Quote :

" That's a faulty analogy. All those other people you mentioned are on great teams. The Rangers suck. For example, how would Hamilton's numbers look if he were on the Cubs or the Angels?"

The Rangers are one of the top 3 offenses in baseball

You have to look at hitting and pitching independently and devoid of team record

You could say the Ravens suck...but you couldn't say they don't have a great Defense

[Edited on July 13, 2008 at 11:59 AM. Reason : his numbers would look much worse on the Angels...their hitting is mediocre; their pitching is great]

7/13/2008 11:58:20 AM

Quote :

"You want your 3-4-5 hitters to be able to take a walk just as well as your 1-2 hitters. Please don't tell me you "don't want 'em cloggin' the bases"."

Jesus christ...read my post and you'll see my reasoning. It has nothing to do with clogging the bases.

What players do you put in the 3-4-5-6 positions?? The hitters...the guys who are going to "hit" the ball and drive in the players that got on base in front of them. You're 1-2-3 guys are the fast guys, the guys with good eyes who get more walks, the guys who put the ball in play and try to get on base.

You don't expect your 7-8-9 hitters to drive in runs. So if Burrell is batting 5th or 6th with two runners on...I want him swinging the bat and trying to get the ball in play instead of getting a walk and having the next hitters ground into a double play or strike out.

Yeah...its pretty nitpicky...but pointing to Burrell's walk total and OBP in arguing that he might be just as good or better than Hamilton makes no sense.

7/13/2008 12:00:25 PM

But if Burrell comes up with the bases empty so many times, as he does hitting behind Utley and Howard, than a walk = a hit unless he hits a home run. Granted, Pedro Feliz and Carlos Ruiz aren't the best RBI men in the world, but it makes more sense for him to take the BB than to swing for the fences with nobody on in front of him.

7/13/2008 12:04:12 PM

^ I agree with that

And,

Quote :

"but pointing to Burrell's walk total and OBP in arguing that he might be just as good or better than Hamilton makes no sense."

it makes a lot more sense to use walks and OBP to argue that Burrell is a good hitter than to use RBI and runs scored to argue that Hamilton is a good hitter.

[Edited on July 13, 2008 at 12:14 PM. Reason : ]

7/13/2008 12:09:45 PM

^I think both are equally relevant...or irrelevant.

If I point to BA, then you would point to walks and OBP. But I would say that BA is much more important in their relative hitting orders. If Burrell were a 1-2 or even 3 hitter, then his OBP is much more important. But since both players are hitting in positions where it is likely that there will be runners on base (except when Howard cleans them up)...and since Burrell has worse hitters after him, it would be better for him to get hits than walks.

7/13/2008 12:18:46 PM

There is no situation in which BA is more pertinent to a batter's ability than OBP. A batter's job is not to drive in runs, it's to get on base. If batters get on base, the runs will take care of themselves.

The best way to measure a batter's ability to get on base (which, remember, is his goal in each at bat) is his OBP. His BA tells us so little and is such a deceptive stat that it's almost useless.

7/13/2008 12:22:55 PM

Not that it really matters for your discussion, but the Rangers don't exactly suck either. 3 games over .500 isn't too shitty, but everybody already mentioned it's because of their hitters.

7/13/2008 12:33:30 PM

Quote :

"A batter's job is not to drive in runs, it's to get on base. If batters get on base, the runs will take care of themselves. "

Have to disagree when it comes to batting position. You won't see the Phillie's manager getting pissed at Howard for striking out so much when he's hitting 2 and 3-run homers all the time. Sure they would like him to have a better eye and get a walk every now and then...but they won't trade it in for those game-changing, multi-run blasts.

7/13/2008 12:57:21 PM

Josh bats better with RISP, much better with 2 outs and RISP and has two game-winning HRs. Not saying he's having a much better batting year than Pat but he's been great in clutch situations.

7/13/2008 2:37:06 PM

I can't even believe you are making this argument.

No one is comparing Josh Hamilton's RBI numbers to the #7 hitter for the San Diego Padres.


He is leading the fucking league and has the potential to put up one of the all-time greatest RBI totals.

How is that not significant?

When you hit well with RISP and you are a flat out slugger you will drive in runs. Nate fucking McClouth is going to drive in 100 runs for the Pirates for gods sake.

