Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

It's time...


Chuck

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, OHTANILAND said:

Projections more often than not overvalue players like Cozart who had a good season last year. He’s not that good. 

Please stop talking ...  Youre only proving what a blithering idiot you really are.

Here are the actual pre-season projections for Cozart

ZIPS - .249/.317/.419  - 98 wRC+
Steamer - 244/.313/.407 - 95 wRC+

To date he's put up a 93 wRC+

Projection systems tend to dismiss outlier seasons in favor of the bigger picture - they also tend to trend down for players 32+

But thanks again for providing the message board with your usual useless BS.

Edited by Inside Pitch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Angelsfan1984 said:

On what planet should Seattle even be competing with us? They are riddled with injuries and just lost their best player to suspension...

Our leadoff hitter was doing fine while we were 13-3 remember? Was there a reason that had to be changed? You can keep making excuses all you want but over the years the faces have changed and its just constant finger pointing to everyone but the actual problem. Maybe one day you'll get it.

And maybe one day you’ll believe in personal responsibility as opposed to the boogie man.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Angelsfan1984 said:

You know damn well that the projections from those sites aren't based on historical performance. There is so much bias when it comes to how the numbers are manipulated.

"The preseason projections had the Angels behind the Yanks/Sox, and Twins as a WC hopeful" that's not very original, in fact that's essentially just a continuation of last years race.

Another super-fan talking out his ass about something he doesn't know jack shit about.  Take five seconds and look up what projections are based on.   They compare a player's career arc to players with the same historical trends -- throw in age/park/league related indexes and then try to determine a projection based on how those hundreds of players they most similarly compare to aged..  There is no manipulation -- the problem is there is no certainty.   Projections systems tend to miss the most on younger players -- because early career numbers tend to have the greatest amount of volatility.   

The only certainty that comes with projections is that there is always someone so full of their own opinions they dismiss them..  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Another super-fan talking out his ass about something he doesn't know jack shit about.  Take five seconds and look up what projections are based on.   They compare a player's career arc to players with the same historical trends -- throw in age/park/league related indexes and then try to determine a projection based on how those hundreds of players they most similarly compare to aged..  There is no manipulation -- the problem is there is no certainty.   Projections systems tend to miss the most on younger players -- because early career numbers tend to have the greatest amount of volatility.   

The only certainty that comes with projections is that there is always someone so full of their own opinions they dismiss them..  



How often are projections actually correct? Projections don't account for misuse of ability. They don't account for idiotic pitching changes. They don't account for lineup manipulation. They are based on optimal situations based on expected performance from career averages. Seattle did nothing but sign a 2nd baseman to play the outfield while we added the highest touted international prospect, Upton and Cozart (whom I didn't believe in but people here did), yet we are supposed to be fighting with them for a wild card? That makes literally no sense. If that's something you are willing to believe in then that's on you. I am not one to believe it because someone said its supposed to be true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Angelsfan1984 said:

How often are projections actually correct? Projections don't account for misuse of ability. They don't account for idiotic pitching changes. They don't account for lineup manipulation. They are based on optimal situations based on expected performance from career averages. Seattle did nothing but sign a 2nd baseman to play the outfield while we added the highest touted international prospect, Upton and Cozart (whom I didn't believe in but people here did), yet we are supposed to be fighting with them for a wild card? That makes literally no sense. If that's something you are willing to believe in then that's on you. I am not one to believe it because someone said its supposed to be true.

Projections aren't perfect -- nobody has ever said they are and anyone expecting them to be in order to give them any credence is a fool.  They are an attempt at an educated guess based on actual data and actual historical trends, park, age and league indexes....  not just fan driven whims.   Everything you are using to discredit them is subjective... except for the idiocy where you claim they are based on optimal situations -- they are in fact guilty of the complete opposite.   As far as your subjective "analysis" goes.... It's up to YOU to decide if something is being done right because well -- You're just smarter and everyone else should listen to you.   Like when you droned and on and on about not using the 50 save guy and pointed to him as the obvious best choice to use as a closer.  When employed in that capacity he's been complete garbage, but in the mind of the super genius fan -- it was OBVIOUS.   Meanwhile all the predictive data the last four or five years shows he isn't that guy anymore and likely shouldn't be used like that ..    

