24 Sep 2021 10:03:38
One last bit... you made sure to pretend that the Giants bullpen was bad.

Here was the quote: "I'm sorry to say, but they probably have the worst bullpen of playoff caliber teams. That'll be tough come October."

You said that on August 2nd. Let's get an update on how the two bullpens have been since August:

Chicago White Sox: 3.56 ERA, .276 wOBA against.

Now, for the "worst among contenders" Giants bullpen:

2.64 ERA, .276 wOBA against.

The Giants did this while playing a gauntlet of excellent baseball teams during that stretch, including the Brewers and Braves (two series each), the Dodgers, Padres, and Athletics.


1.) 25 Sep 2021
25 Sep 2021 19:18:38
I said their pen could be a problem come October, not the end of September.

Reading is hard.

Comparing must win games for the Giants vs. non-must win games for the Sox is called a skewed sample. The marginal value of a victory for the Sox is your sample here is exponentially lower that a win for the Giants.


2.) 27 Sep 2021
27 Sep 2021 18:31:49
The Giants bullpen has a WPA/ LI of 13.51, second only behind the Dodgers.

They are literally one of the best bullpens in baseball in high leverage situations. They are literally one of the best bullpens when playing top-level teams.

Against the current and highest projected playoff teams, who has the lowest ERA and wOBA? If you guessed the San Francisco Giants, you'd be correct.

Seriously, not a single metric or statistic agrees that the Giants have the "worst bullpen of playoff caliber teams". In fact, EVERY statistic suggests the exact opposite: they might have the best bullpen of all playoff teams.

Once again, HOW ARE YOU SO BAD AT THIS?


3.) 27 Sep 2021
27 Sep 2021 23:24:30
Mr. BABIP and FIP regression himself selectively omits this rationale when it doesn't help his own narrative.

It's almost as if there's a pattern forming here.


4.) 28 Sep 2021
28 Sep 2021 05:51:43
ERA and wOBA against playoff teams, by playoff bullpens, ranked.

Giants- 3.23 ERA, .278 wOBA
Rays- 3.30, .297
Dodgers- 3.79, .294
Cardinals- 3.89, .292
Red Sox- 3.92, .316
Astros- 3.94, .307
Yankees- 4.24, .318
Braves- 4.31, .291
White Sox- 4.92, .346
Brewers- 5.31, .332

We'll put it another way, if the bullpens were a pitcher, and the wOBA represented a hitter, here's what the matchup would look like (stats from 2018-2021)

Giants- Jack Flaherty vs. Dee Gordon
Rays- Zack Wheeler vs. James McCann
Dodgers- Aaron Civale vs. Mike Zunino
Cardinals- Marco Gonzales vs. Yolmer Sanchez
Red Sox- Kenta Maeda vs. Eric Hosmer
Astros- Dallas Keuchel vs. Alex Gordon
Yankees- Joey Lucchesi vs. Gary Sanchez
Braves- Johnny Cueto vs. Nicky Lopez
White Sox- Trevor Cahill vs. Matt Chapman/ Marcus Semien/ Francisco Lindor
Brewers- Vince Velasquez vs. Buster Posey

I ask, which matchup would you rather have: Jack Flaherty vs. Dee Gordon, or Trevor Cahill vs. Semien/ Chapman/ Lindor?

The choice is obvious. And so it is with which bullpen is better.


5.) 08 Oct 2021
08 Oct 2021 14:35:46
Chi Sox, this says nothing of "regression". Most of these bullpen arms will surely regress, which is why Zaidi won't make long-term commitments to them.

But you'd have to prove that this regression will occur conveniently during the playoffs. Good luck with that.

Also, you'd have to prove what the "mean" BABIP for a bullpen that has just TWO returning relievers from 2020 (Rogers and Garcia) would look like. There's not enough data to point to any actual mean number. The same is true for xFIP. You need some solid sample to point to a "mean", and there's just not enough to build that number.

So yeah, they'll likely regress. Will it be to their 4.20 xFIP? Perhaps, perhaps somewhere between their 2.99 ERA and 4.20 xFIP.

(Don't forget that xFIP punishes pitchers like Jose Alvarez and Tyler Rogers who are pitch-to-contact pitchers and have made a skill out of inducing weak contact) .

