PDA

View Full Version : Half Point Reds VORP leaders



westofyou
07-12-2006, 06:20 PM
VORP

Value Over Replacement Player. The number of runs contributed beyond what a replacement-level player at the same position would contribute if given the same percentage of team plate appearances. VORP scores do not consider the quality of a player's defense.

Here are the Reds top 10 batters and pitchers by VORP.

3 of the top 4 position players and the top pitcher are all Krivsky moves.

Ponder where the Reds would be if those performances weren't replaced with quality.


VORP

1. Brandon Phillips CIN 2b 20.9
2. Adam Dunn CIN lf 20.5
3. Scott Hatteberg CIN 1b 18.5
4. Dave Ross CIN c 18.4
5. Ryan Freel CIN cf 18.1
6. Felipe Lopez CIN ss 16.7
7. Austin Kearns CIN rf 14.9
8. Ken Griffey Jr. CIN cf 12.1
9. Edwin Encarnacion CIN 3b 7.7
10. Rich Aurilia CIN 3b 7.2

VORP BABIP
1. Bronson Arroyo CIN NL 39.7 0.282
2. Aaron Harang CIN NL 25.5 0.341
3. Todd Coffey CIN NL 11.5 0.317
4. Elizardo Ramirez CIN NL 10.3 0.293
5. Eric Milton CIN NL 6.1 0.269
6. Dave Weathers CIN NL 3.9 0.296
7. Esteban Yan CIN NL 3.3 0.220
8. Matt Belisle CIN NL 3.0 0.300
9. Kent Mercker CIN NL 1.5 0.260
10. Jason Standridge CIN NL 1.3 0.385

Ltlabner
07-12-2006, 06:27 PM
Does that mean the number of runs contributed as in RBI's? Or runs contributed as in how many times the individual player crosses home plate?

wheels
07-12-2006, 06:29 PM
I can't wait to see Milton's VORP at the end of the season.

westofyou
07-12-2006, 06:31 PM
Does that mean the number of runs contributed as in RBI's? Or runs contributed as in how many times the individual player crosses home plate?

VORP is a cumulative stat, not a rate stat,

VORP encompasses how much playing time the player in question got, and is a number of runs contributed over replacement level *given that amount of playing time.* There is a rate stat version of VORP--"VORPr" (VORP-rate)

It expresses a player's rate of production in runs per game above replacement level. e.g. a player with a .500 VORPr contributes half-a-run above replacement level per game (which is outstanding, BTW). VORPr (and VORP) can be less than zero, meaning that a player was below replacement level over that stretch of plate appearances.

reds44
07-12-2006, 06:32 PM
Our cleanup hitter is 10th on our team.

:lol:

Ltlabner
07-12-2006, 06:38 PM
Our cleanup hitter is 10th on our team.

:rolleyes: I wondered how long it would take for that comment to be made.

I'm also currious about that guy in 9th place.

reds44
07-12-2006, 06:45 PM
:rolleyes: I wondered how long it would take for that comment to be made.

I'm also currious about that guy in 9th place.
What about him? He is a developing player, and he hasn't been hitting cleanup.

Actually our 3-4 hitters are 8 and 10th. Sad lineup.

edabbs44
07-12-2006, 06:48 PM
VORP is a cumulative stat, not a rate stat,

VORP encompasses how much playing time the player in question got, and is a number of runs contributed over replacement level *given that amount of playing time.* There is a rate stat version of VORP--"VORPr" (VORP-rate)

It expresses a player's rate of production in runs per game above replacement level. e.g. a player with a .500 VORPr contributes half-a-run above replacement level per game (which is outstanding, BTW). VORPr (and VORP) can be less than zero, meaning that a player was below replacement level over that stretch of plate appearances.
What, or who, is this replacement player?

dsmith421
07-12-2006, 06:50 PM
What, or who, is this replacement player?

It refers to your average AAAA scrub that bounces between the majors and the minors, not an average major leaguer. Think someone like Reggie Taylor.

westofyou
07-12-2006, 06:51 PM
What, or who, is this replacement player?

A replacement-level player is one who is "easily available" to any team--a AAA journeyman or end of the bench player.

Replacement level is significantly below average--about 80% of average for the position.

If you think of it in OPS terms, (which we know you won't want to) roughly 70 points of OPS below the average for the position is replacement level.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4187

Ltlabner
07-12-2006, 06:54 PM
What's really impressive is Brandon Philips. He's been all over the lineup and yet has been able to find a way to contribute runs whether he's 2nd or 8th.

I know he's a dreaded vet, but I really like Hatte. That guy finds a way to 1B come heck or highwater.

pedro
07-12-2006, 06:58 PM
Edwin has also missed more than a month of play. I would guess his VORP would be more like 13 or so had he been not been injured.

edabbs44
07-12-2006, 06:59 PM
A replacement-level player is one who is "easily available" to any team--a AAA journeyman or end of the bench player.

Replacement level is significantly below average--about 80% of average for the position.

If you think of it in OPS terms, (which we know you won't want to) roughly 70 points of OPS below the average for the position is replacement level.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4187
I can think of it in OPS terms. I am just asking who this replacement player is. I'm also just asking how the thing is calculated, not the validity of it.

Now the validity question.

The million dollar question is...how in the world can Dunn be only worth 2 runs more than Hatte? Am I misreading this stat? Dunn has scored many more runs and knocked in double Hatte's runs.

So, is this number calculated by theory? That Hatte should be worth two runs less than Dunn? If it is, IMO, this stat is bogus. Because it isn't playing out on the field.

Please don't turn this into an OBP argument. I don't want to be involved in another OBP Royal Rumble. But if Dunn is only worth two more runs than Hatteberg, then he is severly overpaid and should be traded immediately. If OBP is driving Hatteberg's VORP into ridiculous levels, then just say that is the reason and we can move on. I just cannot see that two run difference as being legitimate, no matter if Bill James swears on a stack of Baseball Prospectuses that it is.

I again request a simple answer. Please no OBP brawls.

pedro
07-12-2006, 07:04 PM
I think it has something to do with Dunn's horrid may/june, poor defense so far, and the fact that Hatteberg has been playing over his head. I think you can expect that Hatteberg will finish the season about where he is and Dunn will finish with a VORP of about 45.

TMBS, if the Reds manage to get a VORP of 20 out of Hatteberg over the full season it will be quite the coup. BP projected hattebergs VORP prior to the season to be exactly Zero.

Ltlabner
07-12-2006, 07:10 PM
Edwin has also missed more than a month of play. I would guess his VORP would be more like 13 or so had he been not been injured.

