[Drayton] We ain't trading Rocket

[NJRocket]

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/3594380

Astros owner: We're not trading Clemens
Story Tools: Print Email XML
Ken Rosenthal /
Posted: 1 hour ago



If the Yankees think Roger Clemens might be the answer to their rotation problems, they need to think again. The Astros will not trade Clemens, team owner Drayton McLane said Thursday in an interview with The Sporting News.



"There are no conditions under which I would do that," McLane said. "I'm committed to winning, not breaking up a team."

McLane denied published reports that he has an oral agreement with Clemens to trade the pitcher if the Astros fall out of contention, saying, "I would never have agreed to that." Clemens, 42, would receive a $3 million assignment bonus on top of his $18 million salary if he were traded. The money he is owed likely would serve as a deterrent to every team but the Yankees — but Clemens might only consider a return to New York if the Yankees were in contention.

The Yankees are 11-17, 7 1/2 games back in the AL East, while the Astros are 11-15, seven games back in the NL Central. The Astros' sagging offense, however, should receive a boost Friday with the return of left fielder Lance Berkman, who has been out all season since undergoing knee surgery in November. Berkman eventually could move to first base if Jeff Bagwell is sidelined by his arthritic right shoulder, at which point the team could try to acquire an outfielder such as the Mets' Mike Cameron.

Poor run support — and a blown save by closer Brad Lidge on Wednesday — have resulted in Clemens going 1-1 in his first six starts, despite a 1.29 ERA that ties him with the Marlins' Dontrelle Willis for the league lead. Even if the Astros continued to flounder, Clemens would risk tarnishing his image if he clamored for a trade out of his hometown. McLane said that he is obligated to his ticket buyers to keep Clemens and make the strongest attempt possible at helping the team reach its first World Series.

"Integrity and honesty — those are some of the main reasons I wouldn't (trade Clemens)," McLane said. "People are very excited about Roger. He has won seven Cy Youngs. He's a Houston person, a Texan.

"I would be going against their desires to see him, the people who bought tickets. I'm committed to winning. I'm a very loyal person. (A trade) is not something I'd consider."

McLane demonstrated his reluctance to dump high-priced veterans last season when the Astros declined to trade center fielder Carlos Beltran before the July 31 non-waiver deadline. The Astros were 52-52 on that date, six games back in the wild-card race. But they went 40-18 down the stretch to win the wild card, then beat the Braves to win their first post-season series and extended the Cardinals to seven games in the NLCS.

The current Astros club has been weakened by the free-agent defections of Beltran and Jeff Kent, but Clemens, Roy Oswalt and Andy Pettitte form an impressive top of the rotation, and Lidge has emerged as one of the game's top closers. The Astros entered Thursday ranked fourth in the National League in ERA, but only 12th in runs per game. An improved offense could make them a wild-card contender in the wide-open NL.

[NJRocket]

It's nice to hear him deny it

However...

"I would be going against their desires to see him, the people who bought tickets. I'm committed to winning. I'm a very loyal person. (A trade) is not something I'd consider

I wish Drayton had that "committment" mindset when it was time to resign Kent and Beltran.

[MadMax]

Originally posted by NJRocket


I wish Drayton had that "committment" mindset when it was time to resign Kent and Beltran.

:rolleyes: I just threw up a little in my mouth. Yeah, I know..I know...the $100 million + offer to Beltran wasn't real. It was all fake.

here's drayton saying he isn't trading the guy you assumed he would....and you find a way to complain. why am i not surprised?

[NJRocket]

Originally posted by MadMax
:rolleyes: I just threw up a little in my mouth. Yeah, I know..I know...the $100 million + offer to Beltran wasn't real. It was all fake.

here's drayton saying he isn't trading the guy you assumed he would....and you find a way to complain. why am i not surprised?

I'm just pointing out the irony in his statement

[NJRocket]

Max - its Derby week...can't we all just get along?;)


who u bettin?

[MadMax]

Originally posted by NJRocket
I'm just pointing out the irony in his statement

i know..he had no commitment to sign beltran. none at all. he didn't even try.

[Groogrux]

Originally posted by MadMax
:rolleyes: I just threw up a little in my mouth. Yeah, I know..I know...the $100 million + offer to Beltran wasn't real. It was all fake.

here's drayton saying he isn't trading the guy you assumed he would....and you find a way to complain. why am i not surprised?

