Prev: The Rose Award For 6-20-10. <9955>
Next: RC/25 for Cs (July 3)
From: John Gregory on 22 Jun 2010 14:35
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Bink B wrote:

> John Gregory wrote:
>> By the way, I didn't bother to argue about how you defined an
>> "average" player, but it could use further refinement. It
>> seems you (or whoever generated those numbers) took the league
>> total for things like HR and RBI, divided by 14 teams (OK),
>> and then divided by 9 batters in the lineup (not so OK). That
>> works only if you assume a player plays every inning of every
>> game. Only stars come even close to that. So a truly average
>> player, with fewer chances, will put up lower totals than those.
>
> So wouldn't that push A.B.'s abilities the the next higher notch in HR and
> RBIs? Or does that mean there are actually very few average players? Or
> should I have said average starting player for a better fit?

There are multiple ways to proceed from here, and it's a
sad testament to the state of Usenet newsgroups that only
you and I are discussing this.

Beltre 2005 is an interesting case because of the pressure
his contract placed on his manager. Counting-stats, like
HR and RBI, will continue to increase over the course of
the season, even if his *rate* of production is mediocre or
worse. A rookie putting up numbers like his in 2005 (he
started even more slowly than his final stats suggest) might
have been benched, or at least had his playing time sharply
decreased, against righties for instance. Beltre hardly
ever walks for a power hitter, so when he's not hitting one
out he's not really setting the table for anyone else - he
batted third at least to start the 2005 season so some
good hitters should have been driving him in yet he scored
only 69 runs and that includes 19 of his own HR. That
makes his mid-.200's batting average even less valuable
than it would at first appear. He was soaking up outs for
his team at a prodigious rate, compensating twice a week
with extra base hits.

I guess what I'm saying is that yes, he might be at a
higher notch with his HR or RBI, but that's somewhat an
artifact of his contract, and those particular stats are
his best points but he has some negatives to go with them.

As for your question about what we mean by "average" players,
you do raise a good point about whether to limit the discussion
to starters. For the money Beltre was paid in Seattle, it
probably is fairer to ask how he stacks up against his
peers at 3B. Nelson Lu posts to this newsgroup a periodic
ranking according to a sabermetric type of stat called
Runs Created (or really a variation of it), and I searched
via Google for his rankings during the years in question
(not as easy to find as I expected), and it looks like
Beltre ranked as below average offensively during his
Seattle years except for 2007. That surprises me since
another sabermetric stat called OPS+ puts Beltre as above
average (across all positions) for the period 206-2008.
I didn't think 3B was such a high offense position that
there would be such disparity. Maybe Nelson is reading
this thread and can comment.

Anyway, my take on the general question of who is an
average player, is that we all have a general idea of
what we mean by the idea but it's actually pretty hard
to pin down, in part because of the way that once a
guy achieves starter status his opportunities (and his
counting stats) go up even if his abilities remain the
same. Any player can "be" a starter, if his manager
declares him to be and sticks with it. That's why
the sabermetric stats were invented, to try to guess
better what players' contributions would be if given
equal chances.

--
John Gregory ashbury at skypoint.com http://www.skypoint.com/ tilde ashbury
Thought for the moment:
Another victory like that and we are done for. -- Pyrrhus

From: Bink B on 22 Jun 2010 19:05
John Gregory wrote:
> There are multiple ways to proceed from here, and it's a
> sad testament to the state of Usenet newsgroups that only
> you and I are discussing this.
>

LOL... this is so true. There are a couple groups I frequent that still
have quite a few posters but most just have spam now. I really didn't
know where else to post this to get an intelligent response these days.

What you write is very interesting to read. I'm not a stat hound but I
have a buddy that to this day says dumping Beltre was one of the Dodgers
biggest blunders in decades and my memory tells me a little different.
His last two seasons before his big breakout Dodger season he was being
roasted all the time in the press and by fans. He showed some power but
he never seemed to come up with a key hit or walk when we needed one.
Most seemed to want him gone and management seemed to think the same
since no contract extension came about. Then came his mammoth year and
he wanted an equally mammoth contract. The Dodgers would have loved to
keep him I'm sure but not knowing if this was an aberration no way would
they pay what he wanted. That's how I recall it.

