GDT 4/5 - Colon @ deGrom

Enscheff said:
Kemp drove in 100 runs, but a better hitter would have driven in more given the same opportunities.

That's why literally nobody with any idea how to value baseball players use RBIs as a measure of productivity. The moment you bring up RBI is the same moment you discredit yourself in any discussion dealing with baseball analysis.
Click to expand...

Ok...you made the first comment that a better hitter would have driven more runs in than Kemp last year. Can you prove that? And please don't use a layer like trout because that's obvious.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
sure, but would someone who hit .300 in the same situations as Kemp not have relatively the same amount of runs batted in? even if that person didn't have that much power...
Click to expand...

The problem thethe has is that RBI is totally dependent on other factors outside of a hitters control. Freeman hasn't had 100 RBI since the last time the Braves were good. Does that make him a less of a hitter? Has he not been that good the last 3 years? RBI is a stat much like wins for pitchers. Totally useless when determining how good the individual is. The 'win' is a dependent on much more than what the pitcher does on the mound. Just like RBI is dependent on many variables on the offense. A stat that can suggest Kemp was better than Freeman in 2016 and that someone like Francoeur was better than Barry Bonds in 2007 is not a stat we should be actively looking at determine the worth of a hitter.
 
thewupk said:
The problem thethe has is that RBI is totally dependent on other factors outside of a hitters control. Freeman hasn't had 100 RBI since the last time the Braves were good. Does that make him a less of a hitter? Has he not been that good the last 3 years? RBI is a stat much like wins for pitchers. Totally useless when determining how good the individual is. The 'win' is a dependent on much more than what the pitcher does on the mound. Just like RBI is dependent on many variables on the offense. A stat that can suggest Kemp was better than Freeman in 2016 and that someone like Francoeur was better than Barry Bonds in 2007 is not a stat we should be actively looking at determine the worth of a hitter.
Click to expand...

Please find where I said that's the only relevant stat.
 
thethe said:
Ok...you made the first comment that a better hitter would have driven more runs in than Kemp last year. Can you prove that? And please don't use a layer like trout because that's obvious.
Click to expand...

I don't have to prove it, it's literally been proven for years now. Google "RBI stat" and you will see several links with titles stating the stat is useless.

Just because you either can't understand, or don't want to understand, doesn't make it any less of a fact. Whatever holes you think you're poking into the facts are completely irrelevant.

I realize you think you're being clever and inquisitive, but you're actually just being like the little kid that say "why?" to everything.
 
thethe said:
Please find where I said that's the only relevant stat.
Click to expand...

You didn't. But it's a worthless stat. It brings virtually zero value to a hitters ability. You only bring it up because it makes Kemp look good. Something you are desperately trying to do for some reason. Just a couple of years ago you would of hated Kemp on this team. The high K%, poor OBP, meh contact guy. When you were promoting speed and contact like it's the next best thing. Now that the Braves have been one of the hardest teams to strike out the past two years with one of the worst offenses I guess you have changed your tune. One day you will get it right.
 
thewupk said:
You didn't. But it's a worthless stat. It brings virtually zero value to a hitters ability. You only bring it up because it makes Kemp look good. Something you are desperately trying to do for some reason. Just a couple of years ago you would of hated Kemp on this team. The high K%, poor OBP, meh contact guy. When you were promoting speed and contact like it's the next best thing. Now that the Braves have been one of the hardest teams to strike out the past two years with one of the worst offenses I guess you have changed your tune. One day you will get it right.
Click to expand...

Haha I remember that tune from thethe. Derrrrrp!
 
quick look at Kemp last year. He had 34 or 35 (can't remember my number now) RBI's where bases were empty or just a runner on 1st. I feel these are the RBI's he should be credited with because a light hitting .300 hitter would not get these most likely. Yes, I know that hitter would still contribute to the offensive production..so I am not arguing for 'RBI'.. just offering another perspective.
 
bravesfanMatt said:
quick look at Kemp last year. He had 34 or 35 (can't remember my number now) RBI's where bases were empty or just a runner on 1st. I feel these are the RBI's he should be credited with because a light hitting .300 hitter would not get these most likely. Yes, I know that hitter would still contribute to the offensive production..so I am not arguing for 'RBI'.. just offering another perspective.
Click to expand...

That's where extra base power comes in. Power generates runs and is something this team needs more of. All of this is accounted for in WOBA though. It may be 'hypothetical' runs but it's based on what what hitters actually do. The teams with the highest WRC+ will score the most runs.
 
thewupk said:
That's where extra base power comes in. Power generates runs and is something this team needs more of. All of this is accounted for in WOBA though. It may be 'hypothetical' runs but it's based on what what hitters actually do. The teams with the highest WRC+ will score the most runs.
Click to expand...

