Good summary of the Angels on AN

Good summary of the Angels vs Pythagoras.

5 months ago infant Comment 26 comments 0 recs |

Comments

Wow, that was different than what I was expecting

Turns out your post title contained no sarcasm as I thought. It’s nice to see some analysis of our boys from a rival’s POV. Not just mindless bickering. Good stuff.

porno abbreviation :-)

White trashin' the 909

by Red114 on Jul 23, 2008 9:54 PM PDT 0 recs

Exactly.

I was positively surprised. And I told them, too.

Good things.

by infant on Jul 23, 2008 9:57 PM PDT up 0 recs

I did'nt think the article was all that positive, in fact I thought it was sarcasm cloaked in half-ass baseball analysis.

by 44FAN on Jul 23, 2008 11:43 PM PDT up 0 recs

I think you're trying to read to much in it

No sarcasm there.

by infant on Jul 24, 2008 8:29 AM PDT up 0 recs

The part written about Bad Long Relief Pitching was based on inaccurate information.

He said the Angels lose games because we hand the ball to pitchers like Bootcheck and Moseley. They are not even on the Angels roster. They were gone after their first month on the active roster, except Moseley, who was the < starting pitcher > in the Oakland game July 13 which he won 4-3 with 5.1 innings pitched. Moseley has pitched more games as a starting pitcher than in relief. The article did not mention the good relief pitching by Oliver, O’Day, and Shields, because they are not bad.

It’s a matter of reading it, rather than reading too much in too it. Maybe you should read again.

by 44FAN on Jul 24, 2008 2:11 PM PDT up 0 recs

I don't think that's what he said.

I think he was saying that the pythag was skewed because of Moseley and Boot, which is exactly what we say here—when we even bother to pay attention to pythag.

Angels fan since '67

by red floyd on Jul 24, 2008 4:08 PM PDT up 0 recs

I left a comment similar to this on the AN thread and author Nico's goofy response to me pretty clearly indicated that he realized what he wrote in his article was wrong.

by 44FAN on Jul 24, 2008 4:20 PM PDT up 0 recs

trying to figure out what happened to my post

How did I do that?

White trashin' the 909

by Red114 on Jul 24, 2008 12:29 AM PDT up 0 recs

The guys from here who posted

Also reflected well on all the HH’ers. Nothing snide, and some good commentary.

Angels fan since '67

by red floyd on Jul 23, 2008 11:21 PM PDT 0 recs

WHOA...

I’m dizzy after reading that thread.

by Red on Jul 23, 2008 11:25 PM PDT 0 recs

I thought that analysis was dead-on...

couldn’t have said it any better myself…of that I am certain!

Now next year on the other hand, worries me greatly! Reagins/Soth will more than earn their keep in 09 if we continue to win!

This is BAD Vlad and his band of wimps! (can't change it now, cuz the last time I did...he started sucking again!)

by K3YEROUT on Jul 24, 2008 12:20 AM PDT 0 recs

The Fog of Pythagoras

Moseley-Adenhart games count … making the vaunted measuring tool M O O T.

by Rev Halofan on Jul 24, 2008 1:16 AM PDT 0 recs

Unusual injury patterns

Lackey was down when Kendrick & Figgins were up & hot. Kendrick & Figgins went down when Lackey came back. I betcha that if you take the team’s Pythag from the past 30+ games, when the lineup has been united and they’ve been scoring more than 5 runs a game (just like I predicted!), the run differential will be just about the same as the W-L%.

by mattwelch on Jul 24, 2008 7:12 AM PDT 0 recs

Well Played Nico

Seattle I would like to thank you for sucking. It allows me to get back to my roots: Hating Fremont.

Kobe tell me how my ass tastes

by hauldog on Jul 24, 2008 9:50 AM PDT 0 recs

Lemme get this straight...

The predictive model is not flawed because the Angels are especially suited to confound the model.

Isn’t that a flaw?

by Higz on Jul 24, 2008 1:02 PM PDT 0 recs

Not if the model accurately predicts those ways to confound the model.

Francisco Rodriguez: 188 career saves. 2 career Panthers, tied with Hector Carrasco.

by Stirrups on Jul 24, 2008 2:06 PM PDT up 0 recs

Given that the models predicted us to be a mid-80s win team this year

BEFORE Lackey and Escobar’s injuries, I’d say their models still need work.

~Till the Halo burns out...

by Zu Long on Jul 24, 2008 2:09 PM PDT up 0 recs

This is true.

And I would say that they have their work cut out for them. But I think that there are some interesting observations there, and intriguing for discussion.

Francisco Rodriguez: 188 career saves. 2 career Panthers, tied with Hector Carrasco.

by Stirrups on Jul 24, 2008 3:15 PM PDT up 0 recs

Pecota is dogshit

ItDoes it use the prior years expected wins and losses?

Seattle I would like to thank you for sucking. It allows me to get back to my roots: Hating Fremont.

Kobe tell me how my ass tastes

by hauldog on Jul 24, 2008 3:47 PM PDT up 0 recs

Well, I would think that anything that spans a single season is dogshite.

The composition of teams, both one’s own and those of all the competition, change too much for the results of other years to be relevant to the probable outcomes within the current year. See 2007 vs. 2008 Mariners and A’s.

Francisco Rodriguez: 188 career saves. 2 career Panthers, tied with Hector Carrasco.

by Stirrups on Jul 24, 2008 3:55 PM PDT up 0 recs

There's no prediction though.

It’s all hindsight analysis of what confounded the model, i.e. A LIST OF FLAWS.

Sure, you can take those things that confounded the model (the flaws) and say that A, B, and C are factors that will skew the model’s accuracy, but at some point the model will buckle under the weight of those things.

The list is already too long.

by Higz on Jul 24, 2008 2:33 PM PDT up 0 recs

My post was in jest, adding on to your playing on words.

Your original post was correct. A working model will predict BOTH the results strongly suited to the model, AS WELL AS those methods that can be used to defy usual the predominant results AND the strategies that would be employed to fall outside the predominant results.

Francisco Rodriguez: 188 career saves. 2 career Panthers, tied with Hector Carrasco.

by Stirrups on Jul 24, 2008 3:09 PM PDT up 0 recs