Try educating yourself on how something works before you run your mouth talking about why it doesn't.  You not understanding something doesn't mean it doesn't make sense.   But please, feel free to tell me how your ignorance is on me or how my being aware of how something actually works is a liability when actually discussing the matter.   

 

Edited by Inside Pitch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, stormngt said:

If you were a GM you better hope you have an owner with unlimited funds because you would be paying a lot of players a lot of money NOT TO PLAY FOR YOU.

Not true. I wouldn’t be signing these people and paying aged players. I’m very big on playing the younger kids than signing older vets. Cheaper cost controlled high energy and usually more athleticism. Even as a business owner u have to realize when to cut your losses. Like with employees. Do u try to make everyone work out or do u just cut bait and find a replacement. I agree u can’t be very rash and do it after a week of bad performance but if bad performance last 50-80 games do u really give them another 80 to see if they can turn it around? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Angelsfan1984 said:

I bet he was "projected" to do better than he is...

He was...  and yet was also projected to remain below average.   

Both Steamer and ZIPS projected both his OBP and SLG% to go down -- they both saw him as getting WORSE.

I bet you thought you made a point... 

  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Projections aren't perfect -- nobody has ever said they are and anyone expecting them to be in order to give them any credence is a fool.  They are an attempt at an educated guess based on actual data and actual historical trends, park, age and league indexes....  not just fan driven whims.   Everything you are using to discredit them is subjective... except for the idiocy where you claim they are based on optimal situations -- they are in fact guilty of the complete opposite.   As far as your subjected "analysis" goes.... It's up to YOU to decide if something is being done right because well -- You're just smarter and everyone else should listen to you.   Like when you droned and on and on about not using the 50 save guy and pointed to him as the obvious best choice to use as a closer.  When employed in that capacity he's been complete garbage, but in the mind of the super genius fan -- it was OBVIOUS.   Meanwhile all the predictive data the last four or five years shows he isn't that guy anymore and likely shouldn't be used like that ..    

Try educating yourself on how something works before you run your mouth talking about why it doesn't.  You not understanding something doesn't mean it doesn't make sense.   But please, feel free to tell me how your ignorance is on me or how my being aware of how something actually works is a liability when actually discussing the matter.   

 

It has nothing to do with educating myself. Its not believing blindly in a system that has so many variables which can be based on bias and assumptions. If I assume that someone is going to have a great year (cozart) based on what he has done in his previous year that would be stupid. People clamored that Cozart "found a new approach" and would resemble 2017 rather than his career averages. Extrapolate that over an entire team let alone an entire league and you can find where the bias is. Projections can be useful in understanding trends and expectations but they are not always accurate. In fact they seldom are. They are actuarially defined as baselines. If the factors being used aren't correctly associated within the structure then you will not get an accurate projection. Some guy from the mlb network isn't using an actuary to determine a career arc of a player/players. He's telling you what he thinks is going to happen based on additions/subtractions from team to team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

Not true. I wouldn’t be signing these people and paying aged players. I’m very big on playing the younger kids than signing older vets. Cheaper cost controlled high energy and usually more athleticism. Even as a business owner u have to realize when to cut your losses. Like with employees. Do u try to make everyone work out or do u just cut bait and find a replacement. I agree u can’t be very rash and do it after a week of bad performance but if bad performance last 50-80 games do u really give them another 80 to see if they can turn it around? 

