Remember 1982?
posted by The People's Show at 1:13 PM
Thursday, March 02, 2006
Links
Episode Download Archive
- Tim McKernan Interview
- 2006-05-16
- 2006-05-04
- 2006-04-27
- 2006-04-20
- 2006-04-12
- 2006-04-06
- 2006-03-30
- 2006-03-09
- 2006-03-02
- 2006-02-24
- 2006-02-15
- 2006-02-10
About Me
- Name: The People's Show
- Location: St. Louis, Missouri, United States
54 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
YESS!! ANKIEL IS A NOMINEE!! and i agree about a trillion percent, he is a flirt, larussa is in love with him, and he is incredibly worthless.
Ok, just got to the big mention of ashley, and all i can say, is that you guys REALLY dont need to elevate her ego. Someday, her true colors will shine through, and she will go back to her friendless days. Clearly, you have not known her long.
And a pitcher is a leader of the team. He should be able to rally his team, HOWEVER ERA is the best display of his pitching ability. The truth is a win loss record shows the pitchers ability to get a team going, but the era shows his talent. Both need to be looked at, becuase there can be a good pitcher on a bad team and a bad pitcher on a good team. This is why they put BOTH stats up everytime they show it.
oh yes, and i pretty much love this show more than chocolate. Its the reason i made it through my week of makeup work. Thanks guys!
I would just like to say that the last time I checked, Alaska was not a country. I'm just throwing that out there.
Great show today. Doc Michaelson interview was priceless, but I still can't believe we have a test tomorrow.
Megan, although you are a friend of the show, I believe that you are just plain wrong about this.
How can you justify looking at W-L record when pitcher A has an ERA of less than half of pitcher B, strikes more than two times as many batters as pitcher B, walks less than 1/3 of the batters as pitcher B, and gioves up fewer home runs in more innings pitched than pitcher B, but pitcher B's record is 15-8 and pitcher A's record is 12-14.
What could pitcher A have possibly done better? Objectively, he did everything in HIS power to pitch better than pitcher B. However, because pitcher B recieved a much higher quality of offensive and bullpen support, he has the better record.
Why not just judge pitcher's on things that they CAN control instead of things that they can't.
NOTE: If a "close-game" ability did exist, then how come pitchers with bad periperal numbers and good W-L records, whom I would term lucky, always end up being terrible?
I demand to go on "the people's show" next week to defend my honor and reputation. Or do you want the people to not hear the truth of why I really won the Tim Schmidt Scumbag Award?
Honestly! I've heard of soar losers but soar winners? Tom, you know perfectly well what you said. I don't know why it's so hard for you to admit that you hurt my feelings and just apologize like any other upright future seminarian would.
I agree with nick. Why use a "stat" that can only effectiviely measure some of the pitchers in the MLB? It is like Nick says, a subjective stat, dependent on the quality of the pitcher's team.
Taro, how dare you bring logic and reasoning to this forum!
Now now, i said that everything was important. You need to hear it all to form a good opinion. Scouts dont base their judgement of a player solely on one or the other, they need to look at everything. I mean, seriously, what is a good ERA worth if the pitcher can't lead the team to victory, and how can a pitcher lead a team to victory without a good era? Its not one or the other, its BOTH!! both, just like i said in my first post, even though some people only read the first line and didnt read the rest of my comment.
baseball is a collaboration of independant efforts, which means there must be a good independant effort and a good collaboration.
Sorry, Megan its just impossible to successfully argue the merits of a such a subjective stat. What if a pitcher throws 8 strong innings allowing only 2 runs while his team scores three (therefore he has successfully kepty his team in the lead and had a good ERA for the game) but his closer comes in and blows the game? Then some reliever for the other team who pitched one inning gets the win.
How is that a valuable stat?
Another thing twith the Ben Sheets/ Shawn Estes example; the Brewers had a .416 winning percentage and the Rockies had a .420, and both teams finished with 94 losses (Brewers played one less game.)This throws out the good team/ bad team theory advocated by Dan.
