topper09er

Runners on first and third is automatic contact play to stay out of the double play, if a ball is hit too weakly to not turn 2 then you probably cant throw the runner out at the plate either. If it is hit sharply at someone R2, R1 1 out (.963 runs expected) is much better than R3 2 outs (.385 runs expected) so you always go home.

Actually, since 1903 there have been 16 teams * 58 seasons (1903-1960) 18 teams * 1 season (1961) 20 teams * 7 seasons (1962-1968) 24 teams * 8 seaons (1969-1976) 26 teams * 16 seaons (1977-1992) 28 teams * 4 seaons (1993-1997) [MINUS 1994] 30 teams * 14 seasons (1998-2011) _______________________________ 2226 team-seasons 1% of that is 22, so we should expect about 22 teams to have made the playoffs given a 1% playoff chance since 1903 Counting the 2011 cardinals who bottomed out to 1.1, there have been 19 teams since 1901 to make the playoffs with a 1 % chance (all teams with a min chance below 1 eventually got up to 1% on their rise towards the playoffs) Not too bad

I wonder if blacklisting him means that people will refuse to list him first? I doubt anyone would completely leave him off the ballot? He might end up with almost all 2nd place votes and the first place votes may be split among Posey/McCutch and Braun could sneak into it. The 1991 NL was an infamous blacklist effort against Bonds and he still got 10 first place votes.

2000- 2011 there were 355 bunts with either 3rd or 2nd and 3d occupied and 1 out. 84 times the runner on third scored and there were no outs recorded. 193 times the runner on third scored and 1 out was recorded. There were 25 double plays, on one of which a run also scored. There were 49 plays where no one scored and 1 out was recorded and 5 plays where no one scored and no out was recorded. In addition, there were 53 missed bunts where the runner was caught stealing, 5 missed bunts where the runner was safe at home, and 34 missed bunts where the runners did not advance. Obviously not all the bunt attempts were suicide squeeze plays. (source) So I think the 34 missed bunts where the runners did not advance were foul bunt strikeouts. They probably werent squeeze plays since you dont usually try it with 2 strikes. Also not counting the 5 plays where no one scored and no out was recorded since they must not have been squeeze plays, that gives 84+193 "success" plays and 25+49+53 "fail" plays out of 355+53=408 plays. 277/408 = 68% success 127/408 = 32% fail with 6% of those resulting in 2 outs.

So I see this is how we spent our Wil Nieves $1 we've been saving up. Seems like an upgrade

Segura has 1 XBH in 82 ABs.

Well his rWAR was 2.9 and his fWAR was 2.8 and we won the division by 6 games, so we actually would have been in the playoffs without him.

Braun ties his career high in HRs with 29+ games to go

At least HR Braun 36 Stanton 29 RBI Braun 92 Holliday 90 TB Braun 288 McCutchen 271 SLG Braun .610 Stanton .604 OPS Braun .999 McCutchen .975

Lucroy 5-20-12 3-5, 7 RBI, grand slam today 3-5, 7 RBI, grand slam

Parra has only thrown 2 of 13 pitches for strikes but he was able to bounce the ball off the grass on a breaking pitch. Just leave him out there

So if the pitcher falls behind everyone you can replace him if its before the 8th inning, just checking RRR

Wow Castro was an easy out at 3rd on his triple if Weeks is doing his job

Weeks would have been out by about 80 feet if Sedar sent him. OK, not watching. When I see double to LF that usually means Soriano is involved but I see FromChrist is out there today

Weeks with an IF hit to SS, probably would have been an out at 2 if Akoi wasn't CS? Can anyone confirm. Also Eddy Cedar needs to turn that arm into a windmill with Braun up, pad those RBI stats

If Marcum can go 6 IP+ without allowing an ER his ERA will be below 3, looks nice for trade bait

After being pounded by the Brewers for 6 runs in less than 5 IP the Pirates cut Eric Bedard. After giving up 3 straight ding bombs without recording an out against the Brewers the Cubs DFA'd Alex Hinshaw. Nice

I feel bad for Rusin, he joins Yuni Betancourt in the 'triple on first ever pitch seen in MLB' club. Rock's first MLB hit was a triple in his first game but it came in his 4th AB. Fellow Chub Anthony Rizzo's first career hit was also a triple, 2nd AB

This is only true for comparisons between players with the same number of chances. Ozzie Smith was in the top 10 for most errors by a shortstop more times (5) than Derek Jeter has been (3)

