Wednesday Astros, etc. Round Up
Because starting your morning with Astros and other baseball tidbits is a lot better than getting to all those action items you have waiting for you.
- This one if a few days late, but I found it clearing out my RSS feeds and it's loaded with goodies: managerial rankings and trade fodder surrounding Miggy:
The Astros would entertain a deal for him if they could get a pitching prospect in return. Tejada has made a nice comeback and is hitting very well.
I'm not sure I can actually imagine the Astros front office making this trade because Tejada just keeps adding to his popularity (think 11th inning walk off HR) and Drayton seems too PR focused to let Miggy go.
- Solomon weighs in on the Astros attendance issues and exemplifies how sarcasm should really be used in sports journalism (in my opinion).
- Richard Justice tries to use numbers to critique the Astros pitching, so I won't say too much, but....eeeesssh.
- Coop is finally giving consideration to rethinking the Astros running game, it's just a shame it took until we were thrown out for the cycle to come this realization.
- This just made my snarky saber-sense tingle. Lance Berkman, however, short circuits my saber-sense by favoring both the RBI and OBP.
- I'll file this under things that won't make me lose sleep.
2 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Hmm
I read through the snarky SABR link, and I gotta say it irked me a bit. I like the advent of statistical analysis in baseball, but what bothers me about a lot of these number crunchers and what is at the root of what drives a lot of “baseball people” to turn their nose up at the whole lot, is this notion that by just looking at numbers, you can explain everything there is to know about baseball and neatly categorize every inidividual and exclaim with a bony index finger held aloft that “the numbers don’t lie!”
Sure, I’ll agree that RBI is a relatively meaningless stat when it comes to evaluating a player’s ability. RELATIVELY meaningless, not meaningless. Taken as a lone stat, it tells you nothing definitive about a player, not even that he was simply at the right place at the right time. I’ll also agree that OBP and these fancy wOBP concoctions are much better statisics for evaluating a players offensive ability. There’s a leap in there that I didn’t quite fully grasp, which is how runs created is somehow weighted with wOBP, but it doesn’t stop me from resenting the fact that words like “over-rated” get tossed around to define players when the whole article seems to imply that certain statistics used in this analysis shouldn’t be used to define players..
Admittedly, my feathers didn’t really get ruffled until I saw Carlos Lee’s name. That’s the homer in me bleeding through. Certain guys get put in RBI situations for good reason. Certain abilities that would pump up your wOBP, like being able to leg out an infield single or draw a walk, have nothing to do with being able to put the ball in play to score a run with a man on thrid and less than two outs. I’m not saying that every guy at the top of their list has some innate ability to drive in runs in certain situations that people further down the list don’t, but the fact that such things are not accounted for and not acknowledged, yet the authors still portend to draw clear and unrefutable conclusions from their precious calculations, just rubs me the wrong way.
Okay, rant over. Thanks for the links. I like it when these spark some conversation. Work can be boring, and nobody here likes to talk about baseball.
Now that you mention it, I'll look at the article.
It seems to me that the guys identified as “overrated” tend to share a characteristic: their SLG% makes up a relatively larger proportion of their OPS than OBP. In effect, they are middle order hitters who get most of their OBP through Batting Average. The guys who are identified as “underrated” tend to fit one of two types: middle order hitters with very high OBP (in addition to good slugging%) or lead off type hitters with great OBP and decent slugging% (e.g., Biggio, Sizemore, etc.). Maybe the problem is using the words over- or under- rated . That assumes that we don’t understand the differences between types of hitters. Are “underrated” (using their designation) hitters like Berkman and Pujols more valuable than a supposed “overrated” hitter like Carlos Lee. Sure. I think most baseball fans understand that Berkman and Pujols (both of whom may be on a Hall of Fame track) are more valuable than Carlos Lee. But that doesn’t mean that Carlos Lee isn’t valuable. He has significant value as a hitter. Whether he is under or over rated depends on your assumption about how he was rated in the first place.

by 

























