Your Opinion- Hypothetical Player Stat Comparison

[Lt Melmo]

Yeah, but you conveniently left out one stat in how many runs did he drive in with nobody on base as in solo homers? He must have had more than Markakis else how does he have that many more rbi overall with so fewer hits per plate appearance? If you cannot explain that I have to question the accuracy of your stats as they don't make sense.

You're completely correct about the solo home runs. Pena has eight more than Markakis.

Of course his opens up a whole new can of worms, doesn't it?

Of Pena's 31 home runs, 18 of them are solo. So 58% of his home runs only score himself.

Of Markakis' 20 home runs, 10 of them are solo. That's 50%.

Which player is the more "efficient" RBI producer to you, in this situation? By your logic... if I understand it, which I probably don't... wouldn't you prefer Pena strike out when no one's on base, so he can "save" his home runs for a scenario in which he'd be able to drive more runs in? This is where your logic takes this, and if this isn't accurate you need to clarify.

Let's put it another way. Pena has driven in 52 runs on his 31 homers. Per homer, 1.67 runs score. Markakis has driven in 34 runs on 20 homers. Per homer, 1.7 runs score.

[ledzepp8]

Yeah, but you conveniently left out one stat in how many runs did he drive in with nobody on base as in solo homers? He must have had more than Markakis else how does he have that many more rbi overall with so fewer hits per plate appearance? If you cannot explain that I have to question the accuracy of your stats as they don't make sense.

:eektf::scratchchinhmm:

What the hell does how many solo homers someone has hit have to do with anything that Lt Melmo posted? Pena has more RBIs because he has had a few more opportunities...but even then it's not like he has that many more RBIs than Markakis. He only has 15 more on the season. The stats that Lt Melmo posted shows that Markakis is more efficient at driving in a run and that if he had as many opportunities as Pena then he would probably have more RBIs.

[Old#5fan]

You're completely correct about the solo home runs. Pena has eight more than Markakis.

Of course his opens up a whole new can of worms, doesn't it?

Of Pena's 31 home runs, 18 of them are solo. So 58% of his home runs only score himself.

Of Markakis' 20 home runs, 10 of them are solo. That's 50%.

Which player is the more "efficient" RBI producer to you, in this situation? By your logic... if I understand it, which I probably don't... wouldn't you prefer Pena strike out when no one's on base, so he can "save" his home runs for a scenario in which he'd be able to drive more runs in? This is where your logic takes this, and if this isn't accurate you need to clarify.

Let's put it another way. Pena has driven in 52 runs on his 31 homers. Per homer, 1.67 runs score. Markakis has driven in 34 runs on 20 homers. Per homer, 1.7 runs score.

Yet you seem to discount that BA wise Pena gets far fewer hits per ABS than Markakis yet significantly out homers him. That has to count for something and it does. He produces more rbi and runs with fewer hits per AB. Therefore, he is making more out of less. Which is the entire point of this thread despite Sports Guy stating (erroneously) that this thread has no point!

[Old#5fan]

:eektf::scratchchinhmm:

What the hell does how many solo homers someone has hit have to do with anything that Lt Melmo posted? Pena has more RBIs because he has had a few more opportunities...but even then it's not like he has that many more RBIs than Markakis. He only has 15 more on the season. The stats that Lt Melmo posted shows that Markakis is more efficient at driving in a run and that if he had as many opportunities as Pena then he would probably have more RBIs.

I was merely pointing out that for some reason he selectively omitted the category of solo home runs. Now we see why. Pena had 8 more! I get accused of this all the time (selective use of stats) so I just want to point out I am not the only one here who does it. It is actually very common.

[ledzepp8]

Yet you seem to discount that BA wise Pena gets far fewer hits per ABS than Markakis yet significantly out homers him. That has to count for something and it does. He produces more rbi and runs with fewer hits per AB. Therefore, he is making more out of less. Which is the entire point of this thread despite Sports Guy stating (erroneously) that this thread has no point!

This makes no sense. You want Markakis to hit worse? And besides Markakis has scored way more runs than Pena, has produced way more runs that Pena and once again the only reason that Pena has more RBIs (only 15 more) is because he's had more opportunities...even though Markakis is more efficient at driving in runs.

