Jump to content

Your Opinion- Hypothetical Player Stat Comparison


Old#5fan

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 171
  • Created
  • Last Reply
No, he is better at making fewer outs but not in producing runs that are more apt to have an impact on a game helping his team win. Why else do you think Pena is in the running for MVP and Markakis isn't ever even in running to make the AL All-star team? And don't give me it is because Pena is on a top team going to the playoffs and Markakis on the bottom team. If Markakis was on the Rays he still wouldn't be an MVP candidate or an Allstar. The huge difference in the two is Pena hits homers and produces more runs as in RBI's which are what win games.

<img src = "http://www.themadhat.com/images/vader-fail.jpg">

FAIL.

What you continually overlook is the fact that RBI's, like TGO said, are context dependent.

Try this on for size:

Pena, 2 out, runners in scoring position is batting .181 this year. .181!!!

Markakis, 2 out, runners in scoring position is batting .317

In fact, Nick beats the hell out of Pena in practically EVERY SINGLE CLUTCH batting statistic there is.

Any way you break it down, Nick is more proficient at driving in runs. He just hasn't had as many opportunities to do so, based on the team he plays on. You can guarantee that if Nick was on Tampa in 2008, he'd have well over 100 rbi's right now.

With runners in scoring position (less than 2 out), Pena is batting .259 with an on base of .416 and a slugging percentage of .524.

Nick is batting .311, .435, and slugging .523.

You're insane if you can't see the difference here. But knowing you, you'll just ignore the factual evidence that has been brought to your attention.

Markakis is a way better hitter than Pena. You can't deny this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Markakis is going to have no HR over 100 AB?

No, he might have a couple but he is not really much of a HR hitter as we all know. The importance of this comparison is to show the difference in types of hitters and how merely using OBP as the measure of who is a better hitter is folly IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is still an opinion based on nothing relevant as in no Gold Glove ever awarded. You should look in a mirror. I am 100% correct on this. A correct statement would be Markakis plays excellent defense, superb defense, or above average defense. Leave an unachieved award or official recognition out of the statement entirely as it is simply non-applicable since it has never happened.

So I can say he's a Gold Glove candidate? But not Gold Glove caliber? Just like Derek Jeter might be an MVP candidate but not an MVP caliber player?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<img src = "http://www.themadhat.com/images/vader-fail.jpg">

FAIL.

What you continually overlook is the fact that RBI's, like TGO said, are context dependent.

Try this on for size:

Pena, 2 out, runners in scoring position is batting .181 this year. .181!!!

Markakis, 2 out, runners in scoring position is batting .317

In fact, Nick beats the hell out of Pena in practically EVERY SINGLE CLUTCH batting statistic there is.

Any way you break it down, Nick is more proficient at driving in runs. He just hasn't had as many opportunities to do so, based on the team he plays on. You can guarantee that if Nick was on Tampa in 2008, he'd have well over 100 rbi's right now.

With runners in scoring position (less than 2 out), Pena is batting .259 with an on base of .416 and a slugging percentage of .524.

Nick is batting .311, .435, and slugging .523.

You're insane if you can't see the difference here. But knowing you, you'll just ignore the factual evidence that has been brought to your attention.

Markakis is a way better hitter than Pena. You can't deny this.

How many walk off homers has Pena had versus Markakis? How many game winning hits has Pena had versus Markakis? You overlook them completely, why? I haven't looked them up but I bet Pena has more.

The fact remains which try as you may, you cannot deny that Pena has driven in more runs and hit more homers while making more outs than Markakis which makes him more efficient in producing runs.

In other words his hits mean more to his team than Markakis to his team. Nick is not more proficient at driving in runs because Pena has done more with fewer hits. One of the reasons is he hits more homers which automatically produce at a minimum one run regardless of who is on base.

Markakis is more of a walker than a HR hitter. Pena is a HR hitter period. Give me a HR over a walk anyday of the week.

Again your are completely missing the importance of this comparison which is to show the difference in types of hitters and how merely using OBP as the measure of who is a better hitter is folly IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I can say he's a Gold Glove candidate? But not Gold Glove caliber? Just like Derek Jeter might be an MVP candidate but not an MVP caliber player?

You can say anything but even saying he is a candidate is conjecture. The term Gold Glove signifies an award for best defensive player at their position. Until it has been awarded to that player, I fail to see why it should be used in describing said player.

Edit. Okay, I admit if the player has received votes in the past, that would make him a candidate. I definitely agree with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using same total plate appearances:

1. Player A -

Here are his hypothetical stats:

Walks - 4

Singles- 2

Doubles - 2

Homers - 0

Sac Fly- 0

Total hits- 4

Total ABs- 12

Total plate appearances - 16

BA - 333, Runs - 2, RBI - 3

Game winning hits - zero

2. Player B

Here are his hypothetical stats:

Walks - 0

Singles - 1

Doubles - 1

Homers - 2 (three run shot, and solo)

Sac Fly - 1

Total hits - 4

Total ABs- 16

Total plate appearances - 16

BA - 250 Runs - 3, RBI - 6

Game winning hits - 1

Which of the two do you prefer based on the above?

