Agendas for sale. Low low prices.
Agendas for sale. Low low prices.
alwaysawarrior (08-08-2014),Brutus (08-08-2014),westofyou (08-08-2014),wheels (08-08-2014)
Apparently the ad hominem agenda has been on a buy one get five free deal...Originally Posted by membengal
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
No data should be removed in an analysis Billy's work this season. A total sample is needed to get a true analysis of his performance.
I do not want any data removed, but if one set has to be removed, the better argument IMO goes to removing the bad stretch to start the season. It can at least be argued in that circumstance that Billy was pressing because he was a rookie given his first major league starting role and replacing a guy who was instrumental to the Reds success the year before. I don't think this is a very strong argument to totally remove the data from the set but it is more compelling than removing a hot streak against two teams that are ahead of the Reds in the standings.
If Billy's hot streak came against a club, who in September, was out of it and were running out minor league fodder and Billy tore it up, then a case could be made to remove the data because it wouldn't be indicative of his performance versus true MLB caliber talent. That wasn't the case at all. He went on that stretch versus teams that are in the thick of the playoff race that run MLB level talent out to the mound on a daily basis.
It really doesn't appear as if anyone is arguing that Hamilton is an offensive juggernaut, rather that when taken as a whole set, both good and bad, Hamilton has exceeded most peoples' offensive expectations and when combined with his defense and and base running ability, he has been a positive force on the Reds this year.
REDREAD (08-08-2014)
The following question has no deliberate snark or anything else attached to it:
Do you enjoy watching Billy Hamilton play?
You sir are an abomination. You will eat your white bread dry like the rest of us!
Bob Sheed (08-08-2014)
The only reason to remove a section of data from an overall set of data, is if that secction of data is somehow corrupt. It either wasn't gathered correctly, or represents a situation that shouldn't have been included in the overall set of data in the first place.
The reason why we include all data in evaluating a player is because we want to know how he responds to every possible situation he might face going forward. That is why small sample sizes are dangerous. They only tell us how he responds to certain, very specific situations. That is also why the bigger the sample size, the more accurate the analysis can be. The more situations we see the player perform in, the better we can understand how he will perform going forward. We want to see how he performs in every stadium, against every type of pitcher, against every type of defense, in all weather conditions, healthy, not healthy, with no rest, with lots of rest, with all types of hitter in his lineup, etc. The more situations, the better.
If you could prove that either, those stats in those four games were collected improperly, or that Hamilton will never face those same situations every again, like they were against little leaguers, or the opposing team didn't wear fielding gloves, or the pitchers threw like slow pitch underhand softball pitchers, then it makes sense to remove them. Otherwise, it actually makes our ability to accurately evaluate Hamilton going forward, more difficult.
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
I love great defense more than almost anything else on the baseball diamond. The fact that I even compare his defense to FG's ought to be perceived as a major complement. I enjoy watching BH play, obviously.
That said, I also enjoy analyzing baseball. The two aren't mutually exclusive. BH is alot more fun to watch play defense than he is to watch in the batter's box.
Last edited by jojo; 08-08-2014 at 12:03 PM.
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
Old school 1983 (08-08-2014)
And again, we're not talking about an estimate of his true talent which obviously should include all of the data but also obviously, an estimate of his true talent currently isn't very accurate right no due to the small sample size so the issue is not close to being settled. And frankly based upon past history, you're not the guy to be lecturing on estimating a player's true talent level.
We are (at least I am trying to) talking about perceptions of his performance which change dramatically based upon how 21 straight PAs in June are treated. Jeeps, it's one of the least controversial points ever made on redszone if one actually is willing to entertain it. Clearly many are not willing. No one has clubbed your pet baby seal.
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
It's a very inconsistent argument.
One side of your argument is that you say you consistently prefer the largest sample size possible.
The other side of your argument is that his stats are misleading because he happened to chunk his best performances of the season together and should therefore be removed from his stats, in turn creating a smaller sample, despite the fact that said strong performances occurred against two reasonably strong pitching, quality teams.
Never before have we seen you argue to twist the stats around to make such a basis for an argument, especially when your commentary around the omission is because they occurred in a short, consolidated time span. That normally isn't something you write, so it leads us to question as to why the argument is valid here, but mostly invalid in every other argument you post.
Again as I argued before, the at bats weren't against poor pitching, at a specific time of the season that would inherently suggest success for billy, and not did he juice up for a few games. I think it was a random spike of performance like we see with other players all the time because I don't see any compelling evidence around the stretch of games to suggest the circumstances somehow favoured billy.
"I'm not mad, I just type aggressively"
-Rdirtypirates (Sep 6, 2023)
alwaysawarrior (08-08-2014),membengal (08-08-2014),wheels (08-08-2014)
Fangraphs listed Billy as having somewhere between the 31st and 40th most trade value of any player...prospects included. Would you jojo, try to parlay that value into a trade for a better player believing that Billy is overvalued and his worth will soon drop?
Okay, I misunderstood your point then. I do agree with your last paragraph.
But I am deeply offended that you had to go all political and bring my favorite hobby of clubbing baby seals into this discussion
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
To be fair, as the author of that list pointed out in the original 2005 list he listed Felipe Lopez as having top 50 most trade value of any players.
Another bad joke?
westofyou (08-08-2014)
No. What is happening is people are conflating two separate issues largely because for many, the "issue" has been settled. My argument is and has been very consistent concerning Billy as is the immediate ad hominem from those who don't want to entertain it.
"This isn’t stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner
I enjoy defense as well, but I also enjoy watching Billy (and other highly touted prospects) hit. With young players you can see them trying to make adjustments and try to figure it out. From watching Billy you can tell he has gotten better from the beginning of the season. He is making better contact with the ball and seems to be gaining a better understand of the strike zone. Do I think Billy is a good hitter right now? No. I think he is adequate though, and I remember he is a 23 year old rookie that is learning on the job. My point is that even if he is not the best hitter right now I look forward to his offense more than defense right now because he is a bit of an unknown factor.
When Jay Bruce comes up to bat I think to myself "Well, he is probably going to strike out, but maybe he will hit an XBH." With Billy I think to myself "This will be fun, anything can happen."
Last edited by RedTeamGo!; 08-08-2014 at 12:17 PM.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote