2009 Boston Red Sox

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

If he's hitting in the .270's generally, his on base percentage is due to drawing walks.

OBP is a part of OPS. The other part is slugging. He was 3rd in the AL in slugging percentage among outfielders.

Perhaps he's more suited to the NL game with more hit and runs, sacrafices, etc.

Wrong.

He still had a good OPS because he walked a lot but he only hit .213.

No, he had a good OPS because he was 3rd in the AL in slugging and 2nd in the AL in on base percentage, among outfielders.

That means he's not just walking and hitting singles, folks. You all fail.

 

[Patman]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

even you should know that for tba and the other 'new stats' guys, steals are stupid. a runner on first should never, ever think of stealing a base. it doesn't lead to runs.

I know you're being snarky but in Moneyball it outlined that you can steal if your name happens to be Johnny Damon or Jacoby Ellsbury. I think they gave roughly 75% clip as the benchmark.

Think of it less as stealing bases and more as costing outs.

 

[Rover]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

Tonythestatsnerd,

Are you stupid or just playing a character out here? What part of a .270 average, 18 HR's, 67 RBI's, and more strikeouts than walks are you having trouble understanding? Could it be, perhaps, maybe, that the stat you're hung up on is deceiving you?

mookie,

its funny what these Poindexters believe in. Last year one of them was telling me wins weren't important. Now apparently neither are runs. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess none of these guys ever played organized baseball as youngsters.

 

[thecomicbookguy]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

NERRRRRRRRRRRRRRDS!!

FYP

(Not that I entirely disagree with you.)

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

Tonythestatsnerd,

Are you stupid or just playing a character out here? What part of a .270 average, 18 HR's, 67 RBI's, and more strikeouts than walks are you having trouble understanding?

I don't think I can quite explain how dumb this comment and...

Last year one of them was telling me wins weren't important. Now apparently neither are runs.

...this comment are without getting you to understand why they're dumb. Those of us who understand the stats are laughing at you.

The "wins" and "runs" stats for individual players are, in fact, probably the two worst measurements of performance out there.

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess none of these guys ever played organized baseball as youngsters.

Incorrect.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

Disclaimer: I'm a math major. Soooo, my opinions are obviously biased. But I'll defend the math till the end!

I do enjoy a good baseball-related stats argument though.

 

[Patman]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

its funny what these Poindexters believe in. Last year one of them was telling me wins weren't important. Now apparently neither are runs. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess none of these guys ever played organized baseball as youngsters.

I don't have to do crack to know the problems with a rising rate in crack users. On the other hand maybe you take a hands on approach to life.

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you still cling to those baseball fundamentals taught to everybody since forever... you know until Billy Beane said "fork this ship" and went a different way.

 

[Patman]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

Disclaimer: I'm a math major. Soooo, my opinions are obviously biased. But I'll defend the math till the end!

I do enjoy a good baseball-related stats argument though.

Now, now, my eyeball knows more than all you egg-heads and when my eyeball sees a guy batting .283 then that's what my eyeball sees.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

2004

alcs

ball four

pinch runner

dave roberts.

(steals are not important. they cause you to lose games more often than cause you to win them. they are overrated and too risky to use if you want to maximize your run totals.)

 

[Patman]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

2004

alcs

ball four

pinch runner

dave roberts.

(steals are not important. they cause you to lose games more often than cause you to win them. they are overrated and too risky to use if you want to maximize your run totals.)

just read all the information in its context... if you fly like the wind then by all means steal.

Rover is the one that brought up steals... so... how good do you have to be at stealing to make up for the lower OBP? Oh, you mean that might involve math? I'll just use my gut to make this decision.

edit: of course it should be said that francona does statistical tea-leaf reading like playing specific pitcher adjustments (like playing players who happened to go 3 for 4 against some guy).

 

[joegrav]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

For real, Rover? Drew was hitting behind big-time RBI guys who tended to drive in the guys at the top of the order - Bay, Ortiz and Youkilis were all at 90+. When those guys are driving in the runs, it doesn't leave as many on base for you to drive in when you're batting 6th/7th/8th. Additionally, when batting 2nd, which he sometimes does, you don't get as many RBI opportunities, either.

His disproportionate amount of extra-base hits meant that despite hitting in front of the weakest part of the line up (and the bottom of the order for the Sox in '09 was VERRRRY weak), he scored 84 runs. Granted, runs is a pretty meaningless statistic.

Another explanation for his low RBI totals is that he walked a TON with RISP (his OBP w/ RISP was something like .398, ridiculous considering he hit .220), indicating that pitchers were giving him nothing to hit (nor should they, with the collection of automatic outs at the bottom of the order for the Sox).

He gets on base, and hits a ton of extra base hits. He plays pretty decent defense. And once he was healty, he slammed the crap out of the ball the last few months of the season. Please, tell me who the Red Sox could realistically acquire who would be an upgrade over what JD Drew produces in right field.

 

[Rover]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

Might be time to post the clip of Ogre from Revenge of the Nerds a second time cbc.

Lets take it one by one:

1) Superfan Joe, that would only make sense if the guys in front of him were clearing the bases with home runs. While they have a few guys hitting the ball out at a decent clip, to say the bases are clear when he gets up is a big stretch. Most likely he's just not getting enough hits (.270 or so BA), or making enough contact (100+ K's, a lot of walks) because he's decided to work the walk instead of putting the ball in play. I also find it incredulous that pitchers were pitching around him. Again, he's most likely got the bat on his shoulder looking for a free pass, and more often than not it doesn't work (hence the K's greater than BB's). Furthermore, this has been going on for 3 years. If he's been hurt for 3 years, so be it, but that doesn't change the fact of his lack of production.