I would easily take B. Not even close in deciding either. Even though he has a lower BA and obviously OBP he has produced more runs to help his team win. He also has done more with less hits than A has, so IMO he is more efficient. Yet most stats people will favor Markakis because they just don't look deeper into the numbers.

This is the problem I have with stats based decision making using only OBP. It distorts the true value of a player.

Please feel free to explain whether you disgree, or not and why. Please bear in mind this is based solely on the stats as stated. However, I do think it illustrates my old school take that homers and rbi's are more important than walks and merely getting on base.

I'm sorry I can't give you an answer, but I'll try to explain why...

Except in the case of a HR, 'Runs Scored' are directly affected by the other players on the team.

Except for the 1 RBI from driving one's self in on a HR, 'RBI' are directly affected by the other players on the team.

For 'Runs Scored', how often does an average player who reaches first base score? How often does an average player who reaches second base on a double score? How often does an average player who reaches third base on a triple score? In your hypothetical situation, is Player A or Player B more or less likely to score than an average player with the same players batting behind him because of speed and/or base running ability?

Player A got on base 8 times and scored 2 runs. If he scored both times he hit a double, that means all six times he reached first he didn't score. Were the players behind him slumping?

Player B only got on base 4 times but he scored 3 times. He scored twice on a HR, and let's assume once when he hit a double. That means he was only stranded once.

'RBI' is affected by the players in front of you also. Two of the 6 RBI by Player B came from driving himself in. Two of the other 4 came because guys in front of him got on base for one of his HR's. It'd be nice to have a guy like Player A who gets on base 50% of the time in front of a slugger like player B, who hits about 80 HR's a year (if he stays healthy). One of his last 2 RBI came on the sac fly. It seems that Player B will have more opportunities for Sac Fly RBI with Player A in front of him, then Player A would have with Player B in front of him. Finally, that means Player B's 1 double and 1 single only drove in 1 run while Player A's 2 doubles and 2 singles drove in 3 runs. That discrepancy can probably only be explained by looking to see what the players in front of them did.

I could go on and on. I understand the point OldFan is trying to make. But if ANY stat is going to mean something, we have to look deeper at the whole player. Any one particular stat only tells us what THAT PARTICULAR STAT tells us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many walk off homers has Pena had versus Markakis? How many game winning hits has Pena had versus Markakis? You overlook them completely, why? I haven't looked them up but I bet Pena has more.

The fact remains which try as you may, you cannot deny that Pena has driven in more runs and hit more homers while making more outs than Markakis which makes him more efficient in producing runs.

In other words his hits mean more to his team than Markakis to his team. Nick is not more proficient at driving in runs because Pena has done more with fewer hits. One of the reasons is he hits more homers which automatically produce at a minimum one run regardless of who is on base.

Markakis is more of a walker than a HR hitter. Pena is a HR hitter period. Give me a HR over a walk anyday of the week.

Again your are completely missing the importance of this comparison which is to show the difference in types of hitters and how merely using OBP as the measure of who is a better hitter is folly IMO.

Thats nice, but like I said, Nick beats Pena in every clutch hitting stat available. If you were to take the stats presented to you in my prior post and have to pick either Pena or Nick to be up at the plate with 2 out in the bottom of the ninth and men on 2nd and 3rd, you'd take Pena, the one with the lower batting average in that situation?

You can say anything but even saying he is a candidate is conjecture. The term Gold Glove signifies an award for best defensive player at their position. Until it has been awarded to that player, I fail to see why it should be used in describing said player.

Yeah, but if Jeter has received MVP votes, he is a candidate for that award.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry I can't give you an answer, but I'll try to explain why...

Except in the case of a HR, 'Runs Scored' are directly affected by the other players on the team.

Except for the 1 RBI from driving one's self in on a HR, 'RBI' are directly affected by the other players on the team.

For 'Runs Scored', how often does an average player who reaches first base score? How often does an average player who reaches second base on a double score? How often does an average player who reaches third base on a triple score? In your hypothetical situation, is Player A or Player B more or less likely to score than an average player with the same players batting behind him because of speed and/or base running ability?

Player A got on base 8 times and scored 2 runs. If he scored both times he hit a double, that means all six times he reached first he didn't score. Were the players behind him slumping?

Player B only got on base 4 times but he scored 3 times. He scored twice on a HR, and let's assume once when he hit a double. That means he was only stranded once.

'RBI' is affected by the players in front of you also. Two of the 6 RBI by Player B came from driving himself in. Two of the other 4 came because guys in front of him got on base for one of his HR's. It'd be nice to have a guy like Player A who gets on base 50% of the time in front of a slugger like player B, who hits about 80 HR's a year (if he stays healthy). One of his last 2 RBI came on the sac fly. It seems that Player B will have more opportunities for Sac Fly RBI with Player A in front of him, then Player A would have with Player B in front of him. Finally, that means Player B's 1 double and 1 single only drove in 1 run while Player A's 2 doubles and 2 singles drove in 3 runs. That discrepancy can probably only be explained by looking to see what the players in front of them did.

I could go on and on. I understand the point OldFan is trying to make. But if ANY stat is going to mean something, we have to look deeper at the whole player. Any one particular stat only tells us what THAT PARTICULAR STAT tells us.

At least you do understand my point and I do understand yours as well. However, I would guess that Markakis when batting third probably had an above average chance at driving in runs as often times Roberts would lead off a game either with a double or a single/walk, etc. and steal second. Instead of driving Roberts in it seemed to me like Markakis would be more prone to walk in that situation. Pena, on the other hand is more prone to driving himself in with the long ball which is why I see the big difference in rbi, not that Pena had that many more opportunities. It just wouldn't make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats nice, but like I said, Nick beats Pena in every clutch hitting stat available. If you were to take the stats presented to you in my prior post and have to pick either Pena or Nick to be up at the plate with 2 out in the bottom of the ninth and men on 2nd and 3rd, you'd take Pena, the one with the lower batting average in that situation?

Yeah, but if Jeter has received MVP votes, he is a candidate for that award.[/QUOTE]

True, same as if a player received Gold Glove Award votes. I certainly agree with that 100%. As far as Pena verus Markakis. If I needed a walk to win a game in the bottom of the 9th with the bases loaded, I would take Markakis over Pena. If I needed a grand slam, I would take Pena in a heartbeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact remains which try as you may, you cannot deny that Pena has driven in more runs and hit more homers while making more outs than Markakis which makes him more efficient in producing runs.

To take your original hypothetical to it's extreme...

Player A's 16 PAs included having men on base 3 times and nobody on base 13 times.

Player B's 16 PAs include having men in scoring position 16 times and bases loaded 8 times.

Player B still your guy - the more efficent one in producing runs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To take your original hypothetical to it's extreme...

Player A's 16 PAs included having men on base 3 times and nobody on base 13 times.

Player B's 16 PAs include having men in scoring position 16 times and bases loaded 8 times.

Player B still your guy - the more efficent one in producing runs?

No, but I was considering those factors roughly equal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope you realize that your hypothetical isn't very representative at all. If players followed your pattern over 162 games, player A would have 0 HR and 81 RBI, while player 2 would have 81 HR and 243 RBI, with each scoring an equal number of runs. That's not very connected with reality.

The reality of baseball is complicated. Let's say player A singles, player B walks and player C singles, with A scoring on the play. Player A gets a run scored, player C gets an RBI, but that run doesn't score unless B's walk has advanced the runner to 2nd. Obviously, the walk contributed to that run scoring.

There are statisticians who have gathered data from thousands and thousands of games to figure out the likelihood that a walk leads to a run, that a single leads to a run, etc., in every possible game situation. So we really don't have to guess as to the relative value of a walk vs. a HR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, he is better at making fewer outs but not in producing runs that are more apt to have an impact on a game helping his team win. Pena is a good deal better than Markakis and I will tell you why. Even though he strikes out more he produces more runs as in homers and rbi's with fewer hits. Ergo he is more efficient in that regard. Think about it!

Really?

Pena has 76 runs scored and 102 rbi's with 31 HR's. Since each HR counts as both a run scored and an rbi, the net number of runs produced is 147.

Markakis has 106 runs scored and 87 rbi with 20 HR's. Thus a net number of runs produced of 173.

So, Markakis produces more runs.

Pean has 496 AB's and 96 walks or 592 plate appearances. So, his average of runs produced per plate appearance is 0.248.

Markakis has 591 AB's and 99 walks or 690 plate appearances. So, his average of runs produced per plate appearance is 0.251.

So, Markakis produces more runs per plate appearance.

So, exactly how does Pena produce more runs? :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as Pena verus Markakis. If I needed a walk to win a game in the bottom of the 9th with the bases loaded, I would take Markakis over Pena. If I needed a grand slam, I would take Pena in a heartbeat.

This is sort of obvious, though. I don't think anyone will disagree with this point.

The problem is you don't get to set up a team roster for specific situations. You have to pick the player (assuming you only get one) that gives you the best outcome in the most situations. Markakis is that guy among these two.

(especially when you factor in that Pena is awful against LHPs, so a team with a good lefty in the pen would neutralize your advantage when you're looking for that grand slam)

Now ideally, of course, you'd like to have both. And more. But if we're talking comparisons, I want the best overall player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...