This is the Braves best lineup since 2003.

[Super]

Yes. Correct.

i was pretty lost, i suppose that was an attempt at an insult.

[thewupk]

I think one promising thing for Atlanta is that they had 4 players with high differentials on the bad luck side in xwOBA vs wOBA.

1. Ozuna .046
7. Swanson .031
30. D'Arnaud .02
43. Acuna .0197

They have no one on the roster that was particularly lucky in that regard, at least that had qualifying PA.

I remember the stretch Acuna had hitting seeds right at people early in the season and people talking like he was a bust.

[Southcack77]

vs RHP

1. Acuna RF
2. Albies 2B
3. Freeman 1B
4. Ozuna DH
5. Puig LF
6. D'Arnaud C (Flowers had 111 wRC+ vs RHP last season, but that is reverse of his usual split. Not a huge difference in last 3 years of numbers 88 vs 82).
7. Camargo 3B
8. Swanson SS
9. Inciarte CF


Camargo really doesn't do much vs RHP, so this is a place where Riley could get starts even though Riley was lost this past year. This requires Riley to improve. I kind of think he doesn't really need to play much at 3B/DH, is my guess.

Duvall/Inciarte platoon historically makes sense, but if you get last season's version of Inciarte you might be looking for other options. I sort of think just playing Acuna in CF for a year and hoping for the best as far as defensive look might be fine, but you got Inciarte for better or worse so I guess you have to see what he's got.

This isn't really an imposing lineup vs RHP, but I don't guess it is bad either.

[SJ24]

Multiple posters OTB are telling me that RUNS, the single metric games are won and lost by, is not the most important statistic.

And they are running around proclaiming victory and intellectual superiority based on groupthink.

What a world. Mobs are bad- mobocratic rule is worse.

[SJ24]

Yes. Correct.

Nah.

[UNCBlue012]

I remember the stretch Acuna had hitting seeds right at people early in the season and people talking like he was a bust.

I remember that as well. The same goes for Dansby's entire season. lol

[Skeeter31]

Multiple posters OTB are telling me that RUNS, the single metric games are won and lost by, is not the most important statistic.

And they are running around proclaiming victory and intellectual superiority based on groupthink.

What a world. Mobs are bad- mobocratic rule is worse.

Correct, because in most scenarios, it’s not an individual statistic. It relies too heavily on the rest of the lineup driving you in.

From your logic, let’s run a what-if with Markakis, who you’ve done nothing but bad mouth for the last week. You would think he was the best player ever if the Braves batted him lead off and he walked or hit singles every time and then got driven in by Acuna, Albies, and Freddie? In that scenario, Markakis would be the best player right?

[thewupk]

vs RHP

1. Acuna RF
2. Albies 2B
3. Freeman 1B
4. Ozuna DH
5. Puig LF
6. D'Arnaud C (Flowers had 111 wRC+ vs RHP last season, but that is reverse of his usual split. Not a huge difference in last 3 years of numbers 88 vs 82).
7. Camargo 3B
8. Swanson SS
9. Inciarte CF


Camargo really doesn't do much vs RHP, so this is a place where Riley could get starts even though Riley was lost this past year. This requires Riley to improve. I kind of think he doesn't really need to play much at 3B/DH, is my guess.

Duvall/Inciarte platoon historically makes sense, but if you get last season's version of Inciarte you might be looking for other options. I sort of think just playing Acuna in CF for a year and hoping for the best as far as defensive look might be fine, but you got Inciarte for better or worse so I guess you have to see what he's got.

This isn't really an imposing lineup vs RHP, but I don't guess it is bad either.

Ender should still be a 3 WAR player when he's healthy. He played through injuries in the 1st half last year and his numbers suffered. But I am all in on maximizing the offense with Duvall against lefties and putting Ender in once the bullpen comes in.

[BeanieAntics]

Multiple posters OTB are telling me that RUNS, the single metric games are won and lost by, is not the most important statistic.

And they are running around proclaiming victory and intellectual superiority based on groupthink.

What a world. Mobs are bad- mobocratic rule is worse.

It might be useful to take mine and other people's argument and point out the things that you think we got wrong, rather than just making an assertion. Once again, are you seriously suggesting that a player's runs scored is the best, most descriptive statistic in terms of a player's talent? Because that is what is being discussed. We aren't discussing whether or not runs is the unit of scoring in baseball.

This isn't an example of groupthink/mob rule being in an ideological bubble. You are objectively wrong and you can be proven objectively wrong over and over again using both qualitative and quantitative evidence. You are so wrong, that Joe Simpson is in awe, gazing at the majesty of your wrongness.

