Everett and Kent Leading Vote-Getters at Their Respective Positions

Garciaparra is leading the AL shortstops in votes...and hasn't seen a pitch yet this year. Enough said.

 

There's nothing revolutionary to it, it's been done before and I would like to see it done again. After Reds fans stuffed the ballots in 1957, fan voting was suspended until 1970.

Especially now that the All-Star game result has a direct bearing on home-field advantage in the World Series, it it time to make sure that the best players are on the field, and not just the most popular.

 

If you can't compare the 2 players, how do you know that Ichiro was more valuable? The MVP Award is rarely given to the player who had the best season, but to the player that the media deems 'Most Valuable', which is interpreted differently by every person that votes.

As you have probably figured out, I think that Giambi deserved the award, but can't really complain too much about it going to Ichiro. It wasn't as far off as the 0.300 points in OPS would initially indicate. I admit that there are some limitations to OPS, and a couple of them are that it doesn't factor in defense or basestealing, which were both weighted heavily in Ichiro's favor, as well as the Mariners winning an AL record 116 games.

 

I never questioned whether Giambi or Suzuki were more valuable to their team. My point was that they are completely different players (highlighting the OPS disparity), yet both players were deserving of the MVP award; both had different strengths in different statistical catergories.


Strictly judging baseball player's worth over a single weighted statstic, such as OPS, adamently as you were doing is thoughtless.

 

If you read my post immediately proceding this one, you will read where I concede that there are some holes in using OPS as a comparison tool.

However, your consideration of OPS as a single weighted statistic is thoughtless in my book. OPS is not a single number, but an amalgum of stats that includes nearly every way a player can contribute to his team scoring runs. It includes BB, HBP, 1B, 2B, 3B, & HR.

Like I said, its primary weaknesses are that it does not include stolen bases or defense in its calculation. However, the original point of this exercise was to find NL outfielders who are having a better season than Biggio, and Biggio's performance makes the inclusion of SB and DEF as a comparator stat irrelevant.

 

Depends on the player and the job he's asked to do. There are such things as productive outs. Strikeouts are in no way productive.

 

OPS fails to include RBI, R -- two very important factors in winning games. After all, a player can get all the doubles, triples, BB's to pad his OPS stat he wants, but at the end of the game its the amount of runs created that determines the winner. Alot of people could argue that Griffey doesnt deserve to be in the All-star game (.871 OPS, .239 BA), yet you look at the fact that he leads all MLB outfielders in RBI's you could make a strong case for him.

SLG and thusly OPS, is weighted towards HR power hitters, which doesnt favor players like Biggio, Suzuki, Pierre etc etc.

To look at things historically. Mark McGwire was a career .260 hitter -- only hit .300+ once, yet has a career .982 OPS. In contrast, Pete Rose, the all-time hits leader, had a dismal .784 OPS career average. You could make the case that if you play long enough youll start breaking records, which is certainly fair, but Rose still batted over .300 15 times in his career. I could use Tony Gwynn as another example, was a career .340 hitter, yet had a .847 OPS, etc etc.

I'm sure there are better cases showing horrible hitters with good a OPS stat compared to some of the greats in the game with low OPS, but that's just what popped in my head.

 

It's awesome to see all the Stros up there. This years ASG will be fun to watch.

Let's go Stros!

 

Think the Suzuki vs Giambi 2001 MVP vote. Suzuki's OPS was hovering around .800+ all season about .300 points lower than Giambi's number. You cant compare the value of those 2 since they're completely different players.


Biggio is not stealing bases and creating havoc in all sorts of unique ways that Ichiro did that year. Bsaically, Wilson is better in virtually every aspect over Biggio this year. Sure, he's not leading off... because you put your best hitters in the 3-4-5 spots, so why would he? Instead of saying "well, how would Wilson do in the leadoff spot", why not ask "how would Biggio do in the 3-4-5 spots"? It's also notable that

Regardless, I'm not even sure why this is an argument. There are clearly 8-10 outfielders better than Biggio in basically every way, so it doesn't matter if he's #11 or #50, he shouldn't be in the all-star game. Kent, Berkman, Clemens - definitely. Everett? Maybe, since that position is pretty weak in the NL - although Jack Wilson and his 0.350 batting average should take the starting spot. Everyone else? They simply don't deserve it if you're actually trying to pick based on performance.

 

i just voted alot... LETS GO 'STROS

 

There are a couple of things I'd like to rebut in your post.

