Apr 18 2008 07:39 PM
Lets get a run or two.
Master Index of Archived Threads
IGT 4/18/08 Santana against Hamels
| Nymr83 Apr 18 2008 05:15 PM |
|
cant believe nobody started this yet, i guess we're all tired from 14 innings last night.
|
| KC Apr 18 2008 05:18 PM |
|
After reading that you're 7'3" and 478 pounds, I think people are afraid to post.
|
| Nymr83 Apr 18 2008 05:31 PM |
|
The way this is progressing I will soon be bigger than George Muresan
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 05:51 PM |
|
Please no head/neck injury for Reyes. Please no head/neck injury for Reyes. Please no head/neck injury for Reyes.
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 05:54 PM |
|
Can Phillies phans be any more tacky, booing an injured player?
|
| seawolf17 Apr 18 2008 05:56 PM |
|
Jose Reyes, gamer.
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 05:58 PM |
|
I'm hoping it was just one of those "need a breather" moments and not a real injury.
|
| metsguyinmichigan Apr 18 2008 06:00 PM |
|
David Wright, best player in baseball.
|
| Valadius Apr 18 2008 06:19 PM |
|
We were waiting for Edgy.
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 06:35 PM |
|
The Phillies defense feels like an impervious net sometimes.
|
| metsguyinmichigan Apr 18 2008 06:36 PM |
|
DWright now a homer away from the cycle! And that bandbox in Philly is just the place for it!
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 06:38 PM |
|
And if he hits it deep into the stands, it cuts down on the chances of Phillies outfielder catching the ball.
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 06:45 PM |
|
Johan Santana.."he works hard for the money" Hamels doesn't impress me..
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 06:53 PM |
|
Nice pitching duel, though.
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 06:56 PM |
|
|
I'm very gullible..is this true?
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 06:57 PM |
|
K K K K K K K K K K
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 06:59 PM |
|
Top of the order..Sac it up men!
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:03 PM |
|
The Wright stuff...He is the best player in the game today.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 18 2008 07:04 PM |
|
Santana says "Hi!"
|
| Nymr83 Apr 18 2008 07:05 PM |
|
Hamels suddenly loses it and the bases are loaded with nobody out, Romero coming on to face Delgado.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 18 2008 07:06 PM |
|
Come on, Carlos, bust it open.
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:07 PM |
|
|
Props all around Triple Dee
|
| Nymr83 Apr 18 2008 07:09 PM |
|
Delgado hits it hard to Howard, that could have been an out at home or a 3-6-3 DP but he bobbles it and their only play is at first. 3-1 mets 2nd and 3rd 1 out.
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:09 PM |
|
J.C. Romero..one of the first busted and suspended steroid guys as a Twin.
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:10 PM |
|
In P-A-G-A-N I trust
|
| Nymr83 Apr 18 2008 07:12 PM |
|
Pagan doubles home another run, i'm a bit suprised that they didn't walk the righty pagan to face the lefty schneider with the bases loaded considering Romero's dominance vs. lefties. even if schneider only make 1 out they've then put the mets in a situation to get santana out of the game which benefits the phils as he has been unhittable
|
| Nymr83 Apr 18 2008 07:13 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 18 2008 07:13 PM |
|
schneider makes it all moot as he drives another one in.
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:13 PM |
|
Lastings who?
|
| Nymr83 Apr 18 2008 07:14 PM |
|
someone missed a sign, pagan coming home as if it was a squeeze and castillo fouls it off.
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:16 PM |
|
The hard foul was the highlight for casshito
|
| Nymr83 Apr 18 2008 07:18 PM |
|
Santana males the last out, i like that he was left in.
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:20 PM |
|
Be nice to get a CG....The sight of Heilman in the BP creeps me just a bit
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:24 PM |
|
Good Lord
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 07:25 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 18 2008 07:26 PM |
|
|
I liked it too, but it doesn't seem to be working out so far. Maybe if he had femaled the last out it would be different.
