sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Mar 13, 2018 11:44:56 GMT -5
Again, I'm not commenting on the job he has done. That's a bit subjective. I'm simply stating facts about the man himself.
So is he evil? That's subjective, but I think it's fair to say that a liar who disregards women and seemingly other minorities or under-appreciated groups is a bit evil.
Incidentally, you guys disagree so heavily on politics because political situations are rarely clear cut, and yet you treat them as if they were -- often with two opposite opinions.
Dood - actions speak louder than words. There are more women in executive positions working for Trump than men. Female unemployment is at its lowest level in decades. Hispanic and black unemployment are at historically low levels...yet another promise he's kept. As for the "lying," one could make a credible argument that he exaggerates no more than most presidents in recent memory. Of course the fake news media overemphasizes it like they have never done before. Clinton committed perjury. Obama let our Libyan ambassador and 3 other Americans die in Benghazi and then made up a bogus excuse that it was all due to some youtube video when the Ambassador was asking for more security for months. Obamacare was supposed to make rates drop, we were supposed to be able to keep our plans and doctors and Illegal Aliens were not supposed to be covered...the inaccuracy of the last point probably explains the first.
I don't give a rat's ass about his rough words and tweets. One can hardly blame him considering the constant media scrutiny, much of which is inaccurate or exaggerated. His actions and accomplishments are what we all should be concentrating on. Most of America is on board because they are seeing less taxes taken out of their paychecks. They have paychecks now instead of handouts. They are seeing bonuses from companies that are grateful after their taxes were cut. If that is evil, we needed more evil before now.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 13, 2018 11:51:25 GMT -5
Belt rarely carries the team. In fact outside of a few weeks during the first half of 2016, he hasn't. I'm not talking about OPS..and whatever numbers you want to throw at me. I'm talking about getting that big hit. If he did carry the team when he was hitting, I'd be inclined to agree with you. But people who watch the games know that's not the case. As for your comparison to Bengie Molina, Bengie got those big hits, Brandon rarely has. There are plenty of stats like high leverage situations and late and close...but none of those stats really show what the big hit of the game is. That's something you have to see for yourself. Rog -- As for how often Brandon carries the team, I don't have time to cite the times, and that would boil somewhat down to definition anyway, but while you mention early in 2016, I can tell you that in the last 7 games that Brandon started that season, when the Giants were battling to make the playoffs rather than to have the best record in baseball at that point in the season, the Giants came on when they moved Brandon to second in the order. They won six of the seven games he started and lost the one he didn't. I don't know that you could say Brandon carried the team, but when it mattered most in the season, he hit .370 with a .500 OPS, a .630 SLG and a 1.130 OPS. He scored six runs in the seven games and drove in five. You said you had to watch the games to realize that Brandon rarely got the big hit, but you didn't even remember in the 2016 season what an important role Brandon played down the stretch. I agree with you that Bengie got more key hits, but the difference isn't anywwhere near as large as you portray it to be. And how many key runs did Bengie SCORE compared to Brandon? Here are the two fallacies I see in your argument: . Your focus is too narrow. . Your memory isn't good enough. One good thing about it is that you don't underestimate Brandon to nearly the same extent as Randy and Boly do. Especially Randy, who demonstrates how little substance there is to his argument by resorting to name calling. We're not talking about a superstar here. What we're talking about is a good player who is being treated here like a lousy one. We've discussed how good (great, really) Brandon Crawford's defense is. How many times has Belt saved him from an error? I'm not using that to pump Andrelton Simmons up, by the way. I have mentioned that while playing in Atlanta, he may have received even more help from Freddie Freeman than Crawford has received from Belt. But both first basemen have contributed to the excellent fielding record of their respective shortstops. When we look at the total player -- as I said, taking a complete player approach as opposed to taking a fantasy approach -- Belt is pretty good. And he almost certainly would be better offensively if he played in a more favorable home park. AT&T has cost him many home runs and RBI's. The more one focuses on Belt's negatives, the worse he looks. The more one takes the overall player and the conditions he plays under, the better he looks. Let's not be guilty of too narrow a focus. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4337/pitching?page=1#ixzz59eBbX6v8
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 13, 2018 11:52:44 GMT -5
CNN, NBC, CBS makes up what they want people to hear. They have their own ADMITTED and DOCUMENTED agenda. And they have CLEARLY STATED they don't care if they misrepresent the facts. Rog -- Where have they clearly stated that, Boly? If they have clearly stated it, it should be easy to point to excellent examples. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4337/pitching?page=1#ixzz59eH8Z7Ff
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 13, 2018 11:56:49 GMT -5
