The truth about Pat Burrell

Postby Vote for Kalas » Mon Jul 30, 2007 7:00 am

MoBettle wrote:
Vote for Kalas wrote:
MoBettle wrote:I think if he hit .280 the way he did in 05 the people who get on him would calm down.


He did that in 2002 as well...it did not stop anyone unfortunately.


Wait what? He was christened the savior in 02.


What I meant was he had already done what you stated 3 years before 2005 and fans had already forgotten it...thus doing it again in 2005 or this year would not change the dynamic some have against Burrell...some just like to have or need a scapegoat IMO.
In the little town of Candor, in the last year of my youth, I learned the final lesson of the levels to the truth. -- Harry Chapin

R.I.P. Dave
User avatar
Vote for Kalas
There's Our Old Friend
There's Our Old Friend
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 6:02 pm

Postby MoBettle » Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:36 am

Vote for Kalas wrote:
MoBettle wrote:
Vote for Kalas wrote:
MoBettle wrote:I think if he hit .280 the way he did in 05 the people who get on him would calm down.


He did that in 2002 as well...it did not stop anyone unfortunately.


Wait what? He was christened the savior in 02.


What I meant was he had already done what you stated 3 years before 2005 and fans had already forgotten it...thus doing it again in 2005 or this year would not change the dynamic some have against Burrell...some just like to have or need a scapegoat IMO.


I don't see what's so hard to understand about this:

In the years Burrell hits .280, the fans don't get on him.

In the years Burrell does not hit .280, the fans do get on him. It does not carry over anything to the next year, but that year he is safe.

He is not hitting .280 this year.

Therefore the fans are getting on him this year.
User avatar
MoBettle
Space Cadet
Space Cadet
 
Posts: 13412
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 12:45 am

Postby drsmooth » Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:50 am

milton bernard thompson wrote:the thing that strikes me as especially funny about the hate for walks from the "i watch the games" crowd is that my personal game-watching-gut almost feels like it's impossible to score non-HR runs in an inning without walks. i mean, how many times do you see teams string together 3 consecutive singles in an inning to get 1 run, and how difficult is it to go about doing things that way? why would these people think it's easier to score like this instead of accepting men on base that you didn't have to earn by risking a 70% chance of an out on a ball in play? sometimes i think these people are on drugs or are watching a different sport than me or something.


You may want to help them define their terms. It may be that they are starting from the assumption that, while getting on base is good however you do it, getting a hit is "better" in every situation. That's kinda dumb, but you can help them see why that thinking can cause them problems.

Since outs are the fundamental currency of baseball offense, avoiding outs - by getting hits, by walking, by sticking your gourd over the plate & having it get hit without the umpire thinking you were trying to do that - is good. Making outs is bad. That leads to a veritable cascade of understandingl;

a) it makes no sense to swing at non-strikezone pitches to get on;
b) because getting hits is hard even when swiping at in-zone pitches, being conservative in swinging at 'sure' strikes is the more rewarding game-in, game-out strategy;
c) there are about 10 active MLers who can hit for eyepopping combinations of average & power, & most other players - even 'stars' - compromise between them;

etc

Once that's established, they can try to make the case that a bases-empty single is better than a walk if they like.
Yes, but in a double utley you can put your utley on top they other guy's utley, and you're the winner. (Swish)
User avatar
drsmooth
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 46923
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:24 pm
Location: Low station

Postby FTN » Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:58 am

No stats to back this up, but the last month or so, fans haven't been getting on him at all. He's getting great ovations when his caddy has come into the game in the late innings.
User avatar
FTN
list sheriff
 
Posts: 47429
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:42 pm
Location: BE PEACE

Postby Houshphandzadeh » Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:02 am

I think that's correct, FTN. At the game yesterday, he was mildly applauded after his strikeout and after his walk with men on 2nd and 3rd.
User avatar
Houshphandzadeh
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 62856
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:15 pm
Location: nascar victory

Postby Trent Steele » Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:03 am

drsmooth wrote:
milton bernard thompson wrote:the thing that strikes me as especially funny about the hate for walks from the "i watch the games" crowd is that my personal game-watching-gut almost feels like it's impossible to score non-HR runs in an inning without walks. i mean, how many times do you see teams string together 3 consecutive singles in an inning to get 1 run, and how difficult is it to go about doing things that way? why would these people think it's easier to score like this instead of accepting men on base that you didn't have to earn by risking a 70% chance of an out on a ball in play? sometimes i think these people are on drugs or are watching a different sport than me or something.


