PDA

View Full Version : RedsZone would have exploded: Votto for Bautista



Pages : 1 [2]

Captain Hook
09-04-2011, 02:23 AM
Why not include 2014 and 2015 for Bautista vs nothing for Votto since he will be a free agent? Wouldn't that make sense too.

And I am not sure I would wager Bautista would be better than Votto in 2012/2013, but I know at worst I would expect it to be close. But of course I would absolutely, without question take Bautista and his current contract over Votto and his. It would be like choosing between Minka Kelly and Jim Kelly as a future wife. No contest. No second thoughts.

It wouldn't be vs nothing for Votto.It would be vs the draft picks the Reds would get along with the 14 million per they'd be paying Bautista.If there is some decline from Bautista it's not imposible to imagine the the Reds putting that money to better use.

dougdirt
09-04-2011, 02:49 AM
It wouldn't be vs nothing for Votto.It would be vs the draft picks the Reds would get along with the 14 million per they'd be paying Bautista.If there is some decline from Bautista it's not imposible to imagine the the Reds putting that money to better use.

Well the draft picks from Votto aren't going to be around in the Majors for 2013 or 2014. But I get your point about the money.

Mario-Rijo
09-05-2011, 07:06 AM
Does the sum total of 2 seasons change anything?

I get that there are non-believers in Bautista. If that is your argument, I will let it be. But right now and over the past 2 years, Bautista is and has been better.

I must take your word for it I haven't totaled the 2 seasons but if Jose has been better over the past 2 seasons it's only on the strength of him having a better '11. Yes I have my doubts on Bautista, no it's not because I think he is a PED user (though I wonder) but I just don't believe he has become a .300 hitting 50 HR guy. I think he is more likely a 35-40 .260-.280 hitter at best who the league just hasn't fully adjusted to yet. Still very valuable but not better than a .300+ hitting 35-40 HR guy, especially a much younger version. Does the fact Bautista is signed for 2 more years have somewhat a degree of a balancing effect, yeah sure and maybe technically it has a greater one than I give it credit for. But IMO it's not worth it to make such a deal and it sure ain't if we are giving Votto plus. We hold plenty of leverage in such a deal and therefore I'd stand my ground and ask for Bautista plus if I even gave consideration to doing such a deal.

Personally I don't know why it's got to be this way. Why can't we deal others for a Bautista or a lesser but still plenty good alternative try to win the next 2 years and still have plenty to continue remaining competitive should Votto leave. Why is this alternative so easily dispatched?

Mario-Rijo
09-05-2011, 07:11 AM
Doubtful. I think Bruce could be like Larkin (and Bench and Concepcion...). A plus player at his position that could spend his whole career with the Reds. It doesn't matter whether it's now or 5 years from now, Bruce is probably the least likely player to be dealt.

I was being sarcastic Dan. I hope Bruce stays a Red for good, and I hope the fan base doesn't run him out of town in the mean time just because he K's alot and looks bad doing it. But patience isn't this generations strong suit.

dougdirt
09-05-2011, 07:44 AM
Personally I don't know why it's got to be this way. Why can't we deal others for a Bautista or a lesser but still plenty good alternative try to win the next 2 years and still have plenty to continue remaining competitive should Votto leave. Why is this alternative so easily dispatched?

Why would the Blue Jays trade the best hitter in baseball for less than Joey Votto +? The Blue Jays aren't stupid. They know that they have the best hitter in baseball locked up for four years on the relative cheap. Moving him for anything less than an absolute star + would be downright stupid.

That is why that alternative is so easily dispatched.... It will never happen.

kaldaniels
09-05-2011, 11:08 AM
So when does Bautista's explosion become the real thing? He now has 2 elite seasons in a row under his belt. What will it take, non-believers?

RedsManRick
09-05-2011, 01:05 PM
So when does Bautista's explosion become the real thing? He now has 2 elite seasons in a row under his belt. What will it take, non-believers?

If he keeps hitting like this, it's just evidence that he keeps cheating. If he falls back to earth, it's evidence that he stopped cheating. There is nothing that he could do to change some people's mind; that's sort of the whole point of this conversation. Some people just believe that is is impossible to legitimately become this good, this quickly, this late in one's career. Nothing he can do moving forward would change that belief. It's not about him in particular; it's the circumstance itself.

Homer Bailey
09-05-2011, 09:15 PM
So, your premise is to only look at Bautista's numbers from 2010-11 and ignore the rest of his career? I would take everything into account when trying to project how Bautista and Votto will play in the future. I'm not just looking at Bautista from 2004-09, and I'm not just looking at his last two years. I'm trying to factor everything into the equation. You agree about Bautista's age being a concern, so I don't need to expound on that.

Bottom line is we'll find out 24 months from now who was better in the 2012 and 2013 seasons combined. I think it will be Votto and would be willing to make a friendly wager on that front. Any takers?

What does pre-2010 have to do with anything? Please, tell me. Does he swing the same way today that he did in early 2009? The answer is no. The results say that he has completely transformed as a hitter. Factoring in what you're seeing now is all that needs to be factored in at this point when judging the player that you are receiving. You're getting the current version of Bautista, who is, without any conceivable, factual argument, the best hitter in baseball.

Could his numbers decrease gradually with age? Sure. But, let's not treat him like he's Scott Rolen though. He's 30. By the end of the contract, he'll still be older than Rolen was when he came to the Reds.

Votto vs. Bautista is a comparable situation over the next two years. Gun to my head, who is going to post the higher WAR? I'll say Votto. But I expect it to be very close. Who is going to provide better value over the life of their contracts (aka who has more trade value)? Not even debateable. It's Jose Bautista. And who provides more value to the Reds, Votto or Bautista? It's Bautista. Stick him in LF, Yonder at first, and the Reds are immediately a better team. Which is my (and others) entire point.

cincrazy
09-05-2011, 09:49 PM
What does pre-2010 have to do with anything? Please, tell me. Does he swing the same way today that he did in early 2009? The answer is no. The results say that he has completely transformed as a hitter. Factoring in what you're seeing now is all that needs to be factored in at this point when judging the player that you are receiving. You're getting the current version of Bautista, who is, without any conceivable, factual argument, the best hitter in baseball.

