Jump to content
MurphDogg

Orioles make an offer to Yasiel Puig. UPDATE: Puig to sign with Braves Tests POSITIVE for COVID 19

Recommended Posts

OBP was definitely undervalued back then. Mickey Tettleton was traded after a "disappointing season."  He hit .223 in 1990, but with a .376 OBP and an OPS+ of 116.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eddie83 said:

You covered it well here. 

Back then  a .290 hitter with a .315 OBP was the superior player to a .268 hitter with a .380 OBP who had the same power. 

All about BA, HR, RBI. 

Runs correlate with OBP.  Sport magazines used to tout runs produced which was runs + RBI’s - home runs.  While somewhat team dependent it is a good basic measure of how much you helped the team score runs,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gtown said:

OBP was definitely undervalued back then. Mickey Tettleton was traded after a "disappointing season."  He hit .223 in 1990, but with a .376 OBP and an OPS+ of 116.

Dumb trade by Roland Hemond! 
 

 

one of my favorite O’s at the time

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Philip said:

 I’m sorry it wasn’t clear for you. Yes it means that a player with less raw ability compensates. After all would you rather have someone who is a genius when he tries hard but frequently doesn’t? Or someone who is average at best, but is always doing his best and is therefore always average?

Have you really never heard that before? “He gives "40% of 100%"”? Well, that’s what it means.

No, I have never heard of giving "40% of 100%." You pulled that silly crap out of yo ass! Nobody has heard of this ridiculousness:

 

Google
 
"40% of 100%"
 
 
No results found for "100% of 40%" sports.
 
Google also came up with Zero results for "100% of 40%."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, ChosenOne21 said:

Well obviously it depends on what the 40% and 100% are, doesn't it? If we have a guy who's a 40 (scouting) runner, but always runs at 40 speed, that's less valuable than an 80 runner who sometimes runs like a 35 on routine groundouts.

"40% of 100%" has absolutely nothing to do with a "40" (scouting). "40% of 100%" is totally meaningless.

I'll give you an "A" for creativity.

But an "F" for real life meaning. When you tried to explain the unexplainable: "a 40 (scouting) runner, but always runs at 40 speed, that's less valuable than an 80 runner who sometimes runs like a 35 on routine groundouts," I just about crapped myself in laughter.

Meanwhile, I will be happy to the the talented speed demon (80) who dogs it once in a while and you can have the 40 runner who gets thrown out every time when trying really hard to take an extra base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Enjoy Terror said:

Evidently it's a 2020 Braves move who just won 97 games, and have a young outfield of Acuna, Riley, and if not Nick Markakis then top prospect Cristian Pache. Oh and don't forget Inciarte and Ozuna.

But sure, keep telling me that Smith, Williams, and Wilkerson are suddenly in line for storied Orioles careers because we didn't sign Puig.

They aren't.  Puig makes sense for a competitor, trying to spend money and fill a stop gap in a good line up.  Its not that Puig is terrible, he just doesn't fit the narrative.  Smith, WIlliams, and Wilkerson may become anything, but Hays, Santander, Mountcastle, and Diaz will.  And Smith, Williams, and Wilkerson don't have to develop into stars to have future value.  Role players have value, but when role players become starters, they lose value bc they are vulnerable.  If Wilkerson can be Ryan Flaherty with speed, and Williams becomes a 4th OF for two more seasons with a .750 OPS off the bench, that's valuable if they aren't relied upon beyond that.  They might not become that, but 2020 is a great year to see if they do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Beef Supreme said:

"40% of 100%" has absolutely nothing to do with a "40" (scouting). "40% of 100%" is totally meaningless.

I'll give you an "A" for creativity.

But an "F" for real life meaning. When you tried to explain the unexplainable: "a 40 (scouting) runner, but always runs at 40 speed, that's less valuable than an 80 runner who sometimes runs like a 35 on routine groundouts," I just about crapped myself in laughter.

Meanwhile, I will be happy to the the talented speed demon (80) who dogs it once in a while and you can have the 40 runner who gets thrown out every time when trying really hard to take an extra base.

I think @ChosenOne21 was agreeing with you that the more talented player is obviously more valuable.  Idk, i’m as confused as anyone by this conversation.  I don’t understand the fascination with terrible players who try really hard.  

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ScGO's said:

Dodged a bullet there

LOL.  Even if Puig went 0 for his first 100 at bats it wouldn’t be anything that bad.  A 2 month contract is hardly going to be a negative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ArtVanDelay said:

I think @ChosenOne21 was agreeing with you that the more talented player is obviously more valuable.  Idk, i’m as confused as anyone by this conversation.  I don’t understand the fascination with terrible players who try really hard.  

Brandon Fahey was a gamer! Got his uniform dirty! Hustled! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ArtVanDelay said:

I think @ChosenOne21 was agreeing with you that the more talented player is obviously more valuable.  Idk, i’m as confused as anyone by this conversation.  I don’t understand the fascination with terrible players who try really hard.  

It's weird.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Yardball85 said:

Brandon Fahey was a gamer! Got his uniform dirty! Hustled! 

I was going to make a joke about Jeff Fiorentino, but the defensive metrics actually love his SSS of a Baltimore career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Frobby said:

I realize I’m not the average fan, but OBP was a stat I was well aware of long before 1984.     And while it’s not exact, if you just calculated H+BB/AB+BB you’d be within 5 points of OBP more than 90% of the time.  

