If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN)   Today's "this headline works for two different sports franchises": "Romo chokes in the clutch"   (scores.espn.go.com) divider line 33
    More: Obvious, Sergio Romo, Dodgers, Giants, Pablo Sandoval, sports franchises, lead in, Yasiel Puig, Buster Posey  
•       •       •

981 clicks; posted to Sports » on 12 May 2014 at 2:35 PM (18 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



33 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-05-12 01:15:45 PM
Yes, the headline works, but the end result is only for baseball... Romo gets the win.
 
2014-05-12 02:40:14 PM
Troll threads, you're inone.jpg

/don't take the bait Di.
 
2014-05-12 02:47:18 PM
read that as "on the clutch" and thought that must have been one hell of an accident...
 
2014-05-12 02:49:09 PM
Is it December already?  Shiat, I need to get my Christmas shopping done.

/forgive me, Cowboys faithful
 
2014-05-12 03:18:07 PM

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: read that as "on the clutch" and thought that must have been one hell of an accident...


No, that'll be when Mike Sam gets creamed later this year
 
2014-05-12 03:23:03 PM
I, for one, am looking forward to the start of the Weeden era in Dallas.

\BWAHAHAHA
 
2014-05-12 03:36:59 PM
As someone with Jean Machi on my fantasy team to scoop the save, I am really getting a kick out of these replies.
 
2014-05-12 03:46:36 PM
So would "Cardinals Defeat Giants"...two sports, four different cities.
 
2014-05-12 03:52:11 PM
And in both cases, anyone with an objective eye knows it's wrong.  Both do quite well at the end of games.
 
2014-05-12 03:57:01 PM
Multiple franchises? Too easy. Let's do multiple historical circumstances.

"Dodgers make poor draft decision"
"Vikings no longer known for sacking"
"Duke sucks"
 
2014-05-12 04:02:21 PM

This Looks Fun: "Dodgers make poor draft decision"
"Vikings no longer known for sacking"
"Duke sucks"



don;t forget when the MLB team in Cleveland or the NFL team in Washington loses:  "_____s lose to Cowboys/Rangers; this is not a repeat from 1865"

or every World Cup, when either France or Poland loses to Germany:  "....this is not repeat from 1939 / 1944"
 
2014-05-12 04:04:52 PM
Pitchers who blow saves shouldn't be eligible to get wins in the same game.
 
2014-05-12 04:11:43 PM

PowerSlacker: Pitchers who blow saves shouldn't be eligible to get wins in the same game.


Agreed. And batters who strikeout in the first inning shouldn't be allowed to hit homeruns later.
 
2014-05-12 04:11:57 PM

PowerSlacker: Pitchers who blow saves shouldn't be eligible to get wins in the same game.


yeah, i noticed that too.  shouldn't that be at best, a no-decision?  how can you get charged with the blown save and get the W?

/i feel a great disturbance in the Fark....as if millions of sabermetricians suddenly cried out in nerdgasm and were suddenly rushing to this thread.  i fear something stupid is about to happen
 
2014-05-12 04:12:50 PM

germ78: As someone with Jean Machi on my fantasy team to scoop the save, I am really getting a kick out of these replies.


Heh, should put him in a starter.

PowerSlacker: Pitchers who blow saves shouldn't be eligible to get wins in the same game.


I agree.  I wish they could give it to Jean Machi for the scoreless 10th.  He'd be 6-0 with an ERA 0.49.

Cy Young anyone?
 
2014-05-12 04:13:13 PM

PowerSlacker: Pitchers who blow saves shouldn't be eligible to get wins in the same game.


Since they're both crap statistics (especially wins), why not just ignore them both?
 
2014-05-12 04:16:21 PM

Khellendros: Since they're both crap statistics (especially wins), why not just ignore them both?



well, his DIPS was pretty good, and his WAR is strong. not a fan of his BABIP, but that WAR - have oyu seen his DICE? - is strong.  his LIPS, PERA, and VORP are stupid good.
 
2014-05-12 04:16:36 PM

This Looks Fun: PowerSlacker: Pitchers who blow saves shouldn't be eligible to get wins in the same game.

Agreed. And batters who strikeout in the first inning shouldn't be allowed to hit homeruns later.


I'm pregnant.  No one is THAT stupid.
 
2014-05-12 04:18:57 PM
Save vs win.

So, he enters the game for a save opportunity, loses the lead (blown save) and is still pitching when his team takes the lead. Seems legit to me.
 
2014-05-12 04:22:16 PM

haemaker: This Looks Fun: PowerSlacker: Pitchers who blow saves shouldn't be eligible to get wins in the same game.

Agreed. And batters who strikeout in the first inning shouldn't be allowed to hit homeruns later.

I'm pregnant.  No one is THAT stupid.


I'm certain that someone somewhere IS that stupid, however as I was using sarcasm, that someone is not me in this case. Not sure what pregnancy has to do with it though.
 
2014-05-12 04:22:50 PM

This Looks Fun: Multiple franchises? Too easy. Let's do multiple historical circumstances.