Edwin has started 54 games, RA has started 60 so there isn't much different there in playing time. In fact, JR has started 60 games and has a higher number than both. And Ross, has only started 45 games yet has a significantly higher number than either EE or RA.

Crash Davis
07-12-2006, 07:12 PM
3 of the top 4 position players and the top pitcher are all Krivsky moves.

That's pretty impressive, right?

It absolutely blows my mind that fans on this board are still ragging on the job Krivsky has done. The "Aurilia / Hatteberg / Narron" type sniper cheapshots prevelant here since early in the season have branched out and now get aimed Krivsky's way because he had the nerve to pick up "former Twin" Juan Castro and a veteran closer not named Mariano Rivera or K-Rod. How someone can deride Krivsky's work since he's taken over is more than a bit :confused:

On a side note, how we lookin' on Hatteberg vs. Carlos Pena or Hee Seop Choi?

pedro
07-12-2006, 07:15 PM
Edwin has started 54 games, RA has started 60 so there isn't much different there in playing time. In fact, JR has started 60 games and has a higher number than both. And Ross, has only started 45 games yet has a significantly higher number than either EE or RA.

True, but there a couple of factors that I would expect to come into play over the full season.

1. EE's poor D has pulled his VORP down. I would expect over the full season for that to correct itself somewhat, plus he didn't really hit that well in May. I expect that would change as well.

2. RA's VORP has been helped by the fact, at least earlier in the season, that he was facing primarily LHP and playing mostly 1B where his defensive inadequacies (range) are somehwhat masked. If RA continues the trend of starting at 3B against RHP, I would expect his VORP to drop, or at least not grow.

Ltlabner
07-12-2006, 07:17 PM
1. EE poor D has pulled his VORP down. I would expect over the full season for that to correct itself somewhat, plus he didn't really hit that well in May. I expect that would change as well.

2. RA's VORP has been helped by the fact, at least earlier in the season, that he was facing primarily LHP and playing mostly 1B where his defensive inadequacies (range) are somehwhat masked. If RA continues the trend of starting at 3B against RHP, I would expect his VORP to drop, or at least not grow.

That would be true except for one small detail....

VORP scores do not consider the quality of a player's defense.

pedro
07-12-2006, 07:21 PM
That would be true except for one small detail....

my bad. I thought they did.

nevertheless, I do expect that continued exposure against RHP will hurt RA's VORP.

Marc D
07-12-2006, 07:24 PM
I can think of it in OPS terms. I am just asking who this replacement player is. I'm also just asking how the thing is calculated, not the validity of it.

Now the validity question.

The million dollar question is...how in the world can Dunn be only worth 2 runs more than Hatte? Am I misreading this stat? Dunn has scored many more runs and knocked in double Hatte's runs.

So, is this number calculated by theory? That Hatte should be worth two runs less than Dunn? If it is, IMO, this stat is bogus. Because it isn't playing out on the field.

Please don't turn this into an OBP argument. I don't want to be involved in another OBP Royal Rumble. But if Dunn is only worth two more runs than Hatteberg, then he is severly overpaid and should be traded immediately. If OBP is driving Hatteberg's VORP into ridiculous levels, then just say that is the reason and we can move on. I just cannot see that two run difference as being legitimate, no matter if Bill James swears on a stack of Baseball Prospectuses that it is.

I again request a simple answer. Please no OBP brawls.

No expert but I think VORP is based soley on the players position. IE Hatte is worth x more runs than a replacement level 1B and Dunn y more than a replacement level LF. You do not compare two players VORP from 2 different positions. I think the stat that compares any 2 players is Runs Created.

Take it FWIW, but thats the impression I get from casually looking over some of this stuff.

pedro
07-12-2006, 07:26 PM
No expert but I think VORP is based soley on the players position. IE Hatte is worth x more runs than a replacement level 1B and Dunn y more than a replacement level LF. You do not compare two players VORP from 2 different positions. I think the stat that compares any 2 players is Runs Created.

Take it FWIW, but thats the impression I get from casually looking over some of this stuff.


your are correct.

Reds1
07-12-2006, 07:26 PM
I was surprised to see EE so low. That list shoes who has carried us this year and it's been the bottom of the order. BP racked when he was hitting down in the order. Surprised Griffey so low too as he has produced well.

Ltlabner
07-12-2006, 07:27 PM
my bad. I thought they did.

nevertheless, I do expect that continued exposure against RHP will hurt RA's VORP.

I agree that over the long haul it's more reasonable to predict EE's VORP to increase and RA's to decrease. I was just suprised to see that they have contributed the same amout to the Reds offense thus far compared to other 3b.

I must be honest...I added the last italilicized part after reading post 21. I was making the mistake of comparing Dunn to Philips to Hatte to Kearns, etc. Thanks for clarifying.

Marc D
07-12-2006, 07:32 PM
I agree that over the long haul it's more reasonable to predict EE's VORP to increase and RA's to decrease. I was just suprised to see that they have contributed the same amout to the Reds offense thus far.

VORP is what both have contributed over and above what a replacement level guy would have done based on how much each has played this season.

If you want to see who has contributed more to the Reds offense, again I think RC is the stat you need to be looking at.


Per another post courtesy Ravenlord:





As 3B

Player AB RC

Encarnacion 187 29.95

Aurilia 111 15.39

Freel 40 17.12

Castro 14 2.5



Total 352 64.96

Replacements 165 35.01

Ltlabner
07-12-2006, 07:39 PM
VORP is what both have contributed over and above what a replacement level guy would have done based on how much each has played this season.


But RA has only played 4 more games than EE. So if they have played the same amout of time, haven't they contributed above and beyond the replacement player at the same level so far this year?

So for my statement to be correct (EE VORP increaseing, RA VORP decreasing) they would have to both play the same number of games, at the same position for a valid comparison (the comparison being who has contributed more runs above the level of the replacement player) to be made? Is this correct?

I'm not arguing, I'm asking becuase I want to understand this further. Thanks for taking the time to reply.

Marc D
07-12-2006, 07:43 PM
But RA has only played 4 more games than EE. So if they have played the same amout of time, haven't they contributed above and beyond the replacement player at the same level so far this year?

So for my statement to be correct (EE VORP increaseing, RA VORP decreasing) they would have to both play the same number of games, at the same position for a valid comparison (the comparison being who has contributed more runs above the level of the replacement player) to be made? Is this correct?

I'm not arguing, I'm asking becuase I want to understand this further. Thanks for taking the time to reply.

