Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Willihammer

Provisional Member
  • Posts

    7,383
  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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 Willihammer

  1. Can't pull a pitcher from a shutout! ...unless you're me <----- in which case feel free to pull me from a no-no in the 7th
  2. Frankie's slider has consistently been one of the top 4 or 5 in baseball. He just can't throw it unless he gets ahead in the count. That's been his problem, falling behind hitters neutralizes his best pitch.
  3. It will be refreshing to finally watch someone throw a pitch that spins
  4. You just can't ask guys to go out there and throw cutters or fastballs to hitters 3 or 4 times a night. Its too predictable, too straight. The margin for error is too small. Most guys aren't Cliff Lee.
  5. This Sunday at the pace we're going
  6. I accept reality that there is no stopping gays getting married nor do I care if they do. Its the procreating part that gives me pause. There's a new social bloc we're going to be creating after doing this. Gay-family kids, whom I suspect will fall on average, somewhere between children of single parents and children of hetero parents in terms of math scores / teen pregnancy rates / crime / average income / whatever. If it turns out they skew towards the single mom end of the spectrum - I'm talking specifically about the kids born via sperm donor or foster mom (not adoptees), I think that would present a very tough scenario to work out of, especially after society collectively seems to be agreeing that gays have all the same rights - including productive ones, I assume, as heteros, despite the biological loopholes required in order for them to make families which could potentially be tightened or loosened with regulation / taxes / whatever. Its a bit of putting the wagon before the ox I know. I'm just surprised that that possibility, however small, hasn't really been considered, particularly given what we know about the gaping differences between hetero family kids and single mom kids.
  7. Wait till I get to the punchline! Somewhere there is a 4 year old girl with two lesbian moms running around (or more likely, walking slowly with her head down), and yours truly is the sperm donor who made her lukewarm existence possible.
  8. Care to put a wager on that? I'll give 2:1 odds that kids of lesbians turn out to be even fatter than kids of heteros, and also worse at math. A whole new generation of David Sedaris walk-reading bookworms coming our way, I recon. Can't wait!
  9. Or they would not have existed at all.
  10. Let's say the social science comes back in a few years and says "of the 3 groups - children of single moms, children of gay parents, and children of hetero parents, the gay-family kids average score ranks in the middle on every metric." Then what?
  11. I would hope any couple, SSM or hetero, would fare better than your average single mom just by virtue of having 2 incomes. What I am more concerned with is how kids of gay parents fare compared to kids of hetero parents. There is not the same robustness of data and social science. I don't have any religious or moral arguments against gay marriage but I would like to hear just one proponent admit that what we are doing here as a society by bestowing the legal benefits of marriage on gays and further encouraging them to form families is, we're valuing gay rights over social science and putting a new generation of gay-family kids in a certain degree of risk.
  12. I'm of the conviction that kids, particularly boys, need a strong male presence in their upbringing. And there are plenty of studies out there to support this. So I'll be eagerly watching as humanity's first crops of children born to energetic gays and lesbians make their way in life.
  13. The variance between K/9 and K% is small but magnified in a situation like this. The number John should have arrived at is -.65. That is a difference of .09 from the -.56 coefficient he arrived at. In other words, about 10% of the variance between the two figures is explained solely by the imprecise nature of the K/9 stat in measuring what it supposes to measure. There is simply no reason to use it instead of K% unless you have a bias towards minimizes the importance of strikeouts.
  14. I'm sure in another 40 years after fashions have changed, ownership will still be perfectly satisfied and not want a modern ballpark or threaten to leave if it doesn't get one.
  15. Again I can't help myself. Its disingenuous to use K/9 to look at any relationship involving strikeout proficiency, unless you are purposely trying to discount the strength of that relationship.In the K/9 universe, walks, and hits, improve your strikeout numbers. It is not a huge discrepency, but its there, and its skewing your correlations. Example: Pitcher A has a K/9 of 7.97. Pitcher B has a K/9 of 8.57. Pitcher B is the better strikeout pitcher right? No. Pitcher B strikes out 21.7% of batters, but Pitcher A is slightly better, striking out 22.0% of batters (Pitcher A is Jake Peavy, Pitcher B is Edinson Volquez). K/9 is an obsolete metric.
  16. So, Dunn isn't drawing walks anymore, but he's still hitting HRs and striking out. In other words, there isn't any reason left to throw him a strike.
  17. Yeah I didn't think that smelled right either and you have pointed out why. I did a simple fangraphs query using combined totals, so my set was just 30. I did it again using season-totals instead and sure enough the BB%-R correlation comes up a more meaningful .43. K%-R is still higher than K/9 correlation though, at -.65. H%-R comes in at .80. I really only bring it up becuase of a pet peave with /9 stats which are going to discount any relationship you try to glean from strikeouts, as opposed to PA-based stats. Issue more walks, give up more hits, face more batters, strikeout more batters per 9! and vice versa. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5pIzP28qdp-WktNVFNtb1V3U1E/edit?usp=sharing
  18. By my math, the correlation between K% and H% going back to 2007 is -.824. Stronger relationship to Runs and ERs using K%, and weaker relationship using BB%, as opposed to /9 stats. K%-R correl is -.69. BB%-R correl is .13 https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5pIzP28qdp-OURLaHA5OTVkcUk/edit?usp=sharing
  19. I suspect this is true but if the opposition is going L-R-L-R, as the Stinking Whities did last night, then you are back to asking yourself, would it just be better to let the starter go out to face the lineup a 3rd time instead of asking Fien to get multiple lefthanders out, or Duensing to get multiple righthanders out over the course of 1+ innings. More and more, I think today's game is obsoleting the specialists and rewarding the guys with either a swing and miss fastball, or a 3rd pitch (changeup or splitter) to get opposite handed hitters out. Unfortunately the Twins only have two of those guys on staff and they're the 8th and 9th inning guys.
  20. 2-2 game after 7. Correia's PC at 98, goes back out for the 8th to face 8-9-1 hitters for the Sox. Gives up back to back doubles on 6 pitches. Leaves with no outs down 3-2 with a man on 2nd. May 14, 2013 Chicago White Sox at Minnesota Twins Box Score and Play by Play - Baseball-Reference.com
  21. I think the conventional wisdom says 100 pitches which can be extended in the event of a shutout.
  22. Way too early to judge most of last offsesaon's signings.
  23. Sometimes I miss the good old days when the winds could be summoned by the flip of a switch: http://www.aem.umn.edu/outreach/Baseball_Launcher/startrib1.pdf
×
×
  • Create New...