Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 1:11 pm Post subject: Azphan's plan to 3.6 dominancy
This Bud's for you jmmcray, Shoewiz, and others. he won't do it so's I will. Just don't shoot the executioner!
I also thought it quite appropriate for this topic to be in this thread, no?
<all comments underneath are the sole property of azphan and may not be reproduced without azphan's written and expressed consent.>
3.6 is more than a number, it represents a model for management to follow to provide consistant, compliant, dominant pitching to the team. In order for 3.6 to be implemented, a war room must be convened to determine varied factors. These factors include but are not limited to, availability, contract status and costs, and compliancy to the program.
After candidates are identified, the remaining will go through a final evaluation to weed out the undesirables not fully complying with the three main rules as set forth by the war room. Here is where sabermetrics comes into play. The costs, both upfront and long term are compared to the metrics of said candidate in comparison to their forecasted ERA, runs allowed, opponents BA, and WHIP measures in comparison to Chase Field's batter's heaven.
Once the final field of candidates is identified, measures to secure these players are to take place. <Money is of no object! there are always more than one way to skin a cat!>
This process is to be an annual event. It will restore the Diamondbacks to NL West pitching glory!
Personally, I think this process is no more than a clone of the "moneyball" principles. It identifies inexpensive players who fit the mold of the "undervalued" player. Say, isn't Byrnes a "moneyball" desciple?
For what it's worth folks, jmmcray has been asking for it over here, so here it is. Have fun!
Also, if I can remember things I left out, I will surely update this post.
_________________
Nothing like an over-priced cold one, or several, to complement your gametime experience!
I'd feel a lot better if it were implemented in a peace room, but I'm just a dumb liberal.
Let the party begin!
I do have many questions I'd like to direct to the architect of 3.6, but unfortunately, many are left to figure it out for themselves. I guess that does indeed insue a "war room", no?
_________________
Nothing like an over-priced cold one, or several, to complement your gametime experience!
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 3052
Location: In front of my computer
Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 1:26 pm Post subject:
Quote:
In order for 3.6 to be implemented, a war room must be convened to determine varied factors. These factors include but are not limited to, availability, contract status and costs, and compliancy to the program.
They already do this, and in a much more sophisticated manner than is outlined here.
Quote:
After candidates are identified, the remaining will go through a final evaluation to weed out the undesirables not fully complying with the three main rules as set forth by the war room
What are the 3 main rules again? Was that "consistant, compliant, dominant "? What does that even mean?
Quote:
The costs, both upfront and long term are compared to the metrics of said candidate in comparison to their forecasted ERA, runs allowed, opponents BA, and WHIP measures in comparison to Chase Field's batter's heaven.
Phan has never used the word "forecasted"....ever. Nothing has ever been outlined in his "plans" about how to go about forecasting. And I can tell you with 100% certainty, opponents BA and WHIP are not the measures that will allow anyone to forecast FUTURE ERA with any degree of accuracy.
Reference here to park factors seems to be alluded to, and I can assure you that the people in Josh Byrnes "war room" are well versed in using park factors and all advanced metrics to make forecasts.
Quote:
Once the final field of candidates is identified, measures to secure these players are to take place. <Money is of no object! there are always more than one way to skin a cat!>
Yes, we are familiar with THAT particular management philosophy. But I can give you 300 million reasons why that particular philosophy does not work in the long term.
There is nothing here. What it all boils down to is identify the best pitchers in the league and then spend as much as it takes to get them, (money is no object). Well, thanks to the largesse of the previous managing partner, the money isn't there.
I didn't overlook the "there are more ways to skin a cat" portion either...
you can only skin that cat so many times before you get down to nothing but bone and guts.
Don't hang the executioner, Shoe. Mcray asked for it over here, I obliged. Granted, Mcray was just leaving a spool of rope over here for azphan to form a noose with, but he didn't bite.
I did take a serious look at his plan and came to the conclusion it was no more than a clone of moneyball principles, principles which lie heavy on sabermetrics. I further surmised that in order to aquire the first aquisition to bolster the pitching staff, it would take an initial investment of either money (spending on what looks to be an over-inflated FA market), or trading off some, yes I said some, of our very valuable prospects. Both options are absolutely no option at all for this team now and at this time.