This gives abetter breakdown than I could.

http://www.stathead.com/bbeng/woolner/vorpdescnew.htm

Ltlabner
07-12-2006, 07:45 PM
Encarnacion 187 29.95

Aurilia 111 15.39

Another question: Does this mean that aprox 16% of EE's at bats end up creating a run one way or another, while aprox 14% of RA's at bates end up creating a run one way or another.

I got those percentages by deviding the RC by the AB's.

Is that a correct interpretation?

Sorry to hijack the thread. If you'd rather answer in PM that's fine.

pedro
07-12-2006, 07:47 PM
But RA has only played 4 more games than EE. So if they have played the same amout of time, haven't they contributed above and beyond the replacement player at the same level so far this year?

So for my statement to be correct (EE VORP increaseing, RA VORP decreasing) they would have to both play the same number of games, at the same position for a valid comparison (the comparison being who has contributed more runs above the level of the replacement player) to be made? Is this correct?

I'm not arguing, I'm asking becuase I want to understand this further. Thanks for taking the time to reply.


I'm honestly not sure how they do it when players play mutiple positions. My assumption is that the total them seperately per position and then add them together.

Regardless, while it is true that it isn't specifically meant as a way to compare players at different positions I wouldn't completely disregard it for that purpose either.

Ltlabner
07-12-2006, 07:49 PM
This gives abetter breakdown than I could.

http://www.stathead.com/bbeng/woolner/vorpdescnew.htm

Most cool. I have bookmarked it and will read it throughly.

Thanks!

pedro
07-12-2006, 07:53 PM
This gives abetter breakdown than I could.

http://www.stathead.com/bbeng/woolner/vorpdescnew.htm


that's excellent. thanks.

Marc D
07-12-2006, 07:57 PM
No problem.

Google has long been my friend in deciphering the stat acronyms I come across on here.;)

Reds Nd2
07-12-2006, 08:33 PM
I'm honestly not sure how they do it when players play mutiple positions. My assumption is that the total them seperately per position and then add them together.

For major league players, BP uses a weighted average across all positions played. Minor league players are rated at their most frequently played position.

edabbs44
07-12-2006, 08:52 PM
Ryan Howard VORP = 22.2
Scott Hatteberg VORP = 18.5

Same position. Howard has been worth a little under 4 runs more than Hatte.

I'll take Howard over Hatteberg any day of the week in a landslide. Thanks for playing, VORP.

Reds Nd2
07-12-2006, 08:57 PM
Here is how the position players rank at their position in the National League.


VORP League Rank

1. Brandon Phillips CIN 2b 20.9 3rd
2. Adam Dunn CIN lf 20.5 6th
3. Scott Hatteberg CIN 1b 18.5 8th
4. Dave Ross CIN c 18.4 3rd
5. Ryan Freel CIN cf 18.1 4th
6. Felipe Lopez CIN ss 16.7 6th
7. Austin Kearns CIN rf 14.9 4th
8. Ken Griffey Jr. CIN cf 12.1 8th
9. Edwin Encarnacion CIN 3b 7.7 13th
10. Rich Aurilia CIN 3b 7.2 14th

Far East
07-12-2006, 09:00 PM
What is the significance of Bronson Arroyo's 39.7 or any pitcher's VORP number?

39.7 what units?

Thanks.

Far East
07-12-2006, 09:07 PM
Quoting Reds Nd2: "VORP League Rank

1. Brandon Phillips CIN 2b 20.9 3rd
2. Adam Dunn CIN lf 20.5 6th
3. Scott Hatteberg CIN 1b 18.5 8th
4. Dave Ross CIN c 18.4 3rd
5. Ryan Freel CIN cf 18.1 4th
6. Felipe Lopez CIN ss 16.7 6th
7. Austin Kearns CIN rf 14.9 4th
8. Ken Griffey Jr. CIN cf 12.1 8th
9. Edwin Encarnacion CIN 3b 7.7 13th
10. Rich Aurilia CIN 3b 7.2 14th"

If I'm interpreting this correctly,and Reds' 10th guy is as high as 14th ranked in the league at his position, then we have nothing to worry about regarding the offense.

edabbs44
07-12-2006, 09:10 PM
Quoting Reds Nd2: "VORP League Rank

1. Brandon Phillips CIN 2b 20.9 3rd
2. Adam Dunn CIN lf 20.5 6th
3. Scott Hatteberg CIN 1b 18.5 8th
4. Dave Ross CIN c 18.4 3rd
5. Ryan Freel CIN cf 18.1 4th
6. Felipe Lopez CIN ss 16.7 6th
7. Austin Kearns CIN rf 14.9 4th
8. Ken Griffey Jr. CIN cf 12.1 8th
9. Edwin Encarnacion CIN 3b 7.7 13th
10. Rich Aurilia CIN 3b 7.2 14th"

If I'm interpreting this correctly,and Reds' 10th guy is as high as 14th ranked in the league at his position, then we have nothing to worry about regarding the offense.
Isn't that NL rank?

Jpup
07-12-2006, 09:14 PM
I think I understand most of this, but I am not sure what good it does. this doesn't seem to really tell a players worth to the team IMO. saying Brandon Phillips is leading the team in VORP is not really fair. You are comparing him to the likes of Jose Valentin while you are comparing Adam Dunn to the likes of Barry Bonds and Jason Bay. Something isn't right.

pedro
07-12-2006, 09:36 PM
I think I understand most of this, but I am not sure what good it does. this doesn't seem to really tell a players worth to the team IMO. saying Brandon Phillips is leading the team in VORP is not really fair. You are comparing him to the likes of Jose Valentin while you are comparing Adam Dunn to the likes of Barry Bonds and Jason Bay. Something isn't right.


I look at it this way (at least for guys who start)

If a guys VORP at the end of the year is....

under 10 - he's pretty useless

10-20 - he's marginal, but OK if not making a ton on money

20-40 - he's pretty good

40-50 - really good

50-60 - great

over 60 - elite

M2
07-12-2006, 09:59 PM
As for why Scott Hatteberg has such a high VORP, it's based on the RC formula to a large extent and a .411 OB will do wonders for your value in that equation. Ryan Freel, .383 OB, is no slouch on the VORP either.

Dunn's .369 OB is actually a little low for him. If he raises that up to .400 mark, he'll have some sick VORP numbers.

Falls City Beer
07-12-2006, 11:29 PM
That's pretty impressive, right?

It absolutely blows my mind that fans on this board are still ragging on the job Krivsky has done. The "Aurilia / Hatteberg / Narron" type sniper cheapshots prevelant here since early in the season have branched out and now get aimed Krivsky's way because he had the nerve to pick up "former Twin" Juan Castro and a veteran closer not named Mariano Rivera or K-Rod. How someone can deride Krivsky's work since he's taken over is more than a bit :confused:

On a side note, how we lookin' on Hatteberg vs. Carlos Pena or Hee Seop Choi?

