Posted:
#601
@TxRangers
Maybe you could specify, in more detail, why Mike Trout is that bad at playing baseball?
Fwiw, he has 2 hits today.
Mike Trout Strikeouts
Posted:
#603
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
@TxRangers Those are his current averages Very good ones What were the odds tonight? Are you keeping a tally on this? Is it profitable or no? I am still curious if it is so good why the books allow it. Also if this is profitable for strikeout guys, why not play others?
@TxRangers Those are his current averages Very good ones What were the odds tonight? Are you keeping a tally on this? Is it profitable or no? I am still curious if it is so good why the books allow it. Also if this is profitable for strikeout guys, why not play others?
In the month of May, Aaron Judge is 10-1 on this same prop. I don't know the juice, it has to be higher than Trout's.
In the month of May, Mike Trout is 9-1 on this prop.
Posted:
#606
[Quote: Originally Posted by Raiders22]@undermysac I get that streaks will be there. But over a year it has to adjust out the variance and be close to B/E. I am sure the books adjust it as the season goes on, etc.[/Quote]
Streaks ? This has been going on for 3-4 years.. This is what is surprising to most folks. You can do your own due diligence and see something happened around 2022, still in the apex of his career. Go look at his career stats.. The batting average started to crater, and the SO on the upward trajectory.
I live here in SoCAL. I have probably watched more Angel games over Trout's career than any of you . Yeah, with with streaming services in recent memory, anybody can watch any game they want to now. But I'm talking about over the last 20 years. No one can capture this better than me.
I give a lot of credit to TxRangers. He seemingly identified a weakness in Trout much earlier than of you others posting in this thread..
Posted:
#607
@Rush51
Streaks as in the 9-1 and 10-1 he mentioned.
I get over a year there will be streaks like this.
But if the odds are adjusted properly a 2-3-4 game stretch of losing will take all of those wins away.
The books have to have the odds adjusted to offset someone taking advantage of a power hitter nowadays striking out more than they used to.
This is not a 'weakness' if over the course of a season and career it still produces far more runs than a better BA but far fewer strikeouts. Or someone that makes contact but hits into more double plays, etc.
It is not that I am saying Trout is still at his peak. I also get that he is having a very good year.
My concern is not whether Trout is an all-time great or not -- of course he is.
My question now is whether this is a profitable play that someone can blindly play or not.
I would like to see if this has been tracked somewhere. Not just with Trout but with any power hitter. Trout will be retiring at some point and obviously others will be an option for plays like this.
I think the 'weakness' would be if the books have been sleeping on this.
Posted:
#608
Raiders, seriously, please pump the brakes on the use of AI in your responses... ball backspin... graph it out as Y=a*x(squared)... seriously, let's put it to bed.
I'll counter your use of AI with mine which says the """ Actual Trajectory of a fastball, with backspin and high velocity, a 100 mph fastball may only drop about 7.7 inches from where the pitcher aimed it.""
So, it's practically negligible to the catcher's mitt. You can do your own Pythagorean Theorem exercise as to the actual angle of decent based on this. But it's small.... And Sure, the hitter has a naturally slight up-swing to be on the same plane as the ball in this premise. But I'm talking about the "UP-SWING" from the hitter that he focuses on (i.e. The Launch Angle), regardless of the trajectory of the baseball thrown. I thought I spelled this out clearly earlier in my reply. The hitter focuses on "HIS" launch angle", regardless of the pitch thrown.
In any event, I expect over the coming years that the excessive emphasis on "launch angle" will be put to bed... and a RE-FOCUS on learning to hit the baseball will take over..
Posted:
#609
Guy won’t answer the question about current odds because he doesn’t know and isn’t betting .Some emotional ramblings of a guy with no life and pissed he didn’t get a reach around .He should be posting these plays proudly when challenged.This guy might be a Trout stalker if the truth be known.
Posted:
#610
@Rush51
I think this is fairly close:
2011 22%
2012 22%
2013 19%
2014 26%
2015 26%
2016 20%
2017 18%
2019 20%
2020 23%
2021 21%
2022 28%
2023 28%
2024 27%
2025 32%
This looks like age and injury.
