chitownsportsfan

Looks good to me Greg. I'm going to be eating some crow if the team wins 100 games when I predicted 94 before the season started. Oh well, it will taste good with the Sox in the playoffs.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jul 12, 2006 -> 10:18 AM) I never claimed that I did not understand the "new stats." What I claimed is that the "new stats" are entirely inconclusive. Sure, OPS may be correlative to overall runs scored. However, that doesn't address several issues- it is entirely oversimplifying baseball by accepting the premise: "whichever offense scores the most runs overall is the best offense." Unfortunately, that simply is not true. There are no studies which show that a lineup laden with high-OPS hitters produce runs: 1)the most consistently; 2) most against elite pitching; 3) the most in "high stress" situations or environments (postseason); etc. Additionally, there is recent anecdotal evidence which shows that teams that rely simply on reaching base, play station-to-station baseball, and do not believe in "manufacturing runs" do not succeed in postseason baseball. The 04' Red Sox are probably the one example of one that has. In regards to Podsednik, as has been mentioned, no one is comparing him to Rickey Henderson. But there is no conclusive proof you can offer that shows that stacking your team with all OPS guys instead of any speed guys is optimal. Finally, for the people with access to updated advanced defensive metrics, could someone please look up Scottie's performance over the last 15 games or so (about the time Ozzie called him out about his defense). I would be willing to bet that his defense has improved markedly since about that time. There was actually a analysis done of the Sox offense last year that found although they scored less runs in 2005 than in 2004, they scored ~ 5 runs more consistantly, i.e. there was less dispersion in the offense. It was a pretty hot topic at the time in came out, I believe The Hard Ball Times (Studes) did the research and article. Of course there is merit to being able to "manufacture" a run, but if you play for 1 run, you're more likely to score only 1 run. I don't like giving away outs, especially early in the game. The Sox dominated the playoffs in 2005 because of pitching and an offense that suddenly caught fire by hitting home runs and getting on base. Anyways, I'm sick of arguing this point. I've spent too much time on it already and I'm ready to move on. I suggest you do some google searches for sabermetrics though, because it seems you've got a few ideas about it that are misguided.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Jul 12, 2006 -> 12:35 AM) LOL, he hasn't proven a damn thing. He's done the typical, "I don't understand any of these new-fangled stats" garbage that everyone always does (ie, "Don't think you can just throw out your latest Bill James p Again, chitown got it right a long time ago, and it pretty much went ignored. a.) Podsednik isn't a very good ballplayer. but b.) We don't have anybody else to replace him. and, on the bright side c.) He's not a total blackhole, as he's still getting on-base at a decent clip (.353 OBP -- better than last year), and he tends to see a lot of pitches. Again, this doesn't have anything to do with beyond 2006, but I don't mind Pods finishing out the year in LF. The reason, BTW, that this team hasn't been "optimal" yet (it's been great, but I think it can be better, which is a testemant to KW), is obviously 'cause "the greatest five man rotation in history" (ugh, Hawk) hasn't lived up to the billing... QUOTE(Greg Hibbard @ Jul 12, 2006 -> 12:20 AM) Iamshack, the point is that Podsednik isn't just bad at OPS, he's bad at almost everything, and the point of this thread was not to point out that he's JUST bad at OPS. He's terrible at OPS, RBI, HR, and even taking walks (an important stat for a leadoff hitter, wouldn't you agree) in comparison with OTHER LEADOFF hitters, which is even more pathetic. We're talking about other "set the table" guys who also happen to do things like stealing bases and scoring runs ALMOST as well as Pods, but are about 5-10 notches ahead of him in defense and in other offensive categories. Moreover, the things Podsednik DOES do well either aren't necessarily directly attributable to him (in the case of runs, which requires relying on the hitting of another player, as opposed to homers, rbis, and batting average which all are determined solely by the batter), or they aren't necessarily impactful on the game itself (in the case of steals, which AGAIN, unlike RBIs and HR don't impact the scoreboard immediately, if at all) Simply put, my point is that the s*** he does well doesn't matter that much, whereas the s*** he doesn't do well matters a whole lot more. Good post greg, I wish I could frame my answers so succinctly.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jul 11, 2006 -> 11:20 PM) Your opinions and theories and stats-based approach are not invalid; but why can't you provide some more evidence that they actually coincide with winning games instead of simply overall run production? Once again, ask the Indians if it is that simple. I think the word you are looking for is "correlate". Dude, I'm trying hard to restrain myself, but your posts are rediculous. We can "quantify" how runs are scored. They are mostly scored when guys get on base and hit 3 run homers, not when singles hitters are stealing the occasional base and 25% of the time getting thrown out and making an out in the process. Don't ask Billy Beane or Bill James, ask Babe Ruth, Barry Bonds, Frank Thomas, or every other eagle-eyed slugger who's ever been celebrated because they produce runs by hitting the s*** out of the baseball and getting on base (not making outs) at an insane rate. Stolen Bases are a BIT part in run production, as in not very important. That has been proven not with statistics, but with EMPIRICAL evidence. There is a very strong correlation between runs scored, OBP, and HR's, much more so than with SB's. Go sort through a half century of box scores, calculate every team's OPS, and then see how many runs they scored. Than calculate how many SB's they had, then see how many runs the scored. Plot the data with stolen bases and OPS as the independent variable and runs as the dependent. Now look at the chart and see that runs scored is roughly linearly proportional to OPS but not to stolen bases. (If you don't get this part, go research basic stats, it won't take long I promise, like 30 min on wiki) hit the regression button on your graphing calculator if you want to get all pencil headed about it.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jul 11, 2006 -> 11:09 PM) Umm, what is that big red thing? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wB0jkWnK3E&search=meatwad

