qwerty Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 01:46 PM) Win-share stats don't mean everything. They're dependent upon too many other variables. Given the significantly greater interest in Pierre than Rowand this offseason, it appears that most GMs don't take them to seriously either. Rowand was a freaking rally-killer at the plate and on the bases at time this year. I'll take the small sacrifice in defense for the extra offensive boost that Pierre would provide. It is not just win shares... nearly every stastical analysis will show who was more valuable the past two years. Sabre people especially like rowand over pierre. Small sacrafice on defense... holy s***. Rowand's ops+ 93. Pierre's ops+ 84. There was no ''offensive boost'' to be had. Edited December 31, 2005 by qwerty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 (edited) Win-share stats don't mean everything. They're dependent upon too many other variables. Given the significantly greater interest in Pierre than Rowand this offseason, it appears that most GMs don't take them to seriously either. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I wouldn't put too much stock in that. GM's aren't always right. For example, a baseball GM just signed 37 year old Jeromy Burnitz to a 2-year, $10-$12 million contract. That's pretty sad. Rowand was a freaking rally-killer at the plate and on the bases at time this year. I'll take the small sacrifice in defense for the extra offensive boost that Pierre would provide. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> As bad as Rowand's offense was last season (I hated it as well), it was still better than Pierre's. Small sacrifice on defense? Ummm, no. Edited December 31, 2005 by SSH2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 I heard a rumor somewhere and sometime that Junior Griffey was available-or was it Senior? :rolly B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WCSox Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(qwerty @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 12:51 PM) Rowand's ops+ 93. Pierre's ops+ 84. There was no ''offensive boost'' to be had. Way to cherry-pick stats. Apparently you've never heard of stolen bases. How badly did the Sox slip in August when Pods was injured? How much better were they offensively when he was healthy? Pierre's career OBP is also significantly higher than Roand's. The homerism here is absolutely ridiculous at times... "Aaron Rowand is a better player than Juan Pierre!" "Willie Taveras will certainy experience a sophomore slump because... er... because I said so!" "Even if Brian Anderson is a bust, he'll still be better than Taveras was this past season!" :rolly Edited December 31, 2005 by WCSox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 Way to cherry-pick stats. Apparently you've never heard of stolen bases. How badly did the Sox slip in August when Pods was injured? How much better were they offensively when he was healthy? Pierre's career OBP is also significantly higher than Roand's. The homerism here is absolutely ridiculous at times... "Aaron Rowand is a better player than Juan Pierre!" "Willie Taveras will certainy experience a sophomore slump because... er... because I said so!" "Even if Brian Anderson is a bust, he'll still be better than Taveras was this past season!" :rolly <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I like your style, way to stick to your guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 01:57 PM) Way to cherry-pick stats. Apparently you've never heard of on-base percentage. Or stolen bases, for that matter. How badly did the Sox slip in August when Pods was injured? How much better were they offensively when he was healthy? The homerism here is absolutely ridiculous at times... "Aaron Rowand is a better player than Juan Pierre!" "Willie Taveras will certainy experience a sophomore slump because... er... because I said so!" "Even if Brian Anderson is a bust, he'll still be better than Taveras was this past season!" :rolly Cherry pick stats? Do you by chance know what era+ is and what it takes into account? Homerism... haha. You seriously said that to the least homerific person on this site. Rowand truely is more valuable to a team than pierre. Sorry. When i have made predictions in the past on who will slump i have usually be right on. I may be wrong with taveras but i doubt it... sure as hell no he will not exceed last years numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 Way to cherry-pick stats. Apparently you've never heard of on-base percentage. Or stolen bases, for that matter. How badly did the Sox slip in August when Pods was injured? How much better were they offensively when he was healthy? The homerism here is absolutely ridiculous at times... "Aaron Rowand is a better player than Juan Pierre!" "Willie Taveras will certainy experience a sophomore slump because... er... because I said so!" "Even if Brian Anderson is a bust, he'll still be better than Taveras was this past season!" :rolly <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Last season, Rowand's OBP (.329) was a bit higher than Pierre's (.326). I know that's normally not the case though. But Rowand's bat in 2004 was far and away better than Pierre's 2004 offense. Careerwise, Pierre has put up a higher OBP while Rowand has always had a higher OPS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 01:41 PM) I disagree. Pierre's base-stealing prowess and higher OBP win more games. How exactly does a 65% SB% help you win more games? When you're getting thrown out 35% of the times you steal a base, you're hurting your team more than you're helping it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 01:59 PM) I like your style, way to stick to your guns. Even if you are wrong you might as well keep going at it until it is rehashed as much as vafan's thoughts i suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 QUOTE(WCSox @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 01:57 PM) Way to cherry-pick stats. Apparently you've never heard of on-base percentage. Or stolen bases, for that matter. How badly did the Sox slip in August when Pods was injured? How much better were they offensively when he was healthy? Rowand's OBP in 05 > Pierre's OBP in 05 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 Even if you are wrong you might as well keep going at it until it is rehashed as much as vafan's thoughts i suppose. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nope, he's got his opinions and he is standing up to all the stat geeks. The other guy doesn't understand the context of the conversation and argues a totally different point than is being discussed. It's a big difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 WCsox, who had the better first year; 2004 Taveras or 2005 Anderson? What makes you think that Anderson can't improve on his 2005 season in 2006 to a level like Taveras in 2005? Look at the jump Willy made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:01 PM) How exactly does a 65% SB% help you win more games? When you're getting thrown out 35% of the times you steal a base, you're hurting your team more than you're helping it. The downside to stealing bases is greater than it is not to. But no one here will ever believe it ( well most). http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2607 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:04 PM) Nope, he's got his opinions and he is standing up to all the stat geeks. The other guy doesn't understand the context of the conversation and argues a totally different point than is being discussed. It's a big difference. Stat geeks... ok. It is just common sense actually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:04 PM) Nope, he's got his opinions and he is standing up to all the stat geeks. It doesn't take a stat geek to realize Pierre has a noodle arm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 If Brian Anderson can't put up a .666 OPS next season to match Willy Taveras's .666 OPS in 2005, I will eat my own pubic hairs. I'm more concerned with Anderson playing solid defense in center field and from most accounts he does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 The opposing pitchers hate guys who can steal bases and disrupt the game. That makes me happy to have guys who can run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 Stat geeks... ok. It is just common sense actually. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> According to you qwerty it's common sense, maybe he looks at common sense a little differently. Common sense is not strictly limited to your interpretaton of it. I like his style, he has some good points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 It doesn't take a stat geek to realize Pierre has a noodle arm. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You are missing the overall point, but that's ok. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 I will eat my own pubic hairs. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And you were doing so well ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 The opposing pitchers hate guys who can steal bases and disrupt the game. That makes me happy to have guys who can run. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> But playing poor defense and having a noodle arm can also give up runs to the opposing team. Pierre's weak defense takes away some of the the upside of his speed and ability to steal bases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 But playing poor defense and having a noodle arm can also give up runs to the opposing team. Pierre's weak defense takes away some of the the upside of his speed and ability to steal bases. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It is the nature of baseball, there are plusses and minuses to every player. It really depends how they fit together and play together, that's why the individual stats can't be relied up totally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 03:04 PM) The downside to stealing bases is greater than it is not to. But no one here will ever believe it ( well most). http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2607 <{POST_SNAPBACK}> and all that nonsense written by "Clueless" Joe Sheehan is based on some ridiculous matrix as if the events in a major league game are completely random. According to that horses*** table, the Red Sox should've scored 2.4366 runs in the 6th inning in game 3 of the ALDS. Put the calculator down "Clueless" Joe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 31, 2005 -> 02:08 PM) You are missing the overall point, but that's ok. Just like it's doesn't take a stat geek to see Pierre as a poor defender, which is after all what this all stemmed from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 31, 2005 Share Posted December 31, 2005 Just like it's doesn't take a stat geek to see Pierre as a poor defender, which is after all what this all stemmed from. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Right, it's an opinion. Stats can be interpreted in accordance with one's opinion of the player. Happens here all the time ... that's the point. 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.