SB Nation User Blog: dvd1204

Savage's legacy - by the numbers

dvd1204 — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 18:55:21 -0000

I've been a Savage apologist and I was not happy to see him go, but there has been an ongoing debate about how well or poorly he did his job. A simple metric that has been used on this site is the number of players currently on the roster. I decided to look into this further and have run the numbers for all 32 teams'draft picks from 2005 - 2008 (the Savage drafts) and compared them to the current rosters as listed by ESPN. The results are listed below. I don't know what conclusions can be made from these results because it has no real measure of the value of the pick. For example, Charlie Frye shows up as a miss against Savage as a 3rd rounder, but backup QB Alex Smith (#1 overall in 2005) shows up as a hit for the 49ers. I'd argue that both were misses, but it is much harder to start quantifying what is a "hit" and what is a "miss", so we are left with the metric of "is the player on the roster of the team that drafted him?" (note: players traded after draft day like Jay Cutler also show up as misses). Here are the results in descending order by overall hit rate. Also provided is the hit rates by rounds (all data obtained via ESPN):

Rank	Team	# OF HITS	# OF PICKS	Overall HIT RATE	First	Second	Third	Forth	Fifth	Sixth	Seventh
1	New York Giants	21	26	0.808	1	1	1	1	0.667	0.25	0.667
2	San Francisco	22	35	0.629	1	1	0.833	0.6	0.5	0.667	0
3	Baltimore	21	34	0.618	1	0.75	0.5	0.714	0.75	0.6	0
4	San Diego	16	26	0.615	1	1	0.667	0.5	0.5	0.25	0.4
5	Green Bay	26	43	0.605	1	0.625	0.8	0.714	0.167	0.714	0.429
6	Seattle	18	30	0.6	1	1	0.667	0.8	0.5	0	0.429
7	Carolina	21	35	0.6	1	0.75	0.571	0.333	0.429	0.333	0.667
8	Dallas	18	30	0.6	1	0.333	0.5	0.5	1	0.333	0.6
9	Oakland	18	30	0.6	0.75	1	0.667	0.6	0.5	0.333	0.5
10	Buffalo	19	32	0.594	0.75	1	0.75	0.4	0.5	0.75	0.375
11	Washington	16	27	0.593	1	1	1	0.5	0.333	0.625	0.167
12	New York Jets	16	28	0.571	1	0.5	0.667	1	0.333	0.2	0.25
13	Houston	15	27	0.556	0.75	1	0.667	0.75	0.25	0.5	0.25
14	Indianapolis	19	35	0.543	1	1	0.2	0.4	0.286	0.571	0.75
15	Atlanta Falcons	19	35	0.543	1	0.8	0.667	0.667	0.4	0.143	0.4
16	Philadelphia	20	37	0.541	1	0.857	0.4	0.714	0.5	0.167	0.25
17	Arizonia Cardinals	14	26	0.538	1	0.75	0.2	0.667	0.5	0	0.5
18	Chicago	18	34	0.529	0.667	0.6	0.8	0.75	0.667	0.333	0.125
19	Tennessee	20	38	0.526	0.75	1	0.25	0.7	0	0.4	0.5
20	Pittsburgh	15	32	0.469	1	0.667	0.4	0.5	0.333	0.5	0
21	New Orleans	13	28	0.464	1	0.667	0.333	0.5	0.2	0	0.6
22	Denver	12	26	0.462	0.667	0.5	0.25	0.5	0.333	0.333	0.667
23	Minnesota	12	26	0.462	0.5	0.833	0	0.667	0.25	0.5	0
24	St Louis	17	37	0.459	0.75	0.5	0.571	0.6	0.2	0	0.444
25	Cincinnati	14	32	0.438	0.75	0.5	0.75	0.5	0	0.2	0.429
26	Cleveland	13	30	0.433	1	1	0	0.2	0.5	0.286	0.4
27	Miami	13	31	0.419	0.75	0.4	0.5	0.5	0	0.4	0.25
28	Tampa Bay	15	39	0.385	0.75	0.6	0.6	0.5	0.4	0.4	0
29	Kansas City	13	35	0.371	1	0.333	0.667	0	0.333	0	0.167
30	Jacksonville	11	30	0.367	0.75	0.75	0.667	0.333	0.286	0	0
31	Detroit	11	30	0.367	0.75	0.5	0.6	0	0.2	0	0.2
32	New England	11	33	0.333	1	0.5	0.4	0.6	0.25	0	0

