PDA

View Full Version : OPS vs. OBP vs. BAS



BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 10:45 AM
OPS vs. OBP vs. BAS

OPS is an over-simpflification. It attempts to give a catch-all appraisal but in so doing can overstate or understate a player's value to his team.

OBP and "BAS" are better. The best TEAMS WIN games when each individual performs his role at a high level inning and after inning for 162 games. In most cases, this means top of the order guys need to get on base somehow/some way, middle of the order guys need to drive them in. Bottom of order guys need to do what situation dictates.

Better to appraise your top of the order type players based on their speed, bat control and JUST OBP. Appraise your "rbi guys" based on their Batting Average and Slugging.

On a basketball team if you have a 7 footer who can clean the boards it is not going to do any good to have him sit outside and launch threes when you have other players who can do that equally well and benefit from the 7 footer's rebounding. Within the context of this team the 7 footer's long range shooting is a relative non-factor. To give him undue credit/value for that ability overstates his team contribution.


For my boy Dunn, appraise him based on his batting average and slugging. Then give the list of how he rates amongst other players in the league. This is closer to his true value.

Ravenlord
12-12-2004, 10:51 AM
better yet, use Runs Created and Run Created per Game.

NC Reds
12-12-2004, 10:51 AM
Dunn rules. :RedinDC:

westofyou
12-12-2004, 11:09 AM
This is closer to his true value.

Truth is the construct of "ones" reality.

Baseball is a game about not making outs and generating on base skills into runs at the expense of the other teams weakness.

Adam Dunn doesn't make outs as much as other players on the Reds.

Therefore he doesn't "suck" he isn't worth "hating" nor is he worth dragging through the mud every day here on Redszone.

Baseball has a place for the Harmon Clayton Killebrew's in the world, they provided a vaulable service and have since Cap Anson and Ned Williamson wowed them.

Inside baseball died with the Kaiser, even 60-70's baseball worshipped at the alter of slugging percentage and on base skills.

The game is always changing, but the Reds went out and got Long John Reilly in 1883 because he was big strong guy with on base skills.

Just like Adam Dunn is 120 years later.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 11:14 AM
Your point? or was that just drama?

I have a point. It is that Dunn's value to this team is overstated. And if you care about seeing the Reds WIN then (given their shoestring budget), it would be a mistake to pay big $$$ for him.

And on a larger scale ANY PLAYER on any team of the strikeout, big swing, BB prone, error-prone, bad fundamentals - type would likely be overstated (when OPS appraised) to some degree.

You go ahead and live in your nostalgia if you choose. I'd like to see another Reds pennant race - the sooner the better ! !



Truth is the construct of "ones" reality.

Baseball is a game about not making outs and generating on base skills into runs at the expense of the other teams weakness.

Adam Dunn doesn't make outs as much as other players on the Reds.

Therefore he doesn't "suck" he isn't worth "hating" nor is he worth dragging through the mud every day here on Redszone.

Baseball has a place for the Harmon Clayton Killebrew's in the world, they provided a vaulable service and have since Cap Anson and Ned Williamson wowed them.

Inside baseball died with the Kaiser, even 60-70's baseball worshipped at the alter of slugging percentage and on base skills.

The game is always changing, but the Reds went out and got Long John Reilly in 1883 because he was big strong guy with on base skills.

Just like Adam Dunn is 120 years later.

wheels
12-12-2004, 11:25 AM
And getting rid of Adam Dunn will get the Reds into a pennant race more quickly....How?

westofyou
12-12-2004, 11:29 AM
Your point?

I guess it's that your reality is skewed.

That and your handle is pretty smallminded.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 11:31 AM
Thanks for the help on straightening out my reality. And leave it to you to take this off topic and away from the point/argument being made.



I guess it's that your reality is skewed.

That and your handle is pretty smallminded.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 11:37 AM
No, not in and of itself. If the Reds had the budget I'd be in favor of keeping Dunn.

Even with his problems, Dunn could work for a team when batting 6th or 7th (occasionally 5th). And worst case, he'd be a threat off the bench who could play some LF and 1B.

Problem is that with the Reds budget (and what he likely stands to make) they can't afford the luxury of carrying a player of his type.



And getting rid of Adam Dunn will get the Reds into a pennant race more quickly....How?

LvJ
12-12-2004, 11:38 AM
...
better yet, use Runs Created and Run Created per Game.


better yet, use Runs Created and Run Created per Game.


better yet, use Runs Created and Run Created per Game.


better yet, use Runs Created and Run Created per Game.


better yet, use Runs Created and Run Created per Game.


better yet, use Runs Created and Run Created per Game.


better yet, use Runs Created and Run Created per Game.

wheels
12-12-2004, 11:41 AM
Can't this guy find someone else to bag on?

It seems kinda creepy in an obsessed fan kinda way.

I wonder if he's got some wierd shrine set up in the basement or something. :MandJ:

wheels
12-12-2004, 11:43 AM
A threat off the bench?

You can't be serious.

Stewie
12-12-2004, 11:44 AM
No, not in and of itself. If the Reds had the budget I'd be in favor of keeping Dunn.

Even with his problems, Dunn could work for a team when batting 6th or 7th (occasionally 5th). And worst case, he'd be a threat off the bench who could play some LF and 1B.

Problem is that with the Reds budget (and what he likely stands to make) they can't afford the luxury of carrying a player of his type.

I don't get it. Do you hate Adam Dunn because of what he does, or the way the Reds are using him? Would you like him more if the Reds batted him 2nd, because of his OBP?

Redmachine2003
12-12-2004, 11:58 AM
I agree that Dunn has peaked at his ripe age of 24 and will not get any better and that his 46 hrs and 101 RBI's are not needed by the Reds. No one in baseball would throw him a huge long term deal or trade for him. You could find a player like him for a dime a dozen. PLEASE!!! With better protection in the line next year and Chambliss, Dunn could put up Bonds numbers with out the juice. Every team in baseball wouldn't be asking for Dunn in trades if he wasn't any good. With the New Roid issues in baseball you will see Hrs go down and Dunn stay at the top of the league. I really do think Dunn projects to at least a Thome and how much money does Jim make?

MWM
12-12-2004, 12:10 PM
Dude, you're in so far over your head you don't even know it. You've yet to address a single argument in any thread that factually contradicts your belief. The only come back you've got is "Dunn's value is overstated" because you said so. You know, the information age has blessed us with the availability of all kinds of new, factual-based research that only enhances your understanding of the game. I suggest you take the time to learn about these advancements before you try to argue against them. Because it's ever so obvious from reading what you've written that you don't have clue #1 on any of it.

ochre
12-12-2004, 12:11 PM
14th in the majors in SLG for players who played in more than 100 games.

Batting average as an isolated stat is pretty much useless regardless of where a player bats in the order.

But I guess sometimes a troll is just a troll

creek14
12-12-2004, 12:21 PM
You can't be serious.
No, he/she isn't. The board is being played like a
http://www.besmark.com/fiddle.jpg

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 12:40 PM
I'm not a big fan of "Runs Created" perhaps only because I think OBP, batting average, Slugging and the other individual stats tell you all you need to know.

But....honestly, I haven't looked at that stat that much in detail.


better yet, use Runs Created and Run Created per Game.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 12:43 PM
And that I'll go along with. Of course, remember last year was his contract year and his best year in the majors. You run Slugging on Adam for his 4 years in majors and his rank falls considerably I'm sure.

But again, I'll go along with OBP for players at the top of order and Slugging for rbi types.

And agree, that batting average is more independent of role in offense for a given player. OBP best for guys who need to get on base. And slugging (factoring both batting average and power) is pretty darn good for appraising a player's rbi ability................



14th in the majors in SLG for players who played in more than 100 games.

Batting average as an isolated stat is pretty much useless regardless of where a player bats in the order.

