Schaefer business

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

Can't we at least send a beer over to the visitors locker room as a thank you?

[Fman99]

Frayed Knot wrote: Must .. resist .. temptation.. to give Scheffer points to Eric Bruntlett

He must be quite the soccer player. Kicking the ball around like Beckham out there.

[Guest AG/DC]

Maybe Rollins is the MVP after all.

[metsmarathon]

somebody's gonna get yelled at in today's voting thread...

[Benjamin Grimm]

I figure you're either referring to the comments by *62, which are okay, since they're within the same post that contains the votes and they don't contain any numeric characters, or to Johnny Lunchbucket awarding 10.2 points. I won't "yell" over that one either; my magic spreadsheet will automatically pro-rate the points.

I'm glad to see the levels of participation have been pretty good so far, even in games that the Mets have lost.

Meanwhile, voting for Tuesday afternoon's home opening loss to the Phillies will close early on Friday morning:

http://cranepoolforum.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8637

[metsmarathon]

oh. well. fine.

soupcan misspelled pelfrey, too. does that merit a yelling?

[soupcan]

Hey, e.e. marathon - glass houses, pal.

[Benjamin Grimm]

="metsmarathon"]soupcan misspelled pelfrey, too. does that merit a yelling?

HE DID WHAT???

[soupcan]

Har-har-har-de-har-har.

I'll edit if you want, but doesn't that add numbers to the body of the post?

[Benjamin Grimm]

No, the spreadsheet knows how to avoid those editing comments.

It will also point out the misspelling, which will remind me to fix it. So it's no big deal either way.

[seawolf17]

This mystery spreadsheet is fancy as hell.

[Benjamin Grimm]

It is indeed. When it's time for me to close out and tally a game, start to finish takes no more than a couple of minutes.

If not for the magic spreadsheet, I wouldn't be doing this stuff! It would be work!

[metsmarathon]

="Benjamin Grimm"] ="metsmarathon"]soupcan misspelled pelfrey, too. does that merit a yelling? HE DID WHAT???

much better. thank you.

[Guest *62]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I figure you're either referring to the comments by *62, which are okay, since they're within the same post that contains the votes and they don't contain any numeric characters, or to Johnny Lunchbucket awarding 10.2 points. I won't "yell" over that one either; my magic spreadsheet will automatically pro-rate the points. I'm glad to see the levels of participation have been pretty good so far, even in games that the Mets have lost. Meanwhile, voting for Tuesday afternoon's home opening loss to the Phillies will close early on Friday morning: http://cranepoolforum.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8637

Sorry for 'posting' in the thread before reading the guideline ... deleted the comments

>[/code]

[Benjamin Grimm]

As I said above, it's okay to post a comment along with your vote. (It's also mentioned in the guidelines.) I just don't want non-vote posts in the thread. (At least not until after the voting has closed.)

So no need to have apologized *62! Sorry if I led you to think otherwise.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Soso will probably set a new record for most refreshment per pitch today.

[Guest *62]

How can a starter, in this day and age, not get a minimum of three or four 'points' for a "quality start"?

Maine may have been mediocore last night but he still - with Feliciano's help - kept the Mets up front.

Just my $0.02.

[Benjamin Grimm]

When a game runs into extra innings, the points tend to get pinched. I would have normally given Maine a 4 for his effort, but so many relievers also made important contributions that some of their rewards had to come at Maine's expense.

He did pitch 6 innings, but it was only half the game, so it's, in a way, sort of like he only pitched 4-plus.

Not his fault, of course, that the game went into extras, but that's how Schaefer works, with its ten-point limit.

[Guest Triple Dee]

While I agree with you, in principle, in last night's win 4-5 different personnel made key contributions. However, the people who gave Maine < 2 should go shoot themselves!

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

bang.

ow.

[Guest *62]

No, I get it ... I'd have ordinarily given him at least five if the game had ended 3-1 in nine .....

Still, every reliever doesn't necessarily need a bump for an innings work - necessarily. It's good to see the different values placed on contributions; that's what makes the world go 'round. By the same token, a four-run performance by the offense (over 12 innings) doesn't necessitate giving out too many points to the lineup.

I tend to look at the score, how the game progressed, and decide ahead of time the pitching/hitting split ... then I make it fit.