2) Tonythestatsnerd. I work with statistics, albeit of the financial nature, every day. Your laughable expertise based on freshman year classes vs real world experience at least helps explain your naive commentary. What anybody with a brain does is look to see if what a stat says makes sense. A high OPS for Drew doesn't, because the rest of his #'s are mediocre. No need to thank me for this education however. When you turn 21 in 3 years, you can buy me a beer.

 

[joegrav]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

Look...

He takes a lot of strikes because he's a patient hitter. But that's what makes him valuable, he gets on base... a lot. There are zillions of things in baseball you can't control - who's on base, how much protection you have in the lineup, how many times you score runs, ballpark factors, how good the opposing pitcher is - but if there's one thing that you come close to having individual control over, it's being able to get on base.

And not only does he get on base, he gets a ton of extra-base hits.

Why is it laughable that people would pitch around JD Drew? With the likes of Alex Gonzalez, Jason Varitek, Nick Green, Ellsbury, Mark Kotsay, etc. batting behind him?

The four guys in front of him in the order combined for over 100 home runs. How is that not a good clip? How would that not limit RBI opportunities? Plug Drew in the #4 spot in the lineup with the exact same stats and he'd have 30+ more RBI. Probably a higher AVG too since he'd see more pitches to hit.

And the rest of his stats ouside of OPS aren't mediocre. 24 home runs is pretty good for an on-base guy. 30 doubles was 2nd on the Red Sox. He also doesn't hit into double plays despite being of average speed (one of the reasons why I don't consider high strikeout totals to be that big of a deal compared to other kinds of outs).

His batting average was .279, which isn't bad. If nine more grounders up the middle sneak through, if a few slow grounders on the infield die and give him infield hits, and if a few more lazy fly balls drop where a fielder isn't, he's suddenly a ".300 hitter." I don't see nine more hits over 162 games being a huge difference - batting average can be very misleading.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

2) Tonythestatsnerd. I work with statistics, albeit of the financial nature, every day. Your laughable expertise based on freshman year classes vs real world experience at least helps explain your naive commentary. What anybody with a brain does is look to see if what a stat says makes sense. A high OPS for Drew doesn't, because the rest of his #'s are mediocre. No need to thank me for this education however. When you turn 21 in 3 years, you can buy me a beer.

I just turned 21 last week, actually, but I don't drink.

I've been playing with baseball stats for the fun of it since I was a kid. Don't give me that "I'm older than you, therefore I'm right" crap.

Joe pretty much covered all the relevant points first so I'll defer to his post above. ^^^

 

[J.D.]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

Not sure what's going on in this thread, but given that Gonzalez/Beltre aren't happening and Lowell appears to be on his way to Texas...a possible batting order:

1. Ellsbury LF
2. Pedroia 2B
3. Martinez C
4. Youkilis 1B
5. Ortiz DH
6. Cameron CF
7. Drew RF
8. Scutaro SS
9. Kotchman 1B

Color me underwhelmed.

 

[joegrav]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

5, 8 & 9 = yuck. 6, I'm not really sold on either. And ellsbury is up and down. Could be a rough year offensively unless we get papi back on the juice.

 

[J.D.]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

re: Drew

I'm forced to agree with Rover. He's a nice little #2 hitter. The problem is, the Sox signed him to be their #5 hitter and now he'll probably be batting 7th. I don't care what Theo tries selling, I'm not drinking the cool-aid. He wasn't/isn't worth the money.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

2) Tonythestatsnerd. I work with statistics, albeit of the financial nature, every day.

Translation: "You wanna supersize that meal for just $.99 more?"

 

[Rover]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

I just turned 21 last week, actually, but I don't drink.

I've been playing with baseball stats for the fun of it since I was a kid. Don't give me that "I'm older than you, therefore I'm right" crap.

Joe pretty much covered all the relevant points first so I'll defer to his post above. ^^^

Its more like "I have 15 years of real world experience working with stats, as well as an undergrad and MBA degree where I'm sure I took many of the same stats/math courses, as well as higher levels ones, than you have at this point".

Joe,

You can make those excuses for anybody. It still doesn't fly. The guy's not producing. Why is every other stat misleading except the one you want to focus on? How is batting average misleading? Either you can hit the ball or you can't. In this day and age, a .279 average is mediocre. That's been where he's hitting at for 3 years. That's what I call a trend. 24 HR's was his high water mark. He's averaging 18 in his Sox tenure, which again is mediocre. Why should we hold Drew to a different standard than any other middle order hitter in the league, who may also be batting behind a home run hitter? That makes no sense.

Were Drew a leadoff hitter with speed, I could live with drawing walks (but not all the K's) because he'd be a threat to run. He's not. His job is to drive in runs. Any stat, like on base % in this case, needs to be looked in context, not just take it at face value with no other analysis. If there's a runner on second with two outs and Varitek is on deck, I'd rather have a guy swing the bat than work the walk. If its 1 out with a guy on third, but the ball in play and get the runner home, even if you don't reach base safely instead of drawing the walk (and setting up the DP). This is where stats and reality diverge. Drew is doing this team little good offensively, and he's definitely not filling the role the team needs out of him. Basically what we have now is people saying batting average and RBI's don't matter. What game exactly are we referring to again, because it seems we've stopped talking about baseball.

 

[Rover]

Re: 2009 Boston Red Sox

Translation: "You wanna supersize that meal for just $.99 more?"

Like I couldn't buy and sell your @zz.