Yankees vs. Phillies - Let's play "Who would you rather have?"
(promoted to the front page--dajafi)
First off, I realize the Yankees haven't yet won their Series yet, but I've pretty much already penciled them in. So just for fun (not trying to make any grand statement about who the better team is), let's take a look position by position at who we'd rather have (disregarding age, the future, etc - just for this series)... Oh, and no DH, because... well, the DH isn't really baseball...
1B - Ryan Howard vs. Mark Teixeira
Teixeira - .292, 39 HR, 103 runs, 122 RBI, 2 steals, and he is probably the best fielding 1B in baseball.
Howard - .279, 45 HR, 105 runs, 141 RBI, 8 steals, and although his fielding improved by leaps and bounds this year, he's still a below average fielding 1B, and certainly nowhere near the class of that of a Teixeira.
What a matchup - Obviously, these are 2 of the best players in the game. Their regular season numbers are fairly even (I'll give the slight edge to Howard), although Teixeira is an elite fielder. However, Teixeira has been abysmal so far this postseason, whereas Howard just took home some hardware for MVP. I'm taking Howard.
2B - Chase Utley vs. Robinson Cano
Cano - .320, 25 HR, 103 runs, 85 RBI, 5 steals
Utley - .282, 31 HR, 112 runs, 93 RBI, 23 steals
Again, the numbers here are close, although Utley is having a much better playoffs. Is it sacrilegious to not take Chase Utley in any 2B showdown? Yes it is. I'll take Utley.
SS - Jimmy Rollins vs. Derek Jeter
Jeter - .334, 18 HR, 107 runs, 66 RBI, 30 steals
Rollins - .250, 21 HR, 100 runs, 77 RBI, 31 steals
We all love Jimmy again after his immediately legendary Game 4 double off Broxton... Henry Hill was definitely fired up...
But let's get real here... Jeter in a landslide.
3B - Pedro Feliz vs. Alex Rodriguez
Rodriguez - .286, 30 HR, 78 runs, 100 RBI, 14 steals
Feliz - .266, 12 HR, 62 runs, 82 RBI, 0 steals
I didn't realize how blah A-Rod's numbers were this year, but he's lighting it up in the postseason. Feliz loves popping up on the first pitch. Rodriguez... Next.
LF - Raul Ibanez vs. Johnny Damon
Damon - .282, 24 HR, 107 runs, 82 RBI, 12 steals
Ibanez - .272, 34 HR, 93 runs, 93 RBI, 4 steals
Wow, this was closer than I would have thought. I like Ibanez's pop, and Damon's rag arm kills them in left. I'm taking Raul, but just barely.
CF - Shane Victorino vs. Melky Cabrera
Melky - .272, 13 HR, 66 runs, 68 RBI, 10 steals
Victorino - .292, 10 HR, 102 runs, 62 RBI, 25 steals
Really no argument here, plus Shane is having a monster postseason. Victorino.
RF - Jayson Werth vs. Nick Swisher
Swisher - .249, 29 HR, 84 runs, 82 RBI, 0 steals
Werth - .268, 36 HR, 98 runs, 99 RBI, 20 steals
Again, no argument here. Werth is a better hitter, fielder, and I felt he had a l legitimate shot at MVP over Howard. In fairness to Swisher, if I had a nickel for every time I heard how great a clubhouse guy he is, um... can't think of a funny way to end that sentence, but apparently he's a great clubhouse guy. Werth by far.
C - Chooch vs. Jorge Posada
Posada - .285, 22 HR, 55 runs, 81 RBI, 1 steal
Chooch - .255, 9 HR, 32 runs, 43 RBI, 3 steals
Man, I'd love to take Chooch here. Let me preface this by saying I base this on very little, but... Is there a bigger douche in baseball than Jorge Posada? I'd pay $100 to flick his ear just once. Seriously, I would. And how can anyone not love the Chooch? He's WAAAY better with his pitching staff, but in the end, I begrudgingly give this round in a landslide to Jorge because of his offensive capability.
So that's it - 5-3 Phillies, although the 3 advantages for the Yankees are enormous ones. Anyone disagree?
0 recs |
126 comments
Comments
Another fun game to play:
.268, 36 HR, 98 runs, 99 RBI, 20 steals
.286, 30 HR, 78 runs, 100 RBI, 14 steals
Which player should make 30 million a year?
by Whack8888 on Oct 23, 2009 11:15 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
is “neither” an option?
