|
If we're talking about anywhere remotely comparable bats, Tulo is an elite defensive SS which is insanely valuable on its own.  It sucks having the 2011 data point on there, but I don't know why his bat is "a few notches below the other two." Park factors...? I guess?
|
| # ? Apr 7, 2011 15:07 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2013 05:17 |
|
|
It still seems like Tulo should get ranked higher then, especially if defense means so much.
|
| # ? Apr 7, 2011 15:40 |
|
|
It's not like Longoria is a defensive slouch either. He's pretty valuable in that regard too even if it is at 3B instead of SS.
|
| # ? Apr 7, 2011 15:46 |
|
|
Options question - With Milledge being DFA'd, how does that work in terms of options. With this being his what... 3rd or 4th team, does the concept of options continue on in this sort of situation or because he originally signed a minor league deal, his options reset? edit for clarity - Lillibridge has no options left, so he'd have to clear waivers in order to be sent down. Does the same thing hold true with Lastings or are the Sox burning one of his options?
|
| # ? Apr 7, 2011 15:47 |
|
|
Milledge has to clear waivers. I'd guess someone else takes a chance with him.
|
| # ? Apr 7, 2011 15:58 |
|
|
wOBA is a rate stat, so you have to take into consideration the amount of PAs they were able to sustain that level of production. By BBRef WAR, Hanley was a 7+ Wins player 3 years in a row, mostly on the strength of putting up that .950 OPS in 650-700 PAs compared to 550. Tulo might be a better player, but in terms of value provided to this point far he's a touch behind either of the other two because he hasn't been able to stay on the field.
|
| # ? Apr 7, 2011 15:58 |
|
|
Pumpkin McPastry posted:If we're talking about anywhere remotely comparable bats, Tulo is an elite defensive SS which is insanely valuable on its own. wOBA isn't park adjusted. Also, apparently WAR isn't either, unless they updated their formula so it uses wRC+ instead of wOBA. Here is a chart code:edit: added games played. Tulo definitely has an issue staying healthy. Note that the 122 for Longo in his age 22 season was because they waited to call him up. I think. Also Joe Posnanski's list had some stupid stuff in it. Matt Cain is one of the best 30 players in baseball? He's Real Good, but he's a known quantity in this point of his career, and it's not top 30 in baseball. OdinsBeard fucked around with this message at Apr 7, 2011 around 17:08 |
| # ? Apr 7, 2011 16:56 |
|
|
Whats the reason for Prince Fielder's Amazing Season/Middle of the Road Season/Amazing Season/Middle of the Road Season over the past four years?
|
| # ? Apr 7, 2011 18:01 |
|
|
chrysamere posted:Whats the reason for Prince Fielder's Amazing Season/Middle of the Road Season/Amazing Season/Middle of the Road Season over the past four years? probably just natural year-to-year variance, though his walk rate was really high last year so maybe he's being pitched around more often
|
| # ? Apr 7, 2011 18:21 |
|
|
chrysamere posted:Whats the reason for Prince Fielder's Amazing Season/Middle of the Road Season/Amazing Season/Middle of the Road Season over the past four years? the bi-annual milwaukee sausagefest is what motivates prince to mash dingers
|
| # ? Apr 7, 2011 19:07 |
|
|
Tulo plays half his game at Coors which boost his non-contextualized stats.
|
| # ? Apr 7, 2011 23:20 |
|
|
So I always see people posting about how Joe Posnanski says RBIs aren't that valuable of a stat when evaluating a player but why in something like this SI article does he frequently use RBIs to prop a player value up? Is it more writing for the audience or am I just taking things out of context?
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 00:31 |
|
|
nnnAdam posted:Is it more writing for the audience Almost certainly this, he's just offering up stats he thinks his readers are interested in. Especially since the first mention of RBI on that page is him saying "I put almost no weight on RBIs"
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 00:37 |
|
|
A drat FOG posted:Almost certainly this, he's just offering up stats he thinks his readers are interested in. Especially since the first mention of RBI on that page is him saying "I put almost no weight on RBIs" That's what I figured. With the preface about how little weight he puts into RBIs it just seemed odd that he mentions them about 10 times throughout the article.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 00:39 |
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Tulo plays half his game at Coors which boost his non-contextualized stats. Maybe you're trolling, but isn't Coors roughly a normal stadium now?
