|
Post by 1611Luginbill on Jun 21, 2012 8:33:49 GMT -8
So you admit that Venable is running against the wind and Hamilton is running with the wind? They're running in the same heat Bill. Re-read my post again.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 21, 2012 8:36:43 GMT -8
So you admit that Venable is running against the wind and Hamilton is running with the wind? They're running in the same heat Bill. Re-read my post again. They are not running in the same heat. Josh Hamilton plays at Texas Stadium and Will Venable plays at Petco Park. Anologys are only good if they relate to the real world.
If you take Josh Hamilton's road numbers for last year and apply Petco Park's percentages to them you get: Josh Hamilton's overall 2011 if his home games were in Petco Park.282 .333 .490 .823
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 21, 2012 8:40:40 GMT -8
Venable road 2012: .324 .383 .590 .973 Headley Road 2012: .272 .382 .474 .856 2011 Ranger's advantage at homeThe Rangers had an 18.8% better BA at home than on the road. The Rangers had an 12.8% better OBP at home than on the road. The Rangers had an 33.0% better SLG at home than on the road. The Rangers had an 23.7% better OPS at home than on the road. If you take the average difference home and road of Texas players (2011) and apply those home numbers to the players stats above you get the following projected numbers for the two players (to this point in the season), if they had been playing at the Texas home park. Venable .385 .432 .785 1.217 Headley .323 .431 .630 1.061 It turns Headley into a major star and, this year, so far, makes Venable a Josh Hamilton. Opps. That would be their home numbers. Their overall numbers need to have their road numbers averaged back in. They are below: Will Venable .355 .407 .687 1.095 Chase Headley .298 .406 .552 .959 That makes more sense. I was surprised by the other numbers. Then I realized what I did (or didn't). To be more fair, below is the entire 2011 season for the two players doing the same thing. Will Venable .295 .336 .460 .796 Chase Headley .361 .424 .542 .966 If we ever trade Headley, I hope the person on the Padres end understands these things, because Headley is a very, very good player. In any case, a couple years down the road there will be a lot of Padre fans very upset about the trade.
|
|
|
Post by 1611Luginbill on Jun 21, 2012 9:22:26 GMT -8
Hamilton really struggles at Petco....
Last 3 games Hamilton: 3-10, 3R, 3RBI, 3k Venable: 0-11, 0R, 0RBI, 3k
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 21, 2012 10:06:27 GMT -8
Hamilton really struggles at Petco.... Last 3 games Hamilton: 3-10, 3R, 3RBI, 3k Venable: 0-11, 0R, 0RBI, 3k You are really going to use 2 games as proof of anything? Does SSS mean anything to you? But if I did take 2 games of stats seriously, I would note that Hamilton's BA, SLG, and OBP were much lower than his overall numbers.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 21, 2012 10:09:06 GMT -8
They are not running in the same heat. Josh Hamilton plays at Texas Stadium and Will Venable plays at Petco Park. You'd think that the Rangers had offered us Hamilton for Venable and a fringe player. I haven't yet seen any rumors to that effect, not even on ESPN Insider... No. Maybe you would think. I wouldn't think that. I don't know why you would think I would. I never said Venable was as good a player as Hamilton.
|
|
|
Post by Section T(urn Up) on Jun 21, 2012 11:12:45 GMT -8
Bill, the reality is that most people don't even understand what you're saying and get lost in the stats--as evidenced by the fact that you end up going round and round with people arguing apples and oranges.
I grew up playing baseball and still play in the adult league--I don't think you can completely interpret the game using stats like you seem to be attempting to do. I also don't think sac-bunting is smart and I understand (at least how to interpret) wOBA, xFIP, SIERA and park effects. The only way you can communicate with an "old school" mind about it is to meet half way.
Regarding "clutch-hitting," for instance. It doesn't exist. Much like "protection" in a lineup, there's no statistically reliable proof that a hitter could be "clutch." Now, I've been up to bat with the winning run on third in the ninth and I know that it feels different than every other AB. My feeling about clutch hitting is that it makes sense that certain hitters would do *worse* in that situation, but never *better* without it being a statistical anomaly. Stress reaction and management can't be ignored because everyone who has played has felt it and knows it is different. It isn't statistically measurable--but it does exist.
