Posted:
#26
BOL Today Bodio
Bodio's MLB Tue 06/14
Posted:
#27
#2: Cleveland Indians +170
A couple of factors here as to why I'm fading Verlander. He's no doubt a great pitcher but he does have a very lucky .227 BABIP (15th luckiest). Couple that with a below-average GB rate and he's due for regression. Besides this, both Masterson and Verlander are fairly close in terms of advanced stats: Masterson 3.14 FIP / 3.54 xFIP / 3.7 tERA....Verlander 3.17 FIP / 3.16 xFIP / 3.3 tERA. Masterson has a 55% GB%, one of the highest in the league and I expect him to mitigate the effectiveness of this Tigers lineup somewhat, which is the #1 FB hitting team in the league. Verlander, on the other hand is coming off an outing where he threw 126 pitches. Normally, that's not a concern with him but he's averaged 123 pitches-per-game in his last 3 starts. (115 per game average in all starts in 2011). He'll be facing an Indians lineup that had 17 ER's in 32 innings on 29 hits off him last season. I don't expect him to last past the 7th in this one, which will enable Cleveland to see this terrible Detroit BP for at least 2 innings. This mediocre 'pen' is already pretty used up over the last couple of games, and thus I expect it to be an even greater advantage for the Indians. (Cleveland pen is pretty rested, as they were only used for 2 innings last night). Both teams are fairly close in hitting (#11 for CLE and #8 for DET) and the pitching matchup does not justify a +170 price. I'll grab Cleveland in this one as I see a close game in this one with the Tribe having an advantage in the later innings.
Posted:
#28
#3: Milwaukee Brewers -138
Brewers have an advantage in EVERY 'key' category here: better offense (#7 vs #15 based on wOBA); better bullpen (#5 xFIP / #4 teRA vs #23 xFIP / #24 tERA); and better Fielding (#13 vs #29 UZR). Oh, and the starting pitching is much better as well. I know Gallardo is coming off a poor outing, but he hasn't allowed more than 2 ER's in 6 straight starts prior to that. Wells allowed 27 hits and 12 ER's in 17 innings pitched versus the Brew Crew last year. And even though I expect him to be better than that tonight, there are enough 'key' advantages for Milwaukee that justifies playing them as a road favorite in this one.
Posted:
#29
Quote Originally Posted by nepatriots_12:
gl buddy...what are your thoughts on the Yanks tonight? Andarmac has a great writeup on them...good "buy low" price against an overrated pitcher that should regress soon in Ogando...
gl buddy...what are your thoughts on the Yanks tonight? Andarmac has a great writeup on them...good "buy low" price against an overrated pitcher that should regress soon in Ogando...
Yeah, Ogando's metrics do show that 'regression' is imminent but I just can't fade him yet. He's still going strong. Sabathia seems to get tired in the 'later' innings and against this Rangers lineup I'm not willing to lay -148 odds on him. Plus Jeter might not play. Easy PASS for me even though I was looking to back the 'Bombers' in this one
Posted:
#35
Quote Originally Posted by narco12:
wat up bodio where u been past couple of days? I like your picks as well i like cards n brew but was leaning rays as my 3rd pick i feel like big game shields is gonna have a good outing n rays get to wakefield. Im surprised your on 3 road teams
wat up bodio where u been past couple of days? I like your picks as well i like cards n brew but was leaning rays as my 3rd pick i feel like big game shields is gonna have a good outing n rays get to wakefield. Im surprised your on 3 road teams
Yeah, Shields is clearly 'better' in that pitching duel, but I just can't fade Boston right now. GL!
Posted:
#37
Quote Originally Posted by bodio:
#2: Cleveland Indians +170
#2: Cleveland Indians +170
A couple of factors here as to why I'm fading Verlander. He's no doubt a great pitcher but he does have a very lucky .227 BABIP (15th luckiest). Couple that with a below-average GB rate and he's due for regression. Besides this, both Masterson and Verlander are fairly close in terms of advanced stats: Masterson 3.14 FIP / 3.54 xFIP / 3.7 tERA....Verlander 3.17 FIP / 3.16 xFIP / 3.3 tERA. Masterson has a 55% GB%, one of the highest in the league and I expect him to mitigate the effectiveness of this Tigers lineup somewhat, which is the #1 FB hitting team in the league. Verlander, on the other hand is coming off an outing where he threw 126 pitches. Normally, that's not a concern with him but he's averaged 123 pitches-per-game in his last 3 starts. (115 per game average in all starts in 2011). He'll be facing an Indians lineup that had 17 ER's in 32 innings on 29 hits off him last season. I don't expect him to last past the 7th in this one, which will enable Cleveland to see this terrible Detroit BP for at least 2 innings. This mediocre 'pen' is already pretty used up over the last couple of games, and thus I expect it to be an even greater advantage for the Indians. (Cleveland pen is pretty rested, as they were only used for 2 innings last night). Both teams are fairly close in hitting (#11 for CLE and #8 for DET) and the pitching matchup does not justify a +170 price. I'll grab Cleveland in this one as I see a close game in this one with the Tribe having an advantage in the later innings.
