Jump to content
North Side Baseball

sneakypower

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    13,408

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by sneakypower

  1. sneakypower
    right, we've scored five runs in the past week, i don't particularly care if he plays CF
  2. sneakypower
    he is generally loathsome but it's being kind of overlooked here that he was top 10 offensive player in baseball for the previous 2 seasons
  3. sneakypower
    wow i had never seen a -196.4 UZR/150 before
  4. sneakypower
    stimulated double
  5. sneakypower
    This is the thread where we talk about how irreparably broken Kris Bryant is
  6. sneakypower
  7. sneakypower
    I'm seeing 5.1 vs 4.7. Regardless, WAR has standard margin of error - any derived statistical indicator has one. Lowest suggestion I've seen is 15% and I believe the highest I've seen suggested is 2 WAR per year. So .4 is absolutely meaningless; even at the lower 15% the .8 would be borderline. Now there may be other schools of thought on what the margin of error may be, but even it it were lower - 15% is pretty low to begin with - there is still a margin of error; so small fractional differences aren't meaningful. fwar is 4.9 vs 4.1, bwar is 5.1 vs 4.7 fWAR considers them near equals in terms of defensive value, which would seem laughable to a neutral observer; as i think i've said before pretty sure Baez also isn't getting credit for tags & relay throws
  8. sneakypower
    i dont think anything martinez does as a hitter is cheap, i just think if you hypothetically put trout in a situation where he was a table clearer for a team that always had guys on, rather than a table-setter with a couple broke dicks batting in front of him, that he'd be better. yeah i don't disagree, but MVP isn't supposed to be a theoretical though with the opportunities he's been given he's fallen far short of what Martinez has done with his opportunities; that's mostly true of every other hitter really maybe this is where i also point out JD's been ~2 full wins better than Trout in WPA
  9. sneakypower
    this is admittedly veering off-topic, but fWAR doesn't seem to have reasonable calibration for DH or CF at all; replacement-value CF hardly exists because of the innate bias for guys who provide value with their legs and 5 WAR is like the absolute hard cap for DH i mean i get the mechanics of it somewhat, but it doesn't seem practical; failing to go 1st to 3rd on occasion doesn't sensibly close the gap on clearing the bases with regularity in terms of contributing to your team winning games
  10. sneakypower
    his .350 AVG / .700 SLG with runners on is cheapened because...there are always runners on? doesn't that sorta bolster my point
  11. sneakypower
    it is the tiebreaker, and a huge one; the main candidates all have monster stats but Trout gets substantially worse the higher the leverage situation and Martinez the reverse fWAR doesn't incorporate that at all and misses a huge part of the equation...walks are cool, certainly, but there's a valid reason teams just freely give them to you sometimes
  12. sneakypower
    no horsefeathering way is martinez and mvp over trout, even though holy horsefeathers martinez is horsefeathering good. but im down with betts or ramirez. Yeah no way would I vote for JD, even though he's having a great offensive year, but I could get behind Betts or Ramirez. Especially if this Trout injury keeps him out or makes him bad the rest of the year. I just can't see giving the MVP to a DH only when there's plenty of good other candidates and that DH isn't on pace to set or get close to HR, BA, etc records. he's on pace for 150 RBI low leverage: 150 wRC+ medium leverage: 208 wRC+ high leverage: 272 wRC+ (.483/.590/.862) with men on base, he's hitting .347/.427/.698 nobody seems to understand how Boston's 50(!) games over, but i have a couple ideas
  13. sneakypower
    Red Sox have 3 players who've been given 400 PA and have produced negative offensive value; almost 4 more (195 for Hanley) have been given 200 PA Boston as an offensive behemoth is largely JD & Mookie going completely ape horsefeathers, with added, far less significant contributions from Benintendi & Bogaerts and that's it
  14. sneakypower
    it mostly boils down to whether you'd rather see a walk or an extra base hit with runners on base
  15. sneakypower
    i think i'm totally on board with this, and i might go a step further to make it really scorching and say he might not be top-5 for me at the moment did you know: Trout has worst clutch score in baseball right now
  16. sneakypower
    he's just JJ Hardy, is that good or is that bad eh who knows & who cares
  17. sneakypower
    counterpoint: Hamels has 2.5 plus pitches and Lester, well, has none
  18. sneakypower
    f off, he's prime Evan Longoria until further notice
  19. sneakypower
    if you look closely you can actually pinpoint the exact moment his heart breaks in two
  20. sneakypower
    i don't really agree here, he's mostly hit a ton of solo HR but WAR just gonna assume he's actually produced a lot of runs with his .600 SLG which isn't the case and also the ball takes four seconds to get to first when he plays 3rd
  21. sneakypower
    RBIs aren't dumb. Comparing players based on them is. I want my middle order hitters to rack up 120ish RBIs. I believe the whole "RBI's are dumb" is a mantra that's way overdone. Like virtually any other stat it just needs to be examined in the proper context. Looking at any stat in isolation is a recipe for mis-evaluation. he's been very good at driving in runners, fwiw
  22. sneakypower
    this may be a really dumbass suggestion for many reasons, BUT if we internally, love Bote and think he's some safe bet to be 3+ WAR, Corey Koskie redux, what does Billy Eppler say if you offer him up Bryant, Happ/Almora, ++ for Trout? how much does he try to add on before you take pause? Think that already easily gets the deal done if Angels have any inclination to move him with KB's extra years of team control. But if you are making this deal because you see Bote as a solid to good starter. Thats not the deal you make. You trade Russell, Almora, Happ, and even add any 2 prospects the Angels want. Amaya, Azolay who cares. You go Bote to 2nd, Baez to SS and obviously Trout to CF so you dont need the CF platoon. That trade above has to get you extremely close to landing Trout. If they insist on Schwarber over Happ you move Happ to LF, Trout in CF. i can't ever see a Trout trade happening without an unquestioned superstar going back
  23. sneakypower
    this may be a really dumbass suggestion for many reasons, BUT if we internally, love Bote and think he's some safe bet to be 3+ WAR, Corey Koskie redux, what does Billy Eppler say if you offer him up Bryant, Happ/Almora, ++ for Trout? how much does he try to add on before you take pause?
  24. sneakypower
    i mean, i don't know if we can (ever?) expect this to keep up but the narrative will certainly be in his favor; Bryzzo's been mostly useless and the whole rotation has been relative mediocrity yet we stand atop the Central - whom to credit? also i think Freeman's a non-factor in the voting; Eddie Murphy ass having season
  25. sneakypower
    what's great here is even in the sample you're excluding he still slugged .562 on a 42 HR, 137 RBI, 23 SB (10 UIBB) pace
×
×
  • Create New...