2011 Oakland A's Thread

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by TheGoldenState:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Jigga:
Trevor Cahill is a muh'fu**in Stud!

He just keeps proving his doubters wrong.

doubters gonna doubt

his FIP is 2.87, so not quite as impressive as his ERA leads to believe, but still very good.

this is exactly what i mean. Stat guys always just say "he's not actually as good as his ERA and he's going to regress because his FIP is much higher." Every year so far he has outplayed it.

Tonight will be my first A's game at the coliseum. I'm so pumped.

Originally posted by socalfan21:
Tonight will be my first A's game at the coliseum. I'm so pumped.

Nice! Enjoy the tarp, bro. LOL

Nah, seriously, take a sweater/jacket with you. Night games are kinda chilly at OVERSTOCK.COM Coliseum.

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by TheGoldenState:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Jigga:
Trevor Cahill is a muh'fu**in Stud!

He just keeps proving his doubters wrong.

doubters gonna doubt

his FIP is 2.87, so not quite as impressive as his ERA leads to believe, but still very good.

this is exactly what i mean. Stat guys always just say "he's not actually as good as his ERA and he's going to regress because his FIP is much higher." Every year so far he has outplayed it.

Well there are always exceptions, but more often than not FIP and xFIP are good predictors of performance. Matt Cain is pretty much the same way, he outperforms his peripheral stats all the time. Other guys like Nolasco continually perform worse than their peripheral stats would indicate.

But most pitchers do actually regress when their ERA is lower than their FIP/xFIP.


And besides, Cahill has improved his strikeout rate dramatically, so his FIP/xFIP is much closer to his ERA this season than last year.

Originally posted by Jigga:

Originally posted by socalfan21:
Tonight will be my first A's game at the coliseum. I'm so pumped.

Nice! Enjoy the tarp, bro. LOL

Nah, seriously, take a sweater/jacket with you. Night games are kinda chilly at OVERSTOCK.COM Coliseum.

lol yeah they are pretty chilly

good luck though

Originally posted by crzy:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by TheGoldenState:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Jigga:
Trevor Cahill is a muh'fu**in Stud!

He just keeps proving his doubters wrong.

doubters gonna doubt

his FIP is 2.87, so not quite as impressive as his ERA leads to believe, but still very good.

this is exactly what i mean. Stat guys always just say "he's not actually as good as his ERA and he's going to regress because his FIP is much higher." Every year so far he has outplayed it.

Well there are always exceptions, but more often than not FIP and xFIP are good predictors of performance. Matt Cain is pretty much the same way, he outperforms his peripheral stats all the time. Other guys like Nolasco continually perform worse than their peripheral stats would indicate.

But most pitchers do actually regress when their ERA is lower than their FIP/xFIP.


And besides, Cahill has improved his strikeout rate dramatically, so his FIP/xFIP is much closer to his ERA this season than last year.

I'm not doubting the validity of FIP or xFIP WAR or BABIP so so on. As an A's fan it's almost a requirement to know your subametrics lol.

Niners99's post was precisely the type of thing I was talking about in relation to Cahill. Read any A's meesage board this past offseason (and even the previous one to a lesser extent) and you're bound to find pages and pages of discussion about how Cahill is bound to regress and that he is way overrated and we should sell high on him and yada yada yada. Yet game after game he goes in and gets the job done.

Originally posted by socalfan21:
Tonight will be my first A's game at the coliseum. I'm so pumped.

Let me know how the tarp is looking.

Originally posted by crzy:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by TheGoldenState:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Jigga:
Trevor Cahill is a muh'fu**in Stud!

He just keeps proving his doubters wrong.

doubters gonna doubt

his FIP is 2.87, so not quite as impressive as his ERA leads to believe, but still very good.

this is exactly what i mean. Stat guys always just say "he's not actually as good as his ERA and he's going to regress because his FIP is much higher." Every year so far he has outplayed it.

Well there are always exceptions, but more often than not FIP and xFIP are good predictors of performance. Matt Cain is pretty much the same way, he outperforms his peripheral stats all the time. Other guys like Nolasco continually perform worse than their peripheral stats would indicate.

But most pitchers do actually regress when their ERA is lower than their FIP/xFIP.


And besides, Cahill has improved his strikeout rate dramatically, so his FIP/xFIP is much closer to his ERA this season than last year.

Last I checked Ricky Nolasco was undefeated. You should have come up with a better example than him.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by crzy:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by TheGoldenState:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Jigga:
Trevor Cahill is a muh'fu**in Stud!

He just keeps proving his doubters wrong.

doubters gonna doubt

his FIP is 2.87, so not quite as impressive as his ERA leads to believe, but still very good.

this is exactly what i mean. Stat guys always just say "he's not actually as good as his ERA and he's going to regress because his FIP is much higher." Every year so far he has outplayed it.

Well there are always exceptions, but more often than not FIP and xFIP are good predictors of performance. Matt Cain is pretty much the same way, he outperforms his peripheral stats all the time. Other guys like Nolasco continually perform worse than their peripheral stats would indicate.

But most pitchers do actually regress when their ERA is lower than their FIP/xFIP.


And besides, Cahill has improved his strikeout rate dramatically, so his FIP/xFIP is much closer to his ERA this season than last year.

Last I checked Ricky Nolasco was undefeated. You should have come up with a better example than him.

That's only if you think wins are a "peripheral" stat.

Originally posted by dcsham:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by crzy:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by TheGoldenState:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Jigga:
Trevor Cahill is a muh'fu**in Stud!

He just keeps proving his doubters wrong.

doubters gonna doubt

his FIP is 2.87, so not quite as impressive as his ERA leads to believe, but still very good.

this is exactly what i mean. Stat guys always just say "he's not actually as good as his ERA and he's going to regress because his FIP is much higher." Every year so far he has outplayed it.