This isn't saying one guy has 109 RBI and the other has 104 and trying to determine who the better player is. If you drive in 150+ RBI's you had a monster season I don't care if you play for the American Dreams on Baseball Stars.

7/13/2008 10:03:50 PM

Read it again, Rally

Quote :

"Many of the stats you encounter in mainstream baseball circles are what we call "counting stats." That is, they count things: 23 homers, 107 RBI, six triples, etc. This may sound painfully obvious, but the more a hitter plays in a given season, the higher his counting stats are likely to be. Some counting stats, like RBI and runs scored, are highly team and batting-order dependent. A cleanup hitter logging 600 plate appearances in a potent lineup must work very hard not to rack up at least 100 RBI. Whereas a leadoff hitter on an otherwise weak offensive team won't crack the 100-RBI mark no matter how effective he is. If a superior player is surrounded by weak hitters, it's entirely possible that he'll cash in on a much greater percentage of his RBI opportunities and still have a lower RBI total than a lesser player in a stronger lineup. The thing to understand about counting stats is that, absent supporting information, they're really only useful at the margins. That's to say, it's hard to rack up 140 RBI and somehow stink. Conversely, it's difficult to log a season's worth of plate appearances, total 40 RBI and somehow be any good. The flip side of this is that it's entirely possible, especially in eras conducive to run scoring, to break the vaunted 100-RBI barrier and still be an ineffective player. It's debatable what the worst 100-RBI season is, but Ruben Sierra in 1993 may be hard to beat. More later on why he was a lousy player that season. So, highly context-dependent counting stats like RBI and runs scored can be inflated or deflated by a panoply of factors that have nothing to do with that hitter's true abilities. One of the prevailing missions of sabermetrics is to evaluate the player in a vacuum: What's he doing independently of his teammates and environment? Using only RBI or runs scored to judge a player or to frame an argument at the tavern is a fool's errand."

Quote :

"I'm not saying Hamilton isn't a pretty good player; but to say he's pretty good because of his RBI puts you in the Joe Morgan zone."

7/13/2008 10:20:12 PM

Looking at RBI's and trying to gauge a player's effectiveness by the fact he has 75 or 82 RBI's is stupid.

But when you get closer to the poles it isn't. If you drive in 35 runs you better have a damn good excuse like the guys hitting ahead of you are batting .150 and only have one leg.

If you drive in 150 RBI then you could be batting behind Henderson, Ruth, and Bonds and I'd still feel safe assuming you had a good season.

7/13/2008 11:15:13 PM

Well, there's no point in arguing with you, I know you've never been wrong on the internet, but that's pretty stupid.

7/13/2008 11:22:45 PM

The best measuring stick for a player's offensive value is OPS (on base + slugging)

7/13/2008 11:35:52 PM

Dude scoring runs is the point of baseball.

I'd argue that both runs and RBI's are underrated.


Runs never get ANY attention but certain guys generate more runs by being able to move on the basepaths. It's not coincidence that Reyes scores so many runs.

Just like its not coincidence that Manny Ramirez has driven in runs every year he's been alive.

7/13/2008 11:38:11 PM

This argument is stupid. Obviously, if you're a good hitter, you're going to hit in the middle of your lineup. Obviously, the guys in the middle hit behind the guys that have the higher OBP, but not so much SLG, and therefore have more chances to drive in runs. Good players have more chances, and are good, so they drive in more. But the RBI alone is not necessarily a determining factor of how good a player is. Some hitters are very clutch, and have very good avg w/ RISP, but at the same time getting a sac fly for an RBI doesn't even affect that. Reyes scores runs because he can get on base, steal bases, and score from 2nd to home on pretty much any single, but at the same time benefits from having players like David Wright hitting in that 3 hole. Manny Ramirez is able to drive in runs because he comes up to bat so much more often with runners in score position. Because of good leadoff hitters and opportunitys to drive in runs, he gets more RBI, and also he's a very good hitter. Hitting leadoff Manny Ramirez would not be as effective. All of you are right, RBI matter, and are important, runs matter, OBP matters, that's why they are all measured. Stop talking about it, none of you are wrong and it's stupid to argue about.

7/13/2008 11:50:01 PM

^^ The thing you don't seem to understand is that RBI and runs are ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE metrics of individual ability.

Quote :

"It's not coincidence that Reyes scores so many runs."