Could his numbers decrease gradually with age? Sure. But, let's not treat him like he's Scott Rolen though. He's 30. By the end of the contract, he'll still be older than Rolen was when he came to the Reds.

Votto vs. Bautista is a comparable situation over the next two years. Gun to my head, who is going to post the higher WAR? I'll say Votto. But I expect it to be very close. Who is going to provide better value over the life of their contracts (aka who has more trade value)? Not even debateable. It's Jose Bautista. And who provides more value to the Reds, Votto or Bautista? It's Bautista. Stick him in LF, Yonder at first, and the Reds are immediately a better team. Which is my (and others) entire point.

I've gone on record as saying I'd trade Votto for Bautista, but I think it's fair to speculate on Bautista's future. Most major leaguers don't go from putting up backup outfielder stats to Hall of Fame like statistics overnight. I would certainly bet on Bautista continuing his performance going forward, because it's been two years of production now, almost 2.5 years, really. But does a part of it make me nervous? You betcha.

kaldaniels
09-06-2011, 12:06 AM
I've gone on record as saying I'd trade Votto for Bautista, but I think it's fair to speculate on Bautista's future. Most major leaguers don't go from putting up backup outfielder stats to Hall of Fame like statistics overnight. I would certainly bet on Bautista continuing his performance going forward, because it's been two years of production now, almost 2.5 years, really. But does a part of it make me nervous? You betcha.

What sane analysis. :thumbup:

Captain Hook
09-06-2011, 03:41 AM
I've gone on record as saying I'd trade Votto for Bautista, but I think it's fair to speculate on Bautista's future. Most major leaguers don't go from putting up backup outfielder stats to Hall of Fame like statistics overnight. I would certainly bet on Bautista continuing his performance going forward, because it's been two years of production now, almost 2.5 years, really. But does a part of it make me nervous? You betcha.

If there are a few more examples of such a dramatic improvement I'd like to know who it was and when it happened.I'm not saying I'm sold on the idea that Bautista is cheating because it's not at all fair to label a guy a cheater simply because he's improved dramatically.But the truth is that there are plenty of people out there that claim the media,fans and other people in high positions turned a blind eye to this kind of thing back when the steroid era was beginning.It's reasonable to question the fantastic numbers Jose has put up considering how recent it was that the same concerns about guys like McGuire and Sosa were ignored and ended up being a big problem.It's unfortunate but imo all of this brings Bautistas trade value down when compared to a guy that has put up good numbers his whole career.

I'll also add that if the best hitter in baseball is locked down for four year at 14 mil per in todays market it should be questioned why a team would shop him around.

Mario-Rijo
09-06-2011, 06:11 AM
Why would the Blue Jays trade the best hitter in baseball for less than Joey Votto +? The Blue Jays aren't stupid. They know that they have the best hitter in baseball locked up for four years on the relative cheap. Moving him for anything less than an absolute star + would be downright stupid.

That is why that alternative is so easily dispatched.... It will never happen.

You might want to re-read what I said. I'll just make it easy, Bautista OR....

Blitz Dorsey
09-06-2011, 12:56 PM
Wait, Jose Bautista is now considered "the best hitter in baseball" after two great years? Sorry, Albert Pujols is the best hitter in baseball. Adrian Gonzalez is right up there as well. Give me guys that have been good throughout their careers and not just two-year wonders. If Bautista keeps this up another two years and proves he can be consistently a great hitter for more than just 2 years out of his career, then I'm sure he will win a lot of people over.

Bautista is the best hitter in MLB. I've heard it all now. I can't believe I'm defending Pujols but he's been great for 10 years not just two. Pujols is clearly the better overall hitter compared to Bautista.

Man, some of you guys should know to at least look at a player's last three years at a minimum. Two year window? I need more before I'm going to anoint him as the best hitter in baseball. He also plays in the AL and the majority of great pitchers today in MLB are in the NL. Not all of course (the AL has some great ones with Verlander, Sabathia and Felix Hernandez) but definitely the majority.

Personally, just looking at the last few weeks, I think Yonder Alonso is the best hitter in baseball. ;-)

Roy Tucker
09-06-2011, 02:20 PM
The Reds must be way out of contention.

An 18 page thread on a rumor of a trade that proved to have no basis in fact. Plus, it spawned another 24 page thread.

And here I am counting pages on threads to amuse myself. Lord love a duck.

:beerme:

Homer Bailey
09-06-2011, 02:59 PM
Wait, Jose Bautista is now considered "the best hitter in baseball" after two great years? Sorry, Albert Pujols is the best hitter in baseball. Adrian Gonzalez is right up there as well. Give me guys that have been good throughout their careers and not just two-year wonders. If Bautista keeps this up another two years and proves he can be consistently a great hitter for more than just 2 years out of his career, then I'm sure he will win a lot of people over.

Bautista is the best hitter in MLB. I've heard it all now. I can't believe I'm defending Pujols but he's been great for 10 years not just two. Pujols is clearly the better overall hitter compared to Bautista.

Man, some of you guys should know to at least look at a player's last three years at a minimum. Two year window? I need more before I'm going to anoint him as the best hitter in baseball. He also plays in the AL and the majority of great pitchers today in MLB are in the NL. Not all of course (the AL has some great ones with Verlander, Sabathia and Felix Hernandez) but definitely the majority.

Personally, just looking at the last few weeks, I think Yonder Alonso is the best hitter in baseball. ;-)

Sigh. Two years ago, Pujols was probably the best hitter in baseball. He's not anymore. What he did in 2009 is not relevant to what he is currently doing. He's clearly in decline, and just because he put up great numbers 3 years ago, it does not mean he's the best hitter in baseball.

Over the last two seasons, Bautista has been the best hitter in baseball. That's a cold, hard, indisputable fact. Leader in wOBA, OPS, HR's, wRC+.... you name it. In 2011 alone, he's been even better, further distancing himself in almost every meaningful offensive category. He's proven his ability to hit over a pretty substantial amount of plate appearances, and it is so ridiculously clear that he does not even remotely resemble the player that he was in 2009 that it completely eliminates the relevancy of his numbers before the swing adjustments.

