Blue Jays Discussion: It's a bird, it's a plane, it's Kevin Pillar!

[phillipmike]

Edwin speaks almost perfectly fluent English fwiw

Im skeptical because he tends to use a translator when he can.

 

[phillipmike]

Nowhere have I argued that Edwin's absence is responsible for the degree of performance loss we've seen in the roster. Simply that it could be a factor of immeasurable magnitude that shouldn't be dismissed out of hand because it can't be quantified. I guess to bring it back to the Price discussion, can the impact of one player be responsible for us making or missing the playoffs? I would say no, but who knows. But also, to say he had zero impact beyond his on-field performance is also a matter of opinion.

Your 1st two sentences say 2 different things; you say you never said Edwin's departure isnt "responsible for the degree of performance loss we've seen in the roster" but then say "it could be a factor" then say i cant argue you on it because "it can't be quantified." They contradict either other.

In otherwords its just opinion speculation with no evidence to support it one way or another. Which is another way of discussing nothing.

 

[Discoverer]

Your 1st two sentences say 2 different things; you say you never said Edwin's departure isnt "responsible for the degree of performance loss we've seen in the roster" but then say "it could be a factor" then say i cant argue you on it because "it can't be quantified." They contradict either other.

In otherwords its just opinion speculation with no evidence to support it one way or another. Which is another way of discussing nothing.

They don't contradict each other at all. He's saying "I didn't say that's the reason, I just said we can't know for sure either way."

 

[Discoverer]

Im skeptical because he tends to use a translator when he can.

A lot of non-English-speaking players do that when they speak with the media because they're more comfortable with it.

 

[Mach85]

Your 1st two sentences say 2 different things; you say you never said Edwin's departure isnt "responsible for the degree of performance loss we've seen in the roster" but then say "it could be a factor" then say i cant argue you on it because "it can't be quantified." They contradict either other.

In otherwords its just opinion speculation with no evidence to support it one way or another. Which is another way of discussing nothing.

Huh? I've said multiple times that I don't believe EE's loss is an adequate explanation. I've just used the Globe quote as an example (along with the reference to the hot hand study) that things that can't be quantified (or just have yet to be quantified) shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. It's a fact that clubhouse influence can't be measured. But it also can't be dismissed as having zero impact simply because it can't be measured. But the mere fact that I'm pointing that out doesn't mean I'm being contradictory or that I'm taking the position that Edwin's loss is responsible for multiple players having significant drops in performance.

They don't contradict each other at all. He's saying "I didn't say that's the reason, I just said we can't know for sure either way."

Basically this lol.

 

[phillipmike]

They don't contradict each other at all. He's saying "I didn't say that's the reason, I just said we can't know for sure either way."

Which is another way of saying nothing. If you cant say one thing for sure then why bring it up? Its useless to waste time on this conversation.

Huh? I've said multiple times that I don't believe EE's loss is an adequate explanation. I've just used the Globe quote as an example (along with the reference to the hot hand study) that things that can't be quantified (or just have yet to be quantified) shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. It's a fact that clubhouse influence can't be measured. But it also can't be dismissed as having zero impact simply because it can't be measured. But the mere fact that I'm pointing that out doesn't mean I'm being contradictory or that I'm taking the position that Edwin's loss is responsible for multiple players having significant drops in performance.

Basically this lol.

I just think it useless to bring up. Cant say that it had an impact one way or another but cant dismiss it. So then whats the point? Bring it up so it is in the back of our head but we cant say Edwin's presence is and hasnt been the reason at the same time - seems useless to me. Can we say the trading of Jose Reyes mid season meant that he was a hated guy and that's why our 2015 season turned around? I would say the other way around as guys like Jose voiced his displeasure with the trade to the media saying that Reyes was like (EE and Dickey loved the guy) and that the Jays should have went after pitching instead. The clubhouse leaders didnt like the Reye-Tulo swap but it still worked out.

 

[Mach85]

Which is another way of saying nothing. If you cant say one thing for sure then why bring it up? Its useless to waste time on this conversation.

You're really missing my overarching point.

 

[phillipmike]

You're really missing my overarching point.

And you are missing mine. Nothing for sure can be proved one way or another - especially something that is so fluid as different player's feelings in a clubhouse none of us have access to.

So why bring it up... that's all im saying.

 

[Mach85]

And you are missing mine. Nothing for sure can be proved one way or another - especially something that is so fluid as different player's feelings in a clubhouse none of us have access to.

So why bring it up... that's all im saying.

