DiFelice Sent Down to AAA, Gagné Up

[Bucky Rules]

He's fine. He is basically saying Yost is making the move because he either has access to information that we don't have, or he is basing it off of 19 PAs -- It's not a strawman agrument.

You know he wasn't offering up the former as a legitimate option. If you're trying to sell that he was, I'm not buying.

 

He's not necessarily presenting an argument that Yost didn't make, but he certainly is stating that the argument isn't valid based on the assumption that it was a result of looking only at 19 ABs. The fact that he said "Gee, I wonder which it is?" is a pretty important comment. It essentially throws out option 1 as legit. He presented Yosts words and invalidated it because he took Yosts words and turned it into something he didn't say. He didn't say that the results of those 19 ABs alone drew him to that conclusion.

 

Maybe that doesn't fit exactly into the square hole of the definition of a straw-man argument, but it certainly flirts with the borders. He certainly is going out of his way to make some assumptions to make Ned's comment look idiotic. And dismisses his ONE AND ONLY option that could make it look like an intelligent comment by saying "Gee, I wonder which it is".

 

As far as absolutism goes... there can be no debate on this one. "Like every other time Yost has quoted statistics on anything in his entire career, he's just looking at this year's MLB stats for his splits." Come on... this is the poster child for absolutism.

 

it is quite evident you still do not have any idea what a straw-man argument is

Yes, I do. There are several forms. Taking Yosts words and adding your own assumptions to make the comment look idiotic comes close enough for my liking. See above.

 

In fact, by charging me with "bias", you are committing another fallacy, an ad hominim attack on me as a poster rather than against the substance of my post.

No... your post exposed a bias. You made an assumption on the reasoning of his statement. The only assumption that you didn't summarily dismiss was one that would lead you to the conclusion that the statement was "foolish". I didn't say that your post should be ignored because you wrote it and you're biased. I said your post exposes a bias. You claim that option is based on "educated guesses." I call it a bias.

 

By the way... we can now add condescension to your list of bbs no-no's. I'm aware of what ad hominem means, and I can even spell it (see, I can be condescending, too). I don't need you to provide a definition for me. If at any time I'm not aware of a definition, I'm sure I can look it up on the internet. Thank you.

[Thurston Fluff]

Yes, I do. There are several forms. Taking Yosts words and adding your own assumptions to make the comment look idiotic comes close enough for my liking.

 

Not that it's all that important but adding false assumptions is not the same as straw man arguments. It is no more legitimate than a straw man argument since it draws false conclusions.

 

A straw man is saying every one thinks the sky is green but it's not.

 

adding false assumptions is taking the quote "some people think the sky is green," and claiming only a person who believes the sky is green would say that.

 

Brawndo didn't do either of them since he was adding his opinion of why he felt Ned said that. I disagree with his conclusions. As I've stated earlier he left out at least one very viable option. I do agree adding the sarcastic "Gee I wonder which it is," does make it seem as though he was deliberately leading to a conclusion that fit his agenda. Making statements like that does make one wonder if he deliberately left out other options to make his conclusion stronger than it really was. So in that small sense he was making a bit of a strawman.

 

But since this is really about Gagne and Difelice maybe this all belongs in the Yost thread or maybe PMing is the way to go.

Heck maybe we should start a logic thread for this sort of thing in the off topic forum.

[Oldcity]

To me, this isn't about Gagne vs. DiFelice as much as Stetter vs. DiFelice. I agree with giving Gagne one more chance, but why would they demote DiFelice over Stetter? Is having a second lefty really worth getting rid of the better pitcher?

[Brawndo the Thirst Mutilat]

Bucky...you opened fire. I realize there's some lingering discontent about stuff that has gone down in other threads, but I'd appreciate it if in the future you avoid making my posts your vehicle for dredging up any hostility you have toward FTJ, particularly when you have to take several shots at me in order to do so.

 

Beyond that, I'm just going to let sleeping dogs lie here. You can have the last say. I'm done, and I hope never to have to talk about what is and isn't a straw-man argument on this board again.