Best hitter in 2010. Best hitter in 2011. Best hitter over the span of both seasons. Best hitter in baseball. It really is that simple.

Cedric
09-06-2011, 03:04 PM
Wait, Jose Bautista is now considered "the best hitter in baseball" after two great years? Sorry, Albert Pujols is the best hitter in baseball. Adrian Gonzalez is right up there as well. Give me guys that have been good throughout their careers and not just two-year wonders. If Bautista keeps this up another two years and proves he can be consistently a great hitter for more than just 2 years out of his career, then I'm sure he will win a lot of people over.

Bautista is the best hitter in MLB. I've heard it all now. I can't believe I'm defending Pujols but he's been great for 10 years not just two. Pujols is clearly the better overall hitter compared to Bautista.

Man, some of you guys should know to at least look at a player's last three years at a minimum. Two year window? I need more before I'm going to anoint him as the best hitter in baseball. He also plays in the AL and the majority of great pitchers today in MLB are in the NL. Not all of course (the AL has some great ones with Verlander, Sabathia and Felix Hernandez) but definitely the majority.

Personally, just looking at the last few weeks, I think Yonder Alonso is the best hitter in baseball. ;-)

He is the best hitter in baseball by a wide margin. I didn't honestly think that was debatable at this point.

osuceltic
09-06-2011, 03:56 PM
He is the best hitter in baseball by a wide margin. I didn't honestly think that was debatable at this point.

He's having the best year this year. That's the only thing that isn't debatable.

dougdirt
09-06-2011, 05:13 PM
He's having the best year this year. That's the only thing that isn't debatable.

Sure. And his year last year was one of the three or four best in baseball too. Combine them and no one else is close to his production on the last two seasons.

Homer Bailey
09-06-2011, 05:33 PM
The difference between Bautista's wOBA and Pujols' wOBA over the last two seasons is roughly the same difference between Prince Fielder's wOBA and Jay Bruce's over the last two seasons.

Patrick Bateman
09-06-2011, 05:55 PM
Wait, Jose Bautista is now considered "the best hitter in baseball" after two great years? Sorry, Albert Pujols is the best hitter in baseball. Adrian Gonzalez is right up there as well. Give me guys that have been good throughout their careers and not just two-year wonders. If Bautista keeps this up another two years and proves he can be consistently a great hitter for more than just 2 years out of his career, then I'm sure he will win a lot of people over.

Bautista is the best hitter in MLB. I've heard it all now. I can't believe I'm defending Pujols but he's been great for 10 years not just two. Pujols is clearly the better overall hitter compared to Bautista.

Man, some of you guys should know to at least look at a player's last three years at a minimum. Two year window? I need more before I'm going to anoint him as the best hitter in baseball. He also plays in the AL and the majority of great pitchers today in MLB are in the NL. Not all of course (the AL has some great ones with Verlander, Sabathia and Felix Hernandez) but definitely the majority.

Personally, just looking at the last few weeks, I think Yonder Alonso is the best hitter in baseball. ;-)

Applying specific thresholds to data analysis and applying it to any and every situation is inappropriate.

There are always misnomers to the rule that need to be assessed on an individual by individual basis.

For the sake of Bautista, it should not be ignored what he did in prior seasons, but at the same point citing that Pujols is currently better based on what he has done over the course of 10 seasons likely doesn't even come to the correct conclusion, but also doesn't use the correct methadology on making the assessment.

But then again, you could also do the usual by stating an opinion as fact. It could be the reason that the majority of your posts stem into a a lot of rolling eyes.

defender
09-06-2011, 06:57 PM
The difference between Bautista's wOBA and Pujols' wOBA over the last two seasons is roughly the same difference between Prince Fielder's wOBA and Jay Bruce's over the last two seasons.

What makes your point, is that, we consider Fielder's excellent 2009 & 2007 seasons. Bautista has a .434 wOBA over the past 2 years. That is enough to tell me he is a great hitter. Two years is not enough to tell me he is a better hitter than Pujols (.406 over that span). Over 5 years, Fielder has been an elite hitter, past 2 years only .031 wOBA better than Bruce (.388 to .357).

At this point, most people would take Fielder over Bruce. I think most people would also take Pujols over Bautista. Pujols has been better than Bautista after May this year, and has had many years performing at this level and better.

nate
09-06-2011, 11:06 PM
Pujols has been better than Bautista after May this year, and has had many years performing at this level and better.[/QUOTE]

wOBA
June
Bautista: .350
Pujols: didn't have enough qualifying PA

July
Bautista: .444
Pujols: .403

August
Bautista: .427
Pujols: .390

cincrazy
09-07-2011, 12:43 AM
Sigh. Two years ago, Pujols was probably the best hitter in baseball. He's not anymore. What he did in 2009 is not relevant to what he is currently doing. He's clearly in decline, and just because he put up great numbers 3 years ago, it does not mean he's the best hitter in baseball.

Over the last two seasons, Bautista has been the best hitter in baseball. That's a cold, hard, indisputable fact. Leader in wOBA, OPS, HR's, wRC+.... you name it. In 2011 alone, he's been even better, further distancing himself in almost every meaningful offensive category. He's proven his ability to hit over a pretty substantial amount of plate appearances, and it is so ridiculously clear that he does not even remotely resemble the player that he was in 2009 that it completely eliminates the relevancy of his numbers before the swing adjustments. Best hitter in 2010. Best hitter in 2011. Best hitter over the span of both seasons. Best hitter in baseball. It really is that simple.

That's where some of us just simply disagree. I'm not ignoring at all what he's done the last two years. He's been a beast, no question. But there's absolutely no way I turn a blind eye on his previous seasons. It's not as if they never happened.

And let me ask you this: if it's so easy to just say "Oh, I'm going to pull the ball now" and to start smashing 50 homers after hitting no more than high teens previously, why don't more guys do it? Shouldn't Jonny Gomes be taking the same approach then?