Ravenlord
12-12-2004, 12:44 PM
Runs Created is nothing but individual stats

[(H+BB+HBP-CS-GIDP)*(TB+.26(SB+SF+SH)+.52(BB-IBB+HBP))]
divided by Total Plate Appearances.

or a much simpler form:
(H+BB)*TB/AB

Ravenlord
12-12-2004, 12:47 PM
OBP best for guys who need to get on base. all players need a high OBP. a team of guys hitting 200, but with 400 OBPs will always outscore a team of guys hitting 300, but with 300 OBPs. that is assuming that their SLG are relatively same. i could figure how far apart they would have be, and do some projecting, but i don't want to do math right now.

MWM
12-12-2004, 12:49 PM
Slugging for rbi types.

Uh, have you taken a look at Dunn's SLG?

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 12:50 PM
"Dude" apparently you need to learn to read. In every post AFTER my initial one I was responding to a comment made by someone else and addressing it.

I "suggest" YOU learn to not just "read" but also think about what you read. You may even learn something.

I made a very clear fact-based argument for why I believe appraising Dunn on his OPS overstates his value to a team - and in this case, particularly the Reds.


Dude, you're in so far over your head you don't even know it. You've yet to address a single argument in any thread that factually contradicts your belief. The only come back you've got is "Dunn's value is overstated" because you said so. You know, the information age has blessed us with the availability of all kinds of new, factual-based research that only enhances your understanding of the game. I suggest you take the time to learn about these advancements before you try to argue against them. Because it's ever so obvious from reading what you've written that you don't have clue #1 on any of it.

SteelSD
12-12-2004, 12:50 PM
OBP best for guys who need to get on base. And slugging (factoring both batting average and power) is pretty darn good for appraising a player's rbi ability

All hitters "need to get on base". And Slugging Percentage has absolutly nothing to do with Batting Average. Nothing.

wheels
12-12-2004, 12:50 PM
You give me guys that make fewer outs, and my team will whip yours any day, regardless of what you think their role in the lineup should be.

Don't make outs, and accquire as many bases as possible.

It's really pretty simple.

MWM
12-12-2004, 12:52 PM
My point is that you've offered nothing but opinion, your opinion, wile others have offered cold hard facts.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 12:56 PM
Thanks. On first glance though, appears to be very similar to OPS in that it attempts to capture BOTH just "getting on base somehow/some way" AND rbi/power ability. I think it is better to look at those two attributes independently where you can factor in what type of player you're talking about.

But thanks, and again if Reds had a bigger budget then I'd be less against keeping a Dunn-type player and paying him the $$$. But you have to look at every dollar of spending with the Reds.



Runs Created is nothing but individual stats

[(H+BB+HBP-CS-GIDP)*(TB+.26(SB+SF+SH)+.52(BB-IBB+HBP))]
divided by Total Plate Appearances.

or a much simpler form:
(H+BB)*TB/AB

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 12:58 PM
I've heard the "outs" argument as well and I agree there is something to it.

But with the Reds you need to look to strike a mix of players that will give you more than their component parts. You can't afford to just take the guys who make the least outs and pay them whatever they can demand.



You give me guys that make fewer outs, and my team will whip yours any day, regardless of what you think their role in the lineup should be.

Don't make outs, and accquire as many bases as possible.

It's really pretty simple.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 01:02 PM
I assume as big Reds/baseball fans we are all familiar with the raw numbers which background this argument. Do you really need a link or a table of stats?

The point of this argument is to keep OBP and Slugging/Batting average separate. Evaluate top of the order type players based on OBP. Evaluate middle of the order type guys based on actual HITTING (batting and slugging). Inferior hitters who typically bat at the bottom......many exceptions there.

Whoever the player (Dunn or someone else), if you plan to use him in the middle of your order and pay him accordingly don't just rely on OPS.




My point is that you've offered nothing but opinion, your opinion, wile others have offered cold hard facts.

MWM
12-12-2004, 01:12 PM
I assume as big Reds/baseball fans we are all familiar with the raw numbers which background this argument. Do you really need a link or a table of stats?

Yes I do. Because I've never seen a CREDIBLE source make the claims you're making.

ochre
12-12-2004, 01:16 PM
And that I'll go along with. Of course, remember last year was his contract year and his best year in the majors. You run Slugging on Adam for his 4 years in majors and his rank falls considerably I'm sure.

But again, I'll go along with OBP for players at the top of order and Slugging for rbi types.

And agree, that batting average is more independent of role in offense for a given player. OBP best for guys who need to get on base. And slugging (factoring both batting average and power) is pretty darn good for appraising a player's rbi ability................

age?

experience?

"coaches" trying to change his approach because they apparently think similarly to you?

MWM
12-12-2004, 01:26 PM
Dunn's SLG-

2001 - .578
2002 - .454
2003 - .465
2004 - .569

IslandRed
12-12-2004, 01:55 PM
The point of this argument is to keep OBP and Slugging/Batting average separate. Evaluate top of the order type players based on OBP. Evaluate middle of the order type guys based on actual HITTING (batting and slugging). Inferior hitters who typically bat at the bottom......many exceptions there.

Perhaps that's the fundamental problem with your view and other folks' -- you have a notion of batting-order roles that's more rigid and rooted in smallball-era "conventional wisdom" than the more modern research-based thinking in an era where we need to score six runs a game just to keep up with our so-called pitching.

Scoring runs is a process of getting guys on and getting them home, and it's the same process regardless of whether it's the first, fourth or seventh hitter leading off the inning. On-base is key everywhere; power is helpful everywhere. Get the best hitters up early, so they get more at-bats over the course of the season, and don't worry too much about if they're an "OBP guy" or an "RBI guy." Over 162 games, what a #2 hitter and a #5 hitter are called upon to do from at-bat to at-bat is much more alike than different.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 03:12 PM
Dunn has been a "tweener". With the cost-conscious Reds at 400,000 a year they clearly decided that it was a good business decision to use the majors as his AAAA training ground. Even at the expense of a solid NOW contributor Jose Guillen.

However, those "coaches" who some say have "meddled" with him have done anything but. They were making an effort to help him to become a bonafide major leaguer. You draft the big swing in hopes of helping him to get the fundamentals after the fact. He hasn't done it. Push is now coming to shove.

Boone bounced him around in the order hoping to find a place where he could make a solid/consistent contribution. He had the OBP for the top of order but couldn't run or handle the bat well enough. Gave him a chance batting 4/5 but strikeouts and hitting shortcomings were too great. Batting 6/7 he becomes an easy BB for opposing pitcher to then take chances on Larson/Mateo.

He is still young. Of course, no way to know for sure but I've seen enough.


age?

experience?

"coaches" trying to change his approach because they apparently think similarly to you?

flyer85
12-12-2004, 03:15 PM
But....honestly, I haven't looked at that stat that much in detail.

Now that's a shocker.

Batting average is the only damn thing the matters. If you don't hit .300 you suck ... that's what it says in my book.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 03:20 PM
Fair point. However, 1)this is the national league (and the Reds) where #9 is usually a sure out. 2)On this team #7 and #8 slots have been occupied by painfully bad hitters.

When you don't have enough overall team talent to make your batting order relatively unimportant it becomes critical. The order needs to be set with the right players in the right spots to maximize scoring opportunities and runs.

Additionally, when relatively short on overall raw talent "versatility" of the talent you have becomes even more important. Best to have players who can help you in a variety of ways so that the team can better manufacture runs.



Perhaps that's the fundamental problem with your view and other folks' -- you have a notion of batting-order roles that's more rigid and rooted in smallball-era "conventional wisdom" than the more modern research-based thinking in an era where we need to score six runs a game just to keep up with our so-called pitching.

Scoring runs is a process of getting guys on and getting them home, and it's the same process regardless of whether it's the first, fourth or seventh hitter leading off the inning. On-base is key everywhere; power is helpful everywhere. Get the best hitters up early, so they get more at-bats over the course of the season, and don't worry too much about if they're an "OBP guy" or an "RBI guy." Over 162 games, what a #2 hitter and a #5 hitter are called upon to do from at-bat to at-bat is much more alike than different.

flyer85
12-12-2004, 03:20 PM
If you follow Bill James at all. OPS is a very good statistic. Just think who the best hitters are and then look at the OPS ranking. It goes right down the list.