First, in my opinion, R & RBI are two of the most overrated stats in determining player value. I think this is true because they are almost entirely team-dependent. A hitter can have a tremendous season, but his R & RBI will not reflect it if he bats in the middle of a terrible lineup. OPS is team indepenent - it reflects how the player performs and not the offense as a whole.

An example of this is Dmitri Young with Detroit last season. He had an OPS of 0.909 and hit 29 HR, both of these in one of the best pitcher's parks in the league. Yet because he batted in the middle of a pitiful Detroit lineup, he finished with only 85 RBI and 78 R. Conversely, look at Hideki Matsui. Godzilla finished with a pedestrian 0.788 OPS, yet because of the potent lineup that he was a member of, he ended up with 106 RBI and 82 runs. Going by R & RBI, you would say that Matsui had the better season, when in fact Young had a much better year.

Secondly, your comparison of Gwynn vs. McGwire is way off. McGwire's HR are not the only factor in his big advantage in Gwynn in OPS. They are part of it for sure, but if you remember, McGwire used to walk almost as much as Bonds does. In fact, though Gwynn had a batting average of 75 points greater than McGwire, Big Mac actually had a higher career OBP than Gwynn did. So the difference in SLG is exaggerated even more so. I would disagree vehemently with you that you will find a poor hitter with an OPS of greater than 0.950, as you contend.

 

This is the best baseball debate I've ever read..

please keep going!

 

I don't know if you'd find many people who'd concede that Young had a better year than Matsui, but I'll take it in consideration. It should also be noted that Alex Rodriguez put up great RBI and R numbers on dismal Ranger teams, likewise of Vlad Gurrero on the Expos. My point is I don't know if you would want to use Dmitri Young as your example, as a truly great player would fill up the RBI/R column anyways. Truth is a lot of different outside factors affect the game. A player who has played at Coors Field will have a higher SLG/OPS than a person who plays in the Astrodome. Think Bagwell would have been past 500 HR's (better SLG) if he had played in his prime at Minute Maid? I could diverge on tangents and list outside factors that affect OPS dependants stats -- a person with better protection in the lineup will see more balls to drive than another, etc etc. You cant isolate R & RBI statistics as being the only ones affected by factors outside of the player himself. Point is, arguing whether or not R & RBI stats are overrated b/c they depend on the team isnt worthwhile. Last I checked no one frowned upon a player who won the RBI crown.

I don't see how this argues my point at all. If McGwire and Gwynn's OBP is the same, this means the difference in OPS comes from the SLG correct? SLG is total bases divided by AB. Meaning if McGwire went 1-4 with a homerun, his SLG would be the same as if Gwynn went 4-4 with 4 singles. Imagine if they had the same OBP ... who had the better game? Their OPS would be the exact same, even though Gwynn had a more efficient game. That's my very point, OPS is a stat weighted towards power hitters, and doesnt cater towards players such as Biggio, Suzuki, Gwynn, etc etc... Going back to career numbers, comparing Gwynn and McGwire ... Gwynn had 3100+ hits, while McGwire had 1600+ hits (almost 1/2 less than Gwynn), yet Gwynn's OPS is drastically lower than McGwire's.




I think we diverged on the issue. My initial point was to prove that the OPS stat is not some all encompassing super statistic that resolutely determined a players skill. You've conceded that -- we could go on and on but ill stop because statistics can be skewed to prove anything "Lies, damn lies, and statistics"

I never tried to make this a point about Biggio either, I think that he should play in the all-star game given that it's his last season and in front of the home town crowd. While he probably doesnt deserve a place on the roster, it's not like there would be a huge uproar if he earned a spot based on merit alone and not sentimentility. As fans we should embrace it, and not dispute it.

 

Meaning if McGwire went 1-4 with a homerun, his SLG would be the same as if Gwynn went 4-4 with 4 singles. Imagine if they had the same OBP ... who had the better game? Their OPS would be the exact same, even though Gwynn had a more efficient game. That's my very point, OPS is a stat weighted towards power hitters, and doesnt cater towards players such as Biggio, Suzuki, Gwynn, etc etc...

Except in your example, they can't have the same OBP. Gywnn's OBP is 1.0 and his SLG is 1.0, giving him an OPS of 2.0. McGwire's OBP is 0.250 and his SLG is 1.0, so his OPS is 1.25. As you suggested, Gwynn looks better.

OPS isn't slanted towards power hitters, but On-Base hitters. A walk is counted once - in the OBP part. A single is counted twice - in the OBP and the SLG. A double again only counts once more over a single - in the SLG. Triple, HR are the same way. So if two batters have the same number of total bases, the stat is actually weighted to favor the batter that does it with singles than with power.