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:25 PM |
|
NOOO!! JESUS JOSEPH & MARY IM GONNA PUKE!
|
| Nymr83 Apr 18 2008 07:27 PM |
|
Like Hamels, Santana gets pulled after 7+ innings with runners on.
|
| Nymr83 Apr 18 2008 07:28 PM |
||
|
LOL, i won't edit that typo now...
|
| Nymr83 Apr 18 2008 07:28 PM |
|
FUCKIN HEILMAN.
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:29 PM |
|
That's the Heilman i know..fucking jerk-off
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 07:29 PM |
|
Fuck Me! This is a typical Mets-Phillies game after all.
|
| themetfairy Apr 18 2008 07:29 PM |
|
Aaron gets no beer tonight. In fact, he's buying for the rest of the team.
|
| mario25 Apr 18 2008 07:30 PM |
|
Randolph takes out Santana for that piece of dookie...bad call
|
| Triple Dee Apr 18 2008 07:31 PM |
|
Phillies eat Heilman like cheesesteak.
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:31 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 18 2008 07:32 PM |
|
is it legal to come after Heilman with a lit blow torch?
|
| mario25 Apr 18 2008 07:32 PM |
|
How long is Heilman gonna be the 8th inning guy....cmon he is awful
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:34 PM |
|
|
I've agreed on that for years...I'll take Joe Smith in the 8th at this point or Duaner
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 07:35 PM |
|
CWCID, Heilman recovers against the next two batters. I like that Willie left him in to regain some confidence because we're going to need him this season.
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:38 PM |
|
|
Need him? For now....Maybe the jacket can bring him out of himself..or a regular regimen of Cymbalta....
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 07:39 PM |
|
|
| Grote15 Apr 18 2008 07:48 PM |
|
|
Done!
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 07:50 PM |
|
Now let's hope it's enough.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 18 2008 07:50 PM |
|
Say your prayers little one...
|
| Nymr83 Apr 18 2008 07:51 PM |
|
Howard has looked brutal wit the glove alot in his young career, but the Phillies, on account of not playing in the bullshit league, can't hide him at his true "position."
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 18 2008 07:52 PM |
|
|
Heilman always does recover. CWCID. Right after he's done giving up a HR to the first batter he faces.
|
| AG/DC Apr 18 2008 07:54 PM |
||
|
You've thought he was awful for years?
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 07:57 PM |
||
|
Well, would rather he keep pitching poorly or would you like him to resume being an effective 8th inning set-up guy? Is it more important to you to hate Heilman or have him improve thus improving the Mets?
|
| themetfairy Apr 18 2008 07:58 PM |
|
Whew!
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 07:58 PM |
|
Holy shit, the Mets beat the Phillies in Philadelphia. Hooray!!!!!
|
| AG/DC Apr 18 2008 07:58 PM |
|
Wright makes the last play, which is encouraging.
|
| *62 Apr 18 2008 08:01 PM |
|
I like Heilman. He's just destined to give up the bad HR at the worst time. I like him a lot better as the 7th inning guy - where he has thrived - and hop Duaner can play himself back to the #2 guy.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 18 2008 08:01 PM |
|
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 08:03 PM |
|
There's a lot of hubris in that poster, but it still made me laugh.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 18 2008 08:03 PM |
|
Survey sez;
|
| Nymr83 Apr 18 2008 08:04 PM |
|
A guy who has had an ERA between 3.03 and 3.62 and a whip between 1.07 and 1.16 each of the last 3 years has been "awful for years"???
|
| themetfairy Apr 18 2008 08:06 PM |
|
Heilman is an enigma. He has stretches of brilliance, but he also has stretches of suckitude.
|
| Willets Point Apr 18 2008 08:10 PM |
|
|
Don't we all?
|
| themetfairy Apr 18 2008 08:12 PM |
|
At work I've had some stretches that have been better than others, but I can't think of a time when I've really sucked.
|
| AG/DC Apr 18 2008 08:13 PM |
|
If you're regularly pitching in the eighth inning in games where your team is tied or leading by a slender margin, all homers are at the worst possible time.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 18 2008 09:24 PM |
|
Heilman's issue isn't giving up homers at the wrong times; it's that he gives up homers generally (more than you'd like for your 8th inning guy, that is).