Why even bother Max? If we'd have resigned Beltran and Kent, the same whiners would be whining that we weren't undefeated right now and that Drayton hadn't gone out and paid the money to get Ted Williams head out of the freezer.

They're getting boring, seriously.

[MadMax]

Originally posted by NJRocket
Max - its Derby week...can't we all just get along?;)


who u bettin?

Afleet Alex

[NJRocket]

Originally posted by Rocketman95

They're getting boring, seriously.

not 1/2 as boring as our offense ;)

[MadMax]

Originally posted by Rocketman95
Why even bother Max?

because i'm addicted to the Houston Astros. i have a problem.

Hi...my name is MadMax...i'm an Astroholic.

[Groogrux]

Originally posted by MadMax
because i'm addicted to the Houston Astros. i have a problem.

Hi...my name is MadMax...i'm an Astroholic.

Oh, I understand that, I'm one of them too. It's just so tedious to respond to these idiotic claims by the whiners.

[MadMax]

Originally posted by Rocketman95
Oh, I understand that, I'm one of them too. It's just so tedious to respond to these idiotic claims by the whiners.

it just felt good to admit my problem! :D

[NJRocket]

Originally posted by MadMax
Afleet Alex

yeah...seems to be a trendy pick...tough to not like George's horse but I like Sun King as a wildcard.

[NJRocket]

countdown to msn repeating exactly what one of you two just said in .....3......2.....1.........

[MadMax]

Originally posted by NJRocket
yeah...seems to be a trendy pick...tough to not like George's horse but I like Sun King as a wildcard.

i like SunKing, too simply because he's Charismatic's colt! I loved Charismatic.

i picked Afleet Alex after the Triple Crown events last year. so i'm sticking with him. i've got a thread on the Kentucky Derby in the hangout...go make your pick there.

did you know PhiSlammaJamma picked Birdstone 33-1 last year???

[Groogrux]

Hey guys, quit ruining a good foundation of a fight between the whiners and the sunshiners with some lousy horse racing talk. :D

[Mr. Clutch]

Originally posted by NJRocket
It's nice to hear him deny it

However...

"I would be going against their desires to see him, the people who bought tickets. I'm committed to winning. I'm a very loyal person. (A trade) is not something I'd consider

I wish Drayton had that "committment" mindset when it was time to resign Kent and Beltran.


Should have resigned Kent, that is for sure.

[Groogrux]

Originally posted by Mr. Clutch
Should have resigned Kent, that is for sure.

We'll see about that. $8.5/year for two years is a lot of money, especially when we'd have had to outbid that since he was going to his childhood team.

It's not like Biggio's been killing us out there.

[MadMax]

Originally posted by Rocketman95


It's not like Biggio's been killing us out there.

yes he is!!! he's awful!!!!!

where's all that talk by the way?? we need more of those posts.

[NJRocket]

Originally posted by Rocketman95

It's not like Biggio's been killing us out there.

Its not Biggio's spot he would be taking.

It was 2 or 3 weeks worth (and about 10 losses) of Luke Scott, Chris Burke and Eric Bruntlett

[Groogrux]

Originally posted by NJRocket
Its not Biggio's spot he would be taking.

It was 2 or 3 weeks worth (and about 10 losses) of Luke Scott, Chris Burke and Eric Bruntlett

But it did save us from 10 months of whining as to why those guys weren't playing more if Kent was at 2B and Biggio was in LF.

I guess us sunshiners have to pick our poison. :)

[PhiSlammaJamma]

I've been catching up on my sleep during Astro Games.

[NJRocket]

Originally posted by PhiSlammaJamma
I've been catching up on my sleep during Astro Games.

u must be well rested

[msn]

Originally posted by NJRocket
countdown to msn repeating exactly what one of you two just said in .....3......2.....1.........
It's good to be loved!

[SamCassell]

Kent's option at 7m or whatever could have been picked up. We didn't have to outbid anyone.

It's not about Kent though. As said, Biggio's doing fine at 2B. The problem is that we were counting on the combination of several questionable factors for early run production, and they haven't come through for us.

1) Morgan Ensberg hits for OK average, but he's not the run producer we saw in 2003.

2) Bagwell is slumping early and hasn't been able to produce the power this lineup needs.

3) Left field, a key run producing position on any team, has been a black hole of suck for the Stros. Biggio filled a big hole left at 2B, but left one almost as big in left.

4) Adam Everett was expected to become a leadoff man (for some reason) but has really struggled with the expectations.

5) The hopes for an early return by Berkman haven't been met.

Berk should still fill the OF hole left by Biggio when he's healthy. But this lineup still is looking at 3 other disappointments. The return of 1 player, even of Berkman's stature, won't be a panacea.

[Groogrux]

Everett seems to be playing a lot better lately, as has the team as a whole from a hitting standpoint. Berkman's return is right about where most people thought he'd be coming back. I think adding his bat to an already improving offense will help more than you think. I bet we see Bagwell sitting a little more to get Lamb more playing time as well.

We're obviously not doing great right now, but I still think we can be a team fighting for the playoffs a couple of months from now.

[Nick]

Originally posted by Rocketman95
Everett seems to be playing a lot better lately, as has the team as a whole from a hitting standpoint. Berkman's return is right about where most people thought he'd be coming back. I think adding his bat to an already improving offense will help more than you think. I bet we see Bagwell sitting a little more to get Lamb more playing time as well.

We're obviously not doing great right now, but I still think we can be a team fighting for the playoffs a couple of months from now.

At this point, I think if you give me a lineup with Lamb at LF, and Berkman at 1st base, vs. a lineup of Berkman in LF and Bagwell at 1B... i'll take even money that the FORMER is going to outproduce the latter.

[SamCassell]

He's hitting a little better now, he's also been moved out of the leadoff spot. Adam really needs to learn how to make better contact, it's ridiculous for a .250 slap hitter to be on pace for 125 Ks. He's never going to be a big time run scorer or producer, but I'd like to see him improve his discipline.

But on terms of our problems so far this season, power production from the 3 and 4 spots has been the major sticking point, but lack of hitting from the leadoff position has been 1A. Willy hasn't exactly lit it up hitting first either.

[Puedlfor]

Can't help but think that resigning Kent would've stopped a serious effort at Beltran.

In hindsight, we got played by Beltran - but at the time, we needed to free up big money to resign him, and we had plausible replacements for Kent who were much cheaper.

[Rocket Fan]

Didn't have to outbid anyone for Kent, we had his option.

Didn't have to give him 8.5 for two years. Could have had him for I think it was 9 mil for one year.

[pgabriel]

"We ain't winning eighty games"


Drayton

[NJRocket]

Originally posted by Nick
At this point, I think if you give me a lineup with Lamb at LF, and Berkman at 1st base, vs. a lineup of Berkman in LF and Bagwell at 1B... i'll take even money that the FORMER is going to outproduce the latter.

no question........i'd even go as far to say that if Bags could outproduce Ensberg (which is a big question mark), then Bags could play 1b...Lamb 3b.....Berk LF and trade Morgan.

[MadMax]

Originally posted by pgabriel
"We ain't winning eighty games"


Drayton

you're so good at predicting baseball outcomes....

[Hammer755]

Originally posted by MadMax
yes he is!!! he's awful!!!!!

where's all that talk by the way?? we need more of those posts.

HA! That's probably directed towards me since we had that conversation several times. I was right last year - after a tremendous first-half, Biggio finished with a decidedly mediocre offensive season, was the worst defensive player in the league at two different positions, and cost Jason Lane a year of playing time. I foresee pretty much the same thing happening this year.

[Hammer755]

^^^ Hit enter too soon.

Same thing happening means that Biggio will have a decent first-half and a poor second-half, and while he may not be as bad a 2B as he is an OF, he's still pretty poor. Obviously, it will be very difficult for the Stros to screw Lane this year, but I'm sure if they get creative they can find a way. :D

[msn]

Originally posted by Hammer755
...after a tremendous first-half, Biggio finished with a decidedly mediocre offensive season
Really? The Biggio who had his best BA since 2001, scored 100 runs, 47--forty-seven--doubles, 24 bombs, and 187 hits? "Decidedly mediocre"??? Pardon me while I peel my laughing ass off the floor. Do you check facts before you post this drivel? His weaknesses--too few walks, too many K's (94), and OBP a little too low--but those didn't keep him from scoring runs, and that is a leadoff hitter's job.

was the worst defensive player in the league at two different positions, and cost Jason Lane a year of playing time. I foresee pretty much the same thing happening this year.
How's Bidge going to cost Jason Lane a year of playing time? Does Lane play 2B? Also, if he wants PT, he should consider some degree of consistency. To date, he's been DWII minus the breakout season off the bench.