That is a standard deviation of around 4%.
The standard deviation for a typical power hitter is around 3-5%. A contact hitter would be less, at around 1-2%
So, this is far less than a homer or nothing hitter of around 5-6%.
The 7% rise or so since 2022 is a concern for sure. But are the books adjusting for this or not.
Posted:
#611
@Rush51
Quote Originally Posted by Rush51:
Raiders, seriously, please pump the brakes on the use of AI in your responses... ball backspin... graph it out as Y=a*x(squared)... seriously, let's put it to bed. I'll counter your use of AI with mine which says the """ Actual Trajectory of a fastball, with backspin and high velocity, a 100 mph fastball may only drop about 7.7 inches from where the pitcher aimed it."" So, it's practically negligible to the catcher's mitt. You can do your own Pythagorean Theorem exercise as to the actual angle of decent based on this. But it's small.... And Sure, the hitter has a naturally slight up-swing to be on the same plane as the ball in this premise. But I'm talking about the "UP-SWING" from the hitter that he focuses on (i.e. The Launch Angle), regardless of the trajectory of the baseball thrown. I thought I spelled this out clearly earlier in my reply. The hitter focuses on "HIS" launch angle", regardless of the pitch thrown. In any event, I expect over the coming years that the excessive emphasis on "launch angle" will be put to bed... and a RE-FOCUS on learning to hit the baseball will take over..
Raiders, seriously, please pump the brakes on the use of AI in your responses... ball backspin... graph it out as Y=a*x(squared)... seriously, let's put it to bed. I'll counter your use of AI with mine which says the """ Actual Trajectory of a fastball, with backspin and high velocity, a 100 mph fastball may only drop about 7.7 inches from where the pitcher aimed it."" So, it's practically negligible to the catcher's mitt. You can do your own Pythagorean Theorem exercise as to the actual angle of decent based on this. But it's small.... And Sure, the hitter has a naturally slight up-swing to be on the same plane as the ball in this premise. But I'm talking about the "UP-SWING" from the hitter that he focuses on (i.e. The Launch Angle), regardless of the trajectory of the baseball thrown. I thought I spelled this out clearly earlier in my reply. The hitter focuses on "HIS" launch angle", regardless of the pitch thrown. In any event, I expect over the coming years that the excessive emphasis on "launch angle" will be put to bed... and a RE-FOCUS on learning to hit the baseball will take over..
I am sorry. But the physics is what it is. The science is what it is. The proof in all of that is the expected runs produced.
As I said before, I was not a big advocate for it when it started and do not really like it.
It is very frustrating when guys strikeout or have a long fly out to end a rally.
It is also frustrating that teams are not effective with small bal any more. For example teams are not stealing bases any more.
The reason is the same: the analytics have proven it to be a negative EV option over the long run.
I get that folks do not like it. But for now, that is the way it is and how the teams are being built and how the players are being coached.
But if you do not like AI explanation of it, there are many, many great articles online about it and the development over the years of it.
That is why I said earlier MLB is the very best sport for analytics to work out to the positive -- because of the long season and the many situational opportunities that arise.
Posted:
#612
@bonfire69
Quote Originally Posted by bonfire69:
Guy won’t answer the question about current odds because he doesn’t know and isn’t betting .Some emotional ramblings of a guy with no life and pissed he didn’t get a reach around .He should be posting these plays proudly when challenged.This guy might be a Trout stalker if the truth be known.
Guy won’t answer the question about current odds because he doesn’t know and isn’t betting .Some emotional ramblings of a guy with no life and pissed he didn’t get a reach around .He should be posting these plays proudly when challenged.This guy might be a Trout stalker if the truth be known.
I give benefit of the doubt because I honestly do not know.
I also would be amazed if it really were 'free' money, as it were.
Posted:
#613
@Rush51
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/sports/mlb-launch-angles-story/
This is one of the first I remember that went into such detail.
But there are many more detailed and updated ones.
Posted:
#617
@Raiders22
Trout is supposed to be a HOF player... That is the crux of the argument being made. Not that he is being "average", but exceptional. As i say before , go look at his stats over his career. He will clearly have a "first-half" of his career, .... and a 2nd half of his career that is ""NOT"" HOF worthy.
