They lost quite a few games where they banged a hell of a lot so they weren't very good cheaters.
Good info on here but has me asking even more questions.
I am wondering about a game that had only 1 bang? Is that them cheating? 1 bang?
Anyone else have questions?
I mean this is one dude who went through OVER EIGHT THOUSAND PITCHES himself. I'll cut him a little a slack for being a crazy person. Also it's not like you're hitting home runs every time you have this advantage. Baseball's a game of winning in the margins and this is what this advantage did for them. You're not going to swing at balls, it helps your timing. Oh, also still hitting a ball that isn't an out is hard.
What stands out to me is just how much it helped Beltran, and not as much for someone like Altuve (the site's owner (luncatic) admits it's only banging and not every other device they had shoved up their asses). But for those numbskulls that were calling for specific punishments for specific players this is one of the ways that helps you get even remotely close to doing so.
On August 4th, the game with the most trash can bangs, the Astros scored 16 earned runs. Mike Bolsinger, a Blue Jays reliever, allowed 4 earned runs in 0.1 IP. He never pitched in the big leagues again.
On August 4th, the game with the most trash can bangs, the Astros scored 16 earned runs. Mike Bolsinger, a Blue Jays reliever, allowed 4 earned runs in 0.1 IP. He never pitched in the big leagues again.
This is the type of stuff Mike Clevinger was talking about. It's not just that the Astros were underserving champions, or that they cheated the Yankees and Dodgers. Individual players, like Bolsinger in this example, may have had their livelihoods affected.
They lost quite a few games where they banged a hell of a lot so they weren't very good cheaters.
Good info on here but has me asking even more questions.
I am wondering about a game that had only 1 bang? Is that them cheating? 1 bang?
Anyone else have questions?
I mean this is one dude who went through OVER EIGHT THOUSAND PITCHES himself. I'll cut him a little a slack for being a crazy person. Also it's not like you're hitting home runs every time you have this advantage. Baseball's a game of winning in the margins and this is what this advantage did for them. You're not going to swing at balls, it helps your timing. Oh, also still hitting a ball that isn't an out is hard.
What stands out to me is just how much it helped Beltran, and not as much for someone like Altuve (the site's owner (luncatic) admits it's only banging and not every other device they had shoved up their asses). But for those numbskulls that were calling for specific punishments for specific players this is one of the ways that helps you get even remotely close to doing so.
I wish he had breakdowns on whom the banging was for and if their averages went up or not.
On August 4th, the game with the most trash can bangs, the Astros scored 16 earned runs. Mike Bolsinger, a Blue Jays reliever, allowed 4 earned runs in 0.1 IP. He never pitched in the big leagues again.
I know you hate when I do this but this is the shit I see in the data and it makes me question things...
The other 4 highest bangs in games resulted in Astros losses.
There is no exact science to it and needs some tweaking or combing over of more info. That tweet is the perfect example of overreacting though. People are going to run with that story and that player not being in the big leagues anymore and want people burned at the stake and not look into that player any further.
He let up 126 earned runs in 230 ip over 4 years for a robust era of 4.92. That .1 of an inning may have had something to do with him not playing but he wasn't going to be around much longer considering his previous outings unless he played all of his games against the Astros.
They lost quite a few games where they banged a hell of a lot so they weren't very good cheaters.
Good info on here but has me asking even more questions.
I am wondering about a game that had only 1 bang? Is that them cheating? 1 bang?
Anyone else have questions?
I mean this is one dude who went through OVER EIGHT THOUSAND PITCHES himself. I'll cut him a little a slack for being a crazy person. Also it's not like you're hitting home runs every time you have this advantage. Baseball's a game of winning in the margins and this is what this advantage did for them. You're not going to swing at balls, it helps your timing. Oh, also still hitting a ball that isn't an out is hard.
What stands out to me is just how much it helped Beltran, and not as much for someone like Altuve (the site's owner (luncatic) admits it's only banging and not every other device they had shoved up their asses). But for those numbskulls that were calling for specific punishments for specific players this is one of the ways that helps you get even remotely close to doing so.
I wish he had breakdowns on whom the banging was for and if their averages went up or not.
