Messages

Forum Index : MLB Betting : Messages Page 2 of 2  1 2  
Author: [MLB Betting] Topic: 1 of my pet-peeves in baseball
iceman67
RSI Wagerline RSI Rating
send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
iceman67
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2328
Location: United States
#26
Posted: 3/5/2012 3:37:58 AM
QUOTE

Originally Posted by jpero:

 

There is empirical proof and data that show pitch counts limit injuries and arm problems in the long run.------  

REALLY???  Please show me this source exactly, I've never had anyone show me true evidence of this...lots of talk like yours, but its always comes up inconclusive either way. Actually you are probably correct on this somewhat,,,hell if you only pitch 10 pitches a game, chances are your odds of getting injured are lower.  How about 20 pitches?, 38?  What about 180?    

Go look at opponent OPS vs. pitchers for when a pitcher has thrown 100+ pitches.----- So pitch 101 is the killer huh?  That's just nutty,, seems wierd that you can be chugging along fine on pitch 99 and then,,,,,, BAM!!! --Danger Danger!!!!!  that magic triple digit # comes up and you have to get off that mound STAT!!!  

As with every pitching change decision it is  a case by case basis and you would have to be watching the game to get a feel for what is going on at that time.----   See here is where you contradict yourself IMO and actually make my case for me.  This is exactly why some "magic" PC# doesn't apply.  Maybe our wires are crossed on this, I don't know.

Here's my stance on this.  I just ask that your really think about this and try to put aside your preconseptions you may have aquired from being force fed the crap by the sports media for the past 25 years. 

Think of pitching,, like working out,  you can lift all fricking day as long if you just do a few reps,,, rest for 5 minutes repeat,,, rest for 5 minutes, repeat. ect..,   Now if you do 25 reps, take 15 seconds off,, 25 reps,,15 seconds off,,ect ect..  your going to tiered out quick, and risk fn' up your moneymaker..  What I'm saying in a longwinded manner, is that it's not the pitches in a game so much that are risky,, it's the LONG innings and amount of recovery time between half innings that should be monitered, (that includes too long of down time also).

 

quote
The Hawk send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | My Sportsbook: Sports Interaction |
The Hawk
Participation Meter
All-Star
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 14910
Location: California
#27
Posted: 3/5/2012 9:28:36 AM

Today's athletes are much better than those of yesteryear.

Which is why we've gone from a 4-man rotation to a 5.............

 

quote
yankees2k6 send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | My Sportsbook: 5Dimes |
yankees2k6
Participation Meter
All-Star
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11560
Location: New York
#28
Posted: 3/5/2012 11:30:52 AM
QUOTE

Originally Posted by Spartacus10:



I respectfully disagree. A bunt should NEVER be layed when a pitcher has a no no or perfect game going. That is just such a low blow that it shouldn't even be talked about. IMHO, I think that is the #1 unwritten rule in all of sports. I understand they are the opponent, and you are doing all you can to score runs and get on base, but this is a different scenario. I mean lets say he has a no no going into the 8th inning. Laying down a bunt is simply wrong largely because he has a no no and you have to think that if you haven't got a hit in the first 7 innings, then what makes you think that after the bunt you will all of a sudden start hitting him. I know it's possible, but not likely.

  Keep this bush league in Canada, not trying to be an behind but come on... really... how can you really believe this statement.

quote
yankees2k6 send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | My Sportsbook: 5Dimes |
yankees2k6
Participation Meter
All-Star
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11560
Location: New York
#29
Posted: 3/5/2012 11:37:45 AM

One of my pet-peeves in baseball is (thank god he is no longer on the Yanks) when pitchers like AJ Burnett get the first 2 guys out relatively easy in the inning, then he beans somebody and other team has 2 outs with a runner on 1st.  Then the runner steals, then Burnett starts sweating, then he walks a batter, then a single, then a walk, then a double and before you know it, the other team has put up a 4 spot and AJ's pitch count for that inning went from 8 to 30.

I am just using AJ as an example because this seemed to happen to him all the time, I know there are many other pitches that do the same thing.

However I cannot wait for baseball!

quote
KeyElement
RSI Wagerline RSI Rating
send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook | My Sportsbook: 5Dimes |
KeyElement
Participation Meter
Captain
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 9871
Location: Arizona
#30
Posted: 3/5/2012 12:13:09 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by Getty3:

Regarding your final paragraph, if catchers weren't allowed to block home plate (it's defensive interference at any other base) then we could eliminate what you just described and make the game safer for all involved. 
Simply not true. Any fielder in possession of the ball can block any base at any time. It usually isn't necessary because at any other base the ump is going to call the courtesy out anyway. Unwritten rule: "The ball was there before you, you're out." If a shortstop or second baseman lays the glove down with the ball in it before the runner arrives why don't the runners just take a flying crash into them to jar the ball loose? Because the umpires would never tolerate it.
quote
jpero send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook |
jpero
Participation Meter
Captain
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 9323
Location: United States
#31
Posted: 3/5/2012 2:28:24 PM
iceman-

It has to do with the biometrics of pitching. 100 pitches is an arbitrary number for when a pitcher becomes "fatigued" and every pitcher is different. Some pitchers can handle throwing 130 pitches a night while others 100 pitches is their limit for when fatigue sets in. NO 2 pitchers are a like so it is tough to gauge/ place restrictions and thus the 100 pitch barrier has been accepted by teams as the point of fatigue.

Pedro, Clemens, Randy Johnson, Nolan Ryan, etc are different types of athletes and pitchers than Kyle Lohse, Bronson Arroyo, etc. Just like a Rolls Royce or Bugatti or ferrari is different from a honda or toyota or ford. Some pitchers are just better than others which is why I said before its a case to case basis.

The point of fatigue is when a pitcher starts to not repeat their delivery. This is extremely important to the biometrics of pitching. If a player starts to have a variance in their mechanics that can lead to timing issues and as a result causes stress on the arm (you are already causing stress on the arm by pitching since it is an unnatural motion). So by having your mechanics go out of whack you place more stress on your arm and the risk of injury raises substantially.

You are correct about 100 pitches being the magical number. No one really knows the actual number because its arbitrary. The only thing that matters is that each pitcher has a point where they start to fatigue. You want to remove them from the game when they are fatigued because pitching is a very physically demanding position (even though it does not look that way). You need to use your legs to drive down hill and the rest of your mechanics need to be correct so you do not place extra stress on your arm.

Pitch counts and OPS for 2011:

1-25 pitches: .713 (tOPS+ 98)
26-50 pitches: .703 (tOPS+ 96)
51-75 pitches: .737 (tOPS+ 105)
76-100 pitches: .746 (tOPS+ 107)
101+ pitches:  .706 (tOPS+ 97)

2010:

1-25 pitches: .721 (tOPS+ 98)
26-50 pitches: .717 (tOPS+ 97)
51-75 pitches: .736 (tOPS+ 102)
76-100 pitches: .765 (tOPS+ 110)
101+ pitches:  .695 (tOPS+ 92)

2009:

1-25 pitches: .742 (tOPS+ 98)
26-50 pitches: .740 (tOPS+ 97)
51-75 pitches: .763 (tOPS+ 103)
76-100 pitches: .792 (tOPS+ 110)
101+ pitches:  .713 (tOPS+ 91)

Now as you can see the OPS and tOPS+ trend upwards as the pitch count gets higher. You will probably point out that 101+ pitches yields the best results but then you would be subject to putting all your eggs in a basket that involves a small sample size (SSS). The data for pitches 101+ has on average 5-6 times less ABs and PAs vs the other categories. On average there were about 25-32000 from the other categories while only about 5-6000 ABs and PAs for pitch counts of 101+. That is a significant difference and based on the results you would generally conclude that if the pitch count 101+ had as large a data pool as the other pitches it would yield a higher OPS and OPS+ and continue to trend upwards like the pitch counts previous.

