Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Gally

Members
  • Content Count

    8,180
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,475 Excellent

1 Follower

About Gally

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Minnesota Vikings

Recent Profile Visitors

4,983 profile views
  1. I have never said they shouldn't be punished. They should because they broke the rules. I am all for that. My only point is trying to figure out whether or not it was the biggest scandal in the history of sports as some have pushed for.
  2. I have used them in fantasy baseball. They are fine. I prefer to have "position weeks" where 1st vs 2nd, 3rd vs 4th etc. to balance out the schedule. I also have never understood the reason for divisions. For a 12 team league you can play everyone once and then have one position week and be as balanced as can be. Then start playoffs in Week 13. For 10 team leagues you can play everyone once and then have 3 position weeks to bring the total to 12 weeks. In my 14 team league we play everyone once (13 weeks) and then have a position week every 4 weeks (4, 8, 12, 16) and don't do playoffs. Yes we play week 17. Best record wins it.
  3. This is a completely unfounded set of statements. You may believe it. I may not. There is no way to prove it either way. This is why I would like more data on how often and what were the results (impossible to get). You are saying it as if it's proven by fact. It's all speculation and to say otherwise is ludicrous.
  4. By big deal......I mean I don't think it is the biggest scandal in the history of sports. Knowing what pitch is helpful. Without knowing the extent of how often it was done I cannot say one way or another how big of a deal it was and neither can anybody else. Also, just because they kept doing it does not mean it was working to a huge advantage. It cannot be quantified based on what is known. Yes they cheated. Yes they gained an advantage. Did it take away the world series for the Dodgers or the MVP from Judge? Nobody can say either way with out more information.
  5. That's all right. My fat ### 47 yr old reaction time will make it look like its 90.....
  6. Typically sign stealing provides the batter info on whether it is going to be off speed or a fastball. Sometimes the desired location is also included (whether the pitcher actually hits that location or not is still a variable). So generally the only things known for sure is the approximate speed and that there is some kind of movement (curve, slider, change - all off speed). Yes, this is helpful. I am in complete agreement. I understand the difficulty of hitting as I played through college and didn't go further because it is damn tough to hit a baseball. I also understand that the data I would like is most likely impossible to get fully. I do think it is possible to get better data on the actual frequency of illegal sign stealing. That would also be helpful to understand the impact better. I would be willing to bet that it did not happen for every pitch of every home game as some have alluded to in these discussions. The data provided on bangs per pitches (link listed previously) is woefully lacking in any real meaning. Basically it says that sign stealing was occurring. The frequency is still a big leap and tainted by peoples perceptions. Since you don't know for sure if no banging means fastball or no sign being conveyed is impossible to know. You can only know positive (banging or equivalent) actions for sure. The real meaningful data is what actually occurred on the pitches that were stolen with the assumption that if something positive happened it was an advantage and if something negative happen it was not. That is really what matters. Not what he would have done without that knowledge. Yes, I understand this is likely impossible to data to get. I am wishful thinking...hahaha.
  7. And what does that accomplish other than making a bigger mockery of the game than is already happening?
  8. I am not trying to make any type of argument. I have never said they didn't cheat or shouldn't be punished. I am not an Astros fan or a fan of any of the teams that keep whining about the title being taken away from them. I just want to quantify what kind of advantage they really received to know whether or not it was the worst thing in the history of sports. Does the perceived advantage (perceived by fans, other players, Astros players) match the actual advantage? Does the advantage match the outrage? Right now it is all perceived with no real data to evaluate. I doubt we will ever have that answer and that is unfortunate for everyone. Personally I don't think it is a huge advantage and that "advantage" does happen legally. Just knowing what pitch is coming doesn't guarantee you a hit which is why I don't think it is a big deal. We can argue about how big of an advantage it really is and nobody knows. It is all speculation. That is the only point I am trying to make. Without actual data there is no way to know one way or the other.
  9. I am not saying that players that didn't want to know were told anyway. I am saying sometimes knowing a certain pitch is coming you can over swing and actually cause you to get yourself out. I am not saying that happens all the time but I am sure it did happen. This is why having the data of the results of the AB's when known pitches were coming would be a worth while investigation. Having accurate data and more of it is always a good thing when trying to figure out if something had an impact. ETA: I agree the way I worded the original statement wasn't clear to what I was trying to convey. I combined two thoughts into one.
  10. I am not saying it was not an advantage. I am interested in how much of an advantage. If it is 1 hit a game it is minor advantage and I don't think it appreciably changed the outcome - especially if that hit was in the 2nd inning contributing to no runs. To me this is an important distinction especially identifying how often it was implemented. The reason why that is of importance is because the act of sign stealing is not illegal in and of itself. So if the implementation of using cameras occurred in say 20 games for a total of 40 AB's how does that compare to sign stealing the legal way? Does that happen in 140 games for a total of 150 AB's? If this is the case then it's probably negligible in the grand scheme of the game. If its reversed then it's more significant. Secondly, if the result of the illegally (obtained via camera) known pitches was a HR every time then of course that is a significant advantage. If it resulted in a batting average of .115 with no HR's and 15 RBI's then it's not significant. Before I am outraged to the point of this being the worst thing in the history of sports I would like to know the actual impact on games played and would like to know the instances vs legally stealing signs.
