ARod

[Drew]

Are you kidding me? 4 strikeouts tonight, one last night in his one at bat, this is pissing me off to no end. I'd love to defend him, but it's getting to the point where you just can't. I've never seen such an unclutch performer in my entire life. When he comes out with runners on and 1 out, I hope for a strikeout rather then him hitting into a double play.

It's just gotten beyond bad.

Sorry, had to rant.

[LolTolhurst]

he probably still has 2 ABs left too! he very well might whiff 6 times tonight:lol:

[MisterMoss]

Are you kidding me? 4 strikeouts tonight, one last night in his one at bat, this is pissing me off to no end. I'd love to defend him, but it's getting to the point where you just can't. I've never seen such an unclutch performer in my entire life. When he comes out with runners on and 1 out, I hope for a strikeout rather then him hitting into a double play.

It's just gotten beyond bad.

Sorry, had to rant.
That's all you got???

Let is out man

[GreenMachine]

And fans of other teams wonder why Yankee fans boo him......


"But he was MVP last year...

What is the operative word there?

[Uhm a Jets Fan]

Idk he has had some clutch hits for us in the playoffs, not much though. This year is just bad plus isn't he like really sick right now or something.

[LolTolhurst]

it's a miracle!

[FirstTimeCaller]

My favorite Yankee.

[AlioTheFool]

I have been an ARod supporter for a long time now. I held on until the Boston series, when I finally noticed what my brother has been saying all along.

It's not that he can't hit because he can. Sometimes he can even get a clutch hit. It's when he utterly fails that is the problem. The strikeouts are bad enough, but the double plays are downright ridiculous. I have never seen anyone DP so often with the bases loaded and one out to ruin a perfectly good rally.

Even that though, I was willing to forgive. What I discovered disturbs me even more. He doesn't even care!

Watch his face when he grounds into a DP, or strikes out to end a game. He has this look on his face like "It's okay, I know I can play, boo me if you want, I am fine with me."

That's where I draw the line. Failing is a problem. "The Best Player in Baseball" should not fail as often as he does, but let's face it, he isn't the first guy to fail in NY. Look at Kenny Rodgers. I can deal with failure. I cannot deal with being lackadaisical about it though.

It's too bad no one else can afford him. We are stuck with him. I think the best thing to do right now is send him to the minors. Or at least threaten him with it. It worked for Giambi, maybe it will work for him. I know it's bad for PR, I know he's too expensive to play in the minors, etc. However, he is doing us no good here. Even benching him didn't work. (Let's be honest, a "throat infection" doesn't keep you out of the lineup.)

[MisterMoss]

I have been an ARod supporter for a long time now. I held on until the Boston series, when I finally noticed what my brother has been saying all along.

It's not that he can't hit because he can. Sometimes he can even get a clutch hit. It's when he utterly fails that is the problem. The strikeouts are bad enough, but the double plays are downright ridiculous. I have never seen anyone DP so often with the bases loaded and one out to ruin a perfectly good rally.

Even that though, I was willing to forgive. What I discovered disturbs me even more. He doesn't even care!

Watch his face when he grounds into a DP, or strikes out to end a game. He has this look on his face like "It's okay, I know I can play, boo me if you want, I am fine with me."

That's where I draw the line. Failing is a problem. "The Best Player in Baseball" should not fail as often as he does, but let's face it, he isn't the first guy to fail in NY. Look at Kenny Rodgers. I can deal with failure. I cannot deal with being lackadaisical about it though.

It's too bad no one else can afford him. We are stuck with him. I think the best thing to do right now is send him to the minors. Or at least threaten him with it. It worked for Giambi, maybe it will work for him. I know it's bad for PR, I know he's too expensive to play in the minors, etc. However, he is doing us no good here. Even benching him didn't work. (Let's be honest, a "throat infection" doesn't keep you out of the lineup.)
Well, I'm glad you've come around on him, but even I have to say that I think A-Rod cares. The thing is, his body language is all fabricated. He thinks about the way he looks, the way he acts, the way he carries himself. He THINKS. It's like watching a Disney movie. It's all a show. He's too image oriented. He doesn't just "do whatever". Earlier in the season, I remember him slamming his helmet on the ground after a DP (O'neill like). But I don't think repeatedly showing your emotion like that works out well either.

But yet again, maybe he's failed so much that he's gotton used to it by now.

[Jerome 84]

Clutch hitting is a myth. Arod has a lifetime 300 avg in the playoffs, and has the 2nd most game winning rbi's this year after ortiz. Jeter struck out last night in the 7th with the go ahead runner on 3rd and 2 outs. Not saying he didn't have a rough night last night, but give the guy a break. A .380 obp and 25 hrs isn't shabby at all. But because people have this idea that he isn't "clutch" every time he comes up with runners on base and makes an out people jump all over it, jeter comes up in the same situation and does the same thing and within 3 seconds everyone has forgotten about it. It's just natural statistical variation , it all evens out in the end. Arod and Jeter's lifetime batting averages in the regular season almost perfectly mirror their postseason averages. It's all in the publics perception of their performances.

[MisterMoss]

Clutch hitting is a myth. Arod has a lifetime 300 avg in the playoffs, and has the 2nd most game winning rbi's this year after ortiz.
That's an awful stat. Game winning RBI is credited to whoever drove the run after the grand total of runs scored by the opposing team. For example, if the game ends 10-3, the player on the winning team who drove in the 4th run would get credit for the GW RBI. In that case, it will probably be in the early innings. Bad stat.

Jeter struck out last night in the 7th with the go ahead runner on 3rd and 2 outs. Not saying he didn't have a rough night last night, but give the guy a break. A .380 obp and 25 hrs isn't shabby at all. But because people have this idea that he isn't "clutch" every time he comes up with runners on base and makes an out people jump all over it, jeter comes up in the same situation and does the same thing and within 3 seconds everyone has forgotten about it.
Jeter has as many meaningful hits this season than A-Rod has in 3 seasons as a Yankee
It's just natural statistical variation , it all evens out in the end. Arod and Jeter's lifetime batting averages in the regular season almost perfectly mirror their postseason averages. It's all in the publics perception of their performances.
How about this for a statistical variation. With a man on third and less than 2 outs, Arod is batting .244 with 12 STRIKEOUTS in 41 ABs (that's a situation where getting the ball into the outfield to bring in that run is premium). On the other hand Derek Jeter is batting .463 with only 5 STRIKEOUTS in 30 ABs. So Arod Ks 29% of the time in that scenerio, and Jeter 16%. That is horrible situation hitting, and we're not even looking at the Batting averages yet.

[Boss Revis]

Clutch hitting is a myth. Arod has a lifetime 300 avg in the playoffs, and has the 2nd most game winning rbi's this year after ortiz. Jeter struck out last night in the 7th with the go ahead runner on 3rd and 2 outs. Not saying he didn't have a rough night last night, but give the guy a break. A .380 obp and 25 hrs isn't shabby at all. But because people have this idea that he isn't "clutch" every time he comes up with runners on base and makes an out people jump all over it, jeter comes up in the same situation and does the same thing and within 3 seconds everyone has forgotten about it. It's just natural statistical variation , it all evens out in the end. Arod and Jeter's lifetime batting averages in the regular season almost perfectly mirror their postseason averages. It's all in the publics perception of their performances.

Please, don't come here with the sabermetric bullshit that clutch means nothing at all and its all by chance.

Please don't.

Clutch hitters do exist, and so do non clutch hitters.

[Phyr]

Hey if the Yankees do bad in the playoffs we can just have a scapegoat! Its a win win situation.

[MisterMoss]

Here are some more stats. When the game is in the 7th inning or later with the Yankees either ahead by one run, tied or with the potential tying run at least on deck, Arod is batting .203, 10 RBI, 21 Ks in 69 ABs. Jeter is batting .328, 15 RBI, and 12 Ks in 67 ABs in the same situation.

[LolTolhurst]

A-Rod is gonna end up with something like: .290 avg. 32 hrs and 110 RBI. Not bad at all, but all people remember is clutch situations and the playoffs

[JetsVilma28]

I truly believe NY fans have him so rattled. I look at his face, and I see a very desperate/scared player. The guy sucks. I bet he has lucky pennats and dances to will himself a hit, or a play for that matter. Melky, Cano, and Wang have been our highlights this year. We need to keep the baby bombers around.

[FrankTheTank]

And fans of other teams wonder why Yankee fans boo him......


"But he was MVP last year...

What is the operative word there?
....MVP?

:lol:

[JetBlue]

Please, don't come here with the sabermetric bullshit that clutch means nothing at all and its all by chance.

Please don't.

Clutch hitters do exist, and so do non clutch hitters.
I don't see anywhere where he says clutch is chance. he is simply saying that a particular set of statistics show that AROD is clutch. of course, that lies in the interpretation of those statistics, which Mister Moss I believe has succesfully disputed.

statistcally, AROD has good overall game winning stats, but that isn't the argument. the argument is if he has good clutch stats, which is entirely different, and when those stats are analyzed, he has done poorly in clutch situations.

of course, that means we are defining clutch situation differently than situations in which the game winning run is merely scored, which again, as Mister Moss pointed out, could occur in early inning situations. sure, those hits could be considered somewhat clutch, but there is a difference between knowing the game is on the line with an at bat and knowing there are 6 more innings to tie or win the game. it is late inning hits that are generally considered clutch and which I assume is the definition most people are using.

the point is, I think you simply wanted to throw around the word sabermetric.

[The Dark Knight]

A-Rod............

[LolTolhurst]

wow...A-Rod has a deathwish

[MisterMoss]

0 for 5 with 3 Ks today after going 0-5 with 4 Ks yesterday.

[jonnyd]

he sucks assfuck

[jetsaholic1094]

0 for 5 with 3 Ks today after going 0-5 with 4 Ks yesterday.

Well, look on the bright side. At least he's improving.

[MisterMoss]

Well, look on the bright side. At least he's improving.
He continues to improve with a 1-5 and 3 Ks today :lol: :breakdance: :lol:

[Drew]

Fucking piece of shit.

I want him gone.

Now.

[jonnyd]

well he aint goin nowhere now so theres nothing we can do

[Jerome 84]

I don't see anywhere where he says clutch is chance. he is simply saying that a particular set of statistics show that AROD is clutch. of course, that lies in the interpretation of those statistics, which Mister Moss I believe has succesfully disputed.

statistcally, AROD has good overall game winning stats, but that isn't the argument. the argument is if he has good clutch stats, which is entirely different, and when those stats are analyzed, he has done poorly in clutch situations.

of course, that means we are defining clutch situation differently than situations in which the game winning run is merely scored, which again, as Mister Moss pointed out, could occur in early inning situations. sure, those hits could be considered somewhat clutch, but there is a difference between knowing the game is on the line with an at bat and knowing there are 6 more innings to tie or win the game. it is late inning hits that are generally considered clutch and which I assume is the definition most people are using.

the point is, I think you simply wanted to throw around the word sabermetric.


Well, to me the point that's important to make is that the amount of at bats that people are drawing these conclusions for are really small. The one guy quoted, what was it, 60 at bats? 60 at bats is about two weeks at the plate. Thats a pretty darn small number of at bats with which to judge someone. Jeter was batting about .205 a month and a half into last season, in many more than 60 at bats. Of course, Jeter isn't a .205 hitter and given enough at bats he was able to show that. I think if you looked at the "clutch" situations over the course of arods entire career, his stats in those situations would pretty closely reflect the numbers he normally puts up.

Here's another question for the people who strongly believe that clutch hitting is something that definetly exists: if Jeter or Ortiz has some inherent ability to raise his level of game in important situations, then why dont they play like that all the time? If Jeter is hitting .400 in clutch situations this year, then that must mean he's hitting significantly below his season average in "normal" situations. If Jeter actually does have the ability to focus and perform at a higher level at certain times, then that means that he also suffers from a comparitive lack of "focus" during situations that aren't as important. I just don't buy it. Jeter performs well in clutch situations because he always performs well. Arod's numbers will reflect that given enough at bats (and actually do reflect it if a lot people actually bothered to look at some numbers).

[boogerstyles]

I agree with most of whats been said. Since coming to the yankees, A-rod has not performed in clutch situations.

but something is definatly very wrong with the dude. he went from an MVP season (although i would have given it to ortiz) to not being able to catch up to a 91 mile per hour fastballs and his knees look the hes in the matrix on every thing soft. he brings his top hand over, and tries to pull every pitch. when was the last time you saw him go oppo? whens hes going, he hits the ball all over the field. all of his hits seem to be by the shortstop or doubles past the third basemen.

what im trying to say is, it think its completely a mental issue. and to me, thats worse than a hitch or physical problem. a man with so much natural ability, incredible statistics.... can just play like an absolute bitch--- who is becoming a liability in our offense.

if he continues his weak performance, even into the postseason (knock on wood), i say you gotta try to move him. the yankees would have to take the bulk of the salary, but we could prob get a very good player (pitcher) in return. but hey, im not mr. cashman...