Because that's what we were discussing - the impact of Price on this team beyond the boxscore. You don't have to participate in this portion of the discussion if you find it unfulfilling. For about the third time, my main point is that just because something can't be quantified--or has yet to be quantified--it can't be dismissed as immaterial. But I couched that with the caveat that I DON'T believe clubhouse factors are majorly significant, so I wouldn't start a **** storm of being accused of buying into media narratives about clubhouse feelings. Which seems to have happened anyway.

 

[phillipmike]

Because that's what we were discussing - the impact of Price on this team beyond the boxscore. You don't have to participate in this portion of the discussion if you find it unfulfilling. For about the third time, my main point is that just because something can't be quantified--or has yet to be quantified--it can't be dismissed as immaterial. But I couched that with the caveat that I DON'T believe clubhouse factors are majorly significant, so I wouldn't start a **** storm of being accused of buying into media narratives about clubhouse feelings. Which seems to have happened anyway.

Sure and as we are discussing it i dont believe its worth any discussion because what happens if the Jays start winning. Does that narrative go away? I think it does because it doesnt fit the argument/concept anymore that Edwin's departure adversely affects the team.

It only becomes "relevant" now because the Jays are losing. A only fits if there is B... A is Edwin leaving and B is the Jays losing.

Countless examples of teams losing good long term players/clubhouse guys and having mixed results of winning and losing.

 

[Discoverer]

Which is another way of saying nothing. If you cant say one thing for sure then why bring it up? Its useless to waste time on this conversation.

"I'm open to the possibility, but I/we don't know, so I wouldn't put too much stock in it right now" is a perfectly valid topic for discussion and isn't a waste of time.

Not every discussion has to be black-and-white. There's nothing wrong with discussing maybes.

 

[phillipmike]

"I'm open to the possibility, but I/we don't know, so I wouldn't put too much stock in it right now" is a perfectly valid topic for discussion and isn't a waste of time.

Not every discussion has to be black-and-white. There's nothing wrong with discussing maybes.

Which brings me back to the same question i just brought up. What happens if the Jays were winning or if we start winning? Puts major flaws in that narrative... hence why i think it is a waste of time to discuss.

 

[Discoverer]

Which brings me back to the same question i just brought up. What happens if the Jays were winning or if we start winning? Puts major flaws in that narrative... hence why i think it is a waste of time to discuss.

It's not like he just started the conversation himself. His "maybe" comment was in response to several "It has an impact" and "No it doesn't" comments from each side.

 

[doorman]

Which brings me back to the same question i just brought up. What happens if the Jays were winning or if we start winning? Puts major flaws in that narrative... hence why i think it is a waste of time to discuss.

Yes, like if they win tonight, it would be three in a row, who woulda thunk it? lol

 

[phillipmike]

It's not like he just started the conversation himself. His "maybe" comment was in response to several "It has an impact" and "No it doesn't" comments from each side.

Oh i know... But i am just pointing out the the entire argument is baseless and futile not just the point he brought up.

 

[Mach85]

Sure and as we are discussing it i dont believe its worth any discussion because what happens if the Jays start winning. Does that narrative go away? I think it does because it doesnt fit the argument/concept anymore that Edwin's departure adversely affects the team.

It only becomes "relevant" now because the Jays are losing. A only fits if there is B... A is Edwin leaving and B is the Jays losing.

Countless examples of teams losing good long term players/clubhouse guys and having mixed results of winning and losing.

No one's forcing you to participate. Not sure why something has to be "worth discussing" to phillipmike to be brought up here anyway. But as Discoverer said, there was an ongoing discussion that I interjected myself into.

As to your other point, if the Jays start winning, it can be argued that there was an adjustment period, or it can be argued that it was all bs and was an ad hoc explanation for the team's struggles up to that point. I'm not making a case either way. The salient takeaway to my contribution to this discussion is not whether or not EE's absence has materially influenced the Jays' season, but rather that ideas shouldn't be dismissed simply because they aren't measurable (or aren't yet).

 

[phillipmike]

Anthony Alford, CF, Toronto Blue Jays
MLB ETA: 2018
Ceiling: Lead-off hitter/All-star center-fielder

Selected out of high school in 2012, Alford signed a unique deal with the Jays that allowed him to dabble in baseball during the summers while play college football. He appeared in just 25 games over the first three years of his pro career before turning to the sport full-time in 2015 after his college football career went sideways.

