Jump to content
Our free agent ranking is up to 100 names, and now you can filter by player position! Click here to check it out! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

drivlikejehu

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,284

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by drivlikejehu

  1. drivlikejehu
    Bolstering the bullpen is fine and all, but the difference between May and Pelfrey in the rotation more than outweighs that. Plenty of excuses are being offered up for this, as expected. The Twins made the wrong move, as expected. I would be more irritated except I've been criticizing this move for weeks, because it was so obvious that it would happen regardless of how badly Pelfrey pitched. Nor should Milone keep a spot over May. Milone's ERA is much better than he's really pitched, and he would be a better lefty out of the bullpen than Thompson or Duensing. May is better now and more a part of the Twins future plans. So that aspect of the decision is also just plain error on the Twins' part. Not that Milone doesn't 'deserve' a spot, but May deserves it more.
  2. drivlikejehu
    Ending up at 75 would be really bad, but it's not impossible or anything. That's a 64-win full season pace... horrible, but exceeded by the 2011 Twins and nearly reached by the 2012 and 2013 clubs. The Twins have a horrid lineup and atrocious bullpen, with rotation depth but no top-of-rotation starters. I don't see why they are immune to continued June-like struggles.
  3. drivlikejehu
    The bullpen has been a ticking time bomb from day 1. The Twins weren't serious about it then and aren't serious about it now. It's just one of those things... there's really not an explanation other than a lack of decisiveness (to put it kindly).
  4. drivlikejehu
    I know what it means. But here's what dictionary.com says: 1. without the faculty of reason; deprived of reason. 2. without or deprived of normal mental clarity or sound judgment. 3. not in accordance with reason; utterly illogical ... The first and second generally would apply to individuals, whereas I was referring to an abstract idea, which fits well with the third definition above. Relying on small sample size ERA is not in accordance with reason and is therefore irrational. Before you question the use of "reason," I used it in the context that dictionary.com provides as definition #4: "sound judgment; good sense." Relying on small sample size ERA is not in accordance with sound judgment and is therefore irrational.
  5. drivlikejehu
    I only used the analogy with respect to whether there is such thing as a right or wrong decision. Multiple posters are claiming that it's OK to use incorrect reasoning because maybe things will turn out OK anyway.
  6. drivlikejehu
    You can't slow play when your opponent goes all-in pre-flop. I think your claim here, which I find very surprising, is that it is rational to knowingly make poor decisions. To me, that seems like the opposite of rationality, which is just "the exercise of reason." I suppose that is the core of the disagreement. I think it is irrational to intentionally make poor decisions, in the hope of getting lucky.
  7. drivlikejehu
    Not in the scenario I was implying. Heads up, equal stacks. You are big blind and dealt 2 aces. Other player raises all-in. Is it justifiable to fold?
  8. drivlikejehu
    His profile struck me as very risky but without the upside of a potential starting pitcher or position player. Granted, the 2nd round comes with fairly low expectations historically, but I would wait until after the first 100 picks except in unusual situations like Tyler Jay, where a college reliever has a legitimate starter projection.
  9. drivlikejehu
    The comments of mine you object to are all based on a crucial distinction you aren't recognizing. Decisions are based on expected future results, not actual future results. With respect to expected future results, one should always use xFIP in the situation under discussion. Using the correct approach does not always pay off. In hold 'em poker, being dealt 2 aces justifies going all-in without hesitation, but a loss can still easily occur. Does that make it valid to fold those 2 aces when raised? It is a certainty that you should give yourself the best chance to succeed. That was my point. You have agreed with all the underlying facts, except for holding out that using an inferior method is still justifiable. That's not a position that can be reconciled with good decision making.
  10. drivlikejehu
    Flipping a coin may also lead to correct outcomes. My point was about the decision-making process. Decisions can only be made on the basis of available information. Since, as you admit, the expected result will be better when using xFIP, as opposed to ERA, it would be wrong to use ERA. You would intentionally be using a method that, on the whole, produces inferior results. So can you explain why it is valid to use ERA, knowing that it is inferior?
  11. drivlikejehu
    I guess what I meant was - didn't it go wrong on draft day? They made an evaluation of how he would transition to pro ball, and it didn't work out as planned. So now they are slowing things down.
