Yeah, the software is having issues at the moment. I’m trying to bring it back to life.
Dave CameronMember since 2018
13 years ago
Okay, CoverItLive is down across the board, so we’re just going to have to put this one on hold until it comes back to life. If they get the software working again this afternoon, we’ll try to resume and take some more questions. Sorry for the technical difficulties.
JesseMember since 2020
13 years ago
Hey Dave,
In regards to the answer to your last question: “What do you consider better. A 300 hitter with a low walk rate resulting in a .340 OBP or a .240 hitter that walks a ton with a .340 OBP?”
You said the difference is tiny. I would disagree and want to know if there is something essentially wrong with my reasoning. If two batters have basically those rates over 600 plate appearances each, the difference in walks is roughly 35. That means the .300 hitter replaces 35 walks with 35 hits. If every single one of those hits is a single, the most conservative estimate, the difference in value is significant. Using run values from Tom Tango (http://www.insidethebook.com/woba.shtml), a single is worth .77 runs above an out while a walk is worth .62 runs above an out. That comes out to a 5.4 run difference, or just over half a win. Half a win is not insignificant, especially when that’s the absolute low end.
I know my methodology is probably not perfect, but I think the essential characteristics of my argument are solid.
Thoughts?
Thoughts are that he doesn’t care enough about your knit-picking to respond. Obviously it matters some. Obviously someone with his pedigree knows that.
He said, “The difference is tiny.” I’m saying it’s definitely not tiny; it’s quite significant. I am not nitpicking. I am disagreeing. Nitpicking would be my saying you spelled nitpicking wrong. Nitpicking would be my saying you need to add the word ‘his’ to the beginning of your first sentence, otherwise your making a declarative statement about the nature of thoughts which is clearly wrong.
If you’re going to be a rude, self-satisfied prick, at least be right and display proper usage of English.
You are simply wrong. The clear meaning of his statement was that the two players had the same ability to hit for power. Nowhere is it even hinted at that all the walks would instead become singles. The players’ PAs that did not end in an out, walk, or HBP would reasonably be evenly distributed over their normal outcomes when they get a hit. And since I seriously doubt any player in MLB history has had 600 PAs in a season and a .000 ISO, I think it’s quite clear that it would certainly be more than the bare minimum run differential I referred to.
Sorry if I was rude in my response. I was a little irked about the guy above you and just assumed you were being rude as well, so I responded childishly. I have read Dave’s response and it still seems as though their is no reason to believe you should consider the entire difference to consist of walks and singles. If you disagree with what he was saying, so be it. We’ll agree to disagree. But I believe my initial argument holds.
Taylor
13 years ago
In re evaluating managers … arithmetically, you could measure managers’ performance pretty easily in a multilevel model of team-years. The question is not whether you can estimate a bunch of coefficients there, or even if you can get significant results; enough years of data will give you something significant. The question is whether you can interpret these results. We just don’t have any conceptual lenses that would tell us what it means if, say, teams managed by Buck Showalter or Buck Martinez reliably do well, net of other factors that predict winning. Is it about a particular strategy? A managerial nickname? We just wouldn’t know what the numbers meant.
Macek
13 years ago
Hi Dave,
All of this talk about the Orioles’ poor run differential has left me wondering, how long does it take for a team’s past run differential to become predictive of their future run differential? I realize that this might be difficult to measure because of changing rosters, but that information seems important for determining when and how much weight to place on a team’s good or bad differential.
Thanks
TRob
13 years ago
What is the justification for saying the DH makes too much sense for the NL to continue holding out? Just because having more offense appeals to the fringe baseball fan? I for one will likely be done watching my Cardinals if/when the DH comes to the NL. I just don’t see how it’s good for the game but I guess it lines owner’s pockets with more money so it’ll happen.
Or you could also say people would rather have the pinch hitting, double switches etc that not having a DH brings, it’s not really a tough concept to grasp
if all you watch is AL baseball then you prob cannot appreciate the strategy that is involved in an NL game. Yes we all know that most pitchers cannot hit. Why does the game need to have that spot in the order be occupied by a better hitter? Why does that make the game better? A lot people think the game is better by having a spot in the order where managers have to weigh the consequences of taking out or leaving their pitcher in to hit.
I really don’t think it happens in the next 50 years. Adding a DH would alienate too many fans, and I don’t think MLB would risk that when people obviously have such strong opinions about it.
Again, you’re removing a lot of the strategy of the game in favor of adding an additional offensive player. Why is that better? Why does offense trump everything?
You would quit watching your favorite team if they had an extra hitter in their lineup rather than the pitcher? That seems to be a silly reason to give up on the game.
Not saying I agree, but over the past month Harper has been worth 1.6 WAR, while Trout has been worth 1.2 WAR. So there is a plausible scenario in which Harper could outperform Trout, especially if Harper can avoid another terrible midseason slump next season.
DrBGiantsfan
13 years ago
Melky Cabrera is going to be the bargain of the offseason!
maqman
13 years ago
I’ll bet Sullivan won’t say he would trade Felix Hernandez for Upton.
Chat crash for anyone else?
Yeah, the software is having issues at the moment. I’m trying to bring it back to life.
