.900 OPS hitters

[DrungoHazewood]

51 minutes ago, Pickles said:

I'm not talking about you, but the numbers are not also used responsibly or within the limits they should be kept.

If you can get 5% of fans to not stab themselves with a fork repeatedly when you talk about numbers more complicated than RBI you've won.

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Statcast says Mullins is +8 in OAA.  rWAR (really DRS) says he's -4, but DRS isn't on the same level as OAA.  Eventually the Statcast data will be available and integrated into freely-available sites like bb-ref and Fangraphs.

Rtot also has him at -6.  UZR says -4.1.   Go figure.   

Some, but not all, of the difference is that OAA only measures balls that are caught.   It doesn’t account for a poor arm or gappers that hit ground but can be either singles vs. doubles (or doubles vs.triples) depending how well they’re played.   
 

[Pickles]

6 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Rtot also has him at -6.  UZR says -4.1.   Go figure.   

Some, but not all, of the difference is that OAA only measures balls that are caught.   It doesn’t account for a poor arm or gappers that hit ground but can be either singles vs. doubles (or doubles vs.triples) depending how well they’re played.   
 

What do your eyes say?

[Frobby]

Just now, Pickles said:

What do your eyes say?

First part of the season I thought he was a excellent, aside from the weak arm.  Last few months, I often see only a few innings a week, since I don’t turn games on when we’re losing by 4-5 runs by the time I finish dinner.   Overall though, I tend to believe he’s above average on range, below average on arm.   

[Pickles]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

First part of the season I thought he was a excellent, aside from the weak arm.  Last few months, I often see only a few innings a week, since I don’t turn games on when we’re losing by 4-5 runs by the time I finish dinner.   Overall though, I tend to believe he’s above average on range, below average on arm.   

Yeah, I know the feeling.

I agree with your general scouting report, and am inclined to say he is a net positive in the field, despite the weak arm, which he has compensated better for as the year has progressed to my eye.

Let's put it this way, and demonstrate once again, why I hate these f-ing defensive "stats."

Mullins and Vlad Jr. lead the AL in Offensive WAR with 5.0.  They tie for third in Total WAR with 4.7.  Both are ranked negative.  Both are ranked equally negative.

Is there anybody in their right mind who believes that their defensive contributions should be ranked in the same stratosphere?

 

[NashLumber]

7 hours ago, kidrock said:

Luke Scott had a career .821 OPS.  That's really good.  Seems like overall health issues really killed him.  He played more than 131 games just once (148).

One of my long-lasting memories of Luke Scott was him limping around the bases on a home run trot. 

[Barnaby Graves]

God Mullins is so f'n badass.

Wish he could throw but whatever.  Wonder if his arm puts him in a corner OF slot soon enough.  Or maybe it's better having stronger arms on the corners for some strategic reason I haven't considered.

[Frobby]

36 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Yeah, I know the feeling.

I agree with your general scouting report, and am inclined to say he is a net positive in the field, despite the weak arm, which he has compensated better for as the year has progressed to my eye.

Let's put it this way, and demonstrate once again, why I hate these f-ing defensive "stats."

Mullins and Vlad Jr. lead the AL in Offensive WAR with 5.0.  They tie for third in Total WAR with 4.7.  Both are ranked negative.  Both are ranked equally negative.

Is there anybody in their right mind who believes that their defensive contributions should be ranked in the same stratosphere?

 

I think you are misinterpreting the way rWAR and oWAR work.  The reason that Guerrero and Mullins have the same oWAR is that Mullins gets a favorable position adjustment of 1.0 WAR compared to Geurrero.   They are not equal offensive players, obviously.  Guerrero has an OPS of 1.023 compared to Mullins’ .936; he’s the superior offensive player by a clear margin.  But 1.023 for a 1B is equivalent to .936 for a CF precisely because CF is a much more difficult position, so that’s how they end up with the same oWAR.   The reason they also tie in rWAR is that the defensive stat used indicates that Mullins is approximately the same amount below average for a CF as Guerrero is for a 1B.    You can question whether that star accurately reflects reality, but they are fully taking into account that Mullins plays the much tougher position.   

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

I think you are misinterpreting the way rWAR and oWAR work.  The reason that Guerrero and Mullins have the same oWAR is that Mullins gets a favorable position adjustment of 1.0 WAR compared to Geurrero.   They are not equal offensive players, obviously.  Guerrero has an OPS of 1.023 compared to Mullins’ .936; he’s the superior offensive player by a clear margin.  But 1.023 for a 1B is equivalent to .936 for a CF precisely because CF is a much more difficult position, so that’s how they end up with the same oWAR.   The reason they also tie in rWAR is that the defensive stat used indicates that Mullins is approximately the same amount below average for a CF as Guerrero is for a 1B.    You can question whether that star accurately reflects reality, but they are fully taking into account that Mullins plays the much tougher position.   

This is my objection.  I don't believe it.

 

[DrungoHazewood]

7 hours ago, Pickles said:

This is my objection.  I don't believe it.

 

That's why you set up the tracking system and you do that math.  So you don't have to believe your eyes, when your eyes aren't just focusing on that one thing and you see other team's players a tiny fraction of the season.

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

That's why you set up the tracking system and you do that math.  So you don't have to believe your eyes, when your eyes aren't just focusing on that one thing and you see other team's players a tiny fraction of the season.

The problem arises when you’ve got four fairly sophisticated metrics and they don’t all agree.   

[Pickles]

7 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

That's why you set up the tracking system and you do that math.  So you don't have to believe your eyes, when your eyes aren't just focusing on that one thing and you see other team's players a tiny fraction of the season.

There are obviously massive issues with the "eye" test.  Fully acknowledge that.

I like think there are massive issues with the defensive stats, at least those publically available.

This is reminiscent of the conversation about the draft: This is an epistemological question.  And I think something that has to be embraced is appreciating that there is a lot we can never know. 

[baltfan]

I guess Steve Pearce in 2014 didn't have enough plate appearances?

[DrungoHazewood]

22 hours ago, Frobby said:

The problem arises when you’ve got four fairly sophisticated metrics and they don’t all agree.   

The research doesn't sit still, they continue to refine and improve.  It's only a problem if you've made definitive judgments on an interim step and get upset that there was more work to do.

[Frobby]

23 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

The research doesn't sit still, they continue to refine and improve.  It's only a problem if you've made definitive judgments on an interim step and get upset that there was more work to do.

I’m not criticizing the work.  I’m simply saying it is hard not to rely on the eye test when the advanced metrics don’t give you a consensus answer.   In this case the most favored metric (OAA) grades Mullins a heavy plus, but all the other three have him solidly negative.  So that’s not enough evidence one way or the other for me to depart from what I see when I watch.   That would be true regardless of what my opinion was.