"I tried to run him over but Eli had his big boy pads on and he kind of stopped me from getting in the end zone. The next time I’ll try to jump over his head.’’ - Asante Samuel
by foos05 on Oct 23, 2009 11:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haha, not if you are the Yankees for another 9-10 years!
by Whack8888 on Oct 23, 2009 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Surprising that A-Rod scored so few runs this year in that lineup. But then, I guess he was hurt for a while at the beginning.
by taco pal on Oct 23, 2009 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, he only played 124 games this year. Fewer than I’d thought. His counting stats projected out over an extra thirty games would have been 37 HR, 97 R, 124 RBI. Still not exactly the best of A-Rod years, but he’s still great.
by taco pal on Oct 23, 2009 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As far as evaluating players’ contracts, I think it is mildly fair to decrease a player’s value for injuries. Especially when that player is 34. Is being out for a month (or so, I dont really know how long he was out) really all that surprising for a 34 year old? Going forward, I am sure A Rod will have healthy years where he does well, but I think it is also reasonable to expect that he will frequently have years where he spends a decent amount of time on the DL.
by Whack8888 on Oct 23, 2009 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
OPS+ 124 vs 143
If money wasn’t an issue there is no question who I would take. Since money is any issue I would take Werth
I R 5
by say hey nation on Oct 23, 2009 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn’t realize how blah A-Rod’s numbers were this year, but he’s lighting it up in the postseason. Feliz loves popping up on the first pitch. Rodriguez… Next.
You do realize that A-Rod PA’s this year were dramaticlly lower than at any other point in his career, roughly 10%(over a full season)
I R 5
by say hey nation on Oct 23, 2009 11:39 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
…although in fairness, I said “Charlie Manuel doesn’t like stats, and that’s why I love him,” not “I don’t like counting stats.”
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 23, 2009 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s also an incorrect statement, but hey there you go…
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Oct 23, 2009 10:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I’m sure about it…I’m more sure of it than any nonsense you wrote
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Oct 24, 2009 10:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You do realize that it is dishonest to make comparisons based on counting stats without also listing games played, right?
by FuquaManuel on Oct 23, 2009 11:46 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Ugh...
With the exception of Rodriguez and Feliz, there weren’t 2 players that more than a 9 game difference, so I didn’t bother, but thanks for the nit-pick.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 23, 2009 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess what I am trying to say is that counting stats are next to useless, especially when you include so few of them. OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+ are all based on sample size, i.e. plate appearances.
Without including information like PA and walks, comparing counting stats as you do above is essentially pointless.
by FuquaManuel on Oct 23, 2009 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just meant to be a quick fun comparison, brother… didn’t really want to get too deep into all that, but again, thanks for the nit-pick.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 23, 2009 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But it’s not fun. It’s pointless.
by FuquaManuel on Oct 23, 2009 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Alright...
I’m a dickbag. Happy?
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 23, 2009 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No. I’d be happy if you redid your pointless post. Or deleted it.
by FuquaManuel on Oct 23, 2009 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haha, wow...
OK, here are some more stats for you… You posted on here at 11:42, 11:46, 12:06, 12:14, and now 12:21. For a shitty post, why are you spending so much time on it? To be a bully?
I already said I’m a dickbag. OK? Let me do it again…
“I’m a dickbag”
- Bye, Dawk :(, October 23, 2009.
I can send you my lunch money too… Just need your address… Thanks.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 23, 2009 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No one is calling you a dickbag. They are calling you an uninformed poster. Those two things are very different.
by FuquaManuel on Oct 23, 2009 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, sorry. I'll try again...
“I’m an uninformed poster.”
-Bye, Dawk :(, October 23, 2009
Better?
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 23, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No. The proper response to being called an uninformed poster is becoming an informed one.
by FuquaManuel on Oct 23, 2009 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the help...
I’m off to IPU (Informed Posting University). Just enrolled! Wish me luck!
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 23, 2009 12:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok you two....
Baseball is a sport of numbers to the larger fanbase.
2130?
4191?
755?
61*?
56?
These numbers mean something to a lot of tradtional fans, and while they are not the best way to compare performances of two baseball players, they are reasonably good enough to get the job done IN MOST INSTANCES (not all). Look at the presented numbers for Werth and Swisher. Can anyone honestly tell me they need to look at OPS+ to ascertain that Werth is the better player from that comparison? Can you really find a REALISTIC situation in which Swisher could post that line, yet be the better player? C’mon. Let it go.