You may want to help them define their terms. It may be that they are starting from the assumption that, while getting on base is good however you do it, getting a hit is "better" in every situation. That's kinda dumb, but you can help them see why that thinking can cause them problems.

Since outs are the fundamental currency of baseball offense, avoiding outs - by getting hits, by walking, by sticking your gourd over the plate & having it get hit without the umpire thinking you were trying to do that - is good. Making outs is bad. That leads to a veritable cascade of understandingl;

a) it makes no sense to swing at non-strikezone pitches to get on;
b) because getting hits is hard even when swiping at in-zone pitches, being conservative in swinging at 'sure' strikes is the more rewarding game-in, game-out strategy;
c) there are about 10 active MLers who can hit for eyepopping combinations of average & power, & most other players - even 'stars' - compromise between them;

etc

Once that's established, they can try to make the case that a bases-empty single is better than a walk if they like.


The answer is that people are generally stupid.

That said, IIRC a single has been calculates as roughly 35% more valuable than a walk (of course not when no one is on base (but than even moreso with men on) and all your other points are valid as well).
I know what you're asking yourself and the answer is yes. I have a nick name for my penis. Its called the Octagon, but I also nick named my testes - my left one is James Westfall and my right one is Doctor Kenneth Noisewater.
User avatar
Trent Steele
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 40323
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 3:02 pm
Location: flapjacks

Postby philliesr98 » Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:04 am

Fans didn't get on Burrell at all when I was there yesterday, I actually heard some cheers at the beginning of the game.... Had to make sure I was in the right place....
User avatar
philliesr98
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 9224
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:11 pm
Location: an island somewhere

Postby Disco Stu » Mon Jul 30, 2007 10:49 am

FTN wrote:No stats to back this up, but the last month or so, fans haven't been getting on him at all. He's getting great ovations when his caddy has come into the game in the late innings.


Here's the thing, they don't have much of a chance to. He is getting on base at like a .500 clip in July. I have heard some boos when he has made outs with men on base. It is tough to boo a guy when he does well. Even in Philadelphia. But let's see when he goes 1 for 16 what people will say.
Check The Good Phight, you might learn something.
User avatar
Disco Stu
Dropped Anchor
Dropped Anchor
 
Posts: 9600
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:37 pm
Location: Land of the banned

Postby Vote for Kalas » Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:26 am

MoBettle wrote:
Vote for Kalas wrote:
MoBettle wrote:
Vote for Kalas wrote:
MoBettle wrote:I think if he hit .280 the way he did in 05 the people who get on him would calm down.


He did that in 2002 as well...it did not stop anyone unfortunately.


Wait what? He was christened the savior in 02.


What I meant was he had already done what you stated 3 years before 2005 and fans had already forgotten it...thus doing it again in 2005 or this year would not change the dynamic some have against Burrell...some just like to have or need a scapegoat IMO.


I don't see what's so hard to understand about this:

In the years Burrell hits .280, the fans don't get on him.

In the years Burrell does not hit .280, the fans do get on him. It does not carry over anything to the next year, but that year he is safe.

He is not hitting .280 this year.

Therefore the fans are getting on him this year.


Why are you getting so bent out of shape? lol...

I understand your point, but disagree with your statement, simple as that and explained why. Burrell was booed & heckled just this year in April when he was hitting over .300. I went the Pirates game the other night. Right after Burrell hit his 2-run HR, the guy behind me called him a loser who only hits well when the team is already ahead.