My friend is of the opinion that the dodgers should have paid it and
Beltre's numbers through the years have shown they should have paid it.
Plus the dodgers should have seen his greatness approaching and signed
him for less a year before the breakout. So we always wind up arguing
about him. And of course with his recent upswing in Boston my phone
texts are things like, "Beltre's up to .339 now!"

I sure wish we had some better pitching but with lawsuits and such I
guess that's wishful thinking. :-(
From: Will in New Haven on 22 Jun 2010 20:32
On Jun 22, 12:36 am, John Gregory <ashb...(a)skypoint.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jun 2010, Bink B wrote:
> > Good pickup. I asked because Vinny called his career remarkable and I
> > disagreed and was arguing with a friend.
>
> Get new, and better, friends. :)
>
> By the way, I didn't bother to argue about how you defined an
> "average" player, but it could use further refinement.  It
> seems you (or whoever generated those numbers) took the league
> total for things like HR and RBI, divided by 14 teams (OK),
> and then divided by 9 batters in the lineup (not so OK).  That
> works only if you assume a player plays every inning of every
> game.  Only stars come even close to that.  So a truly average
> player, with fewer chances, will put up lower totals than those.
>
> I think I read somewhere that a percentage close to 10 of all
> plate appearances have been made by Hall of Famers.  That kind
> of puts a different perspective on how good an "average" player
> really has to be.  A league's total numbers are heavily skewed
> by the cream of the crop; we don't notice that because of the
> large number of mediocrities getting fewer than 300 PA.

Why not just do the OPS for the league and call that an average
player? Why count any counting stats or use BA at all. That stuff is
all in the OPS. Factor in park effect and mobility on the bases and
you have offense. Defensive value is almost completely a factor of
position played but how well matters also.

--
Will in New Haven
From: John Gregory on 23 Jun 2010 00:29
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Will in New Haven wrote:

> Why not just do the OPS for the league and call that an average
> player? Why count any counting stats or use BA at all. That stuff is
> all in the OPS. Factor in park effect and mobility on the bases and
> you have offense. Defensive value is almost completely a factor of
> position played but how well matters also.

And what exactly baseball skill does OPS measure? Only a
philistine would... oops, sorry, I was channeling the dark
side for a moment there.

Our new friend came to us speaking in terms of counting stats.
If you followed further in the thread (maybe there was a
network latency issue preventing that), you'll see that I was
bringing him along toward a view that opportunity plays too
great a role when that's the yardstick for evaluating a player.
Heck, I even introduced the term OPS by the end; you may notice
he didn't find that especially persuasive.

When starting with HR and RBI, OPS seems a bit much all in
one go. There is some value in being multi-lingual.

--
John Gregory ashbury at skypoint.com http://www.skypoint.com/ tilde ashbury
Thought for the moment:
Let him who would move the world first move himself. -- Socrates

From: Bink B on 23 Jun 2010 04:50
John Gregory wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 2010, Will in New Haven wrote:
> Our new friend came to us speaking in terms of counting stats.
> If you followed further in the thread (maybe there was a
> network latency issue preventing that), you'll see that I was
> bringing him along toward a view that opportunity plays too
> great a role when that's the yardstick for evaluating a player.
> Heck, I even introduced the term OPS by the end; you may notice
> he didn't find that especially persuasive.

(referring to...)
-another sabermetric stat called OPS+ puts Beltre as above
-average (across all positions) for the period 206-2008.

:-) That's only because I didn't know what it stood for (I do now) and I
didn't know baseball went back to the year 206 :-)

It's certainly more accurate then my original post which you set me
straight on... I'm not sure I wanted that much detail as I was looking
for a more general term to describe Adrian Beltre without giving away
who it was. Didn't want bias.... anonymity didn't work did it? I had
thought better than average hitter myself because of the power but he
didn't get on base all that much. My friend had said good to very good
hitter and said Vin Scully announced AB's had a sensational career and
that if I disagreed with Vinny that I was an idiot. Notice Vinny said
career and my friend said hitter.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: The Rose Award For 6-20-10. <9955>
Next: RC/25 for Cs (July 3)