[Jetfanmack]

I don't believe clutch hitting exists, but I do believe you can be not clutch. ARod is an unclutch player. That can change if he gets more comfortable or something, but I do not believe Jeter or Ortiz is more clutch than other players. They just don't panic as much as other players/pitchers might in a big spot, so they have a bit of an advantage. Pitchers are scared of Ortiz in a big spot now, so they play unclutchly.

[AlioTheFool]

I do believe in clutch hitting. It is true that you have to be a good player in the first place, but "clutch" hitters are able to do the same job, even in a situation where nerves can get in the way.

When it's the bottom of the ninth, you have one on with two outs, down by one, usually the pitcher is at an advantage. Clutch hitters turn that around and take advantage of the mistakes, rather than swing at a bad pitch. That's what a Jeter or Ortiz brings to the plate. ARod submits to the pressure.

His stats tell a false story. Sure, he is still putting up very good numbers, even for a cleanup guy. It's when he puts up the big hits that matters. He isn't doing it when it matters. I refused for a long time to accept that his numbers are nothing more than padded stats. He gets a ton of RBI and hits. However, he doesn't do it when the Yankees are down by a run, or runners are in scoring position.

A very telling stat is something Kay brought up a couple weeks ago. ARod has the second worst average with a runner on third in the league. So you can argue it's a small number of at-bats, but considering he can't have that many fewer at-bats in the same situation as any other player (and actually, as a Yankee probably has more opportunities,) he is showing he has more ability to fail in a big situation than the vast majority of big leaguers.

[nyjunc]

A-Rod is gonna end up with something like: .290 avg. 32 hrs and 110 RBI. Not bad at all, but all people remember is clutch situations and the playoffs

Why should we care about non-clutch situations and non-playoff games? Clutch and postseason are what it's all about, I don't care if a guy puts up "great #s" if he doesn't get it done when we need it most.

[3rdAnd15Draw]

Why should we care about non-clutch situations and non-playoff games? Clutch and postseason are what it's all about, I don't care if a guy puts up "great #s" if he doesn't get it done when we need it most.

You sound like champ, should MLB cancel the regular season? Or maybe you could just start taping the games and only watching the wins?

[nyjunc]

You sound like champ, should MLB cancel the regular season? Or maybe you could just start taping the games and only watching the wins?

He said "clutch and postseason". The reg season means something but i couldn't care less if he's getting hits in non-clutch situations and let's not start on his postseason production w/ the yanks. I'll be more than fine w/ his reg season this year IF he has a big postseason. I'd rather he have a subpar reg season and big postseason than last year when he did the opposite.

[ShadeTree#55]

I heart Arod.

[Borgata]

He said "clutch and postseason". The reg season means something but i couldn't care less if he's getting hits in non-clutch situations and let's not start on his postseason production w/ the yanks. I'll be more than fine w/ his reg season this year IF he has a big postseason. I'd rather he have a subpar reg season and big postseason than last year when he did the opposite.

But I would expect someones regular season play to just carry over, I doubt a light just turns on in a slumping players head. Arod is just gonna have more pressure on him come playoffs, but I think this whole thing has really gotten to his head.

[nyjunc]

But I would expect someones regular season play to just carry over, I doubt a light just turns on in a slumping players head. Arod is just gonna have more pressure on him come playoffs, but I think this whole thing has really gotten to his head.

his "MVP" season didn't carry into October last year. maybe w/ the terrible reg season he has had he looks at it as a new start, relaxes a bit and plays like he is capable of playing.

[MisterMoss]

his "MVP" season didn't carry into October last year. maybe w/ the terrible reg season he has had he looks at it as a new start, relaxes a bit and plays like he is capable of playing.
I'm not counting on it. A-Rod has had about 6 "turning points" this year, and has pronounced that he's ready for a big second half of the season on about 5 other occations. He's a fraud.

[MisterMoss]

Well, to me the point that's important to make is that the amount of at bats that people are drawing these conclusions for are really small. The one guy quoted, what was it, 60 at bats? 60 at bats is about two weeks at the plate. Thats a pretty darn small number of at bats with which to judge someone. Jeter was batting about .205 a month and a half into last season, in many more than 60 at bats. Of course, Jeter isn't a .205 hitter and given enough at bats he was able to show that. I think if you looked at the "clutch" situations over the course of arods entire career, his stats in those situations would pretty closely reflect the numbers he normally puts up.

I don't buy it. The 60 at bats are pretty much spread evenly over the course of a season. So they pretty much discount any slump that you may have had, because only a couple of at bats in that scenerio would have come in a time period in which you just weren't hitting the ball in general (which every hitter has).

In political elections, the polls that they have prior to the election only poll maybe a couple of thousand voters on behalf of a whole nation. Those polls are accurate to a couple of percentage points, but the respondents are spread out across demographics relative to the current demographics of the country. It's an accurate, diverse sample.

It's the same with A-Rod. Taking the at bats that fit the scenerio which we're trying to figure out. It's pretty accurate. Plus, can you honestly tell me that you any longer have confidence in A-Rod in a big spot near the end of the game? One point proves another.

[ShadeTree#55]

Arod is dreamy...sigh...

[Coach K]

more A-Rod debates.............YAY

maybe if the mets werent so good this yr us yanks wouldnt look like this when A-Rod was brought up

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

[Jerome 84]

I don't buy it. The 60 at bats are pretty much spread evenly over the course of a season. So they pretty much discount any slump that you may have had, because only a couple of at bats in that scenerio would have come in a time period in which you just weren't hitting the ball in general (which every hitter has).

In political elections, the polls that they have prior to the election only poll maybe a couple of thousand voters on behalf of a whole nation. Those polls are accurate to a couple of percentage points, but the respondents are spread out across demographics relative to the current demographics of the country. It's an accurate, diverse sample.

It's the same with A-Rod. Taking the at bats that fit the scenerio which we're trying to figure out. It's pretty accurate. Plus, can you honestly tell me that you any longer have confidence in A-Rod in a big spot near the end of the game? One point proves another.

Well, a sampling that is done for a political election follows strict rules on getting a representational sample. The 60 at bats for arod's sample is sort of the same as just randomly calling 60 people and judging the nations politcal leaning from that. The higher number of people (or at bats) you poll, the more closely your numbers will match reality.

[MisterMoss]

Well, a sampling that is done for a political election follows strict rules on getting a representational sample. The 60 at bats for arod's sample is sort of the same as just randomly calling 60 people and judging the nations politcal leaning from that. The higher number of people (or at bats) you poll, the more closely your numbers will match reality.
Don't his numbers accumulated in those types of situations confirm the stinky job Yankee fans have witnessed him do?

[AlioTheFool]

Well, a sampling that is done for a political election follows strict rules on getting a representational sample. The 60 at bats for arod's sample is sort of the same as just randomly calling 60 people and judging the nations politcal leaning from that. The higher number of people (or at bats) you poll, the more closely your numbers will match reality.

But if you deny those numbers, do you also deny the point that I brought up that Kay made? That ARod is the second-worst performer in the league with a runner on third?

Not second-best, he is second-to-last. That's out of what, a few hundred players? That's a helluva sampling.

[Crapshooter]

But if you deny those numbers, do you also deny the point that I brought up that Kay made? That ARod is the second-worst performer in the league with a runner on third?

Not second-best, he is second-to-last. That's out of what, a few hundred players? That's a helluva sampling.

But come on, isn't he isolating one stat just to make him look bad? If I told you Arod is in the top 10 with the most two out RBI in MLB doesn't that kinda off set that second-to-last stat the other poster is quoting? Is he second-to-last in batting average with RISP in the league? I doubt it.

[AlioTheFool]

ARod is 7th in the majors in grounding into a DP, with 19.

Also 7th in the league in Ks with 125.

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

59th in extra base hits with a whopping 49.

His RISP BA? A superstaresque... .280

A man on third with less than 2 outs? A dismal .244

Any other stats we need to show what he has done?

He sucks.

[3rdAnd15Draw]

ARod is 7th in the majors in grounding into a DP, with 19.

Also 7th in the league in Ks with 125.

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

59th in extra base hits with a whopping 49.

His RISP BA? A superstaresque... .280

A man on third with less than 2 outs? A dismal .244

Any other stats we need to show what he has done?

He sucks.

He's having a bad year, I don't think anyone is disputing that. However we're seeing the exact same criticisms that were leveled at him last year after an MVP season.

[AlioTheFool]

He's having a bad year, I don't think anyone is disputing that. However we're seeing the exact same criticisms that were leveled at him last year after an MVP season.

Well Crapshooter was saying how one stat offsets another. So I posted all of the relevant stats, to show that there is no way to offset everything.

I was probably the biggest ARod supporter on the board until the Boston series concluded. I think anyone, especially MisterMoss can attest to that. The thing is, I had to open my eyes. He performance is utterly deplorable.

Last year the Yankees didn't need him as much. We had a healthy team, so his padded stats were easy to misjudge. This year, between his terrible bat, and worse fielding, along with 3 opening day starters missing large chunks of the season (Cano, Matsui, and Sheff) the spotlight has been focused on him.

While Jeter, Giambi, Damon, Posada, the newly energized Cano, Cabrera, and now Abreu are performing like a well oiled machine, ARod looks like he never scraped off the winter rust.

[BIG COUNTRY]

A-rod sucks, he is seriously pissing me off.

[AMJets]

Last year the Yankees didn't need him as much. We had a healthy team, so his padded stats were easy to misjudge.

I have no problem with people saying he's had a bad year THIS year, but no way were his numbers last year "padded stats". For the majority of the year, he had more GW RBIs than anyone (it wasn't until towards the end of the season that Pujols passed him.) He fell off the face of the Earth in the playoffs, but he was the deserved MVP last year, and was the most important part of the offense.

[AlioTheFool]

I have no problem with people saying he's had a bad year THIS year, but no way were his numbers last year "padded stats". For the majority of the year, he had more GW RBIs than anyone (it wasn't until towards the end of the season that Pujols passed him.) He fell off the face of the Earth in the playoffs, but he was the deserved MVP last year, and was the most important part of the offense.

Honestly, I can't remember breakfast, much less last year. I know that I was an ARod fan until a couple weeks ago, and I know I was strongly in favor of him getting the MVP last year. The only point I was trying to make is that at this point, I wonder how much of his production is smoke and mirrors. He played for Seattle during its collapse. He played for a bad Texas team. There was significantly less pressure on him pre-pinstripes.

Quite simply, no matter what he did during the regular season last year, he went on a steady decline beginning with last year's postseason. I think any true Yankee fan wants him to succeed as much as any Jet fan hoped Chad would. It's just a matter of how long we have to wait for it.

[Jonathan_Vilma]

Rodriguez is the second to worst hitter with a runner on third and less than two outs, hitting .244. It's not his strikeouts, it's the fact that he's worse than ADAM DUNN with a runner on third, less then two outs. He never makes productive outs, and if the god damn guy would hit a sac fly no one would be on his case.

Problem is that he strikes out or grounds to short and jogs the double play out. This is a guy that has stolen nearly 50 bases at one point in his career, but he can't beat out a slow rolling double play ball?

[devilonthetownhallroof]

Rodriguez is the second to worst hitter with a runner on third and less than two outs, hitting .244. It's not his strikeouts, it's the fact that he's worse than ADAM DUNN with a runner on third, less then two outs. He never makes productive outs, and if the god damn guy would hit a sac fly no one would be on his case.

Problem is that he strikes out or grounds to short and jogs the double play out. This is a guy that has stolen nearly 50 bases at one point in his career, but he can't beat out a slow rolling double play ball?

Watch out, 3rdand15draw will come in here soon telling you how great Dunn is because he doesn't hit sac flies.

[FirstTimeCaller]

A Rod did not strike out today.

[MisterMoss]

A Rod did not strike out today.
2 straight days. Beat that! :up:

[FirstTimeCaller]

2 straight days. Beat that! :up:


Somewhere my favorite Yankee is doing a rain dance right now.

[nyjunc]

I have no problem with people saying he's had a bad year THIS year, but no way were his numbers last year "padded stats". For the majority of the year, he had more GW RBIs than anyone (it wasn't until towards the end of the season that Pujols passed him.) He fell off the face of the Earth in the playoffs, but he was the deserved MVP last year, and was the most important part of the offense.

Stop w/ the GW RBI nonsense, that is a terrible stat as someone already explained in this thread. Obviously he was alot better last year in the reg season but still wasn't clutch like Jeter or ortiz and he was our WORST player in the ALDS. The man did not even have an RBI in 5 games! 2 hits and ZERO RBI in 5 games.

