<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Great Smoltz Debate Rages On</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-great-smoltz-debate-rages-on/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-great-smoltz-debate-rages-on/</link>
	<description>Daily baseball statistical analysis and commentary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 22:26:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: d</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-great-smoltz-debate-rages-on/#comment-93227</link>
		<dc:creator>d</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:27:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=8445#comment-93227</guid>
		<description>Smoltz nothing - what&#039;s going on with Doc Halladay?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Smoltz nothing &#8211; what&#8217;s going on with Doc Halladay?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rizzo</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-great-smoltz-debate-rages-on/#comment-93207</link>
		<dc:creator>rizzo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 14:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=8445#comment-93207</guid>
		<description>Really Nick - please point out where I referred to the &#039;17 AB 6th inning split&#039; that I referenced so many times on the other thread.

Actually don&#039;t bother, because it doesn&#039;t exist</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really Nick &#8211; please point out where I referred to the &#8217;17 AB 6th inning split&#8217; that I referenced so many times on the other thread.</p>
<p>Actually don&#8217;t bother, because it doesn&#8217;t exist</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-great-smoltz-debate-rages-on/#comment-93166</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 08:08:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=8445#comment-93166</guid>
		<description>Sorry, I can&#039;t really tell which Nick I&#039;m debating. The most prolific one seems to think that Smoltz is a Jon Lester caliber pitcher and the Sox should be sending him out there every fifth day.

Well, the Phillies signed Pedro well before Smoltz had been DFA&#039;d so they don&#039;t really count. I think Smoltz is a better option than Padilla, but not by a significant amount. I also think Padilla is in some ways a better fit for the Dodgers since he can go deeper into games and take some workload off their extremely overtaxed bullpen. Finally, the Dodgers front office is not the most brilliant bunch. They basically bid against themselves for Manny.

Tipping pitches is very real and it&#039;s something that major league hitters can catch onto fast. When it&#039;s really blatant I notice it on TV and I&#039;m sure you&#039;ve caught it at some point too. When Wandy started getting really lit up I immediately noticed he was tipping pitches hardcore. And then he figured out, and stopped, and then he got better.

Here&#039;s an example of what I meant by regression: earlier this season, when Nolasco was demoted to the minors, I assume everyone who reads this site either tried to buy low on him or stuck him on their bench. I acquired him and k-rod for Weaver because I knew Nolasco would come back awesome based on his peripherals and Weaver was heading for a blowup (plus I needed the saves). I didn&#039;t start him for his first game back, but since then he&#039;s outpitched Weaver. However, there was no guarantee that his first 3 starts back would be great but I knew that for the rest of the season he would be the better pitcher. The Red Sox can&#039;t take 2-3 chances.

In fantasy you can sit on pitchers while they regress back to their true performance. When you are barely holding onto a wildcard lead, you can&#039;t afford to wait especially when it&#039;s costing you hundreds of thousands of dollars in salary a day. I have no idea what Smoltz&#039;s true talent is; probably mid-4 ERA, which is serviceable and better than other option the Cards had.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry, I can&#8217;t really tell which Nick I&#8217;m debating. The most prolific one seems to think that Smoltz is a Jon Lester caliber pitcher and the Sox should be sending him out there every fifth day.</p>
<p>Well, the Phillies signed Pedro well before Smoltz had been DFA&#8217;d so they don&#8217;t really count. I think Smoltz is a better option than Padilla, but not by a significant amount. I also think Padilla is in some ways a better fit for the Dodgers since he can go deeper into games and take some workload off their extremely overtaxed bullpen. Finally, the Dodgers front office is not the most brilliant bunch. They basically bid against themselves for Manny.</p>
<p>Tipping pitches is very real and it&#8217;s something that major league hitters can catch onto fast. When it&#8217;s really blatant I notice it on TV and I&#8217;m sure you&#8217;ve caught it at some point too. When Wandy started getting really lit up I immediately noticed he was tipping pitches hardcore. And then he figured out, and stopped, and then he got better.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s an example of what I meant by regression: earlier this season, when Nolasco was demoted to the minors, I assume everyone who reads this site either tried to buy low on him or stuck him on their bench. I acquired him and k-rod for Weaver because I knew Nolasco would come back awesome based on his peripherals and Weaver was heading for a blowup (plus I needed the saves). I didn&#8217;t start him for his first game back, but since then he&#8217;s outpitched Weaver. However, there was no guarantee that his first 3 starts back would be great but I knew that for the rest of the season he would be the better pitcher. The Red Sox can&#8217;t take 2-3 chances.</p>
<p>In fantasy you can sit on pitchers while they regress back to their true performance. When you are barely holding onto a wildcard lead, you can&#8217;t afford to wait especially when it&#8217;s costing you hundreds of thousands of dollars in salary a day. I have no idea what Smoltz&#8217;s true talent is; probably mid-4 ERA, which is serviceable and better than other option the Cards had.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-great-smoltz-debate-rages-on/#comment-93157</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 07:27:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=8445#comment-93157</guid>
		<description>So you want me to cherry pick his best and worst starts?

