Your Opinion- Hypothetical Player Stat Comparison

[Old#5fan]

I can't believe enough people responded to Old Fan to make this thread 11 pages. I just shake my head at his ridiculous nonsense (basically the equivalent of trolling, though he isn't smart enough to legitimately troll) and laugh.

So why did you post then? You just did what you are criticizing others for doing!

[Malike]

I can't believe enough people responded to Old Fan to make this thread 11 pages. I just shake my head at his ridiculous nonsense (basically the equivalent of trolling, though he isn't smart enough to legitimately troll) and laugh.

Hi pot, meet the kettle. I just dont understand all of the complaining and insults going on in this thread. If its a topic you don't enjoy then just don't read the thread or respond to it. If you are going to respond just to insult, then you become the troll that you accuse others of.

Personally, back to the topic I think even though the discussion is a fairly moot point because Markakis is a superior hitter there were some cool things thrown out and some interesting reading.

[Genya]

Actually those particular type of stats show (as the post states) they are virtually identical, yet again which shows me that Pena is doing more with less as he only hits 247 to Markakis' 300! To me if a player is hitting that much lower in average yet equal to another guy hitting 300 he is the better player as he is doing more with less.

Pena just hits more Home Runs; 77 percent more than Nick, and Nick makes up for the difference because he gets a hit more often. I'm not sure where you're getting this "doing more with less" from. They have different strengths: Pena hits HR's and Nick hits for average.

I'm also wondering why you're deviating from your own premise in this thread. Your first post said that you'd prefer a Pena type player over Markakis because he would "produce more runs to help his team win."

Now that there's a 10 page thread with convincing evidence to show that Pena isn't a better run producer, why not defend your theory or concede that it isn't true, instead of going off on a tangent about Pena doing more with less.

[Old#5fan]

Pena just hits more Home Runs; 77 percent more than Nick, and Nick makes up for the difference because he gets a hit more often. I'm not sure where you're getting this "doing more with less" from. They have different strengths: Pena hits HR's and Nick hits for average.

I'm also wondering why you're deviating from your own premise in this thread. Your first post said that you'd prefer a Pena type player over Markakis because he would "produce more runs to help his team win."

Now that there's a 10 page thread with convincing evidence to show that Pena isn't a better run producer, why not defend your theory or concede that it isn't true, instead of going off on a tangent about Pena doing more with less.

But he is a better run producer in my estimation because he is doing it with fewer hits. Again, if Pena could up his average to 300 like Markakis and everything else is the same he would produce monster numbers. Markakis doesn't produce monster anything.

[Sports Guy]

But he is a better run producer in my estimation because he is doing it with fewer hits. Again, if Pena could up his average to 300 like Markakis and everything else is the same he would produce monster numbers. Markakis doesn't produce monster anything.

But who cares? So what if Pena hits more homers? What is the point?

Why should we care?

[Genya]

But he is a better run producer in my estimation because he is doing it with fewer hits. Again, if Pena could up his average to 300 like Markakis and everything else is the same he would produce monster numbers. Markakis doesn't produce monster anything.

..and if Markakis could get his HR numbers up to Pena's levels he would produce monster numbers too.

I really don't get what it is that you're trying to argue with statements like these.

[ledzepp8]

..and if Markakis could get his HR numbers up to Pena's levels he would produce monster numbers too.

I really don't get what it is that you're trying to argue with statements like these.

You obviously haven't taken Logic 101 at your local college or university. You should really look into it and then you'll be able to understand the "wisdom" of Old#5Fan.

[Lt Melmo]

I'd like to ask you a question about a very common hypothetical, OldFan.

You have three players hitting in order. Player A, Player B, Player C.

Player A starts off the inning with a single.

Player B then singles, pushing Player A to third.

Player C then singles, driving in Player A and moving Player B to third.

The next three batters strike out.

In this scenario, Player A gets a run and Player C gets an RBI. Player B gets nothing but a hit, even though that run wouldn't have been scored without that hit.

This happens all the time. It probably happens a hell of a lot more often with the guy with 58 more hits than the other guy.

So I guess my question is: do you care?

[Old#5fan]

I'd like to ask you a question about a very common hypothetical, OldFan.

You have three players hitting in order. Player A, Player B, Player C.

Player A starts off the inning with a single.

Player B then singles, pushing Player A to third.

Player C then singles, driving in Player A and moving Player B to third.

The next three batters strike out.

In this scenario, Player A gets a run and Player C gets an RBI. Player B gets nothing but a hit, even though that run wouldn't have been scored without that hit.

This happens all the time. It probably happens a hell of a lot more often with the guy with 58 more hits than the other guy.

So I guess my question is: do you care?

All you are showing here is opportunity to produce an rbi with the same type of hit (single) was there for player C and not for B. So what? Since Pena hits over 50 point lower than Markakis yet still drives in more runs it doesn't mean it is simply a matter of more opportunity, it also means he does more with his hits as in hitting homers instead of the much less productive singles.

If you bat Markakis fourth on the Orioles and Pena second on the Rays I don't think their stats would be reversed or even if you switched teams and did it. In other words their spot in the lineup has nothing to do with the type of hitter each of them is. They are radically different yet somehow achieve almost identical results with Pena slightly better overall and significantly better in cashing in on rbi opportunties. Ergo, to me he is the better man.