I debated with jmmcray about this subject in depth on the other forum, we both came to the conclusion that Byrnes will in no way sacrifice the future for a one time shot at the promised land. I agree with that stance. take our lumps for another few years while the youngsters get valuable service time, then fill the blanks for a title run.
I'll discuss this shit all day long in a civil and educated manner. But please don't pile me in the same heap as azphan. I am not azphan, never was, never will be, just a humble messenger of sordid news.
_________________
Nothing like an over-priced cold one, or several, to complement your gametime experience!
Why are you being so defensive? I didn't attack you. I rebutted the content of the post, plain and simple.
Re-read for content, Shoe. You came off a little gruff.
Don't be so defensive, it'll ruin your sex life.
You can attack the content, but in this case you cannot attack the paraphraser, which is me. Maybe you missed my disclaimer?
_________________
Nothing like an over-priced cold one, or several, to complement your gametime experience!
Plus, this thread really should be moved to... uh... do we have a "Humor" forum? [/quote]
Actually, it is quite appropriate being placed in the fantasy forum, just ask Shoe.
_________________
Nothing like an over-priced cold one, or several, to complement your gametime experience!
Can you please tell me which specific phrase or words come off as an attack on YOU?
It's not there.....YOU are the one that needs to re-read. I even referred to Phan in the third person.
I didn't in anyway shoot the messenger, it's just not there. Why are you manufacturing a fight?
Now the message, that I did shoot....or, more to the point....REBUT
Shoe, I'm not here to fight with you, I can do that over there---------->
Dude, I thought we were cool with each other. I have no intention to pick any type of altercation with you or anybody else. The entire tone of your original response seemed a little coarse and definately directed at me, no doubt. Had you mixed a little humor into your reply, the tone would have clearly been more in jest, EXACTLY AS THE TITLE SUGGESTS!
I'll give you the benefit of doubt today. Maybe work sucks today, maybe you have a rageing headache, who knows? All I know is that I did not attack you, had no intention to, nor ever want to.
And to think I was persuaded to come over here so I wouldn't have to put up with such shit like on the other forum. What a crock of shit! One forum is just like another.
Well anyways, Shoe, let's agree to drop the subject before we say something to each other that we will regret later. I respect you as a fellow baseball fan, and as a friend I've never met. Hopefully you'll respect me for the same.
Peace my brother! Fighting is a waste of everybody's time and energies!
_________________
Nothing like an over-priced cold one, or several, to complement your gametime experience!
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1554
Location: clawing my eyes out, praying for sleep. booyah.
Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 2:52 pm Post subject:
cool, we're really doing this? if nothing else, it provides an evidence that cannot be deleted (except by serial killer...) that his plan is devoid of any real details. and hopefully it will help other readers and lurkers finally see a real debate about his plan.
3.6, to me, seems like an urealistic goal, first of all. you don't need your entire staff to have that low of an era to make it to the ws and win. and the lower these guys era get, the harder it will be to retain them. i think they need to follow the yankees dynasty approach, along with a bit of the diamondbacks approach:
nyy: solid players up the middle, with avg to above avg offense from defensive positions. young, cheap, above avg players.
az: then get two aces to lead your rotation.
but 3.6 seems to want to have the best possible #1, the best possible #2, so on, so forth, and then miguel batista as #5.
that would be a good rotation, don't get me wrong. but i'd rather have webb, co-ace, livan, edgar, enrique. by the time livan is gone, perhaps one of the flying gonzalez brothers is ready to be a #3? long shot, but maybe. at least it's something worth seeing.
i also don't understand why you'd settle for the best #2 pitcher, instead of getting another #1 pitcher. if we had a whole rotation of aces, it goes against 3.6, but it would definitely rock.
fwiw, i agree with you, BC, about how 3.6 would be heavily dependent on stats. i don't understand why he's so anti-saber considering this fact. the best way to manage the pitching staff is to use stats to make a cold decision, no heartbreak, no hand wringing. but i think that's already how byrnes is doing it. and it's why the team is making the smart move and letting batista go.
i guess to me, 3.6 isn't a plan. it's a lofty goal. and until he can shed some light on HOW the team gets there, it's just a lofty goal. as shoe mentioned -- this team ALREADY employs the war room, ALREADY looks to different areas for pitching help, and ALREADY does basically everything this guy has asked the team to do.
the fact is, pitching is hard to come by. it isn't as if there's a bunch of aces out there unsigned, just waiting to win a cy young if only the dbacks would take a flier on them. the team is already signing high risk, high reward people. the team is already looking to trade for another dominant starter.
but this guy wants to attack the FO, so he isn't happy, even though they're basically doing what he's asked. i'm very, very interested though, to see if he's willing to defend his plan and let everyone in on a few details for once.
