8/4 vs Arizona

[Brock Holt]

Farrell continues to show how stupid he is. This is a perfect chance to ease in Rubby, instead he wasted our closer in a 4 run game for no reason. Good logic

[SoxFanForsyth]

No it doesn't. If you have an .800 OPS, you're a good hitter.

 

You're a league average hitter with an .800 OPS at 1B. You're an elite hitter if you have a .800 OPS as a C.

 

To say that positional value doesn't matter is just silly.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

Remy can't go a game without saying some stupid

[SoxFanForsyth]

I'm not arguing that your statement is incorrect. In principle, your argument is absolutely correct. All i'm saying is that the formula isn't perfect, and weird deviations are known to appear in parks with flukey or extreme factors.

 

Well you could argue the exact same thing regarding the entire premise of OPS, since hits are both subjective (to scorers discretion) and randomly distributed (see BABIP).

[Emmz]

Position definitely matters. Do you think Pedroia would get 100 million dollars if he played first base?

 

He hasn't even been as good a hitter as Napoli, so uhhh, probably not right?

 

Napoli's been a good hitter this year regardless of what position he plays.

[User Name]

No it doesn't. If you have an .800 OPS, you're a good hitter.

 

I've seen you use WAR before in arguments. Do you like WAR as a statistic to measure a player's value? If you do, then this statement directly contradicts the formula used to calculate a player's WAR, where the position he plays in either sums or detracts value from a player's overall sum total value.

 

Position matters. An .800 OPS SS is not the same as an .800 OPS first baseman.

 

And for the record, the blanket statement "An .800 OPS hitter is a good hitter" is also incorrect. If a player has an .800 OPS but with a .310 OBP, that player is not likely to be very productive in general terms.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

Tick another day off the calender. Highfivecity

[italstallianion]

See: 7/6 @ LAA

 

Is one nightmare game worth the additional risk of injury from repeated use of one pitcher? Granted, Koji doesn't throw hard and his lack of walks leads to low pitch counts, but with Goldschmidt batting 9th in the inning, why not give Rubby De La Rosa the nod? That was his 52nd appearance on the season, in a 4-0 game against a mediocre offense.

[Emmz]

You're a league average hitter with an .800 OPS at 1B. You're an elite hitter if you have a .800 OPS as a C.

 

To say that positional value doesn't matter is just silly.

 

Why does it matter. You keep saying it, but you don't explain why it matters.

 

.800 OPS is above average, period.

[italstallianion]

Not that my opinion matters but player position is huge when comparing offensive production and compensation.

[User Name]

Well you could argue the exact same thing regarding the entire premise of OPS, since hits are both subjective (to scorers discretion) and randomly distributed (see BABIP).

 

Yeah but it's a lot easier to call fluke by looking at a player's BABIP (which is the first thing we do when we smell fluke) than calculating the impact of standard deviation on the formulaic calculation of a player's wRC+ or OPS+. I also disagree that scorers have an impact on overall OPS calculations.

[sk7326]

If Gonzalez is considered mediocre, what is Napoli considered?

 

Napoli has been okay, on pace for being a 3 win player, maybe a bit less. For 1/5 of Gonzalez' salary pretty good. Gonzalez was a case of the Red Sox (and frankly the industry) being fooled into thinking he was an amazing 1B when he is merely a good one. Most of the OBP was from being pitched around so much in San Diego - and his approach in 2012 was awful for so much of the season. He is a good 1B, but not Joey Votto or 2009 Albert Pujols, who he was being paid like. fWAR FWIW has Napoli at 2.2 and Gonzalez at 2.3. Really Gonzalez decline from his MVP-flavored San Diego/2011 Boston days has been sharp. His fielding and athleticism (by 1B standards) will ease the decline but his days as a true monster are probably done.

[User Name]

Tick another day off the calender. Highfivecity

 

Uehara had to throw 14 pitches instead of his usual five. I am disappointed.

[italstallianion]

Why does it matter. You keep saying it, but you don't explain why it matters.

 

.800 OPS is above average, period.