I think it's extremely unfair to say "BAUTISTA IS A USER IGNORE EVERYTHING HE'S DONE!," but I think it's also silly to complete discount the possibility of him using some form of performance-enhancing drugs. What he's doing is nearly unprecedented. Players in their late 20s early 30s don't go from average to below average to best player in the game over night. Maybe he IS doing it clean, making it all the more remarkable. Yet maybe he's had some help.

dougdirt
09-07-2011, 01:04 AM
That's where some of us just simply disagree. I'm not ignoring at all what he's done the last two years. He's been a beast, no question. But there's absolutely no way I turn a blind eye on his previous seasons. It's not as if they never happened.

And let me ask you this: if it's so easy to just say "Oh, I'm going to pull the ball now" and to start smashing 50 homers after hitting no more than high teens previously, why don't more guys do it? Shouldn't Jonny Gomes be taking the same approach then?

I think it's extremely unfair to say "BAUTISTA IS A USER IGNORE EVERYTHING HE'S DONE!," but I think it's also silly to complete discount the possibility of him using some form of performance-enhancing drugs. What he's doing is nearly unprecedented. Players in their late 20s early 30s don't go from average to below average to best player in the game over night. Maybe he IS doing it clean, making it all the more remarkable. Yet maybe he's had some help.


Some guys simply don't have the ability to just do it. First, you need excellent plate discipline to pull it off, something a lot of guys don't have. Then you need a solid contact ability to be able to do it. Another thing a lot of guys don't have along with the power required to do it. Then of course you need plus bat speed to be able to get to all of those pitches and most guys don't have that. Add it all up and it is why most guys simply couldn't do it even if they wanted. At least not to the point where they would be successful doing it.

But to play the "why isn't everyone else doing it" game. If Bautista is getting "help", why isn't anyone else doing it?

Patrick Bateman
09-07-2011, 01:06 AM
And let me ask you this: if it's so easy to just say "Oh, I'm going to pull the ball now" and to start smashing 50 homers after hitting no more than high teens previously, why don't more guys do it? Shouldn't Jonny Gomes be taking the same approach then?
.

While I agree with most of your post, this is really not a very good reflection of what Bautista did.

Gomes actually seemed to try a similar approach early on this season, but it just didn't seem to work out for him.

redsfandan
09-07-2011, 01:30 AM
I was being sarcastic Dan. I hope Bruce stays a Red for good, and I hope the fan base doesn't run him out of town in the mean time just because he K's alot and looks bad doing it. But patience isn't this generations strong suit.
My mistake.

Fans turning on a player because he doesn't do everything they want and how they want him to do it? That never happens.


It wouldn't be vs nothing for Votto. It would be vs the draft picks the Reds would get along with the 14 million per they'd be paying Bautista. If there is some decline from Bautista it's not imposible to imagine the the Reds putting that money to better use.

Maybe I'm alone but I don't think we can count on those draft picks.

defender
09-07-2011, 01:36 AM
wOBA
June
Bautista: .350
Pujols: didn't have enough qualifying PA

July
Bautista: .444
Pujols: .403

August
Bautista: .427
Pujols: .390

June 1st - Sept 5th: Bautista 349 PA .396 wOBA
June 1st - Sept 5th: Pujols 312 PA .434 wOBA

Two years, with one horrible (for him) two month stretch, is not enough to convince me that Pujols is in decline.

The first 2 months of this year, Bautista had a .530 wOBA. What he has done over the last 2 years does not convince me he will put up .448 or even .420 wOBA's in the future.

Homer Bailey
09-07-2011, 01:55 AM
#selectiveendpoints

And before anyone accuses me of using selective end points, I'm simply using the time period from which Bautista changed his swing.

Blitz Dorsey
09-07-2011, 04:17 AM
Applying specific thresholds to data analysis and applying it to any and every situation is inappropriate.

There are always misnomers to the rule that need to be assessed on an individual by individual basis.

For the sake of Bautista, it should not be ignored what he did in prior seasons, but at the same point citing that Pujols is currently better based on what he has done over the course of 10 seasons likely doesn't even come to the correct conclusion, but also doesn't use the correct methadology on making the assessment.

But then again, you could also do the usual by stating an opinion as fact. It could be the reason that the majority of your posts stem into a a lot of rolling eyes.

Save the immaturity. You're better than that. (I hope.)

Anyone who says "Bautista is the best hitter in MLB" ... let me ask you this: Would you take Bautista over Pujols if we were just betting on who was going to have the best season in 2012? You just look at the last two years, I'll take the last decade into account, and we'll have a grand 'ol time. Pujols will have a better season in 2012 than Bautista will IMO. I'm willing to make a friendly wager on that just like I was on the Votto v Bautista debate. If you really believe Bautista is "the best hitter in baseball" certainly you would want to take said friendly wager. Votto and Pujols will have a better 2012 season than Jose Bautista IMO. Again, the fun thing about these kinds of debates is we'll find out exactly who was right eventually. Eyes rolling or not.

signalhome
09-07-2011, 04:45 AM
Pujols will have a better season in 2012 than Bautista will IMO.

Considering Pujols BB/9 is the lowest of his career, his O-Swing% has increased each of the past four years, and his wOBA has decreased each of the last four years (mostly due to those previous two things, as his other numbers have remained relatively consistent), I think it's fair to begin to question whether we're seeing the start of Albert's inevitable decline. His wFB/C is by far the lowest of his career (0.97 this year, a stark difference from his 2.54 career average), and it has also been on the decline the past three years. Maybe he's starting to lose some bat speed, and this is resulting in a failure to punish fastballs like he has throughout his career. Maybe because of this he's starting to cheat in his at-bats in an attempt to catch up to fastballs, causing him to chase more pitches out of the zone than he ever has. I honestly don't know. In any case, I'm not entirely certain Albert's numbers will rebound to the ~.430 wOBA we've come to expect from him, and I think it's a pretty safe bet to say Bautista will finish next year with a wOBA north of .420.

I think it's more probable that Bautista has the better year in 2012, just like he has the past two seasons. Now, does that mean I'm willing to bet my life on it? No. Baseball features way too much random variance to say anything with that measure of absolute certainty. However, everything I'm looking at seems to paint the picture that Bautista is the better candidate to post a .420+ wOBA in 2012, so that's who I'm putting my money on.

