Why CHONE sucks (Also why the Red Sox are overrated)
Look, Chowerbrains, just because you pay money for your membership into the Red Sox Nation (yes that is 100% true, its like 5 bucks for a stupid plastic card) doesnt mean your team magically creates runs out of their anus.
CHONE sucks.
The Angels will out preform this shitty system, and dominate faces.
about 2 years ago
PhiSlamma
29 comments
0 recs |
Comments
I was just reading that.
It does seem like an unrealistic drop.
Damn, link blocked at work
Also, you spelled it wrong. It’s “chowdahbrains”.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
Where do they get this stuff?
Were suppose to drop 7 spots because we lost Figgins? Most of our line up is suppose to experiance regression? That sounds more like wild hope by east coast fans than any kind of accurate science. I could see possible regression from Aybar, but Hunter, Abreu, Morales, Rivera and Napoli should all do at least as well as they did last year. Mathis certainly won’t manage to do worse and Matsui’s numbers vs Vlads and Kendricks numbers should be large improvements over last year. Izzy puts up constant numbers every year, so that should be about the same. Our Rotation is far better than we actually fielded last year as is the pen…..It seems that they are using VooDoo science in their projections.
"Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem".
"That sounds more like wild hope by east coast fans than any kind of accurate science."
“Wild hope by east coast fans”? Why? Because the Angels don’t come out on top?
Hunter “should” do as well as last year, as a matter of fact? He saw career highs in AVG, OBP and OPS, and you expect him to repeat that as a matter of course with no regression at age 35?
In fact Abreu, Hunter and Matsui — our 2-4 hitters — are all 35+ this year, and Morales (our #5 hitter) is coming off the one good season he’s had thusfar,. Juan Rivera (our #6 hitter) is one year removed from hitting .246 (.720 OPS). There is ample room for regression for all our 2-6 hitters.
Why “should” Hunter, Morales, Abreu, Matsui and Rivera all do as well as they did last year? We hope they will, but there’s no “shoulds” about it.
If one’s going to complain about statistical “voodoo”, it’s pretty weak tea to counter with a bunch of defensive and ill-supported categorical statements.
Not seeing much science here either — just a sketchy paraphrase of “No, you suck, we rock!”
Rivera played about a half-year, maybe a little more in 2008
His two full seasons (06,09) he has been a lock for 20+ homeruns, 80+ RBI and a reasonably high average.
Projections are just that, projections done by calculators, not actual results. Outside of Rivera, I’m not saying you’re right or wrong about any of the other guys. Likewise, Arch has a point that the idea of Figgins’ absence having that big of an affect and several key performers regressing for…no real stated reason, is equally questionable.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 4, 2010 8:47 PM PST up reply actions
*that big of an Effect
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 4, 2010 8:51 PM PST up reply actions
How do players get RBI?
They drive in runs. Who are these runs? Well, they are men on base. So it stands to reason that if a teams leadoff hitter gets 100+ walks, and an OBP near .400, that that will give the 2-6 hitters more chances to get RBI. So if we take that away and substitute someone who is 50-75% As effective at getting on base, then the chances to get RBI will diminish. THAT IS THE REGRESSION. Because you already can see ‘a possible regression from Aybar’ and he is our likely leadoff hitter (at least part time), then his 30 walks and .353 OBP could be even less.
30/.353< 100+/.394. See? It really will matter having a leadoff hitter that is not as good as Chone. Hopefully Aybar puts up something more like 70/.385. Would that make you happy? Even still it is less opportunities for the 2-6 hitters than Chone provided.
There is actual logic in these projections, but like anything that predicts the future, who knows?
by Wally's World on Mar 5, 2010 11:59 AM PST up reply actions
Who knows?
Who knows is the point. I’m not arguing that Figgins wasn’t an asset. He was. But he was batting lead off and Aybar batted much farther back in the line up. The result being that
Figgins got 111 more at bats then Aybar did. He also had Abreu hitting behind him and Abreu has been one of the finest RBI machines in the league for his entire career. So, even if Aybars avg goes down from .312 , the added at bats and the advantage of having a clutch hitter like Abreu behind him will still allow his runs scored (last year at 58) to at least stay at that level. It may indeed actually grow, but as you say, who knows? Now, with that said, if Brandon Wood can drive in just 56 RBI’s they have made up for Figgies 114 rums scored. One has to look at the whole picture to understand the situation and that is where sabermetrics fail. Now are you happy?
"Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem".
You're right, but...
Figgins and our entire lineup benefitted greatly from Abreu’s presence and patience.
Aybar could get 100+ more AB’s from the leadoff spot and “regress” to .290+ and still be a decent leadoff hitter. Izturis is virtually guaranteed to hit .300 and could also bat leadoff. Both have speed and at this stage of their careers, I’d say Aybar actually has a step or two on Figgins.
I could see our offensive numbers slipping some, but seven spots? That’s pretty hard to fathom based off of one guy when there are adequate replacements for him in place.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 5, 2010 1:58 PM PST up reply actions
I checked into this thread expecting to find out...
…why CHONE sucks, and just got three sentences about why Red Sox fans are lame.
By the way, CHONE was designed by Sean Smith, a card-carrying member of the Halosphere, author of the Anaheim Angels All the Way blog, and registered member of this site.
If you thinskinned types think he’s some mouthbreathing Bostonian juking his stats for a partisan thrill, irony strikes hard.
I knew that and I still question the results
I’m not knocking Sean Smith at all. In fact, I think it’s cool that he came up with this and puts his time into it.
