Cameron's option picked up (see reply #128)

[Ennder]

But what about the hitters who excel at hitting 2-0, get-me-over fastballs into the gap or out of the park? They're penalized. It just doesn't seem complete to ignore stuff like that or to assume that every first pitch ball in play is an out, or unproductive one. Seems like pretty massive analysis would be necessary could get the complete picture on what pitchers per PA really means

 

Not at all, we aren't trying to decide if Cameron seeing a lot of pitches helps or hurts him, we KNOW that it hurts the pitchers and that is a good thing. Regardless of why Cameron sees the pitches he is seeing them and it is running up pitcher's pitch counts which helps the team.

[valpocrewsader]

Not at all, we aren't trying to decide if Cameron seeing a lot of pitches helps or hurts him, we KNOW that it hurts the pitchers and that is a good thing. Regardless of why Cameron sees the pitches he is seeing them and it is running up pitcher's pitch counts which helps the team.

But if Batter A strikes out on 5 pitches, that could be worse than Batter A getting a hit on 3 pitches, extending the inning, and letting Batter B strike out on 5 pitches.

[Baldkin]

I wanted to drop this into the thread, as it seems relevant with all the strikeout talk:

 

Just another out?

 

Things to note: You can't compare an outcome to a yet-to-be-determined outcome. IE: You can't compare a strikeout to a batted, but not yet fielded ball. The same way that you can't compare a 6-4-3 double play to an 0-2 count.

 

Anyway, back to the thread topic... Cam is a steal at 1 year, 10million. We aren't going to get 3 wins out of 10million at any other position, and he's worth that over any of the other options I've seen thrown around in the thread.

[paul253]

As for the predictive value of a ball in play, nobody here is comparing strike outs to hits. They're comparing them to outs

 

Right, but I'm saying that if instread of striking out 100 times, surely if you put the ball in play half of those times you'd be getting more hits. So while you comparing these, you are assuming that if they put the ball in play all of them would be outs, which I dont think would be the case. I think some of them would turn into hits or errors, which would increase the run margin.

[Ennder]

But if Batter A strikes out on 5 pitches, that could be worse than Batter A getting a hit on 3 pitches, extending the inning, and letting Batter B strike out on 5 pitches

 

Yeah but we would look at their OBP/SLG to see this side of things. I guess I'm missing your point with this. Going deep into counts is good no matter what, you want to run up the pitchers pitch count and get him out of the game. It isn't a stat that is trying to place some huge amount of value on a player, it is a fringe benefit type of stat like say being able to take 3rd from first base on a single(something else that cameron is very good at that doesn't show in OBP/SLG).

[brewjihad]

Right, but I'm saying that if instread of striking out 100 times, surely if you put the ball in play half of those times you'd be getting more hits. So while you comparing these, you are assuming that if they put the ball in play all of them would be outs, which I dont think would be the case. I think some of them would turn into hits or errors, which would increase the run margin.

 

Right, but every ball put in play eliminates the chance of drawing a walk or getting hit by a pitch. So you have to weigh this as well.

[homer]

Right, but I'm saying that if instread of striking out 100 times, surely if you put the ball in play half of those times you'd be getting more hits. So while you comparing these, you are assuming that if they put the ball in play all of them would be outs, which I dont think would be the case. I think some of them would turn into hits or errors, which would increase the run margin.

Probably, but by the same token perhaps swinging more means you take fewer pitches and you walk less.

[Ennder]

Right, but I'm saying that if instread of striking out 100 times, surely if you put the ball in play half of those times you'd be getting more hits. So while you comparing these, you are assuming that if they put the ball in play all of them would be outs, which I dont think would be the case. I think some of them would turn into hits or errors, which would increase the run margin

 

This is exactly where the strikeouts don't matter discussions always bog down. This is NOT the point of the argument at all. Of course if we could keep everything else exactly the same and just make every strikeout of a player go away and become a ball in play they would be a more productive player, nobody disagrees with that at all. The point is that isn't realistic and you would see a dramatic change in OBP/SLG if this happened which is really why the player is more productive. If you want to boil the argument down to it's simplist state just answer this question...

 

Player A hits .243/.344/.475 with 170 K

Player B hits .293/.344/.475 with 50 K

 

Which player is more valuable and by how much?

 

The answer is they are almost identical in value. The lower average and extra strike outs have an almost negligible effect on the game. Player A most likely goes deeper into counts since he walks more and strikes out more, he also probably hits into fewer double plays. Player B moves runners around the bases a little bit better. The overall difference between these players is something like 1-2 runs over a full season. If you have the players OBP and SLG the number of strike outs he has is pretty much not important to the discussion.

 

The team who leads the league in strike outs can easily still lead the league in runs scored. If a team is in the bottom of the league in OBP and SLG there is almost no way for them to compete in runs scored, even if the team somehow has 0 strike outs on the year. Strike outs just aren't an important part of the equation.

[homer]

The team who leads the league in strike outs can easily still lead the league in runs scored.

Great point. Just look at this past season. Texas was 4th in the AL in Ks and led the AL in runs scored.

[1992casey]

paul253, as a whole, strikeouts will increase as OBP and SLG increase. Note that I'm not implying that increased strikeouts cause increased OBP and SLG. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

The problem is that being too anxious to put the ball in play will result in too much weak contact. Making solid contact is likely to involve waiting for the right pitch. Waiting for the right pitch will mean some called strikes, and called strikes will certainly result in strikeouts.

