Jump to content

Ken Pomeroy's Ranking of D1 Programs


IUFLA

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I know that I was talking about separate things things. The game last night I was talking about was 2 outs but stating that how the defense was set up it would have been hard to get an out with a ground ball.  Also I think the use of analytics has hurt pitching the last few years because of how managers are using their bullpens and their over usage of them.  Why not train the starting pitchers to go longer into games instead of thinking that using 5 relievers is the better route. Here is a stat for you that relievers ERA has gone up each year for the last 6 years and that is due to over use.

Teams don't set up huge shifts when there are multiple players on base with less than 2 outs so not sure what you're getting at there? Votto was playing well behind first base on Turners at-bat because Turner is a pull hitter and it's better to knock the ball down in the infield than letting it get through and letting the runner score from second who is running on contact. The pitcher was on first base and had Votto fielded a hard hit ground ball where he was positioned it would have been a routine out at second to end the inning. Pretty simple baseball 101.

There's enormous amounts of data that show hitters are more successful against the pitcher their third time through the lineup. That's why pitchers don't through 100+ innings and don't typically pitch into the 7th inning or later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 158
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

Teams don't set up huge shifts when there are multiple players on base with less than 2 outs so not sure what you're getting at there? Votto was playing well behind first base on Turners at-bat because Turner is a pull hitter and it's better to knock the ball down in the infield than letting it get through and letting the runner score from second who is running on contact. The pitcher was on first base and had Votto fielded a hard hit ground ball where he was positioned it would have been a routine out at second to end the inning. Pretty simple baseball 101.

There's enormous amounts of data that show hitters are more successful against the pitcher their third time through the lineup. That's why pitchers don't through 100+ innings and don't typically pitch into the 7th inning or later.

There are less successful because of how they baby pitchers today so they are not trained to go deep into games.  Of these athletes are so much better and stronger today why can't these guys work to where they can go deep into game like they did in the past.  I rather have my better pitchers go deep into games if they are having a good game than hope that your relievers are on that day.  The more guys you bring in the better chance that at least one of them won't have it today.  if you are Reds fan just look how much are relievers are struggling the second half of the season.  It is because Bell over used them early in the season because he would take out the starters after 5 innings.  Having to cover 3 to 4 innings every night will put a toll on the bullpen after a few months.  Also to me having to have 8 relievers on your roster also makes it harder for you offense because it is harder to make a double switch or limits a guy who is mainly a pinch hitter or a guy to come in to run late in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

There are less successful because of how they baby pitchers today so they are not trained to go deep into games.  Of these athletes are so much better and stronger today why can't these guys work to where they can go deep into game like they did in the past.  I rather have my better pitchers go deep into games if they are having a good game than hope that your relievers are on that day.  The more guys you bring in the better chance that at least one of them won't have it today.  if you are Reds fan just look how much are relievers are struggling the second half of the season.  It is because Bell over used them early in the season because he would take out the starters after 5 innings.  Having to cover 3 to 4 innings every night will put a toll on the bullpen after a few months.  Also to me having to have 8 relievers on your roster also makes it harder for you offense because it is harder to make a double switch or limits a guy who is mainly a pinch hitter or a guy to come in to run late in the game.

Again, that is not true. Velocity is way up in today's game. Pitchers lose velocity the more pitches they throw, especially under stress. The less velocity and movement on pitches, the easier it is for batters to hit, especially third time through the lineup. There is statistical data that supports this and why it is customary in every single clubhouse. Hitters today are bigger, stronger, and better than era's past. You need swing and miss type pitches to get hitters out. Swing and miss type pitches usually require more velocity, more movement which requires much more arm action and stress. Overwork your starting pitchers and you have problems down the road. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

There are less successful because of how they baby pitchers today so they are not trained to go deep into games.  Of these athletes are so much better and stronger today why can't these guys work to where they can go deep into game like they did in the past.  I rather have my better pitchers go deep into games if they are having a good game than hope that your relievers are on that day.  The more guys you bring in the better chance that at least one of them won't have it today.  if you are Reds fan just look how much are relievers are struggling the second half of the season.  It is because Bell over used them early in the season because he would take out the starters after 5 innings.  Having to cover 3 to 4 innings every night will put a toll on the bullpen after a few months.  Also to me having to have 8 relievers on your roster also makes it harder for you offense because it is harder to make a double switch or limits a guy who is mainly a pinch hitter or a guy to come in to run late in the game.

3 reasons...

Baseball people understand that good pitching beats good hitting

"Dead arm" is real and can have long term effect...look at Billy Martin's use of the A's staff of the early 80s for reference

Teams have a lot of money tied up in good pitching, and they're simply trying to protect that investment, long term

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

Again, that is not true. Velocity is way up in today's game. Pitchers lose velocity the more pitches they throw, especially under stress. The less velocity and movement on pitches, the easier it is for batters to hit, especially third time through the lineup. There is statistical data that supports this and why it is customary in every single clubhouse. Hitters today are bigger, stronger, and better than era's past. You need swing and miss type pitches to get hitters out. Swing and miss type pitches usually require more velocity, more movement which requires much more arm action and stress. Overwork your starting pitchers and you have problems down the road. 

Well if you teach the kids how to pitch and not just throw as hard you can for as long as you can.  I know there is data for today and what it shows but my point is that if you start the kids early and not wait until they get to the majors to go longer then that would be the best for the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

3 reasons...

Baseball people understand that good pitching beats good hitting

"Dead arm" is real and can have long term effect...look at Billy Martin's use of the A's staff of the early 80s for reference

Teams have a lot of money tied up in good pitching, and they're simply trying to protect that investment, long term

 

Exactly. And relievers typically have the best "swing and miss" type stuff. The are instructed to get 3 outs, sometimes less. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

3 reasons...

Baseball people understand that good pitching beats good hitting

"Dead arm" is real and can have long term effect...look at Billy Martin's use of the A's staff of the early 80s for reference

Teams have a lot of money tied up in good pitching, and they're simply trying to protect that investment, long term

 

How is babying really worked for these organizations because it seems that there are more arm injuries today than there ever has.  also I thought it was ridiculous when the Nationals shut down Strasberg late in the year when they had a great chance to win the World Series.  They set him out and they did not win and he still had arm problems a couple years later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, IndyResident16 said:

Exactly. And relievers typically have the best "swing and miss" type stuff. The are instructed to get 3 outs, sometimes less. 

But when you have to use 4 or 5 relievers a night you will more than likely find 1 that does not have that night.  if my starter is going well I am keeping him until he shows me he is done and not what his pitch count is.  I remember watching a game last year between the Indians and the Reds and the Indian's took out Bauer after 8 shutout innings.  They were up 3-0 and the closer came in a gave up 5 runs to blow the game.  Why take out a guy who had it going that night for a guy you have no clue what they will be bring that night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

How is babying really worked for these organizations because it seems that there are more arm injuries today than there ever has.  also I thought it was ridiculous when the Nationals shut down Strasberg late in the year when they had a great chance to win the World Series.  They set him out and they did not win and he still had arm problems a couple years later.

Would you rather have Strasburg for one year or 10 years? I don't think that really needs an explanation. Velocity and movement is required today to get out hitters that are bigger, stronger, and better than ever before. You aren't going to consistently get hitters out like Mike Trout, Altuve, Bregman, etc with a 90-92 MPH fastball. You're going to get them out with a 96-98 MPH fast ball inside and then an 88-90 MPH slider away. It's physically impossible for a pitcher to attain that kind of movement and velocity for 130 pitches. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

But when you have to use 4 or 5 relievers a night you will more than likely find 1 that does not have that night.  if my starter is going well I am keeping him until he shows me he is done and not what his pitch count is.  I remember watching a game last year between the Indians and the Reds and the Indian's took out Bauer after 8 shutout innings.  They were up 3-0 and the closer came in a gave up 5 runs to blow the game.  Why take out a guy who had it going that night for a guy you have no clue what they will be bring that night.

Anomaly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

3 reasons...

Baseball people understand that good pitching beats good hitting

"Dead arm" is real and can have long term effect...look at Billy Martin's use of the A's staff of the early 80s for reference

Teams have a lot of money tied up in good pitching, and they're simply trying to protect that investment, long term

 

Mark Prior, Kerry Wood....and to an extent Carlos Zambrano. Cubs had their Maddux, Smoltz, and Glavine all setup on paper. Dusty used to run them out there routinely for 125+ pitches.....remember once where Wood went out in the 7th I think at 140. Abuse of arms changed the direction of our franchise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

Mark Prior, Kerry Wood....and to an extent Carlos Zambrano. Cubs had their Maddux, Smoltz, and Glavine all setup on paper. Dusty used to run them out there routinely for 125+ pitches.....remember once where Wood went out in the 7th I think at 140. Abuse of arms changed the direction of our franchise. 

And as a Red fan he ruined Volquez, Cueto, etc. Old school manager who didn't really conform. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

Would you rather have Strasburg for one year or 10 years? I don't think that really needs an explanation. Velocity and movement is required today to get out hitters that are bigger, stronger, and better than ever before. You aren't going to consistently get hitters out like Mike Trout, Altuve, Bregman, etc with a 90-92 MPH fastball. You're going to get them out with a 96-98 MPH fast ball inside and then an 88-90 MPH slider away. It's physically impossible for a pitcher to attain that kind of movement and velocity for 130 pitches. 

I guess we will just not agree on this because I still think pitchers like Gregg Maddux could strive in today's game by changing speeds and location of their pitches.  Nolan Ryan pitched many, many years throwing very hard and many pitchers did back in the day.  I think it comes back to how they baby the pitchers today and if they were trained to pitch the right way and work to go deep into games they would be able to.  everyone says that athletes are bigger, better and stronger today so they should be able to do with what those fat lazy players did back in the day.  again don't teach kids to throw as hard as they can but teach them to pitch and that is by changing speeds and changing the locations of your pitches.  you need to go in and out and up and down.  Today pitchers are afraid to pitch inside so they are pretty much taking away half the plate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, CrimsonV said:

Am I at the right spot for Ken Pomeroy’s rankings talk?

24D414D7-4BDD-4DDB-A1E9-AD8DE82D5241.gif

Apparently the KenPom talk is over because there are a few who can't handle the way he does things and thinks it should be discredited because "he's a nerd whose never picked up a basketball" and "basketball is played by humans and not computers".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I guess we will just not agree on this because I still think pitchers like Gregg Maddux could strive in today's game by changing speeds and location of their pitches.  Nolan Ryan pitched many, many years throwing very hard and many pitchers did back in the day.  I think it comes back to how they baby the pitchers today and if they were trained to pitch the right way and work to go deep into games they would be able to.  everyone says that athletes are bigger, better and stronger today so they should be able to do with what those fat lazy players did back in the day.  again don't teach kids to throw as hard as they can but teach them to pitch and that is by changing speeds and changing the locations of your pitches.  you need to go in and out and up and down.  Today pitchers are afraid to pitch inside so they are pretty much taking away half the plate

Greg Maddux is a once in a lifetime pitcher. If somebody could replicate Greg Maddux they would. You look at the best pitchers in the game today, de Grom, Cole, Verlander, Scherzer, etc they all throw hard and they all have great swing and miss type stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, IndyResident16 said:

Greg Maddux is a once in a lifetime pitcher. If somebody could replicate Greg Maddux they would. You look at the best pitchers in the game today, de Grom, Cole, Verlander, Scherzer, etc they all throw hard and they all have great swing and miss type stuff.

Hendricks of the Cubs is doing a pretty good job of it with an ERA a little over 3.  Rather have a pitcher like him than a Noah Sydnagard and  I would take a Sandy Koufax whose career was short but was brilliant over a pitcher who might be good with a long career.  it is funny you brought those pitchers up because those pitchers go deep into games and don't worry about pitch counts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Hendricks of the Cubs is doing a pretty good job of it with an ERA a little over 3.  Rather have a pitcher like him than a Noah Sydnagard and  I would take a Sandy Koufax whose career was short but was brilliant over a pitcher who might be good with a long career.  it is funny you brought those pitchers up because those pitchers go deep into games and don't worry about pitch counts.

Hendricks is one pitcher, again an anomaly. You're telling me in a winner take all game you trotting Kyle Hendricks out there over Scherzer, de Grom, Verlander?? No chance. And again Sandy Koufax pitched in a completely different era. Sandy Koufax would not have near the success pitching against today's hitters as he would have back then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

Hendricks is one pitcher, again an anomaly. You're telling me in a winner take all game you trotting Kyle Hendricks out there over Scherzer, de Grom, Verlander?? No chance. And again Sandy Koufax pitched in a completely different era. Sandy Koufax would not have near the success pitching against today's hitters as he would have back then. 

How do you know how anyone would do in a different era.  My point is if more pitchers would learn to pitch and not just throw they could be effective as well.  Like I said those pitchers you talk about goes deep into games which is what I want and don't really care how they get there.  Guys like Verlander doe snot go all out in the early part of the game and just throw as hard as he can.  He pitches the game and will have stuff left in the tank when it is needed when he gets into trouble. I love for my pitchers to pitch a complete game but I would take 7 innings out of the starter and only have to use your 2 best relievers to finish the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, CrimsonV said:

I like baseball as much as the next guy.  You all are in the wrong spot though.  Take it to the MLB discussion thread in the Animal House.  Thanks in advance

I think Ken Pomeroy got crossed with Ken Burns...

I agree...can we take the baseball part of the discussion over to the Animal House baseball thread?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I had to look for myself to see the rankings and I got 15 out of the 17 right without looking or using any stats.  I don't know why anyone would really have to look at stats to see who is the top programs since 1997.  I really wouldn't put IU that high because since 1997 they have not been one of the top programs.  The only two I missed was that I did not have Maryland and Texas but had UM and UCONN in there instead.   I guess I did not do to bad since UCONN was 19th and UM was 24th on his list.  UCONN has won 4 titles since then so that is the reason I would have them higher on the list

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...