_________________
Hank, you're dead to me.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 3052
Location: In front of my computer
Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 3:02 pm Post subject:
Quote:
Don't hang the executioner, Shoe.
I didn't. What SPECIFIC words or phrases did I use that led you to make that interpretation?
Quote:
don't pile me in the same heap as azphan
I didn't. What SPECIFIC words or phrases did I use that led you to make that interpretation?
Quote:
The entire tone of your original response seemed a little coarse and definately directed at me
What the heck is "course"......and what specifically was directed at "YOU"
I replied to the post....I quoted the CONTENT of the post. I did not direct even one part of my post at you personally.
Again.....please cut and paste what specific words or phrases you interpret as being an attack on you.
What you are doing is not cool man. I made no attack on you at all....I simply responded to the concepts of 3.6, and rebutted them. You then accuse me in strong tones of attacking you......
It's there for all to see. You seriously need to reevaluate here.
[quote="McCray"]cool, we're really doing this? if nothing else, it provides an evidence that cannot be deleted (except by serial killer...) that his plan is devoid of any real details. and hopefully it will help other readers and lurkers finally see a real debate about his plan.[quote]
I hear that. I believe he is just waiting for people like myself to add upon it. Did you notice the silence when the mere mention of sabermetrics/3.6 plan was laid out on the table?
By me simply bringing it over here, as you've asked him to do, he may indeed venture over here to defend what he can of it.
I don't doubt that Byrnes is exercising all knowledgable options at his disposal. No smart GM wouldn't. BUT, I wouldn't count on anything major happening this offseason. It's just simply not the right time and place for this team.
_________________
Nothing like an over-priced cold one, or several, to complement your gametime experience!
I didn't. What SPECIFIC words or phrases did I use that led you to make that interpretation?
Quote:
don't pile me in the same heap as azphan
I didn't. What SPECIFIC words or phrases did I use that led you to make that interpretation?
Quote:
The entire tone of your original response seemed a little coarse and definately directed at me
What the heck is "course"......and what specifically was directed at "YOU"
I replied to the post....I quoted the CONTENT of the post. I did not direct even one part of my post at you personally.
Again.....please cut and paste what specific words or phrases you interpret as being an attack on you.
What you are doing is not cool man. I made no attack on you at all....I simply responded to the concepts of 3.6, and rebutted them. You then accuse me in strong tones of attacking you......
It's there for all to see. You seriously need to reevaluate here.
You're right, Shoe, it is here for all to see.......
Coarse(adjective): Abrasive, rough.
Your entire tone throughout this thread is coarse.
I'm sorry my friend, but this dog don't hunt. I'm done with this! Save your further replies on this matter to yourself. I'm sorry you're having such a shitty day, seriously.
Ironic that Mcray can have civil dialogue about the subject matter........
_________________
Nothing like an over-priced cold one, or several, to complement your gametime experience!
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 2274
Location: Gold Canyon
Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 3:44 pm Post subject:
Beer connoiseur wrote:
The entire tone of your original response seemed a little coarse and definately directed at me, no doubt.
I don't see it.
But then about once a month my wife gets weepy and tells me I'm insensitive, so maybe I'm just oblivious. I think you're imagining anger that isn't there, BC.
No imagination needed here, nor mind-bending drugs.
I sure Shoe is all y'all's buddy over here, so to step up in his defense is expected and admirable. But you need to get this straight, I do not dislike Shoe, nor have I any intents of pissing him or anyone here off. Shoe has had a history of sometimes sounding one way, but fully intending the opposite. He sounded brash and coarse in responses to me. It really is no biggie. Like I said, It's a done deal, no sense in dragging it out further. It would be moot and create hostilities that don't need to exist on this forum.
I'd like to offer Shoe a formal apology if he mistook my intentions. I'd graciously accept his. Definately no hard feelings here at all.
The original initiative of this thread was all Mcray's idea. He made his motives very clear in a reply to me. So intead of beating this dead horse, let's beat on the 3.6 idea. You are all saber's, I know you can exploit weaknesses. I, on the other hand, have revealed strengths in such a plan, only if Byrnes is the saber-student he is acclaimed to be.
_________________
Nothing like an over-priced cold one, or several, to complement your gametime experience!
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 3052
Location: In front of my computer
Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 4:08 pm Post subject:
If my tone offends, than I'm sorry, but this is how I always "sound"
You posted the 3.6 stuff, on behalf of Azphan, as you stated, and I rebutted THE CONTENT.
You accused me of attacking you, and I did no such thing. I asked you several times to show me which words I posted that you interpret to be an attack on you, but all you do is make vague references to my "tone", which is the same as it always is.
The only thing I can think of is that you misinterpret me attacking the idea of a 3.6 plan as attacking you personally. I can't speculate as to why YOU would make such a connection. But just for clarification's sake.......an attack on the 3.6 plan should not be interpreted as an attack on you personally, whether or not you were the original author of said plan.
I hope that clears things up. Have a nice Day. [/b]
troublemaker...
i reread shoe's response and saw nothing directed at any beer drinkers. you gotta realize you don't have to get defensive over here like you did 90% of the time over there, cuz everyone here is knowledgable, kind, and truly interested in carrying on legit talk.
so...have a cold one, on me, of course, (sam adams light) and chill, my brother. you can relax here & have a good conversation. but don't bring up that jerkwadphan over here again.
Last edited by 1golfer1 on Mon Oct 30, 2006 4:17 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1554
Location: clawing my eyes out, praying for sleep. booyah.
Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 4:18 pm Post subject:
one little thing i want to clarify: i am not a saber. i'm learning saber approaches, but i'm not yet on the same level as shoewizard, dylan, levski, or any of the other resident geniuses. and i don't think i'll ever be 100% saber. i grew up with a scouting POV, and i'll always retain some of that. so best case scenario, i end up around a 50-50 mix.
i guess i ought to list my questions for discussion on 3.6. here goes:
1. what stats in particular will be used to ID a pitcher before the rest of the market IDs that same pitcher as a great (and therefore costly) one?
2. how does the idea plan to retain talent once they show dominance?
3. why does the plan choose to focus on roles instead of finding the five best starters and the seven best relievers?
4. why has the plan never been attempted if it's so certain to work?
5. this is a subset of 1. how does the plan give an edge to IDing, acquiring, and retaining good pitchers? is it a statistical edge, like the moneyball/obp idea? if so, what's the stat? is it a scouting edge? looking for pitchers who are unsuccessful now, but with minor changes could add 5mph or good movement to their pitches? if so, what is the adjustment? that will tell us what to look for in a target pitcher.
there are more, but if he's going to reply, those are my top 5.
_________________
Hank, you're dead to me.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1554
Location: clawing my eyes out, praying for sleep. booyah.
Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 4:26 pm Post subject:
1golfer1 wrote:
you gotta realize you don't have to get defensive over here like you did 90% of the time over there, cuz everyone here is knowledgable, kind, and truly interested in carrying on legit talk.
well said, golfer. everybody here is incredibly kind and generous and full of great baseball knowledge. they are all, also, willing to teach what they know to the rest of us. it's a great group. i've learned a lot.
i'd bet he-who-shall-not-be-named doesn't show, doesn't post, and this thread dies and drifts to the bottom. but it'll still be here, ready, in case he ever decides to actually debate his idea. i guess i'm saying, i'm glad BC made the thread, but once he-who-shall-not-be-named doesn't show, we can all go back to not mentioning him or his plan for a while on this board. i don't like giving him PR when he won't even think through his own ideas, but this was somewhat necessary. and i'm grateful to BC for joining our great board, adding to the debate, and also to dbbp for giving us the bandwidth to at least issue this challenge.
it's all his move now.
_________________
Hank, you're dead to me.
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
post.
Let the party begin!
[/b]