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:15 |
|
|
chrysamere posted:Maybe you're trolling, but isn't Coors roughly a normal stadium now? It's still a large hitters park. It's not the complete and total bandbox it has been in the past but it was still twice as strong a hitters park as any other in 2010.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:17 |
|
|
Bob Shabazz posted:It's still a large hitters park. It's not the complete and total bandbox it has been in the past but it was still twice as strong a hitters park as any other in 2010. Yeah. The humidor de-juiced the baseballs, but they still travel 7% farther or something due to altitude and the park is loving BABIP/double/triple city because it's so big.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:18 |
|
|
chrysamere posted:Maybe you're trolling, but isn't Coors roughly a normal stadium now? Coors has never been out of the top five in runs for park factor in the last decade
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:19 |
|
|
Expanding on the Coors discussion... Aside from the atmosphere which they've tried to neutralize, what makes it so hitter friendly? The dimensions don't seem that crazy, and the CF wall doesn't seem silly either. Basically, I'd like to see the amount of area for each ballpark. Does such a thing exist?
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:23 |
|
|
Its a mile in the sky
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:25 |
|
|
Mr. Fahrenheit posted:Its a mile in the sky Sure, but doesn't the humidor kill that effect? If so, there must be something to its dimensions that gives hitters an advantage. If not, why not...'turn up' the humidor?
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:27 |
|
|
Abel Wingnut posted:Sure, but doesn't the humidor kill that effect? If so, there must be something to its dimensions that gives hitters an advantage. If not, why not...'turn up' the humidor? No. Before there was a humidor, the altitude would dry out the balls very fast, making them harder. This had two effects: first, It made them hard to grip for pitchers, and thus harder to throw breaking balls, and second, it juiced them. The ball still carries because the air is thinner because of the altitude. Also, it is a pretty big park. They knew the altitude would make balls travel farther so they tried to compensate by making the walls farther out, for all the good it did them.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:30 |
|
|
Abel Wingnut posted:Sure, but doesn't the humidor kill that effect? If so, there must be something to its dimensions that gives hitters an advantage. If not, why not...'turn up' the humidor? e: Aaaaaaaaand beaten e2: The polar opposite, PETCO Park, the reason it is so pitcher friendly is because it a) at sea-level, b) next to the ocean therefore the air has a lot of salt in it, and c) generally cooler than most ballparks esp. during summer months JediGandalf fucked around with this message at Apr 8, 2011 around 03:40 |
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:33 |
|
|
JediGandalf posted:Humidor helps make the balls heavier so that they don't travel as far. However, the key fact is that it is 1 mile high. The air density is much lower so there is less friction impeding the flight of the ball. So why not make the ball a tad bit 'heavier'? Or is it just a ballpark quirk at this point?
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:36 |
|
|
Bob Shabazz posted:It's still a large hitters park. It's not the complete and total bandbox it has been in the past but it was still twice as strong a hitters park as any other in 2010. I thought the Rangers stadium was by far the worst now? Also, going by pure OBP, why doesn't Pujols bat leadoff? If not Pujols, why wouldn't 2004 Barry Bonds bat leadoff either? chrysamere fucked around with this message at Apr 8, 2011 around 03:40 |
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:37 |
|
|
Abel Wingnut posted:So why not make the ball a tad bit 'heavier'? Or is it just a ballpark quirk at this point? I don't think they could do this without having special balls made. Plus, there's no reason too at this point. It's an offensive ballpark, but it's not ridiculous like it used to be. edit: the humidor doesn't make them heavier, it's just a room that maintains a certain level humidity, I don't think turning up the humidity would make them 'heavier'
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:38 |
|
|
chrysamere posted:I thought the Rangers stadium was by far the worst now? http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor/_/year/2010 BBRef has Arlington at 105/104, Coors at 115/115. And why they don't is because of old-school belief that they want runners on for those big hitters. It's silly.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:40 |
|
|
Deathlove posted:And why they don't is because of old-school belief that they want runners on for those big hitters. It's silly. So it would actually be smartest to have Pujols bat leadoff? I feel if that actually happened, it would be national news.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:43 |
|
|
Abel Wingnut posted:So why not make the ball a tad bit 'heavier'? Or is it just a ballpark quirk at this point? OdinsBeard posted:edit: the humidor doesn't make them heavier, it's just a room that maintains a certain level humidity, I don't think turning up the humidity would make them 'heavier'  ). You're probably right that it adds a negligible weight but makes the baseballs easier for pitchers.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:46 |
|
|
JediGandalf posted:What OdinsBeard said. You'd have "special baseballs" and even if Selig can be Jedi Mind Tricked into doing that, you'd start throwing off a lot of stats. Yeah, I think you're right, if the balls are drying out then they're losing moisture. But the addition of weight isn't the point, it's that the humidor keeps them from being juiced.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:49 |
|
|
chrysamere posted:So it would actually be smartest to have Pujols bat leadoff? I feel if that actually happened, it would be national news. I don't think it would be the smartest because then he's guaranteed one plate appearance per game with the bases empty, which you don't want happening with your best power hitter. Better to stick him somewhere 2nd through 4th so he'll have a non-zero chance of having runners on the first time he comes up in a game. I think the rest of the roster would have to all be terrible at getting on base before you'd consider putting him first just for those few extra PAs over the course of the season. edit: There are definitely some teams out there that could benefit from bumping their 3-4 hitters up to 1-2 but I don't think Pujols is an example of that, since at the very least Holliday and Rasmus can get on base at a good rate and have less power. Tales of Woe fucked around with this message at Apr 8, 2011 around 03:54 |
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:50 |
|
|
Tiny Torso posted:I think the rest of the roster would have to all be terrible at getting on base before you'd consider putting him first just for those few extra PAs over the course of the season. I have news for you...