The A-Rod numbers do need clarity that it wasn’t a full season, but hell, I think we all know he’s better than Happy Pete.
I re-iterate….don’t be a stat-snob. You don’t look smarter presenting “better” data if you look like a jerk while doing so, you just look like a jerk, and then nobody is going to take you seriously and nobody will become better informed. If the goal is education, then educate.
by Bilzo on Oct 23, 2009 2:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just hate Swisher because he prances at the plate, but I agree that even though most of the stats are sum rather than per, it’s still fairly clear who’s better at most positions.
"When you make your final stand
I'll be right there
I'll never leave
And all I ask of you is
Believe"
by The Dark on Oct 23, 2009 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
fuck this guy
dude bye dawk was a great post .. ive done it with my boy whos a yankee diehard .. and he always picks yankees ppl .. biased as hell .. but it makes a lot of sense and its fun
An inconsistent coach is far worse than an inconsistent quarterback.(Route 36)
by jack is better than asante on Oct 26, 2009 2:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude, he is right. To many factors not in the players control effect RBI’s and Run’s
I R 5
by say hey nation on Oct 23, 2009 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know...
I already conceded that I’m a dickbag.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 23, 2009 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Insult to dickbags
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Oct 23, 2009 10:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You do realize who made the original post right? Why should he do more work than ESPN does?
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Oct 23, 2009 10:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know this guy from a can of paint. But I guess I now know what I can expect.
by FuquaManuel on Oct 23, 2009 10:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d consider Jeter-Rollins a bit closer (although I’d still take Jeter) because of Jeter’s atrocious range. There’s also the matter of clutchitude:
2 outs, RISP:
.275/.341/.513, 3 HR, 28 RBI
.259/.419/.414, 2 HR, 19 RBI
Do you know which shortstop goes with each statline?
As for the catchers:
Catchers in the postseason:
.417/.500/.500, 0 HR, 1 RBI
.308/.419/.577, 2 HR, 3 RBI
.346/.500/.500, 1 HR, 7 RBI
One of these is Joe Mauer. The other two play for the Yankees and the Phillies. I’d take any of the three, from an offensive standpoint.
"When you make your final stand
I'll be right there
I'll never leave
And all I ask of you is
Believe"
by The Dark on Oct 23, 2009 11:52 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
*note – the “Do you know” question is a generic you, not a challenge to Dawk. My rhetorical questioning came off as a bit more of a challenge than usual
"When you make your final stand
I'll be right there
I'll never leave
And all I ask of you is
Believe"
by The Dark on Oct 23, 2009 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No worries, bud… Didn’t read it that way.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 23, 2009 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Seriously guys, give the Dawk a break.
Yeah, they’re counting stats….so what. IMHO, they’re no better a decisive factor than Post-season performance which is based on as little as 3 games or as many as 9 games.
Nice comparison, not meant to sell any books or anything.
Don’t be a stat-snob.
by Bilzo on Oct 23, 2009 12:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Phillies Lineup
Consistency, or maybe reliability is the better word, is one thing that worked out well for the lineup this year that has carried into the postseason. In the regular season, six of the Phillies regulars played more than 154 games. Ibanez had an injury that limited him for a month (134 games played). Only Ruiz missed significant time (107 games played) with three weeks out in April, another ten days in late September, plus the periodic days off given to a catcher.
by phillyinportland on Oct 23, 2009 5:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Just a fan.
I’m not an informed poster and I have never heard of a counting stat. That must be why I found Dawk’s post to be a quick, informative comparison of the starting offense and I like our chances more than ever.
by Ritty77 on Oct 24, 2009 3:54 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Let’s start “Uninformed Anonymous.”
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 24, 2009 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know a place where they meet, daily, to express uninformed opinions on the phillies flyers eagles and (to lesser extent) the sixers, not to mention random other topics.
Say my name and how much you htae me – you’ll be instantly accepted
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Oct 24, 2009 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't hate you or anyone else on here...
And I’m kind of uninterested in some kind of weird cyber-feud. Just a Phillies fan here, not much more. If it’s therapeudic to work out your aggression online, well, I guess that’s better than going the Columbine route, but maybe for the next week or 2… How about lightening up a little? You do realize the Phils are in the World Series, right? Why act like an ass?
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 25, 2009 6:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dawk – just ignore him and he’ll go away.
by Bilzo on Oct 25, 2009 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn’t work with you -= you keep coming back spouting nonsense
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Oct 25, 2009 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haha, counting stats arent really all that bad, so long as you are using them properly.