However, just like with PECOTA and all the other systems out there, I won’t put much stock into them until they start producing more accurate results.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 4, 2010 8:53 PM PST up reply actions
Why the Hostility
Despite your venom, you gave no reasons why we should expect the kind of regression it would take to cause the kind of drop off predicted by the sabermetrics other than the fact that they are aging. Sorry, but I’m not expecting that to explain a projected 20 + game drop in our teams success. The sabermetrics crowd has been under predicting the Angels for years and this seems to be another example of it. If you believe in the science of it, then start analyzing why it has been wrong and correct the problem. If you can’t or won’t, but still take it as being infallible, then you are more like a worshipper of a mathematical idol then the practitioner of a valid science.
"Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem".
These days
Sean Smith is hyping TotalZone™ with the insufferable Jeff Sackman. The crudeness of that will only cause a mild disclaimer. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I think of them more as hucksters.
Holy fucking whine and cheese batman
Do you need a hug?
I brought sexy back, but they only gave me store credit....
Mathematical projections like PECOTA and CHONE have grown from a fantasy baseball tool used to predict the stats of individual players into a system that some use to try to accurately predict win loss totals for entire teams. To those who follow them, these systems have taken on a relevance approaching gospel. Disagree about their accuracy to one of the systems acolytes and the offender is likely to get a reaction similar to what one would expect to see from Al Gore if they dared doubt Global Warming in his presence.
That kind of reaction might be understandable if, indeed the systems proved to be accurate. That, however, is just not the case. Even Bill Baer, Blogger for Baseball Prospectus states that "People expect PECOTA to make grand claims when it’s really not going to do that. If you’re expecting PECOTA to mimic Nostradamus, you are always going to close your Internet browser disappointed" Here is the link to the article written by Mr. Baer.
<a href=“http:// ”http://www.baseballdailydigest.com/2010/01/29/what-pecota-says/" target="_blank">http://www.baseballdailydigest.com/2010/01/29/what-pecota-says/" > http://www.baseballdailydigest.com/2010/01/29/what-pecota-says/
These systems don’t predict exactly how many games a team will win, rather they give a window of as few as six, and in some cases as many as 36 games. As an example, in 2009 PECOTA predicted that the Yankees would win between 63 and 99 games. Well, hell, anyone can do that, yet they were still wrong. They predicted that the Angels would win between 78-84 and they were way off. Here is a link to the chart of the 2009 predictions.
http://sixfourthreeblog.com/2009/03/31/analyzing-the-2009-pecota-projections/
"Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem".
Bill Baer. Why does that name sound familiar?
Oh yeah! This guy.
I’m not disputing what you or he wrote, just pointing out another of his point of views.
I remember
Ironic isn’t it. Despite his strong statements at the time, he seems to have changed his tune a bit. That is one of the reasons that I thought his quote here, written after that incident, were so interesting. I wrote to him at the time that, as a statistical analyst, I felt that his data indicated a flaw in his formula. He reacted with quite a bit of anger, but somewhere in there we seem to have made impact in his thought process.
"Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem".
angels
first—Chone Figgins just doesnt suck-he is still good and was a great Angel—Lackey was way too much money and could get hurt—-Vladdy could have stayed and maybe should have-he will always be a great Angel-I hope he does great in Texas-where he has always hit well—Matsui-Pinero and Brandon Wood are very very good replacements-The Angels will win the west and just might beat the Yankees-they will surly beat the Red Sox
by spc7@verizon.net on Mar 5, 2010 7:13 AM PST reply actions
What's the difference?
Other than one was created by an Angels fan?
"Precious in the sight of the Lord, is the death of His Saints." - Psalm 116:15 Rest In Peace, Nick.
Google exists to ask just such a question
Short answer: It’s more accurate.
That said, yes, it’s just a projection system, so shouldn’t be taken over-seriously as a win-predictor. But nor should it be taken seriously as a doofus target for YEAH BOSTON SUX! kind of nonsense that is reducing the value of the FanPosts on a daily fucking basis.
Gotcha,
I wasn’t trying to be a douche, I was actually curious about the differences between the formulas and whatnot.
"Precious in the sight of the Lord, is the death of His Saints." - Psalm 116:15 Rest In Peace, Nick.
One difference
Is my system does not see the Angels as a last place, 76 win team. I have the Angels predicted for 2nd place and 83 wins. I agree that that sucks.
The HK-47 hitting droid is the finest line drive machine ever built
by RallyMonkey5 on Mar 8, 2010 10:18 AM PST up reply actions
I think I look at teams from a coach's standpoint more than anything
That’s likely where my problem with projection systems comes in. They do offer some interesting analysis and good debate, but in the end that’s about all they are guaranteed to give you.
From a coach’s perspective, each of your players’ prior performance tells you what they can do and what you can expect them to do in a given role. It’s a tangible fact. You construct your team on a yearly basis and your lineup on a day-to-day basis based off of this knowledge. Coaches rely a lot on their own observations and analysis, and when they need help, they definitely have books of traditional stats showing everything from how Player X does in RISP situations to how he does against Lefty Reliever Y.
I would be very surprised, however, to find out that the Mike Sciocia’s, Ron Gardenhire’s, and Joe Torre’s of the world had a book full of PECOTA or any similar system’s stats and gave them even a passing consideration when it comes to managing real games.
"You gotta have nuts." - Torii Hunter / Part-Time Nemesis of the HH Reply Function
by Commander_Nate on Mar 5, 2010 9:14 AM PST reply actions 1 recs



