Another reason the OPS and OPS+ is lower for pitches 101+ is because, as I noted before, the better/more dominant pitchers are the ones being left in to go over that 100 pitch barrier. They are the exceptions to the rule and why I said every pitcher must be evaluated on a case to case basis.
quote
lewlew send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
lewlew
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 2102
Location:
#32
Posted: 3/5/2012 2:35:21 PM

you know if biometrics were any good there wouldnt be any injuries...............



some try to explain every little darn thing!


everybody different thats how god wanted it.


some fat guys can pitch some cant.  some skinny guys can pitch some cant............................lol.

quote
lewlew send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
lewlew
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 2102
Location:
#33
Posted: 3/5/2012 2:37:30 PM
wasnt that nationals phenom babied to to max...............yet whta happen ,,,he had major injury!
quote
mainmanmainman2 send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook |
mainmanmainman2
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4309
Location: Antarctica
#34
Posted: 3/5/2012 4:13:00 PM
my MLB pet peeve is that the first basemen dont use that disappearing ball trick enough to get the baserunner out.
quote
jpero send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook |
jpero
Participation Meter
Captain
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 9323
Location: United States
#35
Posted: 3/5/2012 4:55:36 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by lewlew:

you know if biometrics were any good there wouldnt be any injuries...............



some try to explain every little darn thing!


everybody different thats how god wanted it.


some fat guys can pitch some cant.  some skinny guys can pitch some cant............................lol.



throwing a baseball is an unnatural motion. Its about having the right mechanics to stay healthy.

Its called biomechanics not biometrics sorry for the error.

Here are 2 links:

Link 1

Link 2


quote
lewlew send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
lewlew
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 2102
Location:
#36
Posted: 3/5/2012 5:41:15 PM

how can u have 2 sets of rules.



its like saying half the nba can have 3 pt shot and the other half cant.


come bud....dh or no dh....make a decision!

quote
iceman67
RSI Wagerline RSI Rating
send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
iceman67
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2328
Location: United States
#37
Posted: 3/5/2012 6:03:18 PM

OK jpero,,,  lets review  our posts here...

QUOTE Originally Posted by iceman67:   ME--------

Pitch counts,,,    magic arbitrary #'s that  must not be crossed or the pitcher risks dropping dead on the mound.


YOU------
You are very wrong with this statement.

YOU again-----You are correct about 100 pitches being the magical number. No one really knows the actual number because its arbitrary.

I don't see how I was very wrong with my post when you agree with me .   

As far as your OPS data goes,,, when you have to take some sketchy leaps of faith and add qualifiers to make your #'s work,  it seems that it's hardly "Emperical Evidence".  Hell going by your #'s alone , maybe pitchers get stronger after 100 pitches....  I'm not saying I believe that, but my point is that there is no "data" that backs up any significant relationship between a certian PC # and performance..

Here's a quote from someone who expresses my thoughts more clearly than I am doing:    

"But I get and understand that fear drives a lot of this feeling. If you are on this side of the line, you are fine, but if you step over, career over: however, nobody knows where the line is. So once someone draws a line in the sand – BP said 100 pitches was the magic number – then, Frank Viola, everybody is hewing to that line, because if you screw up, there goes your star pitcher, potentially. And it is always better to have, and to not to have to answer reporters asking why you risked your star pitcher by going over that line.

Anyway I've yapped on enought about this,,,  

 

 

 

quote
thorpe send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook |
thorpe
Participation Meter
Captain
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9227
Location:
#38
Posted: 3/5/2012 6:40:16 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by jpero:

iceman-

Now as you can see the OPS and tOPS+ trend upwards as the pitch count gets higher.

This is because of the number of times the pitcher has gone through the order.  A good hitter will hammer any pitch he see twice.  By the third time through the order, hitters will have seen all the pitchers pitches.  
quote
iceman67
RSI Wagerline RSI Rating
send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
iceman67
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2328
Location: United States
#39
Posted: 3/5/2012 6:53:20 PM

Actually, here is a cross sectional study on Pitch counts...   It deals more with game to game differences by previous games pitch counts. but in the end, it summarizes, by saying that the effects are minimal.  My belief is that the same results would occur as to our "debate"..    Its a pretty interesting read.

http://www.sabernomics.com/sabernomics/Bradbury_Forman_PitchCounts_revise.pdf

quote
jpero send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook |
jpero
Participation Meter
Captain
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 9323
Location: United States
#40
Posted: 3/5/2012 7:04:20 PM
You are wrong.

You are using the exceptions to the rule to prove your point.