That said is that OBP is slightly more important component than SLG% and is slightly understated by the OPS stat. Of course that means that Barry Bonds is even farther ahead than the OPS stat indicates.

Of course I am not sure of the point of all this as Dunn lead the Reds in OBP, SLG%, OPS, etc. By almost every statistical measure he was the best Reds offensive player, so what is the point of all this?

flyer85
12-12-2004, 03:23 PM
But you have to look at every dollar of spending with the Reds.

Which is why the Reds would be better off not paying Jr and Casey the big bucks. Dunn will still be under-value at $4M a year.

Sure looks better paying DUnn $4M that Larue and DJ their $3M.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 03:30 PM
Point is he is about to get a raise in the millions. Time to cut the cord. Reds can't afford to pay a player of his type what today's baseball economics will likely demand. (It's nothing personal)

But again, on a higher level and the point of the thread was that OPS to some extent mixes apples and oranges. I'd rather keep them separate. Assign appropriate weight to OBP and to SLG, Batting Avg..... along with fielding, intangibles, speed etc. etc...when attempting to make an overall player appraisal. A Dunn-type player is a good example of an OPS overstating player value.



If you follow Bill James at all. OPS is a very good statistic. Just think who the best hitters are and then look at the OPS ranking. It goes right down the list.

That said is that OBP is slightly more important component than SLG% and is slightly understated by the OPS stat. Of course that means that Barry Bonds is even farther ahead than the OPS stat indicates.

Of course I am not sure of the point of all this as Dunn lead the Reds in OBP, SLG%, OPS, etc. By almost every statistical measure he was the best Reds offensive player, so what is the point of all this?

wheels
12-12-2004, 04:01 PM
If it's nothing personal, why the moniker?

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 04:14 PM
ha ha :D
good one (call my bluff)......ok....(well just a tiny bit personal)....I used to like him more and he seems like good guy etc.. etc...

But .... that whole bit with Guillen two years ago.....here's a guy (Dunn) who had been afforded 2 years+ of major league opportunity to start making adjustments and upgrade his game but he continued to struggle. Then you had Guillen who was far and away the best offensive contributor on team. Dunn could have chosen to be the humble, young player, team guy grateful for chance in majors and yield to the better performing player. Instead he chose to cling to his coregroup spot/seat etc.. etc.....

That didn't make him a bad guy (of course) but from that point on I've become much more impatient. Guys like Pena, Freel, Guillen and others lost playing opportunity to Dunn. And I just don't see enough improvement. He is still pretty much the same player he was 4 years ago.




If it's nothing personal, why the moniker?

wheels
12-12-2004, 04:17 PM
What are saying, man?

Are you saying that Dunn was selfish to continue to play? Should he have sat out even though his name was on the lineup card?

I can see it now..."Sorry, Bob, but I ain't playin'...Jose's better."

Next thing you know, you'll be lamenting the fact that the Reds let Roberto Petagine go.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 04:57 PM
Both Freel and Pena showed last year some of what they are capable of when given opportunity. BOTH of them have had their playing opportunities squeezed the last few years in favor of young Dunn with the presumed "great potential".

"Should" he have yielded to the better performing player? His call. Had he done it he wouldn't have been the first. Professionals in all sports and professions do it all the time.

Just don't ask me to be patient and ok with the "He's only 22" or "He's only 23" or "He's only 24/25". He is now a five year player still with the same problems with his game as year one.


What are saying, man?

Are you saying that Dunn was selfish to continue to play? Should he have sat out even though his name was on the lineup card?

I can see it now..."Sorry, Bob, but I ain't playin'...Jose's better."

Next thing you know, you'll be lamenting the fact that the Reds let Roberto Petagine go.

SteelSD
12-12-2004, 05:37 PM
Both Freel and Pena showed last year some of what they are capable of when given opportunity. BOTH of them have had their playing opportunities squeezed the last few years in favor of young Dunn with the presumed "great potential".

Sure. And Jim Thome should bench himself so Jason Michaels can get more AB for the Phillies.

Particularly amusing that Pena was a "low average/high strikeout" hitter as well last year. In fact, if you were making any effort to be consistent, Pena is exactly the kind of guy you'd be including on your "Players to Hate On" list.

Yet, you support Pena while continuing, without reason, to indict the most productive offensive player on the Reds.

Funny.

MWM
12-12-2004, 05:51 PM
And you also say OBP and SLG are the two most important stats, yet you dislike Dunn. BTW, Adam Dunn was clearly better than Jose "Clubhouse Cancer" Guillen.

RosieRed
12-12-2004, 06:11 PM
Jose Guillen career OBP: .322
Adam Dunn career OBP: .382

Jose Guillen career SLG: .443
Adam Dunn career SLG: .512

Jose Guillen career OPS: .764
Adam Dunn career OPS: .893

RFS62
12-12-2004, 06:16 PM
Both Freel and Pena showed last year some of what they are capable of when given opportunity. BOTH of them have had their playing opportunities squeezed the last few years in favor of young Dunn with the presumed "great potential".

"Should" he have yielded to the better performing player? His call. Had he done it he wouldn't have been the first. Professionals in all sports and professions do it all the time.

Just don't ask me to be patient and ok with the "He's only 22" or "He's only 23" or "He's only 24/25". He is now a five year player still with the same problems with his game as year one.



Allow me to just say "wow".

"Wow" is kind of overused these days. I'm trying to only use it when I'm truly shocked or amazed. And around here, that takes a lot.

But, allow me to reiterate..... freakin' Wow!!!!

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 06:19 PM
ok....(sigh).......I'll connect ALL the dots for you if that's what it takes.

Yes, Pena strikes out too much, still struggles in the field etc...But Pena made two very important improvements last year (and others). He actually hit a couple curve balls AND he made a conscious effort (and was successful) at using the whole field beoming a more complete hitter.

Dunn looked like he might do the same for parts of the first month. After that, he was back to yanking most everything to right (unless fooled or late). In the words of the Pirates announcer "swing hard in case you hit something".

I'd rather take my chances on a guy who made great strides in his FIRST year of significant playing time and who his striving to be more than one dimensional then a guy headed into his 5th year who is still the same one dimensional guy he was in year one. Dunn looks quite comfortable and content with being a just a big swing and Reds can't afford to carry that.


Sure. And Jim Thome should bench himself so Jason Michaels can get more AB for the Phillies.

Particularly amusing that Pena was a "low average/high strikeout" hitter as well last year. In fact, if you were making any effort to be consistent, Pena is exactly the kind of guy you'd be including on your "Players to Hate On" list.

Yet, you support Pena while continuing, without reason, to indict the most productive offensive player on the Reds.

Funny.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 06:23 PM
I'm not the president of the Jose Guillen club. But I can tell a guy who (mid year 2003) is dialed in and showing no signs of cooling off. And I favor playing guys who produce over those with the "presumed potential".



Jose Guillen career OBP: .322
Adam Dunn career OBP: .382

Jose Guillen career SLG: .443
Adam Dunn career SLG: .512

Jose Guillen career OPS: .764
Adam Dunn career OPS: .893

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 06:32 PM
On this team (with its budget and relative talent), I would look at HITTING first when looking for RBI guys (batting, slugging, fundamentals etc..). And if I'm going to pay millions for a guy I better be able to bat him in the top 5 in the batting order.

Dunn and his OBP are of marginal value when he doesn't have the bat control, speed etc. to hit high in the order and take advantage of it.


And you also say OBP and SLG are the two most important stats, yet you dislike Dunn. BTW, Adam Dunn was clearly better than Jose "Clubhouse Cancer" Guillen.

westofyou
12-12-2004, 06:40 PM
Last year only 7 players had 80 EBH, 100 Runs, 100 RBI.

All except Adam Dunn played on Playoff teams.

It's obvious that Dunn is the problem.


