shakes Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9833787/ Weird, sabermetrics proved wrong again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 Thanks for the link. Interesting article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 The White Sox and their fans viewed Podsednik, an All-Star this season, as the catalyst of the offense, the team's leading hitter (at a mere .290) with the speed to steal bases and run down balls in the outfield. Sabermetricians viewed him as a fraud. They noted that his OPS (on-base percentage plus slugging percentage) was a lowly .700 — .351 on-base percentage, and a .349 slugging percentage, with no home runs and only 25 RBIs in 507 at-bats. Lee, meanwhile, had a robust .811 OPS at Milwaukee — .324 on-base percentage, plus a .488 slugging percentage. They'll never get it. :headshake Why would I care about OPS and slugging from my leadoff man? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 QUOTE(mreye @ Nov 1, 2005 -> 09:45 AM) They'll never get it. :headshake Why would I care about OPS and slugging from my leadoff man? We should care about the on base percentage. The slugging is secondary. Which is why the stats geeks need to refine the OPS to reflect position in the order. It may be 75-25 for the lead off guy and 35-65 for the cleanup hitter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Nov 1, 2005 -> 09:52 AM) We should care about the on base percentage. The slugging is secondary. Which is why the stats geeks need to refine the OPS to reflect position in the order. It may be 75-25 for the lead off guy and 35-65 for the cleanup hitter. I know. I care about the "O" about 90% and the "S" about 10% for my leadoff man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shakes Posted November 1, 2005 Author Share Posted November 1, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Nov 1, 2005 -> 09:52 AM) We should care about the on base percentage. The slugging is secondary. Which is why the stats geeks need to refine the OPS to reflect position in the order. It may be 75-25 for the lead off guy and 35-65 for the cleanup hitter. That's a very valid point. Of course, there's also no mention of our improved pitching and defense. But, who really cares about such things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 There is mention of the pitching, but I didnt notice anything about the defense. The pitching is on page two Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevHead0881 Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 Ok, so where does great pitching, good defense and timely hitting fit into their equation? It's funny that saying these three things win championships has become such a cliche, but when it actually happens, somehow people are surprised. Shocking! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shakes Posted November 1, 2005 Author Share Posted November 1, 2005 QUOTE(Felix @ Nov 1, 2005 -> 10:13 AM) There is mention of the pitching, but I didnt notice anything about the defense. The pitching is on page two I saw they breifly mentioned the pitching, but it was the most important driver of this team, not our leadoff hitters slugging %. I just get angry at these articles because they so conveniently leave out important info. By the way, this article was brought to my attention by a scrubs fan who claims because of this we have no chance at repeating. I am truly enjoying the jealousy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingish Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 Like most things, the stats are a useful tool, but hardly tell the whole story. The problems with using just runs scored,ops, etc.. is that they miss so much of what makes a good baseball team. Specifically with Podsednik, while he had a good season Avg.-wise, it was his successful Stolen Base % that brings down his VORP (Value Of a Replacement Player) in systems that measure things that way. When they measure a players value he has to steal bases at a 75% or higher rate for them to even count for a positive for the player. They assign a value to the fraction of a run created for successful stolen base versus the fraction of a run lost from getting caught stealing, and because getting caught is more detrimental than being successful, if you steal at less than a 75% clip, the stolen bases on the whole are counted as a slight negative in your value. The rest is not hard to figure out, if you give Scott Podsednik no credt for any of his stolen bases (in actuality penalizing him slightly versus if he hadn't tried at all), you end up with a player that probably doesn't deserve a major league roster spot. The real story of Podsednik this year was the first half where he stole bases at an incredible %, and the second half where he got thrown out a lot more. (44SB-9CS before the all-star break, 15SB-14CS after) I think what we all saw this season is that there were plenty of intangilbles in Pods game that never get a stat assigned to them. How about "Freak Outs" to describe how many times he got into a pitchers head so much that the guy forgot how to pitch? I'm sure he lead the league in that stat this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevHead0881 Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 Statistically, we outscored our opponents in 110 games this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irishsox1 Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 According to my calculations, I'm 97% positive that these dorks have never kissed a women and 100% positive that they've never had sex with a woman. Stat nerds!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 (edited) PODS ON BASE = high pitch counts by opposition, greater bullpen usage by opposition, & higher winning % by us. Those are winning stats in my book. Edited November 1, 2005 by JUGGERNAUT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 This is why they play the games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 QUOTE(mreye @ Nov 1, 2005 -> 10:45 AM) They'll never get it. :headshake Why would I care about OPS and slugging from my leadoff man? Agreed very much so. That's not what bugged me about that part. Lee, meanwhile, had a robust .811 OPS at Milwaukee — .324 on-base percentage, plus a .488 slugging percentage. LMAO Bill Hall's OPS > Carlos Lee's OPS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 QUOTE(KevHead0881 @ Nov 1, 2005 -> 11:58 AM) Statistically, we outscored our opponents in 110 games this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chitownsportsfan Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 The backlash against sabretrics is understandable, as it threatens old ways of thinking, but many of the claims against it are simply false. The stat geeks don't argue that their methods are infallible, but they do give a often accurate prediction for teams and players. And if you look at it closely, the stat geeks actually like the white sox. They have our defense ranked number 1 in effeciency in 2005. Jermaine Dye was top 5 in VORP for left fielders in the AL. Our pitchers have great whip's and excellent groundball to fly ball ratio's. Hitting wise, we have a bunch of average hitters, a few good ones, but everyone plays + defense, which undoubtable helped Contreras and Garland and the bullpen to career years. It's dissapointing to see such knee-jerk reactions to Billy Beane and his disciples, all they are doing is looking at the game in a new way, in an attempt to figure it all out. They don't claim to know it all, and you would be laughed out of the room if you suggested they wanted to do away with traditional scouting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 QUOTE(chitownsportsfan @ Nov 1, 2005 -> 08:34 PM) \ Jermaine Dye was top 5 in VORP for left fielders in the AL. \ That's good considering he plays right field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Nov 1, 2005 -> 02:22 PM) Agreed very much so. That's not what bugged me about that part. LMAO Bill Hall's OPS > Carlos Lee's OPS Willie and I have talked about this a few times, how Carlos had one hell of an overrated season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Nov 1, 2005 -> 08:38 PM) Willie and I have talked about this a few times, how Carlos had one hell of an overrated season. haha yes^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chitownsportsfan Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 Ok, a typo doesn't negate the rest of my argument. Jesus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wsox08 Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 haha when I read the topic I just had a funny image in my head.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 The only numbers that count: 99-63 11-1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Nov 2, 2005 -> 12:38 PM) Willie and I have talked about this a few times, how Carlos had one hell of an overrated season. It shows how desperate the Brewers were for a middle of the order hitter at the end of 2004. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted November 2, 2005 Share Posted November 2, 2005 QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Nov 1, 2005 -> 10:52 PM) It shows how desperate the Brewers were for a middle of the order hitter at the end of 2004. Desperate? They traded a CFer with a weak arm coming off a .311 OBP season who is considered a leadoff hitter, while having an arguably better replacement waiting in the wings in Brady Clark, a solid, but not spectacular reliever, and a minor leaguer for a LFer coming off a .300 30 100 .890 season. They had money to spend, and I think they spent it very wisely. If I'm a Brewers fan, I have to consider that the heist of the offseason. Unfortunately for Brewers fans, Aaron Rowand's second half OPS > Carlos Lee's second half OPS, Scott Podsednik had a better 3rd year for the Sox than he did 2nd year with the Brewers, putting up a solid OBP and stealing 60 bases, Vizcaino was a rather reliable guy out of the pen, and with the money saved, they added about 2-3 other HUGE players that later went on to help the Sox win the World Series. Hindsight says they were desperate. Hindsight is stupid (sometimes). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.