Why The 2009 Rays Failed to Reach the Playoffs: The Defenders
No problems here.
The defense was excellent once more. For a direct comparison:
2009: 59.7 UZR (56.6 RngR, -1.8 ErrR) 2nd in majors
2008: 74.2 UZR (44.3 RngR, -2.7 ErrR) 1st in majors
Jason Bartlett (-5.8) and Carlos Pena (-3.9) will probably be in the running for their respective positional Gold Glove. They shouldn't be, but reputation matters more than performance. On the flip side, Carl Crawford (15.7), Evan Longoria (14.7), Ben Zobrist (14.4), and B.J. Upton (12.1) were well above average at their positions.
The season's not over, but the Rays currently have better everything except for Double Play Rate.
People will blame the defense for momentary lapses and whatnot, but at the end of the day, there's nothing more to expect from them. They played extremely well and if not for Seattle's resurgence (and dependence) on nothing but hardcore glovers, would've repeated as team UZR champs.
---
Next up: the rotation
184 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I fail to see WHO can actually beat Longoria for a GG @ 3B
He’s got the best defensive & offensive numbers @ 3B in the AL. CC you gotta hope that writers are high on him this year, because it’s tough to win a GG as a LF(JoePos actually had a decent SI article about LF GGs). Maybe his good offensive season and the ASG appearce can give him an edge, it took long enough.
by Transplanted on Sep 9, 2009 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions
this is what i mean by manipulating stats
2009 23rd FPCT/ 9th Errors
2008 10th FPCT/ 23rd Erros
I dont know about you but, thats not very good this year.
That's not manipulating stats. Fielding percentage and errors aren't good stats.
You need to read the Stats Guide.
I can't wait until we trade him for a reliever.
I agree they're not good stats but an error is an error, and many times it leads to giving the opposition an extra out
That cannot be overlooked
an error is an error when the scorer decides it is
www.draysbay.com
by Tommy Rancel on Sep 10, 2009 8:13 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
No, but fielding percentage is one of the most overrated stats in baseball
www.draysbay.com
by Tommy Rancel on Sep 10, 2009 8:30 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
of course i agree with that
but you know there are obvious errors and the Rays have had a bad season in that regard
and look at last night, when the DP wasn’t turned, not ruled an error but as bad as one
take a look at my analysis of the RS blog RJ posted below concerning the average RS per team—thanks
UZR takes into account errors
Not sure what your beef is.
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 10:04 AM EDT up reply actions
No beef, its what he calls baiting
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions
By calling you out?
You said “urdumb.” He pointed to a flaw in your argument. That is not a personal attack.
I'm tired of arguing with y'all
I’m a Rays fan, but i’m realistic
This may or may not be a good team
Who knows" One year proves little, and time will tell what happens
The fact this team is now 4 games under 500 v AL is alarming
I love reading all your stats, nut sometimes i think you become so enamored in them, you lose fact of the ultimate stat W/L
If you don’t agree “obvious ewrror” was a personal attack then we differ greatly
I think we all are realistic.
Generally, we tend to trust the FO because of their success. We also tend to look at underlying causes to explain why the W/L is the way it is. Without that, there is little to discuss. “Oh we won.” Is about the extent of the discussion there.
I would argue you issue a dozen of similar attacks each day
have fun writing on the great Gabes and their wonderful wOBA while the team slowly sinks into the sea
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions
Errors matter, but it should not be the sole determinant
UZR takes errors into account
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
The "new" stats are cool
But I agree with Stern, you can’t overlook the increased number of errors. Sure, UZR does take them into account. OPS takes into account batting average – but BA does still matter.
The Rays were a good defensive team in 2009, but they weren’t as good as they were last year.
I think the stats shown here show that y’all are really both correct. Rays aren’t as good as last year, but D isn’t the reason we’re out of it.
I agree
The Rays were not as good defensively, but still very good. Zobrist arguably saved the team defense.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions
Did you read anything on this site before posting?
I’m not even being a jerk right now, I didn’t spend hours putting together the stat guide just so people wouldn’t use it.
by R.J. Anderson on Sep 10, 2009 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions
Is there a metric for measuring defense in high leverage situations?
Errors and other defensive lapses at critical junctures have been devastating, imo.