For the future though, the slash line BA/OBP/SLG is in my opinion the best “at a glance” stats for hitting. The only thing I dont like about it is SLG is kind of awkward, because Doubles and Triples are very similar in value but a much higher number is given for Triples than for Doubles.
I would really like a “at a glance” stat line of
PA/BB+Singles+HBP/Doubles/Triples/HR
this gives the basic information without any skewing of data because of various unnecessary calculations.
PA/OBP/DPPA (Double per plate appearance)/ TPPA/ HRpPA
could do some quick percentage calculations to help give probability stuff etc.
Probably sacrifices should be in there somewhere though, maybe just at the end. haha you could include producitve outs as well, but I am not a big fan of productive outs and would tend not to give much value to that kind of thing, but that is probably my own irrationality.
by Whack8888 on Oct 24, 2009 4:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Whack8888 is indeed whack!
Yankees are by far better!
by Static Shock 1987 on Oct 24, 2009 11:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Haha, good luck paying A Roid 30 million a year when he is 40 and cant use his Roids.
Look at Manny, that is the kind of production you can expect from A Rod in about 3-4 years.
by Whack8888 on Oct 24, 2009 11:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m slightly amazed that this post got promoted to the front page.
If not for the conclusions, then for the methods used to arrive at those conclusions.
by FuquaManuel on Oct 25, 2009 12:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m slightly amazed that a person can be so ridiculously obsessed with an guest (amateur) post on a blog. I’m excited to see how many times you keep coming back for no other reason that to start a confrontation. It’s getting to be comical.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 25, 2009 6:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pretty sure every post here is by an ‘amateur’, being an amateur doesn’t excuse ignorance
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Oct 25, 2009 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m not trying to start a confrontation. I’m trying to get you to make your post look less like mindless drivel and more like the insightful baseball analysis that makes this site great.
I’ve explained to you why I think the stats you cite are not particularly useful for doing a comparative analysis, and you have ignored those criticisms and have instead chosen to turn it into some kind of personal attack.
See some of MattS’s old series preview posts to get a sense of the kind of useful statistical analysis I am talking about. Of course, I don’t expect you (or anyone else) to demonstrate that level of statistical acumen, but it is good for reference.
by FuquaManuel on Oct 25, 2009 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, whatever… and you’re back yet again to throw out some more good-natured barbs. All in good fun, right buddy? Anyway, my “mindless drivel” (as you of course jokingly put it, since you’re anti-confrontation) was promoted to the front page. Such an honor! So first of all, I’d like to thank my mom and dad, for teaching me to be such a great writer. Secondly, I’d like to thank the authors of this blog, who recognize greatness and promoted me to THE FRONT PAGE (cheers from the crowd). And finally, I’d like to thank my fans, especially you, Fuqua (tears running down my face). It’s your love of this post and your persistence coming back here every couple hours that makes it all worthwhile.
So anyway, due to the overwhelming success of this, the best post in the history of mankind, I’ve been inspired to write A LOT more often. Hooray! See you around… say… every week? Maybe more? Awesome. (High fives all around, shaving cream pie in the face, champagne bottles popping, fireworks blasting). LET’S-GO-BYE-DAWK!!! CLAP CLAP… CLAP CLAP CLAP!!!
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 25, 2009 8:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don’t post on this blog when assholes are near? 10-4. Got it.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 25, 2009 8:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow. Really? You have yet to offer a substantive response to my critique of your methodology.
Stop being so damn defensive and defend your post. Every time you respond with snide remarks like these, I become more convinced that you are not very well suited to discuss baseball statistics.
by FuquaManuel on Oct 25, 2009 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stop being so damn defensive and defend your post.
Hahaha, well… I can’t do both. You have to pick one or the other.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 25, 2009 9:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
*defend the content of your post.
by FuquaManuel on Oct 25, 2009 9:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nope. Gonna stick with being “snide.” It’s more fun for me at this point. You didn’t like the post, and that’s fine… No worries. Other people did, and that’s good enough for me. Good night, my new friend.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 25, 2009 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I liked the post Dawk.
And this is why I don’t post much here. I enjoy baseball and I’m a huge Phillies’ fan, but I can’t hang with all the eggheadness. I think counting stats are fine for what you used them for, but sabermetrics guys will kill you for them every time. I have a buddy who is so into this stuff he has created a whole stat system that catalogs players all the way back to the deadball era. But he went to a saber conference and had the audacity to bring up RBI’s. He said they nailed him to a cross for it. I enjoy baseball as a sport, not a science experiment, so I thought your post was nice little breakdown. If nothing else you know you can feel good about the fact that you bring the heat when you post about the Birds.
But you totally are an uninformed dickbag.
by NOLACuse on Oct 26, 2009 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think Matt S is a fair comparison. Dude gets paid to do that now.
by Bilzo on Oct 26, 2009 9:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You clearly didn’t read my post.
by FuquaManuel on Oct 26, 2009 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah I did…
you said:
See some of MattS’s old series preview posts to get a sense of the kind of useful statistical analysis I am talking about. Of course, I don’t expect you (or anyone else) to demonstrate that level of statistical acumen, but it is good for reference.
In the same sentence you essentially said, “be like Matt, but I know that’s not possible”.
Seems like a reasonable thing to ask somebody to do…..
Before butchering somebody else’s work, take the time to make your own stat analysis. My foray into homer %age by playoff team gave me an appreciation for the amount of time it takes to do this crap, and I had help from somebody else to give me a lot of the data, I just had to add to/arrange it. If somebody wants to take the time to generate fielding by errors in the 9th inning I’ll look at it.
by Bilzo on Oct 26, 2009 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, it does take time to do a good, useful post using more insightful stats. But what this guy at time is the antithesis of that. It takes no time or reflection at all. He lines up a bunch of numbers that aren’t particularly helpful taken on their own and tries to determine who is better. Its the kind of drivel you can find on ESPN and requires about as much research as they do.
The MattS comparison was more to point out that there are better ways to do this kind of thing, not that that is necessarily the way they need be done. But it damn sure requires more research than looking at BA, RBI, and Homers on yahoo.com
by FuquaManuel on Oct 27, 2009 11:46 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
HEY!!!
There he is!!! Good to see you, bud.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 27, 2009 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with all of your picks… as much as I love Ruiz, you have to go with Posada based on the stats you provided. I’d probably still pick him to be on my team though :-)
In life, as in a football game, the principle to follow is: Hit the line hard.
-Theodore Roosevelt
by Eaglesgrl5 on Oct 26, 2009 12:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Pinstripe Alley just did a similar post...
http://www.pinstripealley.com/2009/10/26/1101429/a-quick-glance-at-the-lineups#storyjump
The consensus is largely the same as what Dawk posted, except that they call Howard vs Texiera and Cabrera v Victorino a “push”
by Boundforbeach on Oct 26, 2009 12:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I’ll buy Howard/Teixeira being a push, but Cabrera/Victorino?!? Please.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 26, 2009 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I buy it. Victorino is better with the bat and is a decent but not great defender. While Cabrera is decent no great with the bat but better in the field
I R 5
by say hey nation on Oct 26, 2009 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Victorino won a gold glove last year.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 26, 2009 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I suppose you have some kind of egghead stats that’ll say Victorino is some kind of average CF?
I’m going to stick with trusting my eyes.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 26, 2009 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I also concede that Victorino is better
I R 5
by say hey nation on Oct 26, 2009 3:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough...
But what’s not to like about Victorino’s game, Big arm (and accurate), a ton of speed, and he’ll run through a wall if need be.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 26, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Victorino’s game in CF, that is…
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 26, 2009 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He is a good player. Just not the best
I R 5
by say hey nation on Oct 26, 2009 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He is a beast… he looked like he was going to jump the divider going after that one homerun. Hes amazingly fast and can steal bases like its his job and he can hit. He fields, hits, runs, steals… I’m all about some Victorino.
In life, as in a football game, the principle to follow is: Hit the line hard.
-Theodore Roosevelt
by Eaglesgrl5 on Oct 26, 2009 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
is he the best CFer in his league? Not the best overall CF, but the best fielding CFer. That’s who the award is supposed to go to.
by Bilzo on Oct 26, 2009 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Using gold gloves to support your argument is like using pro bowl appearances
Don't frack with me or you'll get a punch in the kidneys...you've been warned
by jemagee on Oct 27, 2009 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed...
But still, it’s not like they’re giving away Gold Gloves to “decent” fielders, as the post above mine suggested Victorino is.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 27, 2009 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
sometimes they do go to ‘average’ fielders. I don’t think Vic is an example, but hell, Abreu won one.
Sadly, it’s easier to win the gold glove if you deserve the silver slugger.
by Bilzo on Oct 27, 2009 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think Vic is an example, but hell, Abreu won one.