Alford showed a lot of potential that year and posted an .820 OPS while splitting the season between two A-ball levels and he looked poised for a huge breakout in 2016. Unfortunately, he hurt himself in the first game of the year and missed about a month. A concussion clouded the remainder of his season.

Despite the setback, Alford opened 2017 with a laser focus and jumped off to a quick start despite making a significant jump to double-A for the first time. He’s always taken a lot of walks — and currently sits at 12.5 BB% — but he’s made a huge adjustment by trimming his strikeout rate almost in half, from 29.2% in ’16 to 15.3% in ’17 (small sample size warning).

The otherworldly BABIP of .460 is having a huge impact on his .397 batting average but Alford has both the foot speed and the bat speed necessary to post higher-than-normal BABIPs. Although he’s more of a gap-power guy, the 22-year-old outfielder has posted blistering line-drive rates of 25% over the past two seasons. But even if his average tumbles a bit, he’ll still be posting well-above-average on-base rates — which could eventually allow him to be a threat to steal 30+ bases in a season.

In just his third full pro season, Alford is ahead of the learning curve thanks to his plus athleticism, determination and intelligence — even though he’s still very young in a baseball sense. Added to the 40-man roster last November (to protect from the Rule 5), the speedy outfielder is on pace to earn a second-half promotion to triple-A and a late-season cup of coffee in Toronto. With Jose Bautista likely done with the Blue Jays after this season and a noticeable gap in left field, too, Alford is well-positioned to earn a regular gig with the big league club in 2018.

I do have some concerns that Alford’s style of play (ie. football mentality) could continue to make him injury prone and limit his ceiling. His ceiling is that of a top-of-the-order catalyst and a future all-star. His personality should make him a fan favorite.

http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/prospect-stock-watch-alford-funkhouser-soroka/

 

[phillipmike]

No one's forcing you to participate. Not sure why something has to be "worth discussing" to phillipmike to be brought up here anyway. But as Discoverer said, there was an ongoing discussion that I interjected myself into.

As to your other point, if the Jays start winning, it can be argued that there was an adjustment period, or it can be argued that it was all bs and was an ad hoc explanation for the team's struggles up to that point. I'm not making a case either way. The salient takeaway to my contribution to this discussion is not whether or not EE's absence has materially influenced the Jays' season, but rather that ideas shouldn't be dismissed simply because they aren't measurable (or aren't yet).

Sure you are offering your input on something you found in a news article and i am offering my input as to why i think it is BS. Nothing more and nothing less.

 

[theaub]

Im skeptical because he tends to use a translator when he can.

Most guys use one even if they speak well because it both ensures nothing small gets misinterpreted and also ensures that enough people use a translator so that the team won't get rid of them for the guys who actually need one.

When Edwin played here he lived in my ex's condo and I talked to him a bunch of times in the elevator. Zero issues with the language.

 

[phillipmike]

Most guys use one even if they speak well because it both ensures nothing small gets misinterpreted and also ensures that enough people use a translator so that the team won't get rid of them for the guys who actually need one.

When Edwin played here he lived in my ex's condo and I talked to him a bunch of times in the elevator. Zero issues with the language.

What did you guys talk about?

 

[zeke]

Anyone who has played the sport knows the power of belief.

 

[zeke]

There's no way the bullpen loses "another WAR or 2" by pitching another dozen innings or so over two months. Also, it's hard to evaluate a starter's impact based solely on his WAR when we already know the scores of the games being discussed. Again, a sub replacement-level pitcher still wins most of those games, unless you think the 9+ run offense in those games was driven by having David Price pitching.

11 starts of him pitching 2ip/gs more than his replacements did = 22ip.

That's 22 extra IP of the worst pitchers on the team - the bottom of the bullpen middle relievers.

 

[zeke]

If my calculations are correct that's 6.76ip per start for Price, while the potential alternates (Hutch/Norris/Doubront/Copeland/Redmond/Boyd) averaged 4.52....so that's 24.2ip more from the worst relievers on the team down the stretch.

 

[theaub]

What did you guys talk about?

Nothing of value really (the closest thing to anything baseball related was asking him if he'd seen the parrot gif)

 

[phillipmike]

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=131702345&postcount=222

I called it... Didnt i say Zeke was going to ignore my post.

If the Jays didnt land Price then they would have pulled the trigger on acquiring Leake. Then tried to use Boyd to acquire Zobrist.

So the discrepancy wouldnt have been 6.76 innings to 4.52 innings. Rather Price's 6.76 innings to Leake's 6.4 innings.