Jose Abreu general discussion

[southsider2k5]

No, sorry, I should have been clearer and I also shouldn't have made a gigantic typo. Those were the numbers for all AL hitters, and it's actually .255/.318/.394, not .225/.318/.394.

 

For left fielders, it's not all that different. .255/.322/.402

 

Cool. Thanks!

[Balta1701]

There are 2 off days this week with 2 games in-between. Jose Abreu should get at least one of those days off. He won't, but he should. Looks completely out of it at the plate today. Not hurt, just exhausted.

 

 

It's nice to know that I don't have to complain about Abreu's lack of time off, you beat me to it every single time. Thanks.

 

 

Well, that's 0/5 with 2 strikeouts in the first of the 2 games that I said Abreu should have a chance to sit during. Will he be in the lineup again today? I'll call myself impressed if he isn't.

Even Hawk commented on how tired Abreu appeared on Sunday. He's starting again today in what would have been a perfect time to get him just one extra day off.

 

 

[Vance Law]

Even Hawk commented on how tired Abreu appeared on Sunday. He's starting again today in what would have been a perfect time to get him just one extra day off.

 

The manager, the general manager, and the owner who's paying him many millions of dollars clearly don't care what happens to Abreu and/or don't bother to pay any attention.

 

Only internet message board posters do.

[Balta1701]

The manager, the general manager, and the owner who's paying him many millions of dollars clearly don't care what happens to Abreu and/or don't bother to pay any attention.

 

Only internet message board posters do.

Since his hitting streak ended he is hitting .194 with a .515 OPS and a single extra base hit. Not paying attention seems like the least negative excuse.

[Vance Law]

Since his hitting streak ended he is hitting .194 with a .515 OPS and a single extra base hit. Not paying attention seems like the least negative excuse.

 

They probably don't even watch the games or know that Abreu was an all-star this year. I bet Hahn couldn't even tell you the name of the team who plays in San Francisco.

[Balta1701]

They probably don't even watch the games or know that Abreu was an all-star this year. I bet Hahn couldn't even tell you the name of the team who plays in San Francisco.

I see, so you're in on the "they actively want him hurt" version. Well that fits with how they've treated him this year too.

[Vance Law]

I see, so you're in on the "they actively want him hurt" version. Well that fits with how they've treated him this year too.

 

I am being sarcastic, if that wasn't clear.

 

If there was something physically wrong with him, they'd put him on the DL like they did earlier this year, and told his fatass to lose weight to help relieve strain he'll put on his ankles/feet over the long season.

 

If he is suffering from being "mentally tired" from the grind of the long season he's not accustomed to, great. That is another thing he is experiencing and hopefully improving upon in a season that does not matter so that he's better prepared for it in a season that does matter. Abreu having the experience of fighting through a slump and coming out the other end is an excellent thing to be gained in this season that doesn't matter.

 

If Jake Petricka falters in a high pressure situation, make him do it again, and then again. I'm glad he's doing it this year because the Won-Lost record doesn't matter. Same thing.

 

 

 

 

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

1. I bet you've seen about 0.01% of the games they've played in over the last four years, and I would posit that is not anywhere in the range of enough information to have an opinion that is more reliable than all of the data from the most advanced publicly available statistical analyses of defensive value that currently exist. The concept of "this data must be wrong because it doesn't match up with what I already think" is completely illogical, especially when "what you already think" is based on a very small sample of non-professional observation that happened years ago.

 

2. Generalizations are useful for context, but outliers always exist. In terms of late-career improvement, they aren't even THAT rare. Jhonny Peralta jumps to mind immediately. Jose Bautista jumps to mind immediately.

 

3. Why does it make sense that hitters can get better with experience but defenders can't? Quickness declines just like bat speed declines, so why doesn't every player always peak at age 22?

1. Why even bother sending professional scouts to big league games then? How could they possibly form an educated opinion about a player from watching him in 1 game? Why not just go purely with statistical data?

