those stats may still be outstanding, ore more moderate, or possibly even worse than the league average - we just don't know yet, and without any statistical history behind Ogando it's a little difficult to project.

My point has simply been that a person has to be encouraged by what Ogando has done, and like his chances to become a good major league starting pitcher.

 

[Stautner]

I swear to God, someone needs to grab Holland and shake him like they were a British nanny.

Is the pedigree failing?

Sorry - couldn't resist.

 

[gmoney112]

This thread needs more acronyms.

 

[tko112204]

This thread needs more acronyms.

:laugh2:

 

[tko112204]

Here's a new topic to get this thread back on topic a little bit...

Ron Washington, manager... GO.


(I ask because I have a somewhat limited opinion of him, based on pieces of games the last two years, and every inning of the '10 WS 5 or 6 times. And tonight he left Holland in for 110 pitches in a blowout, so I wanted to get some other opinions. I'm sure there are guys that watch every inning, and those are usually the most informed opinions.)

 

[Stautner]

Here's a new topic to get this thread back on topic a little bit...

Ron Washington, manager... GO.


(I ask because I have a somewhat limited opinion of him, based on pieces of games the last two years, and every inning of the '10 WS 5 or 6 times. And tonight he left Holland in for 110 pitches in a blowout, so I wanted to get some other opinions. I'm sure there are guys that watch every inning, and those are usually the most informed opinions.)

I tend to be a bit of a "results" guy (I'm sure you have noticed), so I feel pretty good about Wash. It's alwasy hard to know how much credit to give a manager, but I know the guys love him and want to win for him so that's at least part of the battle.

Sometimes I question his agresiveness on the bases, especially stealing 3rd when a runner is already in scoring position and getting thrown out would end the inning. It works most of the time though.

As for keeping Holland in, that could serve 2 purposes. One, to keep the bullpen rested - our bullpen needs any help it can get. And two, to reinforce the mindset that the team has emphasized the last several years that the job of the starting pitcher is not to just go 5-6 innings and hand off to the bullpen.

 

[YosemiteSam]

lol, tko. At it again.

 

[YosemiteSam]

btw, Wash is doing a good job. About Wash leaving Holland in, I didn't have a problem with it. He had a little bit of control problems, but his stuff was really good. He had only given up two hits through 5 innings I believe. He was pitching very well except for he was giving up a walk per inning. Even giving up the walk, he was able to shutdown the Rays before any damage was done.

Washington left him in because he was trying to get some innings out of him rather than throwing the bullpen (which has been having issues) at it. If your starting pitcher is getting the job done, you don't pull him after five innings and to think otherwise is ignorant.

The fact that you are questioning his decision tells me you didn't watch the game. Holland only needed one out to get through six innings. Wash expected him to get it, but instead it didn't work out. Wash has to let him try to get out of it, thats how a young pitcher learns how to handle those types of situations.

The game wasn't on the line, it was the right thing for Wash to do.

The funny thing about Holland was he was brought up because that *is* what he did. He threw strikes. Now he is having some control issues. (though his stuff is still really good) I think it's just a mechanics issue. He will get it worked out. Holland is going to be a great starter in the future. I think he will be better than CJ before it's over. They both have great arms, but Holland has generally had better control than CJ. Holland is literally a strike thrower like Cliff Lee.

 

[tko112204]

btw, Wash is doing a good job. About Wash leaving Holland in, I didn't have a problem with it. He had a little bit of control problems, but his stuff was really good. He had only given up two hits through 5 innings I believe. He was pitching very well except for he was giving up a walk per inning. Even giving up the walk, he was able to shutdown the Rays before any damage was done.

Washington left him in because he was trying to get some innings out of him rather than throwing the bullpen (which has been having issues) at it. If your starting pitcher is getting the job done, you don't pull him after five innings and to think otherwise is ignorant.

The fact that you are questioning his decision tells me you didn't watch the game. Holland only needed one out to get through six innings. Wash expected him to get it, but instead it didn't work out. Wash has to let him try to get out of it, thats how a young pitcher learns how to handle those types of situations.

The game wasn't on the line, it was the right thing for Wash to do.

The funny thing about Holland was he was brought up because that *is* what he did. He threw strikes. Now he is having some control issues. (though his stuff is still really good) I think it's just a mechanics issue. He will get it worked out. Holland is going to be a great starter in the future. I think he will be better than CJ before it's over. They both have great arms, but Holland has generally had better control than CJ. Holland is literally a strike thrower like Cliff Lee.

Holland for sure has the highest ceiling of anyone in the rotation right now. Unless Wilson cuts his walks back, of course.

He's so young though, lots of young guys walk the world for a while.

I had forgotten about the organizational decision to start getting starters to go deeper in games. I guess that makes more sense then. I didn't watch this entire game, and the parts of it I did see Holland looked good. Just wild.

Anyway, at least your manager doesn't leave your best young bat on the bench every GD day so he can keep starting Pat Burrell and Aaron Rowand.

Grrr....

 

[DIAF]

Holland for sure has the highest ceiling of anyone in the rotation right now. Unless Wilson cuts his walks back, of course.

He's so young though, lots of young guys walk the world for a while.

I had forgotten about the organizational decision to start getting starters to go deeper in games. I guess that makes more sense then. I didn't watch this entire game, and the parts of it I did see Holland looked good. Just wild.

Anyway, at least your manager doesn't leave your best young bat on the bench every GD day so he can keep starting Pat Burrell and Aaron Rowand.

Grrr....

They should have just left Belt down in AAA if they were gonna do this and bring up some OF spare.

 

[tko112204]

They should have just left Belt down in AAA if they were gonna do this and bring up some OF spare.

Exactly. This doesn't do anyone any good. It's not like Belt could be worse than Burrell and Rowand have been. At least he would be taking walks.

Sure, someone would GIDP behind him, but the team OBP would go up, at least!

 

[DIAF]

Arthur Rhodes, Everybody!