The Avi Thread

[ptatc]

Great post. I'll also add that people get too caught up on length of contract. There's a reason that max AAV's essentially haven't increased AT ALL since Alex Rodriguez's original deal -- it's because it's the total contract value that matters way more to ownership. It was going to cost the Angels $240mm to get Albert Pujols -- it doesn't matter if it was over 10 years or four years.

 

The owners HAVE the money, it's just a question of when they write the checks. Because of inflation, it's actually better to defer the payments to later, and for GMs, it helps them stay under the luxury tax too. When people say "I don't mind the $25mm, I just mind the eight years" or whatever, they need to realize that if it was five years, you WOULD mind the AAV. As a team, you might as well spread the cost out -- it allows you to benefit from inflation and gives you the chance to continue to benefit from the player longer, even in a diminished role. All the money to guaranteed was gone the day you signed the deal regardless of how long the deal goes.

 

This is also why it's EXTREMELY dumb to say "The X team is paying him $25mm, they aren't going to bench him/they need to see a return on that investment." Once a guy's roster spot becomes worth more than his performance, it makes all the sense in the world to release him. To continue to allow the player suck wins from you actually REDUCES your ROI. You aren't "eating money" to let him go, you already spent that money long ago. There's no additional cost.

I would disagree with this to a degree. All owners have the money. However, not all of them have the money to absorb a 20 AAV mistake. That could cripple some teams budget and mkae the team useless.

[greg775]

Because we've been commenting on your position for almost a year now. We are kinda tired of it. It's not our fault you ignore what we say and continue to blindly post.

Pitt asked for my position for gosh sakes. You guys are unreasonable regarding me at times. He asked! I delivered. What the heck u want from me?? I've been called a troll. Blindly post? I offered a response to an inquiry. Give me a break for once.

 

I actually thought that his recently stated position showed some change. Seems to me that ( at least in that post ), he's on board with the same plan that management is executing.

I've accepted the plan. I am a fan. I have no choice but to be on board. I am on board. My only other option is to drop the team from my interest list. Hard to do when you are a lifelong fan. I've accepted the plan. I'm observing it and ready to go with the rebuild.

 

you dont read responses. You skim them, say "good post" if someone agrees with you, and then move on and repeat yourself without taking anything anyone has said to you into consideration.

 

I dont even know why i wrote that to be honest

 

 

 

 

he acknowledges the rebuild. He certainly doesnt support it or try to understand it

Oh come on. I don't have to support it 100 percent especially when they are about to do something I deem very very counterproductive - getting rid of Avi and Abreu. There are a few on here who agree with me they'd like to keep both. You also are being unfair when you say I don't read responses and just say "good post." That is a huge huge assumption to make and just isn't true. You are assuming a lot in your last sentence or two and it happens to be untrue. I want to be educated. My "problem" or my trait is I won't accept what I consider to be rubbish takes without fighting back and offering my own take which you can consider rubbish as well.

You guys are very unfair to me at times IMO.

Do I support the rebuild in your words? Of course. I have no choice. It's here and I'm ready for all of them to succeed. I happen to think my takes will help the rebuild succeed or I woldn't post them. Avi and Abreu, of course keep them.

 

What bugs me about you guys is you seem to think we couldn't win the other way. I say we couldn't because of inept manager (Robin) and bad scouts and bad advance scouts and idiotic decisions to sign stiffs like LaRoche rather than good players.

Have a nice day all of you!

[Lip Man 1]

Do you even know how it works?

 

Here's UBR: https://www.fangraphs.com/library/offense/ubr/

 

I know that you can't quantify what goes through a player's mind when he is running, a situation which has billions of variables and how the defense is going to react to that specific situation.

 

To me, my eye test, Avi has improved as a base runner but he's far from ideal which goes into factoring if you want to re-sign him along with his defense which is generally poor and his offensive production. Fundamentals, baseball-sense are important to me.

[Lip Man 1]

This stats looks at base running as a pure run expectancy as the only relevant base running plays. I would disagree that it looks at all of base running in general. Knowing how to stretch a single to a double or take an extra base isn't really considered. Neither is stealing a base. I would classify those as part of base running.

 

Agree.

