|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 21, 2011 8:14:25 GMT -8
Headley has had 3 four-hit games during this road trip. While the rest of the Padres offense is slumping, Headley has been a lone bright spot. We were all hoping this might be a break out year for Headley. That possibility seemed remote in April after he put up numbers to cause some to post how he sucked. But May came and Headley started hitting more like we hoped. Now June is here and Headley is hitting like an all-star. .231 .355 .359 .714 - April .312 .402 .398 .800 - May .357 .423 .486 .909 - June .519 .536 .630 1.166 - Last 7 Days During the last 7 days he is only one of two players (Justin Upton - AR) in MLB to hit over .500.
Headley is a smart player. He knows the difference between having runners on base and not. When the bases are empty he works the pitcher for walks. When there are runners on base he hits earlier in the count reducing his walks and strikeouts. | Walk per 100 | Strikeouts per 100 | W+Ks per 100 | Runners On | 6.7 | 17.3 | 24 | Bases Empty | 16.9 | 26.8 | 43.7 |
This is why although his batting average with the bases empty is only .246, his on base percentage is .359. He works the pitcher to get on base when there are no runners to advance with a hit. A walk with the bases empty is just as good as a single - Headley gets it. With runners on base he hits early in the count and gives up trying to work the pitchers for a walk. That is why his BA with runners in scoring position is .312. There are a lot of players who do that all the time and have much better batting averages but worse on base percentages. Headley has a great OBP. That is why Chris Denorfia has only 4 walks leading off an inning and Headley has 12.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 21, 2011 15:01:05 GMT -8
Headley is the first Padre to ever have 3 4-hit games in a 6 game span.
The last player in baseball to do that is Furcal in 2007.
|
|
|
Post by untitled on Jun 21, 2011 16:23:46 GMT -8
I'd like to see him hit get 70 RBIs in a 162 game span
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 22, 2011 8:39:47 GMT -8
I'd like to see him hit get 70 RBIs in a 162 game span RBIs are a very bad measure of a players worth. An indication of what the other teams think about RBIs: Headley has been intentionally walked 5 times; Ludwick, who leads the Padres in RBIs, has been intentionally walked 1 time. A player can only knock in runners that are there. The two best stats to rate hitters ability to knock in team mates is BA with runners in scoring position and SLG with runners on base. Batting with Runners in Scoring Position.306 Headley (2nd on team behind Gonzalez) .254 Ludwick SLG with Runners on Base.536 Headley (1st on team) .406 Ludwick So you can look at Ludwick's 45 RBI and think he is hitting better than Headley who only has 27 RBI, but you would wrong about who is the better hitter at knocking in runners.
|
|
|
Post by aztecron on Jun 22, 2011 9:46:49 GMT -8
I'd like to see him hit get 70 RBIs in a 162 game span RBIs are a very bad measure of a players worth. An indication of what the other teams think about RBIs: Headley has been intentionally walked 5 times; Ludwick, who leads the Padres in RBIs, has been intentionally walked 1 time. A player can only knock in runners that are there. The two best stats to rate hitters ability to knock in team mates is BA with runners in scoring position and SLG with runners on base. Batting with Runners in Scoring Position.306 Headley (2nd on team behind Gonzalez) .254 Ludwick SLG with Runners on Base.536 Headley (1st on team) .406 Ludwick So you can look at Ludwick's 45 RBI and think he is hitting better than Headley who only has 27 RBI, but you would wrong about who is the better hitter at knocking in runners. I'm not getting into a long drawn out discussion again with you regarding Headley because you refuse to acknowledge any facts in his case. You throw out statistics that show only one side of the conversation and refuse to acknowledge stats others like myself that show the other side of the conversation. Not to mention I really don't like declarative statements thrown out like "but you would be wrong about who is the better hitter at knocking in runners." As if you're the only expert here. So by your standard of RBI versus RBI in the above argument I provide this counterargument, of which you'll ignore, but I'll have had my say and move on to other topics. ;D They both play the same position. Player A is currently hitting .303 20 HR and 63 RBI in 261 AB's. Player B is currently hitting .266 4 HR and 25 RBI in 259 AB's. Just the stats for this argument as you like. MLB judges performance via the market and what it will pay for said performance. Of player A and B whom do you think will get the bigger contract at the end of this season? According to your logic, it could be player B because we would be wrong in judging player B strictly by his inability to drive in runs or put the ball out of the ballpark. Player B could be the better hitter but maybe we're just looking at the wrong stats. ;D NOT! Sometimes you just don't get it. Market value for player A versus player B will be at the opposite ends of the spectrum for each this off season. Player A is Prince Fielder and Player B is James Loney. I'm curious of the two who you'd rather have in your lineup? Its clear for me that I would prefer Fielder over Loney. There's something to be said for players who have the ability to not only drive in runs, but, create runs themselves by hitting the ball out of the park. But, I digress, as that's not important enough to you for your purposes.
|
|
|
Post by untitled on Jun 22, 2011 10:44:06 GMT -8
I don't think asking for 70 RBIs from a corner infielder is asking a hell of a lot. Hell, Mark Loretta had that AND 100 Runs, and a .330 Avg in 2004 at Petco as a second baseman.