[3rdAnd15Draw]

Watch out, 3rdand15draw will come in here soon telling you how great Dunn is because he doesn't hit sac flies.

Oh boo hoo, in 18 whole AB's with a runner on 3rd and less then 2 outs he's only got 11 RBI. Clearly a terrible player, nevermind that Dunn's OPS is over 1.000 with RISP and RISP/2 outs

[ShadeTree#55]

and he was our WORST player in the ALDS.


Matsui was worse.

[nyjunc]

Matsui was worse.

No he wasn't. Matsui had 4 hits and an RBI, ARod had 2 hits and ZERO RBI not to mention his poor defensive play and poor baserunning also hurt us.

[AMJets]

Stop w/ the GW RBI nonsense, that is a terrible stat as someone already explained in this thread. Obviously he was alot better last year in the reg season but still wasn't clutch like Jeter or ortiz and he was our WORST player in the ALDS. The man did not even have an RBI in 5 games! 2 hits and ZERO RBI in 5 games.

Well, I already mentioned that he fell off the face of the Earth in the post-season, so adding that part makes no sense (which is nothing new coming from you.)

And even though all these "clutch" statistics are useless due to the sample size:

RISP
Jeter: .261 / .386 / .355
A-Rod: .290 / .410 / .484

RISP w/2 outs
Jeter: .250 / .393 / .361
A-Rod: .302 / .429 / .512

Close and Late
Jeter: .267 / .353 / .400
A-Rod: .293 / .418 / .520

Now that your whole "A-Rod wasn't as clutch as Jeter" crap was proven to be incorrect, I hope you'll just stop posting on the issue. We all know you'll never admit that your nonsense posting is wrong, so maybe you'll just disappear and stop being an embarassment like usual.

[Drew]

He just grounded into another DP. Go figure.

[ShadeTree#55]

Poor, Poor ARod.

Come to the Mets, play second base.

[3rdAnd15Draw]

man, you guys are quick

[ShadeTree#55]

He can play second hit 8th, no pressure.

Anderson Hernadez for Arod + 8 million a year.

[AlioTheFool]

LoL. Surprise surprise.

[AlioTheFool]

1 for his last 24. That's just disgusting. And he can't blame the boobirds tonight. They cheered for him at the Stadium. He needs to learn how it feels to warm a bench for a few days.

[Drew]

Proctor! FUCK!

[BIG COUNTRY]

Beautiful popups which we pay how many million for? Strikeouts, pop-ups, and double play groundouts. Hes gonna go for a cycle of suck.

[devilonthetownhallroof]

It could be worse. Your team could have given up.

[nyjunc]

Well, I already mentioned that he fell off the face of the Earth in the post-season, so adding that part makes no sense (which is nothing new coming from you.)

And even though all these "clutch" statistics are useless due to the sample size:

RISP
Jeter: .261 / .386 / .355
A-Rod: .290 / .410 / .484

RISP w/2 outs
Jeter: .250 / .393 / .361
A-Rod: .302 / .429 / .512

Close and Late
Jeter: .267 / .353 / .400
A-Rod: .293 / .418 / .520

Now that your whole "A-Rod wasn't as clutch as Jeter" crap was proven to be incorrect, I hope you'll just stop posting on the issue. We all know you'll never admit that your nonsense posting is wrong, so maybe you'll just disappear and stop being an embarassment like usual.

yes you proved me wrong, ARod is Mr. Clutch and Jeter has never done anything in a big spot:lol: . Please post a link for your stats.

[ShadeTree#55]

Arod should listen to savvy old Vets:

"I just tried to relax a little bit and take a deep breath," Wright said. "And once you have a good at-bat, then you feel better up there and can string together a couple of good ones."

[nyjunc]

Arod should listen to savvy old Vets:

"I just tried to relax a little bit and take a deep breath," Wright said. "And once you have a good at-bat, then you feel better up there and can string together a couple of good ones."

it only took him a month to hit his first HR since signing the new deal.

[ShadeTree#55]

At this rate ARods next HR might come next season.

[nyjunc]

At this rate ARods next HR might come next season.

April 23rd, 2007 ARod hits a dramatic 2 out 9th inning 3 run shot to help the Yanks beat the Royals 13-3:lol:

[BIG COUNTRY]

A-rod is not clutch, as a matter of fact for the last while hes been playing like shit. Jeter is a lot more clutch.

[AMJets]

yes you proved me wrong, ARod is Mr. Clutch and Jeter has never done anything in a big spot:lol: . Please post a link for your stats.

That's not what I said. You said Jeter was more "clutch" than A-Rod in 2005 and I proved you wrong.

It's really not that hard to look up stats, but if you need links:

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.
To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

I anxiously await your next excuse.

[kbgreen]

I love A-rod or anyone else for that matter who can drive Yankee fans this nuts!

[BadgerOnLSD]

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

[nyjunc]

That's not what I said. You said Jeter was more "clutch" than A-Rod in 2005 and I proved you wrong.

It's really not that hard to look up stats, but if you need links:

To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.
To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

I anxiously await your next excuse.

I don't care about the reg season and about your manipulate stats, i don't think I mentioned the '05 season anyway I mentioned the '05 playoffs where the man had 1 hit and zero RBI.

It continues to amaze me how you defend this guy to the deat yet you bash Torre at every corner.

[AMJets]

I don't care about the reg season and about your manipulate stats, i don't think I mentioned the '05 season anyway I mentioned the '05 playoffs where the man had 1 hit and zero RBI.

It continues to amaze me how you defend this guy to the deat yet you bash Torre at every corner.

Heh.

Stop w/ the GW RBI nonsense, that is a terrible stat as someone already explained in this thread. Obviously he was alot better last year in the reg season but still wasn't clutch like Jeter or ortiz and he was our WORST player in the ALDS. The man did not even have an RBI in 5 games! 2 hits and ZERO RBI in 5 games.

I know you have a huge ego problem, you know, admitting when you're wrong and all, but I would be embarassed after awhile.

You said, in the 2005 regular season, Jeter was more clutch than A-Rod. I gave you RISP, RISP w/2outs, Close and Late, and these are "manipulated" statistics? They're "manipulated" because they prove your statement to be incorrect.

You know what amazes me? The fact that no matter how stupid and foolish you look, you can NEVER, EVER admit that you were wrong about something. It's truly incredible. A grown man like yourself continuously acting like a little child. Just admit that not everything you say is right, especially when there's actual statistical evidence against you, and everyone will be better for it.

As for defending A-Rod, I haven't been defending him lately. I thought he would bust out of his slump and be great again, but I was wrong. You see what I did there? I ADMITTED that I was wrong. You should try it sometime.

[ShadeTree#55]

5 games in October is much better for judging a players overall worth to the team.

And in junc's world, only bad ones count for everyone except Jeter.

[nyjunc]

You have poor reading comprehension skills, I never said he wasn't as clutch as Jeter LAST YEAR I said he wasn't clutch like Jeter or ortiz have been through the years. Nice try though, try reading slower next time so you can absorb the info better.

You know what amazes me? The fact that no matter how stupid and foolish you look, you can NEVER, EVER admit that you were wrong about something.

I do admit it when I am wrong, it just doesn't happen often and clearly in this case I was not wrong.

As for defending A-Rod, I haven't been defending him lately. I thought he would bust out of his slump and be great again, but I was wrong. You see what I did there? I ADMITTED that I was wrong. You should try it sometime.


I hope someday i am wrong about ARod, I hope he comes through this postseason.

while you are admitting you were wrong on ARod how about one for Torre too?

[nyjunc]

5 games in October is much better for judging a players overall worth to the team.

And in junc's world, only bad ones count for everyone except Jeter.

You'll be ok if Wright, Reyes and Beltran go cold and you lose in the NLDS? You'll say they were great during the reg season so it's ok? It's about winning Championships not about building meaningless fantasy #s. I'd much rather ARod have the year he is having now and come through in octobr than the year he had last year and fail in the postseason.

[devilonthetownhallroof]

Haha, oh boy junc. Your exact words were "last year in the regular season." You lost this one. You are wrong sometimes, and actually a LOT more than you think. Just admit it for ONCE.

[Drew]

Positivity!

[AMJets]

You have poor reading comprehension skills, I never said he wasn't as clutch as Jeter LAST YEAR I said he wasn't clutch like Jeter or ortiz have been through the years. Nice try though, try reading slower next time so you can absorb the info better.

Are you out of your mind? "Obviously he was alot better last year in the reg season but still wasn't clutch like Jeter" and that is supposed to mean throughout the years and not just in 2005?

This is so embarassing for you.

I do admit it when I am wrong, it just doesn't happen often and clearly in this case I was not wrong.

Yeah, that's funny. Like when you said the Yankees in 2005 would have scored the same amount of runs in the regular season with a player like Scott Brosius instead of the MVP of the friggin' league. You still haven't admitted how that comment makes absolutely no mathematical sense.

while you are admitting you were wrong on ARod how about one for Torre too?

Admit what about him? He's a horrible bullpen manager. I've already admitted that.

[nyjunc]

Haha, oh boy junc. Your exact words were "last year in the regular season." You lost this one. You are wrong sometimes, and actually a LOT more than you think. Just admit it for ONCE.

Here comes devil to try to pile on as usual. I never said clutch like Jeter was in last year's reg season but nice try. For some reason you love to TRY to catch me being wrong but as usual you failed.

[3rdAnd15Draw]

You'll be ok if Wright, Reyes and Beltran go cold and you lose in the NLDS? You'll say they were great during the reg season so it's ok? It's about winning Championships not about building meaningless fantasy #s. I'd much rather ARod have the year he is having now and come through in octobr than the year he had last year and fail in the postseason.

What's the alternative? Starting a thread everytime one of them hits into a DP the next season? Boo them every time they come to the plate? Of course the goal is to win a championship but if they don't you still have the most enjoyable season of Mets baseball in awhile to thank them for. You can't bury a player because they have one bad series.

[AMJets]

Here comes devil to try to pile on as usual. I never said clutch like Jeter was in last year's reg season but nice try. For some reason you love to TRY to catch me being wrong but as usual you failed.

You lost this one, just admit it. I've quoted your exact words a number of times now. Just admit you were wrong, and we'll drop the whole thing.

[nyjunc]

Are you out of your mind? "Obviously he was alot better last year in the reg season but still wasn't clutch like Jeter" and that is supposed to mean throughout the years and not just in 2005?


It wasn't about last year it was about being clutch like Jeter and Ortiz, not specifically a year.

Yeah, that's funny. Like when you said the Yankees in 2005 would have scored the same amount of runs in the regular season with a player like Scott Brosius instead of the MVP of the friggin' league. You still haven't admitted how that comment makes absolutely no mathematical sense.


When did I say that? I said I'd rather have Brosius than ARod b/c of the salary difference, Brosius' glove and the fact that Brosious came through alot for us in cluch situations in October.

[nyjunc]

What's the alternative? Starting a thread everytime one of them hits into a DP the next season? Boo them every time they come to the plate? Of course the goal is to win a championship but if they don't you still have the most enjoyable season of Mets baseball in awhile to thank them for. You can't bury a player because they have one bad series.

Expectations change, it will be a huge dissapointment if the mets don't make the WS and if those players don't come through yuo guys would be and should be angry.

You lost this one, just admit it. I've quoted your exact words a number of times now. Just admit you were wrong, and we'll drop the whole thing.

Why b/c devil agreed w/ you? Devil doesn't like me and he always tries to piggy back on other posters who argue w/ me. The facts are I NEVER said Jeter 2005, i said ARod 2005 wasn't jeter-like or Ortiz0like in the clutch.

[AMJets]

"Obviously he was alot better last year in the reg season but still wasn't clutch like Jeter"

That statement means he wasn't as clutch as Jeter in the regular season last year. If you meant something different, you should admit that you made a mistake and you weren't as specific as you should have been.

[nyjunc]

"Obviously he was alot better last year in the reg season but still wasn't clutch like Jeter"

That statement means he wasn't as clutch as Jeter in the regular season last year. If you meant something different, you should admit that you made a mistake and you weren't as specific as you should have been.

keep fighting a losing battle, I never said jeter '05 I just said "like Jeter or ortiz" 2 players known for their clutch ability.

[AMJets]

keep fighting a losing battle

You're the one being laughed at by everyone who reads this thread, not me.

[nyjunc]

You're the one being laughed at by everyone who reads this thread, not me.

Who, besides Devil, has agreed w/ you? I've explained it numerous times, if you can't get it now then I can't help you. I'll let you think you are right for a change, hopefully it will improve your sullen attitude.

[AMJets]

If that's what you meant, fine, but admit that the way you said it was vague. See, this is your problem, you can't admit that you weren't right. No one is saying the point you wanted to make is incorrect, but the way you put it was rightfully taken to mean in 2005 only. All anyone wants you to do is admit the way you stated that sentence was vague, and we'll be done with it.

