D-Cab Still Bad

[Old#5fan]

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?

It is not about fault it is about end results. You are making more out of this than is intended.

Simply stated, I prefer productive outs, hits, walks over non-productive outs, hits, and walks period. I don't value the non-productive categories as much as some of you apparently do. To me they are of much diminished value to the point of almost nothing when viewed in context to the game as a whole. The add little value (the non-productive items) other than padding individual stats of players.

[NewMarketSean]

True, but walks or hits that don't score are simply non-productive.

Wrong. Batters that fail to knock those runners in are unproductive.

I don't know why people are having so much trouble understanding this

Because you're not making any sense. And shouldn't it tell you something when you're the only one who is saying this, and everyone else is saying you're wrong?

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.

It still doesn't make any sense.

Blame the guy who couldn't get it done with runners on. Don't blame the guys who did their job and got on base.

[NewMarketSean]

It is not about fault it is about end results. You are making more out of this than is intended.

When you say a guy who got on base is unproductive you are talking about fault. This can't be debated.

[Tony-OH]

No - wrong as usual about virtually everything I post except for number 2.

You must not have paid attention to much when you took reading in elementary school. I will correct your poor comprehension skills. Refer to above in bold!

I've already dinged you for this, but if you can not express yourself without demeaning others you will be given a vacation until you can. C'mon now, we've had lots of talks about this kind of stuff. I'm tried of getting reported posts because of you.

Chill out or take a break again...

[byrdz]

Productive out and walk correlation explained from HBT:

A look at all teams shows that while productive outs tend to come at higher rates for teams that win, getting on base seems to be much more important. Winning teams over the past two postseasons had a .360 POP compared to the .301 POP of their opponents, a difference of .059. But winning teams also had a .364 OBP in those situations, compared to a .266 OBP for the losers, a difference of .099. Taking productive outs as a percentage of all opportunities, and not just outs made, you find that the difference between winning teams and losing team is only .008 -- .229 to .221.

This last statistic indicates that making productive outs is not an important part of winning ballgames. The correlation to winning percentage drives the nail in the coffin: POP has a .463 correlation to winning percentage, OBP in those situations has a .750 correlation, while the rate of productive outs has a mere .283 correlation.

[Maverick2143]

It won't earn that title until it's 44 pages long, there have been several fistfights, six week-long bans, 12 derailing discussions about the illegitimacy of defensive evaluation/Luis Hernandez/DIPS/VORP, and a offshoot thread dedicated to stream-of-consciousness rambling.

1/4 of the way there

[Old#5fan]

When you say a guy who got on base is unproductive you are talking about fault. This can't be debated.

Again, I am not talking about a player, I am talking about a walk/hit/out. These are things a player can do not the player himself.

Player - Walk not one in the same

Player - Hit not one in the same

Player - Out not one in the same

I am talking about what outcome of the at bat in relation to scoring runs in the innning not the player himself. I am not assigning fault. I am analyzing results as to how they effect the game or not.

I am player neutral in this discussion which is about how certain things that a player does impacts or doesn't the outcome of the game. Again, I want productive outs more than non-productive hits. Why, because the goal is to score runs. A productive out scores a run, a non-productive anything including a hit does not.

[NewMarketSean]

Again, I am not talking about a player, I am talking about a walk/hit/out. These are things a player can do not the player himself.

Player - Walk not one in the same

Player - Hit not one in the sam

Player - Out not one in the same

I am talking about what outcome of the at bat is not the player himself. I am not assigning fault. I am analyzing results as to how they effect the game or not.

But saying something is productive and unproductive should be done right after the at-bat... not at the end of the inning.

[Old#5fan]

I've already dinged you for this, but if you can not express yourself without demeaning others you will be given a vacation until you can. C'mon now, we've had lots of talks about this kind of stuff. I'm tried of getting reported posts because of you.

Chill out or take a break again...

Yeah, I apologized on another post where he said I was as dumb as a second grader by saying I deserved that remark and we were even. I overeacted as I thought he was antagonizing me but he wasn't. He gave me the only "green" I have received on this thread among a sea of "reds." So believe me, I got the message. I also hadn't read your reputation comment before I posted the above post, so it wasn't that I ingnored your comment.

[Old#5fan]

But saying something is productive and unproductive should be done right after the at-bat... not at the end of the inning.

Well, I guess if you were looking at it soley by the individual at bat I would have to agree. However, the score is kept inning by inning, so I usually judge a game as to who is winning or losing by each inning score as the game progresses.

[NewMarketSean]

Well, I guess if you were looking at it soley by the individual at bat I would have to agree. However, the score is kept inning by inning, so I usually judge a game as to who is winning or losing by each inning score as the game progresses.

Baseball operates on such a smaller scale though. I would expect you to understand this if you've been watching the game for so long.

[olehippi]

I made a meager contribution to this thread when it began yesterday. I have just waded through the sometimes wildly amusing 12 pages posted today and have reached this conclusion:

There must be something bad....very, very bad.....in the drinking water in Sheperdstown, WV....

[zff4]

This is not the productive thread I was looking for.

[RShack]

There must be something bad....very, very bad.....in the drinking water in Sheperdstown, WV....

Not sure if it's the place I'm thinking of... but if it is, then it seems like a nice little old-timey town... close to the Antietam battlefield... had a smaller follow-up battle there... I don't think it's Shepherdstown, I think it's just FakeCodgerDude roping you guys in...

[Old#5fan]

Productive out and walk correlation explained from HBT:

Okay, but the point I was making that sometimes getting on base doesn't produce anything at all.I don't see that being factored into this by your explanation. All that is saying is the more you get on base the more chance you have of scoring (or at least that is what I think it is saying) and that teams that have a higher OBP are usually winning more games and the correlation is easier to make. Whereas teams with more productive outs are not necessarily having that big a correlation to winning. However that is like comparing a river to a stream and saying the stream isn't as big, yet it empties into the river so of course it isn't as big!