On another note I still think they should fix the fences, but looking at Loretta's 2004 stats makes me wish they'd fix the lineup more, considering: He hit .295 at home (.368 away), had 11 HRs (5 away), had very similar home and road slugging and had a few more doubles at home than away.
Dude flat out raked that year.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 22, 2011 12:39:13 GMT -8
RBIs are a very bad measure of a players worth. An indication of what the other teams think about RBIs: Headley has been intentionally walked 5 times; Ludwick, who leads the Padres in RBIs, has been intentionally walked 1 time. A player can only knock in runners that are there. The two best stats to rate hitters ability to knock in team mates is BA with runners in scoring position and SLG with runners on base. Batting with Runners in Scoring Position.306 Headley (2nd on team behind Gonzalez) .254 Ludwick SLG with Runners on Base.536 Headley (1st on team) .406 Ludwick So you can look at Ludwick's 45 RBI and think he is hitting better than Headley who only has 27 RBI, but you would wrong about who is the better hitter at knocking in runners. I'm not getting into a long drawn out discussion again with you regarding Headley because you refuse to acknowledge any facts in his case. You throw out statistics that show only one side of the conversation and refuse to acknowledge stats others like myself that show the other side of the conversation. Not to mention I really don't like declarative statements thrown out like "but you would be wrong about who is the better hitter at knocking in runners." As if you're the only expert here. So by your standard of RBI versus RBI in the above argument I provide this counterargument, of which you'll ignore, but I'll have had my say and move on to other topics. ;D They both play the same position. Player A is currently hitting .303 20 HR and 63 RBI in 261 AB's. Player B is currently hitting .266 4 HR and 25 RBI in 259 AB's. Just the stats for this argument as you like. MLB judges performance via the market and what it will pay for said performance. Of player A and B whom do you think will get the bigger contract at the end of this season? According to your logic, it could be player B because we would be wrong in judging player B strictly by his inability to drive in runs or put the ball out of the ballpark. Player B could be the better hitter but maybe we're just looking at the wrong stats. ;D NOT! Sometimes you just don't get it. Market value for player A versus player B will be at the opposite ends of the spectrum for each this off season. Player A is Prince Fielder and Player B is James Loney. I'm curious of the two who you'd rather have in your lineup? Its clear for me that I would prefer Fielder over Loney. There's something to be said for players who have the ability to not only drive in runs, but, create runs themselves by hitting the ball out of the park. But, I digress, as that's not important enough to you for your purposes. You mischaracterize my method of evaluation. I look at singles, doubles, triples, home runs, walks, and hit by pitch, weighed against plate appearances. I weight those items via the formulas that I have stated on this web site. Do you agree that RBIs are partly dependent on opportunities and looking at RBIs without knowing opportunities is like looking at the number of hits versus batting average?
As far as player "A" or player "B" is concerned, I need more information. It is like asking who I think would win the Decathlon: "A" a good jumper. "B" a good runner.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 22, 2011 12:40:47 GMT -8
I don't think asking for 70 RBIs from a corner infielder is asking a hell of a lot. Hell, Mark Loretta had that AND 100 Runs, and a .330 Avg in 2004 at Petco as a second baseman. On another note I still think they should fix the fences, but looking at Loretta's 2004 stats makes me wish they'd fix the lineup more, considering: He hit .295 at home (.368 away), had 11 HRs (5 away), had very similar home and road slugging and had a few more doubles at home than away. Dude flat out raked that year. RBIs are dependant on opportunities. Would you be happy with a player who hit .300 with runners in scoring position and hit a lot of extra base hits and high batting average with runners on base, even if he didn't have a lot of RBIs?