By this simple metric Savage was a little below average (21st) until Ruckerwas released and that dropped him to the position you see here. Perhaps the most interesting result of this exercise is that there appears to be some correlation to how well teams are performing. One could argue, for the mostpart, that the teams at the top of this list are on the rise and the teams on the bottom are in decline or standing still at best.

Can we audible?

dvd1204 — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 16:40:42 -0000

I don't want to start the DA vs BQ debate up, but I do have a question that I hope someone can offer some intelligent insight into. Does DA audible? Is he capable? Is he allowed?

I don't ever think I've seen him switch a play at the line of scrimage, and I wonder if this contributes to his inconsistency. IMO there seems to be many situations where the called play has very little chance of success given the defense's formation yet we run it anyway. I know there is a lot of variables that go into each play's success/failure, but I honestly don't know if we have ever changed a play at the line of scrimage in the Chud era, so I ask why?

Poll

Why don't we audible?

we do audible, stupid

5 votes

our QB is incapable

7 votes

our coach's won't allow it

6 votes

18 votes | Poll has closed

Rumored Vikes Trade?

dvd1204 — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 20:24:38 -0000

I have seen on a few sites that the Browns were supposedly offered 2009 and 2010 first round picks from the Vikings for Quinn and we declined. Is there any legitimacy to this? If (most likely) not true, let's play the hypothetical, if you were Savage would you do this deal?

Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Go Browns!

Chicago based Tribe Fan with Tickets

dvd1204 — Fri, 02 May 2008 22:53:29 -0000

So last year, I plopped down my deposit for season tickets for this year so that I could go to the playoff games. So now I have 2 tickets to 20 games which would normally be quite awesome except that I live in Chicago and can’t use them very often.

So, as a long time reader and seldom poster, I thought I’d ask the members of this wonderful community if they would be interested in being placed on a mailing list that will only be used only when these tickets are available (starting tomorrow against the Royals). I plan for this to be my only post on LGT on this subject and to do the rest offline via email. If you would like to be placed on the list or have questions please send an email to dvd1204 at hotmail with the subject Tribe and I’ll respond as soon as I can.

The seats are $22 per in lower reserved down the third base line. I’ll always be selling them at face since I’m not trying to make any money on them, just doing my best not to eat them (as I have already done for a couple of games).

Ryan/Jay, if this is inappropriate feel free to remove.

First round bye?

dvd1204 — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:42:57 -0000

As I'm sure everyone knows by now, we can earn a playoff appearance with either a win over Cincinnati or a Tennessee loss. Note that this is not the same as a Brown's win or a Tennessee loss or the same as a Brown's win or a Tennessee loss to NYJ. What does this mean? It means that the gimme game against SF in week 17 in regards to a playoff berth is completely meaningless to the Brown's. The illustration below shows that the outcomes of a L-W and L-L finish for the Browns are identical.

    Week 16 Week 17    Overall    Conference
CLE    W    W    11-5    8-4    IN
TEN    W    W    10-6    7-5

CLE W L 10-6 8-4 IN
TEN W W 10-6 7-5

Brown's Loss-Win Scenarios
CLE    L    W    10-6    7-5    OUT
TEN    W    W    10-6    7-5

CLE L W 10-6 7-5 IN
TEN W L 9-7 6-6

CLE L W 10-6 7-5 IN
TEN L W 9-7 6-6

CLE L W 10-6 7-5 IN
TEN L L 8-8 5-7

Brown's Loss-Loss Scenarios
CLE    L    L    9-7    7-5    OUT
TEN    W    W    10-6    7-5

CLE L L 9-7 7-5 IN
TEN W L 9-7 6-6

CLE L L 9-7 7-5 IN
TEN L W 9-7 6-6

CLE L L 9-7 7-5 IN
TEN L L 8-8 5-7

Obviously, the SF game at least at this point still has meaning with regards to the AFC North title and seeding.