First, in my opinion, R & RBI are two of the most overrated stats in determining player value. I think this is true because they are almost entirely team-dependent. A hitter can have a tremendous season, but his R & RBI will not reflect it if he bats in the middle of a terrible lineup. OPS is team indepenent - it reflects how the player performs and not the offense as a whole.

This is true to an extent, but it also measures a batter's "clutchness" (whether you think that was luck or not). For example, Hidalgo last year was terrible in the RBI department, and the reason was that his batting average fell as you had more people on base - he was great with no one on. When he had to drive people in, it kept getting worse. And that's been a pattern for him for years. On the other hand, you'll have a guy like Kent who seems to consistently be able to drive runners in very effectively. Those are numbers that have a real effect on a game, but aren't shown in OPS and other similar categories...

 

everytime i read a thread like this i lament the fact that bill james was born.

 

Bassfly, you finally found some common ground. You are right, OPS does not correct for park effects, so a player in Coors will have inflated numbers over a player in Dodger Stadium. For this very reason, OPS+ is one of my favorite numbers. OPS+ takes a player's OPS, adjusts it for park effects, then compares it to the league-average park-adjusted OPS. It is basically a ratio of a players OPS vs. the rest of the league - the higher the better. For reference, Jeff Bagwell's 1994 season (one of the best offensive seasons in the history of the league) scored him a 213 OPS+ with an OPS of 1.201. That same season, Fred McGriff had a 1.012 OPS, but scored only a 157 OPS+ due to the fact that he played in an extreme hitter's park in Atlanta.

Given your contention that Matsui had a better season than Young, how do you rank Barry Bond's 2003 season? He had only 90 RBI and only 111 R, but I would contend that he had one of the better seasons of all-time. Yet he batted in a poor lineup, which suppressed his RBI/R total.

As for your McGwire/Gwynn response, Major pointed it out, but if one player goes 4-4 and the other goes 1-4, you cannot pretend that they have the same OBP - they don't.

I just don't understand why you see batting average as the be-all end-all stat, something you chided me about using OPS to do. As I said, OPS isn't the only stat to be used, but it is a much more valuable tool than simple batting average. Batting average counts all hits the same, whether they be a single or a home run. Surely you have to recognize that a home run is more valuable than a single, and its value should be designated as such. Batting average cannot do that.

 

Why so? Do you like having your head stuck in the sand? Do you enjoy relying on the same methods of player evaluation that have been used for decades?

Max, I've said this before - from what I've seen, you're a really sharp guy. Why would you not embrace a different way of looking at the game of baseball? Why do you feel the need to be force-fed by ESPN and CBSSportsline, telling you what is significant to the game of baseball and what is not? I'm sure you don't behave this way in any other aspect of the news, so why do you resist change in baseball?

 

Hammer --

seriously back off the jackass tone. it's baseball. want a real argument?? i'll scream your head off in the D&D about abortion. ease up.

1. ESPN and CBS both use the kind of stats you're talking about. So that's not putting my head in the sand.

2. I've played baseball. I know there is far more to the game than numbers from stat geeks. There is definite value from looking at certain stats. But I think James takes us to a point of OVER -reliance on them. Why do you assume because you can look at some numbers compiled on a sheet of paper that you can pick talent better than the guys who went out and found Mickey Mantle...or Stan Musial?

3. You're looking at numbers and making determinations. Your sources of numbers may be different than mine...but that's ultimately all you're doing. You're letting the numbers tell your story...I'm not saying there's necessarily anything wrong with that...but stop trying to pretend like you're some revolutionary with new thoughts on the game and I'm backwards with my head in the sand. The source of your arguments hasn't been from watching a guy's swing...or watching the movement of a guy's actual pitch...but rather from regurgitating some numerical analysis.

 

Max, I truly apologize if I'm coming off as a jerk. That is entirely not my intention. I have a feeling that we'd agree wholeheartedly in an abortion argument.

Statistics are a direct result of what happens on the field, they don't replace what is happening on the field. I played the game too, likely longer than you did. It doesn't mean that I know more about player valuation than anybody else just because I played for 20 years. Good players can be crappy exectutives, it happens all the time.

If you want to believe that batting average is the best indicator of player value, so be it. But don't chastise me because I disagree with you.

 

All I'm saying is think for yourself. Use the available information to make your own conclusions. Don't just regurgitate what Joe Morgan tells you. I'm certain that's what you do in all other aspecsts of life, so why not apply it to sports?