Well there are always exceptions, but more often than not FIP and xFIP are good predictors of performance. Matt Cain is pretty much the same way, he outperforms his peripheral stats all the time. Other guys like Nolasco continually perform worse than their peripheral stats would indicate.

But most pitchers do actually regress when their ERA is lower than their FIP/xFIP.


And besides, Cahill has improved his strikeout rate dramatically, so his FIP/xFIP is much closer to his ERA this season than last year.

Last I checked Ricky Nolasco was undefeated. You should have come up with a better example than him.

That's only if you think wins are a "peripheral" stat.

No. Wins are NOT a peripheral stat. That is the point. How can you say a guy is performing worse than his peripheral stats when he is undefeated.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by dcsham:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by crzy:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by TheGoldenState:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Jigga:
Trevor Cahill is a muh'fu**in Stud!

He just keeps proving his doubters wrong.

doubters gonna doubt

his FIP is 2.87, so not quite as impressive as his ERA leads to believe, but still very good.

this is exactly what i mean. Stat guys always just say "he's not actually as good as his ERA and he's going to regress because his FIP is much higher." Every year so far he has outplayed it.

Well there are always exceptions, but more often than not FIP and xFIP are good predictors of performance. Matt Cain is pretty much the same way, he outperforms his peripheral stats all the time. Other guys like Nolasco continually perform worse than their peripheral stats would indicate.

But most pitchers do actually regress when their ERA is lower than their FIP/xFIP.


And besides, Cahill has improved his strikeout rate dramatically, so his FIP/xFIP is much closer to his ERA this season than last year.

Last I checked Ricky Nolasco was undefeated. You should have come up with a better example than him.

That's only if you think wins are a "peripheral" stat.

No. Wins are NOT a peripheral stat. That is the point. How can you say a guy is performing worse than his peripheral stats when he is undefeated.

I think he was talking about his performance in past seasons which would be valid.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by dcsham:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by crzy:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by TheGoldenState:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Jigga:
Trevor Cahill is a muh'fu**in Stud!

He just keeps proving his doubters wrong.

doubters gonna doubt

his FIP is 2.87, so not quite as impressive as his ERA leads to believe, but still very good.

this is exactly what i mean. Stat guys always just say "he's not actually as good as his ERA and he's going to regress because his FIP is much higher." Every year so far he has outplayed it.

Well there are always exceptions, but more often than not FIP and xFIP are good predictors of performance. Matt Cain is pretty much the same way, he outperforms his peripheral stats all the time. Other guys like Nolasco continually perform worse than their peripheral stats would indicate.

But most pitchers do actually regress when their ERA is lower than their FIP/xFIP.


And besides, Cahill has improved his strikeout rate dramatically, so his FIP/xFIP is much closer to his ERA this season than last year.

Last I checked Ricky Nolasco was undefeated. You should have come up with a better example than him.

That's only if you think wins are a "peripheral" stat.

No. Wins are NOT a peripheral stat. That is the point. How can you say a guy is performing worse than his peripheral stats when he is undefeated.

Your sarcasm meter must be off. I was agreeing with you...

Cocoa trying to steal home was awesome lol

Originally posted by crzy:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by TheGoldenState:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Jigga:
Trevor Cahill is a muh'fu**in Stud!

He just keeps proving his doubters wrong.

doubters gonna doubt

his FIP is 2.87, so not quite as impressive as his ERA leads to believe, but still very good.

this is exactly what i mean. Stat guys always just say "he's not actually as good as his ERA and he's going to regress because his FIP is much higher." Every year so far he has outplayed it.

Well there are always exceptions, but more often than not FIP and xFIP are good predictors of performance. Matt Cain is pretty much the same way, he outperforms his peripheral stats all the time. Other guys like Nolasco continually perform worse than their peripheral stats would indicate.

But most pitchers do actually regress when their ERA is lower than their FIP/xFIP.


And besides, Cahill has improved his strikeout rate dramatically, so his FIP/xFIP is much closer to his ERA this season than last year.

James Shields and Dave Bush have always been great sabermetrically, but never fully lived up to it. Dave Bush in particular.

Cain is exception in the other direction. but thats mainly BABIP related. Cain is just a rarity in that hes a flyball pitcher who just doesnt get beat by the long ball like most every flyball pitcher does. Cain's BABIP always looks lucky, but i think hes just established himself as an elite pitch to contact guy.

i have nothing against Cahill, i was just pointing out that his FIP suggests hes over-performing a bit. however if you look at most pitching currently doing really well, theyre FIP suggests they wont maintain it either.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by crzy:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by TheGoldenState:

Originally posted by AllTimeGreat:

Originally posted by Jigga:
Trevor Cahill is a muh'fu**in Stud!

He just keeps proving his doubters wrong.

doubters gonna doubt

his FIP is 2.87, so not quite as impressive as his ERA leads to believe, but still very good.

this is exactly what i mean. Stat guys always just say "he's not actually as good as his ERA and he's going to regress because his FIP is much higher." Every year so far he has outplayed it.

Well there are always exceptions, but more often than not FIP and xFIP are good predictors of performance. Matt Cain is pretty much the same way, he outperforms his peripheral stats all the time. Other guys like Nolasco continually perform worse than their peripheral stats would indicate.

But most pitchers do actually regress when their ERA is lower than their FIP/xFIP.


And besides, Cahill has improved his strikeout rate dramatically, so his FIP/xFIP is much closer to his ERA this season than last year.

Last I checked Ricky Nolasco was undefeated. You should have come up with a better example than him.

I was referring to his previous seasons.