The view on Burrell by some will NEVER change regardless of what he does IMO. They need or want a scapegoat to blame.
In the little town of Candor, in the last year of my youth, I learned the final lesson of the levels to the truth. -- Harry Chapin

R.I.P. Dave
User avatar
Vote for Kalas
There's Our Old Friend
There's Our Old Friend
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 6:02 pm

Postby MoBettle » Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:15 pm

How am I getting bent out of shape?

I was at several games in April, and I remember it not being nearly as loud as it was in August/September last year. A couple idiots will boo no matter what, but rest of the crowd had quieted down.
User avatar
MoBettle
Space Cadet
Space Cadet
 
Posts: 13412
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 12:45 am

Postby 21McBride » Wed Aug 01, 2007 8:40 am

Michelle Bonner just called Burrell a "gamer".
"Chase Utley You are the Man"

-Harry Kalas
User avatar
21McBride
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 8388
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 9:25 pm

Postby Grotewold » Wed Aug 01, 2007 8:46 am

He looked like an infirmed goat stumbling out of the box on that HR
User avatar
Grotewold
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 43806
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 9:40 am

Postby milton bernard thompson » Wed Aug 01, 2007 8:54 am

yes, affirmative
milton bernard thompson
There's Our Old Friend
There's Our Old Friend
 
Posts: 1036
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 2:14 pm

Postby MarkdlV » Wed Aug 01, 2007 9:17 am

Finished July with a .567 OBP and 1.305 OPS. Quite nice.
User avatar
MarkdlV
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 9:43 am
Location: Chicago

Postby The Red Tornado » Wed Aug 01, 2007 9:21 am

MarkdlV wrote:Finished July with a .567 OBP and 1.305 OPS. Quite nice.


and will probably get no player of the month consideration.
The Red Tornado
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 12717
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 7:21 am

Postby Woody » Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:24 am

My Operations Mgmt. professor made a joke about Pat Burrell last night. Made me want to take of my propellor cap and challenge him to a D&D match.

He was talking about statistics and said something like, "Just because Pat Burrell hasn't gotten a hit in a month, doesn't mean he's going to get one in his next at-bat". Everyone had a nice chuckle. I wonder if he posts on philaphans.
you sure do seem to have a lot of time on your hands to be on this forum? Do you have a job? Are you a shut-in?
User avatar
Woody
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 51201
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:56 pm
Location: captain of the varsity slut team

Postby philliesr98 » Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:33 am

1.300 OPS in the last month mofo professor....
User avatar
philliesr98
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 9224
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:11 pm
Location: an island somewhere

Postby dajafi » Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:56 am

Woody wrote:My Operations Mgmt. professor made a joke about Pat Burrell last night. Made me want to take of my propellor cap and challenge him to a D&D match.

He was talking about statistics and said something like, "Just because Pat Burrell hasn't gotten a hit in a month, doesn't mean he's going to get one in his next at-bat". Everyone had a nice chuckle. I wonder if he posts on philaphans.


He shouldn't be allowed to corrupt young minds with that garbage. Pat just had the best month of his career.
User avatar
dajafi
Moderator / BSG MVP
Moderator / BSG MVP
 
Posts: 24567
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:03 pm
Location: Brooklyn

Postby Houshphandzadeh » Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:58 am

That sounds like a great opportunity to poop directly on a professor's eyeball.
User avatar
Houshphandzadeh
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 62856
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:15 pm
Location: nascar victory

Postby Woody » Wed Aug 01, 2007 11:03 am

I wrote as a self-imposed extra credit answer at the end of my mid-term: "p.s. Pat Burrell is batting .400+ the past month"
you sure do seem to have a lot of time on your hands to be on this forum? Do you have a job? Are you a shut-in?
User avatar
Woody
BSG MVP
BSG MVP
 
Posts: 51201
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:56 pm
Location: captain of the varsity slut team

PreviousNext

Return to Back She Goes!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bob Loblaw, Carbon, etched Chaos, Google Adsense [Bot], WilliamC, Woody and 7 guests