TWiB #8: 5/22 - 5/28

[Guest Princess Leena]

 

And I thought Boston's media was bad.

 

That's just fucking sad...

 

It may be time for New York to just dump A-Rod, because he could hit 100 HR's, and he'd still be hated.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Edit: Double post

[naiwf 0]

Alex Rodriguez NO-RISP 0.378 0.577 0.954

Alex Rodriguez RISP 0.391 0.564 0.955

 

He hits the same with RISP as he does without. Make what you want out of that, but those are the facts.

 

I really don't think A-Rod's hitting .378 or .391 in any situation considering he's batting .307 for his career, and .276 this year. Where are those stats from?

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Those are career OBP/SLG/OPS. I didn't include batting average.

[naiwf 0]

Those are career OBP/SLG/OPS. I didn't include batting average.

 

Any particular reason you left out the stat that lets us know how often he actually hits when trying to determine how often he hits?

[jwest27 0]

Hey, I just noticed that the starting pitcher for the Giants tonight is Matt Morris. Hopefulley he will extend that 5.43 ERA into this game. Marquis might be able to barely edge him out with his 5.08 ERA.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Those are career OBP/SLG/OPS. I didn't include batting average.

 

Any particular reason you left out the stat that lets us know how often he actually hits when trying to determine how often he hits?

 

Batting average is a mostly worthless stat because it doesn't tell you much. Batting average is a component of on base percentage. The goal is to not make an out, not just get a hit.

 

But if you really want to know, it was .305 for both.

[TheDevilAndGodAreRagingInsideMe 0]

If Adande's stat just now that Big Papi only has 3 more ABs than A-Rod with men in scoring position (or was it in late games?) but has TWENTY ONE more RBI in those times was true, that's pretty staggering for the so-called MVP of 2005.

 

He only won because the writers refuse to give it to a DH.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

If Adande's stat just now that Big Papi only has 3 more ABs than A-Rod with men in scoring position (or was it in late games?) but has TWENTY ONE more RBI in those times was true, that's pretty staggering for the so-called MVP of 2005.

 

He only won because the writers refuse to give it to a DH.

 

Or maybe they looked at their identical numbers and figured that A-Rod gets the nod because he plays plus defense. Just a thought.

[TheDevilAndGodAreRagingInsideMe 0]

All you need to do is watch him play on a consistant basis.

 

Throw all these numbers and stats and whatnot around, it doesn't change anything.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

All you need to do is watch him play on a consistant basis.

 

Throw all these numbers and stats and whatnot around, it doesn't change anything.

 

I do watch these guys play on a consistent basis. You know what I can't do though? I can't remember every at-bat, or every fielding play from a 162-game season. That's why I use stats. They give a composite look at a season's worth of individual moments. That way I can remove biases from my analysis where you can't.

[Bruiser Chong 0]

Sometimes I think watching every game (or near every game) a team plays in the season can make you biased in one direction or the other. Lord knows I ragged on certain elements of the Cubs teams in recent years, when in reality, things weren't as bad as they seemed.

 

If you see every A-Rod at-bat with RISP, of course you're going to have your perception of him skewered. You've probably seen him fail seven out of 10 tries.

[naiwf 0]

Sometimes I think watching every game (or near every game) a team plays in the season can make you biased in one direction or the other. Lord knows I ragged on certain elements of the Cubs teams in recent years, when in reality, things weren't as bad as they seemed.

 

If you see every A-Rod at-bat with RISP, of course you're going to have your perception of him skewered. You've probably seen him fail seven out of 10 tries.

 

Fair enough, but I think this is all you need to know to determine "value". Which player is feared by other teams when the game is on the line. I think it's safe to say that the big time teams do not fear A-Rod in the 8th or 9th innings of close games. They do however fear Jeter (even though he won't hit a 450 foot bomb), or Ortiz, or Bonds, or Pujols, or Mariano F. Rivera etc. I don't think A-Rod was even the 2nd most valuable YANKEE last year, so how was he the MVP of the league? Without Mo, the Yankees are shit. With half of their lineup and starting rotation not playing right now, they can still go .500 just because Mo doesn't blow leads. Without Ortiz last year, the Sox finish about 81-81 at best. Without A-Rod, the Yankees still make the playoffs.

 

The fact A-Rod's other MVP came when he was on a last place team is just as ridiculous as him winning last year. I mean, if Texas finished last WITH him, how much worse would they have done without him? The writers need to actually think about their votes and not just go with (often times hollow) power numbers.

[Guest]

For the first time in an eternity, Pierre doesn't bunt to start the game. It wound up where it would have went anyway.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Fair enough, but I think this is all you need to know to determine "value". Which player is feared by other teams when the game is on the line. I think it's safe to say that the big time teams do not fear A-Rod in the 8th or 9th innings of close games. They do however fear Jeter (even though he won't hit a 450 foot bomb), or Ortiz, or Bonds, or Pujols, or Mariano F. Rivera etc. I don't think A-Rod was even the 2nd most valuable YANKEE last year, so how was he the MVP of the league? Without Mo, the Yankees are shit. Without half of their lineup and starting rotation not playing right now, they can still go .500 just because Mo doesn't blow leads. Without Ortiz last year, the Sox finish about 81-81 at best. Without A-Rod, the Yankees still make the playoffs.