Posted:
#619
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
@Rush51 Quote Originally Posted by Rush51: @undermysac What an awfully small sample size. Let's look at the data at the end of the year... Do you know what it is until today so far this season? Not just for Trout -- but for any other power hitters as well?
@Rush51 Quote Originally Posted by Rush51: @undermysac What an awfully small sample size. Let's look at the data at the end of the year... Do you know what it is until today so far this season? Not just for Trout -- but for any other power hitters as well?
Seriously, who cares about any other power hitter. Focus on a winner and ride it.
The notion of finding other opportunities is a tendency to greed ! And this is what leads to losses in the long term. Forget this nonsense. You know better.
Also, the notion of betting 2+ SO per game is greed ( mentioned by someone else) .... Exploit the lines of a book.....................And move on.
Posted:
#620
@Rush51
Ok. An alltime great and a first ballot hall of famer. He got injured and older.
I really get all of that.
But I am not clear that is the crux of the argument, at least for me.
It is whether you can make money off of his strikeouts over a season. If so, why are the book not fixing this. If so, why not bet other power hitters as well.
The crux really is about making money off of his strikeouts—not whether he is great or still is great. That is a side issue that is silly to me.
So, if you can make money off of a declining power hitters if the books are still postíng pre-decline numbers — where can I see this data.
Posted:
#621
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22:
@Rush51 Quote Originally Posted by Rush51: Raiders, seriously, please pump the brakes on the use of AI in your responses... ball backspin... graph it out as Y=a*x(squared)... seriously, let's put it to bed. I'll counter your use of AI with mine which says the """ Actual Trajectory of a fastball, with backspin and high velocity, a 100 mph fastball may only drop about 7.7 inches from where the pitcher aimed it."" So, it's practically negligible to the catcher's mitt. You can do your own Pythagorean Theorem exercise as to the actual angle of decent based on this. But it's small.... And Sure, the hitter has a naturally slight up-swing to be on the same plane as the ball in this premise. But I'm talking about the "UP-SWING" from the hitter that he focuses on (i.e. The Launch Angle), regardless of the trajectory of the baseball thrown. I thought I spelled this out clearly earlier in my reply. The hitter focuses on "HIS" launch angle", regardless of the pitch thrown. In any event, I expect over the coming years that the excessive emphasis on "launch angle" will be put to bed... and a RE-FOCUS on learning to hit the baseball will take over.. I am sorry. But the physics is what it is. The science is what it is. The proof in all of that is the expected runs produced. As I said before, I was not a big advocate for it when it started and do not really like it. It is very frustrating when guys strikeout or have a long fly out to end a rally. It is also frustrating that teams are not effective with small bal any more. For example teams are not stealing bases any more. The reason is the same: the analytics have proven it to be a negative EV option over the long run. I get that folks do not like it. But for now, that is the way it is and how the teams are being built and how the players are being coached. But if you do not like AI explanation of it, there are many, many great articles online about it and the development over the years of it. That is why I said earlier MLB is the very best sport for analytics to work out to the positive -- because of the long season and the many situational opportunities that arise.
@Rush51 Quote Originally Posted by Rush51: Raiders, seriously, please pump the brakes on the use of AI in your responses... ball backspin... graph it out as Y=a*x(squared)... seriously, let's put it to bed. I'll counter your use of AI with mine which says the """ Actual Trajectory of a fastball, with backspin and high velocity, a 100 mph fastball may only drop about 7.7 inches from where the pitcher aimed it."" So, it's practically negligible to the catcher's mitt. You can do your own Pythagorean Theorem exercise as to the actual angle of decent based on this. But it's small.... And Sure, the hitter has a naturally slight up-swing to be on the same plane as the ball in this premise. But I'm talking about the "UP-SWING" from the hitter that he focuses on (i.e. The Launch Angle), regardless of the trajectory of the baseball thrown. I thought I spelled this out clearly earlier in my reply. The hitter focuses on "HIS" launch angle", regardless of the pitch thrown. In any event, I expect over the coming years that the excessive emphasis on "launch angle" will be put to bed... and a RE-FOCUS on learning to hit the baseball will take over.. I am sorry. But the physics is what it is. The science is what it is. The proof in all of that is the expected runs produced. As I said before, I was not a big advocate for it when it started and do not really like it. It is very frustrating when guys strikeout or have a long fly out to end a rally. It is also frustrating that teams are not effective with small bal any more. For example teams are not stealing bases any more. The reason is the same: the analytics have proven it to be a negative EV option over the long run. I get that folks do not like it. But for now, that is the way it is and how the teams are being built and how the players are being coached. But if you do not like AI explanation of it, there are many, many great articles online about it and the development over the years of it. That is why I said earlier MLB is the very best sport for analytics to work out to the positive -- because of the long season and the many situational opportunities that arise.
