Milb for Easter Sunday, 4/24
by casejud on Apr 24, 2011 2:22 AM EDT
Email
PrintI felt like doing one of these for tomorrow because a nice number of nice arms are going, despite the EL - Cal League -MWL - and SAL taking Easter Sunday off, and the games start pretty early.
I hope some of you go to a ballgame and/or post about it here. Here's some of the top guys tossing the baseball tomorrow.
Happy Easter everybody!
AAA - Jenrry Mejia, Andrew Brackman, Homer Bailey vs Andy Oliver, Neil Ramirez, Jeff Suppan vs Zach Greinke!
AA- Rubby De La Rosa, Matt Moore, Casey Kelly
A+ - Drew Pomeranz, Tim Mellville, Chad Jenkins
126 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Desmond Jennings 0-2 so far today
down to .233 on the year after a good starts should Rays fans be worried?
I’d be worried a bit on his slugging, but he’s getting on base.
by Julio Nievas on Apr 24, 2011 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions
Noah Syndergaard Sitting 96
According to Alex Anthopolous, had to rewind the game tape for a double take but he did in fact say sitting, holy crap.
Not sure where all this came from
The best I can come up with is an early post-draft Keith Law interatcive chat when Mssr Law sort of panned the selection of Noah Syndergaard whilst saying something about the pitcher not posessing any secondary offerings. Most other indications seem to say that Syndergaard already has the makings of a well above average CB & the makings of a very good CH (especially when considering he was a well below the radar HS guy). It was probably a case of Law not having a ton of info on the player but most other accounts of Noah’s repertoire are complimentary. Syndergaard throws plenty hard already & has a big, projectable frame – there’s a lot to like here.
Aye, at last description
Syndergaard has;
Fastball-now sitting 96
Curveball-flashes plus but is a new pitch (learnt in 2009)
Changeup-good natural feel for it but hasn’t used it much
Splitter-work in progress (new pitch this year)
Has a good easy action unlike Sanchez, the other fireballer the Jays grabbed, and a durable body, so hopefully he’ll develop well.
Neil Ramirez struggled early with command, but settled down in the 4th and 5th
5 IP | 3 H | 3 R | 3 ER | 3 BB | 3 SO | 1 HR
>mfw
So under-rated...
When he was drafted one of the big plusses for drafting him, was that he played a legitimate defensive centerfield… With the way he hits (career .800 OPS) he could be a lot more than a 4th OF.
-peter
Rubby
Player IP H R ER BB SO HR ERA
De La Rosa, Ru 5.1 5 3 1 4 6 0 1.76
I heard hit 100 MPH
Big Sexy
Follow KBR and Dewey on Twitter! @KBRandDewey
by King Billy Royal on Apr 24, 2011 11:32 PM EDT up reply actions
Mejia
IP 6.0 4H 5R 2BB 3SO
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
Moore
get the feeling he’s about to bust through and start putting together longer, completely dominant, starts…
5 IP, 5 H, 2 ER, 2 BB, 6 K…2 HRs
Considering how his previous April's have been
His start to the year has been fantastic.
Bullpen Banter
Twitter Account: @Ioffridus
2 BB in 5 IP is very respectable for Moore
If he can keep the BBs down, I see no reason why he won’t be a strong contender for the #1 pitching prospect in baseball
No reason . . .;
. . . except for giving up a LOT of longballs, a big red flag for pitchers in the minors. Im not saying he isn’t great but, you guys see him with “Rose Colored Glases” I think.
"If my uniform doesn't get dirty, I haven't done anything in the baseball game." - Rickey Henderson
not a concern
he gave up 7 all last year (144.2 IP), and 6 the year before (123 IP), and already 5 this year (18.1 IP). Which of these look like an outlier? Also, he consistently gets ground balls, and is still doing that this year, so I do expect the HR numbers to go down, he’s suffered from some bad HR luck so far.
sounds logical
. . . its also logical to think hes struggling in AA a little. You also have no idea if he was “unlucky” or not. It sounds good thogh. To me it just looks like he hasn’t been real good.
"If my uniform doesn't get dirty, I haven't done anything in the baseball game." - Rickey Henderson
To be fair, no one is really saying he has been REALLY good.
He’s struggling a little bit and has been unlucky. It isn’t like he is a results guy with little stuff though.
Brett Oberholtzer
Same game: 7IP, 5H, 1R, 1ER, 1BB, 8K
2 Dodgers
Trayvon Robinson and Dee Gordon
Gordon today was 1-5 with a walk. Robinson was 2-5 with a homer.
It’s early in the season, but going back to last year I remain puzzled as to why Gordon is so highly regarded (#1 in BA’s list) and Robinson so lightly regarded (#10 on BA’s list and, though that was his lowest ranking, consistently ranked below Gordon).
This year Robinson’s 1089 OPS is better than .400 points higher than Gordon’s .658. And, yes, of course, it’s early. But it’s not like that’s so surprising — Gordon is hitting about the same as last year and, though Robinson isn’t a 1000 OPS guy, he is a .400 OBP guy with some power.
The reason consistently given is that Gordon is raw and younger. He’s about a half year younger, which is hardly a huge gap, and being the son of a major leaguer I find it hard to believe that Gordon is some sort of farm boy baseball rube. In any case, he’s not showing improvement in skills, so at some point doesn’t raw stop being an excuse? Defensively reports are that Robinson needs to improve his routes in CF, which is common enough and correctable among young players, while I’m not sure errors (Gordon has 6 so far, just as he had a ton in previous years) are as correctable.
Anyway, I guess today’s box score just moved me to pick up a cudgel from last year — I remain puzzled why performance doesn’t seem to matter when judging Gordon and Robinson and why Gordon is more highly regarded.
Sickels' take
much more even…just looked it up and while he had Gordon #1 in the Dodgers’ system, he gave both ‘B’ grades (Robinson ranked #3 — much more reasonable compared to BA, so kudos to John).
Well
On the one hand, I agree with you on Gordon. On the other, I don;‘t think Robinson is very good either. He’s a good AAA player but, I don’t think either will help with the bat OR are outstanding defenders.
"If my uniform doesn't get dirty, I haven't done anything in the baseball game." - Rickey Henderson
why wouldn't Robinson be good?
he has athleticism, skills, pop, and an eye. He Ks too much and supposedly doesn’t take good routes, but his statistical and athletic profile is very good (albeit not great).
he HAS
. . . put up huge numbers this year. The reason I dont like him , as a major leaguer, is that it took him 4 yaers of learning to be a decent AA player. These kinds of players are wondeful but, dont have a good track record in the major leagues.
I also saw him play this springa lot, and he does NOT look like a quality CF to me. Hes fine as a role player perhaps but, doesn’t look like a star, or a starter to me.
"If my uniform doesn't get dirty, I haven't done anything in the baseball game." - Rickey Henderson
Not everyone just kills their first couple years and makes the majors
It takes time. I’m not a big fan of talking about age when it comes to minors leaguers when a player is under 25, because unless they are 24 and in Low A, it really shouldn’t matter all that much. A 26 year old can contribute just the same as a 22 year old as a rookie. Though I’m not a big fan (or at all), Ryan Howard was a rookie at 26. Yeah he had Thome blocking him for a while, but they got rid of thome so he could come up and play, and to my knowledge he wasn’t blocked for more than a year or so.
"If we hit that bull's eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate"
he has been learning to switch hit his first few years
he started switch hitting his second year… he needed some time to adjust to it… hes still learning and getting better
Gordon has the chance to be a premier defensive SS
With a good hit tool and excellent speed. He won’t hit for power and no one should expect him to; he’s going to live off of hitting line drives into the gap and utilizing his speed. He has a lot of refinement left to become that kind of player (on both sides of the ball) and he probably won’t ever post loud numbers, but the scarcity of quality defensive SSs who can hit even a little bit makes him a very good prospect.
Bullpen Banter
Twitter Account: @Ioffridus
Would he be anything like Elvis Andrus?
Gordon and Andrus, to me, seem like they would be very similar.
"If we hit that bull's eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate"
Escobar
If Dee Gordon manages to be the 2010 version of Alcides Escobar, I’d say he over-achieved… The only way he belongs in a sentence with Andrus is if it’s describing whose jock he cannot carry.
by realitypolice on Apr 24, 2011 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions
+1
with points for creativity :) I love knew ways to say that Dee Gordon can’t hit.
Here is another one . . . Josh “The Paperboy” Wilson has a much better hitting record in the minors (.766 AA OPS, .769 AAA OPS, .596 mahor league OPS) than Dee Gordon does.
I’m not cherry picking either. Pick ANY low hitting backup infielder and look how they hit in Aa and AAA.
"If my uniform doesn't get dirty, I haven't done anything in the baseball game." - Rickey Henderson
I bet none of them started playing baseball as a HS senior
you have to realize, the age vs. league is not the only thing to consider with a guy like Gordon. He’s basically only played competitive baseball for 4-5 years
I do consider it
. . I consider it a futher negative on him.
That is development time he can never get back.
By the way, as always, Im not “only” considering ARL, Im considering ARl and how GOOD the player is.
"If my uniform doesn't get dirty, I haven't done anything in the baseball game." - Rickey Henderson
So you're saying Gordon wouldn't have been able to Slug .301 last season?
Or maybe it was that Gordon couldn’t have a UZR of an amazing 0.1? I’m not quite sure what to make of this.
.263/.334/.334 career line with a 12.8 UZR in just about 2 seasons, with 12.1 UZR coming in 2009. Not exactly earth shattering numbers here. Gordon may be similar to escobar, but at this point who is to say Gordon wouldn’t match the numbers of Andrus?
"If we hit that bull's eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate"
Hmm
Of course this does nothing but make one question the validity of UZR. Or affirms the quality of an average, big league Shortstop.
Have you ever watched Andrus play Shortstop? He’s really good.
"If my uniform doesn't get dirty, I haven't done anything in the baseball game." - Rickey Henderson
I'm not saying he's not
From everything I’ve heard he’s an excellent fielder, very sound with a lot of range. Last year according to UZR the range wasn’t as great as 2 years ago for him, though he definitely could have been very sound at SS.
"If we hit that bull's eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate"
No, it should make you question your understanding of UZR
One year of UZR totals isn’t nearly enough to make a judgment. It’s an issue of sample size, because it takes three full seasons of UZR to get anything close to a definitive measurement of defensive skill.
The main difference is age
Andrus has time to mature into a better hitter than he currently is, but the current version of Andrus? I could see that for Gordon.
Bullpen Banter
Twitter Account: @Ioffridus
Is Andrus actually younger than Gordon?
I’m not quite sure about that, but it’s gotta be close. Andrus can certainly improve, no doubt, though he put up similar numbers in the minors to Gordon (though again at an older age), so they could likely be similar numbered players in the next 3-4 seasons or longer. Andrus is sure fast, but Gordon is faster, so his UZR could be very comparable if not better in the majors. I don’t know if they have those types of stats for minors leaguers otherwise I’d check.
"If we hit that bull's eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate"
I think he's a couple months younger right now but that's not the important part
Andrus is already an established MLB player with ~1300 PAs under his belt whereas Gordon is still trying to refine his game into an MLB quality product. I doubt we see him in the majors until September at the earliest and there’s no guarantee that he’ll get the job at the start of 2012.
Bullpen Banter
Twitter Account: @Ioffridus
My faves
Yonder Alonso hit his first home run of the year and went 2-4 – hitting .278. I wish he didn’t always start so slow.
Andy Oliver didn’t have a very game – 4.2 7 5 5 4 3 – but, i still like him.
Josh Reddick hit his 4th homer.
Dustin Ackley, sort of a “reverse” favorite, went 0-4 and is hitting .236. He’s learning a new position though lol. The “best college hitter of his generation” label is already, officially, a joke. Buster Posey was twice as good, one year before.
"If my uniform doesn't get dirty, I haven't done anything in the baseball game." - Rickey Henderson
RE
What don’t you understand about small sample sizes? None of these players have had even 100 plate appearances yet, let alone a sample that is large enough to mean anything. A nice rule of thumb Casey, when there are still players are hitting over .400 the sample isn’t big enough yet.
Also, stop quoting batting average. It’s a pointless statistic.
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
+1, -1
i agree, too early to be drawing too much in the way of conclusions either way. way too early to be writing ackley off. however, i could not disagree more about quoting batting average. are there other, more important stats? YES. does that make batting average pointless? NO. YOU may consider it to be useless, but that doesn’t make it true. i’m so sick and tired of people quoting advanced metrics like they are the end all be all(not saying you did that and not attacking you, i’m just saying). but i think if it were a “pointless statistic”, john would not bother mentioning it in his write-ups
by rangersfan24 on Apr 24, 2011 9:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Re
In all do respect to John, I could not careless what he does or not do.
With that aside, batting average is completely pointless. There are far better alternatives. All BA tells us is when a ball fell for a hit. That is it. It doesn’t say it was a double, triple or home run. That is why you should look at Fangraph’s or Statcorner’s wOBA. Each outcome is weighted for how many runs it is worth on average for that specific league. Put very simply, it’s basically batting average but you also get the value of the hit’s outcome and it includes walks.
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
* care less
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
somewhat +1
batting average is nearly useless, especially in such small contexts. But, I do value it over the course of a career, as it can show the quality of the ability of the player to make consistent, decently hard contact over a career. However, I do believe that it is extremely foolish to look at just one hitting statistic as the end all of everything (including wOBA <— easily the best hitting statistic currently available). It is of the utmost importance to look at everything together to get a good sense of the player (my 3 that I look at no matter what are wOBA, OBP, BB:K, and if the sample size is still pretty small, BABIP)
Absolutely agree
I would look towards other things for quality of contact at the major league level, like line drive % (which has extreme flaws too, but viewed in the appropriate content, can be moderately helpful).
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
JD
I respect your opinions but I am NEVER going to quote LD5 lol
By the way, I a, within reason to quote batting average in Mr. Ackley’s case because of a few reasons . . .
A) it is supposed to be a strength of HIS game.
B) It is NOT a small sample size. Hes now over 680 PAs as a pro and hasnt been able to achieve a .270 average OR hit for any power.
C) There is nothing pointless about batting average as long as it is seen in context.
"If my uniform doesn't get dirty, I haven't done anything in the baseball game." - Rickey Henderson
by casejud on Apr 25, 2011 12:36 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
RE
I’m not going to quote LD% either because the data sucks, but there are ways to look at it in a helpful manner.
Anyway, in regards to point B
a) you didn’t mention his entire sample, did you?
b) Batting Average doesn’t normalize within 680 plate appearances, so the sample is too small.
C) Please, tell me what is meaningful about it.
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
yeah, LD/GB/FB% I look at when I start looking more in-depth into a certain player
it can be quite helpful in identifying certain aspects or showing why a player has performed better/worse in certain time spans
*due respect
"Also, stop quoting batting average. It’s a pointless statistic." -- JD Sussman, who doesn't acknowledge batting titles
by criminal type on Apr 25, 2011 9:54 AM EDT up reply actions
Don't be a g-d damn douche bag just because he says shit you don't like
Who cares if he talks about batting average, as I recall you quoted him and not the other way around, so maybe you could just be less of a dick because he wasn’t talking to you specifically.
"If we hit that bull's eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate"
by Ivdown on Apr 25, 2011 12:33 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
A few things
1. Everything doesn’t have to be “statistically significant” ok? Aonso DID hit his first homer, Reddick DID hit his 4th. These are anecdotal points, not analysis. Reddick has a .421 wOBA. Is that better?
2. I made no mention of any numbers having statistical significance this early or, of any .400 hitters. Maybe you are talking about Bett Lawrie the other day? He has a .514 wOBA. Is that better?
3 In regards to Ackley, his performance now begins to be more than a small sample size, in my opinion. Its 680 PAs into his career and I dont think any offensive metrics show him as particularily good. Is .340 wOBA good? If it is then walks are simply overrated in that metric. Thats all he contributes at an above average rate is walks.
"If my uniform doesn't get dirty, I haven't done anything in the baseball game." - Rickey Henderson
RE
1) No, it doesn’t. But you can’t make a conclusory statement based on statistics (like you often do) and then be shocked when someone calls you out to tell you that the statistic you are relying on is unimportant/insignificant.
Look, I understand its early and these stats are all we have to go on and it is fun to discuss. But when everything is about how right you are and proving a point, it gets beyond irritating. You aren’t right, I’m not right, and no here is right about any of these players. At least, not until at least several years from now. Just please take it down a notch. What you do by talking about batting average after 80 plate appearances is create a series of strawman arguments. It isn’t helpful and causes fights that aren’t necessary (and more importantly, can’t be won).
2) Yes, quoting wOBA is better.
3) I can agree that we have, for some statistics an adequate sample for Ackley. Is .340 good? You’d have to compare it to the league he is playing in. If everyone in the league is hitting at .350, then no, it isn’t good. The easiest way to check this is on Statcorner which tells you the league average, but if that site isn’t working properly Fangraph’s wRC+ adjusts for league difficultly. Thus far, I AGREE WITH YOU, Ackley has been disappointing statistically. But, stats clearly aren’t all that matter, and time will tell if he is able to put things together. I can respect that you aren’t confident in him. Just don’t undermine your opinion by quoting batting average :)
As for wOBA overvaluing walks… wOBA (or TAv) don’t value anything incorrectly. They weight the value of that outcome (BB, HR, 2B, etc.) for each league. While there may be reasons that one’s wOBA may be too high (unstable BABIP, unreproducible BB%, etc.) that isn’t wOBA’s issue.
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
by JD Sussman on Apr 25, 2011 8:09 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
re: Last paragrash
“As for wOBA overvaluing walks… wOBA (or TAv) don’t value anything incorrectly. They weight the value of that outcome (BB, HR, 2B, etc.) for each league.”
Uh, no. The wOBA formula never changes, well at least at published places, you can make your own version if you are at a quite different scoring environment than MLB, where you would run a MARKOV and just replace the values with the same general formula. But no place does that, publicly at least. Now you can park, league, schedule adjust wOBA, but that isn’t the same as “weighing the value of that outcome for each league.” The wOBA formula is based off MLB data and in general is close enough to having the correct weights for other leagues, but it’s not exact.
re
Uh, no. The wOBA formula never change.
That is not true. Appleman has said, on this site, that he does custom linear weights for the minor leagues, as does statcorner (per private conversations with Graham).
Now you can park, league, schedule adjust wOBA, but that isn’t the same as "weighing the value of that outcome for each league."
Well, no one weights wOBA outside of linear weights, thats only the “+” metrics.
The wOBA formula is based off MLB data and in general is close enough to having the correct weights for other leagues, but it’s not exact.
For the MLB it is, again, Dave uses custom linear weights.
http://www.minorleagueball.com/2010/12/10/1868153/community-positional-prospect-15-run-off#54172698
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
re: Appleman
How is that not on fangraphs? Or is it? That is pretty key to use different weights and it not be pretty clearly said.
Are the values he uses for each league even on the site somewhere?
RE
How is it not overtly stated on the site? I don’t know, but it should be. Though, I’m not sure how much a difference it makes. As you said, the coefficients end up being similar.
I don’t believe they are.
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
you must be kidding
I’m not using any stat that varies from league to league. Its too easily fallible. If you can’t see that, you’re blind.
by Jake Rafferty on Apr 25, 2011 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions
Don't speak on things you don't understand
The run values of each event change to suit the run environment. That is not a negative, but a positive.
Bullpen Banter
Twitter Account: @Ioffridus
by Jeff Reese on Apr 25, 2011 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions 8 recs
before you go the "dont understand" route
there are many reasons it could be a negative. Do you realize that inside the park HR’s were more valuable than normal HR’s? Or that triples could have more value than HR’s?
It has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of the triple. It has to do with what damage triples did that season. And so, if in a given season triples happened to have 3 guys on base while for HR’s they normally had empty bases the triple would have far more value.
That doesn’t even get into things like outfield fly then HR vs. HR then outfield fly while a runner is on 3rd. In the first case it scores a run and gets positive value and the HR is devalued. in the second case the fly has negative value and the HR has increased value. Etc. etc.
Some years have very different factors. This is disturbing.
Further, isn’t this stat about removing team and situation dependent factors to get a true value? And the basis to weight said values goes and uses team and situation dependent factors. This seems contrary to the purpose. Wouldn’t using 10 years of data be better?
Its scaled to each league for reasons of accuracy.
This isn’t some evil plot by fangraphs to undervalue certain prospects. The run scoring environments in different minor leagues vary greatly.
rec'd
especially:
No, it doesn’t. But you can’t make a conclusory statement based on statistics (like you often do) and then be shocked when someone calls you out to tell you that the statistic you are relying on is unimportant/insignificant.
Look, I understand its early and these stats are all we have to go on and it is fun to discuss. But when everything is about how right you are and proving a point, it gets beyond irritating. You aren’t right, I’m not right, and no here is right about any of these players. At least, not until at least several years from now. Just please take it down a notch. What you do by talking about batting average after 80 plate appearances is create a series of strawman arguments. It isn’t helpful and causes fights that aren’t necessary (and more importantly, can’t be won).
by gore51 on Apr 25, 2011 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
Thanks for the new tagline. Absolutely classic.
"Also, stop quoting batting average. It’s a pointless statistic." -- JD Sussman, who doesn't acknowledge batting titles
by criminal type on Apr 25, 2011 9:53 AM EDT up reply actions
I'm not sure if that is a diss or a complement
But, I’m taking it as the latter, because I couldn’t care less about batting titles.
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
Hopefully he sees it as a little of both
The sentiment is right on, especially wrt evaluating prospects, but the statement itself is a little absurd.
by auclairkeithbc on Apr 25, 2011 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions
Explanation
I agree that BA is overrated, but the idea of BA being “pointless” is, to me, laughable. Sabermetics is fun. I enjoy analyzing statistics. The problem is that new stats come along (ie WAR and zone defensive ratings) and some people get so swept away by new thinking that old thinking, at least to these people, becomes passe and without value.
New isn’t always better. It’s just new.
The game still is about getting the bat on the ball.
"Also, stop quoting batting average. It’s a pointless statistic." -- JD Sussman, who doesn't acknowledge batting titles
by criminal type on Apr 25, 2011 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions
The new offensive stats are outstanding
You shouldn’t dismiss something like wOBA or wRC+ just because the advanced pitching and defensive stats are still works in progress.
__________________________________________________
"He who gets the best players usually wins" - Bobby Bowden
I have to respectfully disagree then
Just because people recognize an award for batting average, doesn’t make it useful.
I’ll pose the same question to you as I did Casey. What makes batting average useful?
IMHO, you can get the same concept of “putting the bat on the ball” and include the outcome of the batted ball (i.e 1B, 2B, 3B, HR) and walks.
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
You are missing the point.
Saying batting average is pointless is like saying hitting the ball is pointless. It is a fundamental of the game. There are far better ways to judge who is good or which prospects will be successful, but if it is truly pointless, there is no difference between a .000 hitter and a 1.000 hitter. Again, your sentiment is right on, and the statement makes sense in context, but the statement as a stand alone quote is absurd. The combination of you being basically correct and the statement being so absurd is what makes it a good quote. I’m talking about the batting average being a pointless stat part, not that batting titles aren’t too impressive.
by auclairkeithbc on Apr 25, 2011 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm not missing the point...
Saying batting average is pointless is like saying hitting the ball is pointless.
These are two separate concepts. One’s ability to hit the ball isn’t quantified solely in batting average.
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
hah
you are definitely missing the point! i agree with you! but if someone hits .000 and someone else hits 1.000, it matters. obviously you could figure out that the hitter was very good based on other information, but it doesn’t mean that it is pointless. you don’t get it. that’s fine.
by auclairkeithbc on Apr 25, 2011 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
I do get it.
Does it have meaning? Yes. It means something.
What it illustrates is not meaningful.
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
So it isn't pointless!
Obviously. Stop the insanity. I’m not arguing that is it a really good statistic.
by auclairkeithbc on Apr 25, 2011 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions
You can use one of two definitions of pointless
1: devoid of meaning : senseless
2: devoid of effectiveness : flat
I’m going with 2, you can use 1. In my eyes, its pointless.
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
by JD Sussman on Apr 25, 2011 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
You stop
There are many batting stats that are just way more useful in evaluating a player. Your argument in this thread is nearly as pointless as batting average.
Nelson Cruz - 2011 MVP
by t ball on Apr 25, 2011 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
why are you re-stating my position?
in order to attack it? you aren’t disagreeing with me.
by auclairkeithbc on Apr 25, 2011 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions
hit post too soon
I mean that you know very well he is not making an absolutist statement, your bothering to say so is what is pointless.
Nelson Cruz - 2011 MVP
nearly as pointless as my bothering to say what I said
I’m just going to leave now.
Nelson Cruz - 2011 MVP
Saying batting average is pointless is like saying hitting the ball is pointless.
This is an extremely simplified take on the matter.
The process of hitting that ball hard is very important.
The result of whether the ball fell for a hit or not (AVG – dependent on outside factors like park, defense, etc…) is not all that useful in determining the abilities of prospects or the performance of hitters outside of context.
The emphasis you’re all putting on AVG is similar to the emphasis that used to be put on ERA. Hitting the ball hard and on a line drive plane is something that the hitter controls. Whether that ball goes for a hit or not (AVG) is not something the hitter has total control over.
Either way, as JD covered, Ackley’s AVG a) isn’t all that bad anyway; and b) hasn’t reached a sample threshold where it could be expected to be mathematically stable yet anyway.
What??????
I am 100% in agreement with this. And his statement is still completely absurd- the statement itself, not the sentiment.
by auclairkeithbc on Apr 25, 2011 2:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I am not putting any emphasis on AVG
Other than to say that a 1.000 hitter over 10,000 AB is better than a .000 hitter over 10,000 AB. JD’s statement suggests that there is no real difference between the two, even though obviously he does not really believe that.
by auclairkeithbc on Apr 25, 2011 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions
no, that is not at all what he's saying
he’s saying that there can be enormous differences between two players with the exact same batting average. If somebody hits .270 over 1,000 PA, but it’s just 270 singles, they aren’t that valuable. If the person hits 270 bombs and walks a bunch, then they are immensely more valuable (these are the 2 most polar extreme cases of a situation). All JD is saying, is that while average is useful in showing some ability to get hits, there are ALWAYS better options to judge a player by, so it is essentially useless
by gore51 on Apr 25, 2011 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
i am not arguing with him.
i am agreeing with him. re-read the last few posts.
by auclairkeithbc on Apr 25, 2011 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions
thanks Gore
Exactly.
Bullpen Banter's Top 100 Prospects for 2011!
- - - - - - - -
You can find my musings at Bullpen Banter and Beyond the Box Score.
I think you should read it again.
You’re the only one I see taking it to that extremity… That wasn’t exactly what JD said.
Buster Posey as the "best college hitter of his generation?"
Really?
Dude had 7 HRs combined his freshman & sophomore seasons, playing 60+ games as a starter each year.
Used to love this thread
Now Its 88% bitchy bickering over Dee Gordon or Dustin Ackley or Casey Kelly or whom ever or over some statistically insignificant sample or some super statistical method that should be used and quoted by all as an all encompassing goodness or badness of any baseball ever and how useless rbi, era, BA, sb, OBP, OPS…….My goodness can we keep this thread to simply a discussion on what players did that day, few comments about the player is fine but maybe go create your own tread once it reaches a back and forth who has the prettiest vagaina contaest!! the whiny back and forth has become intolerable
by tvators01 on Apr 25, 2011 10:05 AM EDT reply actions 10 recs
True
>90% of my posts are true updates, but I don’t see any problem with some discourse breaking out.
Yes, I get sick of the Ackley/Casey Kelly/Gordon rhetoric, but I’ve had no problems ignoring it lately. I just skip past it. If an update includes more than 200 words, I’m guessing it’s a flame war. Blah blah blah.
I’d better cut this post off before I hit 200!
"Also, stop quoting batting average. It’s a pointless statistic." -- JD Sussman, who doesn't acknowledge batting titles
by criminal type on Apr 25, 2011 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions
hahahaha
once it reaches a back and forth who has the prettiest vagaina contaest!!
this is one of the funniest things i’ve read on this site in a while lol. well done!
If Lind continues to founder...
…should Cooper get a look?
What is he finding?
"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day."
-Frank Sinatra
It depends
How pretty is his vagina?
by realitypolice on Apr 25, 2011 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