No kidding, he's a great hitter. But as a statistic, runs scored depend on so much more than a player's individual talents: park factors, lineup, etc. If Reyes were playing for the Nationals and scoring 60 runs every year, would he be less of a player? Runs scored and RBI tell us virtually nothing about a player's offensive value and that's why they're trash. To score runs you need to get on base, thus stats like OBP or slugging percentage or OPS tell us so much more about how well a player contributes.

Counting stats are bunk; if you're using them to gauge a player's value, you really have no idea what you're talking about.

7/14/2008 12:35:23 AM

Quote :

"The best measuring stick for a player's offensive value is OPS (on base + slugging)"

1. L Berkman 1.096
2. C Jones 1.086
3. A Pujols 1.074
4. M Bradley 1.049
5. J Drew .984
6. P Burrell .979
7. D Uggla .978
8. M Holliday .975
9. A Rodriguez .972
10. R Ludwick .962
11. H Ramirez .957
12. C Utley .955
13. I Kinsler .945
14. B McCann .940
15. K Youkilis .933
16. J Dye .923
17. J Hamilton .919
18. A Dunn .918
19. J Bay .917
20. J Giambi .915

[Edited on July 14, 2008 at 12:41 AM. Reason : ahah Ryan fucking Howard is 54th]

7/14/2008 12:40:01 AM

That's because Ryan fucking Howard is batting .233/.324/.511, which is retardedly bad. He's going to hit 50 homers, but he'll strikeout 250+ times and have a 4:1 SO:BB ratio. The guy is terribly overrated and is going to burn out big time over the next 2-3 years.

There's a lot more to the game than home runs, you know. Ryan Howard would be a much better player if he could hit anywhere near replacement level.

[Edited on July 14, 2008 at 12:50 AM. Reason : V oic]

7/14/2008 12:45:27 AM

Yeah and he stole the MVP over Pujols in 06. Yes I'm still bitter.

Adam Dunn at 18 is a surprise as is Giambi at 20

[Edited on July 14, 2008 at 12:49 AM. Reason : ^I hope you don't think I am defending Howard. I agree with all of what you said]

7/14/2008 12:48:54 AM

Yeah, Howard would be hitting .200 with 18-20 HRs if he was at a real ballpark. Literally 4 out of his 5 HRs this week would have been flyouts at a park like Shea...

*** I generally like OPS as a good measure of offensive worth independent of team, but I don't think it accounts for the value of guys like Reyes and Rollins (save 2007). They will never have as high an OPS because they don't hit as many HRs but they will hit more 2B and 3B then your typical power hitter. I think the stat should incorporate SB-CS somehow...

[Edited on July 14, 2008 at 11:56 AM. Reason : rollins won mvp with a decent, but not great OPS...]

7/14/2008 11:54:17 AM

Howard has the opposite field Citizens Banke park shot down pat

Those leave the yard in Philly, Houston, and maybe Fenway if their high enough




and OPS is definitely a better stat for measuring pure sluggers...it devalues speed and gap power

kind of like how the QB rating devalues scramblers



[Edited on July 14, 2008 at 12:37 PM. Reason : x]

7/14/2008 12:35:15 PM

funny how Dunn is 18th and Howard is 54th when both of them can't do shit but hit homers and strikeout and bat for a shitty average

7/14/2008 12:41:13 PM

Because Howard doesn't walk nearly as much

Howard's slugging is actually higher

7/14/2008 12:44:33 PM

but neither of them can do shit except hit for power and strike out...they can't run, they can't hit above .265...no way I'd say Dunn is better than Jason Bay and probably a lot of other players in the 20s and 30s from that .OPS ranking

7/14/2008 12:52:22 PM

They're both 3TO players

They both serve a purpose in a lineup

but you need to surround them with more complete players

7/14/2008 1:05:35 PM

i agree and i also agree that OPS is a very telling stat most of the time about a player's ability, but I don't think you could find anybody who follows baseball that would say Adam Dunn is a top 20 hitter in the league, unless the criteria was specifically top 20 home run hitters

7/14/2008 1:13:31 PM

you could find a few extreme moneyball people who might argue that

but most would say he's more in the top 35-40, not the top 20

7/14/2008 1:15:49 PM

i think anyone who knows anything about the Reds would easily put Phillips ahead of him as a better hitter...you could probably still argue that Griffey is a better hitter

Dunn was the only one on that list where I was like "really? 18th best?"

