Is Rickie's Production A Concern?

[kramnoj]

"There's a value in speed, but runs isn't the way to define it."

 

If speed doesn't translate to runs, it doesn't provide any actual value.

Either you misinterpreted what he meant, or you ignored it. Of course speed translates to runs, but you don't measure the runs you gain through speed by runs scored.

 

I didn't say that runs were the way to value speed, but I did say that speed is part of the value of runs. I don't understand your second sentence. I'm not trying to create a seperate measurement for runs gained through speed. I'm saying that runs go beyond waiting on base until being knocked in by a teammate.

[kramnoj]

"Runs are a result stat that have many influencing factors. As are wins and even ERA. I know you've acknowledged this, but then why use runs if you have to adjust the result for its proper context all the time? (Which would be a complicated process.)"

 

Because I think it's fun to look at something beyond OBP. Really, this should be a discussion forum. I come here to discuss things. If the only purpose of a stat discussion was to beat people over the head with OBP, why would anyone waste their time here?

[TerraceReserved]

TerraceReserved wrote:

Either you misinterpreted what he meant, or you ignored it. Of course speed translates to runs, but you don't measure the runs you gain through speed by runs scored.

I didn't say that runs were the way to value speed, but I did say that speed is part of the value of runs. I don't understand your second sentence. I'm not trying to create a seperate measurement for runs gained through speed. I'm saying that runs go beyond waiting on base until being knocked in by a teammate.

 

True, runs go beyond waiting on base, and speed does play a factor. But that said, there's no much noise in it that I don't think runs scored is a reliable method to see how well a player has performed.

[sbrylski]

I'm not trying to create a seperate measurement for runs gained through speed. I'm saying that runs go beyond waiting on base until being knocked in by a teammate.

 

We all agree with that second sentence. We disagree that run totals alone tell you anything close to the players extra ability to score over what their OBP would already suggest.

 

Because I think it's fun to look at something beyond OBP. Really, this should be a discussion forum. I come here to discuss things. If the only purpose of a stat discussion was to beat people over the head with OBP, why would anyone waste their time here?

 

Fun doesn't equal accurate though. Sure its a discussion forum meant for fun, but arguments still have to be true first, then fun second.

[kramnoj]

"Fun doesn't equal accurate though. Sure its a discussion forum meant for fun, but arguments still have to be true first, then fun second."

 

I think you should actually prove that anything I've said is inaccurate before throwing that around.

[Fatter than Joey]

I think you should actually prove that anything I've said is inaccurate before throwing that around.

 

You said this: Really, this should be a discussion forum.

 

It is undisputed fact that this should be Arby's

[Ennder]

Barry Bonds is not very fast anymore but if he played every single day in the middle of the yankees lineup he would probably lead the majors in runs. Corey Patterson is very fast but he is such a poor hitter he struggles to break 80 runs with full time play. Runs and Speed are not directly related.

[TooLiveBrew]

That's not a good analogy. Rickie is going to score a lot more runs than Ichiro is going to prevent HRs.

 

My analogy has nothing to do with the frequency of either occurance. I stand by it.

[Gopher74]

That's not a good analogy. Rickie is going to score a lot more runs than Ichiro is going to prevent HRs.

 

My analogy has nothing to do with the frequency of either occurance. I stand by it.

No, it's really a terrible analogy. I didn't respond to it at the time because I didn't think you meant it to be a serious analogy.

 

But in your analogy, you're comparing Weeks scoring runs, to the pitcher being bailed out on a ball that Ichiro has to bring back. So you're essentially equating leaving a ball up or over to get drilled and hit nearly out of the park is the same as Weeks getting on base to score runs.

 

No matter how you put it, Weeks is doing something good. How much credit he gets is to be debated for his runs, but the credit that goes to Ichiro versus the pitcher is not up for debate whatsoever. It's really a poor analogy.

 

Edit-I'll post the initial comment so as to clear up any confusion.

Whether or not he comes around to score is almost completely out of Rickie's control, so to give him credit for that is like giving a pitcher credit for 'hanging tough' on & retiring a batter because Ichiro pulled back what would have been a HR.

 

 

A better analogy would be to giving Weeks credit for scoring a run would be like giving a hitter credit for hitting a Ground Ball that scores a run, or hitting a sac fly that brings a run in. It's still not exactly perfect, but at least in that scenario, both are doing something positive, and the merits of just how positive they are can be debated.

[TooLiveBrew]

So you're essentially equating leaving a ball up or over to get drilled and hit nearly out of the park is the same as Weeks getting on base to score runs.

 

No, I'm pointing out that Rickie scoring a run has to do with other players way more than him, just as the pitcher recording an out in my example has to do with something out of his control. You can give up a bomb on a perfect pitch, not sure why you infer that it'd have to be an inherent failing/meatball on the pitcher's part.

 

I will admit it's not the juciest, most delicious analogy, but it works imo.

[Gopher74]

No, I'm pointing out that Rickie scoring a run has to do with other players way more than him, just as the pitcher recording an out in my example has to do with something out of his control. You can give up a bomb on a perfect pitch, not sure why you infer that it'd have to be an inherent failing/meatball on the pitcher's part.

 

I will admit it's not the juciest, most delicious analogy, but it works imo.

A pitcher throwing a ball that an OF'er has to jump up and bring it back isn't doing anything positive. You simply can't argue that Weeks getting on bae and scoring a run isn't doing anything positive.

The analogy doesn't mesh at all. Yes, in both cases, things are going on out of their control, but at least with Weeks, he's putting himself in position to do something positive.