[Balta1701]

This stats looks at base running as a pure run expectancy as the only relevant base running plays. I would disagree that it looks at all of base running in general. Knowing how to stretch a single to a double or take an extra base isn't really considered. Neither is stealing a base. I would classify those as part of base running.

 

 

Agree.

So guys, this stuff is actually detailed in there. From the linked article here's what goes into UBR:

Mitchel Litchman’s primer outlines the different base running events that are accounted for in UBR:

 

1) On a hit, advancing an extra base, not advancing an extra base, or getting thrown out trying to advance an extra base, as long as no other base runner is blocking an advance.

 

2) A batter getting thrown out trying to advance an extra base on a hit (if he successfully does, we don’t know it, as he is simply awarded a double, for example, on a usual single where he advances an extra base).

 

3) On a hit, the batter advancing, not advancing, or getting thrown out when a runner is safe or out advancing an extra base.

 

4) Trailing runners advancing, not advancing or getting thrown out when a leading runner is safe or out trying to advance an extra base on a hit or an out. This is basically lumped together with #1 above.

 

5) Runners trying to advance on fly ball outs – i.e. tagging up.

 

6) As mentioned above, on ground balls to the infield, runners on first staying out of the force or DP at second base, whether the batter is out or is safe on a FC.

 

7) Also as mentioned above, a runner on second advancing or not (or getting thrown out) on a ground ball hit to SS or 3B.

So yeah, winding up at 2nd base when an average player would wind up at 1b is in there, including the extra run chances of a guy scoring from second. And...

Things to Remember:

 

● UBR does not account for stolen bases and caught stealings, which are dealt with by wSB.

UBR is included in WAR. It is added with wSB and wGDP to make up the “BsR” column in FanGraphs player profiles.

[Kyyle23]

Pitt asked for my position for gosh sakes. You guys are unreasonable regarding me at times. He asked! I delivered. What the heck u want from me?? I've been called a troll. Blindly post? I offered a response to an inquiry. Give me a break for once.

 

 

I've accepted the plan. I am a fan. I have no choice but to be on board. I am on board. My only other option is to drop the team from my interest list. Hard to do when you are a lifelong fan. I've accepted the plan. I'm observing it and ready to go with the rebuild.

 

 

Oh come on. I don't have to support it 100 percent especially when they are about to do something I deem very very counterproductive - getting rid of Avi and Abreu. There are a few on here who agree with me they'd like to keep both. You also are being unfair when you say I don't read responses and just say "good post." That is a huge huge assumption to make and just isn't true. You are assuming a lot in your last sentence or two and it happens to be untrue. I want to be educated. My "problem" or my trait is I won't accept what I consider to be rubbish takes without fighting back and offering my own take which you can consider rubbish as well.

You guys are very unfair to me at times IMO.

Do I support the rebuild in your words? Of course. I have no choice. It's here and I'm ready for all of them to succeed. I happen to think my takes will help the rebuild succeed or I woldn't post them. Avi and Abreu, of course keep them.

 

What bugs me about you guys is you seem to think we couldn't win the other way. I say we couldn't because of inept manager (Robin) and bad scouts and bad advance scouts and idiotic decisions to sign stiffs like LaRoche rather than good players.

Have a nice day all of you!

 

you want to be educated, yet you label people "draftniks" and completely shoot down their posts with things like "you draftniks slay me...." when they make reasonable and very educated posts about the matter.

 

You reap what you sow, greg. People try and reason with you, and eventually they get so frustrated that they snap on you because they explain things to great lengths and you ignore them and keep on repeating yourself

 

[Chicago White Sox]

So, you haven't read any of the posts regarding Sox fans wanting the Sox to pursue big free agents like Machado and Harper? Just about all fans on this board want the Sox to spend, and many are in touch enough to realize that they will.

I know my plan had us spending like $450M on free agents next offseason, but maybe my handle doesn’t indicate clearly enough that I’m a Sox fan.

Edited November 28, 2017 by Chicago White Sox

[Eminor3rd]

This stats looks at base running as a pure run expectancy as the only relevant base running plays. I would disagree that it looks at all of base running in general. Knowing how to stretch a single to a double or take an extra base isn't really considered. Neither is stealing a base. I would classify those as part of base running.

 

As Balta said, that stuff is all in there. I'm sure some stuff is missed somewhere, and the data is no doubt imperfect, but that stuff IS being counted.