Only if you assume that clutchiness requires you to perform better instead of just being able to maintain your average level of play when the pressure in on. By this I mean people in general who refuse to accept that something may exist even though there is no statistically significant evidence of it. I am not talking about the search for clutchness here specifically. One example is when you hear players say it takes a little something special to be a closer or have a closer's mentality, not just anyone can do it. Now I dont know how much that matters, but you will then see people from the SABR crowd jump all over that when their basic argument is just that there isn't a well defined metric called the "closer's mentality" that can be measured so it must not exist. Again, look to your own life, if your company has a very important presentation to make to some potential clients would you say you want the right person to deliver it who has the mentality to nail a presentation, or that just anyone can do it who is familiar with the product and it doesn't matter who does it? Clearly you can tell without any data, only from experience, that some people have it what it takes to that and some don't. I think that is both true and obvious, isn't it? You are totally contradicting yourself here, which is it? Is clutchness simply the lack of choking (which is apparently obvious) or a statistically significant increase in performance? I was addressing the post that claimed to know that "clutch" doesn't exist without using rocket science to come to that conclusion, maybe there is no MLBer who is more clutch than any other but it certainly exists. The problem is that these studies are only looking for relative clutchness among MLB players, which is not what the word "clutch" means colloquially and is not how it is used by the general population. The average person would define clutch as not choking under pressure. If 2 people can sing the national anthem at the Super Bowl perfectly in front of 100 million viewers most people would call that clutch whereas a statistical analysis of them would conclude clutchness does not exist since they just sung that song the same way they do in the shower. Now a select few number of people may recognize that when a SABR study says there is no evidence of clutchness it really means there is no evidence that some players are consistently more clutch than others, but I think when most people say that they are actually thinking that it is a myth that someone could be clutch at doing something under pressure despite all of the evidence staring them in the face from their own experiences.

Prince gives away 2 easy outs and shows off the least accurate throwing arm I have ever seen by an MLB player http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=23894895&topic_id=10023906&c_id=mlb What will his arm look like in the final year of his contract?

If you cant prove something exists that is NOT proof that is does not exist. Again, baseball is not played by simulated computer models, much to the dismay of those who cannot accept that everything in life cannot be completely controlled and predicted. It is in fact possible that a player may be "clutch" sometimes and not others. If that is the case then stats over large samples will not show any consistent clutchness, which in no way proves it does not exist. It amazes me sometimes how crippled people become when some data does not show an obvious answer. THINK ABOUT YOURSELF. Have you ever played sports? Do you feel anything differently between an AB with your brother in your back yard and one with the tying run on 3rd in the championship game? Can you easily catch a pass in practice but in the game you maybe drop it because you are thinking about how important it is too much? Can you have an easy conversation with your mom but freeze up when you try to approach a random hot chick sitting at the bar? Can you recite a speech perfectly in your head but then get nervous when you have to deliver it to your boss or 500 people? Have you ever gotten nervous before an important test? Some people can act the same in any of these situations, and some people act differently. I actually think that part of what it takes to become a professional athlete means that you tend to be the type of person who can overcome these pressures and perform the same in any situation. I think it is human nature to perform a little worse in these types of situations because I see it all the time in REAL LIFE. Of course unless you program a factor for this into your simulated computer model you will just assume everyone can easily treat any situation the same regardless of the context of the situation...sort of like how a robot would react to any situation. Based on this I think there is a decent argument to be made that because there is no noticeable "choking" or decrease in performance of players in "clutch" situations is actually proof that on average an MLB player is a "clutch" type of person. We should expect to see a slight decrease in performance in a clutch situation because the population on average would do that. The entire premise is wrong I think, instead of looking at a players average stats and then seeing that they don't perform better in the "clutch" and concluding clutchness does not exist, we should look at a players average stats and expect a decrease in the "clutch" and conclude that the player may be "clutch" if they can sustain their average stats in those situations.

286 - Played in the Federal League in 1914 and/or 1915 172 - Had previous major league experience 101 - Who had played in the majors before, ended their careers with the FL 71 - Played in the majors both before and after their FL sojourn 89 - Never played in the majors before or after their FL days 25 - Were FL rookies who later signed with major league Clubs ___________________________________________________ 33% of the league were in the middle or the beginning of major league careers, not exactly an equal comp to the NL/AL. Why did Kauff's BA drop 70 points if the competition was equal?

[sarcasm]What does football have to do with this?[/sarcasm] That was his completion percentage, but in the early days of the forward pass that was considered above average, as demonstrated by his 136 OPS+