"Dodgers make poor draft decision"
"Vikings no longer known for sacking"
"Duke sucks"


"Senators get spanked by the young Oilers"
 
2014-05-12 04:23:36 PM

rickythepenguin: Khellendros: Since they're both crap statistics (especially wins), why not just ignore them both?

well, his DIPS was pretty good, and his WAR is strong. not a fan of his BABIP, but that WAR - have oyu seen his DICE? - is strong.  his LIPS, PERA, and VORP are stupid good.


I wasn't advocating digging to the second tier of the sabermetric columns to make a mythical perfect comparison, but there are a lot of currently compiled stats that are absolutely crap, and shouldn't even be maintained or discussed in rational debate.  They are kept for tradition only, and don't do anything except feed ESPN talking heads more to scream about at 3am on a Tuesday late shift.

Saves are a bad metric, but can be serviceable in limited situations. Wins are dumpster stats, about as useful to player evaluation as tomato seed fragments per square parsec is to NASA engineers.
 
2014-05-12 04:29:31 PM

Khellendros: Wins are dumpster stats, about as useful to player evaluation astomato seed fragments per square parsec is to NASA engineers.


ak5.picdn.net

"That is very important to me ", says NASA Scientist I.P. Freely
 
2014-05-12 04:30:32 PM

Khellendros: tomato seed fragments per square parsec is to NASA engineers.


heirloom or cherry?
 
2014-05-12 04:51:30 PM

dletter: "That is very important to me ", says NASA Scientist I.P. Freely


rickythepenguin: heirloom or cherry?


*snrk*
 
2014-05-12 04:55:11 PM

Khellendros: Wins are dumpster stats, about as useful to player evaluation as tomato seed fragments per square parsec is to NASA engineers.


Who says everything has to be used for player evaluation?

All a win tells you is who was pitching when the winning team went ahead for the last time. That's all it was ever meant to tell you.
 
2014-05-12 04:58:52 PM

IAmRight: All a win tells you is who was pitching when the winning team went ahead for the last time. That's all it was ever meant to tell you.


Which is a meaningless thing, and is used in EVERY discussion of how "good" a player is to talk about their greatness, and how much they should be paid during their next contract.  Talking about who was pitching at a specific moment of a game isn't worth being compiled.

Do we compile statistics on the average use of condiments on hotdogs in the stands, or whether the batter spit twice or three times before swinging?  No, because they don't have anything to do with the purpose of collecting statistics in baseball.
 
2014-05-12 05:03:11 PM

Li'l Robbie: So would "Cardinals Defeat Giants"...two sports, four different cities.


..or "Panthers beat Jets"
 
2014-05-12 05:50:31 PM
Nope, not even I care enough to actually get involved in this discussion. Except to make one, small, point:

IAmRight: All a win tells you is who was pitching when the winning team went ahead for the last time.


There are two cases where this is, in fact, not true at all. The first is if the starter goes less than 5 innings; the second is if the 'correct' winning pitcher had a "short, ineffective" appearance AND at least one pitcher came after him.
 
2014-05-12 07:44:55 PM

This Looks Fun: haemaker: This Looks Fun: PowerSlacker: Pitchers who blow saves shouldn't be eligible to get wins in the same game.

Agreed. And batters who strikeout in the first inning shouldn't be allowed to hit homeruns later.

I'm pregnant.  No one is THAT stupid.

I'm certain that someone somewhere IS that stupid, however as I was using sarcasm, that someone is not me in this case. Not sure what pregnancy has to do with it though.


Drew thinks he's funny with his filters.  I was under the impression you were trolling by comparing individual event batting statistics to full game rating pitching statistics.  It is widely believed that a pitcher should not earn a win for placing his team in a worse position than when he entered the game, but the scorekeeping rules are written that way and continued to be followed that way.
 
2014-05-12 11:04:11 PM

haemaker: I was under the impression you were trolling by comparing individual event batting statistics to full game rating pitching statistics.  It is widely believed that a pitcher should not earn a win for placing his team in a worse position than when he entered the game, but the scorekeeping rules are written that way and continued to be followed that way.


Naw, But save isn't a full game stat and win is (as previously stated) a garbage stat. I mean, it's pretty clear to me by the rules: he blew the save and stayed in for the win. It's one of many great arguments against wins as a KPI. But mostly just having fun.
 
2014-05-13 09:15:25 AM

IAmRight: Khellendros: Wins are dumpster stats, about as useful to player evaluation as tomato seed fragments per square parsec is to NASA engineers.

Who says everything has to be used for player evaluation?

All a win tells you is who was pitching when the winning team went ahead for the last time. That's all it was ever meant to tell you.


All true, but, you know there are people who swoon over the "20 game winner" and look down on a pitcher who has a below .500 win %.   Of course, they are not very good evaluators of talent then, but, that is the casual fan thing.
 
2014-05-13 01:20:20 PM

dletter: All true, but, you know there are people who swoon over the "20 game winner" and look down on a pitcher who has a below .500 win %.   Of course, they are not very good evaluators of talent then, but, that is the casual fan thing.


Of course, but that's not really a problem with the stat, that's a problem with people reading too much into it.

Kinda like how the problem with some players is that the media overhypes them, something which isn't always the player's fault. No need to hate the player for it.
 
Displayed 33 of 33 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report