EXTRA BASE HITS >= 80
RUNS >= 100
RBI >= 100
RUNS CREATED/GAME vs. the league average
AGE displayed only

AVERAGE AVG EBH R RBI RC/G AGE
1 Vladimir Guerrero .337 80 124 126 3.44 28
2 Adrian Beltre .334 80 104 121 3.89 25
3 Albert Pujols .331 99 133 123 4.52 24
4 Manny Ramirez .308 87 108 130 3.43 32
5 Jim Edmonds .301 83 102 111 5.23 34
6 Carlos Beltran .267 83 121 104 2.59 27
7 Adam Dunn .266 80 105 102 2.92 24

MWM
12-12-2004, 06:49 PM
What RFS62 said.

Tom Lawless Fan
12-12-2004, 06:50 PM
Fair point. However, 1)this is the national league (and the Reds) where #9 is usually a sure out. 2)On this team #7 and #8 slots have been occupied by painfully bad hitters.

When you don't have enough overall team talent to make your batting order relatively unimportant it becomes critical. The order needs to be set with the right players in the right spots to maximize scoring opportunities and runs.

Additionally, when relatively short on overall raw talent "versatility" of the talent you have becomes even more important. Best to have players who can help you in a variety of ways so that the team can better manufacture runs.

RIGHT ON! :gac:

MWM
12-12-2004, 07:00 PM
Manufacture runs!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's all we needed to make this thread complete.

baseballPAP
12-12-2004, 07:01 PM
Talk about someone typing just to see what it looks like on the screen! Your argument is so full of holes, you'll be getting a call from whoever holds the patent on swiss cheese.

Dunn is good at getting on base. That makes him a good top of the order hitter, according to you DH(interesting what other phrase comes to mind with those initials). But wait...he doesn't handle the bat well enough...OK, well then he sucks.
Dunn is a good power hitter. That makes him a good RBI man, again according to the gospel of DH. But wait, he is ALSO good at getting on base, so that means he can't be a good middle of the lineup hitter...again, he sucks.

Hmmmmm maybe you could change your name to BondsHater...he has the same skills(GREATER, obviously)....good at getting on base and power....man, he must suck even more than my man AD!

flyer85
12-12-2004, 07:03 PM
He actually hit a couple curve balls AND he made a conscious effort (and was successful) at using the whole field beoming a more complete hitter.


And where did you find the statistic that told you that?

Oh, let me see, that is anecdotal evidence based on your observation, I get it.

RosieRed
12-12-2004, 07:03 PM
Manufacture runs!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's all we needed to make this thread complete.

Don't forget the SAC FLIES! :p:

Tom Lawless Fan
12-12-2004, 07:05 PM
Don't forget the SAC FLIES! :p:

Youre right rosie scarifices make a hitter into a complete hitter there really important and I dont think Dunn hase too many of them.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 07:17 PM
I doubt Dunn will ever hit 30+ doubles again (I guess time will tell).
But yes, his 46 HRs and 34 doubles last year (a contract year) were nice. No disputing that.



Last year only 7 players had 80 EBH, 100 Runs, 100 RBI.

All except Adam Dunn played on Playoff teams.

It's obvious that Dunn is the problem.


EXTRA BASE HITS >= 80
RUNS >= 100
RBI >= 100
RUNS CREATED/GAME vs. the league average
AGE displayed only

AVERAGE AVG EBH R RBI RC/G AGE
1 Vladimir Guerrero .337 80 124 126 3.44 28
2 Adrian Beltre .334 80 104 121 3.89 25
3 Albert Pujols .331 99 133 123 4.52 24
4 Manny Ramirez .308 87 108 130 3.43 32
5 Jim Edmonds .301 83 102 111 5.23 34
6 Carlos Beltran .267 83 121 104 2.59 27
7 Adam Dunn .266 80 105 102 2.92 24

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 07:18 PM
You don't bat in your 3, 4 or 5 (your key rbi slots) a guy who is capable of 200+ strikeouts a season and who can't a hit a lick with RISP (lifetime less than .210).

You don't bat in your 1, 2 or 3 spots a guy who can't handle that bat and can't run (despite his OBP).

If Reds had the $$$$$, I'd say pay him and bat him 6th or 7th. Reds can't afford that. Spend those millions elsewhere and hope that Casey, Kearns, Griff, Pena etc... can handle the power needs.

He's been given 4 years of opportunity to become a legitimate 3,4 or 5 rbi guy but he still isn't.



Talk about someone typing just to see what it looks like on the screen! Your argument is so full of holes, you'll be getting a call from whoever holds the patent on swiss cheese.

Dunn is good at getting on base. That makes him a good top of the order hitter, according to you DH(interesting what other phrase comes to mind with those initials). But wait...he doesn't handle the bat well enough...OK, well then he sucks.
Dunn is a good power hitter. That makes him a good RBI man, again according to the gospel of DH. But wait, he is ALSO good at getting on base, so that means he can't be a good middle of the lineup hitter...again, he sucks.

Hmmmmm maybe you could change your name to BondsHater...he has the same skills(GREATER, obviously)....good at getting on base and power....man, he must suck even more than my man AD!

wheels
12-12-2004, 07:21 PM
It wasn't his contract year.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 07:22 PM
Actually my guess is you prefer the stat sheets or fantasy games to actually WATCHING the games. Myself, I WATCHED 99% of the Reds games on the Extra Innings package (120, 130??) and listened to most of the others.

So yes, I watched with my own eyes WMP making conscious efforts to use the whole field and doing so successfully.


And where did you find the statistic that told you that?

Oh, let me see, that is anecdotal evidence based on your observation, I get it.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 07:25 PM
Please correct me if wrong regarding his contract. My understanding is that Dunn will presumably be signing a new deal this winter.



It wasn't his contract year.

RFS62
12-12-2004, 07:25 PM
Actually my guess is you prefer the stat sheets or fantasy games to actually WATCHING the games. Myself, I WATCHED 99% of the Reds games on the Extra Innings package (120, 130??) and listened to most of the others.

So yes, I watched with my own eyes WMP making conscious efforts to use the whole field and doing so successfully.


You watched all those games and you still came up with all this crazy stuff?!?!?!

RosieRed
12-12-2004, 07:30 PM
So yes, I watched with my own eyes WMP making conscious efforts to use the whole field and doing so successfully.

Did you see with your own eyes that WMP struck out more times per plate appearance than Dunn did?


Player Team PA K%
Pena W. CIN 364 30%
Dunn A. CIN 681 28%

wheels
12-12-2004, 07:31 PM
Please correct me if wrong regarding his contract. My understanding is that Dunn will presumably be signing a new deal this winter.

He's not going to be a free agent. It's arbitration, and players are always playing for raises, it's kinda how professional sports work.

flyer85
12-12-2004, 07:47 PM
Myself, I WATCHED 99% of the Reds games on the Extra Innings package (120, 130??) and listened to most of the others.


A couch potato, armchair GM, coach and manager. A self-proclaimed expert.

Now I understand.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 07:47 PM
right.....(sigh).............
he'll be signing a new contract - "contract year" is close enough for me.


He's not going to be a free agent. It's arbitration, and players are always playing for raises, it's kinda how professional sports work.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 07:48 PM
what ever you say stat rat


A couch potato, armchair GM, coach and manager. A self-proclaimed expert.

Now I undrstand.

RFS62
12-12-2004, 07:49 PM
right.....(sigh).............



You seem to sigh a lot, DunnHater.


:RedinDC:

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 07:49 PM
ah...the old "per plate appearance"......rather than "at bat"....

of course, those invaluable walks to pass a clutch rbi situation on to LaRue or Bragg or who knows who else must be factored in.



Did you see with your own eyes that WMP struck out more times per plate appearance than Dunn did?


Player Team PA K%
Pena W. CIN 364 30%
Dunn A. CIN 681 28%

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 07:57 PM
How would you respond to a guy saying you are wrong for calling this year a "contract year" for Dunn?


You seem to sigh a lot, DunnHater.


