Rany on Ponson, Hochevar, Bannister, Gload, Porcello (and a brief shout out to NYRoyal)

Rany has the same problems with Ponson and HoRam that almost every other human being has. He also hints that there's a rumor that the Royals might get a decent prospect back for Gload. And I get my first RotR mention.

10 months ago NYRoyal 28 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Congrats

It won’t ever happen for me. Probably because he totally stole my point about Hochevar’s demotion vs. Gordon’s lack thereof in 2007:

’ve heard the argument that the Royals want to send Hochevar down in part because of service time issues – Hochevar’s service time is currently at one year, 17 days, so if he spends even three or four weeks in the minors, his free agency might be delayed by another year. If that’s true, the Royals are picking an awfully strange time to care about this stuff – a year the Royals actually think they can contend – and an awfully strange player to care about. They had this opportunity with Alex Gordon and didn’t use it; I find it hard to believe that they would potentially sabotage the 2009 season in order to keep Hochevar under team control in 2014.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Apr 2, 2009 9:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think your stuff is over his head

And I’m totally serious. Reading his blog has shown me how limited Rany’s knowledge of sabermetrics really is. Sure some of it is him using mainstream stats so that everyone can understand, but it goes beyond that. He often analyzes position player value without respect to defense. He often evaluates pitchers based on ERA, when better stats point in the opposite direction. When he does mention fielding stats, he uses a nearly valueless, discredited fielding metric. It really seems like his knowledge of sabermetrics is up to date with what Baseball Prospectus has created and has on its stats page. He doesn’t appear to know much, if anything, about the statistical innovations which have passed BP by. I believe the above linked post was the first time I’ve read him use FIP at all.

I’m not saying Rany is an idiot or that he’s sabermetrically illiterate. But, as you know, with sabermetrics, you either follow this stuff and keep yourself up to date or your knowledge becomes obsolete pretty quickly. I really don’t think Rany has been keeping up with his sabermetric CLE’s. I guess a medical practice and having kids can do that to you.

I guess that might have been my last shout out from Rany.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Apr 2, 2009 9:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Maybe

I think he is probably also writing to his audience, which is pretty diverse, from what I can see.

Hard to feel sorry for a guy blogging fro Vail. Dermatology been berry, berry good to him.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Apr 2, 2009 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I also despise him for being a dermatologist, helping found BP, having a family

and being a good writer.

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Apr 2, 2009 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

no, not despise

that implies contempt, or a lack of respect. I “hate” him. As in, “I resent his well-deserved success at everything.”

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Apr 2, 2009 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I SHOULD want to applaud Rany for a job well done

I SHOULDN’T want to keep him in a large mayonnaise jar in my basement.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Apr 2, 2009 10:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Is that skit back on youtube?

that sucked when it got taken down…

Which Royals player should we nickname “Brocktoon?”

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Apr 2, 2009 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, but the writing-to-the-audience argument doesn’t explain his sometimes flawed analysis. And that happens much more often than I would have expected.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Apr 2, 2009 9:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

obsolete?

really? if one doesn’t keep up with to-the-season sabermetrics conclusions then his knowledge and analysis are obsolete? that seems to argue that being on the trailing edge of this particular science is actually MORE beneficial than being on the leading edge. one is better off waiting it out to see what sticks than adopting the latest and greatest. consider the 180 that sabermetrics have done on Adam dunn. the orthodoxy used to be that teams were crazy to underestimate his value because his defense wasn’t particularly important. the new orthodoxy says that dunn’s actually properly valued by baseball because his defense is in fact a huge lability. how huge? well that depends on how you measure defensive value. as far as I can tell scouting is still superior to analytics w/r/t defense due both to sample size and other data-gathering challenges.
sabermetricians are trying to subtract oranges from apples and concluding with a shrug that much of baseball’s old guard had it right all along. I think Rany acknowledges without ever saying it that most of the new, defense-adjusted (even if that includes subtracting defense) stats are only as good as the data that goes into them, which data is necessarily only obtainable by mlb teams themselves (mostly because of positioning, pitch sequencing and the scouting that goes into it).

by billexgordler on Apr 2, 2009 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

that seems to argue that being on the trailing edge of this particular science is actually MORE beneficial than being on the leading edge. one is better off waiting it out to see what sticks than adopting the latest and greatest.