The main point is that you should judge a pitcher based on what he does and W-L record judges the pitcher too much on his offensive and bullpen support.
i agree. When i want to know at about a pitcher, i look at their era. But lets say im looking at a whole team's starting pitcher, w-l would make sense there. ERA is an extremely good stat, but there are other stats worth looking at as well.
I have some other topics for discussion on your show too. How about wearing team apparel to a game! I think that its part of your duty as a fan to show support for your team. SOME PEOPLE (who may or may not be related to me) feel that as long as they wear something close to a similar color, that that is enough. What do you guys think and do you wear team clothing to games. Also, I think Pokey Reese should win the Tim Schmidt award. He is the definition of scumbag.
Ummmm... everyone knows that the Tim Schmidt award only applies to the biggest scumbag within the hallowed halls of SLUH. Last time I checked, Pokey Reese did not go to SLUH. Nice try Megan.
Also, I would just like to say that most of the time I do wear red to Cardinals games. It may not have the team logo on it, but it's still red. And yes, there were probably times where I did not wear red. But the real question here is does it really affect the players' performance if I'm wearing a green shirt instead of a red shirt? I'm thinking no.
On the topic of clothes at Cardinals games:
ersonally, I usually wear my Renteria jersey or Edmonds shirt, but always something Cardinals. While the color of your shirt may not help the Cardinals, it certainly adds to atmosphere of the game.
However, there are other ways to add to that atmosphere (ie cheering loudly, yelling out inane stats, making up new nicknames etc.
Megan just denounce your belief in W-L record.
To show further proof of the worthlessness of the stat, in '04 (the year I've been talking about Ben Sheets) two other pitchers on the staff had similiar records, but niether came close to Sheets' dominance. Doug Davis was 12-12 with 3.39 ERA and over double the walks of Sheets with 98 less strikeouts. Victor Santos was 11-12 with a 4.97 ERA, nearly double the walks and less than half the strikeouts of Sheets. W-L record simply cannot hold up to any serious analysis.
you know what nick, just because of your persistance, ill say era is more important. BUT! i still think w-l record is a valuable stat.
well, pokey reese affects the hallowed halls of sluh because im pretty sure that everyone there would love to be named pokey reese.
and ashley, you usually wear a shade of red, never the right color red.
For the first time in my life I am going to agree with Farley(the world may be ending soon.) Nick you have turned this forum of mockery and insults into a serious sports discussion. For shame! And Megan, never listen to Wings, you should have stuck to your guns with the W?L record but he threw some fancy stats at you and yo gave in. Renounce your last post and stick it to the man(Nick) And Ashley because I consider myself a fashion expert, I see nothing wrong with not wearing red to a cardinals game ( I only occasionally do as red is not my color.) In closing, knock this serious discussion off and lets get back to mocking people like Fen Barley, who has absolutely no fashion sense.
A-Town Where You At?
Yes, where is A-Town?
Anyway, my point is that W-L record is ENTIRELY worthless and I did not say that ERA is end-all stat for pitchers either. The "fancy stats" that I threw out, like strikeouts and walks, were too complicated for someone as simple-minded as Dan (perhaps because it involved "logic" instead of merely following tradition.)
Do you remember 1982?
I Love you guys! I can't wait to get home and listen to the new episode. I hope John wins the Tim Schmidt award this week. I'd vote for him...but i suppose that wouldn't prove his worthlessness. See you guys soon!
I do remember 1982. That feelings coming back again.
But once again the stats I was referring to were the exceptions to the rules of pitching over the last few years. You pick out only the examples that help your cause and don't look at the rest of the piotchers over the last few years. But I digress, rather I want to once again stress that this blog be about mockery and rumors, such as that Ben Farley is Satan (10 bucks says its true.) And megan, i am still waiting for you to renounce your last post and tell wings to jump off a bridge and die in a fire.
A-Town where you at?
Alright Dan, I know you're intimidated by my incredible sense of fashion. Why do you continue to embarrass yourself with inane comments?(Oh, wait a minute, the entire show is inane comments. My apologies) I looked like a stud in my red dress shirt and blue jeans, and you just can't stand it.