[Thurston Fluff]

Stetter vs Difleice is a much more interesting argument. The only thing DiFelice has going for him in that regard is his lack of walks. From my perspective Stetter has been viewed, perhaps unfairly, as the better prospect going forward but for this year there is a good argument to be made for DiFelice. One thing that is hard to argue is how valuable an extra lefty is to a well rounded bullpen. Maybe the best argument to be made for Stetter is he gets lefties out and DiFelise doesn't.

[Bucky Rules]

Not that it's all that important but adding false assumptions is not the same as straw man arguments. It is no more legitimate than a straw man argument since it draws false conclusions.

 

A straw man is saying every one thinks the sky is green but it's not.

Taking Yost's words out of context and drawing a conclusion that he's an idiot for believing it is a straw-man argument. The sky is green comparison is another form of a straw man argument. But, they both are.

 

But since this is really about Gagne and Difelice maybe this all belongs in the Yost thread or maybe PMing is the way to go.

I agree. That was my point in the first place. The Ned shots belong somewhere else. And now I've become guilty of this same offense. So, I'll shut up now or send a PM.

[TooLiveBrew]

Yeah, I agree Stevo. Clearly the concern for Ned was whether or not he had another RP that can get lefties out. Watching Stetter pitch last night really made me wonder why he was chosen over DiFelice. I don't disagree with having more than one lefty, but if the other lefty is Stetter, I think DiFelice is overall more valuable.

This is a vintage Yostian decision, imo. You take one one element of the game (facing LH batters) & over-value it, because it's a bit of an extreme. Like I said, I agree with the philosophy "It's nice to have more than one lefty RP"... however, where I disagree in Stetter over DiFelice is that Mark provides more overall value, and has been a better MLB pitcher so far. It's strange to me that the logic used on sending DiFelice down was, 'He needs to work on getting lefties out', when righties are far & away the most common type of batter (& I think therefore less extreme/dangerous than lefties, to Ned), and Stetter doesn't help you there. DiFelice would have more potential matchups to face, not to mention that he can handle more than an inning or two at a time.

The reason I say 'vintage Yostian' is that he's playing, once again, against the most likely scenario & for one that he personally finds 'spookier' -- you wouldn't want to only have one lefty! What if a lefty came up? I hope it's clear that I'm not 'blaming' Yost for anything here (the difference btw. Stetter or DiFelice probably isn't worth sweating), just trying to point out another poor use of "logic" by Ned. There is good in having another LHRP, but it's less useful imo than having DiFelice. Taking Stetter over DiFelice really appears to match up with Ned's overall strategy: play for something aside from the most likely outcome/scenario, because a less likely one appears more dangerous.

Beyond that, I'm just going to let sleeping dogs lie here. You can have the last say. I'm done, and I hope never to have to talk about what is and isn't a straw-man argument on this board again.

You're certainly not in the minority on this one.

[Thurston Fluff]

however, where I disagree in Stetter over DiFelice is that Mike provides more overall value, and has been a better MLB pitcher so far.

 

Stetter's ML stats so far

21.1 IP, 2.95 ERA, .157 BAA, 27/15 K:bb.

His splits this year, which to me is more important for a lefty is

vs. LH in 22abs .136 BAA, 321 OBP, .273 SLG, 594 OPS.

vs. RH in 33 abs this year .182 BAA, .341 OBP, .333 SLG, .675 OPS.

 

DiFelice's ML stats so far

13.2 IP, 3.95 ERA, .236 BAA, 16/0 K:BB.

His splits this year

vs. LH in 19 ab's, .421 BAA, .421 OBP, 1.053 SLG, 1.474 OPS.

vs RH in 36 ab's, .139 BAA, .139 OBP, .194 SLG, .333 OPS.

 

Aside from the K:BB I just don't see how Difleice has had the better major league career so far. Add into it the fact that one is 27 and the other a 32 year old career minor league journeyman and I just don't think you're being very fair to Stetter. Ned and Doug might just be right on this one.

[TooLiveBrew]

Not much to learn from a combined 35 IP, imho Buc. What I'd point to in there is the BB rate for Stetter -- alarmingly high, but a small sample to be sure. Throw out ERA, BAA, and probably both of their lines v. LH/RH in terms of 'telling us' anything.