2011:

43527.1 total innings

1390.1 innings thrown by pitchers 100+ pitches

3.2% of the innings thrown during the year featured a pitcher who had thrown 100+ pitches

2010:

43305.1 total innings

1368.1 innings by pitchers who threw 100+ pitches

3.2% of the innings thrown during the year featured a pitcher who had thrown 100+ pitches

2009:

43272 total innings

1182 innings by pitchers who threw 100+ pitches

2.7% of the innings thrown during the year featured a pitcher who had thrown 100+ pitches


And as I said before. Those innings that had pitchers who had thrown over 100 pitches were probably the elite pitchers in the game who are exceptions to the general rule.

Everyone wants to be one of the top 20 pitchers in the game but there are about 200 starting pitchers during the year. So taking the top 10% of the pool and using that as a basis to back your argument that over 100 pitches a pitcher might be getting stronger.... That is not a good indication. Especially when the data you are placing credence in only represents 3% of data available.



quote
jpero send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook |
jpero
Participation Meter
Captain
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 9323
Location: United States
#41
Posted: 3/5/2012 7:11:35 PM
QUOTE
Originally Posted by iceman67:

Actually, here is a cross sectional study on Pitch counts...   It deals more with game to game differences by previous games pitch counts. but in the end, it summarizes, by saying that the effects are minimal.  My belief is that the same results would occur as to our "debate"..    Its a pretty interesting read.

http://www.sabernomics.com/sabernomics/Bradbury_Forman_PitchCounts_revise.pdf



Yes that is a great read.

It coincides with what I was saying. The number is arbitrary. There is not an exact number to pull a pitcher at since every pitcher can handle different workloads.

The biomechanics are important and its important to keep an eye when a pitcher fatigues. When a pitcher fatigues they are placing more stress on their arm from not having proper mechanics and not using the body as much. As a result the more pitches that a pitcher throws with bad mechanics builds and wears on the arm and eventually an injury will occur.

The elite pitchers are usually the ones who have great biomechanics and as a result have experienced great success and longevity.

I believe one of the links I posted early talks about how many injuries have occurred to pitchers over the years. It astonishing to think about how often a pitcher gets inured.
quote
mainmanmainman2 send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook |
mainmanmainman2
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 4309
Location: Antarctica
#42
Posted: 3/5/2012 7:22:17 PM
get rid of the DH...


and have one inning or two where the announcer doesnt say a word
quote
iceman67
RSI Wagerline RSI Rating
send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
iceman67
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2328
Location: United States
#43
Posted: 3/5/2012 8:27:07 PM

[Quote: Originally Posted by jpero]

It coincides with what I was saying. The number is arbitrary. There is not an exact number to pull a pitcher at since every pitcher can handle different workloads.

 

 

 

How the hell can you say this is what you are saying,,, when you entered this topic by stating that I was wrong for stating this very same thing....   I don't understand what your first post is about what so ever at this point.

quote
iceman67
RSI Wagerline RSI Rating
send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
iceman67
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2328
Location: United States
#44
Posted: 3/5/2012 8:38:46 PM
QUOTE

Originally Posted by jpero:



Yes that is a great read.

Yep,,  I especially find the relevance summary spot on...  

Relevance: This study supports the popular notion that high pitching loads can dampen future  performance; however, because the effect is small, pitch-count benchmarks have limited use for  maintaining performance and possibly preventing injury.

quote
jpero send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook |
jpero
Participation Meter
Captain
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 9323
Location: United States
#45
Posted: 3/5/2012 9:09:08 PM
How can you not understand that the more pitches you throw the faster you will fatigue?

Different players fatigue more quickly than others?

It is when a pitcher becomes fatigued that the increase in injury has a profound effect because thats when they put more stress on their arm because of not repeating their mechanics correctly.

It coincides with what I said. That although 100 pitches is not an exact number... Each pitcher has to be judged case by case to determine their point of fatigue. For most pitchers it is around 100 pitches and thus why you only see about 3% of innings thrown by pitchers who are at the 100+ pitch mark. And most of the pitchers pitching those innings are the elite pitchers, and those elite pitchers are superior because their ability to repeat their mechanics and stay strong through and past 100 pitches
quote
adamtheadoshe
RSI Wagerline RSI Rating
send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
adamtheadoshe
Participation Meter
Prospect
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 74
Location: North Carolina
#46
Posted: 3/5/2012 11:18:31 PM
QUOTE Originally Posted by lewlew:

they black out oakland and sf games in hawaii.