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jul 11, 2006 -> 11:09 PM) Well we've trotted Timo Perez out there before in place of Pods so lets see if that theory is true. Why are we isolating Pods from the rest of the team? Baseball is a team sport and you can't just take stats to prove how important some one might be to a team. Like I said, I just want to know our record with Pods starting and with out him starting the last two years. That is all. Fair enough. Anything to get meatwad up there some more!

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jul 11, 2006 -> 11:00 PM) According to whom is that a leadoff hitter's job? You? Why do sabre types believe that there is only one way to do things (theirs)? I happen to believe that it is a leadoff hitter's job to steal bases. I happen to believe that guys who run alot cause trouble for opposing pitchers and defenses. I posted some limited evidence of that (of course you pulled out the classic sample size argument). Once again, where has it ever been proven that this 75% figure is truly the line where stealing makes sense and where it doesn't? That's an arbitrary number that factors in nothing but a bs mathematical formula, but once again does not account for any of the distractions/effects caused by base stealers. As for your final comment, what I was alluding to is that the trouble Podsednik causes on the basepaths may contribute to Iguchi's success when he is on first base, not that simply any runner being on first base adds to Iguchi's success (thus the difference between Iguchi's OPS with no one on as opposed to a runner at first base, as well as the difference with a runner on second as opposed to no one on). QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jul 11, 2006 -> 10:59 PM) One of you stat guys want to pull up our record with Pods starting and with out Pods the last two years. Just out of curiousity. What would that show about Podsednik in isolation? If the pitching staff is far and away the best staff in MLB, f***ing Timo Perez could trot out to LF and have a number of winning seasons.

I think we should be clear there are two different aruments here: 1) Pods' abilities 2) His value to the team and his future with the Sox. I think it would help if people are clear on what they are arguing. Of course they are related, but I think an argument can be made that PODS isn't a very good player, but he's valuable as the best leadoff hitter we currently have, regardless of his defensive worth. The Sox can win with PODS on this team despite his suckitude. His defense is bad, but LF defense is only worth so much. The players capable of replacing him in left are not better options. Mackowiak is more usefull in an utility role, Ozuna as well. Gload has no role on the team. Widge blows. PODS needs to continue his trend of getting OB and hitting with a bit of pop. He had an otherworldy (read: fluke) first half last year and than went back to mostly crap in the 2nd, although injuries could have played a role. But his career numbers suggest he just isn't that good of a hitter: Career OPS+ of 92 with a career OBP of .345. His career slugging is (puke) .385. Hell, this year, PODS is beating his career OPS by a full 8 points and it's a "lofty" .744. Remember, this is for a LF! Pods is 7th out of 10 among qualified LF in the AL in OPS. In MLB, he is 16th out of 20. ISO power, (Slg-BA) Pods is 2nd to last, only beating...the glorious Matt Murton. Point is, PODS is a terrible LF all around. He can't field a very easy position (relatively), and he can't hit either. He's a below average league hitter in the 2nd best offensive position in baseball. Corner OF is the place for sluggers, not slap hitters. He's the best option this year, next year, we need an upgrade in LF.

QUOTE(watchtower41 @ Jul 11, 2006 -> 06:05 PM) No, because like many have pointed out, Pods does NOTHING positive to help this team. I've made this case several times throughout this thread, but I guess because there is no stat for it, it doesnt count (at least at soxtalk) I've read every post of yours on this topic, and not one of them has been worth anything. Statistics is one of the ways used (some would say the most important, myself included) to measure a players worth. Observation clearly being the other major way. So if you don't want to use stats, at least try and use observations to defend Podsednik. Say he's a good baserunner, say he brings young hotties to the ballpark. Say something.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Jul 11, 2006 -> 12:32 PM) Apparently I'm not the only one who doesn't "get" The Dugout. Not even slightly funny. Red Stater? Do you like Jon Stewart? Do you drive a Volvo and eat sushi?

QUOTE(hammerhead johnson @ Jul 11, 2006 -> 01:19 AM) There's no question about it. That's why I stick to weed. Once you start smoking crack, you're pretty much f***ed for life. LOL... Marijuana is not a drug. I used to suck dick for coke! Now that's an addiction man, you ever suck some dick for Marijuana? Boo this man!!!

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 09:57 PM) Obviously. The point I'm making is he really was mediocre to sucking last year. Everyone talked about how he disrupted pitchers on the bases. If he really bothered pitchers that much, he would have scored more than 80 runs. Since he hit a homer to win a WS game, I will say he was mediocre last year. The THBT's did an informative piece on the effects basestealers have on pitchers and concluded--not much. I believe they said that Podsednik added about 2 net runs per year due to baserunning "intangibles"

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 07:41 PM) Dumb question, but didn't our late summer swoon coincide with Pods' injury last season? Is it possible that he contributes an intangible to the bench that helps motivate our team to win games? I'm sure there's a statistic for that somewhere, but I totally failed that class. No, we all know Aron Rowand provides that intangible.

QUOTE(daa84 @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 07:12 PM) i agree, thats a name i tossed out there in previous threads as well...the problem is that he is relatively young, cheap, and good...and thats the combo KC is looking to keep, not to get rid of, but a package of good prospects would get it done....another name i like alot is eric byrnes Has he been injured? He only has around 100 AB this season. It seems like he's buried on the bench.

QUOTE(Damen @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 06:52 PM) I didn't base my picks on who MVP voters are actually going to pick, I picked who I thought should win these awards. Yeah Hafner has played on a disappointing Indians squad, but as I said previously, that is in no way connected to what he has done on the field. If I were to pick the league MVP, I'd give it to the best hitter in the league. After the first half, the honor belongs to Hafner. Yea, Aboz you're right about the voters being rather uniformed (or perhaps willingly ignorant) of advanced stats when it comes to voting. I'll faint of someone actually cites VORP as a stat they look at in the MVP voting.

QUOTE(SoxnGiants @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 06:44 PM) Pods is a solid hitter in the leadoff spot - not too much available that would be a big upgrade there. Defensively, however, he's below average and I think he should be replaced next year. I'd doubt that someone will be brought in this year but a guy who really interests me a lot is David DeJesus. He's young, plays well defensively and has an OPS of .881 (.804 last year). He could also spell Anderson against tough righties. I'm not sure what his availability is but he plays for KC so I figure there's got to be a chance. Interesting name! I just looked up his stats on Fangraphs and almost every important offensive indicator he is trending up with! His walk rate, OBP, K/BB and ISO are all rising. He's in his prime at 27 next year and will be there for another 2 years a so. He has a career OPS+ of 110 and has an OPS of over .800 again this year. I'm intriqued. If he's still got a few years left on his ARB clock, he'd be a very wise investment via trade. Somehow, he isn't getting much burn on the Royals.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 06:46 PM) Well, if for the sake of this argument you keep things to strickly HR/RBI production which is what I was talking about right there. Manny has more HRs and RBIs on the road than at home, was nearly equal last year and did have more HR/RBI at Home in '04. But yeah, if you're looking at BA/OPS and such the numbers are higher at home but for whatever reason, so far this year Hafner has been much more productive at home than on the road. Alright, I'll concede his HR/RBI numbers are better. I do however contend there are much better stats we have available to measure total offensive production.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 06:36 PM) Their pure offensive production numbers (HR/RBI/etc) really aren't even close. I think Fenway helps Manny out quite a bit.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 06:29 PM) Manny Ramirez Kicks the s*** out of Travis Hafner. It's close, but Hafner has put up better OPS+ numbers the past two seasons, which is as good as comparison (park adjusted) as I care to use right now. Maybe their VORP numbers show something else, but I know they both have been healthy and mashing with plenty of PA's, so I'd guess they are probably similiar in VORP too.

QUOTE(Colorado Sox Fan @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 06:22 PM) I didn't say you can't discuss it. I'm not one of those people who says you can't criticize players or the team. In fact, I said I'm not a big fan of his either. All I'm saying is that it's hilarious how everybody is piling on. Next game, he'll single, steal second and score the winning run and everybody will be in love with him. There's also a reason Pablo is 32 and has never, ever been a regular for any major league team. And, a reason Mack is 30 and has never nailed down a regular spot in someone's lineup. If Kenny can trade for Chone Figgins or Crawford and not get robbed, God bless him. Seems a bit of a stretch that the Angels or Rays would trade those guys. I agree completely. PODS is the best option in LF/Leadoff for 2006. Next year, no--can him. I also agree Mack and Ozuna are bench players only. Ozuna is putting up a fluke year and god bless him, but he's not a regular by any stretch of the imagination. Mack is a also a bench player. Jack of all trades, master of none.

QUOTE(Damen @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 06:21 PM) His numbers are better. He probably wouldn't win because of the Indians struggles, but that is in no way connected to Hafner. He is the best hitter in the game right now, and has been since 2004. I think Albert Pujols just puked a little in his mouth. And strained his oblique.

QUOTE(redandwhite @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 06:14 PM) If the season ended today, He'd win one of the two, if not both. He's been the best reliever in baseball, period. I agree Papelbon for the now retired "Rolaids Relief Man".

Hafner for MVP and Cleveland as most dissapointing team--but not because of Hafter--he's been the best hitter in the AL for a year now. Pujols single handedly made the Cardinals a .600 winning team for awile. If he gets hot again, he can still take it.

QUOTE(Colorado Sox Fan @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 05:56 PM) No. You've got it about right. Don't forget the bullpen and the backup catcher...oh, and Iguchi sometimes when he doesn't get a hit and Gload is terrible because he made a bad baserunning play. Ozuna should be in the Hall of Fame, except when he butchers balls in left and swings at bad pitches. This board cracks me up. I'm not a big Pods fan by any means, but everyone forgets about the games he has helped win with clutch hits. Yea, we should keep Pods around because he's clutch, dude. He's more clutch than Papi... Why is discussing a players flaws such blasphemy? You'd think Pods was a first ballot HOFer. THere is a reason the guy didn't stick around MLB until he was 27-28.

QUOTE(RME JICO @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 04:46 PM) The most glaring stat about Pods is the Sox record when he steals a base: 18-3. That is amazing. For a stat that is supposed to not have that much meaning, that is pretty remarkable. You can look at it two ways, he is stealing when the Sox have a lead or he is actually somehow affecting the outcome of the game. The Sox are also 42-10 when he gets a hit. First off, it's a very large assumption to say that Pods' steals are the main factor behind the White Sox wins. There are so many variables involved, and SB's are just one of many. Perhaps Pods plays on days when the "regular 9" play. Perhaps he steals most his bases against RHP's, which the Sox fare better against. I could go on and on... It's better to just assume his SB's add very little to the run expectancy for the inning and thus the game. SB's aren't that useful for an offense. The only way Pods should be stealing is if he's above a 80% clip. Even then, their benefit is marginal. Call me new fashioned and a stat-head pencil pusher, but I guy that steals bases, gets on base at a .350 clip, hits for zero power in LF, and plays terrible defense as well--is not a good player. He's a replaceable player. I hope Pods is gone next year and if he's gone and no other better options exist, Iguchi should be the leadoff hitter. And that Verducci article is junk. Talk about misleading use of statistics.