Wait, so now you're using STATS to make a point against the stat crowd. For shame.;)

I thought it was all "feel."

But anyway, I don't believe anyone's fully explained the benefits of adding a .580 hitter with mediocre defense and a pitcher with a .900+ OPSA in Guardado.

Seems to me they could have taken their own .900 OPSA pitcher (Milton) and stuck him in the pen for free.

But hey, when Bill Bavasi kicks you to the curb, you KNOW it's gold.

Krivsky's done some good and he's done some inexplicably redundant and pointless. I have no idea what to expect next from the guy. In my heart of hearts, I think that's the fairest assessment, as I see it.

SteelSD
07-12-2006, 11:33 PM
Other guages:

Information courtesy of Baseball Prospectus.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/glossary/index.php

Marginal Lineup Value: A measure of offensive production created by David Tate and further developed by Keith Woolner. MLV is an estimate of the additional number of runs a given player will contribute to a lineup that otherwise consists of average offensive performers.

Reds Rank. Player: MLV

1. Adam Dunn: 17.1 MLV
2. Scott Hatteberg: 16.4 MLV
3. Dave Ross: 15.2 MLV
4. Austin Kearns: 10.6 MLV
5. Ryan Freel: 8.5 MLV
6. Brandon Phillips: 6.5 MLV
7. Edwin Encarnacion: 5.5 MLV
8. Ken Griffey Junior: 4.9 MLV
9. Rich Aurilia: 3.6 MLV
10. Chris Denorfia: 2.1 MLV (and no, I'm not kidding)

Runs Above Replacement: RAR compares a hitter's Equivalent Run total to that of a replacement level player who makes the same number of outs and plays the same position. A replacement level player is one who has .736 times as many EqR as the average for that position; that corresponds to a .351 winning percentage.

Reds Rank. Player: RAR

1. Adam Dunn: 26.1 RAR
2. Scott Hatteberg: 20.0 RAR
3. Austin Kearns: 18.9 RAR
4. Ryan Freel: 15.2 RAR
5. Brandon Phillips: 14.9 RAR
6. David Ross: 14.3 RAR
7. Felipe Lopez: 13.5 RAR
8. Ken Griffey Junior: 10.5 RAR
9. Edwin Encarnacion: 10.3 RAR
10. Rich Aurilia: 9.1 RAR

Equivalent Runs: EQR = 5 * OUT * EQA^2.5. In the fielding charts, the estimated number of EqR he had at the plate while playing this position in the field.

Reds Rank. Player: EQR

1. Adam Dunn: 57.1 EQR
2. Austin Kearns: 49.3 EQR
3. Felipe Lopez: 46.6 EQR
4. Scott Hatteberg: 42.1 EQR
5. Brandon Phillips: 40.08 EQR
6. Ryan Freel: 37.9 EQR
7. Ken Griffey: 33.8 EQR
8. Rich Aurilia: 29.9 EQR
9. Edwin Encarnacion: 28.2 EQR
10. Dave Ross: 25.3 EQR

Runs Above Position: The number of Equivalent Runs this player produced, above what an average player at the same postion would have produced in the same number of outs.

Reds Rank. Player: RAP

1. David Ross: 10.7 RAP
2. Adam Dunn: 9.6 RAP
3. Scott Hatteberg: 7.5 RAP
4. Brandon Phillips: 7.2 RAP
5. Ryan Freel: 6.1 RAP
6. Felipe Lopez: 4.6 RAP
7. Austin Kearns: 4.1 RAP
8. Edwin Encarnacion: 1.9 RAP
9. Ken Griffey Junior: 1.6 RAP
10. Rich Aurilia: -0.9 RAP (negative)

oregonred
07-13-2006, 01:48 AM
KGJ's 1H looks really mediocre to downright bad in all those categories. Compare him to Freel in every category. The 75 point difference in OBP is huge. Then factor in Freel being a better defensive player...

Then factor in 1/12th the cost. We need a new measure factoring in payroll impact.

Cooper
07-13-2006, 07:45 AM
I like RAP (runs above position) better than anything else that's been listed. It judges you against your peers nd you can tell in a quick, dirty way who's holding their own and who's not. Though multi-position players get he shaft cause know one knows quite where to put them (Freel, Aurilla, etc...).

Griffey's average offense and below average defense are a concern. I know he's had some great hits and timely knocks, but if his numbers stay where they are presently at then overall he hurts the team. That's not to say he's going anywhere --also, he could get his numbers up --maybe his BABIP numbers are low --i haven't checked...but as it stands right now, i'd guess he's about in the overall below average category as compared to his peers.

vaticanplum
07-13-2006, 09:58 AM
Truly, I don't see how anyone can't think that Hatteberg is a huge steal for us right now. What does he make, $750,000?

Jpup
07-13-2006, 10:04 AM
Truly, I don't see how anyone can't think that Hatteberg is a huge steal for us right now. What does he make, $750,000?

On Base Machine.:D

ochre
07-13-2006, 10:36 AM
I believe the unit for all these metrics is picoFreels, or pF.

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 11:07 AM
Truly, I don't see how anyone can't think that Hatteberg is a huge steal for us right now. What does he make, $750,000?
Agreed. Deno in LF, Dunn to 1B. Btw Hatte and LaRue's $, that would help the bullpen out a bit.

lollipopcurve
07-13-2006, 11:07 AM
On a side note, how we lookin' on Hatteberg vs. Carlos Pena or Hee Seop Choi?

Hatteberg in the majors: .411/.486/.897

Pena in AAA: .382/.415/.797
Choi in AAA: .347/.361/.708

vaticanplum
07-13-2006, 11:46 AM
Agreed. Deno in LF, Dunn to 1B. Btw Hatte and LaRue's $, that would help the bullpen out a bit.

I actually meant that he's a great deal for this team. I am all for helping this bullpen, but honestly I don't think that Hatteberg's salary will be able to attract anything near the kind of help we need, not with what good bullpen help is going for these days. He alone is worth more to this team than his trade value.

Now combined with something else, I agree that he could be a good trading chip. I am as big a LaRue fan as anybody, but given Ross's emergence and the season LaRue's had, I agree that his salary needs to be moved. He would be worth a lot more to another team.

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 11:49 AM
I actually meant that he's a great deal for this team. I am all for helping this bullpen, but honestly I don't think that Hatteberg's salary will be able to attract anything near the kind of help we need, not with what good bullpen help is going for these days. He alone is worth more to this team than his trade value.