[nyjunc]

If that's what you meant, fine, but admit that the way you said it was vague. See, this is your problem, you can't admit that you weren't right. No one is saying the point you wanted to make is incorrect, but the way you put it was rightfully taken to mean in 2005 only. All anyone wants you to do is admit the way you stated that sentence was vague, and we'll be done with it.

I do admit re-reading it it can be interpreted the wrong way but I am ALWAYS honest and that was not my intent. I still don't think ARod was clutch as much as an MVP should have been but obviously he was much, much better last year than this year or '04.

[devilonthetownhallroof]

I don't dislike you, but I do think you are a pompous arrogant (self proclaimed) know-it-all who refuses to admit your mistakes and twists things to try to get out of them. By putting the words "last year's regular season" in the same sentence as "not clutch like Jeter", you VERY strongly imply that you meant for last season. That was shown to be incorrect, so you changed it to "Arod last year was not as clutch as Jeter the last few years." Well, that's wrong too. Here are Jeter's stats over the last 3 years compared to Arod last year.

RISP
Jeter: .288 / .380 / .405
A-Rod: .290 / .410 / .484

RISP w/2 outs
Jeter: .298 / .396 / .419
A-Rod: .302 / .429 / .512

Close and Late
Jeter: .249 / .352 / .392
A-Rod: .293 / .418 / .520


So Junc, once again, YOU ARE WRONG!

Well, at least until you change your argument AGAIN.

[nyjunc]

I don't dislike you, but I do think you are a pompous arrogant (self proclaimed) know-it-all who refuses to admit your mistakes and twists things to try to get out of them. By putting the words "last year's regular season" in the same sentence as "not clutch like Jeter", you VERY strongly imply that you meant for last season. That was shown to be incorrect, so you changed it to "Arod last year was not as clutch as Jeter the last few years." Well, that's wrong too. Here are Jeter's stats over the last 3 years compared to Arod last year.

RISP
Jeter: .288 / .380 / .405
A-Rod: .290 / .410 / .484

RISP w/2 outs
Jeter: .298 / .396 / .419
A-Rod: .302 / .429 / .512

Close and Late
Jeter: .249 / .352 / .392
A-Rod: .293 / .418 / .520


So Junc, once again, YOU ARE WRONG!

Well, at least until you change your argument AGAIN.

"once again"?:rofl: Just look at the million big his Jeter has had in his career compard to the few for ARod. Stats are great but my eyes saw Derek in the middle of every rally in '96 and most from '96-'98 including a WS MVP award. You can have all ARod's stats but you can't honestly say you'd rather have ARod up in a big spot over Jeter. Actually as a Sox fan(you rather quiet now, why is that?) you'd rather have ARod up than Jeter but if they were on your team you'd rather have Jeter as would the rest of the World if they were sane.

[ShadeTree#55]

You only have eyes for Jeter, you homo...

LOL

[nyjunc]

You only have eyes for Jeter, you homo...

LOL

I appreciate true greatness rather than just stat guys. if he was a Met you'd probably have a tatoo of him on your ass.

[ShadeTree#55]

I am saving that spot for real talent.

Jose Reyes, the Bets SS in baseball.

True clutch hitter.

[nyjunc]

I am saving that spot for real talent.

Jose Reyes, the Bets SS in baseball.

True clutch hitter.

I thought Kaz matsui was the best SS in NY?

We'll see what happens when Reyes sees real pressure in october.

[ShadeTree#55]

His numbers with RISP and 2 out are better then your fag boy Jeter.

He'll be fine.

[nyjunc]

His numbers with RISP and 2 out are better then your fag boy Jeter.

He'll be fine.

Hitting in "big spots" vs. the Phillies, Marlins, Nats and Rockies when his team is 50 games in front is a little different than october pressure.

[ShadeTree#55]

Not really.

[BIG COUNTRY]

Not really.
Yes its much different.

[ShadeTree#55]

No it isn't that is Yankee bullshit.

If you preform with 2 outs well, you preform well under pressure.

[BIG COUNTRY]

No it isn't that is Yankee bullshit.

If you preform with 2 outs well, you preform well under pressure.
What about A-rod, 2 outs 8th inning, were up by 10. Theres no pressure there.

[ShadeTree#55]

Yankee fans are a piece of work.

[3rdAnd15Draw]

Jeter = .847 OPS regular season
.842 OPS postseason

ARod = .962 OPS regular season
.927 OPS postseason

However since Jeter eats his lunch and ARod only gets hits when his team is up by 10 runs this doesn't matter. At least if you're a Yankee fan

[devilonthetownhallroof]

So basically even though you've been proven wrong with tangible statistics over and over again, you're right because the way you see it, Jeter is better even thought the stats prove otherwise? In other words, what you choose to remember is all that matters?

Hell, if that's how things work I guess the Cowboys won the Super Bowl last year because my eyes saw some pretty good play from them. Who cares about the records or results, my eyes saw otherwise.

[ShadeTree#55]

And if you are the perfect mix of black and white and ate your lunch you are definitely more clutch then anyone on the planet.

[AlioTheFool]

Amazingly ARod hit a homer with no score tonight. Unfortunately, he did follow it up with a 1 out DP.

[DROB63Cmart28]

I am saving that spot for real talent.

Jose Reyes, the Bets SS in baseball.

True clutch hitter.

Are you on crack? Best SS in baseball? Dont make me bring out the stats.

[ShadeTree#55]

Bring it.

Name one thing Jeter leads MLB in, or even the AL.

[kinghenry89]

Bring it.

Name one thing Jeter leads MLB in, or even the AL.
Jeter leads all shortstops in the major leagues in batting average for one.

Kudos to A-Rod for having another great game tonight. Hopefully he can put it all together longterm going into the postseason. And as for this whole business with Rodriguez supposedly being a better postseason player than Jeter, using OPS as a measuring stick isn't a fair comparison between the two hitters.

Of course A-Rod is going to have a higher OPS, he's a power hitter--his slugging % is always going to dwarf Jeter's. Judging how good of a player they are by OPS alone is like if I said "Jeter must be a better postseason hitter than Rodriguez, he has more hits in the playoffs." You can't make a fair judgement there.

[3rdAnd15Draw]

except that OPS incorporates all facets of a hitters ability, while hits ignores several

[ShadeTree#55]

Jeter leads all shortstops in the major leagues in batting average for one.



I meant leads the league. Not by position.:lol:

Reyes leads MLB in SB and Triples. Beltran knocked him to #2 in Runs but he was leading, and should retake the lead shortly.

[AlioTheFool]

Jeter is third in the league (MLB, not just AL) in average. He's fourth in the league in hits, seventh in OBP, fifth in stolen base % (Reyes ranks 18th,) 30th in OPS (not too bad considering how many actual power hitters sit above him. Reyes ranks 62nd.)

No, Jeter does not lead the league in any stat, but that's not really a fair argument. His overall numbers are very impressive. That's not to say Reyes' aren't. He is a very talented ballplayer, and I applaud the Mets for recognizing that enough to lock him in for the next few years.

In all fairness Shade, you called Reyes the best SS in baseball. DRob countered by saying he would pull out the stats. One would assume he meant stats showing that Reyes is not the best shortstop in baseball. He didn't even imply that Jeter was better than Reyes, just that Reyes is not the best SS in the game.

As far as stolen bases, yes, Reyes is leading the league with an astounding number of stolen bases, but he is also third in the league getting caught. Jeter ranks 16th and 99th respectively.

On the subject of triples, it's almost a meaningless stat. Surely more meaningless than average. Triples are soley a speed stat. There is no question Reyes is fast. You'll never see Ortiz lead the league in triples, does that mean Reyes is a better hitter than Ortiz?

How about fielding? Reyes is just above Jeter in % among ML SS. They have the same number of games, same number of starts, but Reyes has about 40 more innings. Jeter has had 8 more total chances with 18 more put outs. Jeter has 18 more attempts, with one more error, and 8 more DPs. Jeter trails Reyes by 2 percentage points, with a range factor of 4.10 to Reyes' 3.91, while Reyes' zone factor is about 20 points higher than Jeter's.

They are both very comparable players, though they are still totally different. Arguing one against the other is a losing battle. It's too subjective. Obviously, the guy you watch every day is more important to their team than the other. If you look objectively though, they are both just as valuable to their team.

Does Jeter deserve the MVP? Maybe, maybe not. Does Reyes? Maybe, maybe not. If you go soley on bats, and how those bats affected their team's success, the four guys I would say should be in the running are Ortiz/Beltran, and Giambi/Pujols, in that order. I don't just credit bats myself. I count the hitting, along with fielding, and the resulting affect on the player's team's final standing. That's the way I feel the system is designed to work anyway. That's why I believe the voting system is very good. While it is flawed, at least by having a nation of sports journalists, who watch a lot of film on numerous players over the course of a season, you get a generally fair vote. There will always be debate on who should or shouldn't win, but the same goes for any electoral process.

Anyway, wasn't this a conversation about ARod?

[nyjunc]

Bottom line:

Who would you want up in a big spot int he 9th inning of a postseason game?

Jeter or ARod

[Uhm a Jets Fan]

They guy gave RISP from last year he dosen't remember that Jeter started out the first few month of the season hitting .195, no shit thats gonna lower his RISP also, then he turned it all around almost bringing his average up to .300 and bringing up his RISP average, dude to do that is like 3 hits or 2 a night almost. I do like A-Rod and all but he looks like an asshole out there now, except that last two games.

[nyjunc]

They guy gave RISP from last year he dosen't remember that Jeter started out the first few month of the season hitting .195, no shit thats gonna lower his RISP also, then he turned it all around almost bringing his average up to .300 and bringing up his RISP average, dude to do that is like 3 hits or 2 a night almost. I do like A-Rod and all but he looks like an asshole out there now, except that last two games.

That was 2 years ago when he started really slow.

[kinghenry89]

except that OPS incorporates all facets of a hitters ability, while hits ignores several

But Jeter and Rodriguez are totally different hitters, they can't be compared by a single statistic (even if sabermetricians try to tell you that OPS is the holy stat that measures hitting ability completely.) Jeter will never have as many total bases as Rodriugez and he's never gonna have as many sacrifice flies. Does that make him a worse hitter, even though he has an on base % of 40 points higher and he's stolen 17 more bases?

Is Adam Dunn a better hitter than Ichiro Suzuki just because Dunn has a higher OPS? No, that's a ridiculous arguement to make (Ichiro hits almost 60 points higher than Dunn, steals far more bases and scores more runs while Dunn hits many more homers and knocks in more RBIs.) It's comparing apples and oranges.

[statjeff22]

But Jeter and Rodriguez are totally different hitters, they can't be compared by a single statistic (even if sabermetricians try to tell you that OPS is the holy stat that measures hitting ability completely.) Jeter will never have as many total bases as Rodriugez and he's never gonna have as many sacrifice flies. Does that make him a worse hitter, even though he has an on base % of 40 points higher and he's stolen 17 more bases?

Is Adam Dunn a better hitter than Ichiro Suzuki just because Dunn has a higher OPS? No, that's a ridiculous arguement to make (Ichiro hits almost 60 points higher than Dunn, steals far more bases and scores more runs while Dunn hits many more homers and knocks in more RBIs.) It's comparing apples and oranges.

I don't really understand your argument regarding Jeter and Rodriguez as hitters. I don't think anyone is arguing that Rodriguez is having a better year this year than Jeter, but for their careers they have almost the same OBP (.388 versus .385), while A Rod's SLG is far better (.572 versus .463). Are you seriously suggesting that for their careers Jeter has been a comparable hitter to Rodriguez? Their stolen base numbers (including success percentages) for their careers are also virtually identical, and when they were both playing SS, Rodriguez was the better fielder. Putting aside the whole "clutchness" thing, I don't see any argument that through their careers Jeter has been a better player than A Rod.

I actually know a few people who are members of SABR, and believe me, the last thing they would say is that OPS is the holy stat that measures hitting completely. Even a cursory look at their literature would show that they are much more into runs created, win shares, linear weights, secondary average, value over replacement player, etc., etc. The nice thing about OPS is that it is simple to calculate, simple to understand, and is vastly better than batting average at measuring the quality of a hitter.

[AlioTheFool]

statjeff, I think the problem is everyone seems to be having different arguments.

Here is what I think all of them boil down to:


Jeter is more "clutch" than ARod, based mostly on postseason performance.
ARod is a vastly better hitter over his career than practically anyone, especially Jeter.
ARod was a far superior SS to Jeter and Reyes, but since he doesn't play the position anymore, and he has had much less success at third than the others have had in the same timeframe at SS, ARod's value has diminished.
Reyes and Jeter are very good overall players, and very important to their teams. The argument stems more from who watches who more often. The player on the person's favorite team is going to favor their "guy."
ARod has had a miserable year. The biggest question is can he recover before the postseason begins?
Do Jeter's batting statistics alone make him worthy of the MVP award? While the general answer is no, do his fielding stats, along with his perceived intangibles push him over the top?