While that tells a story of what may have affected the Rays season, it does not tell a story of player's overall abilities
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 10:56 AM EDT up reply actions
My bad,
I thought that this discussion was about the Rays’ season, given that the article is titled “Why the 2009 Rays failed to make the playoffs”.
My point is that, as a team, defensive mistakes have often: a) come at the worst possible critical moment or b) be immediately followed by a bad pitch which results in a huge inning for the opposition. The second occurrence is also a pitching problem, of course, but it’s the misplay on the field that often flusters whoever’s on the mound.
Also,
if I can say so without receiving a harshly-worded reprimand, anyone who begins an article about the Rays’ 2009 defense with the sentence “No problems here” needs to watch more baseball and fewer speadsheets.
imo.
I can say I really don't give a shit what you say.
by R.J. Anderson on Sep 10, 2009 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions
Except you're reading my opinion daily.
Feel free to stop.
by R.J. Anderson on Sep 10, 2009 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions
MVB's declining defense is of HUGE concern to me.
One of the key reasons I’d like to trade him this offseason.
The media fallout from this should be fun
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions
right around MVB's 2008 .329
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions
If we don't get equal value for JB we won't trade him.
End of story.
by RaysTheRoof on Sep 10, 2009 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
Comment wasn't meant at you.
at the people griping about trading JB.
by RaysTheRoof on Sep 10, 2009 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions
What's MVB's contract look like?
If the Rays have someone who can fill in and perform adequately with average offense and (as RJ says) 0 < x < 5 defense, who is ~ 2 WAR, who is 1/5 the cost, dont you at least explore it?
www.bucem.com - SBNation's source for all things Buccaneer
Bartlett's under control for next and the year after next.
by R.J. Anderson on Sep 10, 2009 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Which INCREASES his trade value
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions
To the Brewers for Jon Lucroy and William Braddock
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
Brignac is still a under control for longer though, correct?
I know Brignac has SSS at the MLB level, can we derive anything from a look at MVB, his contract/cost and age compared to Brignac.
The Rays can’t afford to be stuck holding the bag on declining aging players (I think we all know that, just re-stating the obvious). No one is suggesting to go nuts and trade everyone. But if I had any say in the discussion, I’d be fielding and making calls as often as possible to gauge interest on some guys. You obviously dont move a Longo, but with MVB, Pena, etc you never know when you might get a great offer that could replace their production.
www.bucem.com - SBNation's source for all things Buccaneer
Brignac's under control for roughly six seasons.
And a post on shortstop options is coming next week. I tried holding it off til the off-season but … well.
by R.J. Anderson on Sep 10, 2009 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions
The argument for team defense being a larger factor
When looking at the overall field, there were only two of seven positions with UZR improvements (Zobrist’s two main positions. Here are the year over year positional changes:
1B: -10.9
2B: 5.9
3B: -6.3
SS: -4
RF: 13.7
CF: -5.5
LF: -10.7
The left side of the diamond had a net change of -23.75 (inc/ half of CF)
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
Of course it was still highly positive at 17.75 on the left side
but a big drop of 41.5 a year ago.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions
JP's problems
Did anyone read what JP Howell said about his recent problems? It was in todays Times.
Gary Williams for President!
Put Rose in the Hall of Fame
Sorry, it was in the Trib
He said,“It’s just one of those things where it hit me.” “I hit a tough spell in August, fatigue-wise, and tried to manipulate my body a different way. It worked for a little bit, and now I’m feeling pretty healthy at this point and I’m off mechanically.” Howell tried to compensate for his diminishing strength by altering his motion, and ended up falling off the mound toward third base on a regular basis, his front leg giving way as he delivered the pitch. “Its like I’m throwing towards the right-handed batters box instead of throwing towards home.”
I made a previous post on my observation of this exact mechanical problem and was ridiculed for it. I have been reading and participating on this blog for a few weeks and have learned a lot, and have a lot more to learn with regards to deep stat analysis and how a team with such budget constraints is able to compete. I try to keep an open mind when I read stats that sometimes seem arguable as to their relevance. Others should sometimes keep an open mind that they can learn something too.
Gary Williams for President!
Put Rose in the Hall of Fame
Did anyone read this in today's paper?
If he figures out his control issues, that could be a big deal.
Gary Williams for President!
Put Rose in the Hall of Fame
What is wrong with you people!
