There are plenty of places you can go to read team power rankings for all of Major League Baseball. I believe most respectable bloggers and journalists are required by the code of moot speculation to incite as many arguments as possible by haphazardly or systematically arranging the teams from best to crappiest.
Two things prevent me from doing that: a) I’m discredited and therfore not bound by the blogger codes of conduct, and b) We all know the Cubs are wallowing at the bottom of any but the most randomly created rankings anyway. So instead, I’ve set out to rank the Cubs players.
I used a complex formula incorporating projected player value and season data combined with intangibles factor and adjusted for fun-to-watchedness and how much the player as a person inspires and/or annoys the crap out of me. It’s a pretty advanced method, I won’t bore you with the details. I’ll just get straight to the rankings.
1. Starlin Castro
He’s really, really, really good at sports. Allowed to eat dinner on a regular basis.
2. Carlos Zambrano
Zambrano is never boring. Quite the opposite. Not only does he have a pitching arsenal entirely his own, he’s got personality. And personality goes a long way.
3. Carlos Marmol
Dude is filthy. I have no idea if he’s a complete jerk or nicer than Mr. Rogers, and I really don’t care.
4. Geovany Soto
Geo could be higher on this list if he were producing this year, but as it is there are very few hitters I would rather see at the plate than Geo right now. And by very few, I mean Starlin Castro.
5. Alfonso Soriano
All you really need to know about the 2011 Cubs is that Alfonso Soriano is in my top 5 favorite players right now.
6. Marlon Byrd
Marlon got off to a very brief rough start, but now he’s hitting about as well as he was in spring training, and also showing he is not to be messed with. Don’t let the perma-smile fool you. He’s one bad hombre.
7. Ryan Dempster
Dempster is boring good. Not his best work so far this year, but he’s still much better than what we’ll see from the 3 starters slotted behind him and Z in the rotation. And during the Stanley Cup playoffs, I needed a Canadian to rank pretty high.
8. Sean Marshall
Like mb21, I expect Sean Marshall to disappoint us this season, but really, how many Cubs from the past three seasons (including this one) can you name that you have zero complaints about the entire time? After Sean Marshall, it gets pretty difficult to come up with names.
9. Kosuke Fukudome
It’s April, yeah, so Kosuke should maybe be even higher on this list. I like him. He’s consistently above average in right field. He is nursing a sore hamstring, but he’s part of the better-than-Pujols committee in the leadoff spot.
10. Andrew Cashner*
The kid is on the DL now, which sucks, but the nearly six innings we saw from Cashner were inspiring.
11. Randy Wells*
It’s almost unfathomable that at some point this spring, Randy Wells‘ value to this rotation was in question. I’m pretty sure that when Joni Mitchell wrote “Big Yellow Taxi,” she was referring to the disabled list.
12. Aramis Ramirez
I don’t know why Aramis is so far down on this list. It makes the Cubs look much better than they are to have him here, but I stand behind my foolish decision.
13. Jeff Baker
It’s not the sample size, it’s how you swing it. Right now Baker is swinging it to the tune of a .952 OPS. And he ranks 13th on this team? How do they suck so bad?
14. Kerry Wood
Kerry is the line of demarcation between the players I’m satisfied with and those with whom I’m losing patience. I’m glad for sentimental reasons Wood is on this team, but I’m afraid sentimentality is one of the only reasons he’s on this team.
15. Tyler Colvin
When he hits the ball, it goes far. But most pitches prove very elusive to Tyler Colvin.
16. Carlos Pena
He can’t save all the errors, and he’s basically Tyler Colvin with a shorter future with the Cubs.
17. Darwin Barney
A hot start is what has Darwin so high on this list. I’m sure he’s very good defensively, but I’d rather see Baker in the game.
18. Marcos Mateo
Mateo could easily skyrocket up this list if he keeps throwing like he did last night. But there are only so many Astros in the Majors.
19. Matt Garza
Garza is this low more due to his annoyance factor than anything else. I don’t really want to talk about it.
20. Jeff Samardzija
There are seven Cubs ranked lower than Spellcheck on my list of favorites. If Soriano’s number 5 ranking wasn’t convincing enough, this oughta do it.
21. Casey Coleman
I like Casey Coleman, but he’s the literal definition of a replacement player.
22. James Russell
He’s Rosencrantz.
23. Jeff Stevens
He’s Gildenstern.
24. Blake DeWitt
The bottom of this list was pretty tough to sort out. Blake DeWitt has a game-winning RBI to his name (to go with a comedy of errors from last night). So he finds himself atop the scrappy heap.
25. Reed Johnson
I like Reed. I really wish I was liking him as the occasional visiting ex-Cub instead of the occasionally used Cubs 5th outfielder. His presence on this team makes the Matt Garza trade seem all the more ridiculous.
26. John Grabow
There are times when Grabow will get the job done, especially if “the job” is allowing the other team to score runs.
27. Koyie Hill
I put Koyie at the bottom because he has the respect of the clubhouse and the leadership qualities necessary to handle a position of this importance. He can take this ignominious distinction. I don’t know who else is up to it.
Go ahead. Prove this false.
Comments
*disabled list
AndCountingQuote Reply
K
MishQuote Reply
There’s nothing really here yet, but as an FYI, I’ve started a baseball blog (like, an hour ago). Content pending.
http://www.sacrificelies.com
MishQuote Reply
(dying laughing) @ Rosencranz and Gildenstern
Rice CubeQuote Reply
You and I often agree.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
[quote name=WenningtonsGorillaCock]I prefer Benny Hill
Suburban kidQuote Reply
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/20110413_U_S__judge_sides_with_middle_schoolers_suspended_for_wearing__I__heart__Boobies__bracelets.html
GBTSQuote Reply
It’s not like the Cubs gave up two better 5th OF candidates in that deal.
GBTSQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/20110413_U_S__judge_sides_with_middle_schoolers_suspended_for_wearing__I__heart__Boobies__bracelets.html
[/quote]
Good to see the courts spending valuable time and money deciding when it is OK for children to say “boobies.”
Aisle424Quote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]It’s not like the Cubs gave up two better 5th OF candidates in that deal.[/quote]I was thinking more along the lines that the Cubs got Fernando Perez as part of the deal and he didn’t even make the team. Not that Perez was considered a great acquisition or anything.
AndCountingQuote Reply
Marmol is a nice guy he’s given me treats from the elliusive pink backpack 2 times last season
CerambamQuote Reply
Great point about Marshall. There’s absolutely nothing to dislike about that guy.
mb21Quote Reply
Mish, aren’t you going to start writing for Drays bay?
mb21Quote Reply
You may not realize it, so I’ll let it pass…this time. But the advanced stat that you’ve mislabeled “adjusted for fun-to-watchedness” is actually VATMBWE™ or Value Added To My Baseball Watching Experience. I can’t tell you the formula-I’d have to kill all of you if I revealed it here-but I can disclose that it involves proportionally weighted modifier counts (mainly adverbs and adjectives, adjusted for player’s racial identification and recent dinner-eating rankings). Although largely ignored in the world of advanced metrics, VATMBWE™ is the single greatest predictor of the discrepancy between the game as it occurs on the field and the game is it is perceived in the minds of millions of baseball fans, something all of your faget stats are helpless in accounting for.
As I said, I’ll let it pass…this time. But I’m watching you.™
UrkQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Mish, aren’t you going to start writing for Drays bay?[/quote]Sometime in May. I figure I could get in the mindset and also blog about non Rays baseball.
MishQuote Reply
Urk FTW
GBTSQuote Reply
I dunno which thread y’all be using, but:
http://espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=310413118
Castro now hitting .389, but OBP only at .411…doesn’t walk enough. There are a lot of Cubs so far who either haven’t walked, or have barely walked, and it’s kind of annoying.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Also…awesome.
http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=13765759
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]I dunno which thread y’all be using, but:
http://espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=310413118
Castro now hitting .389, but OBP only at .411…doesn’t walk enough. There are a lot of Cubs so far who either haven’t walked, or have barely walked, and it’s kind of annoying.[/quote]His discipline has gotten quite a bit worse than last season. I’d like to see him put back down in the 8th spot so he can take some pitches while the pitchers are working around him. Then again, that didn’t do anything to help him out anyway.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]I dunno which thread y’all be using, but:
http://espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=310413118
Castro now hitting .389, but OBP only at .411…doesn’t walk enough. There are a lot of Cubs so far who either haven’t walked, or have barely walked, and it’s kind of annoying.[/quote]Two words: Rudy Jaramillo. This is his entire approach.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
MB, didn’t you, b, or Shawn do a rundown on Jaramillo at ACB?