Also, how was Bidge the worst outfielder? 13th if FPCT for all outfielders isn't bad. Are you going by the nine errors? To me, DW is a far worse outfielder--unless he was at 1B last year.

I think you're just bitching about it for the sake of bitching. Is it because you're delusional about lack of production, or because you're a bitter Jason Lane fan?

I was right last year
About what?

[SamCassell]

Originally posted by msn
Also, how was Bidge the worst outfielder? 13th if FPCT for all outfielders isn't bad. Are you going by the nine errors? To me, DW is a far worse outfielder--unless he was at 1B last year.

Who's DW? Biggio was a subpar outfielder not because of the errors, or even his range. His deficiency was that his arm was easily the worst OF arm in baseball, and guys routinely took the extra base on him. Highlighted in the LCS. But you know all this already.

[msn]

Originally posted by SamCassell
Who's DW? Biggio was a subpar outfielder not because of the errors, or even his range. His deficiency was that his arm was easily the worst OF arm in baseball, and guys routinely took the extra base on him. Highlighted in the LCS. But you know all this already.
Worst arm in the league, granted. Worst outfielder? Subpar indeed, but not so sure about "worst at two positions". But the point was that the other poster was whining with points that weren't really defensible.

DW is Dayle Ward. Lane has all the potential DW has, but has produced only what DW produced--minus that season where DW banged like 21 off the bench.

[SamCassell]

I'm with you on Biggio's D. He wasn't the worst OF, and he isn't the worst 2B. I wouldn't call his D a plus at either position, but there are worse starting at both LF and 2B.

And Ward deserved a chance to start after the 21 homer outburst. He didn't do anything with the opportunity, and was justifiably replaced. He was also a fatass who was a terrible defender. Jason Lane also deserves a chance to start this season. Will he produce? I think he will, but if he doesn't, then he also deserves to be sent packing. Just because one outfielder flames out doesn't mean the next one will, though. Give him the opportunity and then sit back and see what he does with it. I think his offense and defense have been OK so far. He's on pace for .275/25/80, which makes him about an average starting ML outfielder. I don't see him flaming out DW style. (Ward's doing OK with the Pirates this year, btw).

[msn]

Originally posted by SamCassell
I'm with you on Biggio's D. He wasn't the worst OF, and he isn't the worst 2B. I wouldn't call his D a plus at either position, but there are worse starting at both LF and 2B.

And Ward deserved a chance to start after the 21 homer outburst. He didn't do anything with the opportunity, and was justifiably replaced. He was also a fatass who was a terrible defender. Jason Lane also deserves a chance to start this season. Will he produce? I think he will, but if he doesn't, then he also deserves to be sent packing. Just because one outfielder flames out doesn't mean the next one will, though. Give him the opportunity and then sit back and see what he does with it. I think his offense and defense have been OK so far. He's on pace for .275/25/80, which makes him about an average starting ML outfielder. I don't see him flaming out DW style. (Ward's doing OK with the Pirates this year, btw).
I agree with you. I'm glad for DW that he found his stroke (and that he can now see his feet again).

[isoman2kx]

Originally posted by NJRocket
It's nice to hear him deny it

However...


I wish Drayton had that "committment" mindset when it was time to resign Kent and Beltran.

moron

[Hammer755]

Originally posted by msn
Really? The Biggio who had his best BA since 2001, scored 100 runs, 47--forty-seven--doubles, 24 bombs, and 187 hits? "Decidedly mediocre"??? Pardon me while I peel my laughing ass off the floor. Do you check facts before you post this drivel? His weaknesses--too few walks, too many K's (94), and OBP a little too low--but those didn't keep him from scoring runs, and that is a leadoff hitter's job.


How's Bidge going to cost Jason Lane a year of playing time? Does Lane play 2B? Also, if he wants PT, he should consider some degree of consistency. To date, he's been DWII minus the breakout season off the bench.

Also, how was Bidge the worst outfielder? 13th if FPCT for all outfielders isn't bad. Are you going by the nine errors? To me, DW is a far worse outfielder--unless he was at 1B last year.

I think you're just bitching about it for the sake of bitching. Is it because you're delusional about lack of production, or because you're a bitter Jason Lane fan?


About what?