Will that regression take place, all of a sudden, during a 3-19 game span in the heart of the postseason? It's extremely unlikely to see regression take place so quickly. It's happened, but it would require a monumental collapse of everyone at the same time.

And based on what we saw out of the 2021 Giants, you probably shouldn't bet on that.


6.) 08 Oct 2021
08 Oct 2021 15:13:11
Also, please tell me how the Giants will regress toward the 4.20 bullpen xFIP when all season, THEY'VE BEEN MOVING AWAY FROM IT!

July ERA- 3.66, 91.0 IP
August ERA- 2.46, 120.2 IP
September ERA- 2.42, 137.1 IP

Yes, you're reading that right: the ERA drop correlated with a steady rise in innings pitched by the bullpen. All of this, mind you, while playing deeply impactful games against very good baseball teams. From July to October 3rd, the Giants played 35 games against .500-or-better teams, not including tough games against the Padres, who are still a very good baseball team.

So if the Giants bullpen is going to regress for the playoffs, it'll be the fastest regression we've likely ever seen, and it would completely buck the trend in which they've been playing.

But I'm sure they'll conveniently regress, just for you, Frankie! Good luck!


7.) 09 Oct 2021
08 Oct 2021 21:26:49
Craig Kimbrel. What a pickup LMAOOOOO.


8.) 09 Oct 2021
09 Oct 2021 14:56:51
“ (Don't forget that xFIP punishes pitchers like Jose Alvarez and Tyler Rogers who are pitch-to-contact pitchers and have made a skill out of inducing weak contact) . ”

Lol, When you were fighting tooth and nail a few years ago to try and prove to me that Will Smith was far superior to Aaron Bummer, calling for Bummer’s xFIP regression was fair game. Now when it’s SF relievers, you choose to consider the big picture like Rogers’ and Alvarez’s BIP profiles.

But hey, at least you’re slowly learning, but only when it fits your convoluted narrative at a given time.


9.) 09 Oct 2021
09 Oct 2021 15:02:30
And Kimbrel. Wow, just wow.


10.) 18 Oct 2021
18 Oct 2021 14:45:30
"But hey, at least you’re slowly learning, but only when it fits your convoluted narrative at a given time. "

LOL. You still think, despite LITERALLY EVERY STAT SAYING OTHERWISE, that Jose Abreu had a better 2021 than Darin Ruf.

I'm not sure you're in the position to accuse anyone of having a "fitted convoluted narrative" that ignores stats.

If you need further proof that Darin Ruf was better and more valuable, look at this:

Ruf: 2.5 fWAR, 1.275M salary.
Abreu: 2.9 fWAR, 17M salary.

Let's see how that fits into the whole team:

% of team WAR vs. percentage of team payroll:

Darin Ruf: 4.8% of team WAR, 0.7% of team payroll.
Jose Abreu: 5.5% of team WAR, 12.1% of team payroll.

So not only was Ruf STATISTICALLY better, he was of far more value than Abreu. Like, it wasn't even remotely close.

And the fact that you continue to refuse this information shows why you should find a new hobby. You're probably the most comically wrong person on this site, consistently. And not having bwright around makes it a lot worse for you. You should find him, because you REALLY need someone to make you look smart again.


11.) 18 Oct 2021
18 Oct 2021 14:52:36
And yes, I used xFIP back in 2019. I was wrong then. I'm willing to admit that.

You, however, won't admit that you've been wrong about the Jose Abreu vs. Darin Ruf thing. Not once.

Nor have you acknowledged how wrong you were about where the Giants were in their timeline, or how you thought the White Sox were "on par with the Dodgers" or how you thought Craig Kimbrel was this incredible talent worth an excellent return, or how believed Cesar Hernandez would be better than Trevor Story ROS.

All of these things were things you've said within the past 12 months.

Maybe you should start by acknowledging all the stupid things you've said in the last 12 months before rehashing something someone said over 2 years ago. At the very least, start there, THEN, you can come at me about my xFIP statements from 2019, which I now admit were wrong at the time.

Fair?


12.) 19 Oct 2021
19 Oct 2021 23:20:27
"All of these things were things you've said within the past 12 months. "

1. I never said that Hernandez would be better than Story -- I said it was a distinct possibility.

2. Kimbrel was the best reliever in baseball when he was acquired and he deserved that kind of return They completely botched his role, largely due to the incompetency of their manager. He should have been the 9th inning guys with Hendriks given the highest leverage situation in the 6th-8th.

