Orioles still pursuing Ike Davis

[El Gordo]

I don't like Ike. If we can't get one of Morales/Cruz, I like Henry.

[gpolee]

If their OPSs are identical, then yes...extremely likely.

Actually, player A is more the slugger than B if OPS is equal. B has higher OBP than A, so A is more of a slugger

[atomic]

If you had to depend on a .310 or .240 BA player to drive in runs, you'd get more runs out of the .310 BA player. Walks are good and all but they don't produce runs... they only help you get guys on base.

Walks have more value coming from a fast player than a slow player. Walks are good but hits are better.

[Redskins Rick]

I don't like Ike. If we can't get one of Morales/Cruz, I like Henry.

[Babypowder]

Clearly you've never played baseball. I get the feeling you've never even watched baseball.

This is very far from the truth. I have both played and watched plenty of baseball.... not that it even matters. Actual run scoring data over 140 years of baseball backs my statement. I'll take a comp from last year too, Giancarlo Stanton and Carlos Gomez. Stanton had an OPS of .845 to Gomez's .843. Stanton slashed .249/.365/.480, and Gomez slashed .284/.338/.506. The OPS are about even, with Gomez hitting for a much higher average and a little less OBP. By wOBA, which puts the proper weight on OBP adjusted to league run scoring data, Stanton was the more productive hitter by 5 points. He was also 5 points better by wRC+.

[Babypowder]

Actually, player A is more the slugger than B if OPS is equal. B has higher OBP than A, so A is more of a slugger

This couldn't be further from the truth. His SLG will be higher but that will driven by his BA. ISO measures power, and player B will have a much higher ISO.

See my post above. Who has more power, Stanton or Gomez?

[AlbionHero]

This is very far from the truth. I have both played and watched plenty of baseball.... not that it even matters. Actual run scoring data over 140 years of baseball backs my statement. I'll take a comp from last year too, Giancarlo Stanton and Carlos Gomez. Stanton had an OPS of .845 to Gomez's .843. Stanton slashed .249/.365/.480, and Gomez slashed .284/.338/.506. The OPS are about even, with Gomez hitting for a much higher average and a little less OBP. By wOBA, which puts the proper weight on OBP adjusted to league run scoring data, Stanton was the more productive hitter by 5 points. He was also 5 points better by wRC+.

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=4881&position=OF#value

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=4949&position=OF#value

While using more advanced metrics has Gomez with 26 offensive value, and Stanton with 19 (since Gomez gives you a lot more speed). The doubles that makes Stanton look better in slugging percentage can negated by the stolen bases Gomez gives you. Even taking out speed, Gomez has 20 batting value to Stantons 19. I'd take Gomez myself.

[Babypowder]

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=4881&position=OF#value

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=4949&position=OF#value

While using more advanced metrics has Gomez with 26 offensive value, and Stanton with 19 (since Gomez gives you a lot more speed). The doubles that makes Stanton look better in slugging percentage can negated by the stolen bases Gomez gives you. I'd take Gomez myself.

We are merely talking about hitters with similar OPSs here. Not total packages. I'm not arguing who was the better player of these two, just using the shapes of their batting lines to frame an example of players with similar OPS's but one with lower BA and higher OBP being better as a hitter.

[kalcashmoney]

Please say NO to Ike Davis - I would rather have Delmon Young DH'ing...

[pollaxt]

We could get into a long discussion on this one but you can't knock a guy in from 2nd base with a walk or move a run from 1st to 3rd. I'm no expert on numbers but I'll take player #1 under this scenario.

Not to mention Player #1 will most likely hit more than just singles.

[JayThomas]

I don't feel strongly about Ike Davis either way. I do feel more strongly that Urrutia should play outfield everyday at AAA rather than platoon DH here. Not because I don't think he'd produce with the bat for us this year, but because I think he can be much more valuable to us next year as a possible replacement for Nick and he needs to get in outfield reps to prepare. His bat will play (I think).

[clapdiddy]

I don't feel strongly about Ike Davis either way. I do feel more strongly that Urrutia should play outfield everyday at AAA rather than platoon DH here. Not because I don't think he'd produce with the bat for us this year, but because I think he can be much more valuable to us next year as a possible replacement for Nick and he needs to get in outfield reps to prepare. His bat will play (I think).

Agree with all of this. Very well said.

[gpolee]

Not to mention Player #1 will most likely hit more than just singles.

Singles, like doubles, count towards slugging percentage. There's a reason for that.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Well, Fangraphs Oliver projections has...

Urrutia at 1.4 WAR, with .287/.332/.422 along with 14 homers and 72 rbi.

Davis at 1.1 WAR, with .216/.327/.398 with 22 homers and 72 rbi

By these numbers, Urrutia is the better guy for us, and we don't have to spend 3.5 mil or give up an asset for him.

OK, I'm not sure I buy it based on what I saw from Urrutia, but that's certainly reasonable supporting evidence.

[gpolee]

This is very far from the truth. I have both played and watched plenty of baseball.... not that it even matters. Actual run scoring data over 140 years of baseball backs my statement. I'll take a comp from last year too, Giancarlo Stanton and Carlos Gomez. Stanton had an OPS of .845 to Gomez's .843. Stanton slashed .249/.365/.480, and Gomez slashed .284/.338/.506. The OPS are about even, with Gomez hitting for a much higher average and a little less OBP. By wOBA, which puts the proper weight on OBP adjusted to league run scoring data, Stanton was the more productive hitter by 5 points. He was also 5 points better by wRC+.

No, 140 years of stats do not back you up - have you ever looked at stats from 140 years ago? From 120 years ago? From 100? They are not very accurate, to put it mildly - you are conflating you're claim. Now, you post one example and declare it proof that lower batting averages with more walks make it *extremely likely* to result in a more productive offensive player. Probably 100 - 1 that the more productive player gets hits rather than walks, even using wOBA. And I don't believe you have played baseball. If you had, you'd know that hits create more runs than do walks. Part of the reason they call them "runs" is that players are running around the bases following hits to score runs.