Your response is dripping with irony. Let's do as you suggest and check the facts and see whose opinion they come closer to.

While I admit that it is sometimes difficult to compare players using numbers, you use three of the worst stats (AVG, 2B, & RS) that correlate to offensive production. One of my favorite numbers to use when comparing players is OPS+, which takes a player's OPS and corrects it for his home park, then compares it to the rest of the league. OPS takes two of the stats you mentioned (AVG & 2B) into consideration in its calculation. Runs scored is a terrible comparator stat because it is almost entirely dependent on the players that bat behind him (RBI falls into this category as well). A better player could have scored much more than 100 runs batting ahead of Kent and Berkman. Corey Patterson scored 91 runs last season with an OBP of 0.320 - it didn't mean he had a good season, it meant that the guys behind him had good ones.

Biggio's OPS+ last season was 106 (http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/biggicr01.shtml), which means that, corrected for Minute Maid's park effects, he was 6% better than league average. So mediocre may not have been the right word, maybe slightly better than mediocre would be a better descriptor.

So now let's look at the defensive facts. Once again, you choose one of the stats (Fld%) that is almost entirely ineffective when judging true defensive talent). Granted, defensive numbers are much less dependable then offensive stats due to the subjective nature of judging defense, but when multiple numbers tell you the same thing, you kind of think they're on the right track.

In 2004 (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlbhist/stats/fielding?groupId=8&season=2004&seasonType=2&split=84&sortOrder=true&sortColumn=rangeFactor&qualified=0), Biggio's Range Factor was 2.13 in CF and 1.64 in LF. The player with the worst RF in CF was Corey Patterson with a 2.18, and the player with the worst RF in LF was Moises Alou with 1.66. So, if Biggio qualified, he would have had the worst range factor at both positions.

His ZR (Zone Rating) was 0.796 in CF and 0.764 in LF. The player with the worst UZR in CF was Andruw Jones with a 0.836, and the player with the worst UZR in LF was Matt Holiday with 0.815. So, if Biggio qualified, he would have had the worst zone rating at both positions.

Once again, I would like to point out that I am not 100% sold on any defensive metric (one that ranks Jones last has something wrong with it). However, when they all say the same thing, ie Biggio ranked last in every category in 2004 at both LF and CF, then I am inclined to give the notion some merit. In fact, using ESPN's historical records, Biggio's ZR are the worst (again, for LF and CF) of any player over that past 5 years at both positions. Combine these facts with Biggio's terrible arm, and you can see why I can conclude that he was the worst defensive player at both positions in the NL last season.

So, I did what you asked, I looked at the cold, hard facts, and that's how I came to my conclusion. I'm willing to be that it's a little more thorough look than you did.

And I didn't say anything about Lane this year, other than suggest that Houston has been screwing him for so long that they would probably find a way to do it again. What I did say was that the team could have almost certainly gotten a similar or better season from Lane last year at about 10% of the salary (300k vs 3 mil).

[msn]

Originally posted by Hammer755
OPS+, RF, blah, blah, blah
I skimmed your response and saw OPS+ and RF and knew that I didn't have to waste my time actually reading it.

No stats tell the whole story--but some are *worse* than others. Anyone who would use OPS+ to say that Craig Biggio was "decidedly mediocre" from the offensive side last year, from example, is a prime example of someone who has divorced himself from reality in favor of useless numbers. *Anyone* can get *any statistic* to say *anything* he or she wants. Numbers are easy to manipulate. You want some "cold, hard, facts"? Consider watching the damn game. If you think Craig Biggio was mediocre, you weren't watching, or you don't know what on earth you're looking at.

Oh, and by the way: Runs Scored is immeasurably more important that "OPS+". You don't win games with OPS, you win them by scoring more runs than your opponent. And, don't waste your time, I won't read your response where you disagree--I've read the same drivel all too many times. Some people take stats too far.

[Hammer755]

Originally posted by msn
I skimmed your response and saw OPS+ and RF and knew that I didn't have to waste my time actually reading it.

No stats tell the whole story--but some are *worse* than others. Anyone who would use OPS+ to say that Craig Biggio was "decidedly mediocre" from the offensive side last year, from example, is a prime example of someone who has divorced himself from reality in favor of useless numbers. *Anyone* can get *any statistic* to say *anything* he or she wants. Numbers are easy to manipulate. You want some "cold, hard, facts"? Consider watching the damn game. If you think Craig Biggio was mediocre, you weren't watching, or you don't know what on earth you're looking at.

Oh, and by the way: Runs Scored is immeasurably more important that "OPS+". You don't win games with OPS, you win them by scoring more runs than your opponent. And, don't waste your time, I won't read your response where you disagree--I've read the same drivel all too many times. Some people take stats too far.

Once again, your post blasts off of the irony meter. You tell me to look at the facts, then when I do, you tell me how they don't matter. Interesting.

[msn]

Originally posted by Hammer755
Once again, your post blasts off of the irony meter. You tell me to look at the facts, then when I do, you tell me how they don't matter. Interesting.
Facts and OPS+ are two different things entirely. I understand that we don't agree on that.

That said, it's most likely obvious to you that the whole statgeek mentality is royally irritating to me--because the manipulation of these numbers causes otherwise reasonable and intelligent people to arrive at conclusions that appear, well, ridiculous. (To say that Biggio is not close to what he once was is accurate; to say that last year's performance was mediocre is not. Ensberg was mediocre.)

*Anyway*, all that to say my tone in the above posts is without excuse. "Statgeeking" and whining really irritate me, and I've been piling on hard lately, and when I come back and read I come off like a jackass (although I still think I'm right :) ).

Please excuse the arrogant tone, and thanks.

[Xenon]

Originally posted by msn
I skimmed your response and saw OPS+ and RF and knew that I didn't have to waste my time actually reading it.

No stats tell the whole story--but some are *worse* than others. Anyone who would use OPS+ to say that Craig Biggio was "decidedly mediocre" from the offensive side last year, from example, is a prime example of someone who has divorced himself from reality in favor of useless numbers. *Anyone* can get *any statistic* to say *anything* he or she wants. Numbers are easy to manipulate. You want some "cold, hard, facts"? Consider watching the damn game. If you think Craig Biggio was mediocre, you weren't watching, or you don't know what on earth you're looking at.

Oh, and by the way: Runs Scored is immeasurably more important that "OPS+". You don't win games with OPS, you win them by scoring more runs than your opponent. And, don't waste your time, I won't read your response where you disagree--I've read the same drivel all too many times. Some people take stats too far.

Just because you can't understand a basic concept such as OPS doesn't make the stat useless.

Fact: Craig Biggio was a below average outfielder in 2004. This can't be denied by anyone. He was horrible in the field and merely average offensively when compared to other outfielders in the league. You know guys like Bonds, Berkman, Ichiro? Those guys that played in the outfield.

I'm actually going to defend Biggio this season though. He deserves to be out there every day. The reason? Compare his STATS last season to every other 2nd baseman in the league and they matchup pretty well.

The thing is just because you don't understand how a certain stat works doesn't make it worthless. OPS especially is a pretty basic stat that you dismiss. You do understand that all it is is On Base % + Slugging % right? How freaking hard is that? It may get a little fancy when you factor in park adjustments, but with extreme pitchers parks like Detroit and hitters parks like Colorado you have to do this.

[Hammer755]

Originally posted by msn
Facts and OPS+ are two different things entirely. I understand that we don't agree on that.

That said, it's most likely obvious to you that the whole statgeek mentality is royally irritating to me--because the manipulation of these numbers causes otherwise reasonable and intelligent people to arrive at conclusions that appear, well, ridiculous. (To say that Biggio is not close to what he once was is accurate; to say that last year's performance was mediocre is not. Ensberg was mediocre.)

*Anyway*, all that to say my tone in the above posts is without excuse. "Statgeeking" and whining really irritate me, and I've been piling on hard lately, and when I come back and read I come off like a jackass (although I still think I'm right :) ).

Please excuse the arrogant tone, and thanks.

Fair enough.

But could you please explain to me why you are so quick to dismiss stats like OPS which, as Xenon mentioned, is quite a simple calculation - OBP (AVG, BB, & HBP) + SLG (1B + 2B +3B + HR). It encapsulates every single thing that goes into offensive production except for stolen bases, which is a moot point for Biggio anyways. So why is it treated as some abstract idea that requires a back-room supercomputer to decipher?

As Xenon said again, OPS+ is simply OPS corrected for park effects, and compared to the league average. A 30-HR season in Coors Field and a 30-HR season in Dodger Stadium are two completely different animals, so OPS+ corrects for park effects as best possible.