As for the "lying," one could make a credible argument that he exaggerates no more than most presidents in recent memory. Rog -- After one of the debates he was asked by a woman reporter about something he said. His terse reply was, "I never said that." Yet he had spoken it less than an hour earlier. He appears to see the world as, well, how he sees it -- not necessarily as it is. One thing that really soured me on Donald (I initially supported him.) was when it was pointed out that the head of the KKK had made a significant donation to his campaign. He answered that he didn't know the man. That may well have been the case, but why didn't he go on to add that he certainly didn't support many of the ideals of the KKK? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4337/pitching?page=2#ixzz59eHUgNel
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 13, 2018 11:58:52 GMT -5
I don't give a rat's ass about his rough words and tweets. One can hardly blame him considering the constant media scrutiny, much of which is inaccurate or exaggerated. Rog -- Nice excuse, Randy. Apparently two wrongs make a right? Then again, he's merely the President of the United States. Why should he be held to a high standard? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4337/pitching?page=2#ixzz59eIYZ2Tp
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 13, 2018 12:00:27 GMT -5
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 13, 2018 12:02:35 GMT -5
What you have done here, Randy, is what you're criticizing the press for. You're speaking for someone (and implying that he speaks for the profession) without even asking him. Believe me, I understand what you're saying here. But you are being as guilty as you are saying the press is. Dood - Even if that were true, there is a very big difference...nobody here, let alone the entire country, is depending on me to provide their primary political information. Rog -- More excuses, Randy. Darn, you're good at them. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4337/pitching?page=2#ixzz59eJkO9Cv
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 13, 2018 14:14:33 GMT -5
It's funny how if one reads on baseball, he can often come across something relevant to our discussions here, even if he wasn't looking for it. Here is a link to an article about the effects of the new income tax on baseball: www.fangraphs.com/blogs/how-tax-reform-impacts-baseball/Here are a few points with regard to the impact on baseball teams: . The state income tax deduction is being reduced to a mazimum of $10,000, which means tens of millions to big-contract players who play for teams in California. This is poor news for California teams in particular. At least California players could write their state tax burden against their federal tax. Now, for practical purposes for high-priced players, they can't write if off virtually at all. . Businesses can no longer write off half the cost of tickets they buy. That will decrease demand for tickets, particularly high-priced tickets, by an unknown amount. . There are other tax changes that may discourage the trading of players, causing a taxable gain on teams that are dumping contracts. As for the individual impact, it varies by individual situation. The rates are being cut, and no one is going to complain about that. There are some changes though that will hurt certain individuals: . Not being able to write off more than $10,000 of state taxes will hurt those who pay high amounts of income taxes. This tax will affect many in California who are less than rich. . Limiting interest deductions to the money borrowed on no more than $750K will hurt families and individuals who may be relying on interest tax breaks to help pay their mortgages. The last two affect pretty much only the upper middle class and above. Certain middle and lower class families and individuals will be hurt as well. For instance: . The $4K exclusion -- a direct reduction of taxable income -- is gone. . The standard deduction is being increased from $6K to $12K. These two mean that those who take the standard deduction will benefit by $2K -- the $6K increase in the standard deduction less the $4K elimination of the exemption. But those who itemized and say wrote off $11K, will see their taxable income go up by $3K. They'll get an extra $1K from the increased standard deduction, but lose out on the $4K exemption, for a net loss of $3K. These figures are based on individual taxpayers. Married and head of household have higher standard exemptions. So some lower income and upper middle income taxpayers may actually be hurt by the new law. Overall there will be a reduction in taxes though. I found something quite intriguing about corporate taxes. They're being lowered, but an oddity is that the highest marginal percentage of tax will be paid from $100K to $335K of income. The tax rate then goes down, never to exceed the 39% rate on this particular sliver of income. It does come back up to 38% on profits from $15 million to $18 million, but then drops to 35% on profits above $18 millon. Weird. So there are some of the effects on baseball, individuals and families, and on businesses. Here is another link: www.fool.com/taxes/2017/12/29/your-complete-guide-to-the-2018-tax-changes.aspxBased on projections (which are usually too rosy, no matter which politician issues them), the economy should get extra growth. Sounds reasonable, even if the risk exists that the growth is being overstated. It does appear though that it will take a long time for tax revenue to get back to where it is now. And that will affect spending that can be done and the amount of debt necessary to sustain it.
|
|
|
Pitching
Mar 14, 2018 13:44:13 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 14, 2018 13:44:13 GMT -5
Rog- One good thing about it is that you don't underestimate Brandon to nearly the same extent as Randy and Boly do. Especially Randy, who demonstrates how little substance there is to his argument by resorting to name calling.