 

I don't understand what you want SFF to do. I think he already explained why it matters. Yes, you are correct an .800 OPS is above average (correct). But everyone else is correct that an .800 OPS is "meh" for a 1st baseman but would make you elite for a C/SS. That's why player position matters. The type of guys that can play SS/C aren't often the type that can hit with a .800 OPS, therefore they are rarer. .800 hitting OPS are fairly common and as such not remarkable, and certainly not worth the same amount of money.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Yeah but it's a lot easier to call fluke by looking at a player's BABIP (which is the first thing we do when we smell fluke) than calculating the impact of standard deviation on the formulaic calculation of a player's wRC+ or OPS+. I also disagree that scorers have an impact on overall OPS calculations.

 

So you think Ellsbury's RBI knock that Parra lost in the sun today was legit?

[User Name]

So you think Ellsbury's RBI knock that Parra lost in the sun today was legit?

 

How many times over a 600 PA (conservative estimate) season is that going to happen?

[sk7326]

Why does it matter. You keep saying it, but you don't explain why it matters.

 

.800 OPS is above average, period.

 

OPS is a terrible stat - but good training wheels. .800 is probably a good OPS, but without the components there is no value.

 

Reasons OPS is lousy, without getting into fancy reasons like park effects:

 

1. Different denominators: maximum OBP is 1, maximum SLG = 4 (hit a homerun every time up)

2. OBP is WAY more important than slugging - roughly 40% more by the regression standards. Theoretically this is clear too. A 1.000 SLG team could hit 1 homerun every inning. A 1.000 OBP team would never be retired.

3. SLG treats all bases equally - when that is not true when considering the impact on scoring a run.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

Two of the most knowledgeable posters going at it. Who shall come out victorious? Wait and find out on the next episode of "Talksox Z"

[User Name]

OPS is a terrible stat - but good training wheels. .800 is probably a good OPS, but without the components there is no value.

 

Reasons OPS is lousy, without getting into fancy reasons like park effects:

 

1. Different denominators: maximum OBP is 1, maximum SLG = 4 (hit a homerun every time up)

2. OBP is WAY more important than slugging - roughly 40% more by the regression standards. Theoretically this is clear too. A 1.000 SLG team could hit 1 homerun every inning. A 1.000 OBP team would never be retired.

3. SLG treats all bases equally - when that is not true when considering the impact on scoring a run.

 

That's why you have wRC+. I was the one to bring up OPS, mainly because of the simplicity of comparing hitters using OPS, without having to complicate production standards.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Is one nightmare game worth the additional risk of injury from repeated use of one pitcher? Granted, Koji doesn't throw hard and his lack of walks leads to low pitch counts, but with Goldschmidt batting 9th in the inning, why not give Rubby De La Rosa the nod? That was his 52nd appearance on the season, in a 4-0 game against a mediocre offense.

 

I'm not defending it, I'm just saying he's got plenty of reason to bring in the guy. Not to mention you're going on the road in a 3 game set against the worst team in the MLB (Astros have an 85 wRC+). So, there's a pretty good chance that there won't be a save opportunity over the next 3 days. Go ahead and notch the W today.

 

Plus RDLR walks quite a few hitters. He's better suited for a 7th inning stint to get his feet wet, where the team has some time to react if needed.

[User Name]

Two of the most knowledgeable posters going at it. Who shall come out victorious? Wait and find out on the next episode of "Talksox Z"

 

"Special WAR cannon!"

[sk7326]

I don't understand what you want SFF to do. I think he already explained why it matters. Yes, you are correct an .800 OPS is above average (correct). But everyone else is correct that an .800 OPS is "meh" for a 1st baseman but would make you elite for a C/SS. That's why player position matters. The type of guys that can play SS/C aren't often the type that can hit with a .800 OPS, therefore they are rarer. .800 hitting OPS are fairly common and as such not remarkable, and certainly not worth the same amount of money.

 

Position matters a lot - that is the entire foundation of VORP and fancier things. Even if you don't consider anything else - the number of CFs who could hit like Ellsbury did in 2010 vs the number of LFs is a huge difference, and that has to be considered.

 

That is the biggest part of the Boegarts prospect story, isn't it? If he is a full time SS, he is slugging at a position where nobody is getting production, while the Sox could stock 3B with an average guy and together they'd put together much more punch than Boegarts and an average SS.

[italstallianion]

OPS is a terrible stat - but good training wheels. .800 is probably a good OPS, but without the components there is no value.