I wrote a paper in college (1979 graduate) that discussed how tesm BA, OBP and  SLG correlated with runs scored.    And I still remember the professor commented that there were people out there writing much more sophisticated analyses than the one I’d done.   Ouch!

It couldn't have been much more sophisticated.  That was the timeframe where Bill James would look through 1500 box scores on microfiche to try to approximate things like run support for starters, or opponent stolen base rates for catchers/pitchers.  Writing the annual Abstracts was a many, many month process, mainly because the data we can access in a three minute bb-ref query took weeks of research.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, eddie83 said:

You covered it well here. 

Back then  a .290 hitter with a .315 OBP was the superior player to a .268 hitter with a .380 OBP who had the same power. 

All about BA, HR, RBI. 

Remember that as late as the mid-90s Juan Gonzalez won two MVP awards as an okay-fielding RF with an okay OBP and 150 RBI.  Neither of his MVP years were in the top 10 in the AL in rWAR.

The 1996 MVP voting is inexplicable.  ARod hit .358 with a 1.045 OPS as a SS, and they gave the award to the slow RFer with 144 RBI.  Gonzalez was 57th in the majors in OBP among qualifiers, he was about 90 points behind Frank Thomas in the AL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ArtVanDelay said:

 I don’t understand the fascination with terrible players who try really hard.  

Everyone loves the underdog.  Well, everyone except Yanks and Patriots fans.  Who doesn't want to see the little guy who hustles and out-works everyone else do better than the QB of the high school team who dated the prom queen?  Every Oriole fan has a soft spot for the Rene Gonzaleses and Lenn Sakatas and Floyd Rayfords, the guys you could almost imagine yourself having similar talents and somehow willed and lucked and hustled their way into MLB careers.

Just don't let that enthusiasm convince you that David Eckstein is the MVP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Everyone loves the underdog.  Well, everyone except Yanks and Patriots fans.  Who doesn't want to see the little guy who hustles and out-works everyone else do better than the QB of the high school team who dated the prom queen?  Every Oriole fan has a soft spot for the Rene Gonzaleses and Lenn Sakatas and Floyd Rayfords, the guys you could almost imagine yourself having similar talents and somehow willed and lucked and hustled their way into MLB careers.

Just don't let that enthusiasm convince you that David Eckstein is the MVP.

It’d be absurd to take those guys over an actual good player “with issues”, as Phillip was saying in his bizarre “100% of 40%” post. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • 1966 ranks 107th of the 115 World Series ever played?   The hell with that!    That series was a huge upset and featured two 1-0 nail biters.  1970 ranks 95th?    The great O’s team over the Big Red Machine?   Brooks puts on the best defensive show of all time and this is what we get? 1983 ranks 84th?    So all three Orioles wins are in the bottom 32 World Series ever played, and worse than every World Series they lost?   Aargggghhh! Now for the killer: you have to jump all the way to 36 for Mets vs. Orioles in 1969.    Other than the fact that the Mets were a terrible team before ‘69, what about that series is better than 1983?    They are both 5 game series where the winning team lost the opener and then swept 4 straight.   Screw this!  This is why I hate all New York sports teams so much.     1971 — 20th.     1979 — 13th.    Now, I can’t really argue that, objectively speaking, the two seven game losses to the Pirates weren’t better World Series than the four other 4-5 game Series that the O’s played.  But lord it pains me to see them up so high.   And just to add insult to injury: “When Eddie Murray batted in the eighth inning of Game 7, the championship leverage index in the moment was higher than for any other play in history. He flied to the edge of the warning track, and after a slightly awkward break, Dave Parker ran it down. Five more feet and it could have looked a lot like the ball Nelson Cruzmisplayed, for which David Freese got a triple, in 2011.” https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/29104085/ranking-every-world-series-mlb-history
    • FV dropped from 50 to 45 and ceiling dropped from 55 to 50.   That feels a little harsh to me.   But based on the write-up, it seems Tony heard some things about Diaz’s camp that were a bit more negative than what has been stated publicly.    I think Diaz is a guy who could exceed his projection if things go right for him.  
    • Ceiling grade dropped from 55 to 50 this year.    
    • Hopefully “better than those guys” is not the standard we’re trying to meet.   
    • One name I haven’t seen listed yet is Hunter Harvey, who is still rookie-eligible.  He was ranked 10th last year. For now I will assume he’s been downgraded after being somewhat less impressive in 2020 than in 2019, but it’s also possible that Tony didn’t realize he was still eligible.    The next two on last year’s list were Wells and Rom.   That’s not a pairing here, but Zimmermann did reach the majors and didn’t embarrass himself, so Wells and Zimmermann is possible.   Assuming Tony meant what he said about not shuffling the order of incumbent players who weren’t in Bowie, McKenna-Hall and Hall-Mayo aren’t possibilities since there are several incumbent players ahead of Hall.    That leaves Baumler-Mayo or Mayo-Baumler.    The latter seems more likely since Mayo was the higher pick and got the higher bonus.     As between Mayo-Baumler and Wells-Zimmermann, I think Tony will go with the younger pairing with more upside.    Wells and Zimmermann are both 5th starter/swingman types.   And my gut tells me that Wells not being invited to Bowie is a bad sign for him.   So I’m going Mayo-Baumler.   
    • Got this pairing correct.   Not that excited about Vavra’s writeup, though.    
    • I think it all depends on how much his deception plays up. He throws a little harder than Milone and his release point and extension on his release helps it play up as well.  I like him, but was disappointed that Elias didn't have him at the auxiliary camp. 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...