That's no problem. Just drive to the ballpark and watch the game. Seriously, why would they do that? Do they just want to toy with Hawaiians?  Hope you can catch the games online.
quote
NJDevils send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook |
NJDevils
Participation Meter
Covers Rehab
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 33122
Location: Nevada
#47
Posted: 3/6/2012 12:29:43 AM
The term Walkoff annoys the garbage out of me. friggin dumbest term in sports
Posted using a mobile device.
quote
NJDevils send a private message View Space | Blog | Friends | Playbook |
NJDevils
Participation Meter
Covers Rehab
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 33122
Location: Nevada
#48
Posted: 3/6/2012 12:30:58 AM
Also guys who swing at the 1st pitch after the pitcher just walked the previous batter
Posted using a mobile device.
quote
iceman67
RSI Wagerline RSI Rating
send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
iceman67
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2328
Location: United States
#49
Posted: 3/6/2012 4:42:43 AM

OK,, I'm in the midst of trying to upgrade my people skills package, so I'm going to attempt to take the high road here and give you the benifit of doubt that we may be talking about slightly different theories here. 

I'm saying that there is no evidence out there that point to some certain pitch count amount that you can go into a game with, that you have to adhere to because once you hit it,, it's collapse time..  This is what you here about virtually from the opening pitch forward in todays coverage of the games (media).

Obviously the more pitches thrown the more fatigue that sets in eventually,, it's the degee of that fatige and trying to deteremine the tipping point that is up in the air... We seem to agree that it for each pitcher it should be judged case by case  and game by game, ,which to my way of thinking rules out the usefulness of having a preset PC # going into games, thus making pitch counts,   how should I put this softly-----  "overrated"

 

quote
iceman67
RSI Wagerline RSI Rating
send a private message View Space | Friends | Playbook |
iceman67
Participation Meter
Veteran
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2328
Location: United States
#50
Posted: 3/6/2012 5:26:43 AM
QUOTE

Originally Posted by jpero:

  For most pitchers it is around 100 pitches and thus why you only see about 3% of innings thrown by pitchers who are at the 100+ pitch mark.

  Whoa!    I may have started peace negotiations too soon...  your statement above is exactly where we differ.   "for most pitchers it is around 100 pitches"------ why,,, where do you come up with that,, what proof do you have,, and what does "around" mean,, 70 to 130,,,, 99 to 101,,,,    32 degree temp at opening pitch???,,, 104 degree temp???,,   Surely there are thousands of studies proving this 100 pitch #,,,  it couldn't possibly be some handy number that was convienent for the media and public to latch on to and eventually this legend turned into fact could it?

I contend that the reason you see so few pitchers going over 100 these days is not based on any performance breakdowns at that point on a regular basis.   The reason why is because this 100 PC  theory is a FN' CRUTCH...

It's a crutch for managers to just play it by the "book" and take the safe way out for, takes out of play the dangerous second guessing from the all powerful media, ( although for managers, it could be argued it's also a henderance).   

It's a crutch for agents and in some cases even the SP's.  Nothing bad can happen if your not on the mound, and that means no loss of $,,,  I don't blame them, but I don't have to agree with it.

Lastly, it's a crutch for the media, and Joe Public,,   It gives them a feeling of having a certian extra knowledge of the game. They have one more opportunity to second guess a decision from the outside armed with this indisputable PC belief, that is now gospel because of the herd mentality that they (alright we) all sometimes fall into,,, 

Look, take solice in the fact that your band of believers is going to win out in the real world right or wrong..  The money factor alone trumps all other arguments...  using a "magic" pc # is a win win for everyone involved, except perhaps those who want to see the best pitcher on the mound late in the game regardless of what the "book" says to do... 

I'll let you have the last word, I go off on this about once every season, and this one came early,,,

No hard feelings,,, GL going forward....

 

 

quote
Forum Index : MLB Betting : Messages Page 2 of 2  1 2  
You have entered the forum as a GUEST. 
You must login/register to post or reply.