I completely agree. Alternatively, based on the highlighted section, I can argue that sometimes you can have the right people they are just being slotted in the wrong hole. Some people are systematically set up for failure. While I believe a lot of blame falls on the players for simply not performing, its also the job of the manager to make sure he has the pieces in the correct place to utilize them properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Angelsfan1984 said:

It has nothing to do with educating myself. Its not believing blindly in a system that has so many variables which can be based on bias and assumptions. If I assume that someone is going to have a great year (cozart) based on what he has done in his previous year that would be stupid. People clamored that Cozart "found a new approach" and would resemble 2017 rather than his career averages. Extrapolate that over an entire team let alone an entire league and you can find where the bias is. Projections can be useful in understanding trends and expectations but they are not always accurate. In fact they seldom are. They are actuarially defined as baselines. If the factors being used aren't correctly associated within the structure then you will not get an accurate projection. Some guy from the mlb network isn't using an actuary to determine a career arc of a player/players. He's telling you what he thinks is going to happen based on additions/subtractions from team to team.

Yes people claimed that Cozart found a new approach, but projections didn’t believe it.  I am not sure why you are arguing this argument.  As for not believing a system that can be based upon bias, dude, your entire issue with the organization is based upon your bias.  

Edited by SuperTroopers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

He was...  and yet was also projected to remain below average.   

Both Steamer and ZIPS projected both his OBP and SLG% to go down -- they both saw him as getting WORSE.

I bet you thought you made a point... 

  

 

You made it for me. You have multiple projections giving different results. If they were all using the correct baseline they would come to the same conclusion. There is the bias. You have assumed outcomes based on different factors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SuperTroopers said:

Yes people claymores that Cozart found a new approach, but projections didn’t believe it.  I am not sure why you are arguing this argument.  As for not believing a system that can be based upon bias, dude, your entire issue with the organization is based upon your bias.  

Is it? If it was just me, wouldn't we have won a playoff game by now? Results don't lie strad. You don't have the best player in baseball for 5+ years and have zero playoff wins to show for it. You can continue to change the faces, but if you don't change the culture you will just continue to lose. Forget Harper and forget Machado. As long as Scioscia is at the helm they need a miracle to win the world series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dick B Back said:

Projections for Brandon Wood were...

Or conversely how about guys who aren't projected to do crap then come in and blow it up. Its a complete farce and totally based on different evaluators personal beliefs and bias. Taking a projection at face value is laughable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Angelsfan1984 said:

It has nothing to do with educating myself. Its not believing blindly in a system that has so many variables which can be based on bias and assumptions. If I assume that someone is going to have a great year (cozart) based on what he has done in his previous year that would be stupid. People clamored that Cozart "found a new approach" and would resemble 2017 rather than his career averages. Extrapolate that over an entire team let alone an entire league and you can find where the bias is. Projections can be useful in understanding trends and expectations but they are not always accurate. In fact they seldom are. They are actuarially defined as baselines. If the factors being used aren't correctly associated within the structure then you will not get an accurate projection. Some guy from the mlb network isn't using an actuary to determine a career arc of a player/players. He's telling you what he thinks is going to happen based on additions/subtractions from team to team.

LOL...   Doesn't know what he's talking about -- accuses someone else of "blindly believing"....   Sorry Champ..  I'm not the one guilty of blindly believing anything..  in this case it's you and your own BS...

But keep telling yourself you know everything, including how others view and interpret information.  

 

Edited by Inside Pitch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Angelsfan1984 said:

Is it? If it was just me, wouldn't we have won a playoff game by now? Results don't lie strad. You don't have the best player in baseball for 5+ years and have zero playoff wins to show for it. You can continue to change the faces, but if you don't change the culture you will just continue to lose. Forget Harper and forget Machado. As long as Scioscia is at the helm they need a miracle to win the world series.

NO shit results don’t lie.  But you can sit here and bitch and moan and pretend it is all because of Scioscia but bottom line it is much deeper than that. This isn’t basketball where one player gets you into the playoffs.  And this nonsense about Harper or Machado is just that nonsense.  If they don’t sign here it will have nothing to do with Scioscia.  Scioscia is your boogie man which is sad because you are a grown up.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Dick B Back said:

Projections for Brandon Wood were...

Pretty bleak actually -- they correctly dismissed him as nowhere near the player his park driven numbers made him out to be.   To that end -- when everyone was standing in line to blow the kid, I was comparing him to George Arias and pushing for the Angels to trade him.

But...  I lack the common sense the super fans on this board were born with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...