PS- Megan, you seem to be smarter than both these guys.
Hey Dan! My sister says you deleted her post, and she's reeeeeeeally mad. She has threatened to going back to reading the Prep News. You are officially my favorite of the week. Sorry Nick.
Ok first off i would like to express my extreme anger that my post was removed. If anyone can give me a reason as to why it would be greatly appreciated. I guess i should only write this post to dan, because once he sees it he will take it down, so i will say, that i will not take back anything i have said in the past. I stick by what i said, and my opinion has not changed at all. I did not give in to nick. I acknowledged his good argument but disputed it as well. I am extremely disappointed in your dictator-esque actions.
To review my last post, that was deleted, it said that its important to wear red and support the cardinals because we are the greatest baseball city in the country. And if red "isnt your color" wear white.
and after dan took down my post, i will not insult ben farley, especially because he was nice to me.
Ashley quotes in the past 30 mins.:
"Who is Tim McKernan?" ::i mock her:: "I know he was in jupiter"
"I dont know much about football. I know there is a quaterback and a center that hikes the ball. And a running back who catches a whole lot of balls. HAHA [yes, she laughed at her own joke] Dirty!"
Although I may regret admitting this and forfeiting my position as Ashley's "favorite", I must tell the truth which is that I did not delete anyone's post. The proof that I did not do it is simply that I do not have the technological capabilities to even begin to comprehend how to do such a complicated process, so you should probably talk to Wings. And all I am doing is trying to look out for you and help you realize that you should never give in to wings because it only encourages him.
A-Town Where You At?
ok, well nevermind all the mean things i said then. i do take those back. Good thing i didnt go to the extreme lengths to put up the picture of the poster that said "nick you make my heart tick"
Dan, just face it, my examples prove that W-L is completely worthless. You admit that its worthless in the multiple situations that i have pointed out, so why even bother to look at it. How many times has a guy had year with a good ERA, good, strikeout and walk numbers, and few HRs allowed and someone be able to say that he had a bad year? The only instance would be if that someone was looking at the worhtless W-L record.
If what I posted/ said cannot convince you that W-L record is worhtless I honestly don't know what can. There is no logical way to justify using W-L record in any shape or form to evaluate a pitcher.
too bad the "nick you make my heart tick" idea didnt fall thru.
ERA ISNT EVERYTHING!! You have found one example of a good pitcher with a bad w-l record, BUT the majority of pitchers' era reflects their w-l. Sure there are other exceptions, but the point is that w-l record is generally a good stat. You can find stats to support any argument out there. And isnt the most important part about baseball winning? Not the number of runs you give up, but actually winning the game? Can you possibly defend your statement now? Do you disagree and think that winning is not the most important thing? because last time i checked, it was the number of games you won that got you into the playoffs. Maybe the world is crumbling beneath my feet, but im pretty sure winning is important. If you really want me to give into you nick, you are going to have to some how prove to me that winning is not important. And let me tell you, good luck.
If you just give up now, i'll change my picture to the nick you make my heart tick picture.
Alright, the idea that winning games is the most important thing was the idea behind my whole premise. If you look at a pitcher's W-L record, you wil not know how much he helped his team win.
Cliff Lee was tied for fifth in the MLB last season with 18 wins, Jeff Suppan and Mark Mulder both had 16 wins. Not to take anything away from them, but the best pitcher in the game, Johan Santana had 16 wins! Give Santana the kind of run and bullpen support that the previous three recieved and he is easily a 20 gmae winner.
I'm sure that if the Twins were stupid enough (although people who believe in W-L would consider it an even trade) to trade Johan for Mulder that Jocketty would do it.
Winning is the most important thing, but if you evaluate a pitcher based on his W-L record, I gurantee that you won't win.
Megan you are once again correct, as this is the same argument I made on the show. Wings, I won this argument ion the show as shown by the poll taken in the studio, and any further discussion of this topic will constitute you as a "sore loser," which may land you as a Tim Scmidt candidate. I once again demand that we stop this serious conversation, and Megan do not let Wings push you around. Just tell him to fall off a cliff and die. P.S. has evryone heard the McKernan interview yet.