7/14/2008 1:20:31 PM

I can see Phillips, but no way is Griffey better anymore

His OPS is 114th

7/14/2008 1:24:46 PM

i guess Griffey is only batting .235 this year...I'd definitely say Phillips is a better hitter than Dunn though

7/14/2008 1:27:42 PM

ok i dont give a fuck what stats you value over other stats, this motherfucker is better than Pat Burrell

7/14/2008 9:53:13 PM

7/14/2008 10:00:15 PM

Golden God

7/15/2008 8:57:46 AM

i was sure he was going to put one out of Yankee Stadium last night. I was sure he would!

7/15/2008 1:39:09 PM

http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?mid=200807143136482

for those that missed it

he almost hit it out of yankee stadium, kurkjian said he has never seen balls hit to parts of the stadium josh was hitting

7/15/2008 3:24:35 PM

kurkijan has also never seen a vagina

and HR derby = dunk contest in terms of actual game relevance

Hamilton put on a hell of a show, but it did nothing to change my argument

7/15/2008 3:40:45 PM

What exactly is your argument again? That Burrell is just as good or better hitter or that the RBI is meaningless??

7/15/2008 4:28:19 PM

Kinda Both

Burrell is just as valuable a player, and if it wasn't for 95 RBI's, Hamilton would just a typical middle of the order hitter on a good offensive team

7/15/2008 4:51:51 PM

Hamilton has been a much better hitter with runners in scoring position, as his RBI numbers would indicate.

He is an MVP candidate, and for good reason.

The homerun derby just reinforced the idea that he is only scratching the surface of his abilities.

7/15/2008 4:55:28 PM

Pat Burrell minus this year has been a huge disappointment with the Phillies.

I don't think any GM would take him over Hamilton...

7/15/2008 5:07:34 PM

he's without question the most naturally talented hitter I've ever seen play.

7/15/2008 5:15:45 PM

Quote :

"if it wasn't for 95 RBI's, Hamilton would just a typical middle of the order hitter on a good offensive team"

did you not see what he did last night? how in the world can you simply say he is a "typical middle of the order hitter"? Lance Berkman and Justin Morneau are better than typical middle of the order hitters, and Hamilton embarrassed them

7/15/2008 5:28:38 PM

Quote :

"HR derby = dunk contest in terms of actual game relevance"

7/15/2008 5:29:33 PM

i guess dwight howard is just a run of the mill NBA center

7/15/2008 5:30:39 PM

and I guess Gerald Green is a regular Hall of Famer

7/15/2008 5:35:08 PM

Quote :

"Burrell is just as valuable a player, and if it wasn't for 95 RBI's, Hamilton would just a typical middle of the order hitter on a good offensive team"

I think you lose that argument.

7/15/2008 5:35:28 PM

Don't stoop to that level, jbrick

You're better than that

Give Hamilton 65 Rbi's instead of 95

What seperates him from any other 3-4 hitter in baseball ?

Batting Average ? Home Runs ? OPS ?

No, no, and no

RBI's are a sexy stat, and his total is extremely impressive

But its also extremely fluke-y

7/15/2008 5:40:33 PM

Quote :

"What seperates him from any other 3-4 hitter in baseball ?"

did you see what he did last night?

fuck every single stat...fuck RBIs, fuck OSP fuck every stat...if you watched the derby last night you know Josh Hamilton is a helluva ball player

Quote :

"Give Hamilton 65 Rbi's instead of 95"

Give David Ortiz 60 stolen bases while you're at it

I don't know what thats supposed to mean, but if we're taking away stats that one player earned, we might as well just give away stats to other players

If you want to say that RBI totals don't make Hamilton great, then thats fine, although RBI numbers make him good...but seriously how can you watch him last night and say with a straight face that Pat Burrell is just as valuable?

7/15/2008 5:45:23 PM

^^Actually all of those stats put him in the upper-echelon of 3-4 hitters in the MLB right now. Just because he's not #1 in those categories doesn't mean he's not "separated" from most of the rest (not to mention his BA with RISP...which to me is a huge deal).

[Edited on July 15, 2008 at 6:04 PM. Reason : .]

7/15/2008 5:48:14 PM