 

Reasons OPS is lousy, without getting into fancy reasons like park effects:

 

1. Different denominators: maximum OBP is 1, maximum SLG = 4 (hit a homerun every time up)

2. OBP is WAY more important than slugging - roughly 40% more by the regression standards. Theoretically this is clear too. A 1.000 SLG team could hit 1 homerun every inning. A 1.000 OBP team would never be retired.

3. SLG treats all bases equally - when that is not true when considering the impact on scoring a run.

 

 

This is a really good post. Very well thought out and articulated.

[User Name]

Position matters a lot - that is the entire foundation of VORP and fancier things. Even if you don't consider anything else - the number of CFs who could hit like Ellsbury did in 2010 vs the number of LFs is a huge difference, and that has to be considered.

 

That is the biggest part of the Boegarts prospect story, isn't it? If he is a full time SS, he is slugging at a position where nobody is getting production, while the Sox could stock 3B with an average guy and together they'd put together much more punch than Boegarts and an average SS.

 

You mean 2011, and you would certainly be correct.

 

Again, a very big part of the WAR calculation (which has to be considered the premier overall-value encompassing stat today) is positional value calculation. With the exact same offensive and defensive numbers, a SS is always going to have a significantly higher WAR value than a 1B.

[sk7326]

That's why you have wRC+. I was the one to bring up OPS, mainly because of the simplicity of comparing hitters using OPS, without having to complicate production standards.

 

That's fine - wOBA works for me - and it does look like OBP statistically which makes things easier to explain. OPS is good for simplicity I suppose, but an .800 OPS guy who is not getting on 30% of the time. (Hello Pedro Alvarez) is creating a lot less punch than say Dustin Pedroia. Granted, Pedro Alvarez' hulk-smash factor with homeruns is fun to see.

[Emmz]

I don't understand what you want SFF to do. I think he already explained why it matters. Yes, you are correct an .800 OPS is above average (correct). But everyone else is correct that an .800 OPS is "meh" for a 1st baseman but would make you elite for a C/SS. That's why player position matters. The type of guys that can play SS/C aren't often the type that can hit with a .800 OPS, therefore they are rarer. .800 hitting OPS are fairly common and as such not remarkable, and certainly not worth the same amount of money.

 

It's not bad for a first baseman either, and it's pretty respectable overall. I'll take that production from anyone, and I think it's ridiculous to put a spoiler on everything he does because he's a first baseman. If someone's a good hitter, they're a good hitter and I don't ever really think about what position they're playing. If someone's hitting poorly, I don't give them an excuse because they're a f***ing shortstop either.

[SoxFanForsyth]

Why does it matter. You keep saying it, but you don't explain why it matters.

 

.800 OPS is above average, period.

 

So, when the AL league average SS has a .659 OPS, and the AL league average 1B has a .775 OPS, you're saying regardless of position, an .800 OPS provides the same value, regardless of whether a player is a SS or a 1B??

 

Come on. You cannot possibly be serious.

[SoxFanForsyth]

It's not bad for a first baseman either, and it's pretty respectable overall. I'll take that production from anyone, and I think it's ridiculous to put a spoiler on everything he does because he's a first baseman. If someone's a good hitter, they're a good hitter and I don't ever really think about what position they're playing. If someone's hitting poorly, I don't give them an excuse because they're a f***ing shortstop either.

 

I'm sorry, this is one of the most absolutely silly things I've ever heard in terms of any kind of baseball analysis.

[SoxFanForsyth]

That's fine - wOBA works for me - and it does look like OBP statistically which makes things easier to explain. OPS is good for simplicity I suppose, but an .800 OPS guy who is not getting on 30% of the time. (Hello Pedro Alvarez) is creating a lot less punch than say Dustin Pedroia. Granted, Pedro Alvarez' hulk-smash factor with homeruns is fun to see.

 

wRC+ is just the OPS+ of wOBA, just to let you know.

[sk7326]

You mean 2011, and you would certainly be correct.

 

Again, a very big part of the WAR calculation (which has to be considered the premier overall-value encompassing stat today) is positional value calculation. With the exact same offensive and defensive numbers, a SS is always going to have a significantly higher WAR value than a 1B.

 

WAR is probably the best - whichever publication's version you use. That said, definitely consult the components there too. If a guy's WAR is all on the defensive side - then his value has to be looked at skeptically. We know defensive measurement is light years better than it used to be - but it is still much flimsier than the offensive measurements. Of course when you are nearly twice as valuable as your peers like Mike Trout was last year, who cares.