:RedinDC:

SteelSD
12-12-2004, 08:11 PM
of course, those invaluable walks to pass a clutch rbi situation on to LaRue or Bragg or who knows who else must be factored in.

Right. Because great hitters swing at Balls.

Build your bridge yet?

TRF
12-12-2004, 08:17 PM
A contract year implies Dunn is playing for a contract offer from multiple teams. He isn't. He's Reds property. period.

So you don't know the terminolgy.

It's about getting on base, and not making outs. Add to that Dunn's prolific power and incredible SLG and what you have is A HOF player in the making.

Don't hand us any garbage about rbi's. guys have to be on for him to jack one, and it certainly isn't his fault he had no credible protection in the lineup with Jr. and AK hurt most of the year.

You walked into Redszone. This is without a doubt the most intelligent fanzone on the internet. Don't bring the BA, RBI arguement here, it's got no weight. But if it makes you feel better, After Boone left, Dunn's BA jumped 50 points.

wheels
12-12-2004, 08:23 PM
:MandJ:

CougarQuest
12-12-2004, 08:42 PM
Mr. or Ms. DunnHater

Take it easy. Believe it or not this board is full of extremely knowledgable baseball and Cincinnati Reds fans. This apparent need of yours to explain stats isn't necessary, the posters here already know stats. Some posters here have enough computer knowledge to even know how to look up stats they don't already have. Some posters here even know how to read books to look up stats and what they mean. Many posters in here go to every home games and many away games. You don't need to post with a chip on your shoulder. I realize this is the season to be giving, but you need to receive a little also. Relax, enjoy. That way we all might learn something.

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 08:44 PM
you want to split hairs go ahead....his performance this past year will have a direct impact on what dollars he will get from the Reds in his new contract to be signed THIS year. you frame that in whatever "terminology" you want to.

Don't hand me your "garbage" and pretentious attitude. I started this thread very simply to express an opinion about OPS vs. OBP vs. "slugging/batting average". If you can't see that on one level mixing OBP and SLG is mixing apples and oranges and can produce a result which can in some cases overstate/understate well then I can't help you. You can lead the horse ......blah blah...............

Dunn can help a team. But he strikes out too much and is plain and simply not a good enough hitter to bat 3, 4 or 5. And despite his OBP, his lack of bat control/speed make him totally ill suited for a 1,2 spot in order where you might plug in a high OBP. He has had 4 full years to develop into a more complete player but he is still basically the same guy he was in year one. Reds can't afford to pay multi-millions for a one dimensional big swing guy.



A contract year implies Dunn is playing for a contract offer from multiple teams. He isn't. He's Reds property. period.

So you don't know the terminolgy.

It's about getting on base, and not making outs. Add to that Dunn's prolific power and incredible SLG and what you have is A HOF player in the making.

Don't hand us any garbage about rbi's. guys have to be on for him to jack one, and it certainly isn't his fault he had no credible protection in the lineup with Jr. and AK hurt most of the year.

You walked into Redszone. This is without a doubt the most intelligent fanzone on the internet. Don't bring the BA, RBI arguement here, it's got no weight. But if it makes you feel better, After Boone left, Dunn's BA jumped 50 points.

RANDY IN INDY
12-12-2004, 08:49 PM
Right. Because great hitters swing at Balls.

Build your bridge yet?

Adam Dunn knows how to take a walk. He also strikes out a lot when he takes a couple of hittable strikes and then goes fishin' for a ball out of the zone in those "behind in the count" situations. I heard an interview with Adam Dunn, late in the season, and he stated that he would like to start "cashing in" on more of the fastballs that he gets, early in the count, particularly when there are runners in scoring position.

I'm not going to try and take anything away from Adam Dunn's season because I thought it was really impressive in a lot of ways, but even he knows and admits that he takes a lot of good pitches that he can and should hit with authority. I want to see him agressive on those pitches. The guy knows a ball from a strike. To blindly defend the fact that he can and should hit a lot of those pitches in favor of trying to draw a walk goes against the grain where I am sitting. Hitting those pitches with authority is not going to change the type of hitter that he is in any negative way. He'll, more than likely, draw more bases on balls because of it.

I want Adam Dunn on this baseball team. I also want to see him start making pitchers pay for those "fat ones" that they have been getting by him, early in counts, for the last couple of years. When he does this, and I really believe he can, he is going to price himself right out of the Queen City and become a "truly elite" hitter. He, self admittedly, knows what he needs to do. When he does it, he will be a much more complete hitter.

wheels
12-12-2004, 08:55 PM
you want to split hairs go ahead....his performance this past year will have a direct impact on what dollars he will get from the Reds in his new contract to be signed THIS year. you frame that in whatever "terminology" you want to.

Don't hand me your "garbage" and pretentious attitude. I started this thread very simply to express an opinion about OPS vs. OBP vs. "slugging/batting average". If you can't see that on one level mixing OBP and SLG is mixing apples and oranges and can produce a result which can in some cases overstate/understate well then I can't help you. You can lead the horse ......blah blah...............

Dunn can help a team. But he strikes out too much and is plain and simply not a good enough hitter to bat 3, 4 or 5. And despite his OBP, his lack of bat control/speed make him totally ill suited for a 1,2 spot in order where you might plug in a high OBP. He has had 4 full years to develop into a more complete player but he is still basically the same guy he was in year one. Reds can't afford to pay multi-millions for a one dimensional big swing guy.

How am I being pretentious? You said Dunn was in a contract year, and he wasn't. He's still Reds property. Every year for every player and the stats they put up directly impact how much they make.

It's not about "terminology". I just don't agree with your assertion that Dunn's numbers were somehow inflated because he's in a "contract year".

You being offended by that would be akin to me being offended because you called me a horse. ;)

BadFundamentals
12-12-2004, 09:02 PM
Didn't refer to you as "pretentious". I was referencing TRF (scroll up).
(same with horse reference.....)

This past year was critical for determining what Dunn will make in this upcoming contract. How about that? ;) Agree on that?

Were he to have put up another .215 avg. and led both leagues in outfielder errors again he would stand to make much less money than he will likely sign for this winter.

His single-season strikeout record this past year didn't help his case but his 46 HRs and 34 doubles will be some good ammunition for upping that dollar amount.


How am I being pretentious? You said Dunn was in a contract year, and he wasn't. He's still Reds property. Every year for every player and the stats they put up directly impact how much they make.

It's not about "terminology". I just don't agree with your assertion that Dunn's numbers were somehow inflated because he's in a "contract year".

You being offended by that would be akin to me being offended because you called me a horse. ;)

Tom Lawless Fan
12-12-2004, 09:03 PM
I think shes got a point about it being just about money for Dunn. Just because she got the terms wrong doesn't mean anything. :eek:

Raisor
12-12-2004, 09:24 PM
I think Dunn would be a much better hitter if he would just hit the ball more and not take thouse stupid walks eventhough it's actually the pitcher not pitching him the ball so it really isn't his fault but he hits long homeruns with noone on base excetp when Casey who does hit the ball gets on but what I really mean is Go REds! Because the Reds are going to trade Dunn for Mark Prior and Josh Beckett in a three way deal eventhough he isn't any good.

letsgojunior
12-12-2004, 09:29 PM
word

westofyou
12-12-2004, 09:32 PM
This thread reminds me of this story.

http://www.deadballart.com/redszone/haircut.jpg

RosieRed
12-12-2004, 09:36 PM
Were he to have put up another .215 avg. and led both leagues in outfielder errors again he would stand to make much less money than he will likely sign for this winter.

So ... we should hope Reds players perform poorly so that the FO doesn't have to pay them much money?

Raisor
12-12-2004, 09:36 PM
OPS is just jealous of batting average because one day they were having coffee and OPS found out that batting average had three lumps of sugar and OPS only had two and to this day it has caused a rift between Bill James and the guy that had the three lumps of sugar but it doesn't matter because I wonce saw Willy McGee run really fast which means that today's players just aren't as good.
gO REds!