We're not talking about a superstar here. What we're talking about is a good player who is being treated here like a lousy one.
Boagie- When he's healthy and not in one of his prolonged slumps, yes, he's good. I would characterize his hitting as decent, and his fielding as very good to excellent.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Mar 14, 2018 14:31:13 GMT -5
I guess he can be a good hitter at times. But he's a coward, his focus wanders and he has no desire to make the most of his ability. He strikes out or walks in way too many of his plate appearances, which tells me he's trying to walk most of the time. He has good soft hands for fielding but he gets caught out of position. I can't abide his accepting mediocrity. His lackadaisical attitude is not one I feel is good for our prospects to be exposed to.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 14, 2018 14:39:53 GMT -5
But he's a coward, his focus wanders and he has no desire to make the most of his ability.
Rog -- I'm pretty sure #2 is true. Given the nature of baseball (long periods for a player with no action), I suspect that is the case with almost every player -- and possibly more so with Brandon than most. But what evidence do you have that supports the other two points?
As for cowardly, I think it's rather cowardly of you to take potshots such as these without bothering to provide strong evidence to back them up.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Mar 14, 2018 14:49:11 GMT -5
cowardice is the easiest thing in the world to see if your eyes are open and you actually watch the games. You can keep yours closed where Belt is concerned if you like
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 14, 2018 14:52:38 GMT -5
He strikes out or walks in way too many of his plate appearances, which tells me he's trying to walk most of the time. Rog -- And here I thought you knew something about hitting. Certainly striking out isn't a very good way to go. It beats only hitting into a double play. But walking too much? Let's get serious. The batters' basic goal is to avoid making an out. A walk not only accomplishes that, it provides an additional base runner. Criticize a hitter for striking out too much, sure. But criticizing a hitter for walking too much is foolish. Joey Votto is probably the best hitter in the game today. Certainly in the top few. And he has led the NL in walks five of the past seven seasons. If Joey Votto isn't the best hitter, it might be Mike Trout, who has led the AL in walks. Apparently Babe Ruth struck out and walked in too many of his plate appearances. When he retired, he led major league baseball in both. Apparently he was trying to walk most of the time. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4337/pitching?page=2#ixzz59ko2iT7r
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 14, 2018 15:20:33 GMT -5
You're highly critical of Belt's approach, yet who do you suppose led the Giants in slugging percentage last season? In home runs?
Who had a sluggin percentage that was 45 points higher than Evan Longoria, the hitter some here want to have bat cleanup? Who had a slugging percentage in 2016 44 points higher than Andrew McCutchen, the guy who will almost certainly hit third this season?
Who has averaged the most bases per hit since he joined the Giants in 2011? Was it the 2012 Most Valuable Player? No. It's that guy who tries to walk too much.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 14, 2018 15:27:30 GMT -5
cowardice is the easiest thing in the world to see if your eyes are open and you actually watch the games. You can keep yours closed where Belt is concerned if you like
Rog -- Is that truly the best answer you can come up with to answer the question in the following exchange?
But he's a coward, his focus wanders and he has no desire to make the most of his ability.
Rog -- I'm pretty sure #2 is true. Given the nature of baseball (long periods for a player with no action), I suspect that is the case with almost every player -- and possibly more so with Brandon than most. But what evidence do you have that supports the other two points?
Seriously? The best you can do is try to avoid the question?
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 14, 2018 15:30:26 GMT -5
I would characterize his hitting as decent, and his fielding as very good to excellent.
Rog -- I think you might be less than generous in your appraisal of his hitting (.819 SLG and a 126 OPS+), but let's say you're spot on. Isn't what you have just described a good player?
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 14, 2018 15:33:23 GMT -5
I guess he can be a good hitter at times. But he's a coward, his focus wanders and he has no desire to make the most of his ability. Rog -- Let's suppose you're right about all of this. Combine it with very good to (recently) excellent fielding, and don't you have a good player? That's all we're saying he is. A good baseball player. Not a great one. A good one. Let's put it this way: Name me a player with a 126 OPS+ and a very good to excellent glove who isn't a good player? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4337/pitching?page=2#ixzz59l0pHN4L
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Mar 14, 2018 15:41:25 GMT -5
My point about strikeouts and walks combined is the lack of aggressiveness. Obviously walks are not bad, but I prefer putting the ball in play. I don't want a corner fielder leading the team in walks. I want him driving in 100 runs like Duvall.