A couple of articles on this blog have hypothesized about what has happened to JP and the record of the bullpen. JP gets quoted in today’s paper about the very topic that has had many of you guessing, and everyone would rather discuss the lack of someone’s ability to write coherent sentences. I don’t get it.
Gary Williams for President!
Put Rose in the Hall of Fame
am i wrong to disagree
seems like people get very offended on here if you disagree with thier post or comments. is this not a blog site?
Disagreeing is not inherently wrong
Your opinion, however, is wrong. Is that so very hard to grasp?
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Use proper grammar.
Last warning, seriously.
by R.J. Anderson on Sep 10, 2009 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions
last warning
is there some rule for where i am going to be kicked off this site. or are you saying your gonna put me on blast for being a huge idiot
There is a rule for using proper grammar.
If you would’ve read any of the literature upon signing up here, you would know this. It’s really not hard to use the shift key every few words.
by R.J. Anderson on Sep 10, 2009 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions
No one has a problem with a disagreement or another opinion
but opinions should be stated as such (“in my opinion”) and other arguments should be properly backed up. Use stats where applicable. Not just inflammatory comments (not you specifically). Read kericr’s guide on how not to get banned, that should help.
www.bucem.com - SBNation's source for all things Buccaneer
And if you are anti-stat there are more appropriate blogs for you than a stat based site
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions
im not anti-stat
i love this sites stats on new upcoming players, and underated players that someone may have not realized how good they are, i was just stating a lot of times i think IN MY OPINION the stats are a reach, as if you want to disagree with maintream media just becuase you can.
Or because we don't think our readers are a bunch of bloody idiots who die at the sight of an algebra equation.
by R.J. Anderson on Sep 10, 2009 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Man, you do need a break
Very angry
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions
It's my opinion that your only basis for this is not understanding statistical methods, including how they are derived and applied
But that’s just my opinion
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
speaking of which, maybe you would be willing to answer my FIP questions on BTB?
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions
I know
tRA, I’m assuming he agrees with me about it not being truly fielding independ. so long as IP is used
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Can you elaborate?
This is the type of stuff I’m looking for.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions
From the tRA primer at statcorner:
tRA is built around knowing how many runs and outs each of these events are worth. These individual factors differ from year to year and from league to league as we account for different run-scoring environments. Using play by play data we can, in any given year, determine the average number of outs that was made on a given type of play by simply going through each play and counting the number of outs made on each type of play and dividing by the total number of plays for that type. Fairly straightforward, although a small correction factor has to be introduced to deal with outs made on the bases. An example table for 2008 is shown below:
Excellent, thanks
so xOuts is based solely on batted ball type and Ks, not counting for the individual team defense. Is there a form adjusted for a specific team’s defense?
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
I think he wants luck-neutral, though.
I don’t know why that would be more valuable or insightful, though.
You'd have to back it out through team infield/outfield UZR I'd guess
That would be beyond a nightmare
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions
I'll just answer here
The FIP coefficients are derived from the run/out values of walks, hbp, hr, and strikeouts. Since they all have out values of 1 or 0, it essentially becomes a matter of weighting the run values of the FIP inputs relative to one another, which is where 13 (HR), 3 (BB), and -2(K) come from.
Using IP is definitely bad, though.
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Feel free to throw questions at me if anything is unclear though
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Is there a reccomended adjustment that can be made to FIP without having to use batted ball type out values?
I only ask b/c of the simplicity in quickly calculating FIPs vs tRA. I understand it would take it off the ERA scale, but it would still be apples to apples which is what really matters.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
Here is what I would do for the adjustment:
Take league average of the following function as your expected outs per ball in play.
lg_xO/BIP = 1-(H-SF-S-HR-DP-2*TP)/(PA-HR-SF-BB-HBP-S-K)
Then the pitcher-specific FIP version of xIP would be:
xIP = K+(TBF-HR-BB-K)*lg_xO/BIP
I haven’t put any thought into this beforehand, so this might not be the best way to go about it. I hope that’s at least a little helpful.
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Thanks for your help
I was toying with the notion of something based on a % of TBF versus per 9 Innings.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
What is wrong with this?
It would seem using the pitcher’s 10% of the pitcher’s FB%, along with K% and BB% could make a tidier little picture of defensive indep. ability.