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]I dunno which thread y’all be using, but:
http://espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=310413118
Castro now hitting .389, but OBP only at .411…doesn’t walk enough. There are a lot of Cubs so far who either haven’t walked, or have barely walked, and it’s kind of annoying.[/quote]
In a 10 or 12 game span where any player is hitting .390, I don’t really care if he’s walking; he’s hitting the ball well. The real test will come when he hits a slump, and hopefully can make the adjustment to be more selective. I also don’t think it’s out of the realm of possibility that he’s a .330-.340 true talent BABIP
Recalcitrant Blogger NateQuote Reply
[quote name=Recalcitrant Blogger Nate]In a 10 or 12 game span where any player is hitting .390, I don’t really care if he’s walking; he’s hitting the ball well. The real test will come when he hits a slump, and hopefully can make the adjustment to be more selective. I also don’t think it’s out of the realm of possibility that he’s a .330-.340 true talent BABIP[/quote]
Right, but the guys who aren’t walking are guys we sort of know don’t walk anyway, so when their numbers come back down to earth…what to do?
I’d like to think that all of them are .400 hitters all year though. That means 90 wins, right?
Rice CubeQuote Reply
I’m taking the stance that it’s too early to make hard and fast judgments on his plate discipline. I definitely think he has a good sense of the strike zone, but he has been over anxious. The fact that it has led to him just hitting the ball a lot has been wildly entertaining. I have confidence he’ll be able to exercise more patience moving forward, though.
AndCountingQuote Reply
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]MB, didn’t you, b, or Shawn do a rundown on Jaramillo at ACB?[/quote]No, but I recently looked into it. There’s nothing at all that stands out about Jaramillo. His teams were outstanding on offense (batting average, OBP and slugging). His teams had a higher isolated discipline than the league average.
The problem isn’t Jaramillo. It’s that the Cubs don’t have any patient hitters. The only patient hitters in the lineup is Fukudome and Soto. They’ve been patient hitters their entire careers. The rest of the lineup is full of guys who have been hackers their entire careers.
Take the Cubs lineup tonight for example: Castro, Barney, Byrd, Soriano and Colvin (all next to impossible to walk and they’ve been that way their entire careers), then there was Baker who hits the ball 1000 mph every time he swings against a lefty, Soto. This team has no patience.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]No, but I recently looked into it. There’s nothing at all that stands out about Jaramillo. His teams were outstanding on offense (batting average, OBP and slugging). His teams had a higher isolated discipline than the league average.
The problem isn’t Jaramillo. It’s that the Cubs don’t have any patient hitters. The only patient hitters in the lineup is Fukudome and Soto. They’ve been patient hitters their entire careers. The rest of the lineup is full of guys who have been hackers their entire careers.
Take the Cubs lineup tonight for example: Castro, Barney, Byrd, Soriano and Colvin (all next to impossible to walk and they’ve been that way their entire careers), then there was Baker who hits the ball 1000 mph every time he swings against a lefty, Soto. This team has no patience.[/quote]
It seems if there’s one thing a hitting coach can have an impact on, it’s patience. But by reputation, Jaramillo is terrible at it. What he’s great at is the mechanics of hitting.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
DeRosa injured his wrist again.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
The Cubs don’t really draft, sign or develop patient hitters either in their system, with the exception of Jackson. Pena is a patient FA signing, as was Bradley. Ramirez has average patience, no?
Recalcitrant Blogger NateQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]DeRosa injured his wrist again.[/quote]Ugh.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
Didn’t Colvin walk almost 10% of his PA last year?
Also, I’m curious about when guys are on absolute roles, if their BB% goes down. It’s an interesting point, and it wouldn’t surprise me at all.
Then there’s the side question of Barney, is he really no good at walking? He’s walked like 5 times already this year hasn’t he?
DoogolasQuote Reply
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]It seems if there’s one thing a hitting coach can have an impact on, it’s patience. But by reputation, Jaramillo is terrible at it. What he’s great at is the mechanics of hitting.[/quote]I don’t know about Jaramillo per se, but it seems like an organizational philosophy with the Cubs. That’s what Fuld’s comments after he left seemed to indicate. I should probably look it up before going off about it, but I’m too lazy. IIRC, he made it sound like Lou and Hendry wanted him to hack away more than take walks. I don’t know if that’s on Rudy as well or not.
AndCountingQuote Reply
Also, it’s worth noting that not all guys with good plate discipline can walk, no matter what they do. I mean, take a look at Theriot’s Plate Discipline numbers. Guys like him, after the league realizes they will hit nothing but singles, they stop seeing pitches out of the zone cause there’s really no point in playing around because the most they’ll do is get on with a single.
So somebody like Fuld, I’m willing to bet, towards the end of the year we’ll see his Plate Discipline numbers looks shiny but his insane lack of power (which will surely even out) and his ability to walk will be thusly compromised.
DoogolasQuote Reply
In 394 PA last season, Colvin walked 30 times and K’d 100.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
Yikes. I thought he walked more than 7.5%. Good lord.
DoogolasQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]so when their numbers come back down to earth…what to do?[/quote]
Worry about it then?
Seems like it was only last year the old blog was mocking people who critiqued Castro for not being patient enough when he was busy destroying the Southern League.
Chris DickersonQuote Reply
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]It seems if there’s one thing a hitting coach can have an impact on, it’s patience. But by reputation, Jaramillo is terrible at it. What he’s great at is the mechanics of hitting.[/quote]I don’t ever remember him being thought of as terrible when it came to anything regarding his hitting coach abilities. I remember that teams slugged the shit out of the ball when he was there and that some players emerged as starts that weren’t thought of as stars before. I remember if he had a weakness it was that his teams didn’t take as many walks as you’d like, but I don’t think terrible is the word. Jaramillo definitely is not responsible for the Cube free-swinging ways.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Chris Dickerson]Worry about it then?
Seems like it was only last year the old blog was mocking people who critiqued Castro for not being patient enough when he was busy destroying the Southern League.[/quote]My concern for his patience has been blown out of proportion. It was nothing but a simple remark meant only to show some concern that his hitting may not have developed much at all from a year ago (may even have regressed). I’ve not made any honest comparisons or made any statements about his future other than to highlight that he’s still the youngest player in the game.
But yeah, I could see how it could look like we (I) am doing nothing but criticizing him. I should have commented on it and ignored the follow ups. It certainly didn’t deserve as much time being spent on it as was last night.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Doogolas]Yikes. I thought he walked more than 7.5%. Good lord.[/quote]He was at 7.6% last year and that’s just barely below league average. He’s just over 10% this season. Colvin’s walks aren’t an issue. He’s never going to walk much, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s slightly above league average this year. Strikeouts are just an out. Doesn’t matter how you make them. Colvin also hits a home run twice as frequently as the average batter. Of all his skills or lack of skills, the home run skill is the one that stands out the most.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Chris Dickerson]Worry about it then?
Seems like it was only last year the old blog was mocking people who critiqued Castro for not being patient enough when he was busy destroying the Southern League.[/quote]Let’s not confuse the call for patience with demanding more walks. I know I’m not the one saying Castro is way too impatient, but right now he is swinging at more pitches outside the strike zone than normal. He has swung at 37.6% of pitches outside the zone (in 2010 his O-Swing% was 32.3%, league average is 27.9%). He’s making contact with 80% of those pitches (league average: 65.4%). He’s also swinging at more strikes (69.1%, league average is 64.7%; last year Castro’s Z-swing% was 64.9%, right around league average). He can be more selective without necessarily walking all that more frequently.
I would rather see him hit than walk when he makes solid contact all the time. But if he’d get back to taking pitches outside of the zone (especially the ones way outside the zone he’s been swinging at this week), I think we’d see his power numbers increase a bit.
But still, I’m never going to complain much about his walk rate when his OBP is .411. Never.
AndCountingQuote Reply
The Rangers hitters have become more patient since Jaramillo left.
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
In summary: Castro swings at a lot of pitches. Castro hits almost everything he swings at (in baseball parlance, almost 150 points higher than average). Starlin Castro is good at sports.
That said, if his O-Swing % continues to escalate, teams will attack him outside the zone. I expect he’ll adjust to that, but if he doesn’t, his production will almost certainly drop.
AndCountingQuote Reply
B. Jackson 3/3, BB, SB
Vitters 0/3, 2 BB
M. Gonzalez 3/5, HR
Struck 5.2 IP, 6 H, 1 ER, 3 K, 1 BB, 7-3 GO-FO
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
[quote name=AndCounting]In summary: Castro swings at a lot of pitches. Castro hits almost everything he swings at (in the parlance of our times). Starlin Castro is good at sports.
That said, if his O-Swing % continues to escalate, teams will attack him outside the zone. I expect he’ll adjust to that, but if he doesn’t, I’m just gonna go find a cash machine.[/quote].
