Logan Watkins had the day off. Brian Bogusevic had a nice one, with a solo shot and 3 walks. Brett Jackson 2: The Umpire Strikes Back had a triple, a run scored, and 2 strikeouts. Dave Sappelt did well, with 2 singles and a walk. Josh Vitters had another 0-4 day. Donnie Murphy had a solo shot and a strikeout as well, as did Edwin Maysonet. Edwin also had a single.
Guillermo Moscoso had a really rough outing, surrendering 8 in 4 innings. He allowed 3 home runs, 6 hits, and 4 walks. Casey Coleman pitched 3 scoreless innings of relief, and Hisanori Takahashi allowed a run in two innings.
Daytona Cubs 8 @ Jupiter Hammerheads 4
Zeke DeVoss had 2 RBI and a run with a single and a strikeout. John Andreoli is up to .296 on the season; he had 3 singles today. Javier Baez scored 2 runs with an RBI, going 1-5 with a double. He celebrated with his 20th error. Jorge Soler had 2 walks and a single with 2 RBI. Dustin Geiger had a double, a single, and an RBI. Chadd Krist had a walk and double. Everyone on the Cubs had at least one hit today.
Austin Kirk drew the start and went 5 strong innings. He allowed a single run and a baserunner an inning. Luis Liria kept it interesting, as is his wont, with 2 runs in 1.2 innings. Hunter Cervenka closed the door with his 5th save of the year, this one 2.1 innings. He needs to get more strikeouts.
Kane County Cougars 2 @ Peoria Chiefs 9
A battle of the Cubs affiliates! The story of the day for the Cubs was the return of Albert Almora to semi-meaningful baseball. He didn't disappoint, going 3-4 with a double, a run, and an RBI. He batted 2nd in the lineup. Dan Vogelbach also doubled. Jeimer Candelario, Bijan Rademacher, Marco Hernandez, and Gioskar Amaya (batting 9th!) each went 1-4. The only walks on the day were two from Rock Shoulders, who has cooled off considerably.
Michael Heesch had a poor outing. He went 6.2 innings and allowed 5 runs (4 earned), and he struck out only 3 batters. In A ball that's not going to work. Eddie Orozco went 0.1 in relief and stunk. He allowed 3 hits and 2 runs. Brian Smith pitched a poor 8th inning to close it out.
Francisco Carrillo went 3 innings and allowed no baserunners. He also struck out 5.
Comments
Basically the entire Cubs FO was at Gray’s start yesterday.
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20130522&content_id=48302062¬ebook_id=48323968&vkey=notebook_chc&c_id=chc
BerseliusQuote Reply
WaLi wrote:
Firefighter, that could work too
joshQuote Reply
Bubbles thoughts:
What could cubs get for shark if they put him on the market?
Might be a lot… Looking at teams that might fit
Nats: Rendon
Indians: Lindor?
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
bubblesdachimp wrote:
http://www.triplepundit.com/2011/09/quantifying-shark-fin-market-perspective-wiping-species/
With Jeff Samardzija weighing in at 225 lbs, Cubs could expect between $45,000 and $67,500.
WaLiQuote Reply
@ WaLi:
(dying laughing)
BerseliusQuote Reply
I’d imagine Shark would fetch a prospect in the global 15-20 range but that’s talking out of my ass.
MylesQuote Reply
@ WaLi:
(dying laughing)…….I love how far people will go for some snark.
MuckerQuote Reply
I think all team names should just be colors of socks.
joshQuote Reply
@ Myles:
If so, what is actually doing the typing?
joshQuote Reply
Mucker wrote:
http://youtu.be/KZojpl-p_5A
Suburban kidQuote Reply
Someone should tell Alvin that it is Andrew McCutchen that owns the Cubs.
BerseliusQuote Reply
Cubs should trade for Ethier. Just for shits and giggles.
joshQuote Reply
@ josh:
Or should I say “The Blue Sox”? Aw yeah!
joshQuote Reply
So……….Edwin Jackson.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-2013-cubs-better-than-we-think/
MishQuote Reply
@ Suburban kid:
5 Strikeouts and one walk means he must be having a good day, right? RIGHT?
BerseliusQuote Reply
Mish wrote:
The Cubs are so not clutch
WenningtonsGorillaCockQuote Reply
Berselius wrote:
Better than we think
MylesQuote Reply
Keith Moreland can’t remember his families’ birthdays
MylesQuote Reply
Rain Delay
MylesQuote Reply
@ Myles:
I bet shit tastes better than I think, too.
joshQuote Reply
@ josh:
You think about the taste of shit?