The gravity of the ball crossing the plate ?? Please, I expect better from you Raiders... I already said what needed to be said. That is some juvenile stuff when it comes to people that know baseball... Read my response again... It is noteworthy,.
Posted:
#622
@Rush51
Seriously, who cares about any other power hitter. Focus on a winner and ride it.
I do.
Because if it is truly working then it has to be working for others.
Books will limit what you can play on these props anyway — so, why not play multiple players.
If there is truly an edge — why not maximize this edge.
Besides what if Trout gets hurt again. Do you just sit on the sidelines the rest of the year and not take free money.
Posted:
#623
@Rush51
The gravity of the ball crossing the plate ?? Please, I expect better from you Raiders... I already said what needed to be said. That is some juvenile stuff when it comes to people that know baseball... Read my response again... It is noteworthy,.
Yes. They explain exactly how many inches gravity is bringing the ball down as it crosses the plate.
Pure physics.
I recommend reading up on this and the whole science behind it.
It has transformed the game because of it. We can not like it; but we cannot deny the science and math behind why they are doing it.
Posted:
#624
[Quote: Originally Posted by ArtSchlichterJr]True 2nd half not HOF but over all he is a LOCK.. That's why it is called a career.[/Quote]
And really ???? What makes a career ?? And yet, you will find no other HOF player that had more SO than hits over his career, and also DID NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THE PLAYOFFS AT ALL !!!! HE WILL BE THE FIRST to achieve such a lackluster postseason AND a SHITTY 2nd half of his career. !!
It really is something for people to think that he is some exceptional player over the length of his career... It just isn't so. ...
Posted:
#625
Quote Originally Posted by Rush51:
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: @Rush51 Quote Originally Posted by Rush51: @undermysac What an awfully small sample size. Let's look at the data at the end of the year... Do you know what it is until today so far this season? Not just for Trout -- but for any other power hitters as well? Seriously, who cares about any other power hitter. Focus on a winner and ride it. The notion of finding other opportunities is a tendency to greed ! And this is what leads to losses in the long term. Forget this nonsense. You know better. Also, the notion of betting 2+ SO per game is greed ( mentioned by someone else) .... Exploit the lines of a book.....................And move on.
Quote Originally Posted by Raiders22: @Rush51 Quote Originally Posted by Rush51: @undermysac What an awfully small sample size. Let's look at the data at the end of the year... Do you know what it is until today so far this season? Not just for Trout -- but for any other power hitters as well? Seriously, who cares about any other power hitter. Focus on a winner and ride it. The notion of finding other opportunities is a tendency to greed ! And this is what leads to losses in the long term. Forget this nonsense. You know better. Also, the notion of betting 2+ SO per game is greed ( mentioned by someone else) .... Exploit the lines of a book.....................And move on.
Is it a winning bet over the long run? None of us really know.
I tried my best to examine it in a previous post. Came up with +$140 at the time(not exact), I was guessing the odds at -365 at the time on all games. Used that # cause that's what I saw him at for one game a few days ago.
I think that's all Raiders and I would like to know.
This thread in the meantime has turned into a massive argument what makes a player good, or great, or hall of fame worthy etc...with the main argument for Trout sucking is his strikeout rate.
I simply pointed out that Judge strikes out more than him. And I don't see anyone making the argument for Judge being a bad player.
There could better odds on his strikeout props if the perception is different than the true implied odds on his strikeout props.
Just a thought. Have a great day gentlemen
Hot Forum Topics