Now combined with something else, I agree that he could be a good trading chip. I am as big a LaRue fan as anybody, but given Ross's emergence and the season LaRue's had, I agree that his salary needs to be moved. He would be worth a lot more to another team.
Whoops, misread it. I think that $ could have been spent elsewhere.

Cyclone792
07-13-2006, 11:53 AM
Whoops, misread it. I think that $ could have been spent elsewhere.

Right, let's take away a .400+ OBP and a .450+ SLG that costs less than a million for something else. Perhaps we can trade that in for another Chris Hammond or Rick White, the type of pitchers available for less than a million.

Sounds like a truly phenomenal plan. :help:

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 12:05 PM
Right, let's take away a .400+ OBP and a .450+ SLG that costs less than a million for something else. Perhaps we can trade that in for another Chris Hammond or Rick White, the type of pitchers available for less than a million.

Sounds like a truly phenomenal plan. :help:
1) .450 SLG is nothing to brag about.
2) Do you think Deno has the ability to match his OPS while helping the OF defense?
3) I said earlier if they added his $ to that ridiculous LaRue contract, they would be able to get some help for the BP.

Please don't turn this into an OBP debate.

BoydsOfSummer
07-13-2006, 12:19 PM
1) .450 SLG is nothing to brag about.
2) Do you think Deno has the ability to match his OPS while helping the OF defense?
3) I said earlier if they added his $ to that ridiculous LaRue contract, they would be able to get some help for the BP.


Give me ten or twelve guys who can slug that. Please. Preferably with, say, a ten percent walk rate. We'll score bigwholelotta runs. And I wouldn't have to "manage" much,which is good,cuz I'm lazy and stuff.

Cyclone792
07-13-2006, 12:21 PM
1) .450 SLG is nothing to brag about.
2) Do you think Deno has the ability to match his OPS while helping the OF defense?
3) I said earlier if they added his $ to that ridiculous LaRue contract, they would be able to get some help for the BP.

Please don't turn this into an OBP debate.

Scott Hatteberg's production relative to his cost has been nothing short of outstanding. If you think otherwise, please feel free to provide that long list of free agents with six plus years of service time who are making equal or less than Hatteberg and have out-performed him so far this season. This list must include reams of players that everyone else has forgotten about.

You've dismissed OBP already, you've dismissed runs created and now in this thread you've dismissed VORP. Perhaps you just have a problem with any metric that shows any player you personally despise to be you know ... productive.

RBI must be the answer then, I'm assuming.

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 12:57 PM
Scott Hatteberg's production relative to his cost has been nothing short of outstanding. If you think otherwise, please feel free to provide that long list of free agents with six plus years of service time who are making equal or less than Hatteberg and have out-performed him so far this season. This list must include reams of players that everyone else has forgotten about.

You've dismissed OBP already, you've dismissed runs created and now in this thread you've dismissed VORP. Perhaps you just have a problem with any metric that shows any player you personally despise to be you know ... productive.

RBI must be the answer then, I'm assuming.
Explain to me how Ryan Howard has a VORP of less than 4 runs better than Hatteberg and then I will concede the validity of VORP. Please, help me understand this. I can't quite figure it out. Please. I don't think there is anyone in the world (with the exception of Mrs. Hatteberg) who would say that Hatteberg and Howard are anywhere close to even in production.

I have an idea...instead of all of these acronyms (VORP, RC/27, etc etc etc) let's just rank OBP and use that as the only stat worth mentioning. It seems like OBP is 95% of every new stat out there. No reason to do anything else. I know OBP is great and everything, and I don't discount the value, but as I have said before I think it's a little overvalued. I know it goes against everything the sabermetrics say. But if Ryan Howard is worth 3 more runs than Hatteberg through 90 or so games, then something is wrong.

Roy Tucker
07-13-2006, 01:01 PM
Whoops, misread it. I think that $ could have been spent elsewhere.
Double negatives always confuse me too. I move my lips when trying to figure them out.

Cyclone792
07-13-2006, 01:07 PM
Explain to me how Ryan Howard has a VORP of less than 4 runs better than Hatteberg and then I will concede the validity of VORP. Please, help me understand this. I can't quite figure it out. Please. I don't think there is anyone in the world (with the exception of Mrs. Hatteberg) who would say that Hatteberg and Howard are anywhere close to even in production.

Plate Appearances
Hatteberg: 292
Howard: 352

Outs
Hatteberg: 172
Howard: 232

Total Bases
Hatteberg: 118
Howard: 184

Ryan Howard has 66 more total bases than Hatteberg, but it's also taken him 60 more plate appearances to accumulate those extra bases as well as using up 60 more outs.

Outs are bad. Avoid them and you're very productive.

Nobody is saying that Hatteberg will continue to be more productive than Howard, but so far in 2006 up to July 13th, he's been darn close.


I have an idea...instead of all of these acronyms (VORP, RC/27, etc etc etc) let's just rank OBP and use that as the only stat worth mentioning. It seems like OBP is 95% of every new stat out there. No reason to do anything else. I know OBP is great and everything, and I don't discount the value, but as I have said before I think it's a little overvalued. I know it goes against everything the sabermetrics say. But if Ryan Howard is worth 3 more runs than Hatteberg through 90 or so games, then something is wrong.

I have a better idea ... instead of you dismissing any metric you're not familiar with simply because you don't like how it quantifies a certain player, how about you make an attempt to learn about it.

Falls City Beer
07-13-2006, 01:09 PM
Explain to me how Ryan Howard has a VORP of less than 4 runs better than Hatteberg and then I will concede the validity of VORP. Please, help me understand this. I can't quite figure it out. Please. I don't think there is anyone in the world (with the exception of Mrs. Hatteberg) who would say that Hatteberg and Howard are anywhere close to even in production.

I have an idea...instead of all of these acronyms (VORP, RC/27, etc etc etc) let's just rank OBP and use that as the only stat worth mentioning. It seems like OBP is 95% of every new stat out there. No reason to do anything else. I know OBP is great and everything, and I don't discount the value, but as I have said before I think it's a little overvalued. I know it goes against everything the sabermetrics say. But if Ryan Howard is worth 3 more runs than Hatteberg through 90 or so games, then something is wrong.

I think stopping with VORP to determine the overall value of a player's offense is a little bankrupt. But OPS is still a damn reliable measurement of output--and the two players aren't all that far apart on that level: sort of opposite sides of same coin--Howard on the SLG end; Hatteberg on the OBP end.

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 01:14 PM
I have a better idea ... instead of you dismissing any metric you're not familiar with simply because you don't like how it quantifies a certain player, how about you make an attempt to learn about it.
I know what VORP is. I now fully understand it. But my point was all of the new, chic stats begin and end with "outs are bad". So why bother making up any new stats? Let's just stick with OBP.

