imb

With the help of our friend http://www.baseball-reference.com, I went through every game that Mark Prior allowed four or more runs in during his career. Twenty four times in his career with Chicago, Mark Prior allowed at least four runs. After allowing the fourth run, here are his numbers. 42.2IP 41H 22R 49K 25BB 3HBP 4.69 ERA 1.61 WHIP Looking at those stats, everything looks completely normal except for the walks. That shouldn't be a surprise though, because if a good pitcher allows four or more runs, something is off. In Prior's case, it looks like more often than not it was lack of control. So apparently, during his career, after allowing his fourth run, his ERA was just over 4.00. Makes sense, right? Notes: His career ERA is 3.51. His career k/9 is 10.37. After allowing his fourth run, he averaged 10.35. There were 24 games in which he allowed 4+ runs. On 11 occasions, that fourth run scored on a home run. At the end of 2003, his ERA after allowing 4+ runs was 3.88. After 2004, it was 3.84. Before the injuries kicked in, he seems to have rebounded quite well after allowing his fourth run. Someone who is smarter than I am (I'll get out my Meph pager) can go through these numbers and pull more meaning out of them. Obviously we don't know how other pitchers fared in games that they allowed 4+ runs in, so I'm not sure what this all means. The 4.69 ERA would have placed him 32nd in the NL last year. I'm not sure what ERA tells you though 42.2 innings, but if there are 16 teams in the National League, and each has five starters, that equals 80 pitchers. So after 4+ runs, he falls somewhere in the middle of the pack. The 3.84 ERA he had after 2004 would have been 15th in the NL (right behind Ted Lilly). Until the injuries set in, it looks like he was really good after allowing his fourth run. In 2005 and 2006 he wasn't nearly as good. In 2005, however, there were only three instances of 4+ runs and the numbers are skewed by a game against the Astros that he allowed three runs in 1/3 of an inning. He only pitched 4 2/3 innings in 2005, and three of the five runs he surrendered came in 1/3 of an inning.

Luckily I'm getting the Rams/Packers game here in sunny Oklahoma. It's the second quarter and I've gotten TDs from Grant, Holt and Jackson. Good times, good times.

It's actually going to just say Steve.

no, I am simply pointing out that if you base all your opinoins on stats, and keep saying that those types of opinoins are the only ones that can be made, you cannot have an opinoin (or at least one that has any meat to it) on an issue that has no stats to validate or deny it. it really has nothing to do with Mark Prior. I am just pointing out what i find to be troubling with the whole stats analytical or else arguement. I really dont think its that crazy to understand. but mayne OMC was right Facts, not stats. An opinion that isn't based to any extent on facts and rational logic is worthless. facts was not the word used. it was stats. Cuse was the one who asked everyone else to find stats (stats that are probably impossible to get) for him to back up his claim. On top of it, unless I've missed something, he has yet to provide one piece of support for his argument, other than that it's his opinion. Maybe I could actually be swayed to buy into it (doubt it, but maybe) if there was any sort of support. The part that got me was that even if someone got those stats for him, what's the point? We don't know his normal LD% allowed, we don't know the league's and we don't know anyone's after they've allowed four runs (which is stupidly arbitrary, anyway). Stats are useless unless you have something to compare them to. Not to mention, he wouldn't even know what the stats meant had someone gotten them for him. Just bizarre.

The best part is that they're so confused by their own argument that they don't even know what they're arguing anymore. It's fascinating to watch.

I honestly thought this was settled like 4 pages back. How can this still be debated? You cannot quantify this. You might as well spend your time hunting leprechauns. You can't make a physchological hypothesis based on solely observable behavior and then demand statistical data to refute what basically comes down to an uneducated, underinformed opinion. That's what's so laughable about the whole thing. They know there's no way to put that into a statistic. It's that they think it somehow validates their argument is what is so insane.

I really hope this is ironic posting, or something.

Just so I can get this straight in my head, you guys are asking for stats that you know cannot possibly exist in a way to validate your theory that you can read Mark Prior's mental makeup from seeing him pitch on tv 30 times?

I always thought he was a bit of a streisand, but he's rocking the ish in this one.

