Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=19220:date=Feb 19 2009, 10:21 PM:name=Clapp)-->QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 19 2009, 10:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Lou says Bradley is indeed likely batting 4th.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He also said Lee is still 3rd. If Bradley is 4th and Lee 3rd, the pretty much is gonna cement Soriano at leadoff and Ramirez 5th.
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
1. Soriano
2. Fontentot/Theriot/Miles
3. Lee
4. Bradley
5. Ramirez
6. Soto/Fukudome
7. Fukudome/Soto
8. Theriot/Fontenot/Miles
Posts: 7,162
Threads: 138
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=19221:date=Feb 19 2009, 09:27 PM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Feb 19 2009, 09:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19220:date=Feb 19 2009, 10:21 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 19 2009, 10:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Lou says Bradley is indeed likely batting 4th.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He also said Lee is still 3rd. If Bradley is 4th and Lee 3rd, the pretty much is gonna cement Soriano at leadoff and Ramirez 5th.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Cool I missed that. So yeah looks like how we thought it would.
@TheBlogfines
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=19223:date=Feb 19 2009, 10:30 PM:name=Clapp)-->QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 19 2009, 10:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19221:date=Feb 19 2009, 09:27 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Feb 19 2009, 09:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19220:date=Feb 19 2009, 10:21 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 19 2009, 10:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Lou says Bradley is indeed likely batting 4th.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He also said Lee is still 3rd. If Bradley is 4th and Lee 3rd, the pretty much is gonna cement Soriano at leadoff and Ramirez 5th.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Cool I missed that. So yeah looks like how we thought it would.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He said it the other day actually.
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=19218:date=Feb 19 2009, 09:39 PM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Feb 19 2009, 09:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19217:date=Feb 19 2009, 09:36 PM:name=Brock)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brock @ Feb 19 2009, 09:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19215:date=Feb 19 2009, 09:30 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 19 2009, 09:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19213:date=Feb 19 2009, 08:19 PM:name=Brock)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brock @ Feb 19 2009, 08:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19125:date=Feb 19 2009, 04:37 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 19 2009, 04:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19121:date=Feb 19 2009, 03:26 PM:name=Brock)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brock @ Feb 19 2009, 03:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->So it's not true that there's players out there that are more valuable than their stats over a whole season indicate them to be?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, with Miles we sure better hope that is true, because I certainly wouldn't want him to be LESS valuable than a career .693 OPS guy.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Miles can play just about anywhere<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sure, but does he play any positions well? Versatility doesn't mean too much to me if he's below average defensively at most positions.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->he'll play his ass off, take out guys on double plays, make contact consistently, etc. He'll do things each game to help us win each game that don't all show up in the box score.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
These are the things? I would hope he plays hard, just like I hope everyone on the team plays hard. Taking out guys on double plays? Ok. Making contact? Ok, but that shows up in the box score under the strikeout column.
I don't mean to come off like an ass, but I really don't see him as much of a player. Hopefully I'm wrong.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, please throw away OPS, SLG, all that crap with this guy.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well that's just silly. But I'll stop now, carry on.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why? We have plenty enough power.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Because you can't just disregard a guy's offensive output.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not a Miles fan, but for players that are tablesetter-type players, <b>OPS and SLG are not stats that need to be emphasized when evaluating them.</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, On-base Percentage constitutes a full 50% of OPS, and On-base Percentage is the <b>ultimate</b> stat for "table-setters." So OPS is certainly an important stat for table-setters <i>and</i> sluggers alike, which is why it's become so widely used.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 7,162
Threads: 138
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
Miles will be getting a lot of playing time against lefties most likely. At second base, that's almost surely which side he's going to be batting from the most.
Last 3 years obp from that side of the plate:
06: .378
07: .368
08: .377
Fontenot has a career .298 batting average and .852 OPS against right-handers in 464 plate appearances. If Lou uses them correctly which I think he will, they should get very good production out of second base.
@TheBlogfines
Posts: 14,116
Threads: 90
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=19231:date=Feb 19 2009, 11:16 PM:name=Clapp)-->QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 19 2009, 11:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Miles will be getting a lot of playing time against lefties most likely. At second base, that's almost surely which side he's going to be batting from the most.