SteelSD
12-12-2004, 09:43 PM
Adam Dunn knows how to take a walk. He also strikes out a lot when he takes a couple of hittable strikes and then goes fishin' for a ball out of the zone in those "behind in the count" situations. I heard an interview with Adam Dunn, late in the season, and he stated that he would like to start "cashing in" on more of the fastballs that he gets, early in the count, particularly when there are runners in scoring position.

I'm not going to try and take anything away from Adam Dunn's season because I thought it was really impressive in a lot of ways, but even he knows and admits that he takes a lot of good pitches that he can and should hit with authority. I want to see him agressive on those pitches. The guy knows a ball from a strike. To blindly defend the fact that he can and should hit a lot of those pitches in favor of trying to draw a walk goes against the grain where I am sitting. Hitting those pitches with authority is not going to change the type of hitter that he is in any negative way. He'll, more than likely, draw more bases on balls because of it.

I want Adam Dunn on this baseball team. I also want to see him start making pitchers pay for those "fat ones" that they have been getting by him, early in counts, for the last couple of years. When he does this, and I really believe he can, he is going to price himself right out of the Queen City and become a "truly elite" hitter. He, self admittedly, knows what he needs to do. When he does it, he will be a much more complete hitter.


Randy, I completed a study some time ago that determined that Adam Dunn does not sit and watch fat pitches go by. He's not the passive hitter you seem to think he is. He does not take the number of "fat" strikes you think he does early in counts. It's just that he misses a bunch of pitches he swings at. As he continues to develop, he'll hit a higher percentage of them allowing us all to be happy.

He's already an "truly elite" hitter just the way he is. At age 24. Scary.

Raisor
12-12-2004, 09:52 PM
He's already an "truly elite" hitter just the way he is. At age 24. Scary.


You just think that because you're somekind of scientist with the numbers and the facts and stuff. If you actually watched the game you'd know that Dunn can't manufacture runs because he strikes out too much to be an elite player. You can get your facts to say anything they want to because pie is good.

RANDY IN INDY
12-12-2004, 10:19 PM
Randy, I completed a study some time ago that determined that Adam Dunn does not sit and watch fat pitches go by. He's not the passive hitter you seem to think he is. He does not take the number of "fat" strikes you think he does early in counts. It's just that he misses a bunch of pitches he swings at. As he continues to develop, he'll hit a higher percentage of them allowing us all to be happy.

He's already an "truly elite" hitter just the way he is. At age 24. Scary.

I respect your opinion, Steel, (even if you don't think so) and I would be interested in seeing that study in print, but I also watch the majority of the Reds games that are televised. I know that my eyes are not deceiving me when I see Adam Dunn take a lot of very hittable pitches for strikes, early in counts. IF I were the only person to see that, I might feel different, but a lot of folks that I talk to, and respect, have observed the same thing. In my opinion, he gives a lot of at bats away because of it. He is not a good two strike hitter. He goes fishin' for the ball out of the zone a whole lot with two strikes. A lot of hitters do. It's not everyone's forte to hit with two strikes. It's tough. I even heard Adam Dunn allude to the fact that he wants to make pitchers pay by hitting more of those early strikes in an interview.

As far as Dunn being a truly elite hitter, well I think that is very subjective from person to person. I don't think he is there yet. It'll take putting up elite #'s for a few more seasons for me to say that, and my opinion is only that. I think that the key is, "will Dunn continue to develop as a hitter. It's not easy at this level.

I think you hit it on the nail when you said, "As he continues to develop, he'll hit a higher percentage of them, allowing us all to be happy." Let's all hope he does just that.

RANDY IN INDY
12-12-2004, 10:21 PM
You just think that because you're somekind of scientist with the numbers and the facts and stuff. If you actually watched the game you'd know that Dunn can't manufacture runs because he strikes out too much to be an elite player. You can get your facts to say anything they want to because pie is good.

That's nice.
:rolleyes:

Steve4192
12-12-2004, 11:10 PM
I usually find Raisor's posting style to be cogent and thought provoking. After viewing his most recent attempts at sarcasm ... I hope he never returns to making sense. I especially enjoyed "because pie is good".

That stuff is gold I tell ya, GOLD!

MWM
12-12-2004, 11:14 PM
This thread got me curious, so I ran a quick and dirty regression on a few key statistics and how they correlate with runs scored per team. I simply put in runs scored as the dependent variable and made the other stats the independent variable. The best measure of correlation (R-Squared) tells us how much of the variation in runs scored is explained by this variable. Below are the results (and the P-values are very low for all items below):

Batting Average - .64 (that's not very good and this model, in most cases, would be considered very poor in it's predictive value). Also, the residual plot showed significant autocorrelation.

OBP - .76 - Still not great, but better than BA. Residuals look OK on this one.

SLG - .86 - Getting warmer

OPS - .94 - Folks, we have a winner

BA w/ RISP - .56 (basically, no predictive value)

Strike Outs - .003 ( :MandJ: )

Walks - .36

And the standard error for OPS is only 40% the size of the SE for BA.

Also, if you compare a team's BA with RISP and compare it with the team's overall BA, there's almost NO difference across the board. Of the 30 teams, only 4 had a difference greater than 5% from their overall batting average. Only 1 team had a difference greater than 10% (which happened to be 10.9% and it was Milwaukee and it was lower).

SteelSD
12-13-2004, 01:09 AM
I respect your opinion, Steel, (even if you don't think so) and I would be interested in seeing that study in print, but I also watch the majority of the Reds games that are televised. I know that my eyes are not deceiving me when I see Adam Dunn take a lot of very hittable pitches for strikes, early in counts. IF I were the only person to see that, I might feel different, but a lot of folks that I talk to, and respect, have observed the same thing. In my opinion, he gives a lot of at bats away because of it.

Randy, it has nothing to do with respecting or not respecting an opinion in this case.

Here's a data sample I posted back on September 16th:

Dunn's first 56 September PA:

<Begin cut-and-paste job>

1st Strike Looking: 27 PA
1st Strike Swinging: 26 PA

2nd Strike Looking: 10 PA
2nd Strike Swinging: 23 PA

3rd Strike Looking: 6 PA
3rd Strike Swinging: 25 PA

Note: "Strike Swinging" totals includes balls hit into play with a 0, 1, or 2 strike count as well as swinging strikes. Also note that Dunn has drawn a BB 3 times this month while not taking or swinging at a single strike.

Now, I haven't the time to track Strikes PA by PA over the course of the season but I feel that the September numbers are pretty reasonable considering that I already charted the June numbers.

Dunn swings at about half of the first Strikes he sees. After that, Dunn has either swung and missed or swung and hit the second or third strike he sees into play 47 times. In some cases, he's fouled off multiple pitches (which I didn't track) in getting to a PA outcome.

Considering that Dunn has only looked at strike two and three sixteen times this month, my question would be:

"What room does Adam Dunn have to swing at a bunch of 'fat' pitches he's not swinging at currently?"

First pitch strikes. That's it. After the first pitch, he's swinging at about 75% of the balls we can assume are strikes. Of course, not all pitches he swings and misses are in the strike zone, so Dunn has actually seen fewer true strikes than he's swung at and, of course, not all strikes taken are "fat" pitches. I simply don't see, with only 16 strikes taken after Strike one this month, where Dunn is getting all these "fat" pitches- especially considering how careful opposing hurlers are when pitching to him.

<End cut-and-paste job>

Dunn swung at "early-count" pitches 57% of the time over that sample.

So yeah. Sorry, but I'm going to tell you that your (and your friends') observations are inaccurate. Your eyes are deceiving you. Dunn swings a ton. There's really no opportunity for improvement in the area of swinging earlier in counts based on the results of that data set.

And if Dunn thinks he needs to swing at more pitches early in the count, he's wrong. He's swinging at enough of them. He's either over-thinking or he's getting bad advice.

Cedric
12-13-2004, 01:49 AM
Let me end this thread.

Adam Dunn is the best player the Reds have, there is ABSOLUTELY no reason for this to be discussed.