|
| AG/DC Apr 18 2008 09:38 PM |
|
The tack-on run was nice. I was worried we go into the prevent offense.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 19 2008 06:48 AM |
|
Heilman's career ERA @ CBP is 10.24.
|
| AG/DC Apr 19 2008 07:48 AM |
|
I'm going to say too much attention to that sort of thing would be foolish of any manager.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 19 2008 08:17 AM |
|
Okay, if you want a larger sample space, then how about a career 8.10 ERA against the Phils over 36.2 ip.
|
| AG/DC Apr 19 2008 08:49 AM |
|
Depends on who else is available.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 19 2008 10:07 AM |
|
I don't think there's anything magical about the Phillies that makes Heilman ineffective against them even if he has been ineffective. And managing that way is nuts, sayeth MASATO (Metfans Against Statistical And Tactical Overkill).
|
| Centerfield Apr 19 2008 10:22 AM |
|
Heilman Shmeilman. Hey, first place Mets!
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 19 2008 10:22 AM |
|
|
+1. If it's anything, it's a Heilman thing.
|
| Nymr83 Apr 19 2008 12:15 PM |
|
|
how many of those guys are still on the phillies? its like the dumb stats that "chipper owns the mets" or "burrell is a met killer" of what possible use are those numbers against Santana, Maine, Perez, etc who werent here for all of that?
|
| Triple Dee Apr 19 2008 09:23 PM |
|
|
This would be a potentially decent argument if Heilman had a long career, but his career numbers are basically a 3-year average, and the Phillies line-up hasn't changed that much in three years. Howard, Rollins, Utley and Burrell were all starters in 2005, and Victorino was on the bench. That's half their line-up. But I love how people complain about Willie "managing on a hunch" and then come out and say it's okay if he overlooks data like this.
|
| OlerudOwned Apr 19 2008 10:19 PM |
|
Aside from the millions of dollars, being a Mets relief pitcher is such a thankless job. I can think of 29 other teams that would be thrilled to have a late-inning reliever with a history of effectiveness against lefties and righties who's been as consistently successful over the last few years as Aaron has been. Remember when everyone was on the Heilman-for-Closer bandwagon late in '05? Nothing about his performance has changed much since then.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 19 2008 10:37 PM |
|
|
The object of my reproof is Willie's management not Heilman.
|
| OlerudOwned Apr 20 2008 07:49 AM |
||
|
No, I know. You're one of the ones I'm agreeing with. My post was just an observation on the impatient, home team-booing fanbase as a whole.
|
| holychicken Apr 20 2008 08:11 AM |
|
I swear that people unfairly hate Heilman because of the way he looks.
|
| SteveJRogers Apr 20 2008 08:57 AM |
|
|
Really, how so?
|
| Triple Dee Apr 20 2008 09:07 AM |
||
|
People are generally wary of baby-faced adults.
|
| AG/DC Apr 20 2008 10:34 AM |
|
Heilman saved the castle last night. The data was worth bupkis.
|
| OlerudOwned Apr 20 2008 10:47 AM |
|
|
Holy crap, I thought I was the only one. He's got a smugish face, or something like that. I don't know. it's certainly irrational, but kind of fascinating.  Very punchable.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 20 2008 06:40 PM |
|
|
Yeah, because he struck out Geoff Jenkins and Jayson Werth, hence proving the previous 36.2 ip was an aberration.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 20 2008 06:42 PM |
|
You're going to have to show some cause-and-effect here. Because B follows A does mean A caused B, etc etc
|
| Triple Dee Apr 20 2008 11:44 PM |
|
I can't quite figure out why you find the idea that the Phillies may have figured Heilman out, and consequently he should be used sparingly against them, such a difficult proposition to come to terms with.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 21 2008 04:21 AM |
|
I tried to edit my previous post, but it opened a new post. Ignore this.