Also, while agree that he shouldn&#039;t be pushed, I&#039;m pretty sure that he was only pulled early because the Cardinals were up 5-0 and he hadn&#039;t pitched in 2 weeks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So you want me to cherry pick his best and worst starts?</p>
<p>Also, while agree that he shouldn&#8217;t be pushed, I&#8217;m pretty sure that he was only pulled early because the Cardinals were up 5-0 and he hadn&#8217;t pitched in 2 weeks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-great-smoltz-debate-rages-on/#comment-93155</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 07:24:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=8445#comment-93155</guid>
		<description>We&#039;ve already established that the reason the Red Sox didn&#039;t keep him was likely due to salary/opportunity cost reasons.  Although, I don&#039;t think that Tazawa or Penny are better than Smoltz, it&#039;s an understandable    

I was addressing possible reasons as to why other teams didn&#039;t sign him.  

You said that the Phillies, Dodgers and Cardinals needed him the most.  Then you said that the Dodgers went with Vincente Padilla &quot;for some reason&quot;.  Maybe that reason is because they looked at Smoltz&#039;s ERA and his age, and decided he was done?

I can&#039;t name a team that would need Smoltz, besides those other two, who went for inferior options in Martinez and Padilla (I assume you agree with this?).            

And I&#039;m not sure what you are trying to say with the regression stuff.  If you believe Smoltz has a talent of, say, a 4 ERA, than you should expect his ERA to drop to that in his next start.  Any pitcher can blow up.  There is no evidence that recent poor performance cause pitchers to blow up more than guys who have been pitching well.