But here's a question. In all honesty, do you believe that if Cincy had Howard instead of Hatteberg this season, they would only have scored 4 more runs in the first half? Just give me your honest answer. I don't want to hear anything else except an answer with reasoning. Nothing about VORP calculations, "outs are bad", OBP or anything else. Just your answer.

Cyclone792
07-13-2006, 01:23 PM
I know what VORP is. I now fully understand it. But my point was all of the new, chic stats begin and end with "outs are bad". So why bother making up any new stats? Let's just stick with OBP.

VORP compares players to a replacement value; OBP shows a rate of outs. Both are useful metrics, but both also show two different values.


But here's a question. In all honesty, do you believe that if Cincy had Howard instead of Hatteberg this season, they would only have scored 4 more runs in the first half? Just give me your honest answer. I don't want to hear anything else except an answer with reasoning. Nothing about VORP calculations, "outs are bad", OBP or anything else. Just your answer.

I already know what my answer is, but I'll wait to give it you as soon as you provide that list of players I requested from you who've been more productive than Hatteberg this season at Hatteberg's salary.

vaticanplum
07-13-2006, 01:33 PM
I know what VORP is. I now fully understand it. But my point was all of the new, chic stats begin and end with "outs are bad". So why bother making up any new stats? Let's just stick with OBP.

It's not "chic", it's valid. Every statistic is developed with a fine-tooth comb in effort to cover information not covered by other stats. "Outs are bad" is the base theory of many of them, yes, but they tell us different things and must be studied altogether in the context of the make-up of a particular team. They're all imperfect, but they all have value. They help us understand precisely where a player's value lies and where his weaknesses are.

There are plenty of arguments against any stat, and they are best served, not surprisingly, by other stats or facts. Dismissing them as "chic" or popular or a fad or irrelevant because of the existence of another fact just doesn't do it for me personally. I can be convinced, for example, that Scott hatteberg is of great value to this team with his salary by any number of stats. OBP and VORP happen to be two of them. I might be able to be convinced otherwise with other stats, but the "chic" factor isn't going to do it.

M2
07-13-2006, 01:35 PM
Team wins and low ERAs are chic too.

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 01:36 PM
VORP compares players to a replacement value; OBP shows a rate of outs. Both are useful metrics, but both also show two different values.
Different values, but if one drives the other then they are strongly related. OBP drives a nice chunk of VORP it seems. Yes or no? That's like saying that Dunn hits a lot of HRs and has a high SLG. We already know his SLG will probably be high since he has a lot of HRs.


I already know what my answer is, but I'll wait to give it you as soon as you provide that list of players I requested from you who've been more productive than Hatteberg this season at Hatteberg's salary.
I have no time to run through every player to see who makes around $700k and has 6 yrs of service time and to determine who is more productive. And it wouldn't matter anyway, since our definitions of productive are different. If you think Hatteberg is almost as productive as Ryan Howard, then it's a moot point anyway. Obviously Hatteberg's sabermetric stats are very good b/c of his OBP. And since these sabermetric stats are where (I believe) you will base productivity from, I will be hard pressed to find someone. But if Howard fit the categories (6 yrs and $700k) and I said he was more productive and you think he was only 3 or 4 runs more productive, then why bother? We can end it here.

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 01:37 PM
It's not "chic", it's valid. Every statistic is developed with a fine-tooth comb in effort to cover information not covered by other stats. "Outs are bad" is the base theory of many of them, yes, but they tell us different things and must be studied altogether in the context of the make-up of a particular team. They're all imperfect, but they all have value. They help us understand precisely where a player's value lies and where his weaknesses are.

There are plenty of arguments against any stat, and they are best served, not surprisingly, by other stats or facts. Dismissing them as "chic" or popular or a fad or irrelevant because of the existence of another fact just doesn't do it for me personally. I can be convinced, for example, that Scott hatteberg is of great value to this team with his salary by any number of stats. OBP and VORP happen to be two of them. I might be able to be convinced otherwise with other stats, but the "chic" factor isn't going to do it.
Do you think that the Reds would have scored only 4 more runs in the first half if they had Howard instead of Hatteberg? I'm looking for an answer.

vaticanplum
07-13-2006, 01:43 PM
Do you think that the Reds would have scored only 4 more runs in the first half if they had Howard instead of Hatteberg? I'm looking for an answer.

First of all, your question has nothing to do with what I just wrote. If you're fishing for a particular answer to one question to back up your entire argument, that's fine, but I was addressing a more general issue of the use of statistics.

But I'll bite. With an equal number of plate appearances, and the offenses that surround them? Yes. Howard is more durable and will prove to be more productive by the end of the season. But for the first half, yes. And I don't know what Howard makes, but I'm guessing it's well more than Hatteberg.

ochre
07-13-2006, 01:45 PM
yes.

There's an answer.

It would have been exactly 4 too. No room for decimal runs in my world.

as to why vorp, I think the wiki article enumerates that fairly nicely:

VORP's usefulness is in the fact that it measures contribution at the margin (as in marginal utility). Other statistics compare players to the league average, which is good for cross-era analysis (example: 90 runs created in 1915 are much better than 90 RC in 1996, because runs were more scarce in 1915). League-average comparisons break down, however, when considering a player's total, composite contribution to a team. Baseball is a zero-sum game; in other words, one team can only win if another loses. A team wins by scoring more runs than its opponent. It follows, then, that a contribution of any runs helps a team toward a win, no matter how small the contribution. However, the Major Leagues are highly competitive, and talent distribution in baseball does not resemble normal distribution's traditional "bell curve"; rather, the majority of players fall within the category of "below-average" or worse. Therefore, the so-called "average player" does not have a value of zero, like in Pete Palmer's Total Player Rating, but instead is a valued commodity. One alternative is to rank players using "counting stats" -- simply their gross totals -- but this is unacceptable as well, since it is likely that the contribution a marginal player makes, even if it does help a team win one game, is not enough to justify his presence in the Majors. This is where the concept of the replacement level enters the picture.

Cyclone792
07-13-2006, 01:46 PM
I have no time to run through every player to see who makes around $700k and has 6 yrs of service time and to determine who is more productive. And it wouldn't matter anyway, since our definitions of productive are different. If you think Hatteberg is almost as productive as Ryan Howard, then it's a moot point anyway. Obviously Hatteberg's sabermetric stats are very good b/c of his OBP. And since these sabermetric stats are where (I believe) you will base productivity from, I will be hard pressed to find someone. But if Howard fit the categories (6 yrs and $700k) and I said he was more productive and you think he was only 3 or 4 runs more productive, then why bother? We can end it here.