[msn]

Originally posted by Xenon
Just because you can't understand a basic concept such as OPS doesn't make the stat useless.
Umm, I *do* understand it. Slugging percentage is the amount of bases per ab. On base percentage is the percentage of PA's a hitter gets on base. OPS is the useless combining of those two that tells us nothing that each stat alone doesn't tell us.

Fact: Craig Biggio was a below average outfielder in 2004.
No, that's an opinion. And a stupid one at that.

You know guys like Bonds, Berkman, Ichiro? Those guys that played in the outfield.
And therein lies the problem with the average whiner fan. If someone isn't Ichiro or Bonds, he's "mediocre" or subpar. Do you have any concept of the middle ground between good and incredibe?

I'm actually going to defend Biggio this season though. He deserves to be out there every day. The reason? Compare his STATS last season to every other 2nd baseman in the league and they matchup pretty well.
And I'll defend because I *watch* the game and he *looks* better than some others. But, to each his own. Rotogeek.

OPS especially is a pretty basic stat that you dismiss. You do understand that all it is is On Base % + Slugging % right? How freaking hard is that? It may get a little fancy when you factor in park adjustments, but with extreme pitchers parks like Detroit and hitters parks like Colorado you have to do this.
I understand park adjustments, too. And era adjustments, even! Assumption is a dangerous playing field, and you've made assumptions about me having never met me. I've read, I've grasped the concept, I'm extremely good in math, trig, and calc, and OPS, along with many other modern stats, is a steaming pile. That's my opinion. At least I'm not confusing my opinion with fact.

[msn]

Originally posted by Hammer755
Fair enough.

But could you please explain to me why you are so quick to dismiss stats like OPS which, as Xenon mentioned, is quite a simple calculation - OBP (AVG, BB, & HBP) + SLG (1B + 2B +3B + HR). It encapsulates every single thing that goes into offensive production except for stolen bases, which is a moot point for Biggio anyways. So why is it treated as some abstract idea that requires a back-room supercomputer to decipher?

As Xenon said again, OPS+ is simply OPS corrected for park effects, and compared to the league average. A 30-HR season in Coors Field and a 30-HR season in Dodger Stadium are two completely different animals, so OPS+ corrects for park effects as best possible.
I explained why I don't consider this stat very valuable above, before I read your post. It's not the abstraction that makes it worthless to me, it's that it leaves out so much--seriously.

How do you measure if a guy hits well behind the runner? How do you measure if he's smarter on the bases, so he scores more getting on less in front of lesser hitters than other guys with higher OBP? How do you measure a baserunner that distracts a pitcher enough to make him throw 3-4 extra pitches, or even a mistake pitch? How do you measure a hitter who does the little things to help his baserunner get a better jump? How do you measure a guy who hits his sac flies high and deep, making it easier for the runner to advance?

Stats are useful, but incomplete. And when someone authoritatively takes *one* stat, even one of these so-called "all-inclusive" stats, and uses it to say something about any player that simple observation will disprove, it hardens me agains stat-heads.

[studogg]

so did we trade clemens yet?

[Xenon]

Originally posted by msn
How do you measure if a guy hits well behind the runner?

Hokey outdated bs. You show me a guy that hits well behind a runner and I'll show you a guy that just plain hits well and it will reflect in his STATS.

How do you measure if he's smarter on the bases, so he scores more getting on less in front of lesser hitters than other guys with higher OBP?

Umm...runs. You know a STAT.

How do you measure a baserunner that distracts a pitcher enough to make him throw 3-4 extra pitches, or even a mistake pitch?

Stolen Bases. You know another STAT. A guy that distracts the pitcher is a guy that can steal bases.

How do you measure a hitter who does the little things to help his baserunner get a better jump?

You mean like drawing more pitches and extending counts? Well typically guys like that have a good eye and this will reflect in his OBP% and his SO numbers. If you're also talking about guys that swing when the runner goes. Well who doesn't do that?

How do you measure a guy who hits his sac flies high and deep, making it easier for the runner to advance?

Rbi's. You know another STAT.

Stats are useful, but incomplete. And when someone authoritatively takes *one* stat, even one of these so-called "all-inclusive" stats, and uses it to say something about any player that simple observation will disprove, it hardens me agains stat-heads.