Suburban kidQuote Reply
@ Suburban kid:
Sometimes. I mean, I’ve read Gravity’s Rainbow, like most of you, and I wonder about things. Like do different odors connote different flavors, or is it all pretty much the same? Why do pigs not think shit is too gross to eat? How much of a given food would you have to eat before the flavor showed up in shit?
joshQuote Reply
@ josh:
Good answer.
Shooter McGavinQuote Reply
Shooter McGavin wrote:
You eat pieces of shit for breakfast?
MylesQuote Reply
@ Myles:
No!
Shooter McGavinQuote Reply
@ Mish:
I hate how the Cardinals always seem to outperform. Part of it has to be due to the manager, right?
WaLiQuote Reply
This thread is quickly turning into the most fucked-up episode of Rain Delay Theatre ever.
uncle daveQuote Reply
http://youtu.be/iuO4BfnlDY8
Frazier ThomasQuote Reply
Just met Jim Bunning (Jr.). Apparently I work with him.
/cool story bro
WaLiQuote Reply
Hate to go on a tangent off of the riveting “What shit tastes like” debate, but I’m wondering if anybody knows of anything that has been written on any difference in value between streaky hitters and more consistent hitters.
For instance, let’s say that Soriano will end up with an OPS around .800 at the end of the year, but he’ll go through massive streaks where he’s as .400 for a few weeks and then some streaks where he’s at 1.200 for awhile. It all evens out at the end, but since you can never know when the switch will flip from good Soriano to bad Soriano and vice versa, is there inherent value to someone who also ends up at .800, but usually only varies between .700 and .900 throughout the year?
Is there anybody who has studied this or written about some measure of consistency and whether that has value?
Aisle424Quote Reply
@ Aisle424:
That would be interesting. Sori et al definitely seem like the kind of players you’re all right having on your team all season, but are bigger risks acquiring them midseason.
joshQuote Reply
@ Aisle424:
Nobody has shown that streakiness in hitters exists.
If they did, streakier hitters would be more valuable, because you could limit their playing time/leverage during cold streaks.
GWQuote Reply
@ Aisle424:
i’ve been wondering about this too. i would think that a higher stdev player (aka a streakier player) will be more valuable in the long run. my reasoning is that if you take this to an extreme, you have a player that will hit, say two homers and a double in every fifth game and not get any other hits all season. so over say 600 PAs you have 64.8 HRs, 32.4 doubles, a 0.162 BA, and let’s say 100 RBIs and 100 runs. Every fifth game (i.e. 32.4 games/season), you will be hugely beneficial to your team’s overall win percentage. i spent about 1 second looking for the WAR coefficients so i could calculate what this would equate to and then i gave up. rest assured it was a valiant effort.
anywho, it sure seems like this shitty player would contribute a lot more from a WAR standpoint than someone with a similar OPS+ but more regular stats.
EnricoPallazzoQuote Reply
@ GW:
Well, streakiness existing and streakiness being predictable are two completely different things.
joshQuote Reply
Aisle424 wrote:
This reminds me of variance in baseball, which is awesome and rules everything we know about the sport. I’ll write about it tomorrow.
MylesQuote Reply
@ josh:
really? then how could one possibly define streakiness? because the essence of such a test would be using one dataset to predict what happens in another.
GWQuote Reply
Aisle424 wrote:
The consistent player is more likely to be found on my Fantasy team than the streaky player. Thus, the consistent player has more value.
SVBQuote Reply
You could look at weekly performance in WAR or RC+ or something (= X). A streaky player would have more variability in weekly X and a consistent player less.
SVBQuote Reply
@ SVB:
some hitters definitely show more variance in output than others (eg high K/ high HR guys), but that’s not what streakiness implies in any sense that I’ve heard it used. it always implies that past performance impacts future performance to some degree (separate from changes in talent level).