I admire your desire to be friendly and civil with your antagonists, but with certain people on this board it's a losing effort to attempt to do so. How is anyone antagonizing him? He's making what might be the most ridiculous statements ever posted on this board (and that's saying something, Mr. It was just a pocketknife).

you said: and so i can only ask what stats prove that his evaluation on the psyche of a player that he has never met means nothing.... edit : grammar Like, baseball stats?

..........

your right IMB, it is lame. I should mold my personallity after the greatest poster of all time, you, because you never have had a post that was anything but respectful and enlightened, and you never get old to other posters. IMB for sainthood! But to get back to my question, and it is a serious question, isnt Soccer's post an arguement against the idea of a choke artist? imb's not the greatest poster of all time. meph is. I believe that Vance won the tourney here, fella. Yeah, but I got named in the Mitchell report for using posting enhancing drugs... 8-[ I thought that was Yeti... Why does everyone want me to name my supplier!!! The problem is, we don't know who was and who wasn't on PED's (posting enhancing drugs). Therefore we must assume an equal posting ground.

your right IMB, it is lame. I should mold my personallity after the greatest poster of all time, you, because you never have had a post that was anything but respectful and enlightened, and you never get old to other posters. IMB for sainthood! But to get back to my question, and it is a serious question, isnt Soccer's post an arguement against the idea of a choke artist? imb's not the greatest poster of all time. meph is. I believe that Vance won the tourney here, fella.

What if Mitchell was on the list? What a conundrum would that be?

"Daddy, why are you a cheater?" "I'm not, that report is full of lies!" "Ok. Well...On a related note, why did you throw a shattered bat at Mike Piazza that time?" "Go to your room" That's how I envision that going. That'd work a little better if the original poster wasn't most likely talking about Koby, his 20 year old son playing in the Astros minor league system. But other than that, =D>

HELLA

isnt this the arguement against a "choke artist"? and in Cuse's defense, he has prefaced his statements as "opinions" Mods, we REALLY need to weeding these threads. they allll are getting seriously off-topic. they are becoming the war of stat-men vs cuse and his crew. seriously, comon. This is so annoying. If you don't want to get involved in a debate, stay out of it or talk about something else. Backseat modding is about the lamest thing you can do. This, however, is extremely insightful: Look above you, he doesn't know what's a high LD% and what's a low one. Someone could dig up all that data, post it, and he'd say "is that good or bad?" He has a terrible argument and he knows it. When your whole argument boils down to "give me some numbers I don't understand and then tell me what they mean", you're fighting a losing battle.

isnt this the arguement against a "choke artist"? and in Cuse's defense, he has prefaced his statements as "opinions" Mods, we REALLY need to weeding these threads. they allll are getting seriously off-topic. they are becoming the war of stat-men vs cuse and his crew. seriously, comon. This is so annoying. If you don't want to get involved in a debate, stay out of it or talk about something else. Backseat modding is about the lamest thing you can do.

Hey Cuse, can you even tell a high LD% from a bad one? Some poor sap might spend hours trying to figure it out, only to have you be unable to decipher the data.

I almost fainted

oh yeah http://www.astrosdaily.com/files/gallery/Bell_Derek_02.jpg

if fukudome puts up a .798 obp i will literally for reals cream my pants if he posts a 798 obp it's going to be because he started the season 13-15 or something (whatever the smallest number of PAs you can have to get a 798 obp) before being attacked by killer bees http://rapidcityjournal.com/blogs/sports/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/01.jpg http://www.astroasylum.com/files/images/bagwell%20night%202.jpg uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh http://www.visitingdc.com/images/bill-clinton-picture.jpg (i forgot the other one)

Again, I use both but as I said, you're narrow minded and just see one thing. Honestly, I could care less what you think. Seriously, how can you possibly believe that thinking you see Prior fade away mentally when he is being hit can outweigh the facts that Prior has done fairly well when he gets into situations when guys get on? Show me your numbers after he gives up 4 or more runs...his line drive % numbers. I didn't believe you, but I just looked them up and you were right. LD% was 8%, highest in the league in 2004 and 2005.

Send Theriot there for the possible drive by* *not to kill him, just to wing him or something.