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 21 2008 07:16 AM |
|
|
I'll bite. Because it's an idea. A theory. That's all it is. Because you don't have enough evidence to take your idea beyond the idea stage. Because 36 innings is nothing more than a tiny blip in the grand scheme of things if you want to use those 36 innings to evaluate Heilman's effectiveness against the Phils. And it wouldn't matter if those 36 innings are the most Heilman's pitched against any one team. It's still only 36 innings and 36 innings isn't enough to prove whether or not Heilman's struggles against Philly is anything more than random coincidence. After all, he's gotta have his worst stats against some team. This is not to say that under other circumstances, 36 innings wouldn't be enough to make some concrete judgement about some pitching phenomena or other. If a pitcher throws 36 innings and allows a HR in every single one of those 36 innings, I think it's safe to say that the pitcher is susceptible to the long ball and needs to make whatever corrections are necessary if that pitcher wants to continue to pitch in the major leagues. Or ordinarily, one wouldn't be able to gather much meaningful information from flipping a coin exactly 36 times. But if I were to flip a coin 36 times and get heads every single time I flipped that coin, my instincts would tell me that the coin is rigged even though it's theoretically possible though unlikely to get 36 straight heads from flipping a fair coin. But you don't have this extreme outlier sort of data that would give greater meaning to a small sample size, so your 36 innings (Heilman's 36 innings) aren't enough yet. Now it might one day emerge that Heilman's struggles against Philly are not random. Perhaps Heilman is tipping off his pitches is such a way that only Philly is noticing. Or maybe the Phils cheat whenever Heilman pitches. But all that would mean, is that you had a hunch, and you followed your hunch and went with it, and it turned out that you were right. But you still need more proof. You have a theory and you are entitled to place as much faith in your theory as you wish. But faith is not evidence.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 21 2008 07:52 AM |
|
|
No, I'm disagreeing because your argument is flawed: It's entirely too casual a conclusion that doesn't illustrate any cause-and-effect, and advocates a response that won't solve the problem it purports to point out. Let's assume for a minute that you're right -- Heilman's stretch of ineffectiveness in fact proves that the Phillies have "figured him out." Why must we go on to assume that Heilman can't go back and "figure out" what the Phillies have figured out? That's what effective pitching is; and Heilman is an effective pitcher, as supported by the preponderence of data except which you've handpicked to make this argument. You also have to acknowledge that buying into that idea requires swallowing a bunch of other ridiculous notions -- such as the idea that if the Phillies had truly figured Heilman out, then their failure the other night with the game on the line must have been spectacular. If you're Manuel, do you pinch-hit the next time Jenkins and Werth need to oppose him? How come? The argument also doesn't solve any problems, but to replace Heilman's innings with the everpopular "someone else" as if that someone is impervious to being figured out themselves, necessarily any better than Heilman, rested/warmed, etc etc. Mostly though I disagree with the general idea of managing by small subsets of outlying nonpredictive data. If Heilman is too ineffective to trust against the Phillies, then he's too ineffective to trust against anyone.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 21 2008 07:55 AM |
|
|
And this is where you're wrong, Grasshopper. Statisticians consider a sample space of 30 as the minimum for achieving a normal distribution. It's called the Central Limit Theorem.
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 21 2008 08:16 AM |
|
|
I think this is absurd. I've been reading about baseball analysis through statistics for about 30 years and I've never heard of anyone making the kind of judgements you're making about Heilman based on 30 innings. According to you, it would therefore be statistically meaningful data when a batter gets hot and bats .500 over a stretch of 30 at-bats. I bet this happens a few times every single season. According to you, that run is supposed to be a strong indicator that the batter is gonna bat .500 over the rest of the season. Would it make any difference to you to consider that the entire population of major league caliber baseball players is, in and of itself, not random at all, but culled from the extreme right side of the curve... so that when I go on and on about how Rey Ordonez sucked, it's still understood here that in the grand scheme of things and when compared to the population as a whole, he was still one of the very best baseball players in the world?
|
| AG/DC Apr 21 2008 08:35 AM |
|
Well, I disagree wth him also, but 30 innings /= 30 at-bats.
|
| Benjamin Grimm Apr 21 2008 08:38 AM |
|
The number "30" can't be significant on its own, independent of the unit of measure.
