St. Louis 2026 Game #151 thread – Monday, Sept. 14 vs. San Francisco Giants

Rafael Devers is now out for the season for the Giants.

Any reason why we can’t sweep this series like they did to us last week?

I’m not sure what XFIP is, Jnevel, but what’s really insane is that an ERA of 4.20 belongs to the NL SV’s leader.

It essentially says if Graceffo was pitching in front of an average defense with an average batting average on balls put in play against him going to that defense in an average park size, he would be expected to have an ERA of 4.90 or something like that. It’s generally a better predictive stat to guess at future production than using ERA and certainly more predictive than using wins and losses for relievers . . . but it’s far from perfect. I think it also uses strikeout and walk rates in the formula. I don’t either like it or hate it. It does seem to work better for certain kinds of pitchers than others.

But Graceffo is still likely to be pitching half his games in Busch stadium next season and he is likely to mostly have Winn and Wetherholt behind him again. So that part of the formula is already messed up.

• This reply was modified 1 day, 16 hours ago by Jnevel.

You have to play lots of close games that you happen to be winning late to accumulate saves. Those other guys are probably better than O’Brien but they just get fewer qualifying save opportunities.

Stats these days are so much fun. These guys will measure anything.

I think we should start keeping track of what relief pitchers’ ate for breakfast and the regularity of their bowel movements.

Some good thoughts here. Any stat is worthwhile, but at the same time only one piece of the puzzle. To get a clear image of a players’s value you need to look at several components.

I think where we go wrong in using statistics is in using them as predictors. Sports is similar to investing; “past results do not guarantee future returns.”

Specific to Graceffo this year, it looks like he has been a bit lucky. Probably some hard hit balls were right at defenders, and he had his share of defensive “web gems.”

Does this mean he won’t be as good next year? I would not count on that. Maybe the breaks even out some, but also maybe he works on arm strength and adds a foot to his fastball. Or perhaps a tweak in his release adds a bit more break to his slider.

As for this year, I guess we can use the old saying “sometimes it’s better to be lucky than good.”

It is easy to go down a rabbit hole with advanced stats. They serve a purpose of drilling under the surface that might reveal information that could be beneficial. Other times they seem like a way for someone to justify their job or pretend how smart they are.

I have noticed a lot of television broadcasts now show Avg, HR, RBI, and OPS. I like that approach. It maintains the traditional stats but including OPS gives us more information and valuable information.

Pitching stats should do the same. I still think the W-L record of starters can be relevant but supporting info like ERA, WHIP, and Avg against really tells the story.

Liberatore currently is 5-14. Is that an accurate portrayal of his season? yes I think it is because his ERA and Avg against are really bad. A more interesting comparison would be McGreevy and Leahy. McGreevy is 7-9 while Leahy is 10-4 but their ERA, WHIP, and Avg against are very similar. The deciding factor is probably Leahy gets more run support. My next question is why does he get more run support. I am surprised someone hasn’t come up with a way to measure why that is. Is it really random?

Is it really random?

Anything the wonks can’t figure out goes in the “random” bucket, or the “doesn’t exist” bucket, like momentum.

I have always believed there is a lot of randomness in life. Us humans always try to connect cause and effect, and often can do so. We get uncomfortable when we cannot control something, saying “there had to be a reason.”

I think often times there is no logical reason for things. Random occurrences happen at times.

I sometimes think my thinking on the subject goes back to the first major I tried out in college, which was anthropology. 100% of the time when the experts couldn’t figure out what some ancient artifact had been used for it was declared to be ‘for ritual purposes’. As if cave men had limitless leisure time to craft items with no practical utility. Endless amounts of stuff was for ritual purposes. They were so sure, but it was so absurd. The hubris it implied amongst the experts was appalling. Whenever there is a convenient off ramp where the unexplained is dumped, thus avoiding an unflattering assessment of the current state of the art, I think of that and of the hubris behind it.

Back 19 years ago I was diagnosed with colon cancer. Fortunately it was caught early, I had the surgery and they took a bunch of lymph nodes that all were clean.

In post op I was talking to my oncologist and asked what caused this – I lived a fairly clean life style, exercised, did not have a family history of cancer, etc. He looked at me and kind of shrugged and goes, “Bad luck?”

So yeah 1TD, when there is no other answer, the “answer” is randomness. And even though we are being kind of light hearted, I think that is true. Sometimes things just happen.