Last 3 years obp from that side of the plate:
06: .378
07: .368
08: .377
Fontenot has a career .298 batting average and .852 OPS against right-handers in 464 plate appearances. If Lou uses them correctly which I think he will, they should get very good production out of second base.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree. It's all about balance, and I think being able to mix and match and keep players rested were the primary reasons for adding so many SH and LH hitters. I think we'll be pleasantly surprised. At the same time though, I'd still like to have one more SS option just in case.
Posts: 7,162
Threads: 138
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
They said on CSN that teams keep approaching the Cubs about Fuk, namely the Mariners. They'd have to take back bad contracts though as well of course. I'd rather just go with Fuk, he can't get any worse and he with Reed should provide a nice platoon in CF.
@TheBlogfines
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Eat Fuk's deal!
Hmm...I didn't realize this:
"Amazingly, Fukudome's batting average dropped <i>six months in a row.</i> It shrank from .305 in April to .293 in May, .264 in June, .236 in July, .193 in August, .178 in September and—the final cherry on the spinach sundae—.100 in the October playoffs."-Phil Rogers
Eat Fuk's deal!
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=19236:date=Feb 20 2009, 12:28 AM:name=Clapp)-->QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 20 2009, 12:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->They said on CSN that teams keep approaching the Cubs about Fuk, namely the Mariners. They'd have to take back bad contracts though as well of course. I'd rather just go with Fuk, he can't get any worse and he with Reed should provide a nice platoon in CF.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
WOW! There's actually a team interested in Fuk?
He's costing us $12 million a year...get rid of him NOW!
The M's would prolly want us to take back Washburn's contract, but at least he'd be a viable SP, and his contract is shorter. And if we could get Bedard instead of Washburn, I'd use Jim's face as my avatar.
Since the M's have Japanese ownership, they seem to go out of their way to try to feature Japanese players...witness the absurd 3-year deal they gave to their horrible catcher last year.
Jim, jump on this. Trade Fuk!
Do it!
Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200. Do it now, before they change their minds.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 7,162
Threads: 138
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
And then do what in CF?
@TheBlogfines
Posts: 1,792
Threads: 49
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Brock, on base percentage DOES NOT constitute a full 50% of OPS unless, of course, it happens to be exactly half of the OPS. OPS is slugging plus on base percentage. So if someone has an OPS of .800 and their OB% is .400 then you are correct. However, that is NEVER the case.
OPS always looks better for sluggers. ALWAYS.
Theriot's ob% was 18 points higher than his slugging last season. Therefor, OPS would be a bad measure for his performance. He did the job you think is most important relatively well--get on base. But using OPS to evaluate him completely disregards his role on the team. This is an instance, like many, where just looking at the numbers and avoiding context (I'm going to use that a lot until it gets into your heads) is bad analysis.
Let's look at this career line: .251/.299/.453
The OPS looks to be about just above average for a starter...much better than Theriot's anyway. That is Tony Batista's career stizzats...a .154 point spread. He was an overpayed and practically useless player for any team trying to win a pennant. He never got hits, never walked and only hit home runs. Yet, his OPS completely over values him because he did hit home runs.
Clapp, a lot of people were big fans of Augie Ojeda because he hustled and "played the game the way it should be played." But people gave him an applause when he got A HIT.
I'm not saying anyone is anyone really wrong here, but you can't both come from two vast extremes in this debate. It just isn't practical.
(Yes, I used two extremes to prove my point, but also to prove the point that there is little contextualization in any of this nonsensical discourse.)
If Angelo had picked McClellin, I would have been expecting to hear by training camp that kid has stage 4 cancer, is actually 5'2" 142 lbs, is a chick who played in a 7 - 0 defensive scheme who only rotated in on downs which were 3 and 34 yds + so is not expecting to play a down in the NFL until the sex change is complete and she puts on another 100 lbs. + but this is Emery's first pick so he'll get a pass with a bit of questioning. - 1060Ivy
Posts: 2,894
Threads: 72
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Bz, OPS= OBP+SLG. That's how you figure it. 1 number plus 1 number.