This is the best article I've seen on the overall situation - if anything it was Luhnow's McKinsey-style approach to everything - the willingness to gain any and all advantages while increasing efficiencies and trimming the fat no matter the cost or consequences:
They lost quite a few games where they banged a hell of a lot so they weren't very good cheaters.
Good info on here but has me asking even more questions.
I am wondering about a game that had only 1 bang? Is that them cheating? 1 bang?
Anyone else have questions?
I mean this is one dude who went through OVER EIGHT THOUSAND PITCHES himself. I'll cut him a little a slack for being a crazy person. Also it's not like you're hitting home runs every time you have this advantage. Baseball's a game of winning in the margins and this is what this advantage did for them. You're not going to swing at balls, it helps your timing. Oh, also still hitting a ball that isn't an out is hard.
What stands out to me is just how much it helped Beltran, and not as much for someone like Altuve (the site's owner (luncatic) admits it's only banging and not every other device they had shoved up their asses). But for those numbskulls that were calling for specific punishments for specific players this is one of the ways that helps you get even remotely close to doing so.
I wish he had breakdowns on whom the banging was for and if their averages went up or not.
This is the best article I've seen on the overall situation - if anything it was Luhnow's McKinsey-style approach to everything - the willingness to gain any and all advantages while increasing efficiencies and trimming the fat no matter the cost or consequences:
THAT article was fantastically written. Thanks for posting. I had no idea Pete Buttigieg worked for McKinsley and had no idea what they do. If the author is correct on McKinsley then I am out of favor of Pete too.
From what I have heard, the Astros are THE moneyball team to follow in terms of excellence and this article shows why and how.
This shows good insight on where the game is headed and it seems soulless.
They lost quite a few games where they banged a hell of a lot so they weren't very good cheaters.
Good info on here but has me asking even more questions.
I am wondering about a game that had only 1 bang? Is that them cheating? 1 bang?
Anyone else have questions?
I mean this is one dude who went through OVER EIGHT THOUSAND PITCHES himself. I'll cut him a little a slack for being a crazy person. Also it's not like you're hitting home runs every time you have this advantage. Baseball's a game of winning in the margins and this is what this advantage did for them. You're not going to swing at balls, it helps your timing. Oh, also still hitting a ball that isn't an out is hard.
What stands out to me is just how much it helped Beltran, and not as much for someone like Altuve (the site's owner (luncatic) admits it's only banging and not every other device they had shoved up their asses). But for those numbskulls that were calling for specific punishments for specific players this is one of the ways that helps you get even remotely close to doing so.
I wish he had breakdowns on whom the banging was for and if their averages went up or not.
This is the best article I've seen on the overall situation - if anything it was Luhnow's McKinsey-style approach to everything - the willingness to gain any and all advantages while increasing efficiencies and trimming the fat no matter the cost or consequences:
THAT article was fantastically written. Thanks for posting. I had no idea Pete Buttigieg worked for McKinsley and had no idea what they do. If the author is correct on McKinsley then I am out of favor of Pete too.
From what I have heard, the Astros are THE moneyball team to follow in terms of excellence and this article shows why and how.
This shows good insight on where the game is headed and it seems soulless.
Not gonna turn this thread political (there's places here for that), but totally one of the main reasons I've been out on Pete.
They lost quite a few games where they banged a hell of a lot so they weren't very good cheaters.
Good info on here but has me asking even more questions.
I am wondering about a game that had only 1 bang? Is that them cheating? 1 bang?
Anyone else have questions?
I mean this is one dude who went through OVER EIGHT THOUSAND PITCHES himself. I'll cut him a little a slack for being a crazy person. Also it's not like you're hitting home runs every time you have this advantage. Baseball's a game of winning in the margins and this is what this advantage did for them. You're not going to swing at balls, it helps your timing. Oh, also still hitting a ball that isn't an out is hard.
What stands out to me is just how much it helped Beltran, and not as much for someone like Altuve (the site's owner (luncatic) admits it's only banging and not every other device they had shoved up their asses). But for those numbskulls that were calling for specific punishments for specific players this is one of the ways that helps you get even remotely close to doing so.