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
AndCountingQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Jaramillo definitely is not responsible for the Cube free-swinging ways.[/quote]
For the most part I don’t think Castro will continue to hit .390 or whatever it is now. I think he tapers off to .325 or less. That’s about a .350-.360 OBP if he keeps swinging at everything and putting balls in play methinks. I also don’t swing at everything no matter what Rudy J preaches.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
I basically agree with AC here – it has less to do with his walks as opposed to his swinging at pitches clearly outside. Given that he’s hitting the ball hard, if he can get fatter pitches to drive we should see a spike in power.
That said, it’s still pretty fun to watch. It’s like the light hitting, shortstop version of Vlad Guerrero.
MishQuote Reply
Wut? How did NYJ get up to No. 5 in 2009?
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
That the singular difference between you and I. (dying laughing)
I’m not complaining either even though it started to sound like it. It’s just something to watch because he’s been much less selective this year than last. The benefits of being more patient go far beyond the walks as you mentioned. You get better hitter’s counts. You see more pitches and therefore more mistakes. He has excellent control of the bat. He can put the bat on the ball and make solid contact almost anywhere the pitcher throws it. Some of those pitches he’s hitting are pitcher’s pitches. I want to see him work the count, get into hitter’s counts, take the free pass if it’s there, drive the ball if it isn’t.
I think he’s more than capable of doing that at the ridiculously young age of 21. I’d hate to see it not happen because that’s literally the difference between Starlin Castro being good and Starlin Castro being great. He’s that close. At age 21. It’s remarkable.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]That the singular difference between 2 and 288. 48/2(dying laughing)
[/quote].
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
[quote name=Mish]I basically agree with AC here – it has less to do with his walks as opposed to his swinging at pitches clearly outside. Given that he’s hitting the ball hard, if he can get fatter pitches to drive we should see a spike in power.
That said, it’s still pretty fun to watch. It’s like the light hitting, shortstop version of Vlad Guerrero.[/quote]Yes, exactly. I want some of those singles to turn into walks, doubles, triples and home runs. Being more selective at the plate is to accomplish that. Once that happens, we’re talking about a legitimate superstar. Until that happens, we’re talking about a guy who is very exciting to watch and exceptionally good for his age.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Jame Gumb]Wut? How did NYJ get up to No. 5 in 2009?[/quote]It’s not always about the numbers, Ryno.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]It’s not always about the numbers, Ryno.[/quote]
How did NYJ get up to the fifth pick two years ago?
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
[quote name=Jame Gumb]How did NYJ get up to the fifth pick two years ago?[/quote]fifth, two, those are numbers. It’s not about the numbers. Get your head out of the spreadsheet for once.
mb21Quote Reply
Zambrano is on pace for another bullpen test. So are Dempster and Garza.
mb21Quote Reply
It’s probably time I ordered something from the OV store. Any particular favorites people?
MishQuote Reply
How about the ipad case?
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]fifth, two, those are numbers.[/quote]
Your rong. There wurds.
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
Is that for real? (dying laughing)
MishQuote Reply
That’s not yet available on the current shop, but it is available on a premium shop that’s not quite finished yet. I should work on that again today and get it finished. There are a lot more products there.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Mish]Is that for real? (dying laughing)[/quote]Yes, if you want that, send me an email and I’ll send you a link. I’m not ready to publish for everyone here to see, but hopefully in the next day or two. I’ve gotten lazy.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Yes, if you want that, send me an email and I’ll send you a link. I’m not ready to publish for everyone here to see, but hopefully in the next day or two. I’ve gotten lazy.[/quote]
You’ve been useless since we fired you. I’d rehire you, but I’ve been fired too.
Aisle424Quote Reply
[quote name=Aisle424]You’ve been useless since we fired you. I’d rehire you, but I’ve been fired too.[/quote]We should contact our union rep.
mb21Quote Reply
I’m in no rush but I probably would get one. I’ll wait for you to publish.
MishQuote Reply
[quote name=Mish]I’m in no rush but I probably would get one. I’ll wait for you to publish.[/quote]I was hoping to have it done Tuesday so you can see I’m behind. It really isn’t that difficult. I was just making it much harder on myself when I first started organizing it and then decided I needed a couple days away from it because I’m stupid.
mb21Quote Reply
jeff baker vs LHP has been fun to watch. his ability to rake vs them is truly a skill
dylanjQuote Reply
(dying laughing) @ some of the quotes from people here: http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/14/what-theyre-saying-about-the-barry-bonds-verdict/
mb21Quote Reply
I’m not okay with it either: http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/14/the-bonds-jury-foreman-admits-he-didnt-pay-attention-to-the-grand-jury-testimony/
Neither would anybody else if it was them on trial.
mb21Quote Reply
The more I read, the more I think the verdict will get thrown out. If that happens I’m going to laugh my ass off. It’s already comical that the government wasted so much money during the worst economy in in nearly a century. I guess that’s not funny at all.
mb21Quote Reply
Some of those quotes are just retarded. The entire showcase is a farce.
MishQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I’m not okay with it either: http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/14/the-bonds-jury-foreman-admits-he-didnt-pay-attention-to-the-grand-jury-testimony/
Neither would anybody else if it was them on trial.[/quote]
I’m not okay with even the original perjury trial that started eons ago. Why waste $?
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I’m not okay with it either: http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/14/the-bonds-jury-foreman-admits-he-didnt-pay-attention-to-the-grand-jury-testimony/
Neither would anybody else if it was them on trial.[/quote]Calcaterra is making the mistake of accusing jurors of being lawyers. They gave him the charge they thought he deserved, but it’s silly to think they pinned it down on one particular statement as precisely as a lawyer would.
I think it’s hilarious that he got hit with obstruction of justice. What justice did he obstruct, exactly? What greater good did he block the government from pursuing? How is society worse off because of Barry Bonds’ lack of cooperation? I’m missing something.
AndCountingQuote Reply
In other news, early returns suggest that Larry Rothschild has fixed AJ Burnett. Now he needs to work on Phil Hughes…
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=AndCounting]
I think it’s hilarious that he got hit with obstruction of justice. What justice did he obstruct, exactly? What greater good did he block the government from pursuing? How is society worse off because of Barry Bonds’ lack of cooperation? I’m missing something.[/quote]
Because baseball is no longer pure.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=AndCounting]
I think it’s hilarious that he got hit with obstruction of justice. What justice did he obstruct, exactly? What greater good did he block the government from pursuing? How is society worse off because of Barry Bonds’ lack of cooperation? I’m missing something.[/quote]
This so hard. I’m pretty sure society is worse off for the entire prosecution.
MishQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I’m not okay with it either: http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/14/the-bonds-jury-foreman-admits-he-didnt-pay-attention-to-the-grand-jury-testimony/
Neither would anybody else if it was them on trial.[/quote]http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=li-novitzkylist090809
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=li-steroidsninthcircuit082609
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=li-novitzkythomas031909
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=li-bondstestswitch021209
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=li-arodlegal020909
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=li-bondshearing020509
There’s definitely a pattern of criminal behavior here…by Agent Jeff Novitsky.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]In other news, early returns suggest that Larry Rothschild has fixed AJ Burnett. Now he needs to work on Phil Hughes…[/quote]Maybe Larry could do Mark Riggins the favor of calling to let Riggins know where the bullpen phone is located.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
Society is no doubt worse off because of this prosecution. I noticed that in those quotes, there was little reference to Bonds actually breaking the law as opposed to being a law-abiding citizen. It was primarily about home runs. We’ve know that all along. Steroids is about nothing other than home runs. It always has been and always will be. The NFL uses steroids far more frequently than MLB ever has and those busted for using steroids actually win end of season awards.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=li-novitzkylist090809
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=li-steroidsninthcircuit082609
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=li-novitzkythomas031909
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=li-bondstestswitch021209
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=li-arodlegal020909
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=li-bondshearing020509
There’s definitely a pattern of criminal behavior here…by Agent Jeff Novitsky.[/quote]Jeff Novitsky career home runs: 0.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Society is no doubt worse off because of this prosecution. I noticed that in those quotes, there was little reference to Bonds actually breaking the law as opposed to being a law-abiding citizen. It was primarily about home runs. We’ve know that all along. Steroids is about nothing other than home runs. It always has been and always will be. The NFL uses steroids far more frequently than MLB ever has and those busted for using steroids actually win end of season awards.[/quote]
It’s Jack Johnson all over again.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Jeff Novitsky career home runs: 0.[/quote]Exactly. But if there’s a HOF for abuse of government power and violations of civil rights, he’s a first-ballot guy.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
It says it all when so many people in this country can actually feel bad for Barry Bonds. When that happens, the government is doing it wrong.
Next up for the government: make Americans feel sorry for Milton Bradley and Jeff Kent
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]Exactly. But if there’s a HOF for abuse of government power and violations of civil rights, he’s a first-ballot guy.[/quote]As much as the journalists pretend they hate steroids, I wouldn’t be surprised if we actually read an article or two from one of them suggesting Novitsky should be in the Baseball Hall of Fame.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]It says it all when so many people in this country can actually feel bad for Barry Bonds. When that happens, the government is doing it wrong.