However, you are correct in that it overvalues slugging, and undervalues On-base%, which is why most geeks use an OPS# that <i>multiplies</i> the 2 numbers (OPB x SLG).
Most stat guys consider OBP to be the single most important stat, and at least twice as important as slugging. (although I've seen 1.8 used)
So, yeah, there is value in table-setters IF they get on base at a high rate.
Clapp, if we trade Fuk, we can use the exact same CF platoon that helped us lead the NL in runs scored last year: the newly revitalized Reed Johnson, and the pennies-on-the-dollar, still-unsigned Jimmy Ballgame.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance
Posts: 4,684
Threads: 78
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=19183:date=Feb 19 2009, 07:39 PM:name=Clapp)-->QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 19 2009, 07:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19178:date=Feb 19 2009, 06:34 PM:name=KBwsb)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 19 2009, 06:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Is anyone complaining about Font? I'm sure not.
It's Miles, a fellow who is clearly inferior to DeRosa, who we're uptight about.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Like Andy said and you always remind us, we got the AL OPS leader in Bradley. You can't look at the positional comparison but the team as a whole. We got a downgrade offensively at 2b, but a monumental upgrade in RF. If we just got Miles instead of DeRosa and kept Fuk in right field, sure there's reason to be upset. Our lineup now has more versatility and might very well be better than last year's. I don't think DeRo puts up those power numbers again either. I bet he hits 12 or 13 homers.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
clapp is on fire. miles is the least of my worries. you have to have grindy scrappy guys like him. this lineup is more balanced than any cub lineup that i can remember.
and lou said yesterday that soriano is leading off.
Wang.
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=19227:date=Feb 19 2009, 10:55 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Feb 19 2009, 10:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19218:date=Feb 19 2009, 09:39 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Feb 19 2009, 09:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19217:date=Feb 19 2009, 09:36 PM:name=Brock)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brock @ Feb 19 2009, 09:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19215:date=Feb 19 2009, 09:30 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 19 2009, 09:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19213:date=Feb 19 2009, 08:19 PM:name=Brock)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brock @ Feb 19 2009, 08:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19125:date=Feb 19 2009, 04:37 PM:name=Clapp)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clapp @ Feb 19 2009, 04:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=19121:date=Feb 19 2009, 03:26 PM:name=Brock)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brock @ Feb 19 2009, 03:26 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->So it's not true that there's players out there that are more valuable than their stats over a whole season indicate them to be?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, with Miles we sure better hope that is true, because I certainly wouldn't want him to be LESS valuable than a career .693 OPS guy.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Miles can play just about anywhere<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sure, but does he play any positions well? Versatility doesn't mean too much to me if he's below average defensively at most positions.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->he'll play his ass off, take out guys on double plays, make contact consistently, etc. He'll do things each game to help us win each game that don't all show up in the box score.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
These are the things? I would hope he plays hard, just like I hope everyone on the team plays hard. Taking out guys on double plays? Ok. Making contact? Ok, but that shows up in the box score under the strikeout column.
I don't mean to come off like an ass, but I really don't see him as much of a player. Hopefully I'm wrong.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, please throw away OPS, SLG, all that crap with this guy.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well that's just silly. But I'll stop now, carry on.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why? We have plenty enough power.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Because you can't just disregard a guy's offensive output.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not a Miles fan, but for players that are tablesetter-type players, <b>OPS and SLG are not stats that need to be emphasized when evaluating them.</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, On-base Percentage constitutes a full 50% of OPS, and On-base Percentage is the <b>ultimate</b> stat for "table-setters." So OPS is certainly an important stat for table-setters <i>and</i> sluggers alike, which is why it's become so widely used.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No. Wrong. When the other 50% of a stat is diluted because it's not part of a player's game (ie. does not hit for power), you cannot use it as a blanket comparison. OPS only works when you are comparing similar players to each other. When you use OPS, you can use it to compare Lee to Ramirez or Soriano to Bradley. However, it makes no sense to use it to compare Bradley to Theriot or Soriano to Miles. If you want to use it to compare Theriot to Miles, then go ahead. However, using it to compare players that have vastly different skill sets is not using the stat the way it should be used.
|