 

I think DiFelice has been better because his command has been much better, and the numbers back that up thus far.

[Thurston Fluff]

I agree with the k:bb rate. I'm certainly not taking anyhting away from DiFelice. He's a great story and I hope to see him again. That said and ERA a full run better is something. The small samples aside I would much rather see Stetter in for a full inning when he has to face batters from both sides of the plate than DiFelice. His performance against LH is far worse than Shouse is against RH. Since there are very few roster spots open for Roogy's and this team has only one lefty it seems apparent that Stetter is the better option for the pen overall simply by the hand he throws with. The fact that he does indeed get them out at a very decent clip as well as hold his own against RH better than Difelice does against LH it shouldn't be considered a slam dunk DiFelice is better. Quite frankly I think just the opposite.

I don't think you can just say his command is better without also acknowledging that he would sometimes be better served to walk a LH instead of letting him slug at a 1.053 clip. Is it better to grove a pitch instead of making a batter hit a pitcher's pitch just so the walks stay down? So far Difelice has not shown he can work around them instead of letting them us him as BP fodder. That probably has something to do with the ERA being a full run above Stetter's. I understand your perspective. I just don't agree it's obvious one is better than the other.

[TooLiveBrew]

That said and ERA a full run better is something.

 

But you're saying, "Small samples aside" when that's my point. ERA over such few IP is completely misleading. I don't think of DiFelice as a ROOGY since he's very capable of throwing more innings than just one.

 

Where we're diverging here is the way the numbers are being interpreted. I don't think Stetter's or DiFelice's opposing lines (BA/OB/SL/OPS) tell you, "This is what to expect, & is the player's talent level." I think they say, "Here's what this pitcher has done over an extraordinarily small amount of work", and have glaring problems in terms of what can be gleaned from them.

 

I hope Brawndo can weigh in here, since he knows DiFelice much better than I do.

 

 

The fact that he does indeed get them out at a very decent clip as well as hold his own against RH better than Difelice does against LH it shouldn't be considered a slam dunk DiFelice is better. Quite frankly I think just the opposite.

 

Neither pitcher has thrown enough yet to start saying things like this. DiFelice added a cut-fastball to his arsenal (which actually tends to help a RH pitcher v. lefties), and has been a different pitcher... he's not some washed-up guy that is just fodder (not that you're saying that). The fact that he's 32 & Stetter is 27 means nothing to me. Both are beyond the age range where we should expect much change due to getting older, except that DiFelice is a bit tricky due to making himself more dangerous with the cutter. If Stetter were to add a cutter, he'd probably be tougher on RHers, but he seems to have enough trouble commanding his two primary pitches.

 

What we do 'know' about the two guys imo is that Mark's command has been fantastic in both the minors & in the bigs, while Mitch's command has been fine to good in the minors & poor (imho) in MLB (7.2 BB/9). Stetter has just not been hit very hard yet, but I don't think that will last with more IP, unless he's able to command his pitches better.

 

 

I understand your perspective. I just don't agree it's obvious one is better than the other.

 

I didn't say that it is -- I did mention I think the difference is probably not worth getting too upset about. I just have seen a lot of command problems for Stetter (not meaning just control, but how well he's working his pitches, too), whereas DiFelice's command has been relatively impressive. Highly subjective goings-on here, and really really hard to see if the numbers support anything when you've got such a small amount of data.

 

With this stretch of 17 games in 17 days, I'd prefer the guy that offers more in terms of his role. The LOOGY or one-inning lefty just doesn't help as much as a guy that can come in & do what Villy did last night. Now what if Soup can't get through 6 tonight? Villy is burned, and you have to resort to your better RP to burn up garbage innings, since DiFelice is gone & Stetter was used in a higher-leverage game. Beyond that, for this 17-game stretch, the 'long RP to save the bullpen' role will probably be important, and moreso than your #2 lefty RP.

 

What's troubling to me is that Yost/whoever feels the #2 lefty is more important than a pitcher that can handle the vast majority of opponent bats (righties) & help keep the rest of the 'pen fresh.

[Brawndo the Thirst Mutilat]

I hope Brawndo can weigh in here, since he knows DiFelice much better than I do.

 

I don't, really, I only know the numbers, and I know a lot about how really smart folks currently use the numbers to make an informed guess about what a player's true talent level is like. You already said the one thing I wanted to say that didn't get said yesterday (I was sorta trying to stay out of this thread...), i.e. that cutters tend to be very effective against opposite-handed hitters. If you don't believe that, check the career platoon differentials for some pitchers that throw it (or threw it). You could start with Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettitte, and Al Leiter. All of them have smaller than average platoon differential (25 - 30 points of AVG is normal); Rivera's (rather famously) is actually backwards.

 

So I guess what I'm saying is I really don't buy the notion that anybody could look at DiFelice's stuff and say "lefties are going to eat him alive." Couple that with a recognition that, quite literally, anything can happen in sample sizes as small as we're using here ("DiFelice can't get lefties" believers should find this illustrated rather nicely by the fact that in a slightly larger, albeit nowhere near large enough, sample of 2008 AAA pitching, DiFelice was actually a lot more effective against lefties than righties) and I don't see how it is possible for an informed person to intelligently conclude that left-handed batters are a problem for DiFelice.

 

Unless, of course, anybody knows where to dig up minor league split data from previous seasons. My fundamental point is that we don't have nearly enough information to draw any confident conclusions one way or the other on Mark DiFelice's future expected MLB platoon differential, so we shouldn't talk about it as a reason to promote / demote him, nor should we factor it into our discussions about how best to employ him strategically.

 

As far as the DiFelice vs. Stetter discussion goes, I wish we weren't even in a position to be having it. Stetter may have a slightly higher true k-rate than Mark, and probably is better at HR prevention -- those two things offset DiFelice's enormous control advantage enough to make it a very difficult call. I think it's an easier call to say that both of them are probably better than Gagne and Mota.

 

edit: fixed split infinitive

[cwolf2012]

Stetter is Turnbow-esque. DiFelice is very good at not giving up the walk. It's honestly kind of a wash for me who I would rather have. The Brewer bullpen is low on pitchers with high K rates, so I tend to lean towards Stetter. The true overall value of each player is probably almost equal, though.

[Thurston Fluff]

Where we're diverging here is the way the numbers are being interpreted. I don't think Stetter's or DiFelice's opposing lines (BA/OB/SL/OPS) tell you, "This is what to expect, & is the player's talent level." I think they say, "Here's what this pitcher has done over an extraordinarily small amount of work", and have glaring problems in terms of what can be gleaned from them.

 

I wasn't trying to use them to predict anything. I was responding to this part of your post.

 

 

however, where I disagree in Stetter over DiFelice is that Mark provides more overall value, and has been a better MLB pitcher so far.

 

If you're going to claim one has been a better MLB pitcher so far then it makes sense to use the stats available. The fact is Stetter has been better so far. Going forward maybe the only thing that counts is the K:BB but even then more needs to be taken into consideration than one stat. While his K rate is great I'd rather make sure it isn't at the cost of a lot of extra base hits against him before I just use that one stat to determine his worth. I'd much rather see a higher walk rate with a lot less power against him. The fact that he only has one walk all year could indicate one of two things. Either he's really that good or he doesn't know how to effectively use his control to avoid extra base hits. I'm just not sure which category he falls under yet.

 

I don't think of DiFelice as a ROOGY since he's very capable of throwing more innings than just one.

 

Funny because you thought Shouse was a loogy and he has better numbers vs RH than DiFleice has vs LH. I'm no better since I'm arguing the other side of the coin on DiFelice. Both get through innings primarily due to facing same handed hitters enough to survive the opposite handed hitter. The only real difference I see is Shouse keeps them from slugging at an unGodly high rate. DiFelice's numbers in the minors showed him having similar problems with power vs Lh in Nashville. In 14 IP vs LH he's only letting them hit at a .208 clip but given up 8 ER for a 5.14 ERA. That would indicate the same pattern of a lot of extra base hits to go along with that excellent 18:1 K:BB rate. My reasons for being skeptical of DiFelice going forward is because guys who give up a lot of extra base hits vs opposite handed hitters aren't going to be able to get out of innings unscored upon as often as those who just give up walks or singles to them IMHO.