My answers:

I agree. Jeter is more clutch. That's admittedly very subjective. ARod doesn't have enough of a base to judge from.
I agree. He is one of the best hitters of the modern era. Ever? I don't know. His total career will tell. If he returns to his last year's form for the majority of his career, he will retire as the HR king. If not...
I agree. ARod was one of the best SS ever. The transition to third looked great lst year, but this year has been terrible as was his first try. Right now, Jeter and Reyes are about even as far as defensive skill IMO.
See 3
He's been miserable. I just want him to play like he has the past couple days. Hopefully his confidence is boosted like it looked last night.
His batting stats are not enough. Adding in the other pieces, then yes, I feel he is more valuable to the Yankees than Dye or Ortiz are to their teams. Those are the only two other guys even remotely comparable IMO. Beltran gets my NL vote, for much the same reasons, over Pujols.

[statjeff22]

statjeff, I think the problem is everyone seems to be having different arguments.

Here is what I think all of them boil down to:


Jeter is more "clutch" than ARod, based mostly on postseason performance.
ARod is a vastly better hitter over his career than practically anyone, especially Jeter.
ARod was a far superior SS to Jeter and Reyes, but since he doesn't play the position anymore, and he has had much less success at third than the others have had in the same timeframe at SS, ARod's value has diminished.
Reyes and Jeter are very good overall players, and very important to their teams. The argument stems more from who watches who more often. The player on the person's favorite team is going to favor their "guy."
ARod has had a miserable year. The biggest question is can he recover before the postseason begins?
Do Jeter's batting statistics alone make him worthy of the MVP award? While the general answer is no, do his fielding stats, along with his perceived intangibles push him over the top?


My answers:

I agree. Jeter is more clutch. That's admittedly very subjective. ARod doesn't have enough of a base to judge from.
I agree. He is one of the best hitters of the modern era. Ever? I don't know. His total career will tell. If he returns to his last year's form for the majority of his career, he will retire as the HR king. If not...
I agree. ARod was one of the best SS ever. The transition to third looked great lst year, but this year has been terrible as was his first try. Right now, Jeter and Reyes are about even as far as defensive skill IMO.
See 3
He's been miserable. I just want him to play like he has the past couple days. Hopefully his confidence is boosted like it looked last night.
His batting stats are not enough. Adding in the other pieces, then yes, I feel he is more valuable to the Yankees than Dye or Ortiz are to their teams. Those are the only two other guys even remotely comparable IMO. Beltran gets my NL vote, for much the same reasons, over Pujols.



Nothing here for me to argue with. Rats! :wink:

[kinghenry89]

I don't really understand your argument regarding Jeter and Rodriguez as hitters. I don't think anyone is arguing that Rodriguez is having a better year this year than Jeter, but for their careers they have almost the same OBP (.388 versus .385), while A Rod's SLG is far better (.572 versus .463). Are you seriously suggesting that for their careers Jeter has been a comparable hitter to Rodriguez? Their stolen base numbers (including success percentages) for their careers are also virtually identical, and when they were both playing SS, Rodriguez was the better fielder. Putting aside the whole "clutchness" thing, I don't see any argument that through their careers Jeter has been a better player than A Rod.

I'm certainly not trying to argue that Jeter is a better hitter than A-Rod over their careers, I'm argueing for this season and against using OPS as the end all be all hitting statistic.

I actually know a few people who are members of SABR, and believe me, the last thing they would say is that OPS is the holy stat that measures hitting completely. Even a cursory look at their literature would show that they are much more into runs created, win shares, linear weights, secondary average, value over replacement player, etc., etc. The nice thing about OPS is that it is simple to calculate, simple to understand, and is vastly better than batting average at measuring the quality of a hitter.

Many people on this site do look at OPS and end the arguement there (3rdand15 being one of them.) That's where my problem lies.

[statjeff22]

I'm certainly not trying to argue that Jeter is a better hitter than A-Rod over their careers, I'm argueing for this season and against using OPS as the end all be all hitting statistic.



Many people on this site do look at OPS and end the arguement there (3rdand15 being one of them.) That's where my problem lies.

I'd be surprised if people are saying that A Rod is having a better year than Jeter this year, but I certainly don't think so.

I won't speak for 3rd other than to say that he's used stats other than OPS in many threads that I've seen, so I'd be surprised (again) if he argued that OPS ended the discussion. As I said in my post, and what I would have guessed he'd agree with, is that OPS is a nice quick summary, and is vastly better than batting average as a single measure of hitting performance.

[Uhm a Jets Fan]

o yea that was 2 years holy shit i forgot

[FirstTimeCaller]

This is a wonderful wondeful thread... I only wish I was here earlier.

[3rdAnd15Draw]

But Jeter and Rodriguez are totally different hitters, they can't be compared by a single statistic (even if sabermetricians try to tell you that OPS is the holy stat that measures hitting ability completely.) Jeter will never have as many total bases as Rodriugez and he's never gonna have as many sacrifice flies. Does that make him a worse hitter, even though he has an on base % of 40 points higher and he's stolen 17 more bases?

Is Adam Dunn a better hitter than Ichiro Suzuki just because Dunn has a higher OPS? No, that's a ridiculous arguement to make (Ichiro hits almost 60 points higher than Dunn, steals far more bases and scores more runs while Dunn hits many more homers and knocks in more RBIs.) It's comparing apples and oranges.

Yes, they can be compared by a single statistic. You may want to say that Jeter is a "leadoff" type hitter while ARod is a "cleanup" type hitter. The upper eschelon of cleanup hitters are always going to be better and more valuable then the upper eschelon of leadoff hitters. Look at Bonds steroid fueled heyday, not only did he lead the league in slugging, but OBP as well. Alot of the top hitters in the league have OBP's around or over .400 in addition to high slugging percentages. How is a guy with an OBP of .420 and a slugging of .400 going to be a better hitter?

How is the argument ridiculous? For all the hits Ichiro gets, Dunn's career OBP is actually higher then Ichiro's and he obviously has a massive advantage in slugging. Any sane person given the choice between Dunn and Ichiro to play a corner OF spot for their team would take Dunn.

As for the OPS stuff, jeff is correct. It's a nice and clean number that easily recognizable and that people are going to be able to understand. VORP and RC are the more comprehensive stats, but unless there is a massive difference in the number of AB's for the players you're talking about, OPS is going to tell you the same thing about the quality of a hitter as these other stats would.

[AMJets]

Well he finally woke up. 4 HRs last 3 games, and should've had one yesterday.

[nyjunc]

Well he finally woke up. 4 HRs last 3 games, and should've had one yesterday.
2 more on Sat, let's hope he can take this into october.

[AlioTheFool]

I missed the game yesterday, but I read about it this morning. It figures that as soon as I give up on him, he comes back to prove me wrong. Happens to me all the time. Penny, CMart, JAbe, and the list goes on and on for me. I think I'll just go give up on the Yankees and Jets for a weeks now, just in case it works...

The only thing that did bother me though, is something he said after yesterday's game. He said everyone was more worried than he ever was. WTF is his problem? That's exactly why I gave up on him! ARod, you should have said something to the effect of "I was getting worried. I know I can play better than I have this year, but something was just off. I think I have it fixed now, but it was scary for a while there."

The thing I find most amusing though is that he broke out after the fans started cheering him again. I said from day one that it was part of the problem. The fans jumped down his throat immediately after he started off July poorly. A few articles and ESPN blurbs later, he was the #1 Enemy of the State. It was blatantly obvious that he is an emotional player. He feeds off the energy around him. Getting booed on the road and cheered at home drives him.

All I can say right now is that I am still not convinced. I want to see this production continue. All it takes is another playoff series like against the Angels last year, and he is back to the doghouse.

[typeOnegative13NY]

I'm glad to see that he is snapping out of it. But lets see him pull this off in October when it matters.

[BIG COUNTRY]

Yes so far so good, hes gotta bring it into October though.

[kinghenry89]

Any sane person given the choice between Dunn and Ichiro to play a corner OF spot for their team would take Dunn.

I don't think that a single GM in baseball would choose Dunn over Ichiro. Ichiro is the best leadoff hitter in baseball, can knock in runs and is probably the best defensive right fielder in the game as well. Dunn draws a lot of walks, but he doesn't get base hits and that's critically important to a lineup no matter how much people value walks and pitch counts these days. Combined with all of his strikeouts, Dunn almost never gets productive outs or moves runners over by putting the ball in play. A groundout to the right side or a single are both 10 times more valuable than a walk with a runner on second and 1 out. It's the difference between a run scoring inning and a blank frame.

As for the OPS stuff, jeff is correct. It's a nice and clean number that easily recognizable and that people are going to be able to understand. VORP and RC are the more comprehensive stats, but unless there is a massive difference in the number of AB's for the players you're talking about, OPS is going to tell you the same thing about the quality of a hitter as these other stats would.

OPS is a useful stat but it can't stand alone. You have to take context into account and view it with other statistics.

[ShadeTree#55]

Reyes is the best leadoff hitter in Baseball.

[3rdAnd15Draw]

I don't think that a single GM in baseball would choose Dunn over Ichiro. Ichiro is the best leadoff hitter in baseball, can knock in runs and is probably the best defensive right fielder in the game as well. Dunn draws a lot of walks, but he doesn't get base hits and that's critically important to a lineup no matter how much people value walks and pitch counts these days. Combined with all of his strikeouts, Dunn almost never gets productive outs or moves runners over by putting the ball in play. A groundout to the right side or a single are both 10 times more valuable than a walk with a runner on second and 1 out. It's the difference between a run scoring inning and a blank frame.

I don't think I could disagree any more with your opening statements. I would take both NY leadoff hitters in a second over Ichiro and not even have to think about it. I'm sure I could come up with some more names if I really looked into it as well.

As for the bolded statement this is just plain wrong and not even open to debate. Check out the Run Expectancy Matrix on Baseball Prospectus: To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.

A ground out to any side is never going to be more valuable then drawing a walk, sorry.


OPS is a useful stat but it can't stand alone. You have to take context into account and view it with other statistics.

That's fair enough and I've said as much, but you also can't disregard it, as you seem to be doing.

[AlioTheFool]

I'll agree with 3rdand15 and Shade on one thing. I would take Reyes over any leadoff hitter in the game at this point. Not Damon though. I'd take Ichiro over Damon in a heartbeat. He is better than Damon in every facet of the game.

I'll take king's side that I would take Ichiro over Dunn in a heartbeat as well.

As far as the OPS thing, I think you guys are arguing apples and oranges. King is saying it's not the be-all-and-end-all of the argument. 3rd is admitting that, just saying that it is a very realistic stat to use to begin to gauge a player by. Maybe take a step back and not get frustrated with each so quickly. You both seem to be saying the same thing in different ways, and misinterpreting each other. (That's not really the same as apples and oranges, I know, I just couldn't think of anything more witty right now.)

[Jetfanmack]

I take Dunn over Ichiro in a second. Dunn is a run producer. If Ichiro walked like Dunn did, and had like a .460 OBP, then fine, a leadoff man in Ichiro with his speed and defense, he might be better than Dunn, but as it is now, there is no way Ichiro is better than Dunn.

And OPS is just a clean, easy stat that people can understand and the numbers make some sense. If I said VORP or RC/27 or WARP3 or something, people would freak out. I don't even understand those fully yet.

[FirstTimeCaller]

The whole arguement about who you'd take as a corner outfielder is silly because obviously Dunn would be a horrible option in RF and Ichiro's defense would be wasted in LF. dunn gets a big advantage in offensive numbers and Ichiro gets the nod in the defense and baserunning ability. It's a pretty close call IMO and I guess it depends on the need of the team and whether you believe Ichiro's skills are starting to diminish (especially power) or if he just needs to get out of Seattle.

[statjeff22]

I'll agree with 3rdand15 and Shade on one thing. I would take Reyes over any leadoff hitter in the game at this point. Not Damon though. I'd take Ichiro over Damon in a heartbeat. He is better than Damon in every facet of the game.

I'll take king's side that I would take Ichiro over Dunn in a heartbeat as well.

As far as the OPS thing, I think you guys are arguing apples and oranges. King is saying it's not the be-all-and-end-all of the argument. 3rd is admitting that, just saying that it is a very realistic stat to use to begin to gauge a player by. Maybe take a step back and not get frustrated with each so quickly. You both seem to be saying the same thing in different ways, and misinterpreting each other. (That's not really the same as apples and oranges, I know, I just couldn't think of anything more witty right now.)