Yes Belt did lead the team in HRs--barely--and Slugging %...but that, IMO, says more about the team than Belt.
When I was playing ball, it would take a LOT more than a scratch or a bruise to get me out of the game. Belt is a coward, in part because he is just fine deserting his teammates by leaving the game in these circumstances. I don't know if you guys remember Chris Brown, who I would call Crystal because he sat out games with a hangnail. Belt reminds me of Crystal...both talented players with absolutely ZERO toughness.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 14, 2018 21:27:15 GMT -5
My point about strikeouts and walks combined is the lack of aggressiveness. Obviously walks are not bad, but I prefer putting the ball in play. I don't want a corner fielder leading the team in walks. I want him driving in 100 runs like Duvall. Rog -- What you aren't understanding, Randy, is that Brandon is a clearly better hitter than Adam. Adam has done better than I expected, but a lot is due to his playing in a great park for his batting skills. Brandon plays in the worst one for his own hitting skills. Despite that, Brandon makes far fewer outs than Adam does. Adam strikes out a lot and walks very little, the worst combination of those two results. Here's one simplified way of looking at the importance of not making outs. Let's take both Brandon and Adam based on 600 plate appearances. Adam has had just over 600 plate appearances in each of his two seasons. In 600 plate appearances over his career, Brandon Belt has made 391 outs. Adam has made 434 outs. That's an extra 43 outs, or a little over a game and a half worth of outs. With that many outs, a team should win an extra game, right? But the difference is much more than that. Many of each player's at bats came with runners already on base, increasing the importance of each added at bat. Assuming their salaries were equal (which of course they're not), I don't think there are many if any GM's who would trade Brandon Belt for Adam Duvall. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4337/pitching?page=2#ixzz59lgAdQKt
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Mar 14, 2018 22:28:44 GMT -5
I'll take the better run [roducer over the better hitter nearly every time...unless we're talking about a 320ish hitter
|
|
|
Pitching
Mar 15, 2018 13:54:32 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 15, 2018 13:54:32 GMT -5
Rog- In 600 plate appearances over his career, Brandon Belt has made 391 outs. Adam has made 434 outs. That's an extra 43 outs, or a little over a game and a half worth of outs. With that many outs, a team should win an extra game, right? But the difference is much more than that. Many of each player's at bats came with runners already on base, increasing the importance of each added at bat.
Boagie- I guess it depends on what one would consider more important, setting the table, or clearing it? Belt has good table setter stats, which bodes well for the Giants lineup if Belt is the #2 hitter. However, in the past he's been asked to drive in runs, which he's not very good at doing. If I needed a table setter in my lineup I'd pick Brandon, if I was looking for a 5th or 6th place hitter I'd choose Adam.
Unfortunately for Brandon, he's not as good a choice for the 2 hole as Duvall is for the 5th or 6th hole. The 2 hole requires good speed and good bat control. Brandon, although has good speed for a first baseman, isn't fast, and he certainly lacks bat control. The 5th and 6th spot in the lineup requires power and the ability to drive in runs, both of which Adam meets, if not exceeds.
Rog doesn't look at what helps the team win, he looks at personal, one dimensional fantasy stats. In the strictly personal stats category Brandon is probably the better hitter, in real game situations Duvall is clearly the more desirable hitter with the role that is asked of him.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Mar 15, 2018 14:05:45 GMT -5
The name of the game is scoring runs. Duvall is great at producing runs. Belt aint.
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Mar 15, 2018 19:52:52 GMT -5
I'll take the better run [roducer over the better hitter nearly every time...unless we're talking about a 320ish hitter Rog -- You can take what you want, but it is just as important to get on base to give a later hitter the chance to drive you in as it is to drive a runner in. It's a joint effort. What's more, a player in between who advances a runner may be instrumental in the effort, as well. We talk all the time about the importance of the batter getting the runner on second with no one out over to third base. Yet he gets neither a run scored or an RBI. In fact, unless it is a sacrifice bunt, he is charged a time at bat. And you didn't even mention the batter who walks to get a runner on base, occasionally also resulting in a runner being advanced. Except for a solo home run, it's a team effort. When we say run producer, we should be including all players who had a part in producing the run. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4337/pitching?page=2#ixzz59rrVdLS3
|
|