Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 2 of 2 pages
Catching linedrives is mainly luck.
That makes no sense.
Also, you really believe, in 2012, the league with the Astros, Cubs, Rockies, Marlins, Mets and Padres wasn't noticeably worse? Hell, the Pirates almost made it to .500. ;)
The first half of your statement should have alerted you to the very high probability that the second half is not, in fact, true
In his last two years as a full-time 3B, Cabrera's been 4th (2007) and 3rd (2012) in his league in assists.(*)
Year AL NL2008 149 1032009 137 1142010 134 1182011 131 1212012 142 110Total 693 566
With respect to how things "seem," the following passage from the preface to the 2013 Baseball Prospectus should be noted: "The quality of the fielder can bias the data: Zone-based fielding metrics will tend to attribute more expected outs to good fielders than bad fielders, irrespective of the distribution of batted balls. ... Simply put, there is no evidence to show that the inclusion of zone-based data improves defensive metrics over the short run, and much evidence that incorporating the data causes severe distortions over the long run."
The first half of your statement should have alerted you to the very high probability that the second half is not, in fact, true.
I think that each of the categories of a player should be accounted for separately and that there shouldn't be one all encompassing number applied to the total.
Equivalent to an 89.2-72.8. But sure, the DH is responsible for a 16 game swing per 162...
I like this idea aesthetically, but I don't see how it's possible. If you measured a player against a replacement level hitter and a replacement level fielder, then that's a player far worse than a replacement-level player.
A head to head collection of small samples doesn't really win the argument for me.
Again there are two more teams in the NL, remove those two weak teams and it's a different story.
Both of those are incontrovertible
I like this idea aesthetically, but I don't see how it's possible. If you measured a player against a replacement level hitter and a replacement level fielder, then that's a player far worse than a replacement-level player. I guess, you could try to estimate it, so instead of 20 runs worse than average overall, a replacement level player is something like 7 runs worse than average on defense and 13 runs worse on offense.
In reality, the replacement level player is average at defense and -20 hitting. As Rogers Hornsby said, "You shake a tree and 10 gloves fall out, but no bats".
I do not think that word means what you think it means....
The thing is that replacement level fielding is basically the same as major league average.
If this is true in practice, couldn't it just be because teams are biased towards replacement level players who are at least average defenders because of the strain the other kind put on their pitching staff? So that other kinds of replacement players (say guys with a -10/-10 split) are hanging around, but teams don't trust them.
Minus 2.3 in FRAA.
In reality, a replacement level player is a replacement level player no matter how he gets there.
It's 1259 games! In what world is that a small sample!?
Is that the BPro metric?
I thought most people viewed that as highly suspect?
It's a collection of small sample sizes. You have 3-4 games between the same team over a 3 year period.
You could say the same thing about players. Jose Bautista isn't facing an equal sampling of all the pitchers in the American League in a given year.
Yes and no. In a players case, you are looking at his performance in 600+ samples over a calendar year. Here someone is trying to put weight on a 1200 sample size, spread out among 30 players(teams) over 5 seasons, this is not the same thing no matter how you look at it.
Why is always Mom's basement and never Dad's?
Voxter you have no idea what you're talking about. Cabrera is a perfectly cromulent 3B. He's slightly worse than average defensively. You can look at the numbers and you can watch him play, it seems pretty clear to me why they are in agreement. He has fine hands, it's his range and arm that aren't that hot.
He has fine hands, it's his range and arm that aren't that hot.
The NL is hurt by having more teams.
Is that the BPro metric?
Here's an interesting question. Who do you think would be the better fielder...Trout at 3B or Cabrera in LF? I think Cabrera in CF would be a total disaster and Trout at 3B wins that argument hands down.
No it isn't.
If each league had an equal but distinct number of players that it was allowed to populate its teams with, then the NL's teams would be diluted as a result of dividing those players into 16 groupings rather than 14 units. That isn't the case. As such, the number of teams has essentially no bearing on the overall competitiveness of the league.
Not sure I follow, but either way, we were arguing about whether there needs to be a league adjustment, not about competitiveness.
Here's the thing, if you take the two crappiest teams from the 2008-2012 NL, and stick them on the AL, two things are going to happen. On aggregate, everyone who stays in the NL, no longer gets to feast off of those crappy two teams, and sees their statistics drop. Everybody in the AL gets to whack around the two new patsies, and their statistics rise. Did everyone in the AL get better and in the NL worse? Did the AL players become more valuable, the NL less? Of course not. The point is, a replacement level player coming into the new AL would also put up better numbers than in th old AL, because he gets more opportunities against crappy teams, thus raising the replacement level. Similarly it drops in the NL, now that replacement level players face better teams on average than before.
Yes, if you artificially manipulate the makeup the teams in a given league, it will weaken a league's overall competitiveness (which happened this year when the dreadful Astros were added to the AL). It doesn't day anything about the actual strength of a league pre-manipulation.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (8 members)
Page rendered in 0.6983 seconds, 57 querie(s) executed