Blitz Dorsey
09-07-2011, 04:50 AM
Considering Pujols BB/9 is the lowest of his career, his O-Swing% has increased each of the past four years, and his wOBA has decreased each of the last four years (mostly due to those previous two things, as his other numbers have remained relatively consistent), I think it's fair to begin to question whether we're seeing the start of Albert's inevitable decline. His wFB/C is by far the lowest of his career (0.97 this year, a stark difference from his 2.54 career average), and it has also been on the decline the past three years. Maybe he's starting to lose some bat speed, and this is resulting in a failure to punish fastballs like he has throughout his career. Maybe because of this he's starting to cheat in his at-bats in an attempt to catch up to fastballs, causing him to chase more pitches out of the zone than he ever has. I honestly don't know. In any case, I'm not entirely certain Albert's numbers will rebound to the ~.430 wOBA we've come to expect from him, and I think it's a pretty safe bet to say Bautista will finish next year with a wOBA north of .420.

I think it's more probable that Bautista has the better year in 2012, just like he has the past two seasons. Now, does that mean I'm willing to bet my life on it? No. Baseball features way too much random variance to say anything with that measure of absolute certainty. However, everything I'm looking at seems to paint the picture that Bautista is the better candidate to post a .420+ wOBA in 2012, so that's who I'm putting my money on.

Hey, I'm not suggesting we bet our lives or our homes ... more like a friendly "message board" wager. For example, let's say "Homer Bailey" (or Doug or anyone else) and I bet on who would have the better season in 2012: Pujols or Bautista. The winner could come up with the avatar and sig for the loser. So, for example, if I win, Homer's avatar would be Mike Brown (because nothing is more humiliating than being associated with Mike Brown) and his sig would say "I will never do anything so dense as to distrust Blitz again."

We would just have some fun with it. That wager is available to anyone on this board. I'll take Pujols in 2012, you can have Bautista. Let's do it!

Homer Bailey
09-07-2011, 10:34 AM
Hey, I'm not suggesting we bet our lives or our homes ... more like a friendly "message board" wager. For example, let's say "Homer Bailey" (or Doug or anyone else) and I bet on who would have the better season in 2012: Pujols or Bautista. The winner could come up with the avatar and sig for the loser. So, for example, if I win, Homer's avatar would be Mike Brown (because nothing is more humiliating than being associated with Mike Brown) and his sig would say "I will never do anything so dense as to distrust Blitz again."

We would just have some fun with it. That wager is available to anyone on this board. I'll take Pujols in 2012, you can have Bautista. Let's do it!

You're on.

Better wOBA over the course of the season, minimum of say, 130 games played?

nate
09-07-2011, 11:02 AM
June 1st - Sept 5th: Bautista 349 PA .396 wOBA
June 1st - Sept 5th: Pujols 312 PA .434 wOBA

In how many PAs?


Two years, with one horrible (for him) two month stretch, is not enough to convince me that Pujols is in decline.

The first 2 months of this year, Bautista had a .530 wOBA. What he has done over the last 2 years does not convince me he will put up .448 or even .420 wOBA's in the future.

There's a lot of "good" below a .420 wOBA.

defender
09-07-2011, 02:22 PM
There's a lot of "good" below a .420 wOBA.

I agree. I posted numbers that Pujols has been better than Bautista over aprox a half season of PAs. Not to imply Bautista is not good, just that he is not the best hitter in baseball. I don't know where to look it up, without calculating it myself, but I would bet Bautista's .395 wOBA since June 1st is not even in the top 10.

I accept the argument not to use Bautista's stats prior to 2010, but not the argument not to use Pujols'. Bautista's .433 wOBA in 2010-2011 is enough to convince me he is very good, but not as valuable as Pujols' .427 over the last 5 years.

I am confident that Pujols will be one of the best hitters next year. With less confindence, I feel Bautista will be at least the 15th best hitter next year. Bautista would be a great player to have. I would not trade Votto for him.

Homer Bailey
09-07-2011, 03:00 PM
I agree. I posted numbers that Pujols has been better than Bautista over aprox a half season of PAs. Not to imply Bautista is not good, just that he is not the best hitter in baseball. I don't know where to look it up, without calculating it myself, but I would bet Bautista's .395 wOBA since June 1st is not even in the top 10.

I accept the argument not to use Bautista's stats prior to 2010, but not the argument not to use Pujols'. Bautista's .433 wOBA in 2010-2011 is enough to convince me he is very good, but not as valuable as Pujols' .427 over the last 5 years.

I am confident that Pujols will be one of the best hitters next year. With less confindence, I feel Bautista will be at least the 15th best hitter next year. Bautista would be a great player to have. I would not trade Votto for him.

Why did you choose June 1st and not May 1st? Or July 1st?

defender
09-07-2011, 03:48 PM
Why did you choose June 1st and not May 1st? Or July 1st?

Because since that date (slightly more than 1/2 a season) he has not been the best hitter in baseball. I will not argue that proves he is not the best hitter in baseball, but I do not believe that 2 seasons of data proves that he is.

Or, in other words, it is at least enough that I can argue that he is not the best hitter in baseball.

Homer Bailey
09-07-2011, 03:55 PM
Because since that date (slightly more than 1/2 a season) he has not been the best hitter in baseball. I will not argue that proves he is not the best hitter in baseball, but I do not believe that 2 seasons of data proves that he is.

Or, in other words, it is at least enough that I can argue that he is not the best hitter in baseball.

Exactly. It is manipulation of numbers to try to help make your point. Pick an endpoint that fits your argument, and viola! Your point is proven!

Over the course of this season, he has been the best hitter in baseball. Same goes for 2010. Same goes for the 2 year period up to today. Why shrink the sample size? What does that prove to us?

signalhome
09-07-2011, 04:11 PM
Exactly. It is manipulation of numbers to try to help make your point. Pick an endpoint that fits your argument, and viola! Your point is proven!

Right on. If instead of June 1st we select May 1st or July 1st or the start of 2011 or the start of 2010 or pretty much any arbitrary end point other than June 1st, we're going to see a much different picture.

defender
09-07-2011, 05:02 PM
Exactly. It is manipulation of numbers to try to help make your point. Pick an endpoint that fits your argument, and viola! Your point is proven!