 

What we do 'know' about the two guys imo is that Mark's command has been fantastic in both the minors & in the bigs, while Mitch's command has been fine to good in the minors & poor (imho) in MLB (7.2 BB/9). Stetter has just not been hit very hard yet, but I don't think that will last with more IP, unless he's able to command his pitches better.

 

I think we also know that Stetter has actually done better overall despite his control problems. I don't think it helps predict what will happen mind you. Just saying we know more than just one thing about them. If the time comes and Stetter does start to grove a few 3-0 fastballs and they get hit hard but his walk rate goes down does that really help make him better. Which to me is the problem with only looking at walk rates. They don't tell you much in a vacuum.

 

 

 

What's troubling to me is that Yost/whoever feels the #2 lefty is more important than a pitcher that can handle the vast majority of opponent bats (righties) & help keep the rest of the 'pen fresh.

 

if this is the real point then we agree sometimes too much is put on lefties in the pen. I'm not sure two lefties is too many but I see the point about extra long men. It should be pointed out though the only time we need two long men are if two starters get eaten alive in a row. Even then we have Mota and Riske who both can throw more than one inning. That means combined they can get at least four innings. Given the makeup of our pen I'm not so sure having two long men is more important than two lefties. What happens more often, a long man needed two days in a row or two situations in a game where a lefty could be used? One situation many times is a blowout the other usually an important moment in a close game. There are arguments to be made for both sides.

[TooLiveBrew]

If you're going to claim one has been a better MLB pitcher so far then it makes sense to use the stats available.

 

Since the samples are tiny, I'm using what has been visible & trying to see if it 'matches up' with the stats at all. It's a dicey proposition, and clearly it's pretty tough to agree on anything based on such limited data. I still believe that DiFelice has been a better MLB-er, because I don't think the stats match up much with performance/command for either Mark or Mitch. I know that sounds waffle-y, but I'm doing my best to clarify.

 

 

The fact is Stetter has been better so far.

 

Come on now, you just wanted to rhyme that. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif I was glad to see Mitch had a good inning of work last night.

 

 

Either he's really that good or he doesn't know how to effectively use his control to avoid extra base hits. I'm just not sure which category he falls under yet.

 

This is what I mean about using the small sample to 'know' or 'say' something. I don't agree with the notion that we can take anything about talent levels (as in, 'DiFelice gives up a lot of extra-base hits'... just an example, not putting words in your mouth) from such a small sample. Looking at the available stats (minor-leagues) leads me to believe that Mark is exceptionally skilled at limiting BBs.

 

 

Funny because you thought Shouse was a loogy and he has better numbers vs RH than DiFleice has vs LH.

 

I do think Shouse is best used as a LOOGY, and his success v. RHP relative to DiFelice's success v. LHP (or vice versa) doesn't influence me much for either guy. Shouse has been pretty bad against RH batters in his career, and DiFelice has a miniscule amount of PA v. LH batters -- I don't think it offers anything in terms of 'who's more talented?'

 

 

The only real difference I see is Shouse keeps them from slugging at an unGodly high rate.

 

This season, this has been true. Over his career, it is not. (I emphasized there bc I cringe when I hear baseball announcers say, "He's a .293 hitter", or "He's hitting .293 this year" -- it's something that happened in the past, not an indicator of what a guy 'is' or 'isn't' as a hitter)

 

 

If the time comes and Stetter does start to grove a few 3-0 fastballs and they get hit hard but his walk rate goes down does that really help make him better. Which to me is the problem with only looking at walk rates. They don't tell you much in a vacuum.

 

That's very true. I'm definitely not *just* looking at BB rate, but I personally weigh it heavier than the other stuff with such limited stats. It's a good point about Stetter, too, to note that if he keeps his BBs down, he is every bit as dangerous v. LH as DeFelice is v. RH, if not moreso.