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 21 2008 08:42 AM |
|
|
My understanding is that 30 refers to the unit. And that any unit is acceptable, assuming that the theory applies in the first place. It's not necessarily the unit of measure, but also what you are trying to measure with what particular unit. But sure, there are necessarily more batter/pitcher confrontations in an entire inning rather than in a singular at-bat, which is obviously a component of the inning itself. But this is why, given what we know about baseball, we all know on an intuitive level that 30 at bats or 30 innings pitched isn't concrete evidence for a whole lot of things, but might constitute proof of some things.
|
| AG/DC Apr 21 2008 08:52 AM |
|
Well, there's some theory out there that performance over 150 at-bats (or is it plate appearances?) is an indication that what a batter is doing is f'real.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 21 2008 08:53 AM |
|||
|
Look I agree with you on one point; If the Phillies have figured Heilman out, the onus is on him to re-adjust. But why do you say the data is "handpicked"? A better argument would be that the data is too broad, like Namor suggested.
Not really. The odds are always stacked in the pitcher's favor. I accept that Heilman's record against the Phillies was one of a multitude of factors that could have influenced the outcome. But I cannot agree that it is not probative.
Fair enough and you are entitled to that. Unfortunately, this is the way baseball is now played. Baseball managers/analysts use even smaller subsets of data. But I find it somewhat confusing that people criticize Willie for managing on a hunch, but find it acceptable when he ignores things like this .
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 21 2008 08:58 AM |
|
|
Yeah. Even 30 at bats might be a meaningful # of at bats under the right circumstances. It's also dependent on what you're trying to figure out. A rookie might come up and hit 4 or 5 hr's in his first 30 at bats and just about blister the ball in almost every other non Hr at bat. Now these 30 ab may not be proof enough that the rookie's going to be setting hr records, but those 30 ab's are more meaningful when trying to gauge if the rookie is capable of hitting major league pitching.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 21 2008 09:09 AM |
|
|
The ERA statistic measures earned runs according to innings. Not to bore you with the finer details of the Central Limit Theorem, but the result of the proof actually mandated a larger sample space. But apparently from empirical evidence, it was shown that that 30 was sufficient.
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 21 2008 09:19 AM |
|
Let me follow up here some more because some of these formulas are not as formulaic as they've been made out to be. It's not good enough to simply say that 36 innings pitched is good enough to decide this. It's not just the unit of measure that needs to be considered, but also what exactly it is that you're setting out to establish, and also what kind of level of comfort do you want to have with your final results - how reliable are your findings.
|
| Triple Dee Apr 21 2008 09:31 AM |
|
Do you know what a normal distribution is?
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 21 2008 09:40 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 21 2008 09:54 AM |
|
|
What are you, The Riddler? You know what? You win. I concede. Heilman sucks against the Phillies and it's not a coincidence. And as soon as Beltran's last 30 or 40 at-bats against any specific team go bad, I'm gonna put it in Willie's suggestion box that Beltran should never play against that team anymore.
|
| batmagadanleadoff Apr 21 2008 09:47 AM |
|
|
But how could Heilman ever readjust when you've conclusively established that the Phillies have his number? Didn't you just prove with his 36 innings that Heilman can't get the Phillies out effectively? So how is Heilman's performance supposed to be able to change? And if he readjusts, for, oh, I don't know, the next 36 innings or so, does this mean that Heilman then has the Phillies number? And that maybe Heilman should then pitch every single game that the Mets ever play against the Phillies instead of never? And then could the Phillies readjust to to the readjusting that Heilman did against them? And if all of that ever happens, which cluster of 36 innings pitched would, in your opinion, get to matter the most? Once you acknowledge that Heilman must readjust or that he even can, doesn't this undermine your claim that Heilman shouldn't pitch against Philly? That you have allowed for a scenario where Heilman and the Phils might go back and forth, trading the upper hand against each other in a game of leapfrog, is proof of the random nature of the 36 innings you relied on. For now, those 36 innings only prove that Heilman sucked against the Phils over his last 36 IP against them.
|