It's important when you think about the statistics of the game (baseball, and really any other sport that is being interpreted statistically) to think of them as one of the (most) useful ways of understanding/interpreting performance, but it is not the only way.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 21, 2012 12:22:05 GMT -8
Will Venable and Josh Hamilton don't even belong in the same sentence. At best, Venable is a fourth outfielder on a decent team. With the Padres, of course, he's guaranteed 400 AB's. You just used Will Venable and Josh Hamilton in the same sentence Let me clarify. Josh Hamilton is a very good hitter. He has not been nearly as good as people think because he gets to play half his games in a very good hitters park. This season is different, so far. On the road, where his true value is best seen, he has been great this season. Since he is now 31 it is more likely an anomaly. But watching his swing on Tuesday was very impressive. I really think his swing would stand out even if I didn't know who he was. Will Venable's career to this point has been a disappointment. He looks like a star player. He is very good defensively, he runs the bases quite well and smartly, his swing is nice. Like Hamilton, until this year he has hit much worse than he currently is. But unlike Hamilton, Will is 29. So this year's results are more likely a breakout year. If you compare the two year by year matching age and only looking at road numbers, they are very similar. But for Will Venable to continue that similarity, he must continue his breakout season this year and have a monster year next year. Because at 30 Josh had a better year and at 31 a monster year (so far) that is way above his normal road numbers.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 21, 2012 12:24:05 GMT -8
Bill, the reality is that most people don't even understand what you're saying and get lost in the stats--as evidenced by the fact that you end up going round and round with people arguing apples and oranges. I grew up playing baseball and still play in the adult league--I don't think you can completely interpret the game using stats like you seem to be attempting to do. I also don't think sac-bunting is smart and I understand (at least how to interpret) wOBA, xFIP, SIERA and park effects. The only way you can communicate with an "old school" mind about it is to meet half way. Regarding "clutch-hitting," for instance. It doesn't exist. Much like "protection" in a lineup, there's no statistically reliable proof that a hitter could be "clutch." Now, I've been up to bat with the winning run on third in the ninth and I know that it feels different than every other AB. My feeling about clutch hitting is that it makes sense that certain hitters would do *worse* in that situation, but never *better* without it being a statistical anomaly. Stress reaction and management can't be ignored because everyone who has played has felt it and knows it is different. It isn't statistically measurable--but it does exist. It's important when you think about the statistics of the game (baseball, and really any other sport that is being interpreted statistically) to think of them as one of the (most) useful ways of understanding/interpreting performance, but it is not the only way. I know exactly what you are saying. But consider that all major leaguers have gone through a weeding out process that leaves players that tend to excel at all times. If players only excelled in certain situations they would have been weeded out well before reaching the level they did. Do you know what just one less hit a week does to a players numbers?
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 21, 2012 12:37:45 GMT -8
Will Venable and Josh Hamilton don't even belong in the same sentence. At best, Venable is a fourth outfielder on a decent team. With the Padres, of course, he's guaranteed 400 AB's. 4th outfielder? Will Venable's 4 year road numbers (2009-2012).282 .346 .463 .809 Average outfielder stats 2011LF .255 .319 .407 .727 CF .261 .325 .409 .734 RF .269 .341 .441 .782 I am shocked that left fielders are so bad vis a vis the other outfield spots. I would expect the opposite. Will Venable has been significantly better in each of the 3 major stats than the normal production from that position, over 4 years of data and he is much better now than 4 years ago. So 4th outfielder? No.