Over the course of this season, he has been the best hitter in baseball. Same goes for 2010. Same goes for the 2 year period up to today. Why shrink the sample size? What does that prove to us?

We use the term "sample size" because we agree that an wOBA achieved over any given PAs may or may not represent true talent.

If over 349 PAs his wOBA is .396 and over 226 PAs his wOBA is .530, it is unlikely that 349 PAs is enough to determine true talent. Is 575 enough PAs to say to say his true talent level is .448? Is 1250 enought to determine his true talent level is .433? I don't think so.

Until you have enough, any sample size is arbitrary. By the dates we pick and/or by the results the fates pick. Given variances between .307 and .560 for one month of data, I don't think 1250 PAs (about 12 months) is enough.

I am not going to argue that your sample size is not enough, and then stand by my data. I mentioned it intialy, because I don't think that there is enough statistical data to prove that Pujols will continue to decline since '09, or that Bautista will improve in '12 like he did in '11.

TRF
09-07-2011, 05:25 PM
it seems simple to me. so far, in 2011 the best hitter in baseball is Jose Bautista. He has both the highest OBP and SLG, so OPS says so. RC says so RC27 says so. ISOP says so. SECA says so.

And it isn't really all that close. He leads the majors in BB's and HR's.

Albert Pujols is right now a first ballot HOF player. hands down. Bautista this year is the better hitter. In fact, one could make the case that this year, Pujols isn't even the best hitter on his own team.

Homer Bailey
09-07-2011, 05:42 PM
We use the term "sample size" because we agree that an wOBA achieved over any given PAs may or may not represent true talent.

If over 349 PAs his wOBA is .396 and over 226 PAs his wOBA is .530, it is unlikely that 349 PAs is enough to determine true talent. Is 575 enough PAs to say to say his true talent level is .448? Is 1250 enought to determine his true talent level is .433? I don't think so.

Until you have enough, any sample size is arbitrary. By the dates we pick and/or by the results the fates pick. Given variances between .307 and .560 for one month of data, I don't think 1250 PAs (about 12 months) is enough.

I am not going to argue that your sample size is not enough, and then stand by my data. I mentioned it intialy, because I don't think that there is enough statistical data to prove that Pujols will continue to decline since '09, or that Bautista will improve in '12 like he did in '11.

OK. You may be right about Pujols not being in decline. We don't know for sure if he is. I wouldn't be surprised at all if he bounced back next year from this "down" year.

But I don't think anyone is arguing that Bautista is going to improve. What many are saying is that 1250 PA's is enough data to tell us that he is the best hitter in baseball right now. For Bautista, it doesn't make sense to go back further than that, because the player from 3 years ago is not representative of what he currently is as a player, and the changes couldn't be more clear.

Patrick Bateman
09-07-2011, 06:54 PM
Save the immaturity. You're better than that. (I hope.)



It's not immaturity.

I actually consider it reasonable advice for constructing future posts rather than being in the middle of the same arguments that never gain traction.

Cedric
09-07-2011, 07:13 PM
Save the immaturity. You're better than that. (I hope.)

Anyone who says "Bautista is the best hitter in MLB" ... let me ask you this: Would you take Bautista over Pujols if we were just betting on who was going to have the best season in 2012? You just look at the last two years, I'll take the last decade into account, and we'll have a grand 'ol time. Pujols will have a better season in 2012 than Bautista will IMO. I'm willing to make a friendly wager on that just like I was on the Votto v Bautista debate. If you really believe Bautista is "the best hitter in baseball" certainly you would want to take said friendly wager. Votto and Pujols will have a better 2012 season than Jose Bautista IMO. Again, the fun thing about these kinds of debates is we'll find out exactly who was right eventually. Eyes rolling or not.

By that logic wouldn't Pujols have had a better year this year than Bautista? I don't see how that's a "grand ol time."

Mario-Rijo
09-07-2011, 07:47 PM
Exactly. It is manipulation of numbers to try to help make your point. Pick an endpoint that fits your argument, and viola! Your point is proven!

Over the course of this season, he has been the best hitter in baseball. Same goes for 2010. Same goes for the 2 year period up to today. Why shrink the sample size? What does that prove to us?

Manipulation of the numbers? You mean like suggesting he has been the best hitter the past 2 years completely ignoring the fact he wasn't the best hitter in 2010, though you keep saying it hoping people will start to believe it I guess. 3rd in OPS in '10 in the AL behind Hamilton and Cabrera and 5th overall behind also Votto and Pujols. Heck he didn't even out slug Hammy and Cabrera despite leading everyone in HR's and signals from the OF.

Patrick Bateman
09-07-2011, 07:49 PM
Could we at least agree that it is arguablewho the best hitter in baseball currently is?

I think it's a case where both sides could at least give in to that, rather that keep using absolsutes.

Bautista currently has one season clearly better than Pujols which is this year. This is important yes, but he hasn't clearly demonstrated the ability to be better than him going forward.

IMO, it is clearly debateable.

Blitz Dorsey
09-07-2011, 08:38 PM
You're on.

Better wOBA over the course of the season, minimum of say, 130 games played?

You've got yourself a deal. Consider this a cyberhandshake. I've got Pujols, you've got Bautista. The stakes are our avatars and sigs. I win, I pick your avatar and sig. You win, you pick my avatar and sig.

The only thing left to determine is the length of the "penalty" for the loser. I'm thinking at least 3 months. What say thee?

Blitz Dorsey
09-07-2011, 08:43 PM
Could we at least agree that it is arguablewho the best hitter in baseball currently is?

I think it's a case where both sides could at least give in to that, rather that keep using absolsutes.

Bautista currently has one season clearly better than Pujols which is this year. This is important yes, but he hasn't clearly demonstrated the ability to be better than him going forward.

IMO, it is clearly debateable.

No one is speaking in absolutes. This topic is definitely "debatable" -- hence this 20-page thread. Nice try though. The fact of the matter is people are giving their opinions. (And many of us say "IMO" anytime we say something like "Pujols is better ... IMO.") Where are all these examples of people speaking in absolutes and people saying this topic is not debatable? Are you just making stuff up now? One thing is certainly clear about this thread: The topic is debatable. Highly debatable.