Also, I don&#039;t buy for a second that Smoltz was tipping his pitches.  I believe he simply struggled in Boston and pitched very well in St. Louis.  That&#039;s baseball, it&#039;s so random.  That&#039;s why it was foolish for anyone to say he was done after his first 40 innings, and now for anyone to say he&#039;s back after his next 5 innings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;ve already established that the reason the Red Sox didn&#8217;t keep him was likely due to salary/opportunity cost reasons.  Although, I don&#8217;t think that Tazawa or Penny are better than Smoltz, it&#8217;s an understandable    </p>
<p>I was addressing possible reasons as to why other teams didn&#8217;t sign him.  </p>
<p>You said that the Phillies, Dodgers and Cardinals needed him the most.  Then you said that the Dodgers went with Vincente Padilla &#8220;for some reason&#8221;.  Maybe that reason is because they looked at Smoltz&#8217;s ERA and his age, and decided he was done?</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t name a team that would need Smoltz, besides those other two, who went for inferior options in Martinez and Padilla (I assume you agree with this?).            </p>
<p>And I&#8217;m not sure what you are trying to say with the regression stuff.  If you believe Smoltz has a talent of, say, a 4 ERA, than you should expect his ERA to drop to that in his next start.  Any pitcher can blow up.  There is no evidence that recent poor performance cause pitchers to blow up more than guys who have been pitching well.</p>
<p>Also, I don&#8217;t buy for a second that Smoltz was tipping his pitches.  I believe he simply struggled in Boston and pitched very well in St. Louis.  That&#8217;s baseball, it&#8217;s so random.  That&#8217;s why it was foolish for anyone to say he was done after his first 40 innings, and now for anyone to say he&#8217;s back after his next 5 innings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-great-smoltz-debate-rages-on/#comment-93152</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 07:03:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=8445#comment-93152</guid>
		<description>Also re: &quot;FOs aren&#039;t that good at identifying talent&quot;, those are all teams with pretty awful FOs. KC, NYM, and the SFG don&#039;t stack up at all to the Red Sox front office.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also re: &#8220;FOs aren&#8217;t that good at identifying talent&#8221;, those are all teams with pretty awful FOs. KC, NYM, and the SFG don&#8217;t stack up at all to the Red Sox front office.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-great-smoltz-debate-rages-on/#comment-93151</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 07:00:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=8445#comment-93151</guid>
		<description>Well then you&#039;re wrong. The Red Sox employ Bill James and the inventor of FIP. When I listen to Yanks games on the radio or watch games on ESPN, the announcers talk about and know contact rate/swinging strike rate. Theo Epstein and Brian Cashman aren&#039;t less stat-savvy than John Sterling and TIm McCarver. If you think you are smarter than Theo Epstein, then I don&#039;t know what to say except that you should send him your resume.

Smoltz wanted to pitch every five days and didn&#039;t want to come out of the pen. Every team passed on him because there was no team in a penant race that needed a fifth starter, except for the Dodgers, Phils, and Cards. The Phils got Pedro and the Dodgers decided to go with Padilla for whatever reason. All of those teams are running away with their divisions and can afford two or three (or four) blow-ups.  Seriously, name a team besides the three I mentioned for which it would make any logical sense to add Smoltz, or any fifth-starter not-named Smoltz to their roster. Mark Mulder is still unemployed...

The Red Sox have a one and a half game lead in the WC as of right now. It wouldn&#039;t be smart to risk losing that lead and the millions of dollars that come with a playoff berth because &quot;hey John Smoltz has really good stuff he will PROBABLY get good again soon&quot;. Would it be an easy decision for you, with Tazawa and Bowden waiting in the wings?

This isn&#039;t fantasy baseball where you can bench a guy for a couple weeks while his BABIP and ERA regress. It&#039;s MLB and there was no guarantee that Smoltz wouldn&#039;t blow up in his next two starts (and then pitch perfect games for the rest of the season after that), and cost the Red Sox a postseason appearance. None. You can talk all you want about velocity and movement all you want, but that&#039;s the reality. It&#039;s pure coincidence and the genius of Mike Maddux (who says Smoltz was tipping pitches) that Smoltz&#039;s first start as a Card was sick. 

