2008 Orioles MVP using WPA

[Moose Milligan]

Please stop using logic and sense to argue with Old#5. It only encourages him.

Before long this thread will be 33 pages long, and there are an infinite number of things that those 87 trillion electrons could be better used for.

You're totally right.

It's like a trainwreck, you know...want to turn away, but have to look....

[Mackus]

No, he's not and it really isn't even close. This analysis clearly shows it period, even though I realize it is shocking the living tar out of some of you. :laughlol: I think Markakis major flaw is he has a little bit of choke in him. By that I mean he cannot handle pressure situations as well as a lesser skilled hitter like Melvin Mora or even Huff.

You don't understand this analysis. You have no clue of what it represents. A shocker, I know, that you wouldn't understand a statistic, but its the case.

This stat shows who's offensive and pitching contributions have had the biggest impact from Opening Day until now. Its a valuable stat, and nobody here or anywhere will argue that Markakis' offensive and pitching contributions this season have been more meaningful than the others on the top of this list. What this stat doesn't show, is who is simply the best hitter, or the best pitcher, or who is most likely to continue to hit well.

There is no predictive benefit in this stat. Its a great stat for looking back on a season, but its not a great one for looking forward, or for looking for a player's overall value in a vaccuum.

[Sports Guy]

Old Fan...What is the first thing that needs to be accomplished in order for a team to score a run(s)?

[Moose Milligan]

Ozzie Guillen almost never walked, because he comes from an island and you can't walk off islands. That's why he's the greatest man who ever lived.

Dave Kingman for the Hall!

Who cares if he struck out THREE TIMES MORE than he walked?

He lead the league in homers twice. That's all that matters.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Show me where the object is only to "get on base'? The object is to hit the ball and drive in runs. Especially when you bat third or fourth. Walking is fine if you are a leadoff guy but it is not the end all be all for your third and fourth place hitters. Their number one job is to drive in runs period. A walk only does that with the bases loaded. Nobody is going to make a great player out of himself by walking. You have to be able to hit the ball.

One question, and this is the only question I'm going to address to you in thread, so I would prefer a straight answer. And please, no one else answer. This is for him and him alone to declare in a public forum.

If given a choice between two completely identical teams, one with a 1.000 on-base percentage and one with a 1.000 slugging percentage, which would you choose, and why?

[Old#5fan]

Because even the greatest 3rd and 4th place hitters of all time had high on base percentages.

Barry Bonds' on base percentage was flat out ridiculous during his 'roid rage years. As a result, he pretty much carried his team to a World Series appearance.

Will you sit there and tell me to my face that Barry Bonds wasn't that good because he walked a lot?

Here's the list of all time walk leaders: http://www.baseball-almanac.com/hitting/hiwalk1.shtml

Will you sit there and tell me that most of these batters failed at their jobs hitting in the middle of the lineup because they walked a lot?

Bonds isn't a great player because of his walks. Many times the pitcher was more than glad to give him a free pass rather than a roundtripper. He is famous for his bat not his knowledge of the strike zone and not chasing pitches that aren't hittable.:clap3:

[Old#5fan]

Old Fan...What is the first thing that needs to be accomplished in order for a team to score a run(s)?

It depends. In the case of a home run hitter one swing is all that is needed.:laughlol::clap3 Of course much like the chicken/egg argument, a pitch has to be thrown first!::laughlol:

[Sports Guy]

It depends. In the case of a home run hitter one swing is all that is needed.:laughlol::clap3::laughlol:

But other than a home run, what is the first thing that needs to be accomplished for a team to score a run?

[Old#5fan]

One question, and this is the only question I'm going to address to you in thread, so I would prefer a straight answer. And please, no one else answer. This is for him and him alone to declare in a public forum.

If given a choice between two completely identical teams, one with a 1.000 on-base percentage and one with a 1.000 slugging percentage, which would you choose, and why?

That question is nonsensical. A 1.000 on base percentage is impossible. The game would never end.

[ACE]

But other than a home run, what is the first thing that needs to be accomplished for a team to score a run?

If you are waiting for him to say "someone has to get on base" you may want to pack a lunch.

[Old#5fan]

But other than a home run, what is the first thing that needs to be accomplished for a team to score a run?

a runner to cross the plate before the third out.

[Crazysilver03]

That question is nonsensical. A 1.000 on base percentage is impossible. The game would never end.

They could get picked off?

To quote Old Fan: ":clap3::clap3:"

[Moose Milligan]

not his knowledge of the strike zone and not chasing pitches that aren't hittable.:clap3:

Saying Bonds didn't know the strike zone is like saying Einstein didn't know anything about science.

That question is nonsensical. A 1.000 on base percentage is impossible. The game would never end.

Yeah. And if your team was the one with the 1.000 on base percentage, you'd be scoring runs until the other team forfeited.

[Sports Guy]

a runner to cross the plate before the third out.

No no....That isn't the first thing...For that runner to be able to cross the plate, what did he accomplish first?

[Old#5fan]

You don't understand this analysis. You have no clue of what it represents. A shocker, I know, that you wouldn't understand a statistic, but its the case.

This stat shows who's offensive and pitching contributions have had the biggest impact from Opening Day until now. Its a valuable stat, and nobody here or anywhere will argue that Markakis' offensive and pitching contributions this season have been more meaningful than the others on the top of this list. What this stat doesn't show, is who is simply the best hitter, or the best pitcher, or who is most likely to continue to hit well.

There is no predictive benefit in this stat. Its a great stat for looking back on a season, but its not a great one for looking forward, or for looking for a player's overall value in a vaccuum.

This is the greatest statistical data and usage I have ever seen. I think it could also be just as useful as anything else to predict the future as well. I love it, as it shows what I knew to be true about the overhyped Markakis. :clap3: He's like Mike Mussina, a very good player but not great, although hopefully he can get there if he improves over time. Right now he is a young Jeff Conine.