Taking the player as a whole you could argue for Ichiro over Damon, but it's not true that Ichiro is better than Damon at every facet of the game, since Damon is a vastly better power hitter (his slugging percentage is more than 100 points higher, and he has 60 extra base hits this year, compared to a pretty pathetic 28 for Ichiro). Ichiro is of course far far better in the field, and while Damon is an okay baserunner, Ichiro is better.

Ichiro is also a much better fielder than Dunn, of course, and Dunn strikes out too much, but I would certainly rather have Dunn on my team (as FTC noted, however, I couldn't play him in RF, so I'm assuming I have a decent enough rightfielder). Despite the fact that "chicks dig the long ball," people seem to continue to undervalue power hitters, when every available statistic says that extra base hits are much more valuable than singles in terms of producing runs. This is the kind of thing that had the Phillies fans undervaluing Mike Schmidt for years. Of course it would be nice if Dunn struck out as little as Ichiro, and had as high an average, but then he would be one of the best players ever (like juiced Bonds).

This also relates to what IMO is the overvaluation of the "productive out" (ones that move up baserunners). Of course productive outs are better than unproductive ones, but if you look at those run expectation tables that 3rd linked to (I've linked to others as well recently), you can see that a productive out is in a real sense a little bit worse than the "average" play in a game; that is, the average number of runs scored before a productive out is a little more than the average number afterwards. So, for example, teams have scored an average of 0.93 runs from that point on on when there is a man on 1st and no one out, and an average of 0.75 when there is a man on 2nd and 1 out, showing that the "productive out" has actually hurt. Others: man on 2nd, 0 outs, 1.15, man on 3rd, 1 out, 0.99; men on 1st and 2nd, 0 outs, 1.58, men on 2nd and 3rd, 1 out, 1.44. You see this pattern repeatedly if you look at those tables. This is why the sacrifice bunt is usually not a good play, unless the batter on deck is better than the batter at the plate (which is why bunting with the pitcher is perfectly sensible). Of course there can be individual circumstances where such a play might be desirable, but on average these productive out plays don't really leave a team in a better position than the one in which they started, despite the fact that "baseball men" are in love with them. I certainly don't feel that they can in any way count for more than the benefits that come from being a power hitter. What I think people have to remember is that comparing a productive out to an unproductive one ignores the possibility that something good will happen if you hit away (this also argues for having a hitter in your lineup batting second who naturally hits the ball to the right side, so that they're not automatically "giving themselves up" if they hit that way).

[3rdAnd15Draw]

I think alot of it has to do with the "specialization" and compartmentalization that has become more and more prevalent in baseball. People feel like bullpen pitchers have to have clearly defined roles and this is rarely deviated from. For example, the "setup man" will come in the 8th and pitch to the 3-4-5 hitters with a 1 run lead, while the "closer" will pitch to the bottom of the order in the 9th with a 3 run lead and the closer will get the save. Logic would say you would want your best pitcher pitching the 8th but this is never done(unless the closer is pitching the 9th as well).

This past offseason we heard about how the Yankees needed a leadoff hitter, and that they had to go after Damon, despite the fact that Jeter was a very good(and better then Damon) leadoff hitter in 05. In this same vein I think that way too much is made of having a guy that makes "productive outs" hitting second. Ignoring the fact that they play totally different position, Adam Dunn and his 200 K's hitting 2nd in the Mets lineup would undoubtedly produce more runs then Lo Duca's .300+ average, productive outs, and 30 K's. The bottom line is that better hitters in your lineup are going to result in more runs, even if they don't fit the "mold".

[MSUJet85]

I think the choosing between Ichiro and Dunn is a more case to case basis, if your team needs a cleanup hitter or more power they will obviously take a younger Dunn, just like if you need a leadoff hitter with defense and speed you would take Ichiro, this reminds me of the trade the White Sox did years ago when they traded Carlos Lee away for Podsednik because they saw they had power but needed a player to start up their offense, it all depends on the teams philosophy

[3rdAnd15Draw]

I think the choosing between Ichiro and Dunn is a more case to case basis, if your team needs a cleanup hitter or more power they will obviously take a younger Dunn, just like if you need a leadoff hitter with defense and speed you would take Ichiro, this reminds me of the trade the White Sox did years ago when they traded Carlos Lee away for Podsednik because they saw they had power but needed a player to start up their offense, it all depends on the teams philosophy

And as a fan you have to hope that your GM isn't the kind of guy that makes deals like that(on the White Sox side). That was, is and will always be a terrible move. Obviously you can't attribute all of this to the Lee/Podsednik swap, but the White Sox runs scored dipped 124 runs from 04 to 05. Of course, they allowed 186 runs less then they did in 04, won 99 games and won the WS, so the trade was proclaimed a "win-win".

If the trade was made after the 03 season you could excuse it, as Podsednik had a pretty good season in his first full time action in the majors, and Lee had a bit of a down year for him. Chicago apparently disregared the putrid 04 season Podsednik had.

[AlioTheFool]

Okay, Damon is a better power hitter, I'll give you that. I was thinking in terms of what the Yankees would be better off with. I would easily put Ichiro in centerfield in Yankee Stadium, and have no problem with it. He can cover at least as much ground as Damon, and has a significantly better arm. Plus, as a leadoff hitter, Ichiro would score more runs than Damon, and be much more of a steal threat. That would open up the pitcher to mistakes that guys like Jeter and Abreu would absolutely abuse.

Don't get me wrong, I was one of the people who was happy from day one to get Damon, but to get Ichiro, I would dump him in a heartbeat.

I definitely don't underestimate power hitters. If you have the choice between 9 Giambis, or 9 Ichiros in your lineup, you go with the Giambis. You will get more overall run production in the end. However, I think people are underestimating the value of a "for average" hitter. If you have a lineup of 5 Ichiros, and 4 Giambis, and you alternate through the lineup with each, you are going to score a lot of runs.

As for your numbers, they are totally skewed, and I'll quickly explain why. Of course there will be more runs scored with less outs, and less for each number of outs after. It only makes sense. With one out, you have one less out to play with. It's the difference between Aaron Guile making the third out, or Damon getting another at-bat. While I see the point you are trying to make, it is totally off-base. A sacrifice bunt is usually not a good play? Even when you are down one, the tying run is at second, one out, and the guy on deck has the ability to get a base hit?

I think you are falling too much in love with the modern day long ball game. At it's foundation, baseball is still much more a stretegic game than say, football. I would say baseball is to chess, as football is to Monopoly. In baseball, as in chess, one small move can mean the difference between a win and a loss. In football, as in Monopoly, the key is to choke your opponent into submission.

[3rdAnd15Draw]

Okay, Damon is a better power hitter, I'll give you that. I was thinking in terms of what the Yankees would be better off with. I would easily put Ichiro in centerfield in Yankee Stadium, and have no problem with it. He can cover at least as much ground as Damon, and has a significantly better arm. Plus, as a leadoff hitter, Ichiro would score more runs than Damon, and be much more of a steal threat. That would open up the pitcher to mistakes that guys like Jeter and Abreu would absolutely abuse.

Don't get me wrong, I was one of the people who was happy from day one to get Damon, but to get Ichiro, I would dump him in a heartbeat.

Why would Ichiro score more runs? They have similar OBP(Damon's is a tad higher) and Damon's extra power(60 XBH vs 28) more then makes up for 14 SB's .


I definitely don't underestimate power hitters. If you have the choice between 9 Giambis, or 9 Ichiros in your lineup, you go with the Giambis. You will get more overall run production in the end. However, I think people are underestimating the value of a "for average" hitter. If you have a lineup of 5 Ichiros, and 4 Giambis, and you alternate through the lineup with each, you are going to score a lot of runs.

But 9 Giambis will still be better then the 5 Ichiros and 4 Giambis.


As for your numbers, they are totally skewed, and I'll quickly explain why. Of course there will be more runs scored with less outs, and less for each number of outs after. It only makes sense. With one out, you have one less out to play with. It's the difference between Aaron Guile making the third out, or Damon getting another at-bat. While I see the point you are trying to make, it is totally off-base. A sacrifice bunt is usually not a good play? Even when you are down one, the tying run is at second, one out, and the guy on deck has the ability to get a base hit?

Again, this isn't something that can be debated or "skewed" these are facts. These are huge sample sizes and you can see the numbers are fairly consistent from year to year. It's been noted that there are situations when you have a poor hitter at the plate and a much better hitter on deck a sacrifice can be the right play. But for the most part when you start sacrifice bunting you're hurting your ability to score runs.

[MSUJet85]

Okay, Damon is a better power hitter, I'll give you that. I was thinking in terms of what the Yankees would be better off with. I would easily put Ichiro in centerfield in Yankee Stadium, and have no problem with it. He can cover at least as much ground as Damon, and has a significantly better arm. Plus, as a leadoff hitter, Ichiro would score more runs than Damon, and be much more of a steal threat. That would open up the pitcher to mistakes that guys like Jeter and Abreu would absolutely abuse.
This is another problem with your argument, you are basing this on who fits the Yankees better, and with the Yankees who already have Arod, Giambi and when they get back Sheffield and Matsui you can argue that they have 4 cleanup hitters in their lineup and they would really have more of a use for more speed and defense then even more power, but if you are starting from the beginning you have to choose a cleanup hitter over a leadoff guy

[statjeff22]

As for your numbers, they are totally skewed, and I'll quickly explain why. Of course there will be more runs scored with less outs, and less for each number of outs after. It only makes sense. With one out, you have one less out to play with. It's the difference between Aaron Guile making the third out, or Damon getting another at-bat. While I see the point you are trying to make, it is totally off-base. A sacrifice bunt is usually not a good play? Even when you are down one, the tying run is at second, one out, and the guy on deck has the ability to get a base hit?

I think you are falling too much in love with the modern day long ball game. At it's foundation, baseball is still much more a stretegic game than say, football. I would say baseball is to chess, as football is to Monopoly. In baseball, as in chess, one small move can mean the difference between a win and a loss. In football, as in Monopoly, the key is to choke your opponent into submission.

I'm assuming the example you gave above is a typo (you meant no one out, not one out), since that situation is certainly not a good time to bunt, since there is virtually no difference in scoring a run with two outs and a man on second or two outs and a man on third, and it's very unlikely that a runner on second will be doubled off.

I've already had this conversation a couple of weeks ago, and I don't really want to get into it all again, but I don't see what you're saying at all. Put aside all of the "unique" characteristics of an individual play - those obviously change from play to play, are absolutely impossible to quantify, and are certainly very subjective. The point of the game is to score runs, and the expected runs scored tables show how much of that is done. It is simply empirically true that fewer runs are scored on average from the point where a runner is on first with no one out than when a runner is on second with one man out. This has been true going back at least until the 1950s, when George Lindsey constructed the first of the expected runs tables for a paper in the journal Operations Research, and is found consistently year after year, whether it is a pitching era or a hitting era. What this implies is that if you have an average hitter up, and an average hitter on deck, the situation after a successful sacrifice bunt will be worse on average than before it. This also doesn't take into account that many sacrifice bunts are unsuccessful. The same effect is true for a runner on 2nd, runners on 1st and 2nd, and situations with 1 out. This is not my opinion - this is based on the actual numbers of runs scored in games. The situation can certainly be worse after a player swings away, but for an average hitter, that is not the case on average.

The cause is exactly what you said - you have one less out to play with. That is exactly why "productive outs" are far less productive than people give them credit for - you only have 2 outs to play with (on the third the inning is over), and you just gave one away. Note that these are just averages, and the specific characteristics of the hitter and the player on deck also matter - obviously bunting with a pitcher is a good idea, because the pitcher has a much higher probability of making an unproductive out. You might make the same argument with a rookie hitting .224 with fewer than 100 at bats followed by a 12-year veteran with a lifetime .290 average (of course, Guiel isn't a rookie, and he hit .294 last year in KC). That wasn't what this discussion was about, however - it was about the value of "productive outs" when comparing decent (or much better than decent) hitters like Dunn, Ichiro, Lo Duca, Lee, Podsednick, etc. For average players productive outs put the team in a slightly worse position in terms of runs scored; for batters of higher quality, they are even more wasteful, since those batters have that much higher probability of doing something much more productive. If you have a regular position player who is bunting all the time because he has a high probability of making an unproductive out, I would say the solution is not for him to bunt, but rather to get a better position player.

[statjeff22]

But 9 Giambis will still be better then the 5 Ichiros and 4 Giambis.



Again, this isn't something that can be debated or "skewed" these are facts. These are huge sample sizes and you can see the numbers are fairly consistent from year to year. It's been noted that there are situations when you have a poor hitter at the plate and a much better hitter on deck a sacrifice can be the right play. But for the most part when you start sacrifice bunting you're hurting your ability to score runs.