Madrigal is a polarizing prospect in terms of his value. He has one elite tool with the others only average at best. Heuer is a nice relief arm with a lot of control.


13.) 20 Oct 2021
20 Oct 2021 15:42:50
Wait, so Craig Kimbrel was the best reliever in baseball, but he was mismanaged because he was given the higher leverage spots? Shouldn't the "best reliever in baseball" be given the highest leverage spots available, regardless of inning?

The LI for Kimbrel (1.43) vs. Hendriks (1.51) was marginal. So I'm not sure I agree.

As for Kimbrel's "talent", I was never convinced that Kimbrel who was really bad in 2019 and 2020 wasn't going to sustain his 2021 numbers with the Cubs. I just didn't buy it. Hence why I thought it was hilarious that anyone would give up MLB-ready talent for him.

I really don't care about your assessment of Madrigal's value, that was a significant overpay, and I pointed that out the day it happened. You acted like I was dumb. This was your quote: "Of course you think the White Sox locking down maybe the most talented bullpen of all time is a bad deal. "

You'd do any number of federal crimes to undo that trade.

Or this: "Acting like this doesn’t give the White Sox an absolutely filthy bullpen, i. e. what wins in October, for the next 2 seasons, is ridiculous. "

He literally made their bullpen worse when it mattered most.

I was, once again, right about this. You were, once again, wrong. And there's proof of it.

It's really okay to admit that you've had your rear handed to you time and time again on this site by me. It doesn't speak poorly of your character at all.

In fact, not acknowledging what you, myself, and everyone else on this website can VERIFY for themselves as truth, that's the character issue.

Instead, you're holding someone accountable for being wrong 2 years ago (despite them acknowledging they were wrong), but you won't hold yourself accountable for being wrong MULTIPLE TIMES in the past 3 months.

This is a serious character flaw of yours. It makes you a bad person, quite frankly. But I'm not surprised. I've met my fair share of White Sox fans. You're par for the course.


14.) 20 Oct 2021
20 Oct 2021 21:27:33
"Shouldn't the "best reliever in baseball" be given the highest leverage spots available, regardless of inning? "

Theoretically? Yes! Unfortunately, Kimbrel seemingly needed a more structured routine.

"I was never convinced that Kimbrel who was really bad in 2019 and 2020 wasn't going to sustain his 2021 numbers with the Cubs. I just didn't buy it. Hence why I thought it was hilarious that anyone would give up MLB-ready talent for"

He was never going to sustain a 0.49 ERA, no, but giving up ML talent for the best reliever in baseball isn't as crazy as you're making it out to be.

Do I make the trade in hindsight? No. However, without the benefit of hindsight, I make that trade 100/ 100 times and I think it would've worked differently had Kimbrel been given the 9th inning from the start, and its absolutely fine for you to disagree with that, a lot of people do - but I'm not the only one that said that Kimbrel should have been the closer from day 1. Hendriks literally said he didn't care what inning he pitched as long as the team won. Kimbrel is trying to rack up saves to build the best HOF resume possible.

"He literally made their bullpen worse when it mattered most. "

Again, this just objectively wrong. I'm not sure what you're thinking about when you make some of the claims that you do, but they're typically non-sensical. Hence:

White Sox bullpen pre-trade: 4.14 ERA, 4.01 FIP, 3.95 xFIP, 6th best fWAR

White Sox bullpen post-trade: 3.72 ERA, 3.36 FIP, 3.67 xFIP, 2nd best fWAR.

So yeah, no, you were not "right about this" LMAO. The bullpen improved down the stretch after acquiring Kimbrel.

"It's really okay to admit that you've had your rear handed to you time and time again on this site by me. "

LOL, alright dude. I think you're starting to take this a bit too seriously.

"you're holding someone accountable for being wrong 2 years ago (despite them acknowledging they were wrong), but you won't hold yourself accountable for being wrong MULTIPLE TIMES in the past 3 months. "

I promise you, I'm not holding you THIS accountable. Feel free to carry on with your life. I forgive you.

"It makes you a bad person"

WOOOOW, we're getting deep now, Nathan!