Blitz Dorsey
09-07-2011, 08:48 PM
By that logic wouldn't Pujols have had a better year this year than Bautista? I don't see how that's a "grand ol time."

Well, it's basically people putting their money (or in this case their avatars and their sigs) where their mouth is. It's easy to look at 2011 stats and determine who's had the better year. That would take about 2 seconds. However, it's fun to debate who will have the better season in 2012. That's what this is all about: Who will be better going forward. Many of us are not convinced Bautista will keep this up or even close. Others are convinced he will. This is a fun way to debate the topic and find out who is really strong in their convictions.

kaldaniels
09-07-2011, 08:52 PM
I don't like the "if you believe in Bautista, you'd make a friendly wager" viewpoint. I bet all the time with real dollars, but I for one won't be goaded into a bet to prove my convictions. Just my petty two cents.

IslandRed
09-07-2011, 08:52 PM
Without taking sides:

* When calling someone "the best hitter in baseball," there's an implied "right now" in there. This isn't about Hall of Fame credentials. It can reasonably change from year to year. And I mean right now within reason; obviously the best hitter in baseball isn't the guy who had the best stats yesterday. I would say, figure out how much of a track record is necessary to prove to you that what he's doing is repeatable, at least in the short term -- i.e. he's not just in a run of good luck -- and go with that.

* On the positional argument a few pages ago -- true, the all-time great hitters generally get their due regardless of position. Manny Ramirez was one of the greatest hitters of the past 25 years (let's ignore the PED stuff, baseball certainly was at the time) and was paid accordingly.

But if there was a player who was putting up similar offensive numbers while respectably holding down an important defensive position -- for the sake of argument, let's call him "Alex Rodriguez" -- who got paid more?

* Serious props to Roy Tucker's avatar.

Patrick Bateman
09-07-2011, 10:00 PM
No one is speaking in absolutes. This topic is definitely "debatable" -- hence this 20-page thread. Nice try though. The fact of the matter is people are giving their opinions. (And many of us say "IMO" anytime we say something like "Pujols is better ... IMO.") Where are all these examples of people speaking in absolutes and people saying this topic is not debatable? Are you just making stuff up now? One thing is certainly clear about this thread: The topic is debatable. Highly debatable.

I would say the parts where you clearly said there was only one way to debate player's projections (ie. long periods of data). Those were you're words, not mine. That suggested that there was no room for disagreeing with your opinion.

Blitz Dorsey
09-07-2011, 11:00 PM
I don't like the "if you believe in Bautista, you'd make a friendly wager" viewpoint. I bet all the time with real dollars, but I for one won't be goaded into a bet to prove my convictions. Just my petty two cents.

Fair enough. And your two cents are anything but petty. But certainly if you were convinced Bautista was the best hitter in baseball and would continue to be considered as such in 2012, you would jump at the chance of making this bet. Or are you saying you would do it for real dollars but not some "silly" things like avatars and sigs?

Blitz Dorsey
09-07-2011, 11:01 PM
I would say the parts where you clearly said there was only one way to debate player's projections (ie. long periods of data). Those were you're words, not mine. That suggested that there was no room for disagreeing with your opinion.

Actually, I never said that. Please show me where I said "this is the only way to debate a player's projection."

Again, making stuff up, are we?

Just because I personally look at long periods of data when judging players doesn't mean I think that is the only way to do it. I understand others have differing points of view and different ways of coming up with their conclusions.

wlf WV
09-07-2011, 11:40 PM
* On the positional argument a few pages ago -- true, the all-time great hitters generally get their due regardless of position. Manny Ramirez was one of the greatest hitters of the past 25 years (let's ignore the PED stuff, baseball certainly was at the time) and was paid accordingly.

But if there was a player who was putting up similar offensive numbers while respectably holding down an important defensive position -- for the sake of argument, let's call him "Alex Rodriguez" -- who got paid more?

* Serious props to Roy Tucker's avatar.

You are correct. My point was the hitter always gets 1st billing,and elite hitters are pretty much lumped together.

You're right about Roy's avatar,and your's aint bad.

Patrick Bateman
09-07-2011, 11:45 PM
Actually, I never said that. Please show me where I said "this is the only way to debate a player's projection."

Again, making stuff up, are we?

Just because I personally look at long periods of data when judging players doesn't mean I think that is the only way to do it. I understand others have differing points of view and different ways of coming up with their conclusions.

Well for one, I was clearly paraphrasing hence why I didn't use quotation marks. At the same time, one needs to take accountability for what they type:

Bautista is the best hitter in MLB. I've heard it all now. I can't believe I'm defending Pujols but he's been great for 10 years not just two. Pujols is clearly the better overall hitter compared to Bautista.


Man, some of you guys should know to at least look at a player's last three years at a minimum. Two year window?

This is clearly presented as a fact and not an opinion. It is presented as the only way to project a player's ability. It suggests that in no circumstance could a two year windown be valid in any situation.

You can do what you want, but don't excuse me of "making things up" when what I have said is consistent with the style of posts that you have presented. I just find that this is not abnormal, and it's difficult to gain traction in an argument when the condescending attitude of there only being one way to skin a cat is constantly used, or hyperbole is used to mock those with a different opinion:


Personally, just looking at the last few weeks, I think Yonder Alonso is the best hitter in baseball. ;-)

Homer Bailey
09-08-2011, 12:28 AM
Manipulation of the numbers? You mean like suggesting he has been the best hitter the past 2 years completely ignoring the fact he wasn't the best hitter in 2010, though you keep saying it hoping people will start to believe it I guess. 3rd in OPS in '10 in the AL behind Hamilton and Cabrera and 5th overall behind also Votto and Pujols. Heck he didn't even out slug Hammy and Cabrera despite leading everyone in HR's and signals from the OF.

