Absolutely. There's all kinds of "numbers." Which ones are you referring to?

 

BA, WAR, OBP, SLG, & OPS....The most important ones.

Was listening to some baseball guys yesterday. Not fans of baseball, people that do it for a living. They mentioned all the data being thrown around these days and agreed that there is so much data, they really aren't sure what's truly useful and what's not. By "they" they were referring to scouts, coaches, managers...etc.

Was listening to some baseball guys yesterday. Not fans of baseball, people that do it for a living. They mentioned all the data being thrown around these days and agreed that there is so much data, they really aren't sure what's truly useful and what's not. By "they" they were referring to scouts, coaches, managers...etc.

 

I don't necessarily disagree with that, however I will say that every scenario/situation, decision, or event not just in baseball or sports, but really in life, can be broken down to some sort of mathematical formula or equation. Sifting through them and finding out which method provides the most accurate/meaningful results is the key.

 

Having said that, I feel of all the data out right now, Sabremetrics is the best method for evaluating baseball. There's also a new book out called Baseball GPA: A New Statistical Approach to Performance and Strategy that I'm intrigued by. It seems to take Bill James Sabremetric method and expand upon it.

 

An excerpt from the Editor's Note, that really intrigues me:

 

How was offensive productivity affected during the pitching-dominated years from 1970 to 1984 and the Steroid Era (defined here as the 1994-2004 seasons)? During what year did steroid use most affect the game? How much of the increased offensive productivity seen from 1994 to 2004 was due to steroids? Gross Productivity Average can answer these questions using a technique to filter out the other changes occurring over time.

Some baseball strategies have been endlessly debated without any consensus reached s to how or when they should be applied--or whether they should be applied at all. Where should the best hitter bat in the lineup? When should a hitter be intentionally walked? When should a sacrifice bunt be attempted? How often does a runner need to be successful when advancing a base in order to justify the risk?

This book will describe a computerized game simulation, developed independently of GPA, that allows these questions to be answered and definitive guidelines created. As the simulation demonstrates, the number of runs a team scores and the number of games it wins are determined by the GPA of the players in the lineup. The simulator shows that every player with the same GPA is equally productive for the team no matter how many home runs or singles he hits, no matter how many times he strikes out or walks, no matter

how many double plays he hits into.

I don't necessarily disagree with that, however I will say that every scenario/situation, decision, or event not just in baseball or sports, but really in life, can be broken down to some sort of mathematical formula or equation. Sifting through them and finding out which method provides the most accurate/meaningful results is the key.

 

Having said that, I feel of all the data out right now, Sabremetrics is the best method for evaluating baseball. There's also a new book out called Baseball GPA: A New Statistical Approach to Performance and Strategy that I'm intrigued by. It seems to take Bill James Sabremetric method and expand upon it.

 

An excerpt from the Editor's Note, that really intrigues me:

 

How was offensive productivity affected during the pitching-dominated years from 1970 to 1984 and the Steroid Era (defined here as the 1994-2004 seasons)? During what year did steroid use most affect the game? How much of the increased offensive productivity seen from 1994 to 2004 was due to steroids? Gross Productivity Average can answer these questions using a technique to filter out the other changes occurring over time.

Some baseball strategies have been endlessly debated without any consensus reached s to how or when they should be applied--or whether they should be applied at all. Where should the best hitter bat in the lineup? When should a hitter be intentionally walked? When should a sacrifice bunt be attempted? How often does a runner need to be successful when advancing a base in order to justify the risk?

This book will describe a computerized game simulation, developed independently of GPA, that allows these questions to be answered and definitive guidelines created. As the simulation demonstrates, the number of runs a team scores and the number of games it wins are determined by the GPA of the players in the lineup. The simulator shows that every player with the same GPA is equally productive for the team no matter how many home runs or singles he hits, no matter how many times he strikes out or walks, no matter

how many double plays he hits into.

 

This is where I'm skeptical. What data really matters?

BA, WAR, OBP, SLG, & OPS....The most important ones.

 

Great. Now we've got something we can dive into.

 

When you are evaluating him are you evaluating him compared to all MLB players or just second basemen? Are you evaluating him relative to his contract or just relative to output compared to other players? Are we using just last year to determine if he should be kept?

 

That's why I asked "what numbers."

 

I would argue that his offensive numbers, while down this past season, are strong relative to the position over the past couple of seasons. In addition, you can't discount the runs saved he adds.

 

I'd trade him in a heartbeat IF I thought I could use that annual salary in a better way but I'm NOT getting rid of him just because of his 2013 stats.