Obviously I agree with the second paragraph above, but it must be noted that the first statement is impossible to prove empirically, since no such lineup has ever existed. People have used computer simulations that suggest what you're saying, but that is different from the expected runs tables, which are based on actual game results.

[3rdAnd15Draw]

Obviously I agree with the second paragraph above, but it must be noted that the first statement is impossible to prove empirically, since no such lineup has ever existed. People have used computer simulations that suggest what you're saying, but that is different from the expected runs tables, which are based on actual game results.

Well yes, when you're talking about "5 Ichiro's and 4 Giambi's" such a discussion has to be theoretical. But I think the point is valid that it's not possible for run production to improve when you replace 5 hitters with less productive hitters, and the other 4 remain constant.

[devilonthetownhallroof]

This also relates to what IMO is the overvaluation of the "productive out" (ones that move up baserunners). Of course productive outs are better than unproductive ones, but if you look at those run expectation tables that 3rd linked to (I've linked to others as well recently), you can see that a productive out is in a real sense a little bit worse than the "average" play in a game; that is, the average number of runs scored before a productive out is a little more than the average number afterwards. So, for example, teams have scored an average of 0.93 runs from that point on on when there is a man on 1st and no one out, and an average of 0.75 when there is a man on 2nd and 1 out, showing that the "productive out" has actually hurt.

There is a problem here. Of course when you make an out, ANY out, the chances of scoring decrease. But I don't think anyone is saying that moving the runner over is better than getting a hit, which would over value it. It IS however much better than striking out, which is why I'd rather have a guy with theoretically the same stats as Dunn, only half the K's. That player would have a MUCH higher value than Dunn. In your example, yes, the expected runs go down from .93 with a man on first and no outs to .75 with a man on second and one out, it goes down to .56 with a man still on first and one out. That's a huge difference. Your other examples- man on 2nd, 0 outs, 1.15, man on 3rd, 1 out, 0.99 man on second, 1 out, .75; men on 1st and 2nd, 0 outs, 1.58, men on 2nd and 3rd, 1 out, 1.44, men on 1st and 2nd, 1 out, .95.

I don't think there is an overvaluation of "productive outs", because no one in their right mind wants an out over a hit. They DO want a ground out to move the runners over a strikeout every time though.

[3rdAnd15Draw]

There is a problem here. Of course when you make an out, ANY out, the chances of scoring decrease. But I don't think anyone is saying that moving the runner over is better than getting a hit, which would over value it. It IS however much better than striking out, which is why I'd rather have a guy with theoretically the same stats as Dunn, only half the K's. That player would have a MUCH higher value than Dunn. In your example, yes, the expected runs go down from .93 with a man on first and no outs to .75 with a man on second and one out, it goes down to .56 with a man still on first and one out. That's a huge difference. Your other examples- man on 2nd, 0 outs, 1.15, man on 3rd, 1 out, 0.99 man on second, 1 out, .75; men on 1st and 2nd, 0 outs, 1.58, men on 2nd and 3rd, 1 out, 1.44, men on 1st and 2nd, 1 out, .95.

I don't think there is an overvaluation of "productive outs", because no one in their right mind wants an out over a hit. They DO want a ground out to move the runners over a strikeout every time though.

120 of Dunn's 163 K's this year have come in situations where it is not possible to make a "productive out", the whole strikeout thing is way overblown. To do a complete analysis of players ability to move runners up you'd have to go through an entire seasons PBP logs, which I don't think anyone is prepared to do.

[statjeff22]

There is a problem here. Of course when you make an out, ANY out, the chances of scoring decrease. But I don't think anyone is saying that moving the runner over is better than getting a hit, which would over value it. It IS however much better than striking out, which is why I'd rather have a guy with theoretically the same stats as Dunn, only half the K's. That player would have a MUCH higher value than Dunn. In your example, yes, the expected runs go down from .93 with a man on first and no outs to .75 with a man on second and one out, it goes down to .56 with a man still on first and one out. That's a huge difference. Your other examples- man on 2nd, 0 outs, 1.15, man on 3rd, 1 out, 0.99 man on second, 1 out, .75; men on 1st and 2nd, 0 outs, 1.58, men on 2nd and 3rd, 1 out, 1.44, men on 1st and 2nd, 1 out, .95.

I don't think there is an overvaluation of "productive outs", because no one in their right mind wants an out over a hit. They DO want a ground out to move the runners over a strikeout every time though.


"Productive outs" is a fuzzy concept. If a player is trying as hard as he can to get a hit, and ends up hitting a ground ball to second that moves the runner up (rather than striking out), there is no question that this is helpful to a team. It's much easier to see the usefulness of these expected runs numbers if you consider an overt strategy to "give oneself up," like the sacrifice bunt. There is a runner on 1st with no one out. A successful bunt results in a man on second with one out. At that point, the expected number of runs that will score in the inning is 0.75. If it's a failed bunt, there's still a man on first, now with one out, with an expected number of runs of 0.56. I'll keep things simple by ignoring the possibilities of bunting for a hit and bunting into a double play (those are relatively rare events). Say the bunter is a pretty good bunter, and is successful 85% of the time. Then, by calling for a bunt, the expected number of runs after the play is over is

(0.75)(.85) + (0.56)(.15) = 0.72;

the first part comes from the bunt being successful, the second from it not being successful. Now, what if you have the batter swing away. We'll keep things simple and assume that in that case he either goes to first on a walk or a single (and the runner goes to second), or he has an unproductive out. Note that a decent player is probably more likely to get an extra base hit or a long single than to hit into a DP, so I'm actually giving the swing away position an unfair disadvantage (for a thorough analysis we would need to have the chances of each possible outcome, but these calculations show the basic principles). If he gets on base, the expected number of runs scored is 1.58; if he makes an unproductive out, it is .56.

Let p be the chance that the batter will, in fact, get to first base. Note that this is basically his OBP. The expected number of runs after he is up, if he doesn't bunt, is

(1.58)(p) + (.56)(1 - p);

the first part comes from him getting on base, the second from him not getting on base. The sacrifice bunt is only a better strategy (that is, leads to a higher average number of runs scored), on average, if

(1.58)(p) + (.56)(1 - p) < .72.

Solve the inequality above, and you see that a successful bunt is only more effective than swinging away on average (assuming an "average" batter on deck) if p < .157; that is, if the OBP is less than about .160. Of course, no position player has an OBP anywhere near that low, which is why the sacrifice bunt (other than with a pitcher) is rarely a good play.

An analysis of "productive outs" would involve comparing the distribution of results (strikeouts, walks, singles, doubles, etc.) when a player isn't trying to do productive outs to the distribution when he is. This could be done based on play-by-play data (as 3rd noted), but I don't have that data (actually, a PhD student and I are working on a paper on baseball, and whether there is evidence for momentum within games, and she is getting such data from retrosheet, but I don't have it yet). The sacrifice bunt analysis above, however, suggests that a player should definitely not try too hard to give himself up (since that approaches a sacrifice bunt), because that will actually hurt the team; that's why a lefthanded hitter has an advantage, since he can try as hard as he can and still get the runner over on an out a lot more easily than can a righthanded hitter. The other part of the analysis that would be needed would be to look at how often the situation even comes up. I don't have the data to construct it completely, but even Jose Reyes has only gotten on base 88 times this year with the bases empty, and no doubt some of those were with two outs, so how many times has Lo Duca come up in the "productive out" situation anyway (he has more than 460 plate appearances)? (I recognize that this is not completely the story, since Reyes could have singled in a runner from second with no one out, thereby being on first with no one out, but you see the point, I hope.)

This is already too long, but one other thing - I am not claiming that average runs are the only way to make these decisions. The usefulness of these tables, however, is that they give a manager or player the ability to see that there had better be lots of special circumstances going on if plays like the sac bunt are going to be used, since there are strong arguments against them on average.

[AlioTheFool]

I don't know if I can even follow this thread any more, hahaha. Too much math involved for me.

Seriously though, devil said what I was trying to say, better than I said it. Of course, if given the choice between a single and a ground out that moved a runner, I'd take the single every time.

As far as my comment of a runner on second, one out, and a sacrifice, I meant what I wrote. It is the right time to bunt. Your tables can say anything they want, I would still call for the play, especially if it's a fast guy on second.

You can argue that the runner may be advanced by an infield out, but that isn't a sure thing. If the ball gets hit to the shortstop, the runner on second goes nowhere. That's an unproductive out. The bunt will almost always move that runner to third, since if the third or first baseman picks it up, he won't stop the runner going to third. The pitcher has a chance, but more often than not, he is better off throwing to first for the sure out. The catcher has the best chance of stopping the runner, only because he can look him off before throwing to first.

At that point, you have your tying run 90 feet away. Yes, there are now two outs, but there are other factors that come into play. A wild pitch ties the game. A bloop single ties the game. An error ties the game.

Math can solve many issues in the universe. I don't think baseball is one of those things. From my days playing, to my time coaching my kids, I've seen some crazy things happen. That's what baseball is about. If it were all about statistics, Mo Rivera would never blow a save. ARod would never slump. Jeter would create a run any time a runner was within 180 feet of home plate. But that's not baseball.

Baseball is about matchups. It's about a certain guy coming up in a certain situation.

Thinking about it now, Giambi was a terrible example to use. He gets on base too often, and doesn't strike out often enough. A team of 9 of him would be huge, simply because when 2 or 3 of them had a HR in the game, they would score 6-8 runs. On the other hand though, there would probably be a ton of errors, and you would never see that team catching balls on the warning track, those would be doubles.

A team of Ichiros would grind out games. They would rattle pitchers, since they would always have an eye on the baserunner. If you have a team full of high-average players, regardless of power, that team is going to score a lot of runs. It won't be very flashy, but at 6a.m., the paper only shows W or L for the night before.

Now if you mix those two types of players, like I tried to say, you have a great lineup. You have baserunners at least once an inning, and you are going to get homers with runners on, more often than not.

If baseball was played by robots, then yeah, I would want a team of Giambis. But it's played by human beings, and so many situational things happen in baseball that it's impossible to confine success to a series of statistics. Stats are of course very useful. However, you have to look at the whole picture.

[AMJets]

I don't think that a single GM in baseball would choose Dunn over Ichiro.

If that's the case, then I don't think a single GM in baseball should have a job.

[statjeff22]

I don't know if I can even follow this thread any more, hahaha. Too much math involved for me.

Seriously though, devil said what I was trying to say, better than I said it. Of course, if given the choice between a single and a ground out that moved a runner, I'd take the single every time.

As far as my comment of a runner on second, one out, and a sacrifice, I meant what I wrote. It is the right time to bunt. Your tables can say anything they want, I would still call for the play, especially if it's a fast guy on second.

You can argue that the runner may be advanced by an infield out, but that isn't a sure thing. If the ball gets hit to the shortstop, the runner on second goes nowhere. That's an unproductive out. The bunt will almost always move that runner to third, since if the third or first baseman picks it up, he won't stop the runner going to third. The pitcher has a chance, but more often than not, he is better off throwing to first for the sure out. The catcher has the best chance of stopping the runner, only because he can look him off before throwing to first.

At that point, you have your tying run 90 feet away. Yes, there are now two outs, but there are other factors that come into play. A wild pitch ties the game. A bloop single ties the game. An error ties the game.

Math can solve many issues in the universe. I don't think baseball is one of those things. From my days playing, to my time coaching my kids, I've seen some crazy things happen. That's what baseball is about. If it were all about statistics, Mo Rivera would never blow a save. ARod would never slump. Jeter would create a run any time a runner was within 180 feet of home plate. But that's not baseball.

Baseball is about matchups. It's about a certain guy coming up in a certain situation.

Thinking about it now, Giambi was a terrible example to use. He gets on base too often, and doesn't strike out often enough. A team of 9 of him would be huge, simply because when 2 or 3 of them had a HR in the game, they would score 6-8 runs. On the other hand though, there would probably be a ton of errors, and you would never see that team catching balls on the warning track, those would be doubles.

A team of Ichiros would grind out games. They would rattle pitchers, since they would always have an eye on the baserunner. If you have a team full of high-average players, regardless of power, that team is going to score a lot of runs. It won't be very flashy, but at 6a.m., the paper only shows W or L for the night before.

Now if you mix those two types of players, like I tried to say, you have a great lineup. You have baserunners at least once an inning, and you are going to get homers with runners on, more often than not.

If baseball was played by robots, then yeah, I would want a team of Giambis. But it's played by human beings, and so many situational things happen in baseball that it's impossible to confine success to a series of statistics. Stats are of course very useful. However, you have to look at the whole picture.