<img src="http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=104&pictureid=368">

[ledzepp8]

I was merely pointing out that for some reason he selectively omitted the category of solo home runs. Now we see why. Pena had 8 more! I get accused of this all the time (selective use of stats) so I just want to point out I am not the only one here who does it. It is actually very common.

He didn't selectively omit anything. It had nothing to do with anything that he posted. Pena has more RBIs because he has more opportunities, not because he's inherently better at getting them. Lt Melmo's stats supported that and show that Markakis is more efficient at driving in runs.

[Old#5fan]

This makes no sense. You want Markakis to hit worse? And besides Markakis has scored way more runs than Pena, has produced way more runs that Pena and once again the only reason that Pena has more RBIs (only 15 more) is because he's had more opportunities...even though Markakis is more efficient at driving in runs.

<img src="http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=104&pictureid=368">

Okay, so if the only reason Pena has more rbi's is more opporunities wouldn't the fact he hits only 247 as opposed to 300 like Markakis make it more likely he would get the same or even lower rbi' totals than Nick? Afterall he is making a lot more outs? Since this isn't the case, I postulate he is more efficient in doing more out of less. Nobody has disputed this point directly because you can't.

[Lt Melmo]

Yet you seem to discount that BA wise Pena gets far fewer hits per ABS than Markakis yet significantly out homers him. That has to count for something and it does. He produces more rbi and runs with fewer hits per AB. Therefore, he is making more out of less. Which is the entire point of this thread despite Sports Guy stating (erroneously) that this thread has no point!

This is silly. This is pure silliness. I don't understand how you can possibly think that what you're saying makes any sort of baseball sense. I would expect that someone with so many years of watching baseball would have some more sense than a college kid.

What you're saying is that efficiency equals quality.

Pena "does more with less," and thus, he's a better hitter.

Even though I've shown you that Markakis' at-bats produce runs at a higher rate. Regardless of whether he gets an out or a hit.

This is so silly.

You're saying that Markakis is worse because he hits the baseball when no one is on base in front of him, as well as when there are runners on base in front of him.

You're saying that Pena is better because he doesn't hit the baseball when there's no one to bat in, but he does when there are runners on base. Even though, as I've shown you, he is less successful at driving his runners in than Markakis.

Markakis gets on base when there's no one in front of him... you don't see this as a positive thing. Even though, you know, it can often lead to the batters behind him scoring him in. Why do you not acknowledge this? Markakis has scored 106 runs. Pena has scored 76. If Pena got on base more often, regardless of who is hitting in front of him, he would score more runs.

Why am I arguing with you?

[Old#5fan]

He didn't selectively omit anything. It had nothing to do with anything that he posted. Pena has more RBIs because he has more opportunities, not because he's inherently better at getting them. Lt Melmo's stats supported that and show that Markakis is more efficient at driving in runs.

The fact he also has more rbi's while hitting over 50 points lower also means (at least to me) that he is doing more with less hits. That is something nobody wants to acknowledge but I am corrrect in asserting. He hasn't had that many more opportunities to offset 50 points in BA!! Nobody has explained that and it has to be he simply did more with less. Thus he is more efficient.

[Old#5fan]

This is silly. This is pure silliness. I don't understand how you can possibly think that what you're saying makes any sort of baseball sense. I would expect that someone with so many years of watching baseball would have some more sense than a college kid.

What you're saying is that efficiency equals quality.

Pena "does more with less," and thus, he's a better hitter.

Even though I've shown you that Markakis' at-bats produce runs at a higher rate. Regardless of whether he gets an out or a hit.

This is so silly.

You're saying that Markakis is worse because he hits the baseball when no one is on base in front of him, as well as when there are runners on base in front of him.

You're saying that Pena is better because he doesn't hit the baseball when there's no one to bat in, but he does when there are runners on base. Even though, as I've shown you, he is less successful at driving his runners in than Markakis.

Markakis gets on base when there's no one in front of him... you don't see this as a positive thing. Even though, you know, it can often lead to the batters behind him scoring him in. Why do you not acknowledge this? Markakis has scored 106 runs. Pena has scored 76. If Pena got on base more often, regardless of who is hitting in front of him, he would score more runs.

