What does Miles have on Lou and Jim?

[Fly]

<!--quoteo(post=56476:date=Aug 8 2009, 09:05 PM:name=jstraw)-->QUOTE (jstraw @ Aug 8 2009, 09:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=56472:date=Aug 8 2009, 06:34 PM:name=FlyAtTheThigh)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FlyAtTheThigh @ Aug 8 2009, 06:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=56464:date=Aug 8 2009, 05:58 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Aug 8 2009, 05:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I doubt there'd be a run per game difference between Manny Ramirez and Ryan Freel.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That was my point. A run per game difference due to the addition of one player over another is almost, if not completely, impossible.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I know. I agree with you.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I know. I was welcoming the support.

[kbwsb]

How are you figuring that? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but here's a for instance: This year, Ryan Freel has 3 RBI, and has scored 8 times.
Albert Pujols has 97 RBI and 86 runs scored.
Most teams have played about 110 games.
Just by simple addition, Pujols has been a part of 183 runs scored, and Freel has helped his team produce 11 runs. That's a difference of 172 runs in 110 games, far more than a run per game.
So, it's certainly possible.

[Kid]

<!--quoteo(post=56608:date=Aug 9 2009, 01:43 AM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Aug 9 2009, 01:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->How are you figuring that? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but here's a for instance: This year, Ryan Freel has 3 RBI, and has scored 8 times.
Albert Pujols has 97 RBI and 86 runs scored.
Most teams have played about 110 games.
Just by simple addition, Pujols has been a part of 183 runs scored, and Freel has helped his team produce 11 runs. That's a difference of 172 runs in 110 games, far more than a run per game.
So, it's certainly possible.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
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.

[rok]

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.

[jstraw]

<!--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.

[veryzer]

<!--quoteo(post=56429:date=Aug 8 2009, 12:53 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Aug 8 2009, 12:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think signing a AAAA guy in his 30's to a 2-year, 5 million dollar deal in the midst of a deep recession, and then trading last year's team MVP to make room for him was a fine idea.
It has worked out exactly as we all thought it would.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


THEY DIDN'T FUCKING TRADE DEROSA TO MAKE ROOM FOR MILES!!!!! THEY DIDN'T FUCKING TRADE DEROSA TO MAKE ROOM FOR MILES!!!!! THEY DIDN'T FUCKING TRADE DEROSA TO MAKE ROOM FOR MILES!!!!!

[rok]

It was to open up a spot for Bradley, who BTW got his avg up to .266 over the weekend. He still isn't worth the money, but it's good to see him get his shit together. Now if he could only start to hit for some power and maybe just maybe drive in a few runs every now and again.

[jstraw]

<!--quoteo(post=56720:date=Aug 10 2009, 09:44 AM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Aug 10 2009, 09:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=56429:date=Aug 8 2009, 12:53 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Aug 8 2009, 12:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I think signing a AAAA guy in his 30's to a 2-year, 5 million dollar deal in the midst of a deep recession, and then trading last year's team MVP to make room for him was a fine idea.
It has worked out exactly as we all thought it would.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


THEY DIDN'T FUCKING TRADE DEROSA TO MAKE ROOM FOR MILES!!!!! THEY DIDN'T FUCKING TRADE DEROSA TO MAKE ROOM FOR MILES!!!!! THEY DIDN'T FUCKING TRADE DEROSA TO MAKE ROOM FOR MILES!!!!!
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

So, they didn't fucking trade DeRosa to make room for Miles?

[veryzer]

<!--quoteo(post=56721:date=Aug 10 2009, 09:46 AM:name=rok)-->QUOTE (rok @ Aug 10 2009, 09:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->It was to open up a spot for Bradley, who BTW got his avg up to .266 over the weekend. He still isn't worth the money, but it's good to see him get his shit together. Now if he could only start to hit for some power and maybe just maybe drive in a few runs every now and again.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


thank you rok. i wish to god people would quit saying the miles signing had anything to do with derosa being traded.

miles replaced fontenot who replaced derosa who was traded to to get bradley (and probably peavy). miles was never signed to be the everyday 2nd baseman. he was signed to be a utility guy. period.

if you hate the derosa trade, that's fine, but it's a different argument.

[jstraw]

<!--quoteo(post=56724:date=Aug 10 2009, 09:52 AM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Aug 10 2009, 09:52 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=56721:date=Aug 10 2009, 09:46 AM:name=rok)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rok @ Aug 10 2009, 09:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->It was to open up a spot for Bradley, who BTW got his avg up to .266 over the weekend. He still isn't worth the money, but it's good to see him get his shit together. Now if he could only start to hit for some power and maybe just maybe drive in a few runs every now and again.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


thank you rok. i wish to god people would quit saying the miles signing had anything to do with derosa being traded.

miles replaced fontenot who replaced derosa who was traded to to get bradley (and probably peavy). miles was never signed to be the everyday 2nd baseman. he was signed to be a utility guy. period.

if you hate the derosa trade, that's fine, but it's a different argument.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

It wasn't necessarily dumb to shed DeRosa to open up room for a signing that may have ultimately led to acquiring Bradley. What was dumb was the hard-on Hendry had for Bradley from the get go.

[Butcher]

There were a lot of stupid things about the DeRosa trade.

- handing Fontenot the starting 2B job over DeRosa, apparently because of Fontenot's handedness. This also ensured we have two hobbits up the middle on defense.

- signing a fragile Bradley made DeRosa MORE valuable to the team -- not more expendable

- trading DeRosa for three low-impact minor league pitchers who aren't going to help the team this season (whether they'll ever help the team remains to be seen)

- to be fair to Hendry, he couldn't possibly have predicted DeRosa would end up playing a huge role for the Cardinals -- a team currently two games ahead of us in the standings. But, man, it really stings.

- the Miles signing was retarded on its own merits. You don't give a guy like Miles a two year five million dollar contract when you can pick up the exact same player off the scrap heap or from your minor league system for the league minimum.

[The Dude]

<!--quoteo(post=56734:date=Aug 10 2009, 10:28 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Aug 10 2009, 10:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->You don't give a guy like Miles a two year five million dollar contract when you can pick up the exact same player off the scrap heap or from your minor league system for the league minimum.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

This seems to be Hendry's trademark move. Neif, Jock, Rusch, etc.... He loves overpaying for marginal players.

[PcB]

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->- trading DeRosa for three low-impact minor league pitchers who aren't going to help the team this season (whether they'll ever help the team remains to be seen)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Jeff Stevens has been pretty fucking good in the pen.

[Butcher]

<!--quoteo(post=56742:date=Aug 10 2009, 11:30 AM:name=PcB)-->QUOTE (PcB @ Aug 10 2009, 11:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->- trading DeRosa for three low-impact minor league pitchers who aren't going to help the team this season (whether they'll ever help the team remains to be seen)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Jeff Stevens has been pretty fucking good in the pen.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah. That 7.36 ERA in 7.1 IP has been fucking phenomenal.

[rok]

<!--quoteo(post=56743:date=Aug 10 2009, 11:33 AM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Aug 10 2009, 11:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=56742:date=Aug 10 2009, 11:30 AM:name=PcB)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PcB @ Aug 10 2009, 11:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->- trading DeRosa for three low-impact minor league pitchers who aren't going to help the team this season (whether they'll ever help the team remains to be seen)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Jeff Stevens has been pretty fucking good in the pen.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah. That 7.36 ERA in 7.1 IP has been fucking phenomenal.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He was solid until the weekend. I think the jury is still out on him, but if he doesn't figure things out soon, he's going to become a pretty old prospect really quickly.