Next up for the government: make Americans feel sorry for Milton Bradley and Jeff Kent[/quote](dying laughing) No. Shit. When people begin to empathize with one of the biggest assholes ever to walk the face of the earth, something is wrong.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]As much as the journalists pretend they hate steroids, I wouldn’t be surprised if we actually read an article or two from one of them suggesting Novitsky should be in the Baseball Hall of Fame.[/quote]Wouldn’t surprise me. Fuck the Constitution. Steroids. DRUGS. WILL NO ONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!?!?! Jeff Novitzky is obviously a hero.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
The ones who could someday hit home runs. Fuck the rest of ’em.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Society is no doubt worse off because of this prosecution. I noticed that in those quotes, there was little reference to Bonds actually breaking the law as opposed to being a law-abiding citizen. It was primarily about home runs. We’ve know that all along. Steroids is about nothing other than home runs. It always has been and always will be. The NFL uses steroids far more frequently than MLB ever has and those busted for using steroids actually win end of season awards.[/quote]
He had some tax evasion (or maybe just owed back taxes or something) a few years back but I don’t think he ever had a DUI or domestic violence charges. I could be wrong about the latter though, but I’m pretty sure about the tax thing.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Bonds almost certainly lied and should have been found guilty of perjury. He should probably even do some time. The issue for me is whether there ever should have been a chance for him to perjure himself in the first place. That there was is really what disturbs me the most. How much money does the government have to waste on something as silly as steroid investigation for people to open their eyes? Even if the economy was booming, it’s a waste of resources. When the economy has sucked like it has, it’s almost criminal to waste money in such ways.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]The ones who could someday hit home runs. Fuck the rest of ’em.[/quote]The rest of them will be needed to fight the land war in Asia.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
I think you’re right about the taxes. I just mean that the people you read yesterday and today talk little about how he was convicted of a crime because he broke a US law. It goes from being convicted, often in misleading terms, to some diatribe about home runs. Society isn’t better off because Barry Bonds was convicted. I’ve not heard one person make that argument yet, which in my opinion should be a benchmark for all criminal cases. Is society better off pursuing trial or leaving it alone? Whichever attorney came up with the idea that society was better off pursuing charges is incompetent and now our money has been wasted on such ridiculous bullshit.
mb21Quote Reply
Man, Wittenmyer is as predictable as hell:
How dare he avert his gaze! Zambrano must be a Stoic in classical sense, or else!
Fucking Wittenmyer. I said he’d do this last night, and he just couldn’t help himself.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
I often read about the US justice system is the best in the world. That is probably even true, but because it’s the best doesn’t mean it can’t be improved.
mb21Quote Reply
Sure, Gordo, you ginger-pated fuck. Two of the top 5 SP are injured with no timetable for return, the Cubs have a .500 record vs. the doormats of the NL, but Z’s temper is a key issue. GTFO.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
It entertains me that so many people could act so upset about such meaningless bullshit (Zambrano not waiting to hand ball to Quade, Bonds hitting more home runs than anyone else).
mb21Quote Reply
I thought the masses like W’s. Zambrano is 2-0.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]It entertains me that so many people could act so upset about such meaningless bullshit (Zambrano not waiting to hand ball to Quade, Bonds hitting more home runs than anyone else).[/quote]It’s just Wittenmyer trying to stir up shit. He hates Z.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
Despite being 2-0, I think Z is off to a worse start this year than last (not included the opening day debacle). Z’s numbers are bad across the board whereas last year he at least had a good FIP. This year, bad FIP, bad Run Average, bad Base Runs per 9 innings, which just goes to show you how useless the win statistic is.
mb21Quote Reply
3 of the Cubs 6 wins were games started by Zambrano.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I thought the masses like W’s. Zambrano is 2-0.[/quote]But it’s Zambrano. He has to go undefeated, show no emotion, and never allow runs. And even then, he’d still be overpaid.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]It entertains me that so many people could act so upset about such meaningless bullshit (Zambrano not waiting to hand ball to Quade, Bonds hitting more home runs than anyone else).[/quote]
I love how people accuse statheads of sucking the fun out of the game when it seems like we are the only ones that remember it is a game played by fallible human beings more often than not.
Statheads are also accused of only caring about the numbers but I haven’t met any saberist who believes in the sanctity of the HR or Wins or whatever record.
Funny, that.
MishQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]3 of the Cubs 6 wins were games started by Zambrano.[/quote]But he showed someone up. Which is like the worstest thing ever.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]But he showed
someoneup. Which is like the worstest thing ever.[/quote]/how I read it
BerseliusQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Despite being 2-0, I think Z is off to a worse start this year than last (not included the opening day debacle). Z’s numbers are bad across the board whereas last year he at least had a good FIP. This year, bad FIP, bad Run Average, bad Base Runs per 9 innings, which just goes to show you how useless the win statistic is.[/quote]
Yeah, it would be a stretch to say he’s been pitching well. It’s kind of curious that as bad as the starting pitching has been, the Cubs are at .500.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]/how Gordo intended it[/quote]
/how I read it
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
Mish, I think I mentioned this the other day, but I can guarantee you that I enjoy this game more than anyone who has ever criticized me for not enjoying it. As much as I complain about its flaws, it’s still a wonderful game. The game itself has flaws, the people who play it do, the people who coach do and the people who umpire do as well. The game itself is the human element in baseball. It’s on display all the time. The good and the bad. We can’t anymore strike from record the good than we can the bad. It all happened. It’s all part of baseball’s history. It’s all open to interpretation, but as for the counting stats themselves, that’s something that is a matter of record. There’s no interpreting who the single season strikeout leader is among pitchers. There’s no interpreting who the pitcher with the most career strikeouts is. We can interpret the statistic itself. There are far more strikeouts in today’s game than in the past. We would expect modern pitchers to be striking out more so we compare strikeouts to the average number. We can compare this across eras this way.
Most of all, these are just silly records that will stand for a meaningless period of time. Few people know or care who the all time home run champion is. There’s only a select group of people in this country, and a very, very small group in a few other countries who even care. The overwhelming majority of the world couldn’t care less.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Mish, I think I mentioned this the other day, but I can guarantee you that I enjoy this game more than anyone who has ever criticized me for not enjoying it. As much as I complain about its flaws, it’s still a wonderful game. The game itself has flaws, the people who play it do, the people who coach do and the people who umpire do as well. The game itself is the human element in baseball. It’s on display all the time. The good and the bad. We can’t anymore strike from record the good than we can the bad. It all happened. It’s all part of baseball’s history. It’s all open to interpretation, but as for the counting stats themselves, that’s something that is a matter of record. There’s no interpreting who the single season strikeout leader is among pitchers. There’s no interpreting who the pitcher with the most career strikeouts is. We can interpret the statistic itself. There are far more strikeouts in today’s game than in the past. We would expect modern pitchers to be striking out more so we compare strikeouts to the average number. We can compare this across eras this way.
Most of all, these are just silly records that will stand for a meaningless period of time. Few people know or care who the all time home run champion is. There’s only a select group of people in this country, and a very, very small group in a few other countries who even care. The overwhelming majority of the world couldn’t care less.[/quote]
REC’D
MishQuote Reply
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]Yeah, it would be a stretch to say he’s been pitching well. It’s kind of curious that as bad as the starting pitching has been, the Cubs are at .500.[/quote]The team FIP is 3.97 (my calculation so it may be off from Fangraphs), but the Run Average is 5.31. Scaling FIP to runs that’s 4.31 per 9. The defense has been bad, but not even that bad. Then you look at sequencing and the team’s Base Runs per 9 innings is 5.44. I expect both the BsR/9 and RA to come down while the FIP goes up. I do think the defense is bad enough that they’re going to have a much larger RA than you’d expect given their FIP.
mb21Quote Reply
.
GBTSQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]The team FIP is 3.97 (my calculation so it may be off from Fangraphs), but the Run Average is 5.31. Scaling FIP to runs that’s 4.31 per 9. The defense has been bad, but not even that bad. Then you look at sequencing and the team’s Base Runs per 9 innings is 5.44. I expect both the BsR/9 and RA to come down while the FIP goes up. I do think the defense is bad enough that they’re going to have a much larger RA than you’d expect given their FIP.[/quote]Yeah, this defense is awful. Castro was the only average-above average defender out there last night. Barney has a good rep, but has been kinda bad thus far, and I don’t know why, but Colvin is a complete butcher in RF. And we know about the rest. A bad mix.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
But we all have a tendency to treat things we cherish as having significantly more value than it does. I do it, everybody does it. Doesn’t mean it’s right. When you take a step back you can’t help but realize that the records are stupid and won’t stand the test of time. Not only will the records themselves be broken once, twice and many times more than that, but the records themselves will eventually be lost and forgotten about. Baseball documents just aren’t something that is going to be considered important enough to save over a very long period of time. Baseball won’t always exist. The game itself will be of no meaning to the population once it’s gone.