You're right. I meant to say that he has been the best hitter for 2011, and the best hitter for the last two seasons overall. I don't know where I got that he was the best hitter in 2010.

kaldaniels
09-08-2011, 12:37 AM
Fair enough. And your two cents are anything but petty. But certainly if you were convinced Bautista was the best hitter in baseball and would continue to be considered as such in 2012, you would jump at the chance of making this bet. Or are you saying you would do it for real dollars but not some "silly" things like avatars and sigs?

I think you understand my point and I'm glad. I'm saying I would rather bet for personal gain than bet because I was taunted into it.

That said, is this bet also a "retirement bet" for your present avatars? :D

Blitz Dorsey
09-08-2011, 04:34 AM
I think you understand my point and I'm glad. I'm saying I would rather bet for personal gain than bet because I was taunted into it.

That said, is this bet also a "retirement bet" for your present avatars? :D

Avatars (plural) brother? Listen, I'm just trying to keep Jose happy. I don't want him to come over here and toss some snake oil on us -- or completely embarrass us like we're the 1990 Oakland A's -- so let's just keep him happy, alright? And no, I don't really know what kind of tobaccy he's smoking there.

:beerme:

redsfandan
09-08-2011, 06:16 AM
Hey, I'm not suggesting we bet our lives or our homes ... more like a friendly "message board" wager. For example, let's say "Homer Bailey" (or Doug or anyone else) and I bet on who would have the better season in 2012: Pujols or Bautista. The winner could come up with the avatar and sig for the loser. So, for example, if I win, Homer's avatar would be Mike Brown (because nothing is more humiliating than being associated with Mike Brown) and his sig would say "I will never do anything so dense as to distrust Blitz again."

We would just have some fun with it. That wager is available to anyone on this board. I'll take Pujols in 2012, you can have Bautista. Let's do it!


You're on.

Better wOBA over the course of the season, minimum of say, 130 games played?


You've got yourself a deal. Consider this a cyberhandshake. I've got Pujols, you've got Bautista. The stakes are our avatars and sigs. I win, I pick your avatar and sig. You win, you pick my avatar and sig.

The only thing left to determine is the length of the "penalty" for the loser. I'm thinking at least 3 months. What say thee?

Shame we don't have a forum for friendly wagers like this.

Boss-Hog
09-08-2011, 07:44 AM
Shame we don't have a forum for friendly wagers like this.
If this type of thing was that common on here, maybe we would. I can move the posts to the predictions archive, if anyone would like.

TRF
09-08-2011, 10:32 AM
After reading the last 3 pages, I keep expecting a post that says my dad can beat up your dad.

dougdirt
09-08-2011, 11:08 AM
After reading the last 3 pages, I keep expecting a post that says my dad can beat up your dad.

I bet my dad could beat up everyone's dad.

camisadelgolf
09-08-2011, 06:52 PM
My dad's a convicted murderer, so it'd be pretty fun to watch any of y'all's dads try.

Blitz Dorsey
09-08-2011, 08:24 PM
My dad is Chuck Norris.

Strikes Out Looking
09-09-2011, 07:26 PM
Regardless of who is the better hitter, I think the real question is who makes the Reds a better team overall? I hate to say it, but it may be Bautista because you can put Alonso at 1b and save money, which allows for other needs to be filled, in the long run. This realization pains me -- but unfortunately it is the conclusion I reach.

mdccclxix
10-31-2011, 06:51 PM
Hate to exhume this thread, but our boy JohnnySmith28, who I believe all but said that Jiminez was a done deal to Cincinnati, drops this SUBSTANTIAL rumor.


JohnnySmith28 Johnny Smith
Votto-Bautista talks heating up.


I'll be around alllll winter if you need baseless rumors.

Vottomatic
10-31-2011, 06:52 PM
Hate to exhume this thread, but our boy JohnnySmith28, who I believe all but said that Jiminez was a done deal to Cincinnati, drops this SUBSTANTIAL rumor.



I'll be around alllll winter if you need baseless rumors.

Don't forget to tip your bartenders and waitresses. Badda Bing, badda boom!

Captain Hook
10-31-2011, 08:47 PM
Hate to exhume this thread, but our boy JohnnySmith28, who I believe all but said that Jiminez was a done deal to Cincinnati, drops this SUBSTANTIAL rumor.



I'll be around alllll winter if you need baseless rumors.

I admit that I was very much against the idea of trading Votto for Bautista when all of that talk started but after actually seeing what Alonso can do with the bat I'm pretty neutral.

Mario-Rijo
11-01-2011, 01:57 AM
I admit that I was very much against the idea of trading Votto for Bautista when all of that talk started but after actually seeing what Alonso can do with the bat I'm pretty neutral.

I think it's too soon to assume Alonso is for real. What if he isn't? Then we are no better off at best and IMO are worse off with Bautista. I also believe Bautista falls off just as quick as his tear began. Just time for the Reds to make a commitment to their fans and let the cards fall where they may. If they make the proper commitment to putting a real contender around Votto we stand a good chance to re-sign him. If the fans don't respond to a legit team then Votto can still be dealt down the road.

Captain Hook
11-01-2011, 02:22 AM
I think it's too soon to assume Alonso is for real. What if he isn't? Then we are no better off at best and IMO are worse off with Bautista. I also believe Bautista falls off just as quick as his tear began. Just time for the Reds to make a commitment to their fans and let the cards fall where they may. If they make the proper commitment to putting a real contender around Votto we stand a good chance to re-sign him. If the fans don't respond to a legit team then Votto can still be dealt down the road.

I don't completely disagree.I like the idea of building around Joey.

I'm just saying that Alonso looks really good.Before, I really didn't know what he looked like.I knew what his numbers were in AAA but for many of us that was it.Still, he could end up being a bust, but I don't see any reason to really believe that's going to happen.

Strikes Out Looking
11-01-2011, 09:10 AM
Hate to exhume this thread, but our boy JohnnySmith28, who I believe all but said that Jiminez was a done deal to Cincinnati, drops this SUBSTANTIAL rumor.



I'll be around alllll winter if you need baseless rumors.

Where is this JohnnySmith 28? This rumor isn't on twitter.

gilpdawg
11-01-2011, 09:46 AM
Looks like he removed it. That guy is sketchy at best anyway. He's probably a member here just pranking us. :)