[Frobby]

All you are showing here is opportunity to produce an rbi with the same type of hit (single) was there for player C and not for B. So what? Since Pena hits over 50 point lower than Markakis yet still drives in more runs it doesn't mean it is simply a matter of more opportunity, it also means he does more with his hits as in hitting homers instead of the much less productive singles.

If you bat Markakis fourth on the Orioles and Pena second on the Rays I don't think their stats would be reversed or even if you switched teams and did it. In other words their spot in the lineup has nothing to do with the type of hitter each of them is. They are radically different yet somehow achieve almost identical results with Pena slightly better overall and significantly better in cashing in on rbi opportunties. Ergo, to me he is the better man.

Let me say, first of all, that I don't completely buy in to the idea that RBI's are not an important stat. Nick was better at driving in runs in 2007 than he was in 2008, and that is a fact.

At the same time, it seems to me that you are completely dismissing the importance of (1) scoring runs, and (2) creating opportunities for other players to drive runs in.

Markakis scored 30 runs more than Pena, and drive in 15 fewer. Since a HR counts as both a run and an RBI, and Pena hit 11 more HR's than Markakis, that means Nick had 26 more runs produced than Pena. And that doesn't account for the value he added by getting a hit or a walk that advanced a runner and gave Mora or Huff a chance to drive them in. Nick contributed much more to his team scoring runs than Pena did. And, as I've already mentioned, Nick is 24 years old and is likely to keep getting better, whereas Pena is 30 and is not likely to get better.

[Oriol3s]

All you are showing here is opportunity to produce an rbi with the same type of hit (single) was there for player C and not for B. So what? Since Pena hits over 50 point lower than Markakis yet still drives in more runs it doesn't mean it is simply a matter of more opportunity

Umm, actually, that's EXACTLY what that means.

If you bat Markakis fourth on the Orioles and Pena second on the Rays I don't think their stats would be reversed or even if you switched teams and did it.

You don't think??? We were using statistical evidence, not conjecture on your or anybody else's part. You already chastised another poster here for speculating that Nick is a gold glove caliber player (or GG candidate). For what it's worth, I agree that their HR totals would not be reversed, but you would certainly see more RBI from Nick because he would have had more opportunities to drive runners in.

In other words their spot in the lineup has nothing to do with the type of hitter each of them is. They are radically different yet somehow achieve almost identical results with Pena slightly better overall and significantly better in cashing in on rbi opportunties. Ergo, to me he is the better man.

Now you have contradicted yourself from your first statement quoted above where you say it doesn't mean it's a matter of more opportunities to drive runs in. It has also been pointed out that Nick has hit better in "clutch" situations, but I guess you either ignored or forgot about that.

[Old#5fan]

Umm, actually, that's EXACTLY what that means.

You don't think??? We were using statistical evidence, not conjecture on your or anybody else's part. You already chastised another poster here for speculating that Nick is a gold glove caliber player (or GG candidate). For what it's worth, I agree that their HR totals would not be reversed, but you would certainly see more RBI from Nick because he would have had more opportunities to drive runners in.

Now you have contradicted yourself from your first statement quoted above where you say it doesn't mean it's a matter of more opportunities to drive runs in. It has also been pointed out that Nick has hit better in "clutch" situations, but I guess you either ignored or forgot about that.

I understand you until our last paragraph which is totally wrong. It doesn't mean it is the number of opportunities it is the degree of success in cashing in on the opportunities where Pena is better than Markakis. There was an excellent statistical analysis shown by 1970 that pointed this out. Apparently, you didn't see it but it is on this very thread.

[ledzepp8]

I understand you until our last paragraph which is totally wrong. It doesn't mean it is the number of opportunities it is the degree of success in cashing in on the opportunities where Pena is better than Markakis. There was an excellent statistical analysis shown by 1970 that pointed this out. Apparently, you didn't see it but it is on this very thread.

But he's not better than Markakis...you've been told this. Lt. Melmo posted the stats that show Markakis is more efficient at driving in runs. Once again, you're choosing to ignore it.

[ledzepp8]

UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGHHHF:SDGFBASKJGBS:KGBAS:GJKB

So the last time OldFan complained about THIS EXACT THING, the thread was closed before I had a chance to respond. So I'll just do that now.

The stats I'm about to use are barely stats, they only take into consideration RBI and plate appearances with runners on. They can be found here.

Carlos Pena has had 202 plate appearances with runners on first.

Nick Markakis has had 202 plate appearances with runners on first.

In those 202 plate appearances, Carlos Pena has batted in 14 of the runners.

Nick Markakis has batted in 15.

Carlos Pena has had 158 plate appearances with runners on second.

Nick Markakis has had 144.

Carlos Pena has batted in 27 of those runners, which is 17.1%.

Nick Markakis has batted in 29 of his runners, which is 20.1%.

Carlos Pena has had 88 plate appearances with runners on third.

Nick Markakis has had 65.

Carlos Pena has driven in 30 of his 88, for a 34.1% clip.

Nick Markakis has driven in 23 of his 65, for a 35.4% clip.

When Carlos Pena steps up to the plate, 15.8% of the batters on base in front of him end up scoring in that plate appearance.

When Nick Markakis steps up to the plate, 16.3% of the batters on base in front of him end up scoring in that plate appearance.

QFT...and in case Old#5fan didn't see it. Which apparently he did not.

[murrayfan420]

One of the great things about Markakis is his ability to hit RBI's without 30+ homers.