 

I know that you can't quantify what goes through a player's mind when he is running, a situation which has billions of variables and how the defense is going to react to that specific situation.

 

To me, my eye test, Avi has improved as a base runner but he's far from ideal which goes into factoring if you want to re-sign him along with his defense which is generally poor and his offensive production. Fundamentals, baseball-sense are important to me.

 

I don't mind at all if you disagree and hate it, and respect your knowledge and opinion as a long-time fan and poster, I just posted the link because I want you to know what you're actually disagreeing with here.

 

You're right that we can't count what's in a player's head -- but to me, whatever goes through a player's head on the basepaths only matters if it affects his actual baserunning behavior, which can be and is observed and quantified. If he has instincts, good or bad, that DON'T result in him making different running decisions, I don't know why we care.

Edited November 28, 2017 by Eminor3rd

[Eminor3rd]

I would disagree with this to a degree. All owners have the money. However, not all of them have the money to absorb a 20 AAV mistake. That could cripple some teams budget and mkae the team useless.

 

What you said is correct, but that's not what I'm trying to get at. The point I was trying to make is that the fiscally correct way for an ownership group to look at an investment is the total value of the expenditure while factoring inflation. It isn't that the Angels owners are saying "wow this hurts paying Pujols $30m in his age 39 season," it's that the Angels owners spent $240mm to get the rest of Pujols career when he was 32 or whatever. And there's a payment plan that defers that cost ten or so years into the future.

[greg775]

you want to be educated, yet you label people "draftniks" and completely shoot down their posts with things like "you draftniks slay me...." when they make reasonable and very educated posts about the matter.

 

You reap what you sow, greg. People try and reason with you, and eventually they get so frustrated that they snap on you because they explain things to great lengths and you ignore them and keep on repeating yourself

You are crazy. I don't always call them draftniks. I also use the word "stat people" and sabes people. I have used draftniks but not often. You can't imply I call people names a lot and get away with that. I contend I am normally polite. I'd say 90 percent of the time. Draftniks or draft people do slay me and frustrate me but I don't always call them draftniks.

 

I know my plan had us spending like $450M on free agents next offseason, but maybe my handle doesn’t indicate clearly enough that I’m a Sox fan.

450 million would please me. What free agents, though. I stand by my point that we can forget about Manny and Harper.

Edited November 28, 2017 by greg775

[Chicago White Sox]

You are crazy. I don't always call them draftniks. I also use the word "stat people" and sabes people. I have used draftniks but not often. You can't imply I call people names a lot and get away with that. I contend I am normally polite. I'd say 90 percent of the time. Draftniks or draft people do slay me and frustrate me but I don't always call them draftniks.

 

 

450 million would please me. What free agents, though. I stand by my point that we can forget about Manny and Harper.

The Sox signed Albert Belle to the largest contract ever at the time. The Sox offered A-Rod a huge deal back in the day, rumored to be like 10/$190M. They recently offered Tanaka a massive deal as well. You’re fooling yourself if you don’t believe the Sox will pursue the truly elite free agents next year when they have like $2M in guaranteed payroll. Whether they can convince one of these guys to take their money remains to be seen, but I have no doubt Reinsdorf will ok an aggressive offseason plan.

[southsider2k5]

The Sox signed Albert Belle to the largest contract ever at the time. The Sox offered A-Rod a huge deal back in the day, rumored to be like 10/$190M. They recently offered Tanaka a massive deal as well. You're fooling yourself if you don't believe the Sox will pursue the truly elite free agents next year when they have like $2M in guaranteed payroll. Whether they can convince one of these guys to take their money remains to be seen, but I have no doubt Reinsdorf will ok an aggressive offseason plan.

 

The problem isn't with the Sox making offers, it is with them making the largest offer. As for the Albert Belle example, Eloy Jimenez was 7 days old when it happened. They haven't really shown a propensity to set the market for top level players for 21 years now. They have been #2 a lot of times. #1, not so much.

[greg775]

The problem isn't with the Sox making offers, it is with them making the largest offer. As for the Albert Belle example, Eloy Jimenez was 7 days old when it happened. They haven't really shown a propensity to set the market for top level players for 21 years now. They have been #2 a lot of times. #1, not so much.

I was gonna say Albert Belle was a while ago.

[Dam8610]

The problem isn't with the Sox making offers, it is with them making the largest offer. As for the Albert Belle example, Eloy Jimenez was 7 days old when it happened. They haven't really shown a propensity to set the market for top level players for 21 years now. They have been #2 a lot of times. #1, not so much.

 

The White Sox have no significant payroll commitments going into 2019 and most teams will be primarily chasing Harper. The White Sox could definitely swoop in with the best offer early in free agency and get Machado while other teams are busy with Harper.

[ptatc]

So guys, this stuff is actually detailed in there. From the linked article here's what goes into UBR:

So yeah, winding up at 2nd base when an average player would wind up at 1b is in there, including the extra run chances of a guy scoring from second. And...

It only looks at what happened in relation to the expectancy for him to score. It doesn't look at should he have done those things when he should have have or shouldn't have. It doesn't take into account how often he made the correct decision or not.

 

It only looks at the results based on the averages of the results of everyone else in the league. Being a good base runner is not just about how often you are expected to score.

[Chicago White Sox]

The problem isn't with the Sox making offers, it is with them making the largest offer. As for the Albert Belle example, Eloy Jimenez was 7 days old when it happened. They haven't really shown a propensity to set the market for top level players for 21 years now. They have been #2 a lot of times. #1, not so much.

It’s a fair point, but the traditional big spenders are also dealing with a luxury tax right that is far more detrimental than it’s previously been. That’s not to say I expect the Sox to automatically have the biggest offer, but given their complete lack of financial comittments going forward and the need for a big PR move to kick off their return to competiveness I defintiely think it’s a real possibility.

[Balta1701]

It only looks at what happened in relation to the expectancy for him to score. It doesn't look at should he have done those things when he should have have or shouldn't have. It doesn't take into account how often he made the correct decision or not.

 

It only looks at the results based on the averages of the results of everyone else in the league. Being a good base runner is not just about how often you are expected to score.

Literally yes it is. If you get to 2nd base, that is a move that increases your chance to score a run. If you are thrown out, that removes your chance to score a run. For you to be a good baserunner, you have to get to 2nd base enough times successfully that it overwhelms any reduction in the runs lost due to the times you get thrown out. If he makes it there it was a correct decision, if he gets thrown out it was a wrong decision. That is how you assess this on a statistical basis - does the 5 times he gets to 2nd base mean that he generates more runs than what is cost the 2 times he gets thrown out.

[chitownsportsfan]

Literally yes it is. If you get to 2nd base, that is a move that increases your chance to score a run. If you are thrown out, that removes your chance to score a run. For you to be a good baserunner, you have to get to 2nd base enough times successfully that it overwhelms any reduction in the runs lost due to the times you get thrown out. If he makes it there it was a correct decision, if he gets thrown out it was a wrong decision. That is how you assess this on a statistical basis - does the 5 times he gets to 2nd base mean that he generates more runs than what is cost the 2 times he gets thrown out.

 

ptac is way too smart to be arguing this point. It's all based on base runs and linear weights and run expectancy. Gotta read some tangotiger.

[ptatc]

Literally yes it is. If you get to 2nd base, that is a move that increases your chance to score a run. If you are thrown out, that removes your chance to score a run. For you to be a good baserunner, you have to get to 2nd base enough times successfully that it overwhelms any reduction in the runs lost due to the times you get thrown out. If he makes it there it was a correct decision, if he gets thrown out it was a wrong decision. That is how you assess this on a statistical basis - does the 5 times he gets to 2nd base mean that he generates more runs than what is cost the 2 times he gets thrown out.

Not necessarily. It is all based on the average time this happens for everyone in the league. Players vary in their ability whether it be speed, taking leads etc. So the expectant run scored it an estimate on often they should score not whether or not they actually do or don't score. so it isn't really based on your chance of scoring it's more based on how often it happens on average throughout the league.

 

the 5 times he makes it doesn't mean he will generate more runs. By this stat it is just increases the times he is expected to score based on how often all of the other players throughout the the league have scored on average. So what if this player is slower than the average player and takes a shorter lead than the others. This stat is going to be way often on how often he scores compared to how often others in the league scores. So this stat can be very misleading in how it rates this player in based running. It will penalized him for not taking the extra base, because most others would, but it would be the smart, correct choice for him.

 

This is not a purely math stat stat based on numerical chances. It is based on the averages of how the other players in the league perform. This is not generalizable to everyone in the league. If the player is so many standard deviations from the norm it will have no applicability to the player. It is applicable to the average player. If you can find him.

[ptatc]

ptac is way too smart to be arguing this point. It's all based on base runs and linear weights and run expectancy. Gotta read some tangotiger.

This is the issue with the stat. How they determine how often they expect a runner to score is inherently flawed. Not every runner is the average of the league.

[iamshack]

Not necessarily. It is all based on the average time this happens for everyone in the league. Players vary in their ability whether it be speed, taking leads etc. So the expectant run scored it an estimate on often they should score not whether or not they actually do or don't score. so it isn't really based on your chance of scoring it's more based on how often it happens on average throughout the league.

 

the 5 times he makes it doesn't mean he will generate more runs. By this stat it is just increases the times he is expected to score based on how often all of the other players throughout the the league have scored on average. So what if this player is slower than the average player and takes a shorter lead than the others. This stat is going to be way often on how often he scores compared to how often others in the league scores. So this stat can be very misleading in how it rates this player in based running. It will penalized him for not taking the extra base, because most others would, but it would be the smart, correct choice for him.

 

This is not a purely math stat stat based on numerical chances. It is based on the averages of how the other players in the league perform. This is not generalizable to everyone in the league. If the player is so many standard deviations from the norm it will have no applicability to the player. It is applicable to the average player. If you can find him.

So your argument is that it is a stat relative to other players in the League rather than how good a baserunner the player can be given his physical tools?

[Thad Bosley]

The problem isn't with the Sox making offers, it is with them making the largest offer. As for the Albert Belle example, Eloy Jimenez was 7 days old when it happened. They haven't really shown a propensity to set the market for top level players for 21 years now. They have been #2 a lot of times. #1, not so much.

...and all of 3 playoff appearances in those 21 years. Any correlation?

[Lip Man 1]

You're right that we can't count what's in a player's head -- but to me, whatever goes through a player's head on the basepaths only matters if it affects his actual baserunning behavior, which can be and is observed and quantified. If he has instincts, good or bad, that DON'T result in him making different running decisions, I don't know why we care.

 

Eminor: No problem. I care in this case because fundamentals have been so bad on the Sox since the last few years under Ozzie. It costs them games. Avi's baseball-sense, in my opinion is poor. Base running is part of those fundamental instincts and while to the eye he has improved slightly, to me, again, he's still bad at it and in his judgments.

 

It all has to weigh on Hahn's mind as he tried to decide if he wants to offer him an extension.

[Lip Man 1]

The Sox signed Albert Belle to the largest contract ever at the time. The Sox offered A-Rod a huge deal back in the day, rumored to be like 10/$190M. They recently offered Tanaka a massive deal as well. You’re fooling yourself if you don’t believe the Sox will pursue the truly elite free agents next year when they have like $2M in guaranteed payroll. Whether they can convince one of these guys to take their money remains to be seen, but I have no doubt Reinsdorf will ok an aggressive offseason plan.

 

Regarding Belle the reason he was signed to the largest deal in the first place was because JR was paying back the other owners for resolving the labor / impasse issue on terms he did not care for. (Not that the owners had a choice after the Federal judge ruled that MLB was NOT negotiating in good faith.) I think, if memory serves, the Sox and Reds (Marge Schott) were the only owners to vote against the final agreement.

 

In essence he was giving them the finger, 'you won't keep holding out? Fine...here's what we can do to jack up the cost of free agents across the board now that we've set the precedent..."

 

In return the other owners voted JR off the committee that advises the commissioner on labor issues which was a powerful committee at the time.

 

[ptatc]

So your argument is that it is a stat relative to other players in the League rather than how good a baserunner the player can be given his physical tools?

That was just to show that it is a flawed stat but it's only not that it is relative to the other players it's that it is relative to the average of the other players. My argument is that this is a flawed stat and determining if Avi is a good base runner or not should not be determined solely by this stat. It is useful but flawed. The eye test holds value as well.

Edited November 29, 2017 by ptatc