I expect a description of baseball in 500 or 1000 years to read something like this: a game or hobby similar to other stick-ball games first played in Europe centuries earlier and played primarily by the youth in the United States.
mb21Quote Reply
I ran across a stat last year (I wanna say HardballTalk, a Gleeman post) about how any league average reliever would hold a save 85% of the time, and the best closers generally aren’t significantly above that, save maybe Rivera (no pun intended). Anyone know these numbers or have that piece handy?
MishQuote Reply
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]Man, Wittenmyer is as predictable as hell:
How dare he avert his gaze! Zambrano must be a Stoic in classical sense, or else!
Fucking Wittenmyer. I said he’d do this last night, and he just couldn’t help himself.[/quote]
I’m guessing nobody involved in writing that blurb checked out K-zone or GameDay and realized that Z went to so many full counts because batters were walking on strike 6.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]I’m guessing nobody involved in writing that blurb checked out K-zone or GameDay and realized that Z went to so many full counts because batters were walking on strike 6.[/quote]I don’t know what the sports editors at either paper actually do.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
Zambrano has serious anger issues. This was murder:
http://t.co/8Ownewe
AndCountingQuote Reply
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]I don’t know what the sports editors at either paper actually do.[/quote]
GBTSQuote Reply
Why are so many game recaps for yesterday entirely focused on the fact that Z walked off the mound early? I didn’t even catch it in game. Such inconsequential, minor bullshit.
ZappBranniganQuote Reply
[quote name=AndCounting]Zambrano has serious anger issues. This was murder:
http://t.co/8Ownewe%5B/quote%5D
And then he almost gave it all back. What a loser. *
*bad umpire strike zone judgment, stupid RF, yada yada yada
Rice CubeQuote Reply
I couldn’t really tell (somewhat bad eyesight plus the angle was a bit wonky and I can’t slow it down too much) but did that ball bounce off the wall above the yellow line, or off that random balcony? Because if the wall/balcony wasn’t there, that’s like a 430-foot bomb.
Off Abad pitcher, but still. *bada bum*
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=ZappBrannigan]Why are so many game recaps for yesterday entirely focused on the fact that Z walked off the mound early? I didn’t even catch it in game. Such inconsequential, minor bullshit.[/quote]Because it fits their narrative about Z.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]I couldn’t really tell (somewhat bad eyesight plus the angle was a bit wonky and I can’t slow it down too much) but did that ball bounce off the wall above the yellow line, or off that random balcony? Because if the wall/balcony wasn’t there, that’s like a 430-foot bomb.
Off Abad pitcher, but still. *bada bum*[/quote]I was going to say that at Wrigley, that would’ve been on Waveland.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2011/4/14/2110082/why-dont-sabermetric-gms-have-sabermetric-managers-and-shouldnt-they
MishQuote Reply
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-met-kass-0414-20110414,0,4152824.column
MO, I don’t think you should read this.
GBTSQuote Reply
[quote name=Mish]http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2011/4/14/2110082/why-dont-sabermetric-gms-have-sabermetric-managers-and-shouldnt-they[/quote]
This is an interesting article now that I’m done with it. Nothing new in terms of research, but when I interviewed with the Rays in ’09, I basically said something like this (implementing as many saberist principles as possible, i.e. no true closer, optimal lineups, etc).
MishQuote Reply
[quote name=Mish]This is an interesting article now that I’m done with it. Nothing new in terms of research, but when I interviewed with the Rays in ’09, I basically said something like this (implementing as many saberist principles as possible, i.e. no true closer, optimal lineups, etc).[/quote](Serious Question) Did they laugh at you or were they intrigued?
WaLiQuote Reply
[quote name=WaLi](Serious Question) Did they laugh at you or were they intrigued?[/quote]
Neither. It was James Click, who’s a former BP writer himself, so it’s not like he’s not aware of these ideas (he probably champions them as much as anyone in any front office). Most of our discussion was about following the principles to their logical conclusions.
MishQuote Reply
[quote name=WaLi](Serious Question) Did they laugh at you or were they intrigued?[/quote]
Considering what Joe Maddon does as the manager I don’t think they would laugh too much at Mish. Unless he farted.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Rice Cube]Considering what Joe Maddon does as the manager I don’t think they would laugh too much at Mish. Unless he farted.[/quote]
MishQuote Reply
I liked the article Mish. I’m almost done with “The Book” and the article did a nice job summarizing what I’ve learned and most of what I’ve learned isn’t exactly hokey bullshit. People are just reticent to change.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Mish]Neither. It was James Click, who’s a former BP writer himself, so it’s not like he’s not aware of these ideas (he probably champions them as much as anyone in any front office). Most of our discussion was about following the principles to their logical conclusions.[/quote]So what you are saying is you didn’t get the job because you didn’t suck enough cock.
Or you were hired but decided to quit and throw away years of schooling to become a blog writer.
WaLiQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-met-kass-0414-20110414,0,4152824.column
MO, I don’t think you should read this.[/quote]The next time Kass says something right will be the first time.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]The next time Kass cries for something worth crying for, it will be the first time.[/quote]He also cried tears of joy when he got the columnist job.
GBTSQuote Reply
[quote name=Mercurial Outfielder]The next time Kass falls in love, it will be with you.[/quote].
AndCountingQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]He also cried tears of joy when he got the columnist job.[/quote]It’s utterly galling to me that a organization the purports to be a news organization can employ Kass, Rosenbloom, Sullivan, and Rogers.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
[quote name=Mish]I ran across a stat last year (I wanna say HardballTalk, a Gleeman post) about how any league average reliever would hold a save 85% of the time, and the best closers generally aren’t significantly above that, save maybe Rivera (no pun intended). Anyone know these numbers or have that piece handy?[/quote]The information is in The Book. I don’t have it in front of me.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]The information is in The Book. I don’t have it in front of me.[/quote]
Yeah mine’s on my coffee table at home. Not a big deal.
MishQuote Reply
baseball sinner (dying laughing)
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Mish]
[/quote]I hate it when people circle the one that’s funny. If you can’t find it, you shouldn’t be able to laugh. (dying laughing)
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]He was at 7.6% last year and that’s just barely below league average. He’s just over 10% this season. Colvin’s walks aren’t an issue. He’s never going to walk much, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s slightly above league average this year. Strikeouts are just an out. Doesn’t matter how you make them. Colvin also hits a home run twice as frequently as the average batter. Of all his skills or lack of skills, the home run skill is the one that stands out the most.[/quote]This is a fairly old way of thinking. Strikeouts very much do matter. If you strikeout a ton, you need to hit WAY more balls out of the park and be able to maintain a much higher BABIP in order to hit for a decent average, which affects both OBP and SLG.
Striking out isn’t just an out, it’s the worst kind of out because there is a 0% chance a K goes for a hit. The problem with that line of thinking, “An out is an out, doesn’t matter how they’re made” is that that’s not really the situation at hand. It’s a matter of ball in play or no ball in play.
More balls in play in lieu of strikeouts is a very, very good thing.
DoogolasQuote Reply
i honestly think Castro has an average eye but when your hitting as well as he is right now why not swing?
Take one of his last AB’s from last night as an example. He works a 3-1 count and then when the pitcher had to come back with a fastball got his hit.
dylanjQuote Reply
http://www.tangotiger.net/strikeout.html
mb21Quote Reply
When Colvin starts striking out 100 more times than the average batter I’ll care about his strikeouts. Until then, don’t care.
mb21Quote Reply
Recognizing when a ball in play out is better than a strikeout also requires you to look at when a strikeout is more valuable than a ball in play out. How many times have you watched the Cubs in your life with a runner at 1st and less than 2 outs and were hoping that if the batter makes an out he strikes out? Probably as much as me because in that situation, a strikeout is far less damaging than the grounball double play.
mb21Quote Reply
Is there a Cubs game today?
AndCountingQuote Reply
[quote name=AndCounting]Is there a Cubs game today?[/quote]False.
mb21Quote Reply
A strong series in Colorado and things will be looking a lot better for this team. Not good, but not terrible either.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]False.[/quote]
Those poor poor wrigleyville residents get a day off. They really have it rough you know. (dying laughing)
LukasQuote Reply
[quote name=Lukas]Those poor poor wrigleyville residents get a day off. They really have it rough you know. (dying laughing)[/quote]They should really change the name of the neighborhood to Wrigleyfieldville so people know what they’re getting into when they sign their lease.
AndCountingQuote Reply
[quote name=Doogolas]This is a fairly old way of thinking. Strikeouts very much do matter. If you strikeout a ton, you need to hit WAY more balls out of the park and be able to maintain a much higher BABIP in order to hit for a decent average, which affects both OBP and SLG.
