Markakis

[clapdiddy]

If Nick didn't get on, Wiggy just has a base hit that does nothing else but put him on first.

Do you understand that?

Do you understand that for a team to score runs, their players have to get on base? do you understand that you need to score more runs than the other team to win?

So...I guess going by OF5's logic, if Nick would have gotten a solid single up the middle, that would be much better than a walk?

I wonder if he realizes that the teams with the best offenses DRAW MORE WALKS than other teams?

[ledzepp8]

Can we just sticky a thread where everyone lists every "clutch" hit/walk/sacrifice/etc that Nick gets as the year goes on. Then whenever Old#5Fart starts his vendetta against Nick, the only reply needed will be a link to said thread.

[isestrex]

I'm praying every night now that DT leaves Nick in the #2 slot.

It's his home, it's always been his home and I can't believe it took massive lineup shakeups for management to see that.

One thing I've noticed, though, is that Nick is hot when he pulls the ball. For most players it's the opposite. Most hitters will tell you that they're feeling it when they drive the ball deep to the opposite field. For Kakes, it's different. When he's feeling it, he's pulls the ball deep down the line.

That Homer on Saturday was deep to RF. He's feeling it.

[AgentOrange]

That homer was just about the only ball he's pulled lately. He's doing a great job of doing what he does best, taking the ball the other way.

And it was against Wakefield, right?

I think it is great he is taking the ball the other way. He is letting the ball get deep in the zone, and driving the ball. Very happy with the way he is hitting right now.

Jones is also taking the ball the other way, which is a great sign of a better hitting approach.

[Old#5fan]

I'm not quite sure what your deal is...I'm not sure if you're afraid to admit that your thoughts on the game aren't always correct but that walk did get him on base. And, in turn, he wound up on 2nd, allowing Wiggy to get that hit.

What part of that do you not understand? Why would you try to downplay getting on base?

I am not downplaying it at all. In that situation Markakis did his job well which was to get on base any way possible. However, Wigginton did win the game with his CLUTCH HIT. That is called a GWRBI.:clap3: I personally think that deserves more credit as without it, Markakis could have been stranded at second, who knows?

[BRobinsonfan]

I am not downplaying it at all. In that situation Markakis did his job well which was to get on base any way possible. However, Wigginton did win the game with his CLUTCH HIT. That is called a GWRBI.:clap3: I personally think that deserves more credit as without it, Markakis could have been stranded at second, who knows?

And without Markakis being on base - what would Wiggy's single be called?

[SammyBirdland]

<img src="http://i.imgur.com/cHuZ8.png"></img>

<img src="http://i.imgur.com/sBJ0W.png"></img>

<img src="http://i.imgur.com/UAqQO.png"></img>

<img src="http://i.imgur.com/sYReF.png"></img>

<img src="http://i.imgur.com/2k4Oz.png"></img>

<img src="http://i.imgur.com/XSNZ0.png"></img>

<img src="http://i.imgur.com/JyWAe.png"></img>

<img src="http://i.imgur.com/9DVrH.png"></img>

<img src="http://i.imgur.com/mRSHh.png"></img>

[larrytt]

So...I guess going by OF5's logic, if Nick would have gotten a solid single up the middle, that would be much better than a walk?

This brings up an interesting thought I've had for a while. OPS is a nice shorthand stat that roughly shows how a hitter is doing. But it values a single more than a walk, even in situations where they are equal.

Since a walk is as good as a hit with the bases empty (while a hit is often better than a walk when there are men on base), I wonder if there's an adjusted OPS stat where bases-empty walks are considered the same as singles, i.e. they'd raise the slugging percentage like a single, but only for the purposes of the adjusted OPS? You could also extend this to walks with a runner on first, which sends that player to second, with perhaps an adjustment factor for the percentage of times a runner goes from first to third on a single.

OPS is biased a little for slugging, i.e. OBP is statistically a little more important than SLG, and great leadoff hitters with low SLG are usually better than their OPS, so you have to understand these things to judge by OPS. (The reverse isn't necessarily true, i.e. a middle of the order hitter with a high SLG and low OBP is often weaker than his OPS because while he has power, he kills rallies with his low OBP.) Players like Roberts and Markakis, who have higher relative OBP than SLG, are better than their OPS, while a player like Jay Gibbons, with his high SLG but low OBP, was probably weaker than his. And a player like Izturis, while a weak hitter, isn't as weak as he seems since his abysmal slugging overly affects his OPS, while his OBP, while not good, is better relatively than his SLG, meaning he's not quite the black hole his OPS would make him seem. Plus, for fast runners like Izturis and Roberts (and to a lesser degree Markakis), the OBP is also more valuable because of their speed.