RANDY IN INDY
12-13-2004, 07:56 AM
Hate to differ, Steel, but no, my eyes are not deceiving me. I would like to see the #'s for a full season. To call my observation innacurate over a whole season, based on the numbers from two months is a bit presumtuous.

To quote Raisor, maybe "pie is good." ;)

MWM
12-13-2004, 08:06 AM
Whenver "eyes" and the actual numbers themselves diagree, alomst without exception, the eyes are wrong, I don't care how much you know about or how long you've been watching baseball. No one's eyes are that good.

SteelSD
12-13-2004, 11:13 AM
Hate to differ, Steel, but no, my eyes are not deceiving me. I would like to see the #'s for a full season. To call my observation innacurate over a whole season, based on the numbers from two months is a bit presumtuous.

If you'd like to see the numbers for each of Dunn's 681 Plate Appearances, then by all means feel free to track them PA-by-PA in an attempt to provide yourself a tangible counter-argument. In my post above, I explained how to go about it.

Basically, you're asking me to believe that you've got every pitch from all Dunn's Plate Appearances hiding somewhere in your long-term memory store. It's not that I don't "trust" your ability to see or your brain's ability to determine a single pitch's location. It's just that I don't trust the human brain to be able to accurately process, store, and recall the exact velocity, movement, and location every pitch thrown to every player in every game over a week much less a season.

Randy, you just casually dismissed hours of work I put into the subject with no data to support your position while I actually respected the opinion you currently hold enough to put in hours of work tracking it last season.

Folks positioned the concept that Dunn doesn't swing enough. I looked into it. I spent enough time on it to determine that Dunn wasn't behaving as people perceived. I chose to spend no more time on the subject because I don't believe that Dunn just chose to behave in a wildly different manner in June and the first two weeks of September.

It appears your new contention is that Dunn actually DID behave in a wildly different manner in June and September. If you can demonstrate that, I'll be 100% completely without-at-doubt absolutely willing to alter my position. I'd have to because I can't just casually dismiss factual supporting data should you choose to provide it.

As an obviously intelligent guy, don't you think we'd have more productive conversations if you'd bring some supporting data to the table?

Raisor
12-13-2004, 11:16 AM
. I especially enjoyed "because pie is good".



Everyone likes pie.

Even Conan the Barbarian has been known to sit down in his favorite coffee shop and eat a piece of pie.

Cigar2
12-13-2004, 11:22 AM
Man oh Man. I don't know to say about some of the thing said in this thread especially
by BadFun and Dunn Hater.:eek:
But has I writing this I'm still in shock :shocked: I say and thus I'm aving a hardtime getting my thoughts straight.
Anyway's for me when it comes to what I want to see from Donkey next year. Is cut down on those evi strike outs.
Say somewhere in the 150 range while keep everything else he did last year the same (and do it for his career) I would be happy.
And why most here on this board (like me) want Dunn signed to a long term contract NOW!!!
Is because of salary arb and the big unknown it will cause in the future for this team money wise.
Cause has we all know even if Adam puts up the the numbers he did this for the rest of his arbitation years.
Adam will get more and more money from Reds and no longer be (most importantly) affordable for the Reds and keep the Reds from being flexible with their payroll when it comes to making moves to help this team WIN.
While helping the owners of the team make their money.

zombie-a-go-go
12-13-2004, 11:30 AM
OMG vs. LOL

Tom Lawless Fan
12-13-2004, 11:52 AM
I just think Dunn will always strike out and his carreer will fade like Rob Deers did.

At least incavilla lasted a couple years longer because he switch hit.

Maybe Dunn can learn to switch hit?

creek14
12-13-2004, 11:54 AM
I just think Dunn will always strike out and his carreer will fade like Rob Deers did.

At least incavilla lasted a couple years longer because he switch hit.

Maybe Dunn can learn to switch hit?
Can we archieve this?

westofyou
12-13-2004, 12:06 PM
I just think Dunn will always strike out and his carreer will fade like Rob Deers did.

At least incavilla lasted a couple years longer because he switch hit.

Maybe Dunn can learn to switch hit?


Rob Deer had played 91 games in MLB by the time he was Dunn's age.

Pete Incaviglia was a RH hitter.

But please continue.

Raisor
12-13-2004, 01:10 PM
I'm not a big fan of "Runs Created" perhaps only because I think OBP, batting average, Slugging and the other individual stats tell you all you need to know.

But....honestly, I haven't looked at that stat that much in detail.


Here's your chance.

In the majors in 2004, Runs Created was 97.3% accurate in predicting Runs Scored (23,376 actual runs scored vs 24,031.2 Runs Created)

The RC formula was slightly even more accurate when it comes to the Reds. 97.4% accurate (750 actual runs vs 770.1 Runs Created).

In other words, we can be over 97% sure that Adam Dunn created nearly 125 runs for the Reds in 2004, or approx 16% of the Reds total offense. He ranked 9th in the NL behind Bonds, Helton, Pujols, Abreu, Berkman, Beltre, Edmonds, and Drew.

That's with all the strikeouts, by the way. If he's going to create 125 runs a year, I don't care if he K's 200 times or hits .250.

Raisor
12-13-2004, 04:22 PM
Just went to look at something else. Adam Dunn struck out 24 more times per month then Albert Pujols, yet, Pujols created only 3.7 more runs then Dunn per month.

Pujols also had 65 points of batting average on Dunn. All that, and he created less then four more runs per month then Dunn.

Tom Lawless Fan
12-13-2004, 06:04 PM
If Dunn could hit right handed too, he'd be able to see every bad pitch and maybe not get so choked up and nervous. I think he's not as good against lefties and that would even things up a bit. It doesn't take long to learn, I did it when I was a kid and was pretty good.

Raisor
12-13-2004, 06:07 PM
. It [learning to switch hit] doesn't take long to learn, I did it when I was a kid and was pretty good.


ok, I can't compete with this..

:eek:

westofyou
12-13-2004, 06:07 PM
It doesn't take long to learn, I did it when I was a kid and was pretty good.

JT Snow says hi.

Tom Lawless Fan
12-13-2004, 06:11 PM
JT Snow says hi.

:confused: I thought JT is a switch hitter?

First you say Incavigla was RH, now Snoe is not a SH.... :eek:

westofyou
12-13-2004, 06:11 PM
:confused: I thought JT is a switch hitter?

First you say Incavigla was RH, now Snoe is not a SH.... :eek:

Apparently it wasn't as easy for him as it was for you.

Go figure.

Yeah, I "said" Inky was a RH.

Because he was.

Puffy
12-13-2004, 06:12 PM
:confused: I thought JT is a switch hitter?

First you say Incavigla was RH, now Snoe is not a SH.... :eek:

He is saying that JT Snow was a switch hitter but he was adequete from the left side, and very inadequete from the right side.

Or, he was saying it ain't as easy as you think.

And he beat me to his response, so I'd like to change my response to "Skeeter Barnes for President in 2008!!"

wheels
12-13-2004, 06:14 PM
:MandJ: :MandJ:

Raisor
12-13-2004, 06:15 PM
I bet Tom is really Steel having a little fun with us.

:thumbup:

Boss-Hog
12-13-2004, 06:52 PM
I bet Tom is really Steel having a little fun with us.

:thumbup:
Close, but no cigar. :)

wheels
12-13-2004, 08:17 PM
:p:

Raisor
12-13-2004, 09:34 PM
Here's your chance.

In the majors in 2004, Runs Created was 97.3% accurate in predicting Runs Scored (23,376 actual runs scored vs 24,031.2 Runs Created)

The RC formula was slightly even more accurate when it comes to the Reds. 97.4% accurate (750 actual runs vs 770.1 Runs Created).

In other words, we can be over 97% sure that Adam Dunn created nearly 125 runs for the Reds in 2004, or approx 16% of the Reds total offense. He ranked 9th in the NL behind Bonds, Helton, Pujols, Abreu, Berkman, Beltre, Edmonds, and Drew.

That's with all the strikeouts, by the way. If he's going to create 125 runs a year, I don't care if he K's 200 times or hits .250.