[CyYoung31]

Multiple posters OTB are telling me that RUNS, the single metric games are won and lost by, is not the most important statistic.

And they are running around proclaiming victory and intellectual superiority based on groupthink.

What a world. Mobs are bad- mobocratic rule is worse.

Are you going to address my point about Markakis having significantly less ABs than the other two?

No? Because you have no choice but to take an L?Understood.

[Super]

Multiple posters OTB are telling me that RUNS, the single metric games are won and lost by, is not the most important statistic.

And they are running around proclaiming victory and intellectual superiority based on groupthink.

What a world. Mobs are bad- mobocratic rule is worse.

you are a glutton for the Ls. that's gonna be a yikes from me dog.
have mommy fix you a capri sun and put on cartoons for you. you'll be happier.

[mfree80]

To be fair... You guys are talking past each other about different things. Runs are a good measure of past performance, but other measures are better for predicting future performance.

Stop trying so hard to prove each other wrong and see what is actually being said. That would be helpful in the political discussion in the other thread as well.😊

[thewupk]

To be fair... You guys are talking past each other about different things. Runs are a good measure of past performance, but other measures are better for predicting future performance.

Stop trying so hard to prove each other wrong and see what is actually being said. That would be helpful in the political discussion in the other thread as well.��

No. An individual player's runs scored is not a good measure for anything related to that player. Just like RBI.

A good example I always use is Francoeur in 06. In 2006 he was a horrible hitter but he had 83 runs scored and 103 RBI. That's because Jeff was surrounded by really good hitters all year. So the few hits he did get were generally with someone on and the few times he was on base someone was driving him in. But neither of those things reflect on the hitter that Jeff was that year.

Sabremetrics has advanced offensive production down. There are a lot of new things coming out to try and predict future success but knowing how to value past performance? That's pretty clear at this point.

[CyYoung31]

To be fair... You guys are talking past each other about different things. Runs are a good measure of past performance, but other measures are better for predicting future performance.

Stop trying so hard to prove each other wrong and see what is actually being said. That would be helpful in the political discussion in the other thread as well.😊

You’re way off base.

One side is dealing in logic with data to back them up, and started off the discussion politely.

The other is basically putting their fingers in their ears and yelling “lalalala, LOL LIBTARDS”, and resorted to insults.

It’s pretty damn easy to see who is in the wrong here.

[50PoundHead]

No. An individual player's runs scored is not a good measure for anything related to that player. Just like RBI.

A good example I always use is Francoeur in 06. In 2006 he was a horrible hitter but he had 83 runs scored and 103 RBI. That's because Jeff was surrounded by really good hitters all year. So the few hits he did get were generally with someone on and the few times he was on base someone was driving him in. But neither of those things reflect on the hitter that Jeff was that year.

Sabremetrics has advanced offensive production down. There are a lot of new things coming out to try and predict future success but knowing how to value past performance? That's pretty clear at this point.

I agree with the general point being made, but good players tend to score more because they are on base more. Granted, someone has to drive them in, but you have to get on base in the first place for that to happen. That's the whole argument behind the value of OBP. Less so for RBIs, but again, guys who put the ball in play successfully with greater consistency tend to occupy spots in the line-up where they have the opportunity to drive in players with the ability to get on base. That's how line-ups are constructed.

But as for comparing Great Player A to Great Player B, runs scored and runs batted in aren't a very good way to gauge the relative merits of each player. Ted Williams would have scored a lot more runs if he would have been surrounded by a better supporting cast.

[mfree80]

Very well. Carry on with the bickering and name calling then.

[thewupk]

I agree with the general point being made, but good players tend to score more because they are on base more. Granted, someone has to drive them in, but you have to get on base in the first place for that to happen. That's the whole argument behind the value of OBP. Less so for RBIs, but again, guys who put the ball in play successfully with greater consistency tend to occupy spots in the line-up where they have the opportunity to drive in players with the ability to get on base. That's how line-ups are constructed.

But as for comparing Great Player A to Great Player B, runs scored and runs batted in aren't a very good way to gauge the relative merits of each player. Ted Williams would have scored a lot more runs if he would have been surrounded by a better supporting cast.

Sure. Just like players who hit a lot of homeruns tend to be good players. But at this point in player evaluation we should be beyond any sort of individual raw stat like this.

[CyYoung31]

Very well. Carry on with the bickering and name calling then.

Again, there’s only one person leading the charge on that.

[Skeeter31]

And it’s all moot now since the Puig deal has fallen through.

[SJ24]

BOOOOOO

We suck