Why am I arguing with you?

Two can play this game. Since this was used against my position I will now use it against yours. How do you know that the reason Pena only scored 76 times as opposed to Markakis scoring 106 wasn't due to poor hitting by the batters after him? I mean when Markakis batted second he had Huff ( a man with 108 rbi's and counting) hitting behind him. Of course he will score a lot of runs!!!!

[Lt Melmo]

Okay, so if the only reason Pena has more rbi's is more opporunities wouldn't the fact he hits only 247 as opposed to 300 like Markakis make it more likely he would get the same or even lower rbi' totals than Nick? Afterall he is making a lot more outs? Since this isn't the case, I postulate he is more efficient in doing more out of less. Nobody has disputed this point directly because you can't.

You need to read my first post again, and if you still don't get it, you need to learn how to understand numbers.

Pena has more RBIs with a lower average because he has had 14 more runners on second to bat in and 23 more runners on third to bat in. Nick drives his runners in at a better rate, but Pena gets more total because he's had many more opportunities.

There is nothing more to explain.

[Old#5fan]

This is silly. This is pure silliness. I don't understand how you can possibly think that what you're saying makes any sort of baseball sense. I would expect that someone with so many years of watching baseball would have some more sense than a college kid.

What you're saying is that efficiency equals quality.

Pena "does more with less," and thus, he's a better hitter.

Even though I've shown you that Markakis' at-bats produce runs at a higher rate. Regardless of whether he gets an out or a hit.

This is so silly.

You're saying that Markakis is worse because he hits the baseball when no one is on base in front of him, as well as when there are runners on base in front of him.

You're saying that Pena is better because he doesn't hit the baseball when there's no one to bat in, but he does when there are runners on base. Even though, as I've shown you, he is less successful at driving his runners in than Markakis.

Markakis gets on base when there's no one in front of him... you don't see this as a positive thing. Even though, you know, it can often lead to the batters behind him scoring him in. Why do you not acknowledge this? Markakis has scored 106 runs. Pena has scored 76. If Pena got on base more often, regardless of who is hitting in front of him, he would score more runs.

Why am I arguing with you?

I am not saying Markakis is worse, but he should produce way more if he was as efficient at doing more with less as Pena is. In other words Pena does more with less and Markakis less with more (hits that is).

[Old#5fan]

You need to read my first post again, and if you still don't get it, you need to learn how to understand numbers.

Pena has more RBIs with a lower average because he has had 14 more runners on second to bat in and 23 more runners on third to bat in. Nick drives his runners in at a better rate, but Pena gets more total because he's had many more opportunities.

There is nothing more to explain.

But you are overlooking the fact he hits 50 points lower than Markakis, so your theory only makes since if he hit about the same average-wise. You are discounting this completely. You have to realize that even with more opportunities the fact remains he is going to fail more often than a guy hitting 50 points higher , yet he seemingly hasn't!

The fact he is making an out much more often yet still producing rbi's at the pace he has indicates he is doing more with less. Markakis to me ,seems to be doing less with more hits and a higher average than Pena. That is all I am postulating here.

[snatch311]

But you are overlooking the fact he hits 50 points lower than Markakis, so your theory only makes since if he hit about the same average-wise. You are discounting this completely. You have to realize that even with more opportunities the fact remains he is going to fail more often than a guy hitting 50 points higher , yet he seemingly hasn't!

The fact he is making an out much more often yet still producing rbi's at the pace he has indicates he is doing more with less. Markakis to me ,seems to be doing less with more hits and a higher average than Pena.

Ok, I get it.

So, because Pena OVERPERFORMS in certain scenarios, you like him better than a guy who doesn't need to overperform to be superior in every single way possible.

[Old#5fan]

Ok, I get it.

So, because Pena OVERPERFORMS in certain scenarios, you like him better than a guy who doesn't need to overperform to be superior in every single way possible.

He's not superior. If you compare what Pena is doing to what Markakis is doing to help his team win games. Pena is superior in utlizing his hits to maximum potential. Markakis is not over-performing in anything but Pena most certainly is.