Vive le difference.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I try to always reward a reliever who pitches a scoreless inning in a tie game.

Anyway, here's the latest notice about thread closing:

Voting for the Mets Wednesday night 8-2 win over the Phillies will close some time over the weekend, perhaps as early as Saturday morning:

http://cranepoolforum.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8652


There's still plenty of time to vote on last night's 12-inning game. The two-workday rule means that voting will be open until Tuesday morning of next week.

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

It seems that Wright is receiving a lot of love and beer for someone that committed two errors in the game. Such miscues, whether they directly lead to runs or not, make the pitcher have to throw more pitches and work harder to make up for the lost outs. Granted he did drive in two of the Mets three runs (solo HR and sac fly), but how many additional pitches did Santana have to throw due to his errors? He also stranded more men on base than any other Mets hitter. Maybe I'm being a little too hard on Wright, but I'm curious how others view such a game.

[Guest *62]

I agree 100%; and Johan pitched well enough to earn more than most people are giving credit for, IMO.

[Gwreck]

I don't think so. If you can't pitch a "quality start," you can't get more than 2 points.

[Guest *62]

He had two earned runs through six .... he should have never been trotted out for the seventh, IMO, already near 100 pitches, no velocity, and not anywhere near his best stuff.

He .... battled.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Voting for Thursday's 12-inning win over the Phillies will close early on Tuesday morning:

http://cranepoolforum.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=8665

[Fman99]

*62 wrote: He had two earned runs through six .... he should have never been trotted out for the seventh, IMO, already near 100 pitches, no velocity, and not anywhere near his best stuff. He .... battled.

Ugh. I threw up in my mouth when I read that phrase.

Godspeed Mr. Howe.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Tomorrow is "Wacky Wednesday" when three (count 'em!) three Schaefer voting threads will close.

If you haven't voted for all three games from the weekend's series against the Brewers at Shea, you'll have until early tomorrow morning to do so.

Schaefer POTG 4/11/08 - Mets 4, Brewers 2

Schaefer POTG 04/12/08 Milwaukee 5, Mets 3

Schaefer POTG 4/13/08 - Brewers 9, Mets 7

[m.e.t.b.o.t.]

m.e.t.b.o.t. has uncovered a potential flaw in the core algorithm m.e.t.b.o.t. utilizes to calculate schaefer points, as it pertains to the new york metropolitan loss on 13 april. in the win expectancy data presented on www.fangraphs.com, the sole responsibility of a double play is laid upon the feet of the batter. metropolitan second baseman luis castillo is held responsible for the entire decrease in win expectancy (-0.287) while brady clark receives none, despite the fact that clark was not forced into a double play.

m.e.t.b.o.t. has been programmed with fairness indicators, which better enable m.e.t.b.o.t. to socially interact with humans. while these indicators are not intended to be applied towards schaefer voting, the parameters of this instance do present enough of a trigger that m.e.t.b.o.t. cannot ignore the feedback.

m.e.t.b.o.t. has elected to share the responsibility for the play evenly between both the metropolitan batter and the metropolitan baserunner. as a result, brady clark is reduced from +0.108 to -0.036 win percentage added and luis castillo is increased from -0.143 to 0.000 win percentage added.

as a consequence of this decision, brady clark does not receive 1.85 schaefer points, which are redistributed proportionally to the remainder of metropolitans which contributed positively towards the win. metropolitan left fielder angel pagan receives the greatest share of these points, increasing angel pagan's total from 3.13 to 3.66.

m.e.t.b.o.t. understands that there is a liklihood that this effect could average itself out across an entire season, in that a baserunner scoring from first base on a single is attributed to the batter as well, despite being a choice made by the runner. however, this case is of such a relatively uncommon nature that m.e.t.b.o.t. could not ignore it.

m.e.t.b.o.t. is now concerned that this action may be a direct contradiction of m.e.t.b.o.t.'s core mission - to provide input to the schaefer voting based solely upon win expectancy data. if additional human input is such that m.e.t.b.o.t. should not deviate from this purpose, m.e.t.b.o.t. will amend the vote to credit metropolitan brady clark 1.87 schaeffer votes, with appropriate proportional reductions to the remaining positively contributing metropolitans.