GWQuote Reply
GW wrote:
They could be, but when do you bench Soriano? And if you bench when he’s cold, when does he break out of it? There’s nothing to predict when a hot or cold streak will begin or end, but there is no denying that some players have a far greater standard deviation from their career stats/ true talent level.
It seems intuitive that I’d want to limit the number of guys with large standard deviations just so I would have a better idea of what sort of lineup I’m fielding on any particular day.
I know I keep using Soriano in the examples, but he is probably the best example left on the team where there is such a large SD in performance. You never know if you’re going to get a monster day or one that could easily have been achieved by Tony Campana, so how does one maximize a lineup when he’s either a 3/4 hitter or an 8/9 hitter by production? Can you trust a guy with a big SD in a run-producing slot?
I don’t know, that’s why I’m wondering if anyone has written about it/ studied it.
Aisle424Quote Reply
SVB wrote:
This is exactly how I started thinking about this. I fucking love having Joey Votto in the middle of my fantasy lineup and I get frustrated as hell with Jay Bruce (right now I’m loving him, but he was killing me earlier and you CAN’T just bench him).
Aisle424Quote Reply
Aisle424 wrote:
there isn’t?
read the book. they wrote a chapter on streakiness and couldn’t find it for hitters. randomness is a bitch.
GWQuote Reply
@ GW:
Intentionally walking Navarro (dying laughing) (dying laughing)
AkabariQuote Reply
(dying laughing) (dying laughing) Dan Plesac just called Rick Porcello “probably the Cy Young Award winner in the Grapefruit League” in touting his potential.
GWQuote Reply
Aisle424 wrote:
(dying laughing) You and
meSK must have the same fucking roster.Frazier ThomasQuote Reply
GW wrote:
“The Book”?
I’d be very interested. Pedro Alvarez seems to go on month-long streaks toggling between totally awesome and unbelievably shitty.
Aisle424Quote Reply
It’s weird living in a world in which Albert Pujols is not even the best player on his team.
Rizzo the RatQuote Reply
@ GW:
I didn’t read every word, but a player could conceivably be streaky over 162 games without a consistent pattern in terms of measureable effects (like he heats up when the temp gets above a certain level). His streaks could be due to internal factors, or unpredictable factors. He could be the kind of hitter who’s hits come in bunches without any way of knowing when you’re happening upon one, and it works out that he’s fairly consistent year to year. I think all hitters are like that to some degree, but it could be some exhibit that more than others, and that the predictability is only on a seasonal scale. Given all that, though, they’re probably exactly as valuable as anyone else.
joshQuote Reply
josh wrote:
this definitely happens, is a general effect, and has been quantified.
josh wrote:
in that case it could be measured.
josh wrote:
i agree. but the premise is you know that a hitter is streaky. and if you know it, then you obviously have some evidence, which implies a defined set of parameters that has revealed it to you, making it an actionable item.
and by the way, comparing a guy with a .415 career wOBA to a .347 guy, well, let’s just say it might not be streakiness that you are identifying.
GWQuote Reply
josh wrote:
A streaky player is more valuable in a theoretical sense, if only because you can work to maximize his hot streaks and minimize his cold ones. The problem with that is it only works with foresight we don’t (and can’t) really have. On the other hand, there is likely a diminishing return (a very, very, VERY faint one) to each additional hit a player has in a game after the first (the marginal utility of beating a dead horse).
Essentially, though, there is no clear-cut evidence for streakiness in baseball at the player-level.
MylesQuote Reply
@ Myles:
I’m confused about this discussion of streakiness. Is the debate about whether some players tend to get their hits in bunches while others are more consistent, or is the debate about whether if a player gets his hits in bunches that that period will have some regularity in duration, or is the debate about being able to predict when those bunches of hits will occur?
Because I think each of these is some discussion of streakiness, but each is a little different, and each is being discussed simultaneously above.
SVBQuote Reply
Iceman. (dying laughing)
SVBQuote Reply
New Shit
MylesQuote Reply
Myles wrote:
I don’t understand why everyone is so insistent about this. If you have evidence that player X (or a group of players with certain characteristics), given seven previous games of bad performance (or five or 10 or whatever), predictably hits 200 OPS points lower in game 8, then you pinch hit for him in high leverage situations. If you can’t define those types of criteria, then you really only suspect that he is streaky.
GWQuote Reply