Yeah, that’s a lot like:
- sticking with beta max while you’re waiting to see if this DVD thing catches on
- sticking with your TV antenna to see if this cable TV thing catches on
- sticking with luminiferous aether to see if this wavicle theory catches on
- sticking with the flat earth theory to see if this globe theory catches on

Stop me before I analogize again. The trailing edge isn’t a good place to be. Progress is a good thing. It makes sense to replace the good with the better.

as far as I can tell scouting is still superior to analytics w/r/t defense due both to sample size and other data-gathering challenges.

Both scouting and advanced defensive metrics have their drawbacks and limitations. What leads you to the conclusion that “scouting is still superior” with regard to evaluating defense? I think you have to use both and not just assume that the subjective gives you better information than the objective.

sabermetricians are trying to subtract oranges from apples and concluding with a shrug that much of baseball’s old guard had it right all along

Wow, just about every phrase in that sentence was entirely wrong.

I think Rany acknowledges without ever saying it that…

Translation: “I’m going to use the fact that Rany uses one of the worst available defensive metrics (a BP product) and doesn’t talk about others as a sufficiently blank canvas onto which I will project my opinion and assume that Rany agrees with me.”

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Apr 2, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It makes me feel better

that you look down on Rany’s anaytical skills. Now I’ll have some higher class company with me when you clang me on the head with a frying pan for my admittedly non-analysis analysis (opinionating).

The General Theory of Royaltivity

by kabrink on Apr 3, 2009 12:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What are the rumors on the "prospect"?

Everyone's recruits look better than ours.

by 306008 on Apr 2, 2009 11:37 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Perhaps Leo Nunez?

Everyone's recruits look better than ours.

by 306008 on Apr 2, 2009 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Haven't heard anything except for Rany's cryptic remark

And Nunez isn’t a prospect anymore. I have a feeling that “decent prospect” means more than just a piece of minor league roster filler, but not a genuinely good prospect.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Apr 2, 2009 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would guess a Paulo Orlando type

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Apr 2, 2009 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I would've taken Dallas McPherson, if they were just letting him go

Bringing you more-or-less replacement level analysis and commentary to Driveline Mechanics and elsewhere since sometime in 2008.

by devil_fingers on Apr 2, 2009 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

As long as the player can be easily sent to the minors

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Apr 2, 2009 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Which McPherson cannot

As he is out of options

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Apr 2, 2009 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's what I was thinking

Thus the Royals will be getting some kind of prospect. Somewhere in the top-good-decent-marginal-filler prospect spectrum.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Apr 2, 2009 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not a real fan of either

but I would lean toward taking a closer look at McPherson than Shealy.

by Gopherballs on Apr 2, 2009 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have to go with the projections on this one

And they like Shealy’s offense by about 20 points of wOBA. On defense, I think they are likely a wash, at least by UZR.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Apr 2, 2009 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

For this year only, Shealy would be the safer choice

but McPherson is younger and has the higher ceiling and can play 3B in a pinch. PECOTA’s weighted mean likes (and I use that word loosely) McPherson a bit better than Shealy, but McPherson’s 70% is better than Shealy’s 90% and McPherson’s 90% would make him an All-Star. McPherson showed a huge jump in his walk rate last year, which the projection systems regress significantly, but if he really did establish a new skill level, he could beat the projections by quite a bit. I would lean McPherson for these reasons, but sticking with Shealy is certainly reasonable.

by Gopherballs on Apr 2, 2009 1:46 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

All valid points

It’s possible that McPherson has more upside, being one year younger. But at the same time, both CHONE and ZiPS disagree with PECOTA significantly with regard to 2009, and CHONE projects Shealy as a better hitter at every percentile. But you’re right that this all goes to show that choosing either would be reasonable.

The immoderate moderator

by NYRoyal on Apr 2, 2009 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs