 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
 |
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
take the last two years, since thats when ortiz started to hit, and sheffield got off the juice.
Ortiz has a higher SLUG in both 2003 and 2004. He also has a higher AVG + SLUG then sheffroid. which is what you want. you dont want your best hitters drawing walks in those situations, you want them hitting, and hitting with power. |
quote:
oh, and how many games has sheffield won on the final at bat? |
Ah, I love the backtracking goodness.
Look at the ESPN stats, it counts 2003-2005. In 2003, Ortiz had an OPS+ of 144 (actual .961). In 2004, it was 145 (actual .983). And this year he's hitting as he was. It doesn't count 2002, as you seem to think it does.
And what does SLG and BA+SLG (which is super wierd to use.... because you are incorrect, you want to get on BASE because it allows you to score. You want to prevent getting outs) have to do with 'clutch' hitting? If you have high SLG during other situations doesn't that mean that pinning it on 'clutch' hitting is wrong?
Though, I WILL indulge you.
Slugging %:
2003:
Sheff: .604
Ortiz: .592
2004:
Sheff: .534
Ortiz: .603
Where was the higher slugging in 2003 now? Also in 2003, Sheff hit .330 to Ortiz's .288. In 2004, Ortiz was better in SLG and BA, but I'm not seeing where he was that much better.. and in 2003, Sheffield was FAR better in those stats... and what it has to do with 'clutch' batters?
Ortiz:
http://www.baseballreference.com/o/ortizda01.shtml
Sheff:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/s/sheffga01.shtml
Oh, and I love the won on the 'final at bat' query!! Like I said, clutch hitting is a bunch of BS based totally on anecdotal evidence. First, Sheffield, who is not a clutch hitter to you, has a better close/late and RISP numbers, and now you are saying what anecdotal evidence can you remember about Sheffield (ie, no proof for clutch hitting exists)!!
Priceless!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
 |
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001
time: 06:34
|
|
quote:
Look at the ESPN stats, it counts 2003-2005. In 2003, Ortiz had an OPS+ of 144 (actual .961). In 2004, it was 145 (actual .983). And this year he's hitting as he was. It doesn't count 2002, as you seem to think it does. |
yeah, didnt notice that. haha.
quote:
And what does SLG and BA+SLG (which is super wierd to use.... because you are incorrect, you want to get on BASE because it allows you to score. You want to prevent getting outs) have to do with 'clutch' hitting? If you have high SLG during other situations doesn't that mean that pinning it on 'clutch' hitting is wrong? |
clutch players dont draw walks. clutch players get hits. thats why you take your average and add it to your slug, which is a perfect tool to use if you want to know how a player does when he needs a hit. its a clutch hit. and when you hit for clutchness, you also want to hit for power.
quote:
Where was the higher slugging in 2003 now? Also in 2003, Sheff hit .330 to Ortiz's .288. In 2004, Ortiz was better in SLG and BA, but I'm not seeing where he was that much better.. and in 2003, Sheffield was FAR better in those stats... and what it has to do with 'clutch' batters? |
you misunderstood me. when i talked about 2003, i meant of course 2003 late/close situations.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
|
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
a high AVG, low SLUG in close/late situations means that the player is dependant on others to get on base so he can drive them in with a single.
a high AVG, high SLUG in close/late situations means that the player is not dependant on others to get on base (he hits homers, and doubles, etc.) thats what ortiz does. thats why he's clutch.
and just cuz bill james didnt come up with the stat, doesnt mean its wrong. |
A high OBP and high SLG is better, so when you don't get a good pitch to hit, at least you make it on base. There would be a reason that James ignored it. BA is a useless stat. OBP is far better. All BA measures is how many hits you have. OBP measures how many times you get on base. The point in close/late situations is to NOT get an out. Now whether that is through a hit, double, HR, or walk, it doesn't matter. In close/late situations outs are even more precious than they are earlier in the game.
Getting on base isn't enough, so you also look at slugging to see the power that players have.
Remember that the 9th inning of the ALCS began with Millar drawing a walk from Rivera. He was taken out for Roberts, who became the tying score. Without that walk, who knows if the Sox would have won.
It is no mistake that the Red Sox won the World Series after hire a Bill James disciple as GM who stressed OBP.
And if BA+SLG is suuuch a good stat, how come this is the first I've ever heard of it? Can you link to a site that uses it?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
|
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001
time: 06:34
|
|
quote:
Barry Bonds had the best SLG and one of the higher averages in close/late situations.
Though I think the problem is that there is no such thing as a clutch player.
|
and barry bonds might be, i hate to say this, also on the juice.He also drew a lot of walks. in fact, he draws a lot of walks whenever there is anyone on base because he can hit a homer at will. and many of them are either intentional, or intentional unintentionals.
quote:
You have the stats for that year?
|
yeah, it was on those splits, the first two links that you supplied.
quote:
A high OBP and high SLG is better, so when you don't get a good pitch to hit, at least you make it on base. There would be a reason that James ignored it. BA is a useless stat. OBP is far better. All BA measures is how many hits you have. OBP measures how many times you get on base. The point in close/late situations is to NOT get an out. Now whether that is through a hit, double, HR, or walk, it doesn't matter. In close/late situations outs are even more precious than they are earlier in the game.
|
clutch players elevate their game. they dont simply get on base - they make this happen. thats why you dont want your clutchest players drawing walks unless the pitches are miles out of the zone. you want them to swing away and bring the runner in from first, or hit a homer.
quote:
Remember that the 9th inning of the ALCS began with Millar drawing a walk from Rivera. He was taken out for Roberts, who became the tying score. Without that walk, who knows if the Sox would have won. |
thats because the guy behind millar, bill mueller has a low AVG + SLUG, so for him to be clutch, he needs someone on base. plus, it needed a steal, which bill james says isnt worth going for. apparently there are times when sabermetrics isnt the most optimal path to follow. if bill james was manager, he wouldnt have sent the runner.
neither millar or mueller have a high AVG+SLUG.
quote:
And if BA+SLG is suuuch a good stat, how come this is the first I've ever heard of it? Can you link to a site that uses it?
|
you've never heard of it because i just discovered. i fired off an email to bill james a few hours ago, so in his next book, dont be surprised to find AVG+SLUG in a chapter about clutchness.
Last edited by Lawrence of Arabia on 24-06-2005 at 07:26
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
|
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
you've never heard of it because i just discovered. |
You mean you just made up some **** and without testing it, decided it must explain something because you can't back up any of your arguments. 
quote:
plus, it needed a steal, which bill james says isnt worth going for. |
Wrong. James says steals are worth less than people think they are. A successful steal creates 1/3rd greater probabillity of a run, while a caught stealing leads to 2/3rd lesser probability of a run. So the lesson is don't steal all the time for no reason.
And Francona didn't send Roberts either. He went himself, as a Red Sox fan should know .
quote:
you want them to swing away and bring the runner in from first, or hit a homer. |
No, you want them to not make an out. If they get a good pitch to hit, slam it. However, if not, then take the walk. There is no point in the 'clutch' player swinging away and hitting at a bad pitch and making an easy out. After all, in baseball, if you hit safely only 3 out of 10 times, you are considered good.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
|
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001
time: 06:34
|
|
quote:
No, you want them to not make an out. If they get a good pitch to hit, slam it. However, if not, then take the walk. There is no point in the 'clutch' player swinging away and hitting at a bad pitch and making an easy out. After all, in baseball, if you hit safely only 3 out of 10 times, you are considered good.
|
thats right, you dont want them to make an out either. you want them to get a hit. no walk, and no out. and its weird.
if you are a .260 hitter, you only get 4% less hits then a .300 hitter. out of a 100 AB, a .260 hitter gets 26 hits and a .300 hitter gets 30, a difference of 4 measly hits. but a .300 hitter gets into the hall, and a .260 hitter had better be a gold glover.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
|
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
so in other words, since the cost is greater then the benefit, it shouldnt be done. |
It means you have to take the cost into account and thus be more selective, when you know that the steal has a high likelihood of success (if the pitcher isn't good at holding runners and the catcher isn't good at throwing out baserunners).
There are NO hard and fast 'rules' in James' work. In fact, his whole conclusion is that you shouldn't hold yourself to 'rules', but to those things that work. And how do you prove they work? Statistical analysis.
You should like James. He is reportedly the one who told Epstein to bring in Ortiz and Bellhorn.
quote:
do you think that francona brought in roberts because he could have a more interesting conversation with tony clark at first? |
Having speed doesn't mean he necessarily wanted him to steal on that play. Having a fast man on 1st means going from 1st to 3rd on a single to left field, whereas a slow man would have to stop at 2nd.
quote:
you dont want them to make an out either. you want them to get a hit. no walk, and no out. and its weird. |
No, that's ridiculous. Getting a walk is a GOOD thing. No one said it was dumb for Miller to take a walk in that Game 4. Getting base runners is never a bad thing. You want your 'clutch' hitters to, above all, not make an out. If they can get a good ball to hit, then they should go for it, but if not, then the walk is just as good.
quote:
if you are a .260 hitter, you only get 4% less hits then a .300 hitter. out of a 100 AB, a .260 hitter gets 26 hits and a .300 hitter gets 30, a difference of 4 measly hits. but a .300 hitter gets into the hall, and a .260 hitter had better be a gold glover. |
Are you trying to make my point that BA is a useless measure and OBP is far more important?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
|
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001
time: 06:34
|
|
quote:
It means you have to take the cost into account and thus be more selective, when you know that the steal has a high likelihood of success (if the pitcher isn't good at holding runners and the catcher isn't good at throwing out baserunners). |
and since rivera only throws hard stuff, you wouldnt wanna steal on him (plus hes good at holding runners, very good)
quote:
You should like James. He is reportedly the one who told Epstein to bring in Ortiz and Bellhorn. |
bellhorn blows. bring up pedroia. pitchers have figured out that he doesnt swing at the close stuff, so they just nibble at the edges of the strikezone and eventually they get one right on the edge that he watches go by. he hasnt heard of a defensive swing.
bill james was also probably the guy who told theo to put manny ramirez on WAIVERS at the end of 2003. and then tried to trade him for magglio ordonez and arod.
quote:
Having speed doesn't mean he necessarily wanted him to steal on that play. Having a fast man on 1st means going from 1st to 3rd on a single to left field, whereas a slow man would have to stop at 2nd. |
theres a reason why they didnt start him in right field for the still-injured trot nixon.
quote:
No, that's ridiculous. Getting a walk is a GOOD thing. No one said it was dumb for Miller to take a walk in that Game 4. Getting base runners is never a bad thing. You want your 'clutch' hitters to, above all, not make an out. If they can get a good ball to hit, then they should go for it, but if not, then the walk is just as good.
|
its not ridiculous at all - everyone thinks that a walk by millar is good because his AVG+SLUG (ill abbreviate is as ALUG) is low. he is not a clutch hitter. if ortiz is up, and behind him is millar, would you rather have ortiz walk and let millar bring him in, or hav ehim swing away and end the game?
quote:
Are you trying to make my point that BA is a useless measure and OBP is far more important?
|
nah, just like with ALUG, im a creater, an inventor, a see-er of patterns. im always looking at everything from funny angles.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
|
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
and since rivera only throws hard stuff, you wouldnt wanna steal on him (plus hes good at holding runners, very good) |
And perhaps Roberts saw something in Rivera's delivery on film which led to know when he was going to throw over and when not?
Yeah, try to win the WS last year without Bellhorn. You couldn't have done it.
quote:
its not ridiculous at all - everyone thinks that a walk by millar is good because his AVG+SLUG (ill abbreviate is as ALUG) is low. he is not a clutch hitter. if ortiz is up, and behind him is millar, would you rather have ortiz walk and let millar bring him in, or hav ehim swing away and end the game? |
If Millar hit a HR there, HE'D be called the clutch hitter. Indicating how BS it is. If Ortiz is up and he's not getting anything good to hit, I'd rather he talk the walk than try to force a bad hit which may lead to an out, or worse, a double play.
And your ALUG is crap. You made totally made it up without any statistical analysis & backing for it (not even a spreadsheet  ). Basically, it's a BAM. Though I don't expect anything less from you .
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
|
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001
time: 06:34
|
|
quote:
And perhaps Roberts saw something in Rivera's delivery on film which led to know when he was going to throw over and when not? |
nope, read the interview. roberts thought that rivera would only throw over twice, and go home. but rivera went to first three times in a row. roberts didnt know when he was going home and when he wasnt.
quote:
Yeah, try to win the WS last year without Bellhorn. You couldn't have done it. |
why did you selectivly quote?
quote:
If Millar hit a HR there, HE'D be called the clutch hitter. Indicating how BS it is. If Ortiz is up and he's not getting anything good to hit, I'd rather he talk the walk than try to force a bad hit which may lead to an out, or worse, a double play. |
he might be called clutch, but they would be wrong. millar has a low ALUG, and hasnt proved himself in late inning situations (ALUG in late /close situations, the only spot where ALUG can be applied both efficiently and correctly) and obviously if the pitch is a mile outside the strikezone, ortiz shouldnt swing. but in late innings, pitchers dont want to put anyone on, so a hitter has plenty of pitches in the strikezone for him to hit.
quote:
And your ALUG is crap. You made totally made it up without any statistical analysis & backing for it (not even a spreadsheet ). Basically, it's a BAM. Though I don't expect anything less from you |
why is ALUG crap? because bill james didnt come up with it? you need to walk your own road imran. like all great things, it is first ridiculed, then rejected, then accepted. i have no doubt that ALUG will be adopted eventually as the standard for clutchness.
but at least you are one of the more challenging arguers around here. standards have really slipped lately. (at least at things i feel comfortable and interested enough to argue, mainly sports, and economics)
(even though i win everytime  )
Last edited by Lawrence of Arabia on 24-06-2005 at 08:23
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
|
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
nope, read the interview. roberts thought that rivera would only throw over twice, and go home. but rivera went to first three times in a row. roberts didnt know when he was going home and when he wasnt. |
How many times he went to first, Roberts may have been wrong in, but he could have picked up something in when he throws over.
quote:
why did you selectivly quote? |
The rest of it wasn't worth responding over.
quote:
he might be called clutch, but they would be wrong. |
When it is such a SUBJECTIVE measure, how could they be wrong?! You could call anyone clutch and make some argument based on some clutch hit somewhere.
quote:
but in late innings, pitchers dont want to put anyone on, so a hitter has plenty of pitches in the strikezone for him to hit. |
If you get a pitch to hit, you should hit it. But if you don't, you should bide your time, waiting for the good pitch. If you walk, you walk. And in late innings, pitchers try to prevent giving up a fat pitch more.
quote:
why is ALUG crap? because bill james didnt come up with it? you need to walk your own road imran. like all great things, it is first ridiculed, then rejected, then accepted. i have no doubt that ALUG will be adopted eventually as the standard for clutchness. |
Because there is NO STATISTICAL ANALYSIS. You made it up and are promoting it without any facts. It's a BAM. You've made a bald assertion and STILL haven't proven its value, and especially not by statistics.
quote:
even though i win everytime |
Dude, you get PWNED, time and time again, post by post, point by point. Have you ever not been PWNED against me? Hell, you wanted to keep the far inferior Cabrera instead of Renteria. You were not happy with Epstein when he first got there.
You've been wrong time and time again, and you don't back anything up with stats. I do not know any poster who has been proven wrong more than you have.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
|
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001
time: 06:34
|
|
quote:
The rest of it wasn't worth responding over.
|
how convienient. maybe it was because it refutes your point?
quote:
When it is such a SUBJECTIVE measure, how could they be wrong?! You could call anyone clutch and make some argument based on some clutch hit somewhere. |
again, you must refer to their ALUG in close/late situations to figure out their clutchness.
quote:
If you get a pitch to hit, you should hit it. But if you don't, you should bide your time, waiting for the good pitch. If you walk, you walk. And in late innings, pitchers try to prevent giving up a fat pitch more.
|
if a pitcher puts three pitches in the strikezone, at least one will be good to hit. more so if you foul off in the zone pitches that were unhittable (down and away, up and in) so you can get a fatter one.
quote:
Dude, you get PWNED, time and time again, post by post, point by point. Have you ever not been PWNED against me? Hell, you wanted to keep the far inferior Cabrera instead of Renteria. You were not happy with Epstein when he first got there.
You've been wrong time and time again, and you don't back anything up with stats. I do not know any poster who has been proven wrong more than you have. |
hell nah, ive been right a lot more then ive been wrong, especially with you imran. using splits, my average against you is higher then my total average against other posters in win percentage. its clear. for $2 million less, yes I woulda kept cabrera (infact it would have prolly been more since renteria would have signed for less then $10 million with the cardinals.) then we coulda signed someone at 2B instead of that has-been bellhorn.
yeah, i wans t happy at first when they brought in cabrera, but i changed my mind. which is totally normal and logical.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-06-2005 23:21
|