How long will Buck stick with Jim Presley?

[ledzepp8]

Its a good point if the team is ok with being 68 runs behind the Angels and 11th in OBP. Does a year of Wieters and and a half year of Manny make up for that?

Well I suppose when the Orioles start having a payroll of $155 million and the best player in baseball, we can start comparing them to the Angels. If course you could just as easily flip it and say that the Angels should be concerned that it cost them an extra $48 million to score 68 runs more than the Orioles.

Like I said to jtrea's buddy in the other thread, if you want the team to get on base more and score more runs then you get better players. Teams fire coaches because that's the easiest thing to do, not because it's actually going to make a huge difference.

[Redskins Rick]

Bruce Springsteen wanted one of the Yankee coaches fired? BucK does not like Bruce?

Daddy George. The Original Boss.

[ledzepp8]

How many injuries did the 3rd place team have?

What difference does it really make? I'm just saying it's kind of silly to harp on the Orioles for only being 6th in runs scored when there's not that much separation between the top 6.

[Reboulet'sStache]

What difference does it really make? I'm just saying it's kind of silly to harp on the Orioles for only being 6th in runs scored when there's not that much separation between the top 6.

I don't know. You brought up injuries. I was just interested in seeing who the third place team was so I could put the difference in proper context. If the third place team was the Rangers, telling me the O's finished 6th but had all the injuries doesn't really give me a great narrative.

[ledzepp8]

I don't know. You brought up injuries. I was just interested in seeing who the third place team was so I could put the difference in proper context. If the third place team was the Rangers' date=' telling me the O's finished 6th but had all the injuries doesn't really give me a great narrative.[/quote']

It was the Athletics.

[foxfield]

Is there anything that a 23,223rd thread on the influence of hitting coaches can add to the debate that the first 23,222 couldn't?

At this point it's almost a matter of faith. Do players hit, or do hitting coaches hit?

Well, I'll try.....

[Frobby]

Kind of a confusing post. OBP is just a means to end. But having a better OBP equates to more runs. What is you point here?

I think it was clear enough. Try bolding the sentence before the one you chose to bold: "If two teams are about equal in runs, I really don't care which team has the higher OBP." In the three years Jim Presley has been here, the Orioles are 8th in MLB (6th in the AL) in runs scored. They are 22nd in OBP (13th in the AL). Guess which ranking matters more to me? I'm only interested in increasing OBP if it leads to more runs, not to see if we can emulate the many teams who have a higher OBP but score fewer runs than the Orioles.

[Babypowder]

I think it was clear enough. Try bolding the sentence before the one you chose to bold: "If two teams are about equal in runs, I really don't care which team has the higher OBP." In the three years Jim Presley has been here, the Orioles are 8th in MLB (6th in the AL) in runs scored. They are 22nd in OBP (13th in the AL). Guess which ranking matters more to me? I'm only interested in increasing OBP if it leads to more runs, not to see if we can emulate the many teams who have a higher OBP but score fewer runs than the Orioles.

Comparing teams by raw runs scored isn't a very good way to judge offenses either, though.

[ledzepp8]

Comparing teams by raw runs scored isn't a very good way to judge offenses either, though.

Can you elaborate?

[Babypowder]

Can you elaborate?

Sure, runs need to be put in context. Park factors and competition play a major role in how many runs a team scores. Adjusted offensive stats are much more useful. For example, the Colorado Rockies scored the 3rd most runs in baseball this year. They were far from the 3rd best offense in baseball. By wRC+, they had a 99 (100 is league average) and were 13th in MLB. That is a much better indicator of their true offensive prowess. The Rays scored the fewest runs in the AL, but were equal to the Rockies by wRC+ at 99. However, the Rockies scored 143 more runs.

[ledzepp8]

Sure, runs need to be put in context. Park factors and competition play a major role in how many runs a team scores. Adjusted offensive stats are much more useful. For example, the Colorado Rockies scored the 3rd most runs in baseball this year. They were far from the 3rd best offense in baseball. By wRC+, they had a 99 (100 is league average) and were 13th in MLB. That is a much better indicator of their true offensive prowess. The Rays scored the fewest runs in the AL, but were equal to the Rockies by wRC+ at 99. However, the Rockies scored 143 more runs.

This is all well and good. I guess I just don't understand what difference this makes in the long run. We're not comparing players or giving out awards for the best offense by sabermetrics. Teams that score more runs are usually going to be one of the better teams. Does it matter if the team A has sabermetrics on their side against team B, if team B scores more runs leading to a better win percentage?

[ledzepp8]

I think a HUGE problem with the offense is Chris Davis' horrific plate appearances. He struck out nearly a third of the time and didn't hit much at all. I think the Orioles need to find out if this was an aberration or an effect of the adder all or lack of it.Aside from the fact that he violated the drug policy after being warned( that is a red flag if I ever saw one), he literally gave us half of what he gave in 2013. If he slumps again next year, the Orioles need to replace HIM before they replace Presley.

Who cares how many times he struck out? He struck out almost 30% of the time in 2013, did it matter then?

[Reboulet'sStache]

This is all well and good. I guess I just don't understand what difference this makes in the long run. We're not comparing players or giving out awards for the best offense by sabermetrics. Teams that score more runs are usually going to be one of the better teams. Does it matter if the team A has sabermetrics on their side against team B, if team B scores more runs leading to a better win percentage?

But the point is to objectively analyze whether the O's approach, philosophy, etc., is "good." How do we do that? There are certain things you can point to, one being the overall amount of runs scored. But his point is that can be influenced by a bunch of other things that your approach and philosophy aren't really completely controlling per se. So there is value, within the context of this discussion, in trying to equalize all factors and then look at the numbers to get a better idea about how beneficial, or how much of a hindrance, the O's approach is.

[ledzepp8]

But the point is to objectively analyze whether the O's approach' date=' philosophy, etc., is "good." How do we do that? There are certain things you can point to, one being the overall amount of runs scored. But his point is that can be influenced by a bunch of other things that your approach and philosophy aren't really completely controlling per se. So there is value, within the context of this discussion, in trying to equalize all factors and then look at the numbers to get a better idea about how beneficial, or how much of a hindrance, the O's approach is.[/quote']

Okay but the park they play in isn't going to change. And park factors probably don't change that much from year to year, especially for some place like Coors Field (assuming that's still the name).

[Reboulet'sStache]

Okay but the park they play in isn't going to change. And park factors probably don't change that much from year to year, especially for some place like Coors Field (assuming that's still the name).

The point of an offensive philosophy is to lead to runs. It's a means to an end. You want to maximize run scoring. Maybe you still score a lot of runs, but you still want to know, as best you can, if it is because of your philosophy or other factors. Otherwise you might still be scoring an okay amount of runs, but you aren't maximizing the amount of runs you could be scoring.

Lets assume that Coors Field guarantees the Rockies finish in the top 6 in runs scored every year, regardless of what offensive philosophy they adopt. Accounting for the ballpark would be one way Colorado could look at how successful their current offensive approach is. If they only finish right at number 6 every year, they might come to the conclusion that they are a pretty bad offense, because all they can do is finish at the spot they are guaranteed to at least finish at, even if that spot isn't bad per se bad.