|
|
|
Post by Section T(urn Up) on Jun 21, 2012 14:20:44 GMT -8
Bill, the reality is that most people don't even understand what you're saying and get lost in the stats--as evidenced by the fact that you end up going round and round with people arguing apples and oranges. I grew up playing baseball and still play in the adult league--I don't think you can completely interpret the game using stats like you seem to be attempting to do. I also don't think sac-bunting is smart and I understand (at least how to interpret) wOBA, xFIP, SIERA and park effects. The only way you can communicate with an "old school" mind about it is to meet half way. Regarding "clutch-hitting," for instance. It doesn't exist. Much like "protection" in a lineup, there's no statistically reliable proof that a hitter could be "clutch." Now, I've been up to bat with the winning run on third in the ninth and I know that it feels different than every other AB. My feeling about clutch hitting is that it makes sense that certain hitters would do *worse* in that situation, but never *better* without it being a statistical anomaly. Stress reaction and management can't be ignored because everyone who has played has felt it and knows it is different. It isn't statistically measurable--but it does exist. It's important when you think about the statistics of the game (baseball, and really any other sport that is being interpreted statistically) to think of them as one of the (most) useful ways of understanding/interpreting performance, but it is not the only way. I know exactly what you are saying. But consider that all major leaguers have gone through a weeding out process that leaves players that tend to excel at all times. If players only excelled in certain situations they would have been weeded out well before reaching the level they did. Do you know what just one less hit a week does to a players numbers? I'm not disagreeing with you... I don't think every time a guy bats with RISP would have an impact on a player's mentality or ability, but I don't think you can rule out the notion that Jake Peavy was a bit of a choker in the playoffs, or the idea that Madison Bumgarner stepped up in the playoffs in 2010. If you go too far with statistical analysis you're just playing strat-o-matic with players who do have egos. Managers make tons of tactical errors because they're thinking of the game backwards still, but they're also managing egos and personalities that stats don't interpret or display.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 21, 2012 14:31:20 GMT -8
I know exactly what you are saying. But consider that all major leaguers have gone through a weeding out process that leaves players that tend to excel at all times. If players only excelled in certain situations they would have been weeded out well before reaching the level they did. Do you know what just one less hit a week does to a players numbers? I'm not disagreeing with you... I don't think every time a guy bats with RISP would have an impact on a player's mentality or ability, but I don't think you can rule out the notion that Jake Peavy was a bit of a choker in the playoffs, or the idea that Madison Bumgarner stepped up in the playoffs in 2010. If you go too far with statistical analysis you're just playing strat-o-matic with players who do have egos. Managers make tons of tactical errors because they're thinking of the game backwards still, but they're also managing egos and personalities that stats don't interpret or display. Ah, Pitchers. That is a different matter. There is no question that starting pitchers do select times in the game when they "bear down" with stuff that they couldn't maintain over the course of an entire game.
|
|
|
Post by Section T(urn Up) on Jun 21, 2012 14:35:45 GMT -8
I'm not disagreeing with you... I don't think every time a guy bats with RISP would have an impact on a player's mentality or ability, but I don't think you can rule out the notion that Jake Peavy was a bit of a choker in the playoffs, or the idea that Madison Bumgarner stepped up in the playoffs in 2010. If you go too far with statistical analysis you're just playing strat-o-matic with players who do have egos. Managers make tons of tactical errors because they're thinking of the game backwards still, but they're also managing egos and personalities that stats don't interpret or display. Ah, Pitchers. That is a different matter. There is no question that starting pitchers do select times in the game when they "bear down" with stuff that they couldn't maintain over the course of an entire game. Generally there's no doubt that I fall on the stat-geek side of the fence, but ignoring the fuzzy aspects of the game, the parts that are immeasurable, is not getting the full picture either. That's all I'm saying.
|
|
|
Post by aztecron on Jun 21, 2012 16:03:39 GMT -8
Ah, Pitchers. That is a different matter. There is no question that starting pitchers do select times in the game when they "bear down" with stuff that they couldn't maintain over the course of an entire game. Generally there's no doubt that I fall on the stat-geek side of the fence, but ignoring the fuzzy aspects of the game, the parts that are immeasurable, is not getting the full picture either. That's all I'm saying. That's all I was saying yesterday as well.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 22, 2012 7:37:28 GMT -8
Generally there's no doubt that I fall on the stat-geek side of the fence, but ignoring the fuzzy aspects of the game, the parts that are immeasurable, is not getting the full picture either. That's all I'm saying. That's all I was saying yesterday as well. That is why I am careful to say "almost all luck". If I missed saying that above, consider this a correction. When I posted this on the UT Padres site, which is much more busy then this site, a response stated that streaks are just random chance according to stats studies. I really have a problem with that. At bats in a row are related events and not random at bats though out the year, like RISP. I believe strongly that confidence is an element that plays a big part in a batters success. How can a player not be more confident when all his hits seem to find holes or visa vera. That dovetails with another question I have been pondering. Do Padres hitters hit better on the road than they normally would because leaving Petco Park instills confidence in them that they may otherwise not have?
|
|