So assuming that the SF game is truly meaningless, what are people's thoughts on the best way to approach that game? Should we keep playing our regulars and use the game as a playoff tune-up? Or, rest up our regulars (especially those with nagging injuries) and treat the game as a bye.

Quinn's debut?

dvd1204 — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 23:58:35 -0000

I'll save the playoff scenarios for Chris, but should we defeat Buffalo on Sunday there is a strong possibility that we will have clinched a playoff birth before week 17 against San Francisco. Allow me to get a head of myself and ask the question, does Brady Quinn play? If so, how much time should he get? Whole game? Second half?

There is no doubt in my mind that should this scenario arise, he would have to see some time otherwise we run the risk of his debut occurring in a playoff game if DA gets hurt. Boy that could make for a very interesting story.

Can someone please help me?

dvd1204 — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:26:10 -0000

Is anyone going to the game tonight and is willing to check out some seats for me? I live in Chicago, and I'm looking to get tickets to the entire Yankees series. However, I'm afraid that the right field foul pole will obstruct the view of the field and I don't want to pay a premium for obstructed view seats. So, if someone in LGT land can take a peak of the view from Section 116 Row Y (Right Field next to the vistor's bullpen) and let me know how good/bad they are I would be forever indebted.

Carmona and Kruk

dvd1204 — Wed, 02 May 2007 02:19:35 -0000

As I sit here and watch Baseball Tonight, I'm wondering if anyone else saw it last night when Kruk was yelling at Philips that it made no sense at all that the Tribe was sending down their "best pitcher right now". He went even further to say that it would be hard as a player to take the field with lesser pitchers taking the mound.

Not surprisingly, Philips justified the move by saying you have to go with the guys that have a proven track record even if they aren't performing right now. Not once did this former GM mention minor league options as the reason. How did this guy have a job?

Baseball Etiquette

dvd1204 — Thu, 19 Apr 2007 22:13:21 -0000

With one out in the 7th inning, runner on first, down by 7 runs. Do you hold the runner?

That was the situation on Wednesday night and Torre chose not to hold Dellucci. The ESPN crew, mainly Hershiser, was talking about unwritten rules of baseball and the etiquette of the situation. Dellucci stayed at first and in the end it didn't make much difference. But in today's game where runs can really be scored in bunches a 7 run comeback in the 7th doesn't seem impossible (especially if you can chip one more run of the lead with a free base and a bloop single).

So I ask, whose decision is it not to take the conceded base? And whether it was Dellucci's or Wedge's decision, isn't the Tribe conceding the game by not taking advantage of the gift? Either way, I believe this is a lack of leadership from either our veteran and/or our manager. The message is clear; we've lost, so we're not going to try. This is never a message that should be conveyed in baseball where time can never run out.

Does it concern anyone else that Wedge is allowing this loser's mentality to exist? At the very least he could make an example out of Dellucci to the rest of the guys that it will not be tolerated.

No such thing as clutch?

dvd1204 — Mon, 07 Aug 2006 19:48:35 -0000

There has been some discussion on this site about the fact that the 2006 Tribe is not "clutch". The discussion usually divides into those who have watched this team under-perform in tight situations and emotionally state they are not "clutch" and those that witness the same thing and say, it's bad luck since there is no statistical evidence of "clutch" performance.

So I have to ask, if there is no such thing as "clutch", why does a team need a closer?

Before the Wickman trade, there was a clamoring to let Carmona or even Davis close games to "see if they can do it". If there is no "clutch", there is no need to see if they can close because you would theoretically already know based on previous performance levels established in earlier innings than the 9th. You would suspect that they sustain those levels, but the need to see "if they can do it" is to test if those levels will sustain or drop. If they drop, isn't that "anti-clutch" performance?

The last few years have shown a tremendous amount of pitchers who were tried as closers and failed from the current tribe bullpen to Atlanta's to the failed closer by committee in Boston a few years ago.

Maybe there is no such thing as "clutch", but the need for a closer would seem to indicate that there is such a thing as "anti-clutch", and after all, isn't that the same thing?