I wish he had breakdowns on whom the banging was for and if their averages went up or not.
This is the best article I've seen on the overall situation - if anything it was Luhnow's McKinsey-style approach to everything - the willingness to gain any and all advantages while increasing efficiencies and trimming the fat no matter the cost or consequences:
THAT article was fantastically written. Thanks for posting. I had no idea Pete Buttigieg worked for McKinsley and had no idea what they do. If the author is correct on McKinsley then I am out of favor of Pete too.
From what I have heard, the Astros are THE moneyball team to follow in terms of excellence and this article shows why and how.
This shows good insight on where the game is headed and it seems soulless.
Not gonna turn this thread political (there's places here for that), but totally one of the main reasons I've been out on Pete.
It was fantastic insight though on how that company runs things and why the Astros became the way they are.
Like I said, other teams looked to them as the organization to model your team around.
I have friends that work at McKinsey. It's totally what you think it is.
And ever since this hit I figured Luhnow would never work in baseball again, but he'll easily be fine, land on his feet, and do that same thing in another industry. Maybe the NFL!
On August 4th, the game with the most trash can bangs, the Astros scored 16 earned runs. Mike Bolsinger, a Blue Jays reliever, allowed 4 earned runs in 0.1 IP. He never pitched in the big leagues again.
On August 4th, the game with the most trash can bangs, the Astros scored 16 earned runs. Mike Bolsinger, a Blue Jays reliever, allowed 4 earned runs in 0.1 IP. He never pitched in the big leagues again.
On August 4th, the game with the most trash can bangs, the Astros scored 16 earned runs. Mike Bolsinger, a Blue Jays reliever, allowed 4 earned runs in 0.1 IP. He never pitched in the big leagues again.
I know you hate when I do this but this is the shit I see in the data and it makes me question things...
The other 4 highest bangs in games resulted in Astros losses.
2nd highest bang total (aka Jenna Jamison) was a 10-5 Astros win over Twins
Whoops i missed that one...
The next 4 highest they lost...
54 won 48 won 47 lost 45 lost 44 lost 43 lost 41 lost 41 won
In the 32 games with 10 bangs or more the Astros were only 2 games over 500. They won 17 and lost 15.
I'll say this again, they weren't very good at this cheating thing. If you use this math of 17 wins in 32 games the end result would be 86 wins.
From a high level I can agree....but I'm going to guess some other egghead will dig into this and provide many other ways to size this up. Did they do those against the best pitchers? What were the averages of those hitters vs games with low-bang (aka AC Green) numbers? I have all sorts of questions. Fascinating.
Correct. And this doesn't include the dildos that buzzed in their assholes.
Again, the guy "only" recorded 8k pitches when there are much much more where that came from. And another point of that McKinsey/New Republic article is also about how the Astros' K rate went down and OPS went up - those are marginal improvements that you see over the course of 162+ games.
On August 4th, the game with the most trash can bangs, the Astros scored 16 earned runs. Mike Bolsinger, a Blue Jays reliever, allowed 4 earned runs in 0.1 IP. He never pitched in the big leagues again.
I know you hate when I do this but this is the shit I see in the data and it makes me question things...
The other 4 highest bangs in games resulted in Astros losses.
2nd highest bang total (aka Jenna Jamison) was a 10-5 Astros win over Twins
Whoops i missed that one...
The next 4 highest they lost...
54 won 48 won 47 lost 45 lost 44 lost 43 lost 41 lost 41 won
In the 32 games with 10 bangs or more the Astros were only 2 games over 500. They won 17 and lost 15.
I'll say this again, they weren't very good at this cheating thing. If you use this math of 17 wins in 32 games the end result would be 86 wins.
From a high level I can agree....but I'm going to guess some other egghead will dig into this and provide many other ways to size this up. Did they do those against the best pitchers? What were the averages of those hitters vs games with low-bang (aka AC Green) numbers? I have all sorts of questions. Fascinating.
If I had the time I could totally break this shit down more and see what type of benefit they did have.
Like Cliffy said, if it didn't work then they wouldn't have done it.
I am in agreement with that but just looking at the numbers I can't fathom what benefit they got from it looking at the W/L columns.