 

 

I'm not sure two lefties is too many but I see the point about extra long men. It should be pointed out though the only time we need two long men are if two starters get eaten alive in a row.

 

Right -- my point on the long man is that right now (meaning, relative to the roster move where the choice was DeFelice or Stetter), the need for a long-RP > the need for a 2nd LHRP -- 17 games in 17 days stretch. In general, I think the second lefty is more valuable, since as you point out, our bullpen has a better overall ability to work more this season.

[pete]

Keep both Stetter and DiFelice. Let Mota go.

[fondybrewfan]

I now understand why we got Mota for Estrada. We are getting what we paid for. I just really hope Ned isn't duped into believing that Mota wasn't that bad last night because he only gave up one run. He theoretically could have given up 4 without recording an out. He got lucky plain and simple. Shouse and Riske should have the 8th inning IMO with Villy and Stetter as the primary 7th inning guys

[TooLiveBrew]

Shouse and Riske should have the 8th inning IMO with Villy and Stetter as the primary 7th inning guys

 

That's a great alignment imo. The flexibility alone of having Shouse + Riske (since Ned apparently thinks "Thou shalt pitch no other pitcher than one designated guy in the 8th inning" was the lost 11th Commandment) for that inning is great. Mota for long-ish relief & low-leverage innings, and the mix of Shouse/Riske/Villy/Stetter/Gagne/(DiFelice if he's with the club) to get to Torres is a solid, solid 'pen.

[Brawndo the Thirst Mutilat]

This season, this has been true. Over his career, it is not. (I emphasized there bc I cringe when I hear baseball announcers say, "He's a .293 hitter", or "He's hitting .293 this year" -- it's something that happened in the past, not an indicator of what a guy 'is' or 'isn't' as a hitter)

 

Darn tootin'. To me, this needs to remain the #1 item on the stat geek informational agenda -- the difference between using statistics descriptively and predictively. Everyone understands that there is a difference. You can tell because nobody looks at a split and says "Since Mike Rivera is batting .525 on Tuesdays this season, Yost is a goof for persisting in starting Kendall on Tuesdays." We know (or at least strongly suspect) that there's nothing special about Tuesdays, so we look at this as a fluke.

 

Yet every televised baseball game, you will see a graphic displaying a guy's BA w/ RISP, and the announcers will say, present tense, "This guy is one of the best hitters on the team in this situation," fully intending to convey that he is more likely than someone who has a low single season BA w/ RISP to get a hit. This is no less stupid a statement than the hypothetical one about Rivera on Tuesdays.

 

I will say again, we do not have enough information to assume that there will be anything abnormal about DiFelice's expected platoon differential going forward, so we should project league average splits. There is enough historical information about Shouse's higher-than-normal platoon differential to suggest that his correct usage pattern should be as a LOOGY, however effective he has been against righties this season.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

I will say again, we do not have enough information to assume that there will be anything abnormal about DiFelice's expected platoon differential going forward, so we should project league average splits. There is enough historical information about Shouse's higher-than-normal platoon differential to suggest that his correct usage pattern should be as a LOOGY, however effective he has been against righties this season.

It's kind of sad that since DiFelice has been in the minors since the beginning of time that we can't dig up any of these splits on him. This stuff is essential!

[TooLiveBrew]

I know minorleaguesplits.com had a message up at one point that the past seasons' data is temporarily unavailable, but would be coming back online in the near future. This was months ago... iirc the site said they were working on their format or something to that effect.

[Thurston Fluff]

I tried to look up career minor league stats for him but didn't really get very far. So I went with what I had available. That was why I used the stats I did. I think ultimately this in one of those situations where maybe seeing is better than stats. DiFelice as TLB pointed out has the cutter now where he didn't before. Stats may be more useful predictors for hitters than pitchers for those reasons. We'd end up with either too small a sample or useless stats that didn't include the new pitch. I guess when lacking good predictors we should go with seeing is believing. In that aspect I'm woefully inadequate so I'll just trust Yost and Melvin. If it doesn't work out then it's time to blame those who are supposed to know more than I.