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 22, 2011 13:00:18 GMT -8
I'm not getting into a long drawn out discussion again with you regarding Headley because you refuse to acknowledge any facts in his case. You throw out statistics that show only one side of the conversation and refuse to acknowledge stats others like myself that show the other side of the conversation. I don't "refuse to acknowledge any facts". I not only acknowledge the facts, I counter them. I suspect you are talking about RBI and Home Runs. I just posted my response to RBI above and Home Runs on the other thread. How is that refusing to acknowledge them? Ignoring them would be not making a post about it. So by your standard of RBI versus RBI in the above argument I provide this counterargument, of which you'll ignore, but I'll have had my say and move on to other topics. Please explain how my argument is RBI versus RBI. I stated that RBI is a bad measure of a player. They both play the same position. Player A is currently hitting .303 20 HR and 63 RBI in 261 AB's. Player B is currently hitting .266 4 HR and 25 RBI in 259 AB's. Just the stats for this argument as you like. How can you think, having read my posts, that those are the stats just like I like them. I need to know all the stats. I have said over and over that it is not how a player contributes but how much he contribute. Player "B" above could be more valuable. Give him a bunch of doubles, 120 walks, 60 stolen bases, and a few caught stealings. Give player "A" few walks and few doubles. Player "B" could be a lot more valuable. In 1982 Rickey Henderson hit .267 had 10 home runs and 52 RBI (notice that is almost exactly your example extrapolated to a full year). Yet he was one of the most valuable players in the league. That is because he had 116 walks and 130 stolen bases. That is an extreme example of not how but how much.
|
|
|
Post by aztecron on Jun 22, 2011 14:55:08 GMT -8
I'm not getting into a long drawn out discussion again with you regarding Headley because you refuse to acknowledge any facts in his case. You throw out statistics that show only one side of the conversation and refuse to acknowledge stats others like myself that show the other side of the conversation. Not to mention I really don't like declarative statements thrown out like "but you would be wrong about who is the better hitter at knocking in runners." As if you're the only expert here. So by your standard of RBI versus RBI in the above argument I provide this counterargument, of which you'll ignore, but I'll have had my say and move on to other topics. ;D They both play the same position. Player A is currently hitting .303 20 HR and 63 RBI in 261 AB's. Player B is currently hitting .266 4 HR and 25 RBI in 259 AB's. Just the stats for this argument as you like. MLB judges performance via the market and what it will pay for said performance. Of player A and B whom do you think will get the bigger contract at the end of this season? According to your logic, it could be player B because we would be wrong in judging player B strictly by his inability to drive in runs or put the ball out of the ballpark. Player B could be the better hitter but maybe we're just looking at the wrong stats. ;D NOT! Sometimes you just don't get it. Market value for player A versus player B will be at the opposite ends of the spectrum for each this off season. Player A is Prince Fielder and Player B is James Loney. I'm curious of the two who you'd rather have in your lineup? Its clear for me that I would prefer Fielder over Loney. There's something to be said for players who have the ability to not only drive in runs, but, create runs themselves by hitting the ball out of the park. But, I digress, as that's not important enough to you for your purposes. You mischaracterize my method of evaluation. I look at singles, doubles, triples, home runs, walks, and hit by pitch, weighed against plate appearances. I weight those items via the formulas that I have stated on this web site. Do you agree that RBIs are partly dependent on opportunities and looking at RBIs without knowing opportunities is like looking at the number of hits versus batting average?
As far as player "A" or player "B" is concerned, I need more information. It is like asking who I think would win the Decathlon: "A" a good jumper. "B" a good runner. My point proven, good enough. If you need more information than that, then I don't know what to tell you. You can't see the forest, for the trees. Do you actually have an idea why Headley was IBB to face Ludwick? Your implication is they're more afraid of Headley than Ludwick, I don't buy it. Probably filling an open base, therefor offering up the chance at a double play when facing Ludwick. Nice try, though.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 22, 2011 16:02:09 GMT -8