I think I can count on my fingers of my left hand (and have four left over) how many times I've quoted myself, but BF is online right now and I'm hoping he might actually take a look at this and perhaps comment.

BadFundamentals
12-13-2004, 09:36 PM
OK fair enough. Thanks for the quick and dirty summary.

I guess I still prefer the OBP, SLG, Batting avg. and a given players intangibles etc. etc..taken independently and assigned appropriate weights for a given discussion to something like RC for a simple reason. They don't group all 162 games together and award the pennant to the team that scores the most cumulative runs during the year. Each game is a new day. If you win a game 25-2 it is still just ONE win. There is no Cingular rollover.

I'd prefer versatile players who can do whatever it takes to win each game one at a time.



Here's your chance.

In the majors in 2004, Runs Created was 97.3% accurate in predicting Runs Scored (23,376 actual runs scored vs 24,031.2 Runs Created)

The RC formula was slightly even more accurate when it comes to the Reds. 97.4% accurate (750 actual runs vs 770.1 Runs Created).

In other words, we can be over 97% sure that Adam Dunn created nearly 125 runs for the Reds in 2004, or approx 16% of the Reds total offense. He ranked 9th in the NL behind Bonds, Helton, Pujols, Abreu, Berkman, Beltre, Edmonds, and Drew.

That's with all the strikeouts, by the way. If he's going to create 125 runs a year, I don't care if he K's 200 times or hits .250.

MWM
12-13-2004, 09:40 PM
If you're losing by 5 runs by the late innings of almost every game, what good are those "intangibles" to you. Also, there's plenty of data that contradicts the whole "blowout" theory. Small sample sizes!

Also, with the level of accuracy laid out by Raisor, how can you possibly prefer your own little theory?

Raisor
12-13-2004, 09:48 PM
OK fair enough. Thanks for the quick and dirty summary.

I guess I still prefer the OBP, SLG, Batting avg. and a given players intangibles etc. etc..taken independently and assigned appropriate weights for a given discussion to something like RC for a simple reason. They don't group all 162 games together and award the pennant to the team that scores the most cumulative runs during the year. Each game is a new day. If you win a game 25-2 it is still just ONE win. There is no Cingular rollover.

I'd prefer versatile players who can do whatever it takes to win each game one at a time.


Personally, I like to be able to see, within a very small margin of error (like I said, in 2004 less then a 3% difference) (nearly) exactly how many runs a player creates, especially when you're comparing one player to another.

Adam Dunn creating the 9th most runs in the NL actually means something.

Raisor
12-13-2004, 09:49 PM
Also, with the level of accuracy laid out by Raisor, how can you possibly prefer your own little theory?


Tomorrow night, I'll try to figure out the margin of error for the last few years, unless someone beats me to it.

IslandRed
12-13-2004, 09:56 PM
I guess I still prefer the OBP, SLG, Batting avg. and a given players intangibles etc. etc..taken independently and assigned appropriate weights for a given discussion to something like RC for a simple reason. They don't group all 162 games together and award the pennant to the team that scores the most cumulative runs during the year.

Except there's been this discovery -- not a particularly new one -- that a team's season run totals (or, more properly, run differential) has a very high correlation to its real-world wins and losses. (It's called the Pythagorean Theorem -- a team's actual record can be predicted, with some accuracy, simply by knowing how many runs it scored and allowed over 162 games.) A player that creates a ton of runs is helping his team win, even if he has some deficiencies that keep him from being even better.

BadFundamentals
12-13-2004, 10:16 PM
Well said.

I'm going to maintain though that if you're one of the good teams who have a legitimate chance at winning a pennant the difference between teams at that level will often be "the little things" and "the intangibles". The Reds can only afford to pay a select few "superstar" money and I think they need to be careful which players get it.




Except there's been this discovery -- not a particularly new one -- that a team's season run totals (or, more properly, run differential) has a very high correlation to its real-world wins and losses. (It's called the Pythagorean Theorem -- a team's actual record can be predicted, with some accuracy, simply by knowing how many runs it scored and allowed over 162 games.) A player that creates a ton of runs is helping his team win, even if he has some deficiencies that keep him from being even better.

Crumbley
12-14-2004, 02:31 AM
I'm not the president of the Jose Guillen club. But I can tell a guy who (mid year 2003) is dialed in and showing no signs of cooling off. And I favor playing guys who produce over those with the "presumed potential".
He hit 46 home runs. That's a lot.

TRF
12-14-2004, 09:15 AM
If there are only a select few, why not pay that money to the guy that produced the ninth most runs in baseball last year?

flyer85
12-14-2004, 09:18 AM
If there are only a select few, why not pay that money to the guy that produced the ninth most runs in baseball last year?

because he strikes out to much. If only he would ground out to SS more often.

BadFundamentals
12-14-2004, 09:47 AM
Because......just for kicks, say the Reds contend this year......(play along) :D .....

It will be the "little things" and the "intangibles" etc... that will ultimately separate a second place team from a first place team and a playoff team from a world series team. If I can only pay a select few big $$$, one of them is not going to be (regardless of his numbers) a one dimensional guy who rates at the very bottom in important intangible areas.

Another example, probably wouldn't pay Manny Ramirez either. I'd love Manny on the team but not if I can only pay 2 or 3 guys like superstars.

I'd keep the Donkey if it were possible to pay him Jiminez/Freel money but I'm sure that is not possible.



If there are only a select few, why not pay that money to the guy that produced the ninth most runs in baseball last year?

westofyou
12-14-2004, 09:54 AM
I'd keep the Donkey if it were possible to pay him Jiminez/Freel money but I'm sure that is not possible.

Both those guys will be doing fanatasy camps by the time Dunn is hitting his 500 HR, and creating the real intangibles.

More runs then then the other team.

flyer85
12-14-2004, 09:54 AM
intangibles - subjective, things that cannot be objectively measured.

Sounds like a great basis for decision making. Let's ignore empirical evidence and focus on things we can't measure.

BadFundamentals
12-14-2004, 09:59 AM
Actually, yes.......empirical evidence can only take you so far.


intangibles - subjective, things that cannot be objectively measured.

Sounds like a great basis for decision making. Let's ignore empirical evidence and focus on things we can't measure.

flyer85
12-14-2004, 10:00 AM
Theories in practice - 2004 Red Sox were presented with the almost perfect contrast of the defense vs offense. I think it is informative to see the direction they went

2nd base - important defensive position.
The candidates:
Bellhorn - poor defense, high Ks, mediocre BA, high BBs good power
Reese - great defense, low BA, low BBs, no power

The Red Sox chose offense over defense and it is rather obvious they made the right choice.

flyer85
12-14-2004, 10:02 AM
Actually, yes.......empirical evidence can only take you so far.

I'll translate - we aren't getting the result we want, we are not wrong, therefore we must not have the right evidence.

BadFundamentals
12-14-2004, 10:03 AM
Where in the "numbers" could it have predicted that Griff would be on the shelf for 4 years?

Where in the "numbers" could it have predicted Rickey Williams would quit football?

Where in his college numbers could you have projected Brady to be the quarterback he has become?


Actually, yes.......empirical evidence can only take you so far.

flyer85
12-14-2004, 10:06 AM
Where in the "numbers" could it have predicted that Griff would be on the shelf for 4 years?

Where in the "numbers" could it have predicted Rickey Williams would quit football?

Where in his college numbers could you have projected Brady to be the quarterback he has become?


two words - straw man

SteelSD
12-14-2004, 10:18 AM
two words - straw man

Uh...actually, that would be straw men.

Carry on. ;)

Raisor
12-14-2004, 08:18 PM
I believe I'm joining M2. I do hope this thread continues, because there is some very interesting points being made. I will say, that if this thread was a baseball game, my side would be beating BF 15-0, 2-out, no one on, in the bottom of the 9th. We've got Eric Gagne up to close things out and BF has Neifi Perez up with 2 strikes.

In other words, I'm feeling pretty good about things.