(13 * 10% * Flyballs as a % of PA) +(3 * (uBB% +HBP%) – (2 * K%) would give a truly defensive indep. #. Granted it takes it off the ERA scale, but it still is apples to apples across pitchers. I know I’m kind of thinking out loud here. Any thoughts?
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
Just curious
what makes the stats so valuable on up and coming players, but useless on established players
www.bucem.com - SBNation's source for all things Buccaneer
If you're expecting an answer, you're likely to get a Hurf
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions
i never said that
i dont think comparing an established player to another established player is fair to simply say “oh this one or two stats make this person better” lets disregard all the other things that normal people would use in arguing the worth of a player.
The reason that certain statistics are used is because they are designed to give a value in wins and losses in terms of everything that a player does
If you think WAR is overriden by RBI and errors, you have a lot of learning ahead of you.
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions
I would also suggest not accusing people who obviously know more about which metrics to use of "skewing the numbers".
by R.J. Anderson on Sep 10, 2009 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions
i dont know if skewing is the right word
but as an example ur stat says this years defense was on track with last year, i dont think im the only one to disagree that was a reach
"ur"
Stop that.
You used fielding percentage, I used UZR. If you don’t understand which is better, either read the stat guide or find some place that embraces the 1960s way of analyzing baseball.
by R.J. Anderson on Sep 10, 2009 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions
well...
i dont know what to tell you? i enjoy this site and if you have a problem with me disagreeing with you then go ahead and find a reason to kick me off. i give you props this site is well informed and you know your stuff. i wasnt trying to take a shot at you, or a low blow. im just telling you that i think.
I'm having a problem with you refusing to use the shift key.
If you haven’t noticed, I have little problems with disagreements.
by R.J. Anderson on Sep 10, 2009 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions
so you can be banned for not using the shift key?
ill try to type better, to make sure it all makes sens. somtimes i just type what im thinking without rereading. but if you want to ban me for having bad grammar, then i could care less. if you can understand what im saying i dont see what the difference is? i have enough grammar check and spell checks when i am at work.
I'm pretty sure you mean "couldn't care less".
And if you can’t re-read your own comments, then why in the hell should I have to read them?
by R.J. Anderson on Sep 10, 2009 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions
ok RJ
im not upset, but i have this feeling you are upset. besides the grammar, becuase im pretty sure you are not really upset becuase i dont type to your standard. basically i said you manipulate your readers with stats that are true but clearly make your argument one sided. is somthing there more that may have offended you that i over looked?
I'm sure that accusations of intellectual dishonesty from someone who communicates with the wit and verve of a 3-month old paraplegic aardvark doesn't bother R.J. at all
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
You've got to understand that Graham has a streak for snarky visciousness that would make me blush.
I can't wait until we trade him for a reliever.
How does
The aardvark’s paraplegia affect its wit?
by Not Whole View Gang survivor on Sep 10, 2009 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions
It's difficult to communicate wittily when one is hypothetically a paraplegic aardvark
No matter how witty said aardvark might actually be
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes. You blatantly ignoring my warning five times.
People like you make writing for sites like this a torture. You drag down the comments section because you’re too damn lazy to read over the 100 words you just wrote and then when someone (the site admin in this case) asks for you to follow the rules you ignore them.
I’ve always said this site growing would be the thing to push me away from it. People like you are exactly why.
by R.J. Anderson on Sep 10, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
well im sorry my grammar bothers you
my original thought was… maybe people were thinking i was way off and maybe i had no idea what i was talking about, but to me what i said made sense so i was all ears.
but your getting pist becuase i dont type the way you want me to, thats a petty thing to be angry over. your gonna have a heart attack at a young age if you worrie over such little things.
and its not that im lazy to not reread my comment its just a bad habbit i guess from casual chatting in other blogs or chatrooms. and i dont see anywhere in the guidelines where it says you have to use the shift key. it pretty much says dont talk in text form and make sure it is readable
So, again, you have enlightened no one and continue to show your ignorance
I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions
There's something to be said about a site with higher standards than "casual chatting in other blogs or chatrooms."
Writing in a clear manner shows respect for other readers, showing them that you care enough about what you’re writing to make it presentable and digestible. When I see a comment that looks like it was typed on a T9 phone, I have a hard time taking it seriously, because reading it becomes a strain. There might be some good information in there, but I’m not going to hurt my eyes and brain trying to find it.