Touche… I think Abreu wears a dog collar that’s hooked up to the warning track.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 27, 2009 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I couldn’t disagree more. Yankees have alot of advantages in this series, but CF isn’t one of them. Victorino is one of the best defensive CF’s in all of baseball this year (and last).
by Boundforbeach on Oct 26, 2009 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cabrera's slightly above average defensively
.990 fld% (league average .987 for outfielders), range factor per 9 innings of 2.30.
Victorino has a .997 fld% and 2.33 range factor/9, so he’s at least roughly equal to Cabrera statistically (he’s slightly better, but the whole NL was slightly better than the whole AL, so there may be a league bias due to the DH effect).
"When you make your final stand
I'll be right there
I'll never leave
And all I ask of you is
Believe"
by The Dark on Oct 26, 2009 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
From an Angels fan...
PLEASE for the love of all that is right with baseball…beat the snot out of the yankees. I hope you get some uncompromising umps for your games and that this is a clean series. BUT PLEASE wipe the stupid smiles off their faces.
GO PHILLIES.
by angelsfan777 on Oct 26, 2009 5:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
it’ll be tough if Pettitte gets the strike zone he did last night. Phils typically suck against him, can’t imagine how bad they’d be if he got a glavine-esque K-zone.
by Bilzo on Oct 26, 2009 9:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s really hard to get Vlad to argue balls and strikes.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 26, 2009 10:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Phillies are 10 times better than the Yankees
and yet, somehow, Las Vegas has the Yankees as a 2 to 1 favorite. Maybe you guys should all go out there and clean up.
But wait a minute, let’s see if we can bridge the gap a little:
1. Starting pitching: Sabathia, Pettitte, Burnett v Lee and pray for rain.
Yankees – check
2. Bullpen
Yankees – check
3. DH
Yankees – check
4. Robinson Cano v Chuck Knoblauch (I mean Chase Utley)
Yankees – check
5. Damon v. the last four months of Ibanez
Yankees = check
6. Home field advantage
Yankees – check
7. Applying a 20% discount to Philly’s numbers for playing in an inferior league.
Yankees – check
Maybe you shouldn’t visit Vegas after all.
by The painful truth on Oct 27, 2009 9:43 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
LOL- Cano over Utley?
DH- will help philly
Pettite and Burnett are just as much wild cards as Hamels, Blanton and Happ
I R 5
by say hey nation on Oct 27, 2009 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
To be honest I think Utley’s great and, while I think Cano is underrated, I would take Utley. I was just teasing with that one. I just think it’s ridiculous how fans pick and choose about how they present stats to support their arguments. In this case, “Utley is having a much better playoffs” is clearly designed to include the division series, because Utley stunk in the NLCS while Cano had a good ALCS.
I disagree on the other two.
by The painful truth on Oct 27, 2009 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Johnny Damon over Ibanez?
Second half numbers:
Damon .290/.369/.462, 7 HR, 40 RBI, 6 GIDP
Ibanez .232/.326/.448, 12 HR, 33 RBI, 5 GIDP
Given Damon’s limp noodle of an arm, it’d be a draw at best for NY – Damon’s better at getting contact, but Ibanez has more power.
Cano over Utley?
Cano:
batting: .320/.352/.520, 25 HR, 85 RBI, 22 GIDP, 126 OPS+
fielding: 0.984 fld%, 4.71 RF/9
Utley:
batting: .282/.397/.508, 31 HR, 93 RBI, 5 GIDP, 135 OPS+
fielding: 0.984 fld%, 4.92 RF/9
Pretty close to a wash – Cano makes more contact, but hits fewer home runs and generates four and a half times as many double plays. Cano also has slightly less range in the field than Utley, though their glovework is statistically about equal.
Lee and pray for rain?
Sabathia: career ERA 4.35 vs. Philadelphia
Pettitte: 3.67
Burnett: 3.75
Lee: career ERA 5.02 vs. Yankees
Hamels: 2.77
Martinez: 3.20
Another wash – amusingly enough, the two staff aces are the worst starters against the other team based solely on ERA (yes, I know ERA’s not a good measure – I’m not willing to put forth a full rebuttal to something this bad).
"When you make your final stand
I'll be right there
I'll never leave
And all I ask of you is
Believe"
by The Dark on Oct 27, 2009 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK, I’m done.
I’ve just had someone try to peddle Pedro Martinez’s career stats as an indicator of how he’ll perform this year. I hope Jerry Manuel agrees with your insight, which, having heard him a few times, I think he just might. Actually, you guys could probably get him to bring back Pete Rose to shore up 3rd base. Doesn’t he have a lot of hits?
by The painful truth on Oct 27, 2009 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve just had someone try to peddle Pedro Martinez’s career stats as an indicator of how he’ll perform this year.
Fair enough. But that said, his one start in the postseason so far…
7 IP, 2 H, 0 BB, 0 R.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 27, 2009 11:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dodgers=/= Yankees
Strikeouts are boring- Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
by CasanovaWong on Oct 27, 2009 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Angels>Phillies
Strikeouts are boring- Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
by CasanovaWong on Oct 27, 2009 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mariano>Broxton
Strikeouts are boring- Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
by CasanovaWong on Oct 27, 2009 11:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You doin it wrong…
You say the opposite of the truth!
I R 5
by say hey nation on Oct 27, 2009 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I dream of an entire comment section consisting only of
greater than less than and not equal to signs. Baseball is a game meant to be played on spread sheets with men in cold dark basements making calculations. One day we will not need words to express baseball thoughts.
Strikeouts are boring- Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
by CasanovaWong on Oct 27, 2009 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why would we care what the Mets manager thinks?
Or are you so ignorant of the NL that you don’t know which Manuel is which, despite there being multiple mentions on the front page of this site of Charlie Manuel?
By-the-by, Pedro has an ERA+ this season of 118, with a 1.254 WHIP and 4.63 K/BB ratio. Pettitte? 107 ERA+, 1.382 WHIP, 1.95 K/BB. Keep telling yourself Pedro’s washed up – it may be a small sample size, but Pedro’s numbers are favorable compared to Raggedy Andy.
"When you make your final stand
I'll be right there
I'll never leave
And all I ask of you is
Believe"
by The Dark on Oct 27, 2009 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Charlie, Jerry, whatever.
You’re right, I don’t spend much time on the National League, or on Triple A either.
By the way, I almost offered you Schmidt instead of Rose but the numbers weren’t there. He had more power, but was a lifetime .260 hitter and struck out too much. He was even worse in the playoffs (.236, 4 homers in eight series). They’re both complete jerks so that was a wash.
I may come back later and bring you back to Earth on the Beagles; I’ll see how I feel.
by The painful truth on Oct 27, 2009 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Using double plays as any sort of statistical measure is pretty stupid too.
Lets just take a quick look at the OBP’s hitting in front of Cano and Utley in 2009.
Utley
Pitcher ?
Rollins .296 , 31SB
Victorino .358, 25 SB
Cano
Matsui .367 0 SB
Posada .363 1 SB
Arod .402 14 SB
Ok so basically Cano had a MUCH higher chance of having people on base and when they were on base they were slow as hell. Utley however, had the opposite. Not alot of OBP ahead of him but, when guys did get on base they were of the speedy variety and more likely to either break up a DP or advance to 2b on a fielders choice.
Not saying Cano is better, Utley is world class and prob a Top 5 player in MLB right now. Just sayin that using GIDP as a measure of player value is stupid. Kind of like RBI’s if Utley hit behind Howard and Werth he’d probably have about 120 or 130.
Strikeouts are boring- Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
by CasanovaWong on Oct 27, 2009 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
1. Starting pitching: Sabathia, Pettitte, Burnett v Lee and pray for rain.
Yankees – check
I don’t think anyone is even a little frightened of Burnett and Pettitte, and we hammered C.C. in the playoffs last year.
2. Bullpen
Yankees – check
Mariano, sure. The rest? Ehhhhh, not so much.
4. Robinson Cano v Chuck Knoblauch (I mean Chase Utley)
Yankees – check
Really?
5. Damon v. the last four months of Ibanez
Yankees = check
Answer honestly… Would you really rather have Rag Arm Damon?
6. Home field advantage
Yankees – check
Best road team in the bigs, brother.
7. Applying a 20% discount to Philly’s numbers for playing in an inferior league.
Yankees – check
That inferior league did win last year, did it not?
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 27, 2009 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
CC is clearly not the same pitcher he was last year at this time.
He still hasn’t eclipsed last year’s regular season innings total.