Okay, CoverItLive is down across the board, so we’re just going to have to put this one on hold until it comes back to life. If they get the software working again this afternoon, we’ll try to resume and take some more questions. Sorry for the technical difficulties.
Hey Dave,
In regards to the answer to your last question: “What do you consider better. A 300 hitter with a low walk rate resulting in a .340 OBP or a .240 hitter that walks a ton with a .340 OBP?”
You said the difference is tiny. I would disagree and want to know if there is something essentially wrong with my reasoning. If two batters have basically those rates over 600 plate appearances each, the difference in walks is roughly 35. That means the .300 hitter replaces 35 walks with 35 hits. If every single one of those hits is a single, the most conservative estimate, the difference in value is significant. Using run values from Tom Tango (http://www.insidethebook.com/woba.shtml), a single is worth .77 runs above an out while a walk is worth .62 runs above an out. That comes out to a 5.4 run difference, or just over half a win. Half a win is not insignificant, especially when that’s the absolute low end.
I know my methodology is probably not perfect, but I think the essential characteristics of my argument are solid.
Thoughts?
Thoughts are that he doesn’t care enough about your knit-picking to respond. Obviously it matters some. Obviously someone with his pedigree knows that.
He said, “The difference is tiny.” I’m saying it’s definitely not tiny; it’s quite significant. I am not nitpicking. I am disagreeing. Nitpicking would be my saying you spelled nitpicking wrong. Nitpicking would be my saying you need to add the word ‘his’ to the beginning of your first sentence, otherwise your making a declarative statement about the nature of thoughts which is clearly wrong.
If you’re going to be a rude, self-satisfied prick, at least be right and display proper usage of English.
He did say assuming power was the same, so you ARE assuming that every one of those hits was a single, no exceptions
You are simply wrong. The clear meaning of his statement was that the two players had the same ability to hit for power. Nowhere is it even hinted at that all the walks would instead become singles. The players’ PAs that did not end in an out, walk, or HBP would reasonably be evenly distributed over their normal outcomes when they get a hit. And since I seriously doubt any player in MLB history has had 600 PAs in a season and a .000 ISO, I think it’s quite clear that it would certainly be more than the bare minimum run differential I referred to.
nitro, try reading Dave’s response before you criticize it, ok?
Sorry if I was rude in my response. I was a little irked about the guy above you and just assumed you were being rude as well, so I responded childishly. I have read Dave’s response and it still seems as though their is no reason to believe you should consider the entire difference to consist of walks and singles. If you disagree with what he was saying, so be it. We’ll agree to disagree. But I believe my initial argument holds.
In re evaluating managers … arithmetically, you could measure managers’ performance pretty easily in a multilevel model of team-years. The question is not whether you can estimate a bunch of coefficients there, or even if you can get significant results; enough years of data will give you something significant. The question is whether you can interpret these results. We just don’t have any conceptual lenses that would tell us what it means if, say, teams managed by Buck Showalter or Buck Martinez reliably do well, net of other factors that predict winning. Is it about a particular strategy? A managerial nickname? We just wouldn’t know what the numbers meant.
Hi Dave,
All of this talk about the Orioles’ poor run differential has left me wondering, how long does it take for a team’s past run differential to become predictive of their future run differential? I realize that this might be difficult to measure because of changing rosters, but that information seems important for determining when and how much weight to place on a team’s good or bad differential.
Thanks
What is the justification for saying the DH makes too much sense for the NL to continue holding out? Just because having more offense appeals to the fringe baseball fan? I for one will likely be done watching my Cardinals if/when the DH comes to the NL. I just don’t see how it’s good for the game but I guess it lines owner’s pockets with more money so it’ll happen.
I think that was just Cameron being Cameron.
people would rather watch a real hitter bat than a pitcher who strikes out 50% of the time. its really not a tough concept to grasp.
Or you could also say people would rather have the pinch hitting, double switches etc that not having a DH brings, it’s not really a tough concept to grasp
if all you watch is AL baseball then you prob cannot appreciate the strategy that is involved in an NL game. Yes we all know that most pitchers cannot hit. Why does the game need to have that spot in the order be occupied by a better hitter? Why does that make the game better? A lot people think the game is better by having a spot in the order where managers have to weigh the consequences of taking out or leaving their pitcher in to hit.
I really don’t think it happens in the next 50 years. Adding a DH would alienate too many fans, and I don’t think MLB would risk that when people obviously have such strong opinions about it.
Again, you’re removing a lot of the strategy of the game in favor of adding an additional offensive player. Why is that better? Why does offense trump everything?
You would quit watching your favorite team if they had an extra hitter in their lineup rather than the pitcher? That seems to be a silly reason to give up on the game.
I would quit watching baseball altogether.
Harper with a higher WAR than Trout next year? What?! Really? I don’t see it….
He’s just saying that so if he’s right he can bring it up later and if he’s wrong, nobody will really remember. TV analyst do that all the time.
Not saying I agree, but over the past month Harper has been worth 1.6 WAR, while Trout has been worth 1.2 WAR. So there is a plausible scenario in which Harper could outperform Trout, especially if Harper can avoid another terrible midseason slump next season.
Melky Cabrera is going to be the bargain of the offseason!
I’ll bet Sullivan won’t say he would trade Felix Hernandez for Upton.