Spelling, punctuation, etc. — these things are important when you want to communicate with another literate person. It’s not just some Draconian rule only enforced by pedantic mods trying to flex their power. I give an e-high-five to any site that tries to set some sort of standard.
Just type semi intelligently
Decent English is a pretty simple request. Lord knows a few folks on this board get on my ass for literally nothing but it’s never been for grammar. And honestly I probably screw my grammar up the most. Part of that is mobile commenting and part of it is a lack of proof reading, but as long as you make a tiny bit of effort to have well constructed thoughts then nobody will get on your case.
Can we get robots for umpires and a computer to make in game strategy decisions? I'm sick of inconsistently bad umpiring and Joe's pitiful in game management. Oh and Navi (and BJ) need some PED's. BenZo, Bartlett, and Pena do not.
by matthan on Sep 10, 2009 7:19 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Hook you may be right, but as far as I know there hasn't been any research in clutch fielding
And I’ll be shocked stronger than what a lightning bolt could do if there was anything more than random variation involved with clutch defense. In other words it’s not controllable. So if it even exists it may have an impact over the small sample size of a season but over the long run that clutch factor would be the same across all fielders.
Can we get robots for umpires and a computer to make in game strategy decisions? I'm sick of inconsistently bad umpiring and Joe's pitiful in game management. Oh and Navi (and BJ) need some PED's. BenZo, Bartlett, and Pena do not.
by matthan on Sep 10, 2009 7:25 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
R.J. is being incredibly patient with you
This site is so much nicer than mine.
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions
It's the weather.
You Brits are already so depressed with the rain and flannel that you can’t stand this strong-minded individuals unwillingness to bend to your whim. In the Sunshine State with bikini-clad coeds, we just have sex… on the BEACH!
Don't forget the men that dress like women
Britain is crazy
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions
I know I was playing along
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions
It's been gorgeous up here of late
Hard to get work done, the winter is more like Northern Germany than Britain. Not sure which is worse.
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions
I recently realized the weather in the mid-Atlantic is terrible.
Thankfully, this time of year half my weekends are spent in beautiful NC.
I'll be in McAllen, TX next week, sucky
but 2 weeks in Cali in Oct should be mighty nice
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions
You got me
Now I’m going to kill myself :(
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
You haven't offended me at all.
Generally people know about it when that happens
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions
I couldn't care less
I am sorry, but saying, “I could care less”, means that you actually do care. It’s like saying that, “you could care less than you do.” Pet peeve.
Gary Williams for President!
Put Rose in the Hall of Fame
Essentially the problem is you are expressing an opinion and doing nothing to defend it but complain when the opinion is attacked
If you can mount a real defence of said opinion people will engage with you and everyone will come out more educated.
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh and you're annoying R.J. by not capitalising and using chatspeak
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions
I think you meant "capitalizing."
This isn’t Britain for Godsakes, and we’re talkin’ ‘bout ’Merica’s game!
Except nobody cares what you think because you haven't expressed anything of intelligence.
You can’t be some geek off the street, you gotta be handy with the stats if you know what I mean.
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions
You can be perfectly baseball intelligent as a non-sabermetrics first guy
But in order to see problems with analytical things you have to understand them in the first place.
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions
If you are baseball intelligent, regardless of your statistical abilities, you would still have a tree to cling to
when the tide rises. I’m fine with people that can argue something from a different perspective. I am not fine with people acting as if their opinion is above all and then proceed to shoot their fool mouth off without providing any sort of backbone to it.
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh, I'm not disagreeing at all
I personally would rather have a (real) scouting report than set of data on a player if I had to pick between the too but my goodness having both is so much better.
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah you is
Agreed, and it’s not like you have to pick one over the other in this day and age.
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Finally the missing link
Neither the Scientists nor the Catholics are right. The universe revolves around DRB user Hook85
Also, I love the irony that the only capital you have ever used is in your name.