Striking out isn’t just an out, it’s the worst kind of out because there is a 0% chance a K goes for a hit. The problem with that line of thinking, “An out is an out, doesn’t matter how they’re made” is that that’s not really the situation at hand. It’s a matter of ball in play or no ball in play.
More balls in play in lieu of strikeouts is a very, very good thing.[/quote]
Double plays matter too. And not every strikeout happens with runners on base.
BerseliusQuote Reply
[quote name=AndCounting]They should really change the name of the neighborhood to Wrigleyfieldville so people know what they’re getting into when they sign their lease.[/quote]
Nah, the city should just sell the naming rights to the neighborhood. I’m sure the residents would be happier if they weren’t associated with the team at all anymore.
LukasQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Recognizing when a ball in play out is better than a strikeout also requires you to look at when a strikeout is more valuable than a ball in play out. How many times have you watched the Cubs in your life with a runner at 1st and less than 2 outs and were hoping that if the batter makes an out he strikes out? Probably as much as me because in that situation, a strikeout is far less damaging than the grounball double play.[/quote]No it doesn’t, and I will show you why using Colvin’s rates last year:
17% line drives
.296BABIP
30 BB
100 K’s
Here is Colvin’s numbers, with the same rate stats, if we take out all walks and strikeouts:
.342/.342/.675/1.016 wOBA: .401
FTR he’s hit 30HR in this situation.
Now that’s obviously incredibly unreasonable. So something more realistic in terms of improvement: 22%K rate and 9% walk rate. With the rates he put up last year that puts up:
.267/.334/.524/.858 wOBA: .374
That is far superior to the line he actually put up last year. K rate is, in fact, extremely important in determining how good a player is and will be.
DoogolasQuote Reply
i like the cut of your jib doogolas
dylanjQuote Reply
Cool.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Cool.[/quote]
I’m not trying to be an ass or anything. That was just the best way I felt like I could illustrate it. Because that is probably the most common misconception in the saber community, that K rate isn’t important.
I also think it’s rather fascinating that as little as 5.6% in K rate can raise someone’s batting average 17 points.
And for the longest time I thought the same exact thing too. The importance of K rate was never clear to me until very recently.
DoogolasQuote Reply
Doogalas, I’m not going to change my opinions here because I’ve seen the historical data proving strikeouts are no more damaging than regular outs. That article I linked earlier lays out all the evidence for you. That article is based on exactly what happened after strikeouts and after regular outs. It’s based on what happened in the game and how it affected run scoring. The answer is that it doesn’t.
Search run value of the strikeout and you’ll find dozens of articles confirming what I’ve said. It’s not my research. Bill James researched it in 1992 and found little or no difference. Every statistician interested in baseball since has also researched the top and reached the same conclusion.
The linear weights provided in that article I linked is decisive. It’s based on the game itself. It’s based on exactly what happened on the field.
Nobody is saying that there aren’t times when the strikeout is more damaging than a regular out just as nobody should be saying there aren’t times when the strikeout is far less damaging than the regular out. Overall though, it makes little difference.
Until someone starts striking out a couple hundred times more than league average, it’s just not much of a concern.
This isn’t some opinion I’ve formed just because I wanted to. It’s based on research that has been confirmed over and over and even research that has proven it. it’s not an opinion.
I didn’t read everything you did with Colvin, but I’m guessing you replaced strikeouts with other rates. You can’t do that. Strikeouts occur when a batter has two strikes. Check out how the average hitter performs when there are two strikes (not good!).
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Doogolas]No it doesn’t, and I will show you why using Colvin’s rates last year:
17% line drives
.296BABIP
30 BB
100 K’s
Here is Colvin’s numbers, with the same rate stats, if we take out all walks and strikeouts:
.342/.342/.675/1.016 wOBA: .401
FTR he’s hit 30HR in this situation.
Now that’s obviously incredibly unreasonable. So something more realistic in terms of improvement: 22%K rate and 9% walk rate. With the rates he put up last year that puts up:
.267/.334/.524/.858 wOBA: .374
That is far superior to the line he actually put up last year. K rate is, in fact, extremely important in determining how good a player is and will be.[/quote]I’m thoroughly confused as to how a guy with a .296 BABIP would post a .342 BA if you take out all the walks and strikeouts.
AndCountingQuote Reply
I’ll admit that for the longest time I thought strikeouts were worse. It was ridiculous to hear that they weren’t, but I was focusing on one or two examples when strikeouts are worse than any other out. Once you realize there are also examples of strikeouts being better you look at it in a different way. As a Cubs fan, how many times were you rooting for Derrek Lee to just strikeout rather than ground into a double play? For a few years it seemed that’s all he did (GIDP) and I’m pretty sure every Cubs fan was hoping for strikeouts at that point. Anything to allow Ramirez to come to plate with a runner on. Anything.
And yes, there are examples of batters who struckout when all you really needed was an infield hopper.
mb21Quote Reply
KG:
# Brandon Guyer, OF, Rays (Triple-A Durham): 3-for-4, 2 2B, 2 R, BB, K, CS. Proving so far that last year’s explosion with the Cubs was for real; 10-for-27 in seven games with five extra-base hits.
# Brett Jackson, OF, Cubs (Double-A Tennessee): 3-for-3, 3 RBI, RBI, BB, SB. It was surprising to see him not begin the year at Triple-A, and he’s now batting .500 (11-for-22), but .625 BABIP says there might be some luck here, no?
MishQuote Reply
[quote name=Mish]KG:
# Brandon Guyer, OF, Rays (Triple-A Durham): 3-for-4, 2 2B, 2 R, BB, K, CS. Proving so far that last year’s explosion with the Cubs was for real; 10-for-27 in seven games with five extra-base hits.
# Brett Jackson, OF, Cubs (Double-A Tennessee): 3-for-3, 3 RBI, RBI, BB, SB. It was surprising to see him not begin the year at Triple-A, and he’s now batting .500 (11-for-22), but .625 BABIP says there might be some luck here, no?[/quote]
Lucky duck indeed.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
2 or 288?
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
[quote name=Jame Gumb]2 or 288?[/quote]’Bout a hundred.
Raymond BabbittQuote Reply
So what’s Vitters’ story? Haven’t heard much about him for awhile.
Also, I’m about halfway through Ken Burns’ Baseball documentary and I’m in awe of it’s sheer awesomeness. I’m amazed on how little I know about baseball.
MuckerQuote Reply
[quote name=Raymond Babbitt]’Bout a hundred.[/quote]
Hanes 32s or boxers?
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
If Alvin can get me banned from SBNation, it’ll be because of this post.
http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/4/14/2111020/barry-bonds-hall-of-fame-trial-conviction-steroids?login=1302808830#64193546
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
[quote name=Jame Gumb]If Alvin can get me banned from SBNation, it’ll be because of this post.
http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/4/14/2111020/barry-bonds-hall-of-fame-trial-conviction-steroids?login=1302808830#64193546%5B/quote%5D
(dying laughing) did he really say that?
WaLiQuote Reply
He said all negro league hall of famers should be removed from the HOF until Buck O’Neill was in. Seriously. He did not understand how fucked up that was. Not only was it ridiculous to suggest removing only blacks, but it’s ridiculous to suggest that people should be removed until someone is in. The guy is braindead.
mb21Quote Reply
Why do people have to be removed? Doesn’t that only make it an even more useless place?
When Barry Bonds gets snubbed I’m going to say that all non Babe Ruth players in the HOF should be removed until Bonds gets in. That’s clearly the solution.
mb21Quote Reply
From my friend who lives in Tampa
(dying laughing)
WaLiQuote Reply
[quote name=WaLi](dying laughing) did he really say that?[/quote]
““The 17 Negro League people who were enshrined en masse two years ago should be summarily dismissed and not allowed back in again,” he said.
Yellon added the clause “until Buck O’Neil is admitted,””
XoomwaffleQuote Reply
Wow that is fucked up.
WaLiQuote Reply
Unfortunately, he deleted that comment…or I can’t find it.
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
.
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
I found it in ACB’s archives. (dying laughing)
XoomwaffleQuote Reply
Mind if I throw that in there?
WaLiQuote Reply
Was that you WaLi? That’s awesome.
MishQuote Reply
The response.. yeah
WaLiQuote Reply
Soriano deserves better.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
That’ll be interesting.
GBTSQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]That’ll be interesting.[/quote]If KOWOH has proved anything, it’s that I spew shit on other SBN sites and then never go back to see who called me out.
