08-09-2009, 08:32 AM
<!--quoteo(post=56609:date=Aug 9 2009, 12:51 AM:name=Kid)-->QUOTE (Kid @ Aug 9 2009, 12:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Well obviously there's going to be that kind of a difference between 2 players when 1 plays and the other doesn't.
But if you want to make that the standard, let's get the numbers right to begin with. Pujols has 100 RBI & 86 runs scored, but you can't say 186 team runs, since you're counting HRs double (as they have both an RBI & a run scored, but only count for 1 team run). Reducing the 186 team runs by the 36 double-counted HRs (so that they're only counted once) = 150. Freel has 11 runs scored & 5 RBI = 16 (with no HRs).
Pujols has about 6.9 times as many plate appearances this season as Freel. If you presume that Freel would maintain the same rate in contributing to team runs if he had an equal number of plate appearances as Pujols, Freel would have contributed to 110 team runs (16 team runs x 6.9 to make up the difference in plate appearances).
So, the real comparison between them is Pujols with 150 and Freel with 110. A difference of 40 team runs (with Pujols having played in 109 games). So well under 1 run/game.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You thought it through farther than I but that's essentially how I looked at it.
<!--quoteo(post=56610:date=Aug 9 2009, 12:57 AM:name=rok)-->QUOTE (rok @ Aug 9 2009, 12:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->And for those stats to mean anything, you would have to assume, all else being equal, that the starting lineups with/without said players are identical and that they face pitching of the same quality. You can't assume any of that.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Very true but this is the problematic nature of all baseball statistics; the illusion that things that are different can be compared as though they weren't. We compare data that reflect occurrences that take place under dissimilar conditions and hope that the volume of data mitigates in favor of generalities.
But if you want to make that the standard, let's get the numbers right to begin with. Pujols has 100 RBI & 86 runs scored, but you can't say 186 team runs, since you're counting HRs double (as they have both an RBI & a run scored, but only count for 1 team run). Reducing the 186 team runs by the 36 double-counted HRs (so that they're only counted once) = 150. Freel has 11 runs scored & 5 RBI = 16 (with no HRs).
Pujols has about 6.9 times as many plate appearances this season as Freel. If you presume that Freel would maintain the same rate in contributing to team runs if he had an equal number of plate appearances as Pujols, Freel would have contributed to 110 team runs (16 team runs x 6.9 to make up the difference in plate appearances).
So, the real comparison between them is Pujols with 150 and Freel with 110. A difference of 40 team runs (with Pujols having played in 109 games). So well under 1 run/game.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You thought it through farther than I but that's essentially how I looked at it.
<!--quoteo(post=56610:date=Aug 9 2009, 12:57 AM:name=rok)-->QUOTE (rok @ Aug 9 2009, 12:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->And for those stats to mean anything, you would have to assume, all else being equal, that the starting lineups with/without said players are identical and that they face pitching of the same quality. You can't assume any of that.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Very true but this is the problematic nature of all baseball statistics; the illusion that things that are different can be compared as though they weren't. We compare data that reflect occurrences that take place under dissimilar conditions and hope that the volume of data mitigates in favor of generalities.