 

2005 WARP numbers:

 

A-Rod: 10.5

Ortiz: 8.0

 

WARP is wins above replacement player, and it measures the true value of a player in relation to his team. A-Rod created 10.5 more wins than a replacement level player would have in that Yankees lineup given the exact same opportunities. If A-Rod and Ortiz both broke their leg on opening day and were replaced by comparable AAA/fringe major league players the Yankees would have won 85 games and the Sox 87 games. Guess who gets left out of the playoffs in that scenario? Do I need to spell that one out too?

 

I know these stats are a little oversimplified, but you can't just throw out blanket statements without providing some proof. Don't tell us that we know nothing about measuring value when there are dozens of advanced metrics that measure this stuff (VORP, WARP1, EQA, RC/27).

 

And I have no gripes with Mo Rivera, but he has to have a lead to protect in the ninth inning. If he doesn't have guys in the lineup who can mash, his value is limited. A guy who pitches 70 innings a year is not comparable to an everyday player or a starter no matter how great they are at the end of a game.

[naiwf 0]

2005 WARP numbers:

 

A-Rod: 10.5

Ortiz: 8.0

 

WARP is wins above replacement player, and it measures the true value of a player in relation to his team. A-Rod created 10.5 more wins than a replacement level player would have in that Yankees lineup given the exact same opportunities. If A-Rod and Ortiz both broke their leg on opening day and were replaced by comparable AAA/fringe major league players the Yankees would have won 85 games and the Sox 87 games. Guess who gets left out of the playoffs in that scenario? Do I need to spell that one out too?

 

I know these stats are a little oversimplified, but you can't just throw out blanket statements without providing some proof. Don't tell us that we know nothing about measuring value when there are dozens of advanced metrics that measure this stuff (VORP, WARP1, EQA, RC/27).

 

And I have no gripes with Mo Rivera, but he has to have a lead to protect in the ninth inning. If he doesn't have guys in the lineup who can mash, his value is limited. A guy who pitches 70 innings a year is not comparable to an everyday player or a starter no matter how great they are at the end of a game.

 

I don't buy certain stats. The Sox have 2 feared hitters. Take 1 out (Ortiz) on opening day and the other (Ramirez) sees nothing to hit all season. As a result, you'd rid Boston of basically all of their offensive threats with the lost of one player. The Yankees on the other hand are still capable of mashing even with Sheff and Matsui out, and being replaced by scrubs like Melky Cabrera and Bubba Crosby. My eyes tell me that the Yankees have more than enough offense to endure without A-Rod while the Sox can't afford to lose either Ortiz or Ramirez.

 

Lastly, Mariano Rivera is essentially the reason the Yankees have been the Yankees for the last decade. A-Rod hasn't helped them win a title yet and I'm sure he was a huge upgrade individually over Charlie Hayes, Wade Boggs and Scott Brosius. Stats can lie especially when they involve complex formulas and have retarded names like VORP and WARP. Sabremetrics has ruined baseball.

[CanadianChris 0]

Stats can lie especially when they involve complex formulas and have retarded names like VORP and WARP.

Oh my God, that's going in my sig.

[devo 0]

Yeah, sure. A small portion of the fanbase has embraced sabermetrics, and they've 'ruined' baseball. Right.

[Guest Princess Leena]

I've asked before, but can someone explain those VORP and WARP type stats... or lead me to a site that does?

 

Stats interest me.

[CanadianChris 0]

Baseball Prospectus ( http://www.baseballprospectus.com ) is a pretty good site for that sort of thing.

[naiwf 0]

Yeah, sure. A small portion of the fanbase has embraced sabermetrics, and they've 'ruined' baseball. Right.

 

You're a Mets fan right? I'm guessing some statistical spreadsheet will probably tell you that Mo is worth about 5 or 6 more wins per season over a "replacement player". As someone who has suffered through Billy Wagner so far this year, John Franco, Armando Benitez and Braden Looper how much stock do you put into that stat? I'm sure the best closer of all time has more of an impact than the numbers would say, and I'm also fairly sure that if any of the Mets closers of the last decade had been on the Yankees the Bombers would NOT have 24 Championships, let alone 26.

[Bruiser Chong 0]

Jacque Jones looks absolutely helpless against lefties. Not just good lefties; ANY lefties.

 

Ronny Cedeno ensures a leadoff triple doesn't go to waste and Wood follows up with an RBI of his own. The Jones signing wouldn't look as bad if they had also picked up someone to platoon the position.

 

I think I can hit better than Juan Pierre, though. This guy looks terrible. He's seen four pitches in two at-bats and both times, has grounded back to the pitcher.

