Page 3 of 6

PostPosted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 3:54 pm
by LBJackal
Bonderman should be better than Loaiza was last year, or else he's in big trouble :-b

And for the record I drafted Loaiza in one league, and I believe it was the 13th round. So it's not that I thought he'd be great. I just thought mroe of himm than everybody else. I wouldn't at all be surprised to see Loaiza have a better ERA than Bonderman this year but I'm not going to bet on it because both pitchers are far too volatile to warrant betting money on them.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 6:11 pm
by Absolutely Adequate
I agree with Mookie completely here - but Mookie forgot one other important statistic.

Against all the teams that he faced two or more times, Bonderman had a sub 4 era against only 3 of them: Oakland, Tampa Bay, and Seattle.

Perhaps at this point in his career, he is the sort of pitcher that can only fool hitters one time (if that).

Also, I never believed in Loaiza. But I think that he will do better than Bonderman in most major categories. How exactly do you plan to judge your competition, ramble?

PostPosted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 6:18 pm
by Mustangs989
At the beginning of the offseason I thought Bonderman would be a pretty nice sleeper that you could get late, 15th round say. His value has defenitely risen and has become overrated in the Cafe. To be fair though he has much more value in a keeper league.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:07 pm
by ramble2
Mookie4ever wrote:
ramble2 wrote:I'm a bit pressed for time, so can't really make the case, but thought I'd put it on record that I'm on the Bonderman band wagon. He does seem to be going earlier than is probably warranted. However, when I draft I don't mind taking guys I really want a bit earlier than I think they should go. (Better than taking a player everyone else THINKS should go earlier and losing out on the players you want because they get taken in the 'right' round.)

Am I sure he'll bust out this year? No. Do I think he's a strong candidate for a breakout year? Absolutely. And in my keeper league I want in on that action before it happens, rather than to be on the sidelines.

Strong second half indicators, good base-line sabermatic numbers, nice Baseball Prospectus write up. Yup, he's one I want.

Mookie and LB, I can't remember where each of you stood on Loaiza last year. I think LB was on board the Loaiza wagon. I was most definitely not. Mookie I can't remember. I think Bonderman could be the anti-Loaiza here. You guys up for a bet? Here are the terms I propose:

Choose one to bet on:

A. Bonderman in 2005 outperforms Loaiza 2004;
B. Bonderman in 2005 outperforms Loaiza 2005 (not much of a bet, really, but hey, if you want to take it).

Loser has to change their avatar next off-season. If I lose, I get a Loaiza avatar. If you lose, you get a Bonderman avatar. Game?


First of all - why did you put a link to Amazon.com in your post :-b

Second, not a huge Loaiza guy. My post was about him being taken before some guys that I'm sure will outperform him. I mentioned Radke in my original post. Take for example the Cafe Challenge slow draft that's going on right now.

Bonderman 10th round
Odalis Perez 12th round
Brad Radke 13th round

I would take the bet if I got to pick Radke or Perez.

Even though I'm around here a lot more than you and your humiliation will not be as severe I will still take the bet.

Bonderman outperforms Radke (5x5 standard roto post 2005 dollar value) and I will wear a Bonderman avatar for (the offseason, a year? 1,000 posts? whatever). Radke outperforms Bonderman and you wear a Canadian flag avatar for your next 1,000 posts.

deal?


Perez and Radke, eh? Those are interesting choices. I actually think both of them are underrated, and agree that Bonderman should probably be taken after both of them - though it's much closer with Radke than Perez. I'm probably more in agreement with your post than I originally thought.

Still, I'm game. Let's see how Bonderman stacks up with Radke at the end of the season. (I won't take the Perez bet!) Let's make it an offseason avatar bet. A Canadian flag sounds good - my fiancee is a Yukoner and will get a kick out of it if I lose.

And for sake of full disclosure, I should mention that I picked Bonderman in my keeper league draft as my 4th pitcher (behind Santan, Wood and Harden) in the *gulp* 12th round.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:09 pm
by ramble2
And oh yeah, I hope the Cafe's getting paid well for the auto links to Amazon. If so, I'll have to start talking about the baseball prospectus that much more ... :-D

PostPosted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:43 pm
by NZF
Two important things most of you guys are missing here with Bonderman. Last season he was in the Top 15 pitchers in BAA and had similar K/IP ratios as Schilling and Carlos Zambrano. Yet he was still only 21 years old. IMO that is a huge factor.

The majority of starting pitchers regress in their second season in the majors. Bonderman improved out of sight. Rich Harden was another pitcher that improved in 2004 and he's getting taken in the 8th and 9th round and quite rightly so, he's a stud in the making.

Bonderman is not that far behind, in fact their BAA was exactly the same and Bonderman's BB/IP and K/IP ratios were better in 2004.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:54 pm
by LBJackal
BAA is only a product of K's, BB's, and HR's. .300 is usually the averge hit rate, and anything above or below is almost completely attributable to luck. Bonderman had a .278 hit rate.

Therefore, his .237 BAA should have been .253 or about there. And really, when you can look at K/BB and HR/9, BAA is useless, and not indicative of anything relevent.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:07 pm
by NZF
LBJackal wrote:BAA is only a product of K's, BB's, and HR's. .300 is usually the averge hit rate, and anything above or below is almost completely attributable to luck. Bonderman had a .278 hit rate.

Therefore, his .237 BAA should have been .253 or about there. And really, when you can look at K/BB and HR/9, BAA is useless, and not indicative of anything relevent.


BAA is a far more relevant and reliable statistic to use than ERA.
Jake Peavy is a fine example of that. IMO you are over analysing something that is quite simple.

You say BAA is only a product of K's, BB's and HR's. I think you've got that wrong.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:08 pm
by slomo007
New Zealand Fan wrote:
LBJackal wrote:BAA is only a product of K's, BB's, and HR's. .300 is usually the averge hit rate, and anything above or below is almost completely attributable to luck. Bonderman had a .278 hit rate.

Therefore, his .237 BAA should have been .253 or about there. And really, when you can look at K/BB and HR/9, BAA is useless, and not indicative of anything relevent.


BAA is a far more relevant and reliable statistic to use than ERA.
Jake Peavy is a fine example of that. IMO you are over analysing something that is quite simple.

You say BAA is only a product of K's, BB's and HR's. I think you've got that wrong.


I've tried arguing with him on this, he doesn't budge. He's more of a stathead than I am, so I let him think he won, but common sense says otherwise. O:-)

PostPosted: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:09 pm
by LBJackal
New Zealand Fan wrote:
LBJackal wrote:BAA is only a product of K's, BB's, and HR's. .300 is usually the averge hit rate, and anything above or below is almost completely attributable to luck. Bonderman had a .278 hit rate.

Therefore, his .237 BAA should have been .253 or about there. And really, when you can look at K/BB and HR/9, BAA is useless, and not indicative of anything relevent.


BAA is a far more relevant and reliable statistic to use than ERA.
Jake Peavy is a fine example of that. IMO you are over analysing something that is quite simple.

You say BAA is only a product of K's, BB's and HR's. I think you've got that wrong.


BAA is better than ERA but it doesn't mean it's useful. ERA is next to useless as well. What does BAA tell you other than a pitcher's hit rate? Nothing. And you can tell their hit rate from their BB, K, and HR.