8/20 Beat the MFY
- Thread starter Curt S Loew
- Start date
Pretty accurate actually. Only 8 misses, two very marginal. Problem was that his misses were bad and the top three were against the same team. Oh well, replay gave us the run back.
I was at the Nouvelle Toilette yesterday.
One, way fewer Sox fans than in prior years. Especially for a weekend day game.
Two, the Toilette Dwellers were downright docile, by their standards. The losing has beaten them down.
Three, that Stadium is so freaking antiseptic.
Four, walking out of there with a sweep is freaking glorious. Even in a year when the Sox appear to be headed for golf in October.
Five, that Bloom was seriously considering trading Justin Turner AND didn't unload ALL of this trade-able assets makes him a wishy washy indecisive turd. How do you trade a team leader type who performs at the level in a season in which you are not totally giving up? Turner should be brought back. Why does Bloom feel the need to turf his success stories like Schwarber and Renfro and Turner? He makes some very good moves. But man does he make some very bad ones too.
One, way fewer Sox fans than in prior years. Especially for a weekend day game.
Two, the Toilette Dwellers were downright docile, by their standards. The losing has beaten them down.
Three, that Stadium is so freaking antiseptic.
Four, walking out of there with a sweep is freaking glorious. Even in a year when the Sox appear to be headed for golf in October.
Five, that Bloom was seriously considering trading Justin Turner AND didn't unload ALL of this trade-able assets makes him a wishy washy indecisive turd. How do you trade a team leader type who performs at the level in a season in which you are not totally giving up? Turner should be brought back. Why does Bloom feel the need to turf his success stories like Schwarber and Renfro and Turner? He makes some very good moves. But man does he make some very bad ones too.
View: https://twitter.com/GaryHPhillips/status/1693379473628897542?t=7dcvWwf3les3_0PXV31CZg&s=19
Has anyone seen a definitive picture of the tag?
Has anyone seen a definitive picture of the tag?
Where did you hear that Bloom was seriously considering trading Turner? All I heard was that teams were interested in Turner and that Bloom listened to offers, which you’d expect.
Every couple of days you see one approaching 2 or more. If I'm reading the page correctly, this seems to be the highest this year. I definitely have some questions about the run methodology. It never seems right to me -- I think it maybe exaggerates a bit, but I don't know how it's calculated.
I'd also note that I think run factor is interesting, but almost irrelevant when trying to decide how to judge an umpire. It's certainly something that maybe over time might betray biases in high leverage moments, but by and large, while it matters enormously to fans, I kind of think that so long as we're going to stick with human umps calling balls and strikes it's not that important for judging them.
I think we'd all agree that 149/150 would be a heck of a day for any human. If the miss is the first pitch of the game, it's quite different from it being 3-2 bases loaded in the ninth. But it's still the same accuracy. Unless we want to imagine that it's possible to tell a human (who is over 99 percent accurate), "concentrate harder in high lev," then it's the same exact performance by the ump, though much different in result. It's impossible tell someone not to make a mistake. That's why it's a mistake.
The run favor stat may have some usefulness at the margins -- especially home versus away -- but by and large it just seems like it's mostly to be discussed by aggrieved fans.
I think we'd all agree that 149/150 would be a heck of a day for any human. If the miss is the first pitch of the game, it's quite different from it being 3-2 bases loaded in the ninth. But it's still the same accuracy. Unless we want to imagine that it's possible to tell a human (who is over 99 percent accurate), "concentrate harder in high lev," then it's the same exact performance by the ump, though much different in result. It's impossible tell someone not to make a mistake. That's why it's a mistake.
The run favor stat may have some usefulness at the margins -- especially home versus away -- but by and large it just seems like it's mostly to be discussed by aggrieved fans.
I agree with all that. What I’m less certain of is the computer system they’re using to calculate this.
Even if you took the pitch zone away yesterday Valentine was all over the place calling pitches in the same place in the same at bat differently. I don’t understand why the scorecard doesn’t seem to be accounting for that.
Well, there's a more likely explanation. But it likely would piss you off if I said it . . . .
:0)
Good point. A umpire who consistently calls balls 3-inches outside strikes is very different from an umpire who is inconsistent. Maybe there’s a way to measure that.