 

And it's not real often that a pitcher gives up a bomb on a perfect pitch. I suppose if we're going to argue that, then we could also go to the extreme and say that Weeks go on via a passed ball on a third strike, was balked to 2nd, 3rd and then home. But since we're trying to use more reasonable situations, I don't think we should use any of the extreme outliers.

[kramnoj]

Barry Bonds is not very fast anymore but if he played every single day in the middle of the yankees lineup he would probably lead the majors in runs. Corey Patterson is very fast but he is such a poor hitter he struggles to break 80 runs with full time play. Runs and Speed are not directly related.

This is so strange. People keep arguing against things that I'm not saying. I haven't argued that runs and speed are directly related. I've argued that speed is a part of the value of runs. In your case, sure, Bonds speed will have very little to do with his runs scored.

 

This started in another thread. The poster known as Rickieweeksjr started his spiel again about how Weeks isn't a proven major leaguer because he has hit less than .250. I posted Weeks run scored because I found it interesting that Weeks has scored more runs than he has had hits. I thought that was an interesting way to show that players have offensive value beyond hitting the ball. Sure, it's an early season stat that won't last all season, but I was just utilizing it prove that BA is not a good way to judge Weeks value to the team. Than FTJ posted that runs scored are a worse data set than BA. I personally don't think that's true, and it is in no way true when discussing Weeks, which is what I was doing.

 

I've said that runs have value and that there aren't a lot of players who score runs that aren't providing value. I have never said that runs are the way to judge all players, but for some people everything has to be positive and negative, and nuance isn't valued. I haven't even said that Runs Scored should be the only stat to value a player, or even the best stat to value a player. I used it to make one point. Since then, people have assumed things I haven't said just because what I wrote isn't part of sabermetric orthodoxy. I love sabermetrics, but anyone who just parrots what they've read and doesn't actually use common sense is missing the point.

[kramnoj]

"I will admit it's not the juciest, most delicious analogy, but it works imo."

 

I'm not sure how it works. In my first post in this revived thread, I said that runs are team dependent. What does your analogy do to go beyond that? Analogies should be used to bring clarity where there isn't understanding. If a child doesn't understand fractions, you can explain that 8 pieces of a pizza represent 8 fractions of one number. That is an analogy. I don't understand what you are saying beyond what I have already stated. Weeks needs his teammates to score runs, but his speed represents a portion of the runs that he scores. Is that really so controversial?

[Greg Vaughn]

Yet there Weeks was, near the top of the heap in runs scored, entering the series tied for fourth in the Majors with 28. Both players with whom Weeks was tied -- the Cubs' Derrek Lee and the Pirates' Nate McLouth -- sported .411 on-base percentages, 85 points higher than Weeks'.

"That's not a weird stat. Rickie is a run-scorer," Yost said.

That may be true, but doesn't the math make him an unlikely run-scorer?

"It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter," Yost told reporters. "See, you guys have no concept. He's a run-scorer. So there's nothing weird about it. That's what he does."

http://milwaukee.brewers.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080506&content_id=2650163&vkey=news_mil&fext=.jsp&c_id=mil




Is Ned really this dumb?

[Gobias Industries]

I wanna be mad about how dumb he sounds but that is too funny. I can imagine the exchange between Yost and the reporters and it makes me laugh for some reason.

[Jacob008]

Weeks needs his teammates to score runs, but his speed represents a portion of the runs that he scores.

 

Felix Hernandex needs his teammates to make outs, but his pitching prowess represents a portion of the outs that he makes.

 

In the case of the pulled-back home run, and the run that weeks scores the vast majority of the "value" is created by the teammate. It's a simple, and appropriate analogy. Another CF and the "out" is a run. Another hitter and "run" is an out.

 

EDIT: sorry, i can't really follow these threads that are so very old, didn't realize i was responding to a post 2 weeks old. please feel free to ignore this.

[RU Rah Rah]

I really wish that Rickie's flashes of power weren't so . . .flashy. In a weird way, I would have been happier to see him hit a gapper to right-center last night.

[TooLiveBrew]

Is Ned really this dumb?

 

Unfortunately, yes.

 

 

What should comfort people about Rickie is that he's struggling massively, yet is on pace for 30-ish HR.

[jazzytrav]

What does it mean that we don't have any concept? Concept of what? That getting on base leads to runs?

[zzzmanwitz]

Rickie played well today.

[Darnell Junior]

No one is as unlucky as Rickie's shown this year. Eventually that batting average will rise.

[Glennron]

How awesome was that to see Weeks jacked after his hit? Maybe it's just me, but I've never really seen him show too much emotion so that was cool to see.

[endaround]

Weeks hasn't been that unlucky, he hasn't been driving the ball. BABIP should be about 11 points highther than a player's LD%. Week's LD% is at a putrid 11.6% leading to his BABIP of .206. Weeks needs to drive the ball.

[jazzytrav]

How awesome was that to see Weeks jacked after his hit? Maybe it's just me, but I've never really seen him show too much emotion so that was cool to see.

All statistics aside, it was just really cool to see SOME emotion from those guys last night, and even more cool to see it from Weeks.

[Ennder]

Weeks hasn't been that unlucky, he hasn't been driving the ball. BABIP should be about 11 points highther than a player's LD%. Week's LD% is at a putrid 11.6% leading to his BABIP of .206. Weeks needs to drive the ball.

 

LD% is pretty luck driven as well though or at least it is subject to very high variance. As a fast player he should get more BABIP out of his groundballs than most as well. I've never seen a good study that suggests you can turn LD% into BABIP accurately.

I would expect his BABIP to be low though because of all the popups, just not nearly that low.