They called it the &quot;John Smoltz Experiment&quot; for a reason. The experiment failed and there&#039;s zero justification for the Red Sox to have stuck with it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well then you&#8217;re wrong. The Red Sox employ Bill James and the inventor of FIP. When I listen to Yanks games on the radio or watch games on ESPN, the announcers talk about and know contact rate/swinging strike rate. Theo Epstein and Brian Cashman aren&#8217;t less stat-savvy than John Sterling and TIm McCarver. If you think you are smarter than Theo Epstein, then I don&#8217;t know what to say except that you should send him your resume.</p>
<p>Smoltz wanted to pitch every five days and didn&#8217;t want to come out of the pen. Every team passed on him because there was no team in a penant race that needed a fifth starter, except for the Dodgers, Phils, and Cards. The Phils got Pedro and the Dodgers decided to go with Padilla for whatever reason. All of those teams are running away with their divisions and can afford two or three (or four) blow-ups.  Seriously, name a team besides the three I mentioned for which it would make any logical sense to add Smoltz, or any fifth-starter not-named Smoltz to their roster. Mark Mulder is still unemployed&#8230;</p>
<p>The Red Sox have a one and a half game lead in the WC as of right now. It wouldn&#8217;t be smart to risk losing that lead and the millions of dollars that come with a playoff berth because &#8220;hey John Smoltz has really good stuff he will PROBABLY get good again soon&#8221;. Would it be an easy decision for you, with Tazawa and Bowden waiting in the wings?</p>
<p>This isn&#8217;t fantasy baseball where you can bench a guy for a couple weeks while his BABIP and ERA regress. It&#8217;s MLB and there was no guarantee that Smoltz wouldn&#8217;t blow up in his next two starts (and then pitch perfect games for the rest of the season after that), and cost the Red Sox a postseason appearance. None. You can talk all you want about velocity and movement all you want, but that&#8217;s the reality. It&#8217;s pure coincidence and the genius of Mike Maddux (who says Smoltz was tipping pitches) that Smoltz&#8217;s first start as a Card was sick. </p>
<p>They called it the &#8220;John Smoltz Experiment&#8221; for a reason. The experiment failed and there&#8217;s zero justification for the Red Sox to have stuck with it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-great-smoltz-debate-rages-on/#comment-93147</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 06:43:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=8445#comment-93147</guid>
		<description>You mean like the 17 AB 6th inning split that you referenced so many times on the other thread?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You mean like the 17 AB 6th inning split that you referenced so many times on the other thread?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-great-smoltz-debate-rages-on/#comment-93143</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 06:10:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=8445#comment-93143</guid>
		<description>I think that other teams strayed away from Smoltz for the reasons that most people here didn&#039;t like him. 

1) He&#039;s 42 and coming off of major arm surgery
2) His ERA was over 8

However, it was also clear, based on his pitch attributes (velocity, movement) and the outcomes (contact rate, swinging strike rate), that his stuff was still good - probably above average.  

If he could regain his command of his pitches with further practice, with his veteran smarts (although I&#039;m not sure how much that matters), he would still be able to be an above average pitcher. 

I would say he was certainly a very nice low risk - high reward pick up, and I am surprised that only the Cardinals bit.  

You may think that I am being arrogant by saying that the front offices made this (non)decision off of ERA and a 40 inning sample in which he struggled with his control, but I really do think that was the case.  

FO&#039;s have shown that they really aren&#039;t that good at identifying pitching talent: Bruce Chen, Oliver Perez, Barry Zito, Sidney Ponson, Adam Eaton are just a few examples of that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that other teams strayed away from Smoltz for the reasons that most people here didn&#8217;t like him. </p>
<p>1) He&#8217;s 42 and coming off of major arm surgery<br />
2) His ERA was over 8</p>
<p>However, it was also clear, based on his pitch attributes (velocity, movement) and the outcomes (contact rate, swinging strike rate), that his stuff was still good &#8211; probably above average.  </p>
<p>If he could regain his command of his pitches with further practice, with his veteran smarts (although I&#8217;m not sure how much that matters), he would still be able to be an above average pitcher. </p>
<p>I would say he was certainly a very nice low risk &#8211; high reward pick up, and I am surprised that only the Cardinals bit.  </p>
<p>You may think that I am being arrogant by saying that the front offices made this (non)decision off of ERA and a 40 inning sample in which he struggled with his control, but I really do think that was the case.  </p>
<p>FO&#8217;s have shown that they really aren&#8217;t that good at identifying pitching talent: Bruce Chen, Oliver Perez, Barry Zito, Sidney Ponson, Adam Eaton are just a few examples of that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-great-smoltz-debate-rages-on/#comment-93141</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 06:00:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=8445#comment-93141</guid>
		<description>Wow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