  11. I disagree to some degree. Some assumptions would have to made (just like in any data evaluation). If we somehow could know every pitch that was known by the batter and had the result of every one of those pitches we can have some idea how much it helped them based on the actual results. We could assume that every non-strike pitch that was swung at that it was a negative (basically - i know the pitch will be x so I am swinging no matter what). We could assume that every HR was an advantage. We can continue on with every scenario and rule it as an advantage or disadvantage and then come to some conclusions. I mean if stat guys can figure out that some player is worth 8 wins over replacement level play then they can come up with some formula to figure out how much an advantage/disadvantage was gained by knowing the pitch that was coming.
  12. I can guarantee that it did not happen every AB for the season. That is ludicrous and there is no evidence saying this is what occurred. However, putting a ball in play and getting out is actually a benefit to the pitcher. It takes less pitches to get through a game that way. I have also seen batters swing at bad pitches because they know a fastball is coming and are geared up for it. Just knowing the pitch doesn't necessarily result in a positive situation for the batter. The quantifying of the data I would like is actually how often it was used and what "advantage" was gained because of it. You can see if extra/less pitches were seen per AB. You can see if it resulted in higher OBP or slugging percentage or whatever hitting metric you want to use. The point is you cannot just assume that it was used for AB for every home game and that it resulted in a huge advantage without having any data. Especially when what little data does seem to be available points to it being used occasionally and not every pitch of every AB. Also, as I have said previously some people don't like to know what pitch is coming from a system like this because it takes away their focus. So what advantage they gain from knowing the pitch they lose because they are focused on something other than hitting. I have known many hitters on my teams that have felt that way. It then becomes a detriment to them because they aren't focused completely. I do think the Astros got an advantage from it. I am just not so sure how big of an advantage it really was. If we had data about how often it was used and the results of the usage while also comparing it to legal sign stealing methods/results it would give a better basis than just speculation.
  13. So how would you quantify this as a big deal? I can guarantee that they did not steal signs for every pitch of every home game as you imply here. So my question is where does it cross over from cheating to the worst thing ever in the history of sports? Did they use it for 10% of home AB's? 20%? I really have no idea how much of an advantage was gained and that's why I would like to know how much it was used and what were the results. I understand that "positive" results can take many forms but I also know it can lead to "negative" results as well. It would be interesting to have this quantified. Also, how does it compare to legal sign stealing with the results. it's hard to quantify this as a "big deal" without really knowing the extent of it. Yes, they cheated. Yes, there performance is tainted. I just don't know how big of a deal it is without quantifiable data. There is so much outrage and I just wonder how big of an impact did it really make.
  14. It would be nice to get the result of every pitch associated with the banging. Beyond just the AB result. Count, pitch result (ball/strike/hit/out/etc). I would really like to get an idea of how much this actually affected outcomes. I would also like to know how much legal sign stealing occurs and what the outcome of those situations. It would be interesting if the results ended up being a BA of like .150 to see if the outrage continued. ETA: I played through college and there were teammates of mine that didn't want to know what pitch was coming when we had the signs. It took them away from concentrating on the pitch and their normal routine. It's not for everyone.
  15. This is where it would be nice to know the extent of the cheating. All teams steal signs (legally) during the season. How many AB's does this affect? Who knows, but without the context of how many AB's were affected positively it is impossible to say how much outcomes were affected. We all know they cheated....bad on them and they should be punished. Yes, their performances are tainted and in doubt. It would be nice to know how tainted the performances were. Just because a batter knew what pitch was coming doesn't necessarily change the outcome (it can also change it negatively for the cheater as well). For example, a batter knows a breaking ball is coming and they pop out. It didn't positively give the cheater an advantage. In fact he could have overswung because he knew what was coming and caused him to pop out thus negatively affecting the cheater's outcome. In addition there were games where a batter knew what pitch was coming legally (not using cameras). What percentage of time does this happen? This should be taken out as a baseline to the results to put everyone on an equal baseline. All this to say it would be interesting to actually know how often it was used, and how much it actually affected the outcome positively and negatively for the cheaters. ETA: For those outraged the most over this cheating, would the quantity of advantage matter in your level of outrage? If it helped in improve 1% of the AB's results vs 20% of the AB's would that change your outrage? If you found out that the BA for balls swung at when knowing the pitch illegally (by use of cameras) was .320 or .190 or .500 affect that outrage? If you found out that knowing the pitch legally was the same advantage as illegally (using cameras) change your outrage level?