I said in another thread a couple of weeks ago that I'm always surprised that people who will accept the benefits of statistical analysis in meteorology, clinical trials, finance, marketing, economics, etc., etc., are so resistant to the idea that it can be used in exactly the same way in sports. I will not attempt to try to convince you of my position, but I will point out that what I bolded above is precisely what statistics does not say. It is these analyses that attempt to model and understand all of the randomness that you are talking about, and to try to separate that which is signal (Rivera is a great pitcher, Pujols is a great hitter) from that which is noise (hard-hit balls go right at fielders, dribblers make it through the infield). There is no other way to do it that has the slightest hope of finding what is real, and what is just a fluke, and there is nothing about baseball that is any different from any other endeavor in that regard. The analysis I did here is naive, because I only have simple data, and I was just trying to illustrate the way the statistics can be used. Using play-by-play data you can of course take into account things like matchups, ballpark effects, fatigue effects, and so on - situational effects that matter. This is exactly what STATS, Inc., does, for a lot of money, for all of the teams in major league baseball. You can also sort out what effects don't matter, and are just luck.

I would be stunned if you would find many people who would agree that you should bunt with a fast man on second and one man out, unless you have two really pathetic hitters coming up to bat. I certainly can't recall it ever happening this year in all of the Mets games I've watched with Reyes on 2nd. A runner doesn't score from 3rd with two outs too often - it only happens about 1/3 of the time. Runners score from 2nd with one out much more often (more than half the time, I would estimate, although I don't have the data), and they score from 2nd with two outs almost as often as they score from 3rd with two outs. Wild pitches are rare. Errors that stay in the infield are rare. (Maybe the point is that you're thinking of coaching kids, where wild pitches and dropped throws are common, but in the major leagues they're not.) Even if they occur, then it's man on 3rd or 1st and 3rd with two outs, and you still have a chance to score. Bloop singles (and all of the other kinds of hits) score the runner from 2nd anyway with two outs, and so would a poor throw by an infielder that gets past the first basemen or a missed catch by an outfielder, since the runner is running on contact with two outs. It is poor strategy to play for a rare event in favor of a common one.

[AlioTheFool]

I said in another thread a couple of weeks ago that I'm always surprised that people who will accept the benefits of statistical analysis in meteorology, clinical trials, finance, marketing, economics, etc., etc., are so resistant to the idea that it can be used in exactly the same way in sports. I will not attempt to try to convince you of my position, but I will point out that what I bolded above is precisely what statistics does not say. It is these analyses that attempt to model and understand all of the randomness that you are talking about, and to try to separate that which is signal (Rivera is a great pitcher, Pujols is a great hitter) from that which is noise (hard-hit balls go right at fielders, dribblers make it through the infield). There is no other way to do it that has the slightest hope of finding what is real, and what is just a fluke, and there is nothing about baseball that is any different from any other endeavor in that regard. The analysis I did here is naive, because I only have simple data, and I was just trying to illustrate the way the statistics can be used. Using play-by-play data you can of course take into account things like matchups, ballpark effects, fatigue effects, and so on - situational effects that matter. This is exactly what STATS, Inc., does, for a lot of money, for all of the teams in major league baseball. You can also sort out what effects don't matter, and are just luck.

I would be stunned if you would find many people who would agree that you should bunt with a fast man on second and one man out, unless you have two really pathetic hitters coming up to bat. I certainly can't recall it ever happening this year in all of the Mets games I've watched with Reyes on 2nd. A runner doesn't score from 3rd with two outs too often - it only happens about 1/3 of the time. Runners score from 2nd with one out much more often (more than half the time, I would estimate, although I don't have the data), and they score from 2nd with two outs almost as often as they score from 3rd with two outs. Wild pitches are rare. Errors that stay in the infield are rare. (Maybe the point is that you're thinking of coaching kids, where wild pitches and dropped throws are common, but in the major leagues they're not.) Even if they occur, then it's man on 3rd or 1st and 3rd with two outs, and you still have a chance to score. Bloop singles (and all of the other kinds of hits) score the runner from 2nd anyway with two outs, and so would a poor throw by an infielder that gets past the first basemen or a missed catch by an outfielder, since the runner is running on contact with two outs. It is poor strategy to play for a rare event in favor of a common one.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying stats don't have a place in the sport. That would be flat out ignorant. If stats didn't matter, then we wouldn't hear insane things like "This guy hits this pitcher once every 3 at-bats, during night games, when the temprature is between 68 and 72 degrees." (Yes, that was silly, but the exaggeration illustrates the point.

My writing has nothing to do with my kids. I simply used them as examples. I think part of my "problem" is that I am too old school for the modern sport of baseball. I still see the game in the more pure pre-strike form. The sort of time when your power was locked into the 4,5 positions, and sometimes, if you were really lucky, in the 3 or 6 holes. A guy like Rickey Henderson was an abberation, rather than the rule.

Pitching today cannot keep up with modern day hitters. There's too much film to study. And let's be honest, steroids does far more for a hitter than a pitcher. Powerball is the game today.

If I can get over my prejudices, perhaps I can see it from a different angle. I don't think that will ever actually happen though. When I played, it was just different. Not in an "I walked to school barefoot, in the snow, uphill, both ways" sort of way, just different. Baserunners were critical to a team's success. A game ending 7-6 was jokingly referred to as a football game. Now a score like that is a slow night.

I hope I am not offending you with my comments about mathematics. I'll admit, I hate math, and always have (which everyone I know thinks is strange, considering I am a programmer *shrug*) That doesn't mean I don't believe it has it's own important place in the world. Actually, I think math, in its various forms, is the basis for everything else. Anyway, I just wanted to let you know it's nothing personal.

BTW: Wasn't this an ARod thread? :breakdance:

[MSUJet85]

Pitching today cannot keep up with modern day hitters. There's too much film to study. And let's be honest, steroids does far more for a hitter than a pitcher. Powerball is the game today.
I may get attacked for this, but I don't think that is the case, considering that half of the guys caught with steroids were pitchers, the only reason why we don't hear about pitchers is because we go crazy over the HR stat, and just assume that you have to be huge to be on steriods, but that is only if you work out on those areas, with steriods a fringe player that throws in the mid 80s all of a sudden throws in the low 90s, and the recovery time is also faster after each appearance, and ironically enough after all the talk about finally addressing the steriod problem HRs have been up instead of down, the steriod being a hitter thing is more something that the media overblown so they can get a story

[Royal Tee]

I may get attacked for this, but I don't think that is the case, considering that half of the guys caught with steroids were pitchers, the only reason why we don't hear about pitchers is because we go crazy over the HR stat, and just assume that you have to be huge to be on steriods, but that is only if you work out on those areas, with steriods a fringe player that throws in the mid 80s all of a sudden throws in the low 90s, and the recovery time is also faster after each appearance, and ironically enough after all the talk about finally addressing the steriod problem HRs have been up instead of down, the steriod being a hitter thing is more something that the media overblown so they can get a story
I can definitely agree with that logic. Especially the media aspect of it and the fact that Clemens name has popped up yet they leave it alone.

If Rocket is Juicing (Not accusing him here) then he falls in line right with your logic.

[statjeff22]

I hope I am not offending you with my comments about mathematics. I'll admit, I hate math, and always have (which everyone I know thinks is strange, considering I am a programmer *shrug*) That doesn't mean I don't believe it has it's own important place in the world. Actually, I think math, in its various forms, is the basis for everything else. Anyway, I just wanted to let you know it's nothing personal.

No offense taken, and I never thought that it was anything personal. I hope that you also realize that my responses were not meant to be an attack either, in any way.

BTW: Wasn't this an ARod thread? :breakdance:

Yeah, but he went 1 for 4 tonight, so there really isn't anything to talk about with respect to him. :lol:

[AlioTheFool]

I may get attacked for this, but I don't think that is the case, considering that half of the guys caught with steroids were pitchers, the only reason why we don't hear about pitchers is because we go crazy over the HR stat, and just assume that you have to be huge to be on steriods, but that is only if you work out on those areas, with steriods a fringe player that throws in the mid 80s all of a sudden throws in the low 90s, and the recovery time is also faster after each appearance, and ironically enough after all the talk about finally addressing the steriod problem HRs have been up instead of down, the steriod being a hitter thing is more something that the media overblown so they can get a story

You make a very good point. I firmly believe there are many pitchers doping. At the same time, so still are many hitters. Anyone that believes that just because baseball has "cracked down" the problem is even remotely fixed isn't paying enough attention.

Either the testing system is a total crock, or guys are using undetectable juice. Regardless, guys are still doing it, and the numbers still show it.

The reason a hitter has an advantage over a pitcher, when both are using steroids is simple. It doesn't matter how hard a guy throws, it doesn't make him a great pitcher. Vlad Guerrero has one of the most powerful arms I have ever seen, but he isn't a pitcher. Steroids can give your fastball movement, or your curve more break.

On the other hand, steroids not only make a hitter stronger, and give them extra bat speed, but they also increase the hand-to-eye coordination and reflexes required to hit a ball coming at you at 90mph. (I didn't know this was even the case until the beginning of this season. I was always on Bonds side, with the opinion that "Hey, so what, he's strong, it doesn't make him a better hitter." Then my brother showed me some articles regarding research into steroids, all of which concluded that steroids actually makes you a better hitter. Strange, but true.)

Now if you take for argument's sake that Clemmens juices, then there is a good example of your point. He is a very good pitcher without the juice, but with the juice, he can throw harder for longer periods. But how many pitchers are there out there like that? Not nearly as many hitters benefitting from the 'roids.

I hope this doesn't sound like a flame because that wasn't the intention. I hear your point, and I don't totally disagree. Surely substances are helping fringe pitchers be more successful. All I am saying is that those same substances are making more fringe hitters a lot better.

[AlioTheFool]

No offense taken, and I never thought that it was anything personal. I hope that you also realize that my responses were not meant to be an attack either, in any way.

Okay cool. I didn't take anything you said offensively. I find your posts very intelligent, and I admit I am learning from them. I love conversations like this. People like yourself and 3rd make very clear points, and that's the whole point of posting isn't it? Get your points across, and see if you can open some eyes.

Yeah, but he went 1 for 4 tonight, so there really isn't anything to talk about with respect to him. :lol:

Yeah well, I said it this morning. After last night, he has proven that I was right joining the anti-ARod club. The whole team is annoying me. The Royals should not be this competitive against playoff contenders. The only somewhat comforting thing is that they are doing it to everyone in the race.

[MSUJet85]

I hope this doesn't sound like a flame because that wasn't the intention. I hear your point, and I don't totally disagree. Surely substances are helping fringe pitchers be more successful. All I am saying is that those same substances are making more fringe hitters a lot better.
Now see we don't know that for sure since baseball withhold that information, but as for your point you need skill whether you are a hitter or a pitcher to fully utilizes the advantage of steroids, although when you say that it helps a hitter more, I don't agree completely, you are right that no matter how hard a guy throws it doesn't make him a great pitcher, however with work and adjustment it can help him greatly, like you said steriods can give you more break on your curve or give you fastball morement as well as more speed. Just like Joe Schmo can't just take steriods and all of a sudden become a 40 HR hitter every year. The hitter still needs the skill to be able to use the advantage to be a better hitter.

Now using a slightly different example like if a guy that already has low 90s fastball and a ok curve, with steriods he all of a sudden has 95-97 mph with a nasty curve, with enough of a brain to use this to his advantage all of a sudden becomes a much better pitcher

P.S. HAHA what a hijacking of a thread :lol:

[AlioTheFool]

Now see we don't know that for sure since baseball withhold that information, but as for your point you need skill whether you are a hitter or a pitcher to fully utilizes the advantage of steroids, although when you say that it helps a hitter more, I don't agree completely, you are right that no matter how hard a guy throws it doesn't make him a great pitcher, however with work and adjustment it can help him greatly, like you said steriods can give you more break on your curve or give you fastball morement as well as more speed. Just like Joe Schmo can't just take steriods and all of a sudden become a 40 HR hitter every year. The hitter still needs the skill to be able to use the advantage to be a better hitter.

Now using a slightly different example like if a guy that already has low 90s fastball and a ok curve, with steriods he all of a sudden has 95-97 mph with a nasty curve, with enough of a brain to use this to his advantage all of a sudden becomes a much better pitcher

P.S. HAHA what a hijacking of a thread :lol:

I think you misread my post. I said steroids cannot make a pitcher's curve break harder, or put more movement on a fastball. That is a skill that has to be developed individually. I agree that juicing would allow a pitcher to throw for longer periods, but it still comes down to the "bite" he has on his pitches. Throwing 90 right down the middle is the key ingredient to handing out homers for free.

In the case of a hitter, I used to believe what you said, that the player has to have the skill to begin with, but that isn't necessarily the case. As I said, steroids have been found to increase hand-to-eye coordination, and reflexes. Those are the key components to hitting. Bat speed is the number one component of hitting a home run. Now if you mix this with actual skill, like the case of Bonds, you wind up with a guy who can hit 70 home runs in a season.

And yes, this was a total hijack of the thread. Apologies to all.