Offensive trends are at least as important if not more important than season long stats. In the last week, the Tigers are batting nearly 100 points better than the Indians, and scored more than twice as many runs per game as the Indians.
What do you think?
Posted:
#39
Quote Originally Posted by Werker:
Offensive trends are at least as important if not more important than season long stats. In the last week, the Tigers are batting nearly 100 points better than the Indians, and scored more than twice as many runs per game as the Indians.
What do you think?
Offensive trends are at least as important if not more important than season long stats. In the last week, the Tigers are batting nearly 100 points better than the Indians, and scored more than twice as many runs per game as the Indians.
What do you think?
I'm assuming you're talking about short-term streaks (not sure what you mean by 'offensive trends'). In that case, I disagree. Short-term hitting streaks aren't more important than long-term, season-long performance #'s. The fact that player A hit 100 points above his true-career average last week, does not mean that he's that much more likely to get a hit in his next at-bat. It's like saying that after 10 'reds' on a roulette table, there probability of getting another 'red' is higher than 50/50.
Posted:
#41
Quote Originally Posted by bodio:
I'm assuming you're talking about short-term streaks (not sure what you mean by 'offensive trends'). In that case, I disagree. Short-term hitting streaks aren't more important than long-term, season-long performance #'s. The fact that player A hit 100 points above his true-career average last week, does not mean that he's that much more likely to get a hit in his next at-bat. It's like saying that after 10 'reds' on a roulette table, there probability of getting another 'red' is higher than 50/50.
Posted:
#42
Quote Originally Posted by bodio:
I'm assuming you're talking about short-term streaks (not sure what you mean by 'offensive trends'). In that case, I disagree. Short-term hitting streaks aren't more important than long-term, season-long performance #'s. The fact that player A hit 100 points above his true-career average last week, does not mean that he's that much more likely to get a hit in his next at-bat. It's like saying that after 10 'reds' on a roulette table, there probability of getting another 'red' is higher than 50/50.
i actually disagree. not comparing apples to apples there. a roulette table does not have a confidence factor to it. psyche is such a big part of a hitter's game that it makes a big difference. when i played ball, i was a MUCH better hitter when i was on a "streak".
Posted:
#43
Quote Originally Posted by sims_key:
i actually disagree. not comparing apples to apples there. a roulette table does not have a confidence factor to it. psyche is such a big part of a hitter's game that it makes a big difference. when i played ball, i was a MUCH better hitter when i was on a "streak".
Absolutely agree with you Sims.
Bodio, you can't seriously disregard streaks entirely. Do you?
Posted:
#44
Quote Originally Posted by sims_key:
i actually disagree. not comparing apples to apples there. a roulette table does not have a confidence factor to it. psyche is such a big part of a hitter's game that it makes a big difference. when i played ball, i was a MUCH better hitter when i was on a "streak".
Let's say you're on a 'streak' and your psyche is really high. How do you explain going 0-4 against a mediocre pitcher in your next outing? Are you all of a sudden going 'cold'? Why does that happen? How can you predict when a player (or a team) goes hot or cold? I used to look at short-term streaks/performance in the past, but I'm beginning to realize that it just 'complicates' things and is not really a factor. To me, it's simpler, and more efficient, to evaluate each team's 'true' ability and ignore the 'current' streak. Streaks come and go, and usually are too complex to explain (pitchers, weather, ballparks, luck, etc.), but when you have a decent sample size of data (like we do now at this point of the season) it's pretty easy to compare one teams' offense vs another, and vice versa.
Anyone have thoughts on this?
Posted:
#45
Quote Originally Posted by Werker:
Absolutely agree with you Sims.
Bodio, you can't seriously disregard streaks entirely. Do you?
Absolutely agree with you Sims.
Bodio, you can't seriously disregard streaks entirely. Do you?
YES, in baseball I do! To me 'streaks' have too many factors that have ZERO impact on the NEXT game.
Think about this. If team X plays Chicago Cubs (worst ERA in the league right now) in a 4 game series and team X averages 5 rpg and bats .350 in those 4 games, when their season-long average is 3.5 rpg and .290 BA. When team X plays Florida (#15th team ERA) in their next game, are you going to handicap that game focusing on the supposedly 'hot' hitting streak that team X is on, or are you going to use their 'true' ability to hit the ball?
Obviously this is a very simplistic example, since I'm only focusing on Cubs' ERA to explain why team X hit so much better in a short 4-game series than their 'true' ability. There are way more factors involved in explaining why a particular team is hitting better or worse then their ability for a short-period of time. (One of the biggest is LUCK, which is a huge 'factor' in baseball). I'd rather not waste my time trying to analyze ALL of these factors (there are a ton) but rather spend my time analyzing the 'true' ability of each squad (hitter) and comparing them to one another. Hope this makes sense...
Posted:
#47
Quote Originally Posted by bodio:
The fact that player A hit 100 points above his true-career average last week, does not mean that he's that much more likely to get a hit in his next at-bat. It's like saying that after 10 'reds' on a roulette table, there probability of getting another 'red' is higher than 50/50.
i wasn't saying that streaks are MORE important in capping just that your statements above are wrong imo.
i'm on the rays today, so obviously i don't use streaks. 
Hot Forum Topics