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:52 |
|
|
Groucho Marxist posted:I have news for you... I have to admit, it is strange that Holliday bats after Pujols. I know it's TLR being TLR, but still. And this is not to mention the numerous other oddities TLR brings to the game.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 03:54 |
|
|
Abel Wingnut posted:Sure, but doesn't the humidor kill that effect? If so, there must be something to its dimensions that gives hitters an advantage. If not, why not...'turn up' the humidor? The fences being really deep makes for a huge outfield for non-homeruns to fall into and roll a while.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 04:26 |
|
|
So, you want a stupid question? I got some. I'll start easy (for you guys). How do I read the score?!? I turn on a game, and there's a ton of numbers! I just want to know who's winning! Cut me some slack... I'm a Pirates [almost] fan and we have been losing for 18 years. But I thought I'd give us a try this year since I like sports, and like going to the games. But I never have a clue what's going on. We usually only go if there's a concert after. Ok, lemme have it.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 12:03 |
|
|
Abel Wingnut posted:Expanding on the Coors discussion... The definition of a large/pitcher friendly ballpark would probably be agreed to be Petco, which measures 336-378-396-387-322. A good example of a bandbox is the Reds' Great American Ballpark which measures 328-365-404-365-325. Coors Field measures 347-390-415-382-350. Ranking, size wise, thats 2nd-1st-3rd-3rd-2nd. Wrigley is slightly deeper down both lines, but extremely shallow down the power alleys (350 and 368 feet respectively). Comerica park is deeper to center and right center, but is shallower down the lines and the LF power alley. Minute Maid park is much deeper in center but is practically the polo grounds with a 315-335-436-365-326. And of course Petco is slightly deeper in the RF alley. So yeah. Coors field is probably overall the largest ball-park in major league baseball. Plus, the aforementioned extra distance on a ball due to slightly lessened air resistance means the ball travels faster and falls faster. This means that while Coors may not play as homer heavy as it once did (it's still homer heavy, but not necessarily top of the league every year), it does allow a ton of triples and doubles. Anyways, regardless of all this, Tulo owns, but he needs to stay healthy and produce for the whole year to be as good offensively as Longo and Han-ram. A more interesting discussion for me is Longoria vs Zimmerman.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 12:09 |
|
|
Laynee posted:So, you want a stupid question? I got some. I'll start easy (for you guys). How do I read the score?!? I turn on a game, and there's a ton of numbers! I just want to know who's winning! If you're looking at a final boxscore, the top numbers are for the away team and the bottom numbers are the home team. Going from left to right are the runs scored during that half inning (that go 9 innings and extra innings) (I'm at work so I can't post pics). The three numbers that are usually bunched together (l to r again) are the total runs scored for the team, the number of hits the team had, and errors made on the field.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 12:29 |
|
|
N/M, TUS nailed it pretty well. I would say to just ignore the error part of the score to avoid confusion (I mean, unless you're curious about that). ozymandius1024 fucked around with this message at Apr 8, 2011 around 12:50 |
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 12:47 |
|
|
Laynee posted:So, you want a stupid question? I got some. I'll start easy (for you guys). How do I read the score?!? I turn on a game, and there's a ton of numbers! I just want to know who's winning! If you're talking about a final box score, here's a key for you. The columns down list the per-game totals of the following stats AB - At Bats R - Runs H - Hits RBI - Runs Batted In BB - Walks (Base on Balls) SO - Strike Outs LOB - Left on Base AVG - Batting Average (Season aggregate) Any players that are indented in the lineup are pinch hitters or replacements (Pie was a replacement this game). Anyone that pinch runs would have an annotation at the bottom noting them. In the NL, the list of pitchers shows up even if they have no PAs. There are pitcher totals as well, not included but they show pitching stats. Hopefully this gives you at least a broad idea of what you're looking at.
|
| # ? Apr 8, 2011 12:52 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2013 05:17 |
|
|
I was at the Braves game yesterday and whenever Ryan Howard came up the Braves would go into this really weird shift. Freeman stayed right on first but Chipper was back some between first and second and Gonzo was the only guy between second and third. Was this just more or less an extreme shift because it was kind of odd to see.
|
| # ? Apr 9, 2011 16:18 |
|
