|
|
Post by codyd70 on Apr 30, 2017 22:34:49 GMT -8
If you believe that Mulholland should be getting "more opportunities" than the 38 innings he's already logged this year - but, you know, that's just "spouting stats". Whatever, dude. You admitted that "To me... again it's me... there is not one reliever that gives me the feeling of "lights out"" and I was just pointing out that, yes, it is really JUST YOU, because all 300 other coaches in the NCAA would LOVE to have the same relief pitcher problem that Pat Casey has. SaveSaveI think you got overly excited. The entire post you quoted was about Max. To top it off where did I say OSU did not have a good situation? Neither guy is a lights out closer. Jake has done far better than anyone expected. His stats are great. But, as you may have seen in the last three series he is very "hittable"... and AGAIN... to me neither guy gives me the confidence as others we've had with worse "stats". Very hittable?  ? His BA against is .180. The next closest pac 12 pitcher is .213 |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Apr 30, 2017 22:47:43 GMT -8
I think you got overly excited. The entire post you quoted was about Max. To top it off where did I say OSU did not have a good situation? Neither guy is a lights out closer. Jake has done far better than anyone expected. His stats are great. But, as you may have seen in the last three series he is very "hittable"... and AGAIN... to me neither guy gives me the confidence as others we've had with worse "stats". Very hittable? ? His BA against is .180. The next closest pac 12 pitcher is .213 "Last three series"... What has he done last 3 series? .280 / 7.1 IP 4 ER / 4.91 It's a team game... Fehmel is as much the issue as some other pitchers, the D at times, and the offense. |
|
|
|
Post by codyd70 on May 1, 2017 0:41:48 GMT -8
Very hittable? ? His BA against is .180. The next closest pac 12 pitcher is .213 "Last three series"... What has he done last 3 series? .280 / 7.1 IP 4 ER / 4.91 It's a team game... Fehmel is as much the issue as some other pitchers, the D at times, and the offense. Oh i see. The stats only count when he has a less than stellar outing. Those other 31 innings the other team just wasnt trying so they must not count??? Fyi. The last 3 series there has only been 1 time out of 5 appearances that the opponant got more than 1 hit per inning. Outside of 1 appearance against USC. Opponant BA was .235 the last 3 series. Which is better than all but 8 pac 12 pitchers outside of OSU. But you go ahead and hold on to your 1 single outlier out of 19 appearances this season to prove he is "very" hitable. |
|
|
|
Post by thewizard on May 1, 2017 6:14:18 GMT -8
Let us go back to in the Time Machine. Can some one match the ERA with these Beavers without googling? The Year is 2005:
1. 2.77 ERA, 6-4, 14 Saves
2. 2.13 ERA, 9-2
3. 4.31 ERA, 11-1
4. 2.09 ERA, 12-1, 1 Save
|
|
|
|
Post by codyd70 on May 1, 2017 6:32:06 GMT -8
Let us go back to in the Time Machine. Can some one match the ERA with these Beavers without googling? The Year is 2005: 1. 2.77 ERA, 6-4, 14 Saves 2. 2.13 ERA, 9-2 3. 4.31 ERA, 11-1 4. 2.09 ERA, 12-1, 1 Save Gundy Jonah Kunz Buck |
|
|
|
Post by OSUprof on May 1, 2017 6:55:28 GMT -8
I guess I'm not the only one as several others responded to your post in a similar manner. You're always right. I wonder if The Glove knows that this site has become "Baseba1111"s House"? Actually you again twist actual facts. Responded? Yep. Like you? Not close. As my first post stated... "to me". Didn't say I was right or ask to be agreed with. Dude... you're the ONLY one who prances in here occasionally and thinks he is the absolute bottom line. You act like this site is beneath you and owes you some reverence. You tried that act at work. Did I hurt your feelings? I'm sorry, I missed you too. I'd post here more often but as you know, I'm way too busy at work these days now with the administrative changes in my position and my election to a national leadership position. |
|
|
|
Post by codyd70 on May 1, 2017 7:32:59 GMT -8
David Berg had a .198 BA against in 2013 the year he won Pac 12 pitcher of the year, was named NCBWA stopper of the year and the bruins won the national title. Guess he must have been very very hittable since his BA against was higher than Jake's
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on May 1, 2017 8:28:58 GMT -8
David Berg had a .198 BA against in 2013 the year he won Pac 12 pitcher of the year, was named NCBWA stopper of the year and the bruins won the national title. Guess he must have been very very hittable since his BA against was higher than Jake's Really... you're going to compare Berg to Jake. Comparing guys who have been there done that over a career to a player 38/19.1 innings into his career is a little ridiculous. There are some former SI cover boys who'd love you. You should have stopped when you thought you were ahead. I get you "live" off your stats. But, stats do not come close to telling the whole picture. I get you love Jake's work... as IO said he has far exceeded expectations. However, the outlier was Jake's start to his career. As mentioned before, he'll trend back to the norm, as his stats have in Pac12 play. It's not a slam against him it's the way it is. But, back to the thread... Fehmel has struggled, but because he is not a strike out guy (13 walks/4 HBP vs 22 K's in 57 IP) free passes and E's are a much bigger factor in his decisions. Although not bad for a guy good enough to beat out all the heralded Frosh and other returners even though he was playing 3B until last Fall. |
|
|
|
Post by mbabeav on May 1, 2017 8:58:28 GMT -8