No they are not complete, but you can't tell me that a guy with a .320 obp is worth more offensively than a guy with a .370 obp. Differences like these are too big to discount.

[fya]

Originally posted by pgabriel
"We ain't winning eighty games"


Drayton

80? try 55

[Hammer755]

Originally posted by msn
I explained why I don't consider this stat very valuable above, before I read your post. It's not the abstraction that makes it worthless to me, it's that it leaves out so much--seriously.

How do you measure if a guy hits well behind the runner? How do you measure if he's smarter on the bases, so he scores more getting on less in front of lesser hitters than other guys with higher OBP? How do you measure a baserunner that distracts a pitcher enough to make him throw 3-4 extra pitches, or even a mistake pitch? How do you measure a hitter who does the little things to help his baserunner get a better jump? How do you measure a guy who hits his sac flies high and deep, making it easier for the runner to advance?

Stats are useful, but incomplete. And when someone authoritatively takes *one* stat, even one of these so-called "all-inclusive" stats, and uses it to say something about any player that simple observation will disprove, it hardens me agains stat-heads.

You are correct in that there is no single all-inclusive stat that can authoritatively describe a player, but using the data that is available, you can certainly reach some conclusions using a multitude of different numbers.

You are also correct in that there is no stat that encompasses the thing that you mention. The reason for that is that those things just don't matter, for a few reasons. First, you can't prove that any of those things you mention have any value at all. Even if they do have value that's indiscernible, that value would be infinitesimally small when compared with the things that really do matter - hitting, pitching, and defense.

[Groogrux]

Originally posted by fya
80? try 55

Were you even alive in the late 90s?

[msn]

Originally posted by Hammer755
You are also correct in that there is no stat that encompasses the thing that you mention. The reason for that is that those things just don't matter, for a few reasons. First, you can't prove that any of those things you mention have any value at all. Even if they do have value that's indiscernible, that value would be infinitesimally small when compared with the things that really do matter - hitting, pitching, and defense.
They *do* matter. Playing the game right matters. It affects the other teammates' performance. It is amazing to me that the only things that matter are the things that rotogeeks can cook into another stat.

This is the impasse I always arrive at with the whole stat/rotogeek crowd. I'll play the game and watch it; you enjoy measuring it--at least the precious few pieces that can be measured.

[Mr. Clutch]

Originally posted by studogg
so did we trade clemens yet?

It wouldn't be a bad idea if we could get some nice prospects out if it. Or we could try to pick up a couple of bats and make this season worthwhile. Still hoping for Aubrey Huff at 3rd.

[Hammer755]

Originally posted by msn
They *do* matter. Playing the game right matters. It affects the other teammates' performance. It is amazing to me that the only things that matter are the things that rotogeeks can cook into another stat.

This is the impasse I always arrive at with the whole stat/rotogeek crowd. I'll play the game and watch it; you enjoy measuring it--at least the precious few pieces that can be measured.

I'm surprised it took you this long to get the 'Baseball is played on a field not in a spreadsheet' response. I'm fairly certain that I watch more baseball games than you do, I watch more than most anybody that I know. I attended about half of the Astros home games last year and watched almost all of the rest on TV, and I'm not even an Astros fan.

[Hammer755]

Originally posted by msn
They *do* matter. Playing the game right matters. It affects the other teammates' performance. It is amazing to me that the only things that matter are the things that rotogeeks can cook into another stat.

This is the impasse I always arrive at with the whole stat/rotogeek crowd. I'll play the game and watch it; you enjoy measuring it--at least the precious few pieces that can be measured.

I would suggest that you check out a few articles at Baseball Prospectus.com. They will help you understand a bit better what people like me, 'rotogeeks' as you describe them, feel about baseball and what they are trying to do.

There's a good series on BP Basics (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/index.php?column=31) that they have published this year. Here is the introduction to the first article (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2563) from the series. Even if you don't agree with what they say, you can at least see what things looke like from a different perspective.

If you're not familiar with Baseball Prospectus, here's what we're all about: understanding the game better, and innovating in order to do it. Everyone at BP loves the game of baseball with a passion that most people just don't understand. We feel that this greatest of games is so compelling that we want to know everything about it.

We always want to improve our understanding of the game; each player, each play, each pitch, each throw, each hit--what does it really mean? Those arguments that take place in bars about the relative merits of different players? We really want to know the definitive answer to those questions. But we don't want to kill the joy of the game while we're looking.