 

valpo, with P/PA, we need to look at the big picture. As a whole, a higher P/PA is more likely to get a hitter on base than a low one will. Certainly, however, a batter should swing at the first pitch if it's the right one.

 

Adding to what Ennder says, we don't really use P/PA to tell us a player's value; other stats do that better. We use P/PA to tell us what a player's habits are and to describe the type of hitter he is.

[logan82]

The team who leads the league in strike outs can easily still lead the league in runs scored.

Great point. Just look at this past season. Texas was 4th in the AL in Ks and led the AL in runs scored.

The 5 teams best at not striking out were ranked(in order) 26, 21, 4, 12, and 15 in runs scored.

[danzig6767]

As for the predictive value of a ball in play, nobody here is comparing strike outs to hits. They're comparing them to outs

 

Right, but I'm saying that if instread of striking out 100 times, surely if you put the ball in play half of those times you'd be getting more hits. So while you comparing these, you are assuming that if they put the ball in play all of them would be outs, which I dont think would be the case. I think some of them would turn into hits or errors, which would increase the run margin.

Paul, the two links will show you the rankings for runs scored in the NL last year and the following is strikeout totals per team. Look at them and tell me where there is any pattern to where teams finish in runs scored compared to their strikeout totals? Many of the better scoring teams were also among the highest strikeout teams. Some of the teams who struck out the least were also bad at scoring runs. In other cases it's the reverse. Same goes for the AL.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com...Type=batting&type=reg

 

http://sports.espn.go.com...ype=batting&type=exp1

[logan82]

Since we are discussing it again, I will post my graphs again. 2008 rankings in strikeouts, walks, HR, BA, OBP SLg and OPS vs ranking for runs scored. The stuff Danzig linked in graph form. What we should expect to see is a line ging from the bottom left hand corner to the top right hand corner if a stat is closely related to runs scored. The closer to a line the points are gathered the more closely related to runs the stat is.

 

Link

[zzzmanwitz]

Logan, that is a great data set. I've never seen that before. I mean, I believed it, but never saw it right in front of my face like that. Thanks!

[rluzinski]

Here's what Michael Lichtman uses for average run values for each batting event:

 

so = -.288 runs

FB outs = -.274

GB outs = -.288 for a lefty batter (he didn't give it for a righty)

 

The groundball out includes the possibility of a double play. So according to him, a lefty with a 1:1 GB/FB ratio will create .7 less runs for every 100 strikeouts compared to 100 ball-in-play OUTS. That agrees pretty well with the 100 Ks = -1 runs rule of thumb.

 

This has been verified every-which way. Multi-variable regression on actual games, markov analysis and simulations. If you think that over the course of a season , an average strikeout is significantly worse than an average ball-in-play out, there is no evidence that supports that opinion.

 

If we are trying to measure the value of Cameron's offensive performance from 2008, we can completely ignore his strikeouts and lose little in our estimate.

[Leinie Lodge]

If we are trying to measure the value of Cameron's offensive performance from 2008, we can completely ignore his strikeouts and lose little in our estimate.

Debunking the Strikeout Myth ... an upcoming episode of Mythbusters? http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

[DuWayne Steurer]

Debunking the Strikeout Myth ... an upcoming episode of Mythbusters? http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

That's like aliens and ghosts. The people that believe will continue to believe, regardless of the evidence or lack of.

[Ennder]

Here is an interesting article and I like the idea of trading Cameron for the lefties we need.

 

http://www.nypost.com/sev...d_move_cabrera_137265.htm

 

Cameron for Betemit, Melky Cabrera and a pitcher. Both Cabrera and Betemit are switch hitters who hit better left handed and Betemit can play 3B.

 

I guess that probably belongs in trade rumors but I put it here to show that Cameron obviously has enough value at $10M for 1 year that other teams are willing to trade for that.

 

.

[bklynbrewcrew]

Melky Cabrera is no better than Gwynn. Id rather keep Cameron that take Cabrera in exchange for him.

[DuWayne Steurer]

Ugh. No thanks. Cabrera has trended downward each year he's been a full time player and Betemit is Branyan with about half the power. (And he only walked 6 times in 160+ PA's last year)

[JohnBriggs12]

It's Cabrera, Betemit, a pitcher and $10 million of salary relief (minus what you'd pay those guys) and you guys don't like that deal?

 

How can you not like that deal? Melvin couldn't decide until the last moment possible whether it was worth bringing Cameron back or not for nothing in return.

 

Betemit is similar to Branyan, but he plays all 4 infield spots and would replace Counsell on the roster not Branyan (who's not likely to be back anyway).

 

Cabrera's still just 24 and is much more accomplished than Gwynn. He's better from the left side. Even in his worst year, he hit .265/.311/.359 against right handers. He could platoon in CF with Kapler (if he's brought back) or Hall for that matter. Besides Cabrera saw pretty good pitching in that AL East on a daily basis. The NL Central isn't nearly as strong.

 

"he walked only 6 times in over 160 PA last year"

 

But in 2007 with the Dodgers he walked 32 times in around 190 PA. I suspect the Yankees used him in situations where they wanted him to be agressive.

[fondybrewfan]

Cabrera's still just 24 and is much more accomplished than Gwynn. He's better from the left side. Even in his worst year, he hit .265/.311/.359 against right handers.

His best year was also only .278/.361/.762.

 

Cameron last year against Righties was .231/.309/761

 

So Cam gives up a bunch of OBP but more than makes up for it in SLG. Plus Cam plays better defense and can actually hit off of lefties

[And That]

Let's keep all the Cameron trade rumors in this thread in the transaction rumors forum please. Thanks.