David Berg had a .198 BA against in 2013 the year he won Pac 12 pitcher of the year, was named NCBWA stopper of the year and the bruins won the national title. Guess he must have been very very hittable since his BA against was higher than Jake's Really... you're going to compare Berg to Jake. Comparing guys who have been there done that over a career to a player 38/19.1 innings into his career is a little ridiculous. There are some former SI cover boys who'd love you. You should have stopped when you thought you were ahead. I get you "live" off your stats. But, stats do not come close to telling the whole picture. I get you love Jake's work... as IO said he has far exceeded expectations. However, the outlier was Jake's start to his career. As mentioned before, he'll trend back to the norm, as his stats have in Pac12 play. It's not a slam against him it's the way it is. But, back to the thread... Fehmel has struggled, but because he is not a strike out guy (13 walks/4 HBP vs 22 K's in 57 IP) free passes and E's are a much bigger factor in his decisions. Although not bad for a guy good enough to beat out all the heralded Frosh and other returners even though he was playing 3B until last Fall. |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on May 1, 2017 9:02:20 GMT -8
Really... you're going to compare Berg to Jake. Comparing guys who have been there done that over a career to a player 38/19.1 innings into his career is a little ridiculous. There are some former SI cover boys who'd love you. You should have stopped when you thought you were ahead. I get you "live" off your stats. But, stats do not come close to telling the whole picture. I get you love Jake's work... as IO said he has far exceeded expectations. However, the outlier was Jake's start to his career. As mentioned before, he'll trend back to the norm, as his stats have in Pac12 play. It's not a slam against him it's the way it is. But, back to the thread... Fehmel has struggled, but because he is not a strike out guy (13 walks/4 HBP vs 22 K's in 57 IP) free passes and E's are a much bigger factor in his decisions. Although not bad for a guy good enough to beat out all the heralded Frosh and other returners even though he was playing 3B until last Fall. You need to drop talking about Fehmel, your behind the barn comment was way over the top, and you can't mansplain yourself out of it. "behind the barn" You may want to reread who posts what??? LMAO |
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on May 1, 2017 9:18:57 GMT -8
I guess I'm not the only one as several others responded to your post in a similar manner. You're always right. I wonder if The Glove knows that this site has become "Baseba1111"s House"? Actually you again twist actual facts. Responded? Yep. Like you? Not close. As my first post stated... "to me". Didn't say I was right or ask to be agreed with. Dude... you're the ONLY one who prances in here occasionally and thinks he is the absolute bottom line. You act like this site is beneath you and owes you some reverence. You tried that act at work. THIS has to be the most tone deaf post you've ever made on here. OSUprof is the guy who thinks he's the absolute bottom line? Baseba1111, even when you're dead wrong and facing a pile of facts in front of you that are contrary to your argument, your response is to ALWAYS double down. Admit you're wrong ONCE, and people might not have such a low opinion of you. |
|
|
|
Post by mbabeav on May 1, 2017 9:35:19 GMT -8
You need to drop talking about Fehmel, your behind the barn comment was way over the top, and you can't mansplain yourself out of it. "behind the barn" You may want to reread who posts what??? LMAO I am sincerely sorry, sigh, it was not you and I sincerely apologize - we can keep arguing statistics, Beavaristotle is the one that made that horrid comment. |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on May 1, 2017 9:59:01 GMT -8
"behind the barn" You may want to reread who posts what??? LMAO I am sincerely sorry, sigh, it was not you and I sincerely apologize - we can keep arguing statistics, Beavaristotle is the one that made that horrid comment. No prob... just seemed strange as I was basically saying Fehmel was getting a uncalled for bad rap. Unlike others here I do not take posts emotionally. Right, wrong, it's a message board with a bunch of opinions. Most on here do not keep "score", however a few others seem to think this is some sort of contest... popularity or otherwise. Just wanted to know if it was that comment or I had insinuated some support of it. Thx |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on May 1, 2017 10:03:37 GMT -8
Actually you again twist actual facts. Responded? Yep. Like you? Not close. As my first post stated... "to me". Didn't say I was right or ask to be agreed with. Dude... you're the ONLY one who prances in here occasionally and thinks he is the absolute bottom line. You act like this site is beneath you and owes you some reverence. You tried that act at work. THIS has to be the most tone deaf post you've ever made on here. OSUprof is the guy who thinks he's the absolute bottom line? Baseba1111, even when you're dead wrong and facing a pile of facts in front of you that are contrary to your argument, your response is to ALWAYS double down. Admit you're wrong ONCE, and people might not have such a low opinion of you. It's a message board... it is basically opinion based. So, interloping on this post, which "pile of facts" showed where was I "dead wrong" And, do you come here to be liked??? Meaning you post only things that make you "seem" popular? Hmmmm, makes sense now.  |
|
|
|
Post by thewizard on May 1, 2017 11:43:33 GMT -8
Let us go back to in the Time Machine. Can some one match the ERA with these Beavers without googling? The Year is 2005: 1. 2.77 ERA, 6-4, 14 Saves 2. 2.13 ERA, 9-2 3. 4.31 ERA, 11-1 4. 2.09 ERA, 12-1, 1 Save Gundy Jonah Kunz Buck Very, Very Close Codyd70... Gundy, Jonah, Maxwell and Buck |
|
?