  12. drivlikejehu
    A number of knowledgeable fans such as yourself go off course when it comes to some of the finer statistical points regarding ERA and it's defense-independent compatriots. The predictive value of ERA is all about sample size - at a certain point, it becomes the best predictor of future ERA. In a sample sample, however, it has zero value. Not because the small-sample ERA tells us literally nothing - for instance, even Milone's ERA in 53 IP is enough to be confident he isn't actually a mediocre high schooler that is just getting lucky. But, all of the valuable information being captured by ERA is also captured by xFIP. I've never used an underline before on TD, but that is really the crucial point. You are never better off using small sample ERA as opposed to xFIP, because the expected error value is always higher with ERA than with xFIP. Therefore, a rational analyst must use a normalized metric over ERA in a small-sample situation to produce the lowest expected error. I am at a loss as to how any other conclusion can be reached. If you object to my tone, I understand, but as to my conclusion I would appreciate a substantive explanation of how any other outcome is possible.
  13. drivlikejehu
    The predictive value of various statistical measures has been evaluated empirically. The lack of predictive value for short-term ERA is absolutely a fact. No case against this fact has ever been presented. If you can do so, or point to where someone else has, then by all means do so. Otherwise your objections are per se invalid. I was also only commenting on one aspect of the May v. Pelfrey v. Milone comparison. Even if Pelfrey or Milone did have a performance argument, it would be completely outweighed by May's long-term value, which is best served by keeping him in the rotation. No rational case can be made to remove May from the rotation. Some questions in baseball are subjective and impossible to resolve definitely. This is not such a question. Any conclusion other than May staying in the rotation is erroneous, period.
  14. drivlikejehu
    What about him indicates he is close to the Twins bullpen or deserving of special consideration in terms of promotions/demotions? The fact he was an (unwise) 2nd round draft choice doesn't really matter at this point. He's just another guy that throws hard but can't pitch.
  15. drivlikejehu
    The discussion is over who should stay in the rotation, which relates only to future performance. If you want to value past luck, that's one thing, but it is absolutely a fact that Pelfrey and Milone's luck is not predictive.
  16. drivlikejehu
    May is better at getting hitters out. He hasn't been as lucky in ERA terms as Pelfrey or Milone. It is what it is. I don't see much reason to pretend that a factually incorrect understanding of performance should be considered a legitimate opinion.
  17. drivlikejehu
    Slegers is an interesting prospect. His strikeout rate has picked up a bit recently after a very slow start in that area. In his career to date, he has walked few batters and induced a lot of infield flies. There is definite MLB rotation potential if he progresses in terms of refining his command and off-speed pitches.
  18. drivlikejehu
    Small sample-size ERA is basically meaningless. That's just reality. Your assessment is factually wrong.
  19. drivlikejehu
    May is a better starter than Pelfrey or Milone. It's not close.
  20. drivlikejehu
    Could you point to some evidence that many, or any, people were expecting 50+ home runs from Bryant?
  21. drivlikejehu
    Garver is old for the level and showing zero power. He is doing better but his prospect stock remains limited at best.
  22. drivlikejehu
    May is young, cheap, and has an xFIP of 3.79. It is sheer insanity to suggest anything other than keeping him in the Twins rotation.
  23. drivlikejehu
    My top 10 is fairly similar to the TD one that was counted down recently. The main difference would be that I have some young prospects with potential upside (e.g., Lewin Diaz) ahead of more advanced, but low ceiling players, particularly relievers. But in general, Walker and maybe Felix Jorge and Stuart Turner are the only guys that come to mind where I assess their status significantly lower than the TD consensus.
  24. drivlikejehu
    He's just not that good and never has been.
  25. drivlikejehu
    That's what they did in the Majors. Not the minors. That is a huge, critical difference. Most high-k% sluggers struck out much less in the minors. Even in AA, the majority of pitchers are nowhere near MLB-caliber in terms of stuff or command... they make a lot of mistakes, often with pitches that are mediocre to begin with. It's not just that no player with Walker's plate discipline in AA has ever succeeded in the Majors. That kind of goes without saying, because Walker's AA discipline is among the worst at that level since statistics have been recorded. It's that no realistic amount of improvement would be enough to get his plate discipline to the point where success is possible.
×
×
  • Create New...