But not in sequential order. Dbacks and Rockies score more because of park adjustments despite having lower wrc+
 
Enscheff said:
Kemp drove in 100 runs, but a better hitter would have driven in more given the same opportunities. A better hitter in Kemp's slot would have allowed the Braves to score more runs overall, and win more games, and be a better team.

That's why literally nobody with any idea how to value baseball players use RBIs as a measure of productivity. The moment you bring up RBI is the same moment you discredit yourself in any discussion dealing with baseball analysis.

If you want to sit around the campfire talking baseball with Don Sutton and other nitwits, stick to talking about RBI. If you want to talk baseball with intelligent people, educate yourself.
Click to expand...

You've got a lot of hate built up in you. Don Sutton certainly isn't an advanced stats professor, but I find it hard to completely discount an MLB hall of famer when it comes to knowledge of the game.
 
msstate7 said:
You've got a lot of hate built up in you. Don Sutton certainly isn't an advanced stats professor, but I find it hard to completely discount an MLB hall of famer when it comes to knowledge of the game.
Click to expand...

Being good at playing the game is not the same as knowing how to assign value to players. I'm not surprised you are unable to make the distinction between the two skill sets.

Ever notice how MLB FOs have almost zero ex-players? Remember who the last ex-player GM was? Dave Stewart.
 
Enscheff said:
Being good at playing the game is not the same as knowing how to assign value to players. I'm not surprised you are unable to make the distinction between the two skill sets.

Ever notice how MLB FOs have almost zero ex-players? Remember who the last ex-player GM was? Dave Stewart.
Click to expand...

Maybe so, I don't really think too much of or even care. Are ex-MLB stars even applying for FO jobs? Regardless, I think personal experience of guys like don at least give them enough background to have an opinion that doesn't get them labeled an idiot by a guy whose closest connection to MLB is reading fangraphs
 
thethe said:
But not in sequential order. Dbacks and Rockies score more because of park adjustments despite having lower wrc+
Click to expand...

Right. When looking at extreme hitting or pitching parks you have to take this into account. 95% of teams aren't in these situations though.
 
msstate7 said:
Maybe so, I don't really think too much of or even care. Are ex-MLB stars even applying for FO jobs? Regardless, I think personal experience of guys like don at least give them enough background to have an opinion that doesn't get them labeled an idiot by a guy whose closest connection to MLB is reading fangraphs
Click to expand...

Don Sutton isn't an idiot but he's not right either if that's his opinion. I haven't listened to radio in ages so I have no idea what he says on the air. I would say that he is ignorant though if he's a promoter of RBI. He grew up and played through an era where it was widely believed that was what mattered among other things.

Baseball more than any other sport is numbers based. It's always been that way and always will be that way. What's changed is the actual numbers we use and they are still changing as we get a better understanding of it.
 
msstate7 said:
Maybe so, I don't really think too much of or even care. Are ex-MLB stars even applying for FO jobs? Regardless, I think personal experience of guys like don at least give them enough background to have an opinion that doesn't get them labeled an idiot by a guy whose closest connection to MLB is reading fangraphs
Click to expand...

Don Sutton is a good source if you want to know how to throw a curveball. Or how to deal with the rigors of making 30+ starts a year. Or where to eat in various MLB cities.

He is not competent in assigning value to players or building an MLB roster. Almost every other statement he makes proves this point.

Are you capable of making the distinction between these skill sets? Is this something you can manage to wrap your severely limited mind around?
 
thewupk said:
Don Sutton isn't an idiot but he's not right either if that's his opinion. I haven't listened to radio in ages so I have no idea what he says on the air. I would say that he is ignorant though if he's a promoter of RBI. He grew up and played through an era where it was widely believed that was what mattered among other things.

Baseball more than any other sport is numbers based. It's always been that way and always will be that way. What's changed is the actual numbers we use and they are still changing as we get a better understanding of it.
Click to expand...

You're right... they are changing. 20 years from now the new advanced stats' guys will look at the geniuses today as cavemen, much like the advanced stats' guys look at traditionalists today.
 
Enscheff said:
Don Sutton is a good source if you want to know how to throw a curveball. Or how to deal with the rigors of making 30+ starts a year. Or where to eat in various MLB cities.

He is not competent in assigning value to players or building an MLB roster. Almost every other statement he makes proves this point.

Are you capable of making the distinction between these skill sets? Is this something you can manage to wrap your severely limited mind around?
Click to expand...

Sheeeeet, dude... you need to get laid haha
 
Enscheff said:
Don Sutton is a good source if you want to know how to throw a curveball. Or how to deal with the rigors of making 30+ starts a year. Or where to eat in various MLB cities.

He is not competent in assigning value to players or building an MLB roster. Almost every other statement he makes proves this point.

Are you capable of making the distinction between these skill sets? Is this something you can manage to wrap your severely limited mind around?
Click to expand...

Actually, he'd be a better source if you wanted to learn to doctor a baseball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top