Somebody w more time has to look at this and see what the benefit was.
They probably hadn't employed any statisticians yet to determine how much of an advantage it gave them because you know why? Knowing the pitch coming is always going to provide a higher percentage of success, but it doesn't mean they will win the game because there are additional factors out of their control so they really didn't care. I doubt they expected to win every game, but they knew it was a benefit because individual players were experiencing it which is why they kept doing it.
I am in agreement with that but just looking at the numbers I can't fathom what benefit they got from it looking at the W/L columns.
Somebody w more time has to look at this and see what the benefit was.
They probably hadn't employed any statisticians yet to determine how much of an advantage it gave them because you know why? Knowing the pitch coming is always going to provide a higher percentage of success, but it doesn't mean they will win the game because there are additional factors out of their control so they really didn't care. I doubt they expected to win every game, but they knew it was a benefit because individual players were experiencing it which is why they kept doing it.
So something else I think about. Maybe, just maybe, the Astros thought they were getting an advantage but they really weren't?
Their home and away splits look like this:
Away batting avg, hits, runs, HR's, 2b, 3b were all better than their home numbers. They had 2000 more AB's away than home which means they were hitting more and hence the better numbers. That doesn't make sense to me. I'll say it again. Maybe these Astros just weren't good at this cheating thing and the edge they thought they were getting became a hindrance?
Comments
Good info on here but has me asking even more questions.
I am wondering about a game that had only 1 bang? Is that them cheating? 1 bang?
Anyone else have questions?
What stands out to me is just how much it helped Beltran, and not as much for someone like Altuve (the site's owner (luncatic) admits it's only banging and not every other device they had shoved up their asses). But for those numbskulls that were calling for specific punishments for specific players this is one of the ways that helps you get even remotely close to doing so.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
The other 4 highest bangs in games resulted in Astros losses.
There is no exact science to it and needs some tweaking or combing over of more info. That tweet is the perfect example of overreacting though. People are going to run with that story and that player not being in the big leagues anymore and want people burned at the stake and not look into that player any further.
He let up 126 earned runs in 230 ip over 4 years for a robust era of 4.92. That .1 of an inning may have had something to do with him not playing but he wasn't going to be around much longer considering his previous outings unless he played all of his games against the Astros.
He is now playing in Japan w an era of 4.42.
https://newrepublic.com/article/155863/houston-astros-cheaters-2017-world-series-mckinsey-problem
From what I have heard, the Astros are THE moneyball team to follow in terms of excellence and this article shows why and how.
This shows good insight on where the game is headed and it seems soulless.
Like I said, other teams looked to them as the organization to model your team around.
And ever since this hit I figured Luhnow would never work in baseball again, but he'll easily be fine, land on his feet, and do that same thing in another industry. Maybe the NFL!
The next 4 highest they lost...
54 won
48 won
47 lost
45 lost
44 lost
43 lost
41 lost
41 won
In the 32 games with 10 bangs or more the Astros were only 2 games over 500. They won 17 and lost 15.
I'll say this again, they weren't very good at this cheating thing. If you use this math of 17 wins in 32 games the end result would be 86 wins.
Did they do those against the best pitchers? What were the averages of those hitters vs games with low-bang (aka AC Green) numbers? I have all sorts of questions. Fascinating.
Again, the guy "only" recorded 8k pitches when there are much much more where that came from. And another point of that McKinsey/New Republic article is also about how the Astros' K rate went down and OPS went up - those are marginal improvements that you see over the course of 162+ games.
Like Cliffy said, if it didn't work then they wouldn't have done it.
Somebody w more time has to look at this and see what the benefit was.
Someone will come up with the batting average on, k rate, OPS, etc. on pitches where there was a bang.
As JP said, look a the K rate from 2016 to 2017 and the rest of the league.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
Their home and away splits look like this:
Away batting avg, hits, runs, HR's, 2b, 3b were all better than their home numbers. They had 2000 more AB's away than home which means they were hitting more and hence the better numbers. That doesn't make sense to me. I'll say it again. Maybe these Astros just weren't good at this cheating thing and the edge they thought they were getting became a hindrance?
They cheated. But what did they gain from it?