The data's out there. My answer lies within the data, not personal feelings toward a player one way or the other. I'm sure there's a plethora of highly educated posters reading this right now who can figure out what my answer is.

You've bashed Hatteberg up and down this forum for months, and in none of your misplaced ramblings have you actually provided facts about his run production.

Sniff around. Analyze run production for yourself. You might learn something.

ochre
07-13-2006, 01:47 PM
The data's out there. My answer lies within the data, not personal feelings toward a player one way or the other. I'm sure there's a plethora of highly educated posters reading this right now who can figure out what my answer is.

You've bashed Hatteberg up and down this forum for months, and in none of your misplaced ramblings have you actually provided facts about his run production.

Sniff around. Analyze run production for yourself. You might learn something.
it would be easier to demand answers from you than to try and substantiate.

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 01:55 PM
The data's out there. My answer lies within the data, not personal feelings toward a player one way or the other. I'm sure there's a plethora of highly educated posters reading this right now who can figure out what my answer is.

You've bashed Hatteberg up and down this forum for months, and in none of your misplaced ramblings have you actually provided facts about his run production.

Sniff around. Analyze run production for yourself. You might learn something.
If Hatteberg isn't scoring that many runs or knocking in many runs, then IMO, he isn't really producing that many runs.

I would love to see what someone's VORP and RC/27 would be if they either singled or walked every time up and the team never scored a run. Would it be zero if the team scored zero runs for the season?

We're starting to run around in circles so this can be it. I just need one of these debates once in a while to keep my blood pumping.

ochre
07-13-2006, 01:57 PM
that sounds like a plausible scenario. Why don't you go find an historical player that matches those criteria.

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 01:57 PM
it would be easier to demand answers from you than to try and substantiate.
No, I'm at work and can look at the population of 800 major league players.

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 02:01 PM
that sounds like a plausible scenario. Why don't you go find an historical player that matches those criteria.
No, just use the scenario. Let me know how great his VORP is when the team doesn't score any runs. If it shows a great VORP, then the data, IMO, would be faulty.

Highlifeman21
07-13-2006, 02:06 PM
First of all, your question has nothing to do with what I just wrote. If you're fishing for a particular answer to one question to back up your entire argument, that's fine, but I was addressing a more general issue of the use of statistics.

But I'll bite. With an equal number of plate appearances, and the offenses that surround them? Yes. Howard is more durable and will prove to be more productive by the end of the season. But for the first half, yes. And I don't know what Howard makes, but I'm guessing it's well more than Hatteberg.

Howard = $355,000

As for the rest of this newly formed Howard vs. Hatteberg part of this thread, it's truly apples vs. oranges.


Projected Stats 2006 as of 7/13/06

Player R H 2B 3B HR RBI BA OBP SLG OPS
Howard 85 167 19 2 53 134 .278 .341 .582 .923
Hatteberg 72 146 37 0 16 55 .309 .411 .486 .897

Hatteberg is your OBP driven OPS guy, that doesn't give you much in terms of your typical "slugger" stats.

Howard is your SLG driven OPS guy, that makes some outs, but gives you your typical accrued typical "slugger" stats.

Who is more productive? Depends on the type of player your team needs. Hatteberg fills our needs. Ryan Howard would fill different needs. Do I prefer Ryan Howard over Scott Hatteberg? Sure I do, but I wish Howard got on base at a Scott Hatteberg clip.

ochre
07-13-2006, 02:07 PM
unrealistic artificial scenerios are the artifice I'd prefer to build my team around.

Other than that, it's your hypothesis; have at it.

pedro
07-13-2006, 02:10 PM
If Hatteberg isn't scoring that many runs or knocking in many runs, then IMO, he isn't really producing that many runs.

I would love to see what someone's VORP and RC/27 would be if they either singled or walked every time up and the team never scored a run. Would it be zero if the team scored zero runs for the season?

We're starting to run around in circles so this can be it. I just need one of these debates once in a while to keep my blood pumping.

The baseline for VORP isn't zero, it's what a replacement player is estimated to produce. So a team made up of players with a zero VORP wouldn't score zero runs over the course of a year, they'd probably score something in the order of 550 or 3.4 runs a game.

vaticanplum
07-13-2006, 02:10 PM
Howard = $355,000

Oh wow, I got owned on that. Well then, he's a steal too, and just a kid to boot. With all that, though, and with the information you provided, I'd still stick to my answer.

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 02:14 PM
The baseline for VORP isn't zero, it's what a replacement player is estimated to produce. So a team made up of players with a zero VORP wouldn't score zero runs over the course of a year, they'd prpbably score something in the order of 550 or 3.4 runs a game.
No, I believe VORP shows the value of a player over one replacement player. But if a team scores zero runs over the course of a year, they should all have zero VORP's (at the most) b/c they didn't score any runs. But in that scenario, that player would have a very nice VORP (I would imagine) but still not produce any runs.

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 02:20 PM
unrealistic artificial scenerios are the artifice I'd prefer to build my team around.

Other than that, it's your hypothesis; have at it.
Well I think a lot of these equations and acronyms are artificial as well. OBP might correlate to certain things but it doesn't guarantee production. If Hatteberg walks, he needs a chain reaction to drive him in and create a run. If Howard hits a HR or knocks in a run, it's actual runs being created, guaranteed. I'll take the guy scoring or knocking in runs any day over someone who walks a lot. Forget about RISP chances. Howard has actually been hitting pretty poorly in those situations, I believe.

One question...if someone has the same exact stats in every category except one scored an inordinate amt of runs more than the other, would they have the same (or close to the same) VORP, RC/27 and all the rest?

Highlifeman21
07-13-2006, 02:25 PM
Oh wow, I got owned on that. Well then, he's a steal too, and just a kid to boot. With all that, though, and with the information you provided, I'd still stick to my answer.

Just above league minimum. Isn't eligible for arbitration IIRC until after the 2007 season.

Like I said, do I like Ryan Howard? Yes

Would I love to see him as our everyday 1B? Definitely

Do I wish he got on base as much as Scott Hatteberg? You betcha.

A career .348 OBP isn't anything to write home to mom about. Picture Adam Dunn, minus the walks.

And, I don't have any stats to back this up, just local knowledge from the local rags/media and observation of Ryan Howard @ Citizens Bank BP, but his glove and or range doesn't impress me in the least bit.

pedro
07-13-2006, 02:34 PM
No, I believe VORP shows the value of a player over one replacement player. But if a team scores zero runs over the course of a year, they should all have zero VORP's (at the most) b/c they didn't score any runs. But in that scenario, that player would have a very nice VORP (I would imagine) but still not produce any runs.