Al YellonQuote Reply
[quote name=Al Yellon]If KOWOH has proved anything, it’s that I spew shit on other SBN sites and then never go back to see who called me out.[/quote](dying laughing)
WaLiQuote Reply
all mexican americans should be fired until my cousin gets a job
dylanjQuote Reply
[quote name=Al Yellon]If KOWOH has proved anything, it’s that I spew shit on other SBN sites and then never go back to see who called me out.[/quote]
Obviously doesn’t read every word.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=Al Yellon]If KOWOH has proved anything, it’s that I spew shit on other SBN sites and then never go back to see who called me out.[/quote]
(dying laughing)
He can’t stay away from his children for too long. If he kept going back to see who called him out he wouldnt have his followers to shout them down for him. He’d fall to pieces man (dying laughing)
LukasQuote Reply
.
GBTSQuote Reply
I would think Raymond would respond to threats with his “Who’s on first” routine.
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
^
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
fucking hilarious man.
LukasQuote Reply
http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110414&content_id=17772148&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc&tcid=fb_share
I’m sure most Muskat mailbags are full of facepalms, but the first two questions hit me especially hard.
MishQuote Reply
I would pay a substantial sum of money to waive the 24 hour waiting period so Charlie could tell Alvin that Raymond is capable of way more than he thinks.
17 more hours.
GBTSQuote Reply
Who’s going to join BCB as Dr. Bruner and try to convince Raymond to come back to Walbrook?
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
[quote name=Mish]http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110414&content_id=17772148&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc&tcid=fb_share
I’m sure most Muskat mailbags are full of facepalms, but the first two questions hit me especially hard.[/quote]Why the fuck don’t the URL links work? No wonder everyone keeps blasting this place for being complete shit.
Al YellonQuote Reply
[quote name=Mish]http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110414&content_id=17772148&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc&tcid=fb_share
I’m sure most Muskat mailbags are full of facepalms, but the first two questions hit me especially hard.[/quote]
What? You don’t like Aaron Hill? (dying laughing)
LukasQuote Reply
And we definitely need to have somebody sign up as Man in Waiting Room to tell the story of the Pony Express.
Dr. Aneus TaintQuote Reply
[quote name=Jame Gumb]And we definitely need to have somebody sign up as Man in Waiting Room to tell the story of the Pony Express.[/quote](dying laughing)
GBTSQuote Reply
[quote name=Mish]http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110414&content_id=17772148&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc&tcid=fb_share
I’m sure most Muskat mailbags are full of facepalms, but the first two questions hit me especially hard.[/quote]
What the fuck does this mean???
XoomwaffleQuote Reply
[quote name=Mish]http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110414&content_id=17772148&vkey=news_chc&c_id=chc&tcid=fb_share
I’m sure most Muskat mailbags are full of facepalms, but the first two questions hit me especially hard.[/quote]Wud the Cubbies trade Marshall, Smardja, and Mateo for Daneil Bard?
GBTSQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]Wud the Cubbies trade Marshall, Smardja, and Mateo for Daneil Bard?[/quote]
I can’t believe someone who draws a paycheck to write about Major League Baseball says that they wouldn’t trade Darwin Fucking Barney for Aaron Hill. Jesus, that’s stupid.
And to top it off she relies on a sample size of 40 fucking at-bats for her reasoning.
I suppose we shouldn’t expect any more from her, but that is incredibly dumb even by Muskat’s low standards.
Hector VillanuevaQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]Wud the Cubbies trade Marshall, Smardja, and Mateo for Daneil Bard?[/quote]
I can’t believe someone who draws a paycheck to write about Major League Baseball says that they wouldn’t trade Darwin Fucking Barney for Aaron Hill. Jesus, that’s stupid.
And to top it off she relies on a sample size of 40 fucking at-bats for her reasoning.
I suppose we shouldn’t expect any more from her, but that is incredibly dumb even by Muskat’s low standards.
Hector VillanuevaQuote Reply
Apparently Al’s pseudonym is “Andrew E.” from Buffalo Grove.
Hector VillanuevaQuote Reply
[quote name=AndCounting]I’m thoroughly confused as to how a guy with a .296 BABIP would post a .342 BA if you take out all the walks and strikeouts.[/quote]
Home runs are not balls in play.
DoogolasQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I’ll admit that for the longest time I thought strikeouts were worse. It was ridiculous to hear that they weren’t, but I was focusing on one or two examples when strikeouts are worse than any other out. Once you realize there are also examples of strikeouts being better you look at it in a different way. As a Cubs fan, how many times were you rooting for Derrek Lee to just strikeout rather than ground into a double play? For a few years it seemed that’s all he did (GIDP) and I’m pretty sure every Cubs fan was hoping for strikeouts at that point. Anything to allow Ramirez to come to plate with a runner on. Anything.
And yes, there are examples of batters who struckout when all you really needed was an infield hopper.[/quote]
Strikeouts are not worse than any other out. I’m not saying that at all. But strikeouts ARE worse than balls in play. That’s the key thing. The saber community, as a general rule, views strikeouts compared to outs. The way they should be viewed is “Every strike out is one less ball put into play.”
A ball in play > Strikeout. Sure, it might end in a worse result sometime, but on the whole the added value from all those balls in play that will go for hits, and plenty of them will, significantly outweighs that, as you pointed out, all outs are pretty much the same in the end. The extra balls in play however are very, very valuable over time.
That’s the thing that’s being lost here. Sure, if I can choose a K or a GB out whatever, I absolutely don’t care. But for a specific player, their K rate is important because it takes away opportunities for them to have put a ball in play that potentially went for a hit.
DoogolasQuote Reply
[quote name=Doogolas]Strikeouts are not worse than any other out. I’m not saying that at all. But strikeouts ARE worse than balls in play. That’s the key thing. The saber community, as a general rule, views strikeouts compared to outs. The way they should be viewed is “Every strike out is one less ball put into play.”
A ball in play > Strikeout. Sure, it might end in a worse result sometime, but on the whole the added value from all those balls in play that will go for hits, and plenty of them will, significantly outweighs that, as you pointed out, all outs are pretty much the same in the end. The extra balls in play however are very, very valuable over time.
That’s the thing that’s being lost here. Sure, if I can choose a K or a GB out whatever, I absolutely don’t care. But for a specific player, their K rate is important because it takes away opportunities for them to have put a ball in play that potentially went for a hit.[/quote]
Doogolas, there is a fundamental tradeoff between contact and power. To think that someone like colvin could just make more contact with affecting his long balls is wishful thinking. Could happen, but unlikely.
GWQuote Reply
New stuff: http://obstructedview.net/chicago-cubs/articles/cubs-now-getting-beat-in-marketing-overhype-department-too.html
Aisle424Quote Reply
[quote name=GW]Doogolas, there is a fundamental tradeoff between contact and power. To think that someone like colvin could just make more contact with affecting his long balls is wishful thinking. Could happen, but unlikely.[/quote]
It’s called progression. Plenty of very good hitters do it in their first couple seasons. The dude isn’t a 10 year vet.
Pujols K’d 15% his rookie year. He’s never been higher than 12.9% since and has had seasons under 10% before.
That’s just a quick example, but I’m quite sure it’s not uncommon for guys to up their walk rate and lower their K rate in their second/third years as they adjust to major league pitching.
Finally, the point was that his K rate is what is likely to keep him mediocre instead or a pretty damn good player. The other point was that K% very much does matter. As it greatly affects a guy’s potential. If Colvin could do EVERYTHING he did last year while striking out 22% of the time instead of 27% of the time, he’s a damn good player. As it is, he’s likely a 4th OF.
DoogolasQuote Reply
[quote name=Doogolas]If Colvin could do EVERYTHING he did last year while striking out 22% of the time instead of 27% of the time, he’s a damn good player. As it is, he’s likely a 4th OF.[/quote]
yeah, we all wish colvin was pujols. the point is there are a lot more colvins than pujols. thanks for explaining progression to me, though.
the reason colvin is in the big leagues is because of his raw power. without that, he’s a aaa lifer.
temper your expectations. colvin is unlikely to repeat last season. we should be hoping for mark reynolds.
GWQuote Reply
Doogalas, I’m not sure you’re understanding what the run value is. The run value of the strikeout is virtually the same as the run value of any other out (ball in play). I encourage you to do some searches because the research has already been done.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=GW]yeah, we all wish colvin was pujols. the point is there are a lot more colvins than pujols. thanks for explaining progression to me, though.
the reason colvin is in the big leagues is because of his raw power. without that, he’s a aaa lifer.
temper your expectations. colvin is unlikely to repeat last season. we should be hoping for mark reynolds.[/quote]
Yeah, because that’s the only guy that does it. Here’s a freakin’ list;
Prince Fielder: From 28% to consistently 22%
Aramis Ramirez: 16 to 18% down to the 11-13% area.
Ryan Braun: 25% rookie year to 21%, 19% and 17% the next three years.
It happens ALL the time. It’s part of adjusting to the game. That’s how you separate guys who come up and end up being 4th OF/bench guys from the rest. They adjust. If Colvin adjusts some, he could be WAY more than a 4th OF. He could be a damn fine player for quite a while.
