Orioles still pursuing Ike Davis

[mdbdotcom]

I still say that Lucas Duda is the way to go with the Mets. He presents as much upside with less downside. He's also cheaper (1.6M to 3.9M for Davis) with one year (2+) less service time. Career .812 OPS against RHP's with .823 last year. Davis is a career .823 against RHP's but ony .776 last year and on a downward trend overall for 3 years running. When used as his most strict platoon in 2011, he put up an .856 OPS overall. I don't predict that but he's a cheap option at DH. I suspect with all of the RH bats in camp, (Reimold, Young, Pearce, Almanzar) that if Reimold looks healthy, he might be of interest to the Mets, with perhaps a B minor leaguer thrown in. I guess it depends on how the O's feel about Reimold. If he looks healthy they might just decide to go fulltime DH with him.

I'd rather have Duda as well. Send them Patton. That trade would help both teams.

[PaulFolk]

I'd rather have Duda as well. Send them Patton. That trade would help both teams.

I don't think the Mets are jumping to acquire an OK but nothing-special reliever who is already guaranteed to miss 25 games. I don't think Patton has much, if any, trade value right now.

[gpolee]

Again, he implied (other factors being equal, i.e the same OPS). He backed that that up more cleary with the Stanton example. You are wrong.

All things being equal means counting stats, not formulas. It's intellectually dishonest to change the parameters. OPS is a formula as is wOBA - you will never find two equal players if you rely on every formula you can throw against the wall

[mdbdotcom]

I don't think the Mets are jumping to acquire an OK but nothing-special reliever who is already guaranteed to miss 25 games. I don't think Patton has much, if any, trade value right now.

He would be an improvement to their bullpen.

[PaulFolk]

He would be an improvement to their bullpen.

If so, it would be an incremental upgrade at best -- and, again, they'll be missing close to a month's work from Patton. I don't see the Mets giving up Duda for that.

[gpolee]

I do believe I heard that Walks don't drive in runs and yet over the last 3 years, guess which teams scored the most runs?

2013:

Boston OBP% #1 Runs Scored #1

Detroit OBP% #2 Runs Scored #2

Cards OBP% #3 Runs Scored #3

More base runners means more runs regardless of method. How you get out doesn't really matter. How you get on doesn't really matter. If OPS is equal, I'll take the superior OBP every time. This hit vs walk argument is along the same lines people use when they say well a guy who hits into an out is better than a guy who strikes out because he can advance a runner. That is nonsense. yeah the guy who hits for contact will advance more runners on a pop fly, but he'll also hit into a much larger number of double plays. You know what is nice about walk heavy guys? They don't have to deal with luck. Contact heavy guys are going to get babip lucky stretches and babip unlucky stretches. Walk heavy guys will be much more consistent in production. In the end all that matters is how often you get on base.

Tell me the number of RBIs resulting from walks. You ran away from that because you know the answer is minisculely low. At no time was OPS being equal a factor in the discussion.

Your assertion is not germane to my point and is, thus, irrelevant. And the rest is off-topic and illogical "all that matters is how often you get on base." Nonsense.

[Babypowder]

All things being equal means counting stats, not formulas. It's intellectually dishonest to change the parameters. OPS is a formula as is wOBA - you will never find two equal players if you rely on every formula you can throw against the wall

Just a quick reminder of how this whole conversation came about:

Also, what do we mean by everything else equal? Equal OPS? That also means player B has more power. These players would actually be very different. It's extremely likely player B is better.

Extremely likely? In what universe is it that a guy who gets 2 more walks per month is better than a guy who gets 2 more hits per week?

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

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

In that respect, you are wrong... just as he said.

[gpolee]

The OBA-is-god contingent have changed my mind. They want higher OBA at all costs because it "translates to more runs." The Orioles need to trade Adam Jones for Ike Davis, JJ Hardy for Yunel Escobar, trade Wieters for Saltalamacchia. Hell maybe we can get your beloved Justin Smoak for someone with a lower OBP like Manny Machado. You geniuses will set the baseball world on it's ear. We fans will watch those runs roll in, I mean, walk in. Justin Smoak: 2014 World Series MVP. :scratchchinhmm:

[gpolee]

Just a quick reminder of how this whole conversation came about:

In that respect, you are wrong... just as he said.

Oh, it was you who changed the conversation by adding OPS. How intellectually dishonest of you. You must have been smart enough to know that was not part of the equation but you added it anyhow. You'd be perfect on Fox.

[gpolee]

Just a quick reminder of how this whole conversation came about:

In that respect, you are wrong... just as he said.

Now that you are no longer confused and understand that "equal OPS" was never part of the equation, tell me how "extremely likely" it is for the player with 10 more points of OBA to be more valuable than the player with 50 points more batting average. The answer is contingent on equal counting stats, not equal formulas. I await your reply.

[Babypowder]

Now that you are no longer confused and understand that "equal OPS" was never part of the equation, tell me how "extremely likely" it is for the player with 10 more points of OBA to be more valuable than the player with 50 points more batting average. The answer is contingent on equal counting stats, not equal formulas. I await your reply.

I said if their OPSs were identical, it was extremely likely. You directly disagreed with that notion in a condescending fashion. It's all right there.

[gpolee]

...still, I'd be OK with the Orioles trading for Ike, if it cost them very little. He's young, with limited MLB experience, and may improve.

But trading for Justin Smoak? Almost 2000 MLB PAs with this line: .227 .314 .386 .700. We have a good deal of data on Smoak: adding him seems like a step in the wrong direction for a team that needs more baserunners - whether by hit or by walk. Stating that he has shown greater value than Kendrys based on last year's OBP is foolish.

[gpolee]

I said if their OPSs were identical, it was extremely likely. You directly disagreed with that notion in a condescending fashion. It's all right there.

Please answer the question, now that you understand that all things being equal does not mean OPS being equal: How "extremely likely" it is for the player with 10 more points of OBA to be more valuable than the player with 50 points more batting average. And, please, do not add unrelated external formulas, like you did previously.

[gpolee]

.326 OBP is a relatively high floor, particularly for someone who would not cost much like Davis. He was basically a replacement level player last year while bottoming out on batting average and ISO. Considering the amount of major leaguers whose floor is below replacement level, that is a pretty solid floor.

And no, I am not buying JTrea's rhetoric that the Orioles should have tunnel vision when it comes to OBP but when we are talking about the floor of a player who would be a LH platoon DH, I can take a .326 OBP and not much else.

.326 is not the floor: .305 is the floor. Check Ike's stats.

[Babypowder]

Please answer the question, now that you understand that all things being equal does not mean OPS being equal: How "extremely likely" it is for the player with 10 more points of OBA to be more valuable than the player with 50 points more batting average. And, please, do not add unrelated external formulas, like you did previously.

If all counting stats were equal if your example, then yes it is very likely player A is the better player. However, that will show up in OPS and wOBA without a doubt... so I'm not even sure what the point of this exercise is to being with.

Secondly, I didn't add anything unrelated. I asked a question regarding the parameters of your example. It was not in any way clear that you meant counting stats from the beginning. You still chose to disagree with me when I asked about OPS, though I do appreciate that you are now backing down from that.