A team that scored zero runs would have a negative VORP because even a team made up of AAA fodder (or "replacement players") would score some runs over the course of a year.

Cyclone792
07-13-2006, 02:38 PM
If Hatteberg isn't scoring that many runs or knocking in many runs, then IMO, he isn't really producing that many runs.

RBI won't lead you to actual run production.


Well I think a lot of these equations and acronyms are artificial as well. OBP might correlate to certain things but it doesn't guarantee production. If Hatteberg walks, he needs a chain reaction to drive him in and create a run. If Howard hits a HR or knocks in a run, it's actual runs being created, guaranteed. I'll take the guy scoring or knocking in runs any day over someone who walks a lot. Forget about RISP chances. Howard has actually been hitting pretty poorly in those situations, I believe.

OBP correletes to run production very well because avoiding outs is the single most important thing an offensive player can do. It's not purely an accident that avoiding outs = loads of runs, but for some reason you seem to think so. It's been proven over and over on this board in response to your posts.


One question...if someone has the same exact stats in every category except one scored an inordinate amt of runs more than the other, would they have the same (or close to the same) VORP, RC/27 and all the rest?

The only difference in that scenario is the player with the higher individual runs scored totals would have had the luxury of better teammates. Swap out individual runs scored and put RBI in its place, and it's the same thing; there were better teammates involved.

Using individual runs scored and RBI as a measure of a player's performance is heavily flawed and inaccurate because it relies heavily upon the performance of a player's teammates. Hooray, let's reward a guy who has better hitters around him. That's just begging for a terrible baseball decision right there.

VORP, RC/27, OPS, all these stats you seemingly hate measure a player's individual performance and isolates that individual performance away from any teammate performance. In order to accurately analyze a player's individual performance, you must use metrics that isolate that individual performance.

westofyou
07-13-2006, 02:54 PM
OBP might correlate to certain thingsLike not making outs and aquiring bases?

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 03:00 PM
Like not making outs and aquiring bases?
Like getting to first base. And hoping that someone drives you in.

We should just merge this with every Adam Dunn thread on here.

westofyou
07-13-2006, 03:04 PM
Like getting to first base. And hoping that someone drives you in.

Oh the horror... getting on base is such a drag on the hitting part of the game isn't it?

edabbs44
07-13-2006, 03:24 PM
Oh the horror... getting on base is such a drag on the hitting part of the game isn't it?
Not really. But OBP is talked about like a guaranteed run, which it isn't.

westofyou
07-13-2006, 03:30 PM
Not really. But OBP is talked about like a guaranteed run, which it isn't.
An out is an out
Of course of course
But not making an out is what I endorse

Keep attacking not making an out in a game that uses outs to measure the distance to the end of the game.

There are many other windmills out there too.

Crash Davis
07-13-2006, 08:35 PM
Wait, so now you're using STATS to make a point against the stat crowd. For shame.;)

Hey, I'm a stats guy myself. I love the way stats enhance understanding of the game of baseball. But I also realize that when the game actually gets played, it goes on between the white lines.

Edit for specificity: Between the lines, Hatteberg was always going to be a better fit for this Reds offense than Pena or Choi...no matter what last year's OPS said.


I thought it was all "feel."

What's this? Like unicorns & hot air balloons & scratch 'n sniff stickers?

Feel? Are you getting sentimental on us, FCB? What is this "feel" of which you speak?


But anyway, I don't believe anyone's fully explained the benefits of adding a .580 hitter with mediocre defense and a pitcher with a .900+ OPSA in Guardado.

Castro filled a role. Am I thrilled with it? Nope. Not at all. The problem with Castro is that managers fall in love with his strengths, which are useful maybe 3-5 innings a week, and make excuses for his weaknesses, which are dominant. Reds coaches and management believed the left-side infield defense was horrid enough to necessitate a patch for the rest of the season. I don't have a strong gauge on that myself, but they've earned my trust so far, so I'm open-minded.

Guardado was a fine gamble. He's not just a stat line from April to June. He's a pitcher with certain talents, statistical histories and experience who could pitch like he did in April or like he did in May or something altogether different. This is the same logic that had many here decrying the signing and playing time given to Hatteberg: "Our selective & most recent stats say he's washed up."

Who was realistically going to be acquired to close games for this team? Seriously. Who was going to be more reliable than Todd Coffey? It was a desperate need, and it was filled at the cost of a long-shot arm. Krivsky is going for contention this year whether smart fans believe that's wise or not. Good for him. I like a GM who burns to win baseball games.

Jpup
07-13-2006, 08:43 PM
An out is an out
Of course of course
But not making an out is what I endorse


:laugh:

you are truly a poet. :lol:

edabbs44
09-06-2006, 06:20 PM
Here are the Reds top 10 batters and pitchers by VORP.

3 of the top 4 position players and the top pitcher are all Krivsky moves.

Ponder where the Reds would be if those performances weren't replaced with quality.


VORP

1. Brandon Phillips CIN 2b 20.9
2. Adam Dunn CIN lf 20.5
3. Scott Hatteberg CIN 1b 18.5
4. Dave Ross CIN c 18.4
5. Ryan Freel CIN cf 18.1
6. Felipe Lopez CIN ss 16.7
7. Austin Kearns CIN rf 14.9
8. Ken Griffey Jr. CIN cf 12.1
9. Edwin Encarnacion CIN 3b 7.7
10. Rich Aurilia CIN 3b 7.2

VORP BABIP
1. Bronson Arroyo CIN NL 39.7 0.282
2. Aaron Harang CIN NL 25.5 0.341
3. Todd Coffey CIN NL 11.5 0.317
4. Elizardo Ramirez CIN NL 10.3 0.293
5. Eric Milton CIN NL 6.1 0.269
6. Dave Weathers CIN NL 3.9 0.296
7. Esteban Yan CIN NL 3.3 0.220
8. Matt Belisle CIN NL 3.0 0.300
9. Kent Mercker CIN NL 1.5 0.260
10. Jason Standridge CIN NL 1.3 0.385

Almost 2 months later...here is an update.


Brandon Phillips 29.4
Adam Dunn 28.7
Rich Aurilia 26.9
David Ross 25.5
Scott Hatteberg 25.5

Aurilia really stepped it up.

Cincinnati Reds Pitchers: Five Highest by VORP

Bronson Arroyo 55.7
Aaron Harang 38.4
Todd Coffey 16.4
David Weathers 13.4
Eric Milton 11.9