UMM NO!!! i havent heard that.
and nick, why didnt you just give up? that was the crappiest response i have heard. I honestly expected better, although i dont know why. As a general rule, dont bring jockety into your debates, it basically devalues whatever you are saying by half, no matter what the context
Who do you want pitching for you, Jeff Suppan or Johan Santana; if you go by W-L record,it doesn't matter.
well who would you rather have, Matt Ginter or Chris Carpenter, Matt had a lower era.
And megan sticks it to wings, swing and a home run. NIck you have just been burned once again by someone who knows the facts. Megan, bravo and kudos to you.
haha, thanks. nick, just bow out of this one gracefully. My offer still stands to change my picture if you give up now.
My God, that was beautiful Megan. You are so good that Dan and I are actually agreeing with each other. Kudos to you.
Nick can't respond right now. He's too busy watching a video of himself pitching to a backstop. (Is that weird, or is it just me?)
But seriously, there can't be too many intelligent debates here. That's against everything the show stands for.
I agree Ben, why don't we talk about your heroine addiction, because we are thinking about staging an intervention.
OK, yes I use 5 grams of heroine on a daily basis (on Saturdays I throw in some of Jack Daniel's special drink to spice things up) and sneak down to East St. Louis at 3AM to meet my dealer, Bo. But that doesn't mean I have a problem.
Saying East St. Louis and a dealer named Bo is highly offensive.
I NEVER SAID THAT ERA WAS THE "ONE" STAT.
If I were to look at one stat only, it would be VORP; it would most certainly not be ERA. Besides, Ginter's ERA last year was 6.17 (with a career ERA of 5.46, and a season best of 4.47)
I compared 2 starting pitchers, you compared a starting pitcher and a reliever (well, Ginter did start one game)
I really don't see why you insist on holding onto such a meaningless metric.
I wonder why the area of East St. Louis is offensive to Nick?
PS- Shut up about all the metrics already!
Ginter's era is 0.00 you doof! and i would just like to point out that you agreed with me in saying that there has to be a combo of stats. I'll take that as you giving up. Have a nice day!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I am appaled at your admission of taking cocaine Ben, because everyone knows the best drug is mixing heroine with anabolic steroids. Look at how it has toned my body.
A-Town Where You At?
a mixture of MEANINGFUL stats
(also please cite your source for ginter's ERA because baaseball-reference.com does not lie)
do you remember 1982?
thats this season's
OK, according to baseballreference.com, si.com, yahoosports.com, and baseballalmanac.com, Matt Ginter had an ERA last year of 6.17
tack on cbssportsline.com and espn.com to that list
Those stats are clearly a result of a right winged conspiracy designed for the sole purpose of destroyink the sterling Pitlyk reputation.
ok, im talking THIS year's stats, 2006. but thats ok, because i realize that although an off season means a ton to a player's performance, preseason is not a good reflection of the true potential of a player. And as much as i would love to abandon my biology studies (I, as a sophomore, still need to do my homework) and look for some stats, i will just ask my original question again. Is winning worthless? I dont want any stats, i just want a yes or a no.
He hasn't pitche in '06, so technically he has no ERA, not a zero ERA. The formula is (ER/(IP/9)) With no IP, that means that there is a zero in the denominator. Anyway winning is important, but W-L record does not show whether or not a pitcher is good at winning, merely whether or not he was lucky or unlucky.
I'm sorry, but at this juncture in the discussion, I will have to stop arguing. If after what I showed you, you still W-L record matters, then at this point, you are just not ready to have your mind open to baseball truth.
So go on, listen to your Rick Hortons and Alan Trammels, believe what your Dan McLaughlins and Scott Gilberts tell you, but the bottom is that objective analysis of the game of baseball proves them wrong.
-Nick
you never did answer my question about the importance of winning. and I never said that era was a worthless stat
from previous post:
"Anyway winning is important, but W-L record does not show whether or not a pitcher is good at winning, merely whether or not he was lucky or unlucky. "
Post a Comment
<< Home