-Larrytt

[SilentJames]

I am not downplaying it at all. In that situation Markakis did his job well which was to get on base any way possible. However, Wigginton did win the game with his CLUTCH HIT. That is called a GWRBI.:clap3: I personally think that deserves more credit as without it, Markakis could have been stranded at second, who knows?

You are without a doubt the most...sigh - let's address this -

In 2007 Markakis had four walk-off hits, that is a lot for one year.

In Frank Robinson's entire career he had 26. In his entire 20 year career he had 26, meaning he averaged a little over one-walk off hit a year for his entire career.

There are years he had none, there are years he had many.

GWRBI is a dumb stat because in most situations you need something ELSE to happen to make it a GWRBI. Case in point, if Markakis doesn't get on and over to second Wiggy's hit is just a hit and it is up to someone else.

The fact that you can't understand that, or refuse to understand that just proves how lost to your own twisted faulty ideology you are. It is simply beyond comprehension that you keep going - charging forward in the face of mountains of evidence, you cling to your ill-conceived notions and when someone finally confronts you with insurmountable logic you run away again to alter your ever worsening argument.

Soon it will be Nick doesn't get enough men in from first in GW situations.

You are pathetic.

[Old#5fan]

You are without a doubt the most...sigh - let's address this -

In 2007 Markakis had four walk-off hits, that is a lot for one year.

In Frank Robinson's entire career he had 26. In his entire 20 year career he had 26, meaning he averaged a little over one-walk off hit a year for his entire career.

There are years he had none, there are years he had many.

GWRBI is a dumb stat because in most situations you need something ELSE to happen to make it a GWRBI. Case in point, if Markakis doesn't get on and over to second Wiggy's hit is just a hit and it is up to someone else.

The fact that you can't understand that, or refuse to understand that just proves how lost to your own twisted faulty ideology you are. It is simply beyond comprehension that you keep going - charging forward in the face of mountains of evidence, you cling to your ill-conceived notions and when someone finally confronts you with insurmountable logic you run away again to alter your ever worsening argument.

Soon it will be Nick doesn't get enough men in from first in GW situations.

You are pathetic.

I agree if NM had four (4) walk off hits in 2007 that was darn good. The problem is why do you have to go that far back to show he was good in that situation? What has he done in 2008, and 2009? You sort of make my point without even know it. He has gotten worse rather than better in the clutch!

[Sports Guy]

I agree if NM had four (4) walk off hits in 2007 that was darn good. The problem is why do you have to go that far back to show he was good in that situation? What has he done in 2008, and 2009? You sort of make my point without even know it. He has gotten worse rather than better in the clutch!

2008:

2 outs/RISP: 317/406/467/872

C and L: 290/400/548/948

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?n1=markani01&year=2008&t=b

All of his clutch stats were good in 2008.

You argument is awful...yes, he wasn't great in 2009...You win that..>Big f'ing deal...That is one bad year in his career thus far...Your heros of your youth also had bad years every once in a while.

So please, stop this piss poor argument.

[SurhoffRules]

I agree if NM had four (4) walk off hits in 2007 that was darn good. The problem is why do you have to go that far back to show he was good in that situation? What has he done in 2008, and 2009? You sort of make my point without even know it. He has gotten worse rather than better in the clutch!

I believe SilentJames did indeed address the fact that even one of the most "clutch" Orioles had years when he didn't have a single game winning RBI.

In Frank Robinson's entire career he had 26. In his entire 20 year career he had 26, meaning he averaged a little over one-walk off hit a year for his entire career.

There are years he had none, there are years he had many.

[primetime]

I noticed that too. Seems like his front leg isn't locked out as hard and, like you said, the bat is now on his shoulder with spaghetti arms.

I wonder if this adjustment will help him get the bat around quicker and drive the ball more.

I think the hand position/way he was holding the bat up until Saturday night can cause you to drop your hands and get under the ball too much.

It would be nice to see Nick go on an extended tear. Plus, with Miggi and Wiggy hot, along with AJ showing signs of busting out, maybe this offense can get on a roll.

[ShaneDawg85]

A great thread thrown into the doldrums of nothing and illogical fallacy. Not terribly surprising, unfortunately...

[Mark Carver]

I agree if NM had four (4) walk off hits in 2007 that was darn good. The problem is why do you have to go that far back to show he was good in that situation? What has he done in 2008, and 2009? You sort of make my point without even know it. He has gotten worse rather than better in the clutch!

Worth mentioning from SilentJames to try and get a response...

In Frank Robinson's entire career he had 26. In his entire 20 year career he had 26, meaning he averaged a little over one-walk off hit a year for his entire career.

There are years he had none, there are years he had many.