FanGraphs Baseball

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. gosh game 6 was intense

    Comment by adohaj — November 2, 2011 @ 2:10 pm

  2. The player WPAs for that were pretty insane. Both bullpens lost multiple games, and Freese almost had a entire game won by himself, Berkman close behind. Crazy stuff.

    Comment by Telo — November 2, 2011 @ 2:32 pm

  3. Hey Paul,

    I love your work, but please try not to use the word ‘impactful’ ever again.

    It’s horrid business-speak and detracts from your and Fangraphs’ awesomeness.

    I apologize for my pedantry, but headlines shouldn’t make readers cringe. Even if we pedants are only 10-15% of your audience, there are thousands of us out here.

    [Crawls back into pedantry hutch].

    Comment by Adrock — November 2, 2011 @ 2:59 pm

  4. Add .5 WPA to the starting WE of .5 and that is a win. By that logic, they won the equivalent of 3+ games.

    In game 6 Freese had .953 WPA, and Berkman had .817 WPA. Is that the highest two player combination in a game ever?

    Comment by Anon — November 2, 2011 @ 3:03 pm

  5. I am confused. I thought WPA for a given game should add up to 1. Please help me understand.

    Comment by Stephen Stokes — November 2, 2011 @ 3:03 pm

  6. No Cruz walk off grand slam? Figured that’d be on here somewhere.

    Crazy playoffs.

    Comment by James — November 2, 2011 @ 3:08 pm

  7. WS game 6 took spots 1, 2, 4, and 6. Simply amazing.

    Also, the Cardinals were involved in all of the top 6 plays. Statistical proof for the name Cardiac Cardinals.

    Comment by Anon — November 2, 2011 @ 3:09 pm

  8. Everybody impressed? Good.

    Comment by adr3 — November 2, 2011 @ 3:12 pm

  9. WP added. WP starts at .5 for each team. The winning team will have .5 WPA at the end of the game.

    Comment by Anon — November 2, 2011 @ 3:12 pm

  10. The Cruz walk-off granny in Game 2 of the ALCS placed 290th. The reason is because in loading the bases, the Rangers had been steadily increasing their WE. It stood at 94% when Cruz came up. Also, as the home team in extras, it was already high to begin with, which dampened the magnitude of Cruz’s blast from a WE or WPA perspective.

    But yes, crazy playoffs indeed!

    Comment by Paul Swydan — November 2, 2011 @ 3:21 pm

  11. I will atone. I will admit to being mildly shocked yesterday when I realized it wasn’t a real word, but then I was a marketing major, so you have to understand that I have been programmed to use business speak on the unsuspecting masses. But FG readers are smarter than the average bear or the unsuspecting mass. Thanks for the catch.

    Comment by Paul Swydan — November 2, 2011 @ 3:24 pm

  12. This is a far more gracious and receptive response than I could have ever hoped to receive.

    Thanks very much. It is almost, almost, almost enough to get me to hope for the Red Sox to bounce back next year. But not quite.

    Comment by Adrock — November 2, 2011 @ 3:34 pm

  13. We understood exactly what you were trying to convey.

    Comment by MU789 — November 2, 2011 @ 4:04 pm

  14. “Nelson Cruz isn’t known for his glovework”

    he has a career 5.8 UZR/150. He’s not exactly a butcher out there

    Comment by Taylor — November 2, 2011 @ 4:55 pm

  15. Isn’t it underselling Freese’s triple to say it was the most “impactful” moment of the postseason? That seems like it is an understatement. It may be the most impactful at bat in major league baseball history, when adjusted for context.

    Comment by Cody — November 2, 2011 @ 5:38 pm

  16. I don’t mind so much when people are trying to break new words into the language. After all, English is mutable. Yes, there are already perfectly good words to carry the meaning that the author intended but I don’t have a problem with more words in the lexicon. What does drive me crazy (we all have our silly pet peeves) is when perfectly good words lose their meanings because people conflate them with other words, using “disinterested” to mean “uninterested,” for instance. The problem in that case is that “disinterested” already has a very useful meaning and to misuse it threatens the integrity of that meaning. “Impactful,” however, doesn’t have any official meaning so why not try to give it one?

    Comment by Aaron — November 2, 2011 @ 5:51 pm

  17. The worst 7 inning I’ve watched in a long time followed by the most exciting 4 I’ve seen in a long while. Although I’m still trying to figure out how a major league bullpen manages to blow 3 saves in one game.

    Comment by channelclemente — November 2, 2011 @ 11:04 pm

  18. Many (snooty) people thing “impacted” should be used only when there is a physical obstruction or something for which this is a good metaphor. In this way, it’s probably not the best road to go down.

    Comment by Barkey Walker — November 3, 2011 @ 12:31 am

  19. 323DP

    Comment by Barkey Walker — November 3, 2011 @ 12:33 am

  20. I prefer “impacty” or “impactiest”.

    Comment by Peter — November 3, 2011 @ 6:46 am

  21. While guys like Freese and Berkman rounded up astronomical numbers, the pitching staffs sustained a bunch of negative numbers, bring the sums all the way back down to 1.

    Comment by BVHeck — November 3, 2011 @ 4:06 pm

  22. He also has a cannon for an arm which is always a good thing. Cruz is pretty underrated in the outfield, but yeah, he should have caught that ball.

    I thought Carpenter diving head first while not caring about how he could have been destroyed for his career(after having only missed two years in his prime with really bad injuries)belongs on here. It showed he was manning up and would do anything to when regardless of his age.

    Comment by Kyle — November 4, 2011 @ 4:08 am

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


Close this window.

0.157 Powered by WordPress