 

2. I never said there aren't outliers but I do think it is very rare that a player would improve defensively in his late 30s.

 

3. Simple answer: hitting is far more mental than defense. Hitting is less dependent on physical ability than defense. I guarantee that statistics would prove that a player's peak years defensively happens at a younger age than his peak year's offensively.

Edited August 14, 2014 by JUSTgottaBELIEVE

[Kyyle23]

I see, so you're in on the "they actively want him hurt" version. Well that fits with how they've treated him this year too.

 

I like how Monday and Thursday don't qualify as days off for you. It is only when he is not in the lineup that he actually gets better physically and mentally. Despite the fact that we both know that he will still come to the park and get all of his work in just like any normal day, but merely not play in the game.

 

The guy may be tired, but he isn't hurt, and he is learning what a 162 game grind is like on the fly.

[LittleHurt05]

I like how Monday and Thursday don't qualify as days off for you. It is only when he is not in the lineup that he actually gets better physically and mentally. Despite the fact that we both know that he will still come to the park and get all of his work in just like any normal day, but merely not play in the game.

 

The guy may be tired, but he isn't hurt, and he is learning what a 162 game grind is like on the fly.

 

His time on the DL skewers the numbers, but why can't you teach him what a 150 game grind is like? Then next year he will be more prepared for 162 games. I know he's not a pitcher where his arm needs to adapt to innings limits, but he can adapt to the grind over the course of 2 years, nobody is contending this year.

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

First, read this, published a couple months ago. This is how even a left fielder can flex defensive value.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-value-o...-using-his-arm/

 

Second, his offensive numbers are not "very average."

American League: .255/.318/.394

Alex Gordon: .280/.356/.436

 

 

The article I linked above is one of MANY I have read that references error bars or something like them. Jonah Keri published a piece on Grantland today that includes the phrase "given the vagaries of defensive metrics." I'm sure you have examples to the contrary but I can't really be held responsible for those.

 

And as far as I can tell, you believe the defensive component of WAR is deeply flawed because you believe the defensive component of WAR is deeply flawed. Whether it is or isn't, it's definitely a lot more reliable than saying, "That guy can't be better than this guy because I know it's he's not."

this article pretty much sums up my feelings about WAR

 

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/8900693/...eplacement-stat

 

this post pretty much sums up my feelings about defensive metrics and more specifically OF defensive metrics

 

http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/...e-sabremetrics/

 

take a look at this list and I'm sure more than a few names will jump out to you as being out of place or at least they should

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=...=&players=0

 

[Kyyle23]

His time on the DL skewers the numbers, but why can't you teach him what a 150 game grind is like? Then next year he will be more prepared for 162 games. I know he's not a pitcher where his arm needs to adapt to innings limits, but he can adapt to the grind over the course of 2 years, nobody is contending this year.

 

Because they all go through this, they all hit a wall and have to push through. Plus, he may look tired, but he also may be in another period of adjustment. He looked like this in may after his hot start as well, and all the sudden snapped back into form and went on a tear until his ankle started barking.

 

If the guy can play, he should. He isn't a child, he has been doing this his whole life.

[southsider2k5]

His time on the DL skewers the numbers, but why can't you teach him what a 150 game grind is like? Then next year he will be more prepared for 162 games. I know he's not a pitcher where his arm needs to adapt to innings limits, but he can adapt to the grind over the course of 2 years, nobody is contending this year.

 

We've seen the Sox do the same thing with pitchers, who have a much higher chance at injury.

[witesoxfan]

this article pretty much sums up my feelings about WAR

 

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/8900693/...eplacement-stat

 

this post pretty much sums up my feelings about defensive metrics and more specifically OF defensive metrics

 

http://itsaboutthemoney.net/archives/2011/...e-sabremetrics/

 

take a look at this list and I'm sure more than a few names will jump out to you as being out of place or at least they should

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=...=&players=0

 

Regarding Caple's argument, he says he doesn't like that people are using it as "THE definitive evaluation of a player's worth." No one involved in sabermetrics uses it this way. I personally felt that Trout deserved the MVP the last two seasons because he was an incredible all around offensive player plus he played very good defense. I felt his contributions were worth more to his team than Cabrera's were. I have no problem with the other argument and had no problem with Cabrera's MVPs.

 

He then says it's too complicated. That's a pretty terrible argument against something, and really, it's not. Here is FanGraphs easy definitions:

 

"Offensive players: Take wRAA, UBR & wSB, and UZR (which express offensive, base running, and defensive value in runs above average) and add them together. Add in a positional adjustment, since some positions are tougher to play than others, and then convert the numbers so that they’re not based on league average, but on replacement level (which is the value a team would lose if they had to replace that player with a “replacement” player – a minor leaguer or someone from the waiver wire). Convert the run value to wins (10 runs = 1 win) and voila, finished!

 

"Pitchers: Pitchers – Where offensive WAR used wRAA and UZR, pitching WAR uses FIP. Based on how many innings a pitcher threw, FIP is turned into runs form, converted to represent value above replacement level, and is then converted from runs to wins."

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/library/misc/war/

 

That doesn't seem overly complicated to me. It may be time consuming and tedious to manually calculate individual WARs, but it's not complicated.

 

His next argument is that there are multiple WAR statistics. That's because the two primary sites - B-R and FanGraphs - use two different sets of data, neither of which are wrong, to compute WAR. Consider how you rate the best NFL offenses and defenses in the league. Some people will use yards per game and some will use points per game. It's essentially the same exact process. Yards per game will give a better indication of future success - if a team puts up 450 total yards and doesn't turn the ball over, but only scores 19 points through 4 field goals and 1 touchdown, you would assume that, so long as they continue putting up 450 yards, they'll score points - but total point scored will tell you how often they have actually done it to that point. It's the same difference between fWAR and bWAR, especially for pitchers.

 

Regarding the 3rd link, you are letting a pre-conceived notion bias your opinion again. Just because a guy does not seem like he should be there doesn't mean he shouldn't be there. Some of it likely has to do with Kansas City's park and pitching style - Gordon leads left fielders on balls going into his zone, but he also leads all left fielders on plays made out of his zone. Look at how the fans have scouted him though - very good instincts, good first step, OK speed, good hands, great release, good arm strength and incredible accuracy. Per those calculations, the fans scouting reports says Gordon has saved 16 runs in LF.

 

These are good tools to have. As has been said ad nauseum, these are not the end all, be all, but they do help us see a broader picture.

[Goober]

Except war isn't claiming it measures best player, it is supposed to measures a more exact figure of wins above replacement. So how could somebody be worth 13 wins more oh but also 17 wins more? They can't, and that should destroy any credibility the stat has as it is then contrived. Like I did with my TIP compared to FIP, I could make my own WAR formula and it would be no more and (more importantly) no less valid a stat than war

[Feeky Magee]

Except war isn't claiming it measures best player, it is supposed to measures a more exact figure of wins above replacement. So how could somebody be worth 13 wins more oh but also 17 wins more? They can't, and that should destroy any credibility the stat has as it is then contrived. Like I did with my TIP compared to FIP, I could make my own WAR formula and it would be no more and (more importantly) no less valid a stat than war

What

[witesoxfan]

Except war isn't claiming it measures best player, it is supposed to measures a more exact figure of wins above replacement. So how could somebody be worth 13 wins more oh but also 17 wins more? They can't, and that should destroy any credibility the stat has as it is then contrived. Like I did with my TIP compared to FIP, I could make my own WAR formula and it would be no more and (more importantly) no less valid a stat than war

 

There are different ways to measure how much value teams provide offensively, defensively, and pitching wise, and they suggest that these players would be worth x amount, given the measurements they are using. WAR is a context neutral statistic in all settings - it does not take situations into consideration but says that, if every at bat and every play were held in the same environment, this is how much said player would contribute. You can very generally say if you add a 3 WAR player to the team, you add 3 wins to the team (and you will see people do so and not be cricitized), but that is to be taken with an abnormally large grain of salt. If an NFL team has the best offense in the league and puts up 6000 yards from scrimmage, you would assume that they are, at bare bones minimum, a 10 win team based solely on how good that offense is. But if they have the worst special teams in the league and they always start at their own 5, and their defense doesn't stop an opponent all year long, then those things are costing them wins and they may only win 2-4 games.

 

You could make TIP, but it would also have to be generally accepted by the public as well. I could make a WIP that set up a bias towards RBI, 3B, and CS, come up with a list of players, and say "Look at this," but if the general public says this is not a valid statistic, then it is not valid. WAR, especially fWAR (and to a lesser extent, bWAR), is a very well accepted and often cited statistic. Frankly, that alone validifies it, but that doesn't mean they aren't trying to improve the statistic to paint an even clearer picture moving forward.

 

Now, if people do not want to use WAR or they disagree with WAR, that's their belief, but just because there are different statistics used to measure the same thing doesn't discredit it whatsoever, especially if there is one that is preferred over the other (or when both groups acknowledge the benefits and shortfalls of each statistic and share knowledge amongst each other).

 

There is no perfect statistic, but using the WARs together, along with all other statistics, will help you figure out who the best players in the league are.

[Eminor3rd]

1. Why even bother sending professional scouts to big league games then? How could they possibly form an educated opinion about a player from watching him in 1 game? Why not just go purely with statistical data?

 

2. I never said there aren't outliers but I do think it is very rare that a player would improve defensively in his late 30s.

 

3. Simple answer: hitting is far more mental than defense. Hitting is less dependent on physical ability than defense. I guarantee that statistics would prove that a player's peak years defensively happens at a younger age than his peak year's offensively.

 

1. First, because scouts at lower levels are looking to evaluate talent over skill. You can see how fast a guy runs or how hard a guy throws and be certain that a player's capability will remain consistent in the short-term, but you CAN'T necessarily get a good idea of how that will translate to performance going forward. Secondly, in the upper levels or when a decision over acquisition has to be made, they DON'T only see them once. They send multiple people several times and compare their reports with their peers.

 

2. Certainly rare, but since it's not impossible and there are outliers, then the existence of outliers should not be a sufficient condition to discard a model.

 

3. I strongly disagree with the premise that hitting is far more mental than defense. I also disagree that hitting is less dependent on physical ability -- it's just a different type of physical ability. Statistics do in fact prove that player's defensive peak years typically occur at a younger age than their offensive peak years, but that does not invalidate the existence of outliers.

[Eminor3rd]

Regarding Caple's argument, he says he doesn't like that people are using it as "THE definitive evaluation of a player's worth." No one involved in sabermetrics uses it this way. I personally felt that Trout deserved the MVP the last two seasons because he was an incredible all around offensive player plus he played very good defense. I felt his contributions were worth more to his team than Cabrera's were. I have no problem with the other argument and had no problem with Cabrera's MVPs.

 

He then says it's too complicated. That's a pretty terrible argument against something, and really, it's not. Here is FanGraphs easy definitions:

 

"Offensive players: Take wRAA, UBR & wSB, and UZR (which express offensive, base running, and defensive value in runs above average) and add them together. Add in a positional adjustment, since some positions are tougher to play than others, and then convert the numbers so that they’re not based on league average, but on replacement level (which is the value a team would lose if they had to replace that player with a “replacement” player – a minor leaguer or someone from the waiver wire). Convert the run value to wins (10 runs = 1 win) and voila, finished!

 

"Pitchers: Pitchers – Where offensive WAR used wRAA and UZR, pitching WAR uses FIP. Based on how many innings a pitcher threw, FIP is turned into runs form, converted to represent value above replacement level, and is then converted from runs to wins."

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/library/misc/war/

 

That doesn't seem overly complicated to me. It may be time consuming and tedious to manually calculate individual WARs, but it's not complicated.

 

His next argument is that there are multiple WAR statistics. That's because the two primary sites - B-R and FanGraphs - use two different sets of data, neither of which are wrong, to compute WAR. Consider how you rate the best NFL offenses and defenses in the league. Some people will use yards per game and some will use points per game. It's essentially the same exact process. Yards per game will give a better indication of future success - if a team puts up 450 total yards and doesn't turn the ball over, but only scores 19 points through 4 field goals and 1 touchdown, you would assume that, so long as they continue putting up 450 yards, they'll score points - but total point scored will tell you how often they have actually done it to that point. It's the same difference between fWAR and bWAR, especially for pitchers.

 

Regarding the 3rd link, you are letting a pre-conceived notion bias your opinion again. Just because a guy does not seem like he should be there doesn't mean he shouldn't be there. Some of it likely has to do with Kansas City's park and pitching style - Gordon leads left fielders on balls going into his zone, but he also leads all left fielders on plays made out of his zone. Look at how the fans have scouted him though - very good instincts, good first step, OK speed, good hands, great release, good arm strength and incredible accuracy. Per those calculations, the fans scouting reports says Gordon has saved 16 runs in LF.

 

These are good tools to have. As has been said ad nauseum, these are not the end all, be all, but they do help us see a broader picture.

 

Killer post, Forum Administrator.

[Eminor3rd]

Except war isn't claiming it measures best player, it is supposed to measures a more exact figure of wins above replacement. So how could somebody be worth 13 wins more oh but also 17 wins more? They can't, and that should destroy any credibility the stat has as it is then contrived. Like I did with my TIP compared to FIP, I could make my own WAR formula and it would be no more and (more importantly) no less valid a stat than war

 

This post very clearly indicates that you do not understand what WAR is, how it's calculated, or what it measures. Therefore, I don't blame you for being skeptical. If you still aren't clear after reading wite's post above, I would suggest reading up on linear weights, because that is the central concept behind assigning run values, which it seems like you think is random. If you read up on linear weights and have a problem with how THEY are used, you might have a legitimate argument against WAR in general.

 

If I thought the run values were random, I probably wouldn't like WAR either. I'm not trying to sound pretentious or condescending; I don't think all of this stuff is a matter of being smart or not. I think it's more about how much reading one is willing to do, lol. It's just really hard to take an argument seriously from someone who HASN'T done that reading, you know? Like you shouldn't take political advice from Reddit posts because they are made by people who are simply reacting to headlines with ideas -- but haven't taken the time to actually understand the mechanics of the issues.

[JUSTgottaBELIEVE]

Regarding Caple's argument, he says he doesn't like that people are using it as "THE definitive evaluation of a player's worth." No one involved in sabermetrics uses it this way. I personally felt that Trout deserved the MVP the last two seasons because he was an incredible all around offensive player plus he played very good defense. I felt his contributions were worth more to his team than Cabrera's were. I have no problem with the other argument and had no problem with Cabrera's MVPs.

 

He then says it's too complicated. That's a pretty terrible argument against something, and really, it's not. Here is FanGraphs easy definitions:

 

"Offensive players: Take wRAA, UBR & wSB, and UZR (which express offensive, base running, and defensive value in runs above average) and add them together. Add in a positional adjustment, since some positions are tougher to play than others, and then convert the numbers so that they’re not based on league average, but on replacement level (which is the value a team would lose if they had to replace that player with a “replacement” player – a minor leaguer or someone from the waiver wire). Convert the run value to wins (10 runs = 1 win) and voila, finished!

 

"Pitchers: Pitchers – Where offensive WAR used wRAA and UZR, pitching WAR uses FIP. Based on how many innings a pitcher threw, FIP is turned into runs form, converted to represent value above replacement level, and is then converted from runs to wins."

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/library/misc/war/

 

That doesn't seem overly complicated to me. It may be time consuming and tedious to manually calculate individual WARs, but it's not complicated.

 

His next argument is that there are multiple WAR statistics. That's because the two primary sites - B-R and FanGraphs - use two different sets of data, neither of which are wrong, to compute WAR. Consider how you rate the best NFL offenses and defenses in the league. Some people will use yards per game and some will use points per game. It's essentially the same exact process. Yards per game will give a better indication of future success - if a team puts up 450 total yards and doesn't turn the ball over, but only scores 19 points through 4 field goals and 1 touchdown, you would assume that, so long as they continue putting up 450 yards, they'll score points - but total point scored will tell you how often they have actually done it to that point. It's the same difference between fWAR and bWAR, especially for pitchers.

 

Regarding the 3rd link, you are letting a pre-conceived notion bias your opinion again. Just because a guy does not seem like he should be there doesn't mean he shouldn't be there. Some of it likely has to do with Kansas City's park and pitching style - Gordon leads left fielders on balls going into his zone, but he also leads all left fielders on plays made out of his zone. Look at how the fans have scouted him though - very good instincts, good first step, OK speed, good hands, great release, good arm strength and incredible accuracy. Per those calculations, the fans scouting reports says Gordon has saved 16 runs in LF.

 

These are good tools to have. As has been said ad nauseum, these are not the end all, be all, but they do help us see a broader picture.

1. Who are these people? Folks that work for fangraphs? BMLB GMs? Just trying to understand the definition of "those involved in sabermetrics." It is cited endlessly as the primary criterion in player performance evaluation, and very rarely used as a "complimentary" statistic in conjunction with other statistics by the countless articles I have read on ESPN, SB Nation, etc. as well as forums on this site.

 

2. How is it pre-conceived that De Aza is poor defensive LF? I have watched the guy play the position all season. According to the link, he's actually an ABOVE average defensive LF. Just sayin

[caulfield12]

1. First, because scouts at lower levels are looking to evaluate talent over skill. You can see how fast a guy runs or how hard a guy throws and be certain that a player's capability will remain consistent in the short-term, but you CAN'T necessarily get a good idea of how that will translate to performance going forward. Secondly, in the upper levels or when a decision over acquisition has to be made, they DON'T only see them once. They send multiple people several times and compare their reports with their peers.

 

2. Certainly rare, but since it's not impossible and there are outliers, then the existence of outliers should not be a sufficient condition to discard a model.

 

3. I strongly disagree with the premise that hitting is far more mental than defense. I also disagree that hitting is less dependent on physical ability -- it's just a different type of physical ability. Statistics do in fact prove that player's defensive peak years typically occur at a younger age than their offensive peak years, but that does not invalidate the existence of outliers.

 

See Pods, Mackowiak, Viciedo, DeAza, Rios, etc.

[Kyyle23]

Killer post, Forum Administrator.

 

he will let this get to his head

[caulfield12]

1. Who are these people? Folks that work for fangraphs? BMLB GMs? Just trying to understand the definition of "those involved in sabermetrics." It is cited endlessly as the primary criterion in player performance evaluation, and very rarely used as a "complimentary" statistic in conjunction with other statistics by the countless articles I have read on ESPN, SB Nation, etc. as well as forums on this site.

 

2. How is it pre-conceived that De Aza is poor defensive LF? I have watched the guy play the position all season. According to the link, he's actually an ABOVE average defensive LF. Just sayin

 

 

The ball he misplayed against the Twins that ended up being the game-winner for them (late getting back, drifting, and it bounced off the top of his glove as he hopped for it at the last second), was that considered to be a play he SHOULD have made by those who assess these defensive situations?

[Eminor3rd]

See Pods, Mackowiak, Viciedo, DeAza, Rios, etc.

 

Not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing, but just to clarify my statement -- I'm claiming that hitting and defense are both very "mental."