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the advanced defensive stats show the rays aren't as good defensively as last year
But yes they are still good. Nobody is saying they are as good as last year. It is hard to complain about a top 5 defense…and the rays definitely are that. However in comparing 08 to 09 we have to look beyond relative rank and look at the absolute drop…which was significant. So while the rays defense was again excellent the drop of from 2008 is at least partially to explain the drop in record
Can we get robots for umpires and a computer to make in game strategy decisions? I'm sick of inconsistently bad umpiring and Joe's pitiful in game management. Oh and Navi (and BJ) need some PED's. BenZo, Bartlett, and Pena do not.
by matthan on Sep 10, 2009 7:04 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I fundamentally disagree with the idea that prefacing something with 'in my opinion' somehow makes it ok
If it’s my opinion that the Bucs will only score points (they’re an Am Football team right?) via field goals this season that opinion is clearly insane and should be pointed out and ridiculed.
by Graham MacAree on Sep 10, 2009 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions
No, but presenting your opinion as such instead of as fact
makes a WORLD of different.
“My opinion is the Bucs will win 10 games” is different than “The Bucs will win 10 games” or “The Bucs won 9 games last year so they will win 10 this year”. opinions are your personal thoughts (unless you vomit what the talking heads tell you to). Just present them as such.
www.bucem.com - SBNation's source for all things Buccaneer
I think I agree with Graham
the words I think can lead to a pandoras box of nonsense and that should not be encouraged
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Just staying true to the "How not to get banned guide"
Because of the variety of the words in the English language, reading comprehension is paramount. It is critically important that you are absolutely clear with the words that you use when posting. There is a considerable, substantial difference between a statement of opinion and a statement of fact:
I don’t like Grant Balfour. I think he walks too many people to be an effective reliever.
This is a matter of opinion. You’re free to have an opinion on this site. Nobody here will take any real offense to what you say, as long as you put some logic behind your point of view. That being said, people are free to disagree with you. You need to be prepared to defend your opinion. How does the number of walks Grant Balfour gives up inversely affect his ability to pitch? How does it hurt the team? If nothing else, do you just hate relievers that walk people? That’s fine. Approaching defense to your opinion in any one of these ways is perfectly acceptable.
On the other hand:
Grant Balfour sucks, his ERA is nearly 5.
This is not a matter of opinion, this is you presenting your opinion as a statement of fact, and using a broken statistical metric as your ‘evidence.’ You have not approached this statement in any significant way as to invite any legitimate exchange. You’re going to get flamed, and either I’m going to ban you because you interpreted someone’s sarcasm as a personal attack and responded with one of your own, or you’re going to be so disruptive on the site that I’ll have no choice.
Phrases like “I think”, “my eyes tell me”, “in my opinion” or any variety of the sort, go so far here. If it’s your opinion, make it known that it’s an opinion. Presenting your opinion as fact is pretentious. More then likely, you have zero right to be pretentious, and it’s a pretty good way to find yourself being shown the door.
www.bucem.com - SBNation's source for all things Buccaneer
Oh I know
I don’t really care. None if it really bothers me
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Sep 10, 2009 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions
My eyes tell me that you're a dick
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm just upset that his baby wasn't named Evan Longoria Zorilla
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions
After the walkoff homer against Boston I told my GF (blowup doll)...
if she conceived, we’d name the kid Evan.
Did you bring a hooker to the game so that you could drive in the HOV lane?
Larry David, is that you?
As for naming kids, yeah, absolutely, I’m renaming all my illegitimate kids after the 2008 team. IF THEY CAN FIND ME THAT IS BAHAHAHAHAHA
Embrace Eternity
by Sandy Kazmir on Sep 10, 2009 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Within "I think and my opinions"...
Are legitimate hypothesizing as well as total bullshit. Unfortunately the two often get blended together but hypothesizing should be very encouraged on this site. Without it no advancedments would be made. Of course one has to do the work beyond the opinion.
Can we get robots for umpires and a computer to make in game strategy decisions? I'm sick of inconsistently bad umpiring and Joe's pitiful in game management. Oh and Navi (and BJ) need some PED's. BenZo, Bartlett, and Pena do not.
by matthan on Sep 10, 2009 7:08 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
This is exactly why I said last week that the DRB hegemony should ban alphabetic characters.
Binary only. 1101001100001110101, amir8?
Lead singer, songwriter, and caterer for the band Suicide Phoenix. We play sitar-based anthems on real estate law. Available for weddings, birthdays (13+, please), and LAN parties.
by PlayOnWords on Sep 10, 2009 1:09 PM EDT via mobile reply actions

by 





