 

Wood's also all over the place early. Marlins may have him out by the third at this rate.

[Guest]

Wood's not throwing hard either.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Yeah, sure. A small portion of the fanbase has embraced sabermetrics, and they've 'ruined' baseball. Right.

 

You're a Mets fan right? I'm guessing some statistical spreadsheet will probably tell you that Mo is worth about 5 or 6 more wins per season over a "replacement player". As someone who has suffered through Billy Wagner so far this year, John Franco, Armando Benitez and Braden Looper how much stock do you put into that stat? I'm sure the best closer of all time has more of an impact than the numbers would say, and I'm also fairly sure that if any of the Mets closers of the last decade had been on the Yankees the Bombers would NOT have 24 Championships, let alone 26.

 

Five or 6 wins is actually really significant. That's the difference between the Yankees winning the division every year and watching it from home. A good closer is extremely valuable in baseball. Teams with a good bullpen tend to routinely outperform their pythagorean record (oh know, some funky stat with a weird name) because they perform much better than is expected in close games. But Mo is an extreme case. He literally has almost no comparables because closers just can't do what he has done for this long.

 

And as far as your comment earlier, saying that sabermetrics have ruined baseball is naive and it makes you sound dense. Oh no! Regression analysis! Correlation! What about Jeter's heart! What about bunting! You nerds with your computers can't tell me anything about baseball.

 

God forbid there are smart people out there who love the game and want to understand it better. I doubt that some fringe group is changing the game for the worse. If you don't understand sabermetrics, that's fine. The stuff is really complicated sometimes. But don't get high and mighty and tell us that we don't know anything about baseball.

[naiwf 0]

And as far as your comment earlier, saying that sabermetrics have ruined baseball is naive and it makes you sound dense. Oh no! Regression analysis! Correlation! What about Jeter's heart! What about bunting! You nerds with your computers can't tell me anything about baseball.

 

God forbid there are smart people out there who love the game and want to understand it better. I doubt that some fringe group is changing the game for the worse. If you don't understand sabermetrics, that's fine. The stuff is really complicated sometimes. But don't get high and mighty and tell us that we don't know anything about baseball.

 

I didn't say you don't know anything about baseball. I merely said that you're ruining it with statistical formulas that need to be run on supercomputers. I don't like baseball enough to care to learn about how if I replaced Braden Looper with a one legged arthritic left handed specialist at night, but only on Tuesdays and Fridays that my team might have won 1.73 more games per season over a 50 year stretch. It's just too much information. The supposed beauty of baseball is that the game is still the same as it was 100 years ago, but everything has become micromanaged to the point of it often not being fun to watch anymore. A-Rod wasn't the most valuable Yankee, he shouldn't be the MVP. Any stat that says he's more crucial to the success of the Yankees than Mo is, is a stat I wipe my ass with. That's all I'm saying.

[Guest Felonies!]

Say hi to Jon Miller for me next Sunday please

[Bored 0]

"People can come up with a statistics to prove anything, 40% of people know that."

[CanadianChris 0]

 

And as far as your comment earlier, saying that sabermetrics have ruined baseball is naive and it makes you sound dense. Oh no! Regression analysis! Correlation! What about Jeter's heart! What about bunting! You nerds with your computers can't tell me anything about baseball.

 

God forbid there are smart people out there who love the game and want to understand it better. I doubt that some fringe group is changing the game for the worse. If you don't understand sabermetrics, that's fine. The stuff is really complicated sometimes. But don't get high and mighty and tell us that we don't know anything about baseball.

 

I didn't say you don't know anything about baseball. I merely said that you're ruining it with statistical formulas that need to be run on supercomputers. I don't like baseball enough to care to learn about how if I replaced Braden Looper with a one legged arthritic left handed specialist at night, but only on Tuesdays and Fridays that my team might have won 1.73 more games per season over a 50 year stretch. It's just too much information. The supposed beauty of baseball is that the game is still the same as it was 100 years ago, but everything has become micromanaged to the point of it often not being fun to watch anymore. A-Rod wasn't the most valuable Yankee, he shouldn't be the MVP. Any stat that says he's more crucial to the success of the Yankees than Mo is, is a stat I wipe my ass with. That's all I'm saying.

You obviously don't get it. And that's fine -- it's easy to enjoy baseball without knowing any stats more complex than batting average and ERA.

 

But to suggest that stats and statheads are ruining baseball because you don't agree with them is insulting to those of us who understand sabermetrics.

[CanadianChris 0]

"People can come up with a statistics to prove anything, 40% of people know that."

76% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

[Mik 0]

Noteworthy: Marlins rookie pitcher Ricky Nolasco did more Monday — a homer and two RBI — than Pierre has done all year (no homers, two RBI).

 

Marlins win the trade! Not to mention they got Renyel Pinto and Sergio Mitre for Pierre as well. Nolasco has #2 to ace potential.