This is where I'm skeptical. What data really matters?

 

That's the key. Of all the baseball data present, I feel the Sabremetrics method encompasses the most important aspects. That and the fact that it's had some pretty solid real-life results gives it a pretty good chunk of credibility IMO.

 

I think it really comes down to personal preference though. If someone says HRs or RBIs are the most important piece of data, you can argue Sabremetrics with them till your blue in the face, they'll never accept it.

I'm aware of the hefty contract. Question is, who are you going to get to replace him with as much production at that position? Offensively and defensively.

 

If they trade him, they may get worse at 2B, IMO.

 

But, I'll reserve my opinion until A - he is traded and B - a replacement is signed.

Great. Now we've got something we can dive into.

 

When you are evaluating him are you evaluating him compared to all MLB players or just second basemen? Are you evaluating him relative to his contract or just relative to output compared to other players? Are we using just last year to determine if he should be kept?

 

That's why I asked "what numbers."

 

I would argue that his offensive numbers, while down this past season, are strong relative to the position over the past couple of seasons. In addition, you can't discount the runs saved he adds.

 

I'd trade him in a heartbeat IF I thought I could use that annual salary in a better way but I'm NOT getting rid of him just because of his 2013 stats.

 

Defensively he saved 1 whole run more than the average 2B this past season. I don't think that plays much into it.

 

I think you have to look at it all, and take the intangibles into account as well. And that's why he has to be moved IMO.

Defensively he saved 1 whole run more than the average 2B this past season. I don't think that plays much into it.

 

I think you have to look at it all, and take the intangibles into account as well. And that's why he has to be moved IMO.

I'm not in the mood to argue with you, but that stat is the biggest crock of crap on paper.

I'm not in the mood to argue with you, but that stat is the biggest crock of crap on paper.

 

You're entitled to be wrong. :thumb:

They made the playoffs and almost won the division. I wish the Cubs could have this type of discussion. Never happy. Hey reds fans, be glad you aint a cub fan.

Defensively he saved 1 whole run more than the average 2B this past season. I don't think that plays much into it.

 

I think you have to look at it all, and take the intangibles into account as well. And that's why he has to be moved IMO.

 

That stat is saying that BP saved his team 1 more run over the entire length of the season compared to the average 2nd baseman?

Defensively he saved 1 whole run more than the average 2B this past season. I don't think that plays much into it.

 

I think you have to look at it all, and take the intangibles into account as well. And that's why he has to be moved IMO.

 

Well, with the way the Reds offense was at times during the past year...1 run on defense could be huge. The Reds played in 49 1-run games last year, winning 27 of them...and STILL finished 7 games back of the Cards. Unless you sign someone who's lights out offensively, I just don't see the addition by subtraction.

 

Phillips was 3rd among NL 2B in hits, runs and HR's, and 1st among them in RBI's. And there was only 1 guy that played in more than 120 games at that position (in the NL) that hit .300 or more (so it wasn't like everybody else it raking it.)

 

So, please tell me, who are we supposed to bring in that will have better overall results? (Not trying to be coy. I'd just really like to know.)

Well, with the way the Reds offense was at times during the past year...1 run on defense could be huge. The Reds played in 49 1-run games last year, winning 27 of them...and STILL finished 7 games back of the Cards. Unless you sign someone who's lights out offensively, I just don't see the addition by subtraction.

 

Phillips was 3rd among NL 2B in hits, runs and HR's, and 1st among them in RBI's. And there was only 1 guy that played in more than 120 games at that position (in the NL) that hit .300 or more (so it wasn't like everybody else it raking it.)

 

So, please tell me, who are we supposed to bring in that will have better overall results? (Not trying to be coy. I'd just really like to know.)

 

You left off his awful OBP, his poor WAR, his albatross of a contract, his age, and his diminishing skill set. All of those factors need to be considered as well.

 

At 2B, they probably won't find a guy that by himself replaces the RBI numbers or is quite as good defensively. What they will do, is create a bit of payroll flexibility that would potentially allow them to extend guys like Bailey or Latos, or address problem areas elsewhere such as LF, or potentially even have a shot at resigning Choo.

 

I know people don't like or want to admit it, but BP essentially ended his time as a Red when he called his boss a liar to the media. If he was as great as many Reds fans think he is, why is the expected market for him so bleak? Wouldn't teams be lining up to trade for him, if he was so much better than the other options?

You're entitled to be wrong. :thumb:

You're also not able to discern the game through your pupils. So there's that.