Not sure what the methodology is but the umpscorecard people do try to make a consistency judgment, based not on the robot zone but the zone that the ump himself sets. And Valentine does score below average there yesterday. The two worst are the four pitches at the top left and bottom right, where he called them inconsistently and missed all 4.
If you look at the Pit v. Colo scorecard above, you can see that accuracy was poor, but consistency was good -- and the chart seems to indicate that the guy just had a huge zone all day and called things close strikes.
I've never called a ball or strike in my life. The one time I tried officiating anything (soccer) it was a disaster. So, what do I know. But my guess is not really. I really think these guys try to get them right every single pitch and I'd be surprised if there are moments when they are more likely to screw up, but you know, maybe screaming crowd, big moment, amped up pitchers -- maybe it does matter.
I was at the Woo Sox game yesterday, and what stood out to me was the efficiency of the ball/strike challenge system. The batter taps his helmet to initiate the review, and the whole process takes less than 10 seconds. The 3D strike zone is up on the jumbotron for the entire park to see. The same is true for the pitcher/defense.
There was a handful of challenges, and it was 50/50. Half were upheld, half were overturned.
This would be a great way to change the obvious blown ball/strike calls throughout the course of the game, and it does not slow down the action.
There was a handful of challenges, and it was 50/50. Half were upheld, half were overturned.
This would be a great way to change the obvious blown ball/strike calls throughout the course of the game, and it does not slow down the action.
Only a matter of time, right? I can see why the umps are against it. Most of the calls that baseball umpires make are objective, so at this point balls and strikes are kind of the last area where they remain relevant. Most close calls that matter now can be reviewed and so they are actually kind of ornamental. They still have some judgment calls -- out of the basepath, fair or foul on a ball that bounces before 1st or 3d, whether to call infield fly, stuff like that which doesn't come up much of the time. But for most stuff other than balls and strikes, the call on the field has less and less significance. TV is really good, and the number of times in baseball where they say "well, we don't know for sure so we'll go with the call on the field" is less than in other sports. In baseball, most of the time, it seems like they just go to video and call what they see on video whatever the call on the field. So, other than a manager being out of challenges, they are most there to keep the game moving. I guess that's dismissive -- it's a really hard job. But it's a much different job than it used to be. Balls and strikes, and swing no swing, is kind of the last bastion. Make it so that the number of challenges is limited and it should be fine. Only problem is giving the discretion to the batter. A guy who decides that his batting average is more important than saving a challenge in a low-leverage situation could be a problem that is more significant in the majors than the minors.
Anyway, this is only a matter of time. Could be five years. Could be 1 year if there's a major blown call in the playoffs.
First off, the only evidence that I’ve seen that Bloom was ‘seriously considering’ trading Turner was Rothenthal’s Athletic notebook quoting only the Marlins’ front office. You’re complaining about a move that he didn’t make.
Second, this is the game thread for the Sox’ sweep of the Yanks in the Bronx. Bloom’s big off season free agent signing gave them a big early lead in game 1. Bloom’s trade deadline deal gave them a big early lead in game 2. And Bloom’s two veteran free agent signings gave them two late inning leads and closed out the win in game 3, respectively.
Using this game thread to complain about Bloom is just absurd.
Is it? Oops. I will put my complaints in other places next time. But since it's absurd, I'm not going to perpetuate my mistake and answer your misplaced rebuttals to my comments.
And yes, I was going off what Ken Roesnthal said.
Last edited:
Both Renfroe and Schwarber have completely sucked this year, re-signing them would have been horrendous. The Renfroe trade will likely end up being bad, but considering he followed up a decent season last year by being moved to his 5th team in 5 years it's probably safe to assume there's something else going on with him.
Thanks for confirming that your rant was based on next to nothing.
Love him or hate him, Chaim Bloom had a helluva weekend. I stand by my comment.
If Ken Rosenthal's report is "next to nothing," then you are correct. I don't agree on your assessment, however. I view him as a credible source.
I stand by my comment, too.
Have a grateful day.
Last edited:
We have threads on the main board to talk about Bloom. If you can't find, one start one.
I'm not sure why you are telling me that. I said that I am not going to perpetuate the substantive Bloom discussion here. The point was already taken.