My point proven, good enough. If you need more information than that, then I don't know what to tell you. You can't see the forest, for the trees. "Can't see the forest for the trees" means you are looking too closely at one thing and miss the overall picture. That is exactly what you are doing. It is funny that you used that saying. You gave only BA, HR, and RBIs. Those are the trees. The forest is all the stats - not just a select few. You can't see all the stats for the few you select as important. I see the forest and you are saying, "no, no, look at these trees". Do you actually have an idea why Headley was IBB to face Ludwick? Your implication is they're more afraid of Headley than Ludwick, I don't buy it. Probably filling an open base, therefor offering up the chance at a double play when facing Ludwick. Nice try, though. If it is to face Ludwick it is probably a left/right thing. Ludwick doesn't bat as well against right handed pitching. But since BA with runners in scoring positon or overall batting average is the main metric for IBB, Headley gets the most IBB. He is the best on the Padres at that - in fact, I believe and the stats show: Headley is the best offensive player on the Padres.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 22, 2011 16:24:26 GMT -8
I found some real interesting stats related to RBI. It breaks down the number of times a player has runners at each of the bases when he comes to bat. So if the bases are loaded it counts one for each base...etc. Player | Headley | Ludwick | First | 81 | 85 | Second | 37 | 59 | Third | 12 | 26 |
One thing that makes runners in scoring position numbers versus RBIs misleading is things like: Ludwick has had runners at 2nd and 3rd 7 times this year and Headley never. The complete breakdown is shown below: Base Situation | Headley | Ludwick | Loaded | 6 | 5 | Second | 18 | 26 | Third | 7 | 10 | First and Second | 13 | 21 | First and Third | 5 | 9 | Second and Third | 0 | 7 | First | 57 | 50 |
It shouldn't take long looking a those numbers to realize why Ludwick has more RBIs. the only thing missing is 3B less than two outs. Ludwick 15 Headley 10
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 23, 2011 9:21:13 GMT -8
If you take each situation and assume a percentage of RBIs you expect from that situation and multiply by the chances, the total of those "expected RBIs" is an interesting number. When you compare that number to the actual Runners Batted In, the difference can tell you about how well a player has done at knocking in runners. Player | Headley | Ludwick | Expected RBI % | Headley ExRBI | Ludwick ExRBI | First | 81 | 85 | 0.08 | 6.48 | 6.8 | Second | 37 | 59 | 0.25 | 9.25 | 14.75 | Third 2 outs | 2 | 11 | 0.3 | 0.6 | 3.3 | Third < 2 outs | 10 | 15 | 0.8 | 8 | 12 | Total | | | ExRBI -----------------> | 24.33 | 36.85 | Total | | | Runners Batted In --> | 26 | 36 |
Both Headley and Ludwick are pretty close to what would be expected from doing that little exercise.
|
|
|
Post by aztecmusician on Jun 23, 2011 23:27:31 GMT -8
Good, I'm glad he is hitting. More Padre bats need to wake up.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 24, 2011 8:52:50 GMT -8
The forest is all the stats - not just a select few. You can't see all the stats for the few you select as important. I see the forest and you are saying, "no, no, look at these trees". Yeah but it seems like you fail to pay enough attention to the biggest trees in the forest. If HR, 2B, and RBI didn't matter, then why would all these teams be paying out the ass for guys who actually produce these numbers? The way I see it... a) you're very bright b) you understand arcane statistics better than anyone I've ever known c) you use them to rationalize the Padres' poormouthing I never said any of those don't matter. How do you get that from what I have written? I rate those based upon statistically studies that are well accepted by most who study advanced baseball statistics. Average fans over rate home runs. They don't understand the relative value of a double versus a home run. Exhaustive use of actual game data over scores of years with all teams show that a home run versus an out is worth 1.70 extra runs on average. Likewise a double instead of an out is worth 1.08 extra runs and a walk is worth 0.62 extra runs. Caveat: The Padres have a poor offense at home. When offense is reduced, home runs gain value. That is a fact. So home runs for the Padres, at home, are more valuable (than stated above) relative to other results. Offense overall in baseball is down, so overall home runs gain (slightly) in value. But they don't gain value to the point that they are revered by the general public.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 24, 2011 9:13:17 GMT -8
wOBAUse the link above to "de-arcane" the stat I like when comparing relative results of a plate appearance.