Adjustments don’t always happen. But they’re not at all unheard of. And if Colvin can just adjust some and continue to hit for power he can be an extremely useful player instead of a merely OK one.
[quote name=mb21]Doogalas, I’m not sure you’re understanding what the run value is. The run value of the strikeout is virtually the same as the run value of any other out (ball in play). I encourage you to do some searches because the research has already been done.[/quote]
MB, you continue to not understand what I’m saying. You keep comparing a strikeout to OTHER outs. I am not. You cannot just call a strikeout “the same as a groundout” I have seen teh research you are talking about and I agree. A K is barely worth less than any other out.
That is not the point I’m making. A K takes away the potential for a BALL IN PLAY. A ball in play can go for a hit. A K cannot go for a hit. A ball in play can go for a hit.
That is the big ass difference between the two things. A K is worth less than a ball in play. If the ball in play happens to go for an out, then no, that specific ball in play was not any better than a K. however, plenty of times throughout the season where K’s would happen if you replaced them with a ball in play that goes for a hit, and they WILL HAPPEN, THAT is where the gained value is.
A K is not worth more or less than a groundout, roughly. They’re about the same. Of this I am aware.
However, a groundball, Line Drive and Flyball are ALL worth more than a strikeout by a metric shitton, because they can yield positive value.
DoogolasQuote Reply
your freaking list is invaluable.
braun, ramirez, and fielder were all much more highly touted than colvin because they were all much better than colvin.
colvin has been great. he exceeded all expectations and it would be great if he would get better. most with his profile don’t, though.
GWQuote Reply
What does highly touted have to do with the price of crap in china?
The point is that players DO make adjustments. And the ones that do end up outrageously successful. You cannot just throw out a list because some guys were highly touted prospects. It should be noted that Colvin was at one time the 75th rated prospect. Pujols made ONE list, and it was at 45th.
He wasn’t exactly super highly touted.
Jayson Werth came into the MLB after being ranked the 90th prospect. He struck out nearly 30% of his AB the first few years.
Then he adjusted slowly down to the 26% he was at last year.
DoogolasQuote Reply
[quote name=Doogolas]
The point is that players DO make adjustments. And the ones that make outrageously successful adjustments end up outrageously successful.[/quote]
fixed.
GWQuote Reply
[quote name=GW]fixed.[/quote]I guess that’s kid true. 5% isn’t really a particularly outrageous adjustment though.
All the same, the entire point of my argument isn’t that I think Colvin WILL make a nice adjustment and be good, because I don’t. It’s just to show the value of K rate to a hitter and how much of an affect it can have on their numbers.
That’s all I’m trying to point out. Replacing K’s with other outs doesn’t work because that’s not what’s going on, what happens is that K’s get replaced with balls in play, which can have many different outcomes, including positive ones.
That’s all. I don’t think Colvin is gonna magically figure out the strike zone from his ass from a hole in the ground. I’m just saying that K% does have significance, and a fair amount at that.
DoogolasQuote Reply
The point I’m making is that it doesn’t matter. The run value of the strikeout is the same as any other out. It does not matter how you frame it (ball in play, whatever). The run value is the same. You’re trying to make this much, much more difficult than it is. It really is as simple as the two being equal to one another. Evidence shows this to be true.
mb21Quote Reply
I’m not even sure what we’re talking about here. Tyler Colvin does NOT need to make an adjustment as far strikeouts go to be a valuable bat off the bench. To become a starter, Tyler Colvin has to walk more, hit for a higher average and become a better fielder. Strikeouts have nothing to do with Tyler Colvin now or in the future.
mb21Quote Reply
You continue to say that, but it’s the exact opposite what all research has shown. I really don’t think you understand what the research is showing. That’s the only explanation for the confusion here.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]You continue to say that, but it’s the exact opposite what all research has shown. I really don’t think you understand what the research is showing. That’s the only explanation for the confusion here.[/quote]I’m not being an asshole here. There’s a lot of stuff I don’t understand and I have to go back and read, reread and read again. It’s part of learning, but I think you’re missing something that’s necessary to the whole argument here.
mb21Quote Reply
Why do you keep saying “any other out”. When you replace a strikeout with a ball in play, you cannot, absolutely CANNOT assume that ball in play will be another out.
MB: I am well aware every out is roughly the same.
My point is that when you take away strikeouts you add BALLS IN PLAY not outs. You don’t just turn it into another out. You aren’t seeing this yet, so here is an example. A guy has a .300BABIP. A guy has 500PA 0BB/HBP/etc so he also has 500AB.
Now he strikes out 100 times his rookie year. He puts 400 balls in play. He gets 120 hits and his batting average is, thus, .240.
Same guy the next year only strikes out 80 times. Meaning he puts 420 balls in play. He has a .300BABIP again, he gets 126 hits. That is a batting average of .252.
That is why K rate matters. By lowering his K rate from 20% to 16% he raises his batting average by .012 points. Because the balls put into play, instead of being ALL outs, some of them land for hits.
You’re missing my whole argument. I am not missing yours. I am very, very well aware that all outs are worth roughly the same amount. About two weeks ago, I was you making this EXACT argument to my friend who was explaining to me what I am trying to explain to you.
When you lower your K rate you are subtracting strikeouts and adding BALLS IN PLAY, you aren’t adding different types of outs.
Also, I don’t think you’re being an asshole. No worries. I just think you’re not seeing what I’m saying. Cause you keep bringing up the point about outs all being the same. And believe me, I’m well versed on that. I can tell you off the top of my head what every type of out is worth.
DoogolasQuote Reply
Here is some research Tango did on the very topic we are talking about:
The bolded points are the ones to which I am referring. He breaks it down PERFECTLY. Here is the link:
http://www.tangotiger.net/strikeout.html
Hopefully that explains it better than I have.
DoogolasQuote Reply
That’s the same link I posted earlier in this thread and referred to several times since. Did you not even bother to read it? How could you read that article think that a strikeout, compared to another kind of out, is significant?
He does break it down perfectly and it clearly shows that the difference between the two is minimal.
mb21Quote Reply
That is absurd, but more importantly it’s wrong.
mb21Quote Reply
What? What are you talking about? He clearly shows that strikeout rate is important.
Why do you keep talking about the difference between outs? Once again, did you ignore this part:
Are you going to continually ignore that part?
RIGHT THERE. The bolded part. THAT is the part I am talking about. Why do you keep bringing up “other outs”. He CLEARLY says EXACTLY what I am saying. You are not replacing K’s for other outs. You are replacing them for a chance to get a hit. And by doing so hitters raise their wOBA by roughly 10 points. And thus raise their value by about 5 runs over the course of a year, or half a win.
How can you possibly still be focusing on types of outs? Stop looking at the first sentence. I am aware that all OUTS are worth the same amount. But this isn’t replacing an out with another out. Read the bolded part. THAT is what makes K rate important for hitters.
And how is what I typed earlier wrong? It absolutely was not wrong. If you have 500PA and never walk, get a sac hit, get hit by a pitch, you would have 500AB.
And, once again, it’s not absurd. It was the ENTIRE POINT of Tango’s article. One more time:
It’s absolutely 100% not absurd at all. It is, in fact, 100% correct. That bolded part RIGHT there, those are the words of Tango and it is almost VERBATIM what you quoted me saying and called absurd and wrong. It’s not absurd nor is it wrong. Seriously. It’s not. Read the entire quoted article and focus on the bold part. Because THAT is what I’m talking about. You don’t replace a K with another out when lower your K rate. You replace it with a ball in play, and a ball in play can go for a hit.
You continue to bring up that all outs are worth the same amount when I am clearly very much 100% aware of that. But somehow you aren’t reading the rest of the article or you’d understand what I’m saying. Because Tango himself concluded that a change in approach wherein a hitter lowers his K rate does have a positive impact. He said, of course, that it isn’t something a great hitter should do, but as a general rule, it is a good idea as it raises wOBA by about 10 points.
Seriously dude, it’s right there.
DoogolasQuote Reply
Honestly, the only explanation for this I can possibly think of is that we’re talking about two totally different things. You seem to be focusing on out value.
I’m not. I’m talking about the value of a strikeout vs a ball in play, which is what you’re getting. Because, as Tango pointed out, BABIP does not change when you lower K rate. Thus when you don’t K and put more balls in play, you are not just changing types of outs.
I mean, it really is right there.
DoogolasQuote Reply
You are right a K is the same as an out. I don’t know anyone that is disputing that fact, but the point but a ball in play is not the same value as an out or a K. A ball in play can be an out sure, and at that point it was relatively the same value as the K.
However a ball in play will not always be an out. It will be a hit some of the time.
If you lower your K rate and all other things stay the same your production will improve, and improve quite a bit. I don’t think there is really any argument that it won’t.
Strikeout = ground out
Ball in play =/= ground out.
poQuote Reply