12 hrs after my post, Miller named in WaPost snub headline

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fanc ... ing-roles/

hmmm... guess my A.L. SS choice wasn't so ridiculous after all

You were right. Miller, Bogaerts, and Iglesias have had the best first halves of AL shortstops. I'm not mortally offended by Escobar though, he does have the longer track record of performance than those 3 and is coming off a big 1.5 years for KC. But you're right, the other 3 have been better in 2015.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2015/07/06/all-star-snubs-jose-bautista-brad-miller-robbed-of-al-starting-roles/

hmmm... guess my A.L. SS choice wasn't so ridiculous after all

Actually, Clown's choice was still ridiculous. All the article says is either Miller or Bogaerts would have been better choices than Escobar. And the only reason he gives for Miller is he leads all shortstops in walk percentage and isolated power. Those aren't exactly standards to determine the best SS in the league. As I showed in another thread, Bogaerts and Iglesias are having better defensive and offensive seasons, so Miller has no place on the All-Star team.

Also, I can't believe Clown keeps track of when he actually posts things. That's actually kind of cute.

"As I showed in another thread, Bogaerts and Iglesias are having better defensive and offensive seasons, so Miller has no place on the All-Star team."

Such cartoonish arrogance. Always, absolutely right on every fucking issue. It's never in doubt, and everyone who dares venture a different opinion is always wrong.

He's the Donald Trump of som online. Zero redeeming value with this one.

I just wanna know which Washington Stretcher thinks the Post is printed in.

Just in case anybody doubts my having shown Bogaerts and Iglesias' superiority to Miller, I'll re-post my post where I showed it.

That's funny, Bogaerts and Iglesias both have superior fielding pcts to Miller's. They both have better UZR (ultimate zone) ratings better than Miller. They both have made less errors than Miller. They have better ErrR (error runs) ratings than Miller. They both have better Def. ratings than Miller. Bogaerts has a superior OoZ (out of zone) rating than Miller, and Iglesias has a better RangeRating than Miller.

So, I think it's safe to say Bogaerts and Iglesias have better fielding stats than Miller.

Miller ECLIPSES in Secondary Average ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_average )

And Miller may ECLIPSE in secondary average, but secondary average is just a compensatory stat to better evaluate what a player's batting average doesn't. It certainly doesn't override a player's poor OBP or slugging percentage, and--as I noted earlier--both of Miller's are poor, as he has an anemic line of .240/.314/417 line (for a lowly .731 OPS). When compared to Bogaert's line of .302/.339/.414 and Iglesias' of line of .323/.374/.384, it's clear those shortstops have been superior offensively as well.

So, despite his nice secondary average, Brad Miller is still not an all-star-caliber shortstop.

If anybody disagrees with these comparisons, they are free to do so. Asserting our positions and defending them is what we do on this forum. So, the only "cartoonish arrogance" is Nasty's for criticizing me for what he does himself. I can find many places where he states he's right and criticizes those who disagree with him. He just gets sad when others do it...and there is nothing redeemable about that.

P.s. Nasty, even though you're on ignore, I will occasionally read your posts, just not your response to this one...

And here's a perfect example of Nasty's misplaced cartoon arrogance:

I made these two sound analyses of the Jason Heyward-Shelby Miller trade, which have turned out to be correct, with Miller pitching like an ace and making the All-Star team:

Yes, the Cards give up 4 years of Shelby Miller, who won 15 gms a year ago, and a solid hard-throwing pitching prospect for 1 year of Heyward (& his average hit tool) and Walden. Thats quite a swindle for the Cards...

Anyway, as I said in my first post, getting 4 years of the talented SP Shelby Miller (and Jenkins) for 1 year of Heyward, and Walden, is still a great deal...regardless of what Hart does next. Considering Atlanta's clear starting pitching needs, I'm surprised you're not happy with it yourself.

Teamnasty first responded with the arrogant dismissal of my daring to value wins in a starting pitcher, then proceeded to tell me exactly why I was "wrong"...even though his trade analysis--actually claiming the Cards swindled the Braves--was clearly wrong. He even arrogantly dismissed my correct analysis by referring to my argument in scare quotes.

I'm pretty surprised that anybody on a baseball simulation site in 2014 would actually employ pitcher wins and batting average in an argument over who won a trade, let alone do so in selective fashion to advance their "argument".

On the Braves side they get Shelby Miller who yes won 15 regular season games two seasons ago. And I'll concede further that he had a fine season that year even though pitcher wins is a weak-ass predictive stat when thinking about the future. But his arm was so scragged by the end of that season in 2013 that the Cardinals completely shut him down for the entire postseason, letting him only throw one inning where he got tagged. His velocity plummeted, his mechanics showed it, he had more than fatigue something was dearly wrong. And that showed itself last season where his k/rate (a stat that matters going forward when making predictions unlike pitcher wins) plummeted by 2.5 k's per 9 innings, a massive drop considering that he should be entering his prime. His walk rate spiked by about .6 per 9 too. His velocity was off. The only thing that remotely saved his season was an insanely lucky .256 ba against on balls in play, which is utterly unsustainable. See Voros McKracken's research, etc. Even so he was just 10-9 with an ERA lucky enough to be a middling high 3's. The 15-game winner is gone.

The only plausible thing to say on the Braves side is that they get 4 years of cost control on Miller and a similar amount on the young kid who has yet to make it out of the low minors. But Miller is , at best, a #3 going forward. At best, probably worse than that. Last year , based on the things that a pitcher actually controls that affect the outcome of the game, he was essentially a replacement level starter.

So, not only was his poor analysis of this trade--and particularly of Shelby Miller--way off, he showed the arrogant dismissal of my correct position he erroneously accused me of. Nobody in this Forum has a place to criticize another poster for claiming they're right or telling someone else they're wrong...we all do it. But when someone like Nasty, who rudely dismisses others' arguments, does so, it truly is humorous...

l.strether...

For many months, I was proud of you. It looked like you were trying to play nice (for once) with the rest of us lowly mortals.

Then, the past two/three days happened, and you reverted to your good ole self.

Against nobodies-not-so-popular- belief but your own, most peoples opinions are not like the ten commandments written in stone tablets.

Yours good sir, apparently are.

And the greatest thing is, you are not afraid to wield before mentioned stone tablets, and beat us to a bloody pulp with them like you are the Joan of Arc on some mission to save SOM morality.

That is all.

Have a good day Sir

P.s. Nasty, even though you're on ignore, I will occasionally read your posts, just not your response to this one...

How appropriate is that Many of us on "ignore" but still ready our posts, how nice of l.douchy.

How does one occasionally reads ones posts? Does one look at post and then decide to read it?

So one gets put on ignore, but occasionally comes off ignore to read some posts and selectively responds to it and hurries to put back on ignore, what a freakin coward.

We all know l.douchy cannot accept the fact that he is sometimes flat out wrong and when he has no evidence to back up his statements, he either puts you on "ignore" or will not respond.

What a coward.