|
|
|
Post by aztecron on Jun 25, 2011 8:50:03 GMT -8
My point proven, good enough. If you need more information than that, then I don't know what to tell you. You can't see the forest, for the trees. "Can't see the forest for the trees" means you are looking too closely at one thing and miss the overall picture. That is exactly what you are doing. It is funny that you used that saying. You gave only BA, HR, and RBIs. Those are the trees. The forest is all the stats - not just a select few. You can't see all the stats for the few you select as important. I see the forest and you are saying, "no, no, look at these trees". Do you actually have an idea why Headley was IBB to face Ludwick? Your implication is they're more afraid of Headley than Ludwick, I don't buy it. Probably filling an open base, therefor offering up the chance at a double play when facing Ludwick. Nice try, though. If it is to face Ludwick it is probably a left/right thing. Ludwick doesn't bat as well against right handed pitching. But since BA with runners in scoring positon or overall batting average is the main metric for IBB, Headley gets the most IBB. He is the best on the Padres at that - in fact, I believe and the stats show: Headley is the best offensive player on the Padres. Actually, Bill, I use all the stats. But what differs between you and I is I don't use only the stats that support my argument. I'm a realist, I don't try to slant my argument to my direction solely. I interpret the stats and go from there. When I show you stats that show Headley in another light, you don't even acknowledge them. But, you say you look at the whole picture. I don't buy it. I'm no average fan, In fact I'm far from it, I've been around the game for forty years and have a reasonable knowledge base built up over time. Although I must admit I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night. ;D Stats are not the entire package of a player. They are a large part, but still require eyes on the player to make sure the numbers are prudent or not. Example: Headley BABIP for 2009 .325 and 2010 .323 this year it is .376 which suggests to me he has been extremely (if you know what the stat is and how it defines a hitters luck) lucky so far this season and will more than likely regress back to his norm 50 points below his present standing. My example above of Fielder vs Loney was a litmus test to determine your bias against hitters who can provide offense on their own, vis a vis power. They don't fit you model of what baseball is or should be. But in reality MLB pays for that particular kind of player, Pitching and defense are very important in today's game especially with the PED era gone now. But, to find players who can influence the game with one swing are still more important than others. That's why a player like Evan Longoria gets a 6 year $48 million dollar contract when he's a first year big leaguer and a player like Chase Headley doesn't. The contract Longoria signed wasn't strictly for his defense, nor, for his doubles prowess, but his overall batting and power prowess. His ability to stop runs from scoring, and , more importantly his ability to generate runs all by himself. Tell me what you see in the example of BABIP above re: Headley? Check out Headley's ISO as well. Gone from .131 to .111 and now .106 from 2009 till now. Headley's HR/FB rate is trending down too, 2009 till now, 7.6 6.4 to now 3.3. That means his ability to drive the ball out of the park is going down, down, down. His WAR value has gone down from 4.9 last year to 2.0 this year. That means his value is 2 wins above the average replacement. Again just to say it out loud, I'm not really bagging on Headley, he provides a modicum of offense. I like and acknowledge his current streak, but am hesitant to jump on board right now until we see his trends surge upwards, and more importantly, stay in an upward trend. His history says otherwise. Money equals value in MLB. We're limited in what we can pay at this time. My whole point to this discussion is the premise that the Padres won't pay Headley the money arbitration says he'll get solely due to his Super 2 designation last year. He will be eligible for at least 3.0 - 3.2 million next year, minimum. For a guy that plays 3B and has hit 2 HR's with 28 RBI's in 75 games so far this year? I don't think so. If Headley stole 75 bags a year, maybe, but he doesn't does he? Forest for trees, Bill. I stand by what I said.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 27, 2011 9:08:18 GMT -8
His WAR value has gone down from 4.9 last year to 2.0 this year. That means his value is 2 wins above the average replacement. I am going to address every one of your points. I start with your misuse of WAR.
You are using WAR incorrectly. WAR is Wins Above Replacement. It is a counting stat. Comparing Headley's 2.0 WAR with last year's 4.9 WAR, is just like saying he only has 76 hits this year compared to 161 hits last year. Since you used the first two paragraphs of your post telling me how experienced you are with stats and how long you have used them, what am I to conclude when you twist a simple stat like WAR to support your point of view? AGon's current WAR is 4.6. Headley's 2010 WAR was 4.9.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 27, 2011 9:32:13 GMT -8
...Headley BABIP for 2009 .325 and 2010 .323 this year it is .376 which suggests to me he has been extremely (if you know what the stat is and how it defines a hitters luck) lucky so far this season and will more than likely regress back to his norm 50 points below his present standing. You are suggesting that Headley is just lucky because he has a high BABIP. Let's talk about balls in play. How many hitters in Baseball have a higher percentage of Line Drives than Headley? That would be interesting to know since Line Drives become hits more than any other type of batted ball. One would expect the players who are really good at hitting line drives to have higher BABIP. Headley is 16th in MLB in percentage of line drives. Since there are 30 teams, I would say that is pretty good. Joey Votto is #1 and has a BABIP of .372 Andre Ethier is #2 and has a BABIP of .374 Will he regress to the mean? 2009 LD% 16.5% 2010 LD% 17.9% 2011 LD% 23.7% Not unless you expect him to somehow stop hitting line drives.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 27, 2011 9:40:25 GMT -8
My example above of Fielder vs Loney was a litmus test to determine your bias against hitters who can provide offense on their own, vis a vis power. They don't fit you model of what baseball is or should be. But in reality MLB pays for that particular kind of player, Pitching and defense are very important in today's game especially with the PED era gone now. But, to find players who can influence the game with one swing are still more important than others. I don't know why you think I would like Loney. He no plus offensive attributes. Loney has little power, a low OBP, and has no speed. He is a bad offensive player.
|
|