D-Cab Still Bad

[byrdz]

You're failing to see the value of "productive insults".

If I insult you but in the end you realize how clever I am, then it's a "productive insult", which is always more valuable than an "unproductive but better-mannered statement".

*sigh* Another thread thrown helplessly off the tracks...

EDIT: byrdz beat me to the joke...can't give out more rep, sorry...

I like "productive insult" better anyway.

[BaltimoreTerp]

I'd say my top 3 comics are:

-Calvin and Hobbes

-The Far Side

-Dilbert

They're all productive comics, except that rascal boss of Dilbert's! He's not productive at all!

I don't think Calvin is very productive. That's the plot of half the strips; him finding a way to be lazy!

[Flip217]

Wait... are you talking about Oldfan? Or yourself?

<img src=http://www.leftbanker.com/uploaded_images/Simpsons-Nelson-Haha-715091.jpg>

[DrungoHazewood]

Uh, unlike you I will gladly take a Sac fly or any kind of run scoring any time I can get it. I am much more concerned about scoring runs than I am about not making outs. You are way undervaluing the productive out in winning games. Again, how many times have you seen as I have the Yankees be held to one fourth the hit total of the Orioles yet they score more runs and win the game. One of the reasons is they utilize productive outs. The Orioles will get three hits in an inning and not score a run. The Yankees will get a single and turn it into a run by a Sac fly. Some teams are very good at it. Boston is another team that does this well. Productive outs. They are a key to a winning team.

Non-productive triples are a whole lot tastier than badly cooked mustard greens.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Wow, this thread has somehow earned me 32 rep points!

[nyjimbo]

Has DCab suddenly gotten good since this thread started?

[byrdz]

Good thing we don't have to convince Trembley on any of this. Hasn't he said that he wants the offense to be more patient? I just hope we don't see a lot of sac bunts and stolen bases by anyoen other than Roberts.

[Cokeman]

I am not going to insult your intelligence by copying an pasting Webster's dicitionary definition of "productive" but the word is derived from produce. In the game of baseball when you talk about "producing" something it normally would be a run which is the object of the game (to score runs in total more than your opponent over a span of innings.) So if the walk either drives in a run or "produces" a run as with the bases loaded or ends up scoring a run - the walker crosses the plate, I view this as a productive walk or hit for that matter. If it doesn't, it simply is "non-productive" because it failed to "produce" a run and essentially other than raise the pitch count of the pitcher accomplish nothing as far as the outcome of scoring runs and winning the game.

It does other things beside just raising the pitch count...using hindsight like you have earlier, that "non-productive" walk in the first inning could prove pretty crucial later in the game. For example, Nick Markakis walks with 2 outs in the first inning, but then Kevin Millar strikes out to end the inning. That walk seems pretty meaningless and non-productive at the time...but it really has started turning over the lineup. Later in the game, that could mean the difference between Luis Hernandez and Brian Roberts batting in a crucial situation...which could affect the outcome of scoring runs and winning the game.

[Old#5fan]

Say a batter walks to lead off the inning and the rest of the batters ground/fly/strike out without moving the runner over.

Is the walk unproductive? Was it productive at the time? What makes it unproductive?

It did nothing to impact the game other than raise the pitch count of the pitcher, which fouling off a bunch of pitches also does. It failed to produce or lend to a run scoring so it was essentially meaningless other than to pad the batters OBP.

[NewMarketSean]

It did nothing to impact the game other than raise the pitch count of the pitcher, which fouling off a bunch of pitches also does. It failed to produce or lend to a run scoring so it was essentially meaningless other than to pad the batters OBP.

So what if the next batter(s) knock that runner in? Does that walk all the sudden become productive?

What if someone hits a triple and the next 3 batters fail to knock the runner in? Is that triple unproductive? Does it only increase the average, OBP and SLG percentages of that hitter?

IMO, when you are increasing the chances of scoring, IE, getting on base, you are being productive. After all, you have to get on base to score.

This is stuff a second grader would understand, yet somehow it manages to get by you.

[BaltimoreTerp]

This is stuff a second grader would understand, yet somehow it manages to get by you.

Don't say this. Don't sink to that level.

[Old#5fan]

So what if the next batter(s) knock that runner in? Does that walk all the sudden become productive? YES

What if someone hits a triple and the next 3 batters fail to knock the runner in? Is that triple unproductive? Does it only increase the average, OBP and SLG percentages of that hitter? YES

IMO, when you are increasing the chances of scoring, IE, getting on base, you are being productive. After all, you have to get on base to score.

I agree your increasing the "chance" to score but if you don't actually score it is simply non-productive when it comes to scoring. I don't know about you but I want results not chances that don't come to fruition or meaningless stat padding.

This is stuff a second grader would understand, yet somehow it manages to get by you.

I will ignore that insult because now we are even (payback for my barb about you earlier).

I have already answered all your questions previously to various others during this thread but I will be nice and answer them just for you (see above in bold).

[byrdz]

It did nothing to impact the game other than raise the pitch count of the pitcher, which fouling off a bunch of pitches also does. It failed to produce or lend to a run scoring so it was essentially meaningless other than to pad the batters OBP.

It got a player 90 feet closer to home plate and you didn't give up an out, increasing your chances of scoring that lead off walk. Anyone knows a high percentage of lead off walks are going to score.

[NewMarketSean]

I will ignore that insult because now we are even (payback for my barb about you earlier).

I have already answered all your questions previously to various others during this thread but I will be nice and answer them just for you (see above in bold).

So how is it the fault of the batter for walking or hitting a triple and not getting driven in when it's out of his hands?

Dont you see how much sense you're not making?

[Old#5fan]

It got a player 90 feet closer to home plate and you didn't give up an out, increasing your chances of scoring that lead off walk. Anyone knows a high percentage of lead off walks are going to score.

True, but walks or hits that don't score are simply non-productive. I don't know why people are having so much trouble understanding this definition which is simple:

Productive walk, hit or out - that which ends up producing a run

Non productive walk, hit or out- that which ends up not producing a run.

I cannot explain it any more simply than that. If people want to disgree with this view, fine. I am simply stating my view as I see it.