Strikeouts are boring- Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
by CasanovaWong on Oct 27, 2009 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You think he still remembers this…
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 27, 2009 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hah, Im not even gonna watch but I assume
it’s Victorino’s salami. And yes I’m sure CC remembers. He probably also remembers not having to carry his team into the playoffs by making 3 starts on short rest just to get there,
Strikeouts are boring- Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.
by CasanovaWong on Oct 27, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m sure one of those 2 things sticks out in his mind a little bit more.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 27, 2009 11:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Everybody has one bad game against a team. I doubt it effects him after the season/postseason he has had
I R 5
by say hey nation on Oct 27, 2009 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haha, I know… just a little friendly back and forth.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 27, 2009 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you sure about that??
See Matt Stairs vs Jonathan Broxton.
by SmilingJPhilsPhan on Oct 27, 2009 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ohhhh...
Disappointed in myself for not referencing that. Well done.
by Bye, Dawk :( on Oct 27, 2009 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can’t believe you guys are biting on this. Ignore it. Seriously.
by Bilzo on Oct 27, 2009 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was in a cranky mood earlier and needed a venting spot. That post was the best one I had available. I’m better now :D
"When you make your final stand
I'll be right there
I'll never leave
And all I ask of you is
Believe"
by The Dark on Oct 27, 2009 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This may very well be the worst comment thread in TGP history.
by taco pal on Oct 27, 2009 9:54 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
And possibly the worst front-page post as well.
by FuquaManuel on Oct 27, 2009 11:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I don’t doubt that, but most of the front-page posts here are excellent.
Honestly, I thought your approach in this thread was completely wrongheaded. Don’t take that as an insult; take it in the spirit in which it’s intended. Yes, counting stats are problematic, but that doesn’t mean you had a good reason to flip your lid. I appreciate that that’s part of your persona here, but I thought it went over the line in this thread.
In my view, vehement or even snarky argumentation is warranted when someone says something ignorant in an aggressive and hostile manner. For instance, in the baseball context, when Buzz Bissinger attempts to discredit modern statistical analysis using a condescending, mocking tone, then it’s justified to go on the counterattack.
But ignorance, standing alone, doesn’t justify that kind of response. We’re all ignorant about some things in life, and most of them are a lot more significant than baseball. And that’s all the OP was here – ignorant. He didn’t write his post in an attempt to discredit sabermetrics. He wrote it the way he did probably because he doesn’t know much about statistics. That isn’t a crime. The proper response, as someone said above, would have been to politely explain to him how he should have done his analysis, to educate him. Instead, you called him “dishonest” right out of the chute, which was totally unjustiifed, and basically made the thread an exercise in trying to prove how much smarter you are than he is instead of actually trying to persuade anyone. So great, you won the argument. Woo hoo. That isn’t something to be proud of when your opponent wasn’t looking for a fight.
And heck, the piece he wrote wasn’t even that bad. Counting stats are problematic and we all know that, but it isn’t because they’re “meaningless.” It’s because they’re imprecise and can be distorted by all kinds of noise. Given a very large sample size, the deviation between the middle of the bell curve for counting stats and the middle of the bell curve for more rigorous stats will tend to decrease. And as it turns out, most of his conclusions are actually reasonable, even if the methodology was wrong.
by taco pal on Oct 27, 2009 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
“I guess what I am trying to say is that counting stats are next to useless, especially when you include so few of them. OBP, SLG, OPS, OPS+ are all based on sample size, i.e. plate appearances.
Without including information like PA and walks, comparing counting stats as you do above is essentially pointless."
I thought this was pretty polite and persuasive. After that, he decided to remain ignorant, so I began to poke. Maybe “pointless” was too strong/not the right word to use.
by FuquaManuel on Oct 28, 2009 1:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree with tp. you’re usually not excessively belligerent, and i give time to read your posts (unlike some other peeps).
your first post = I don’t like counting stats.
second = You do realize that it is dishonest to make comparisons based on counting stats without also listing games played, right?
at that point i’d have just assumed you to be combative. i’ve learned “you should never argue with a crazy ma-ma-ma-man”, but Bye Dawk started poking back.
While I agree that his approach was elementary and on a par with something from yahoo or ESPN.com, I still didn’t know all that stuff, and did gain something from his work.
by Bilzo on Oct 28, 2009 7:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It seems that Todd Keith (Sports Illustrated) wants to play too...
Here is his position by position comparison, citing, in part, the same stats used by Dawk. Not much love for the Phightins. He only gives them an advantage at 2nd base, RF and CF. He also gives the Yanks the nod for starting pitching and bullpen.
by Boundforbeach on Oct 28, 2009 10:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 



















