Before I jump into the post, I’d like to address some recent chatter regarding Hillman and Moore. Coming into this season I was a pretty big fan of Moore and very skeptical about Hillman. At this point in time, I am getting very nervous about Moore and I’m completely done with Hillman (as you all know I have been for a while). It doesn’t matter that I never played beyond high school ball – Trey Hillman is a moron. It’s extremely evident that this is true. All you have to do is listen to that numnuts talk.
What a complete and utter joke. I mean that with all my heart (to steal a sappy line from Dayton Moore’s recent “I have faith in my process” article). My concerns with Dayton Moore can probably be summed up with this quote from the Star:
“We’re going to keep the group we have, and we’re going to work. That’s the only way I know how to do it. It might not be the right way, but it’s the only way I know how to do it.”
So much for adapting on the job... We are 19-46 since our nice 18-11 start (small sample size). People like to point to last September (“a run for the ages” – CABG) or this April as “proof” that Hillman is a good manager or that our team is good. My explanation for those two months: Even a blind squirrel finds a nut. I agree with Dayton that we don’t need a massive overhaul and I’m not calling for that. But I certainly don’t agree with “do nothing and hope/wait for it to get better” approach either. Ugh, what a depressing situation we’re in – though it’s nothing new. By the way, we should trade Joakim Soria right now because we obviously don’t know what to do with an elite reliever. On to the post…
Stat guy vs. baseball guy has been quite the topic at the ol’ Bullpen Boys these days. I think a post is definitely called for at this point. If you read the comments section (If you don’t do this, I highly recommend you do as it is a great gathering place for the wide spectrum of Royals fans) then you know that there has been some debate over stats vs. the little things.
I'd like to clarify something. I myself have never attacked any of the following: 1. The little things 2. Hustle 3. Grinders 4. Team cohesiveness 5. Knob location
All I've done is staunchly defend the attacks on stats.
Baseball is my favorite thing in life (sad) and there is no way I could be this perverse about the game without loving and respecting the hell out of the "little things". Those are the things I look for when I’m watching games on TV or out at the ballpark. I love watching the guy in the on deck circle to see how he prepares. I like to see which players hop over the foul line on their way to and from the dugout and which guys could care less about that superstition. I love watching SS and 2B play “daylight” with a runner on 2nd to limit his leadoff. Turning two is probably my favorite play in the game and there is nothing prettier than a smooth turn at the bag. I could go on for hours. All of these little things are very important to winning a baseball game. I fully agree with that. I enjoy all of these things, but I also enjoy WINNING. Something the Royals haven’t done in 24 years. I’m 25. That is pathetic. You see I agree that you need players who grind it out and do all the little things, but if you want to win – you need guys to get ON BASE. In my opinion,OBP is the most imortant statistic in baseball. Even old school Earl Weaver knows that (read this article, long read, but well worth it). Ok, let’s talk shop…
First off, let’s get a little more detail about OPS. OPS stands for On base % Plus Slugging %. OBP = (H+BB+HBP)/(AB+BB+HBP+SF) SLUG = (Total Bases)/(AB) It is a way to quantify a players ability to get on base AND their ability to hit for power. I must say upfront that OPS gives a little more weight to slugging% (contrary to claims in the comment section). The AL average this year for OBP is .335; SLUG is .427 – therefore average OPS is 762. There is more variance (range) in the SLUG because the mean (average) is higher. This means that the difference between the top 10 in SLUG vs. league average is a greater number than the difference between the top 10 in OBP vs. league average – make sense? This means that OPS stat will give a little extra bump to the exceptional SLUG hitters more than the exceptional OBP hitters. Let’s take the SLUG and OBP leaders in the AL from 2008 and assume that they would be league average in the other category. A-Rod had a SLUG of .573 (146 pts above avg) and Milton Bradley (yes, the same guy) had an OBP of .436 (101 points above avg). So, you can see that there is more “room” in the SLUG department.
Now, because this stat combines two stats (and leans towards SLUG) it may not be fair to certain players. Let’s take SS for example. A lot of shortstops don’t hit for much power, so even if they do a good job of getting on base, their OPS will trend lower. Let’s take a “gamer” type player (David Eckstein) who does all the little things right. He may be the ultimate gamer who does crazy hustle things like sprint to first when he draws a walk (Cabby just got a semi). In 2005, David Eckstein had an OPS of .758 which was below league average. However, his OBP was .363 – well above average. So David Eckstein had a very good year for a SS who doesn’t bat in the middle of the order. This is a good example of not blindly following OPS as the end all be all (as I've been accused of doing). That is my disclaimer as I sit here and praise OPS. OPS is used for impact bats (like Gordon and Butler) and that is what the Royals desperately need.
Great baseball minds marginally smarter than I have poured through all the stats in the game and have found that this is one of the best measurements to define a well rounded player. This stat has forced intuitive sports fans to trend away from the measurements we used on the back of baseball cards and look more closely at these stats with PROVEN success. Let’s play a couple games, shall we…
The following two players are from the 2008 season. Both put together nice seasons, but which player would you rather have?
Player A:
Runs: 100
HR: 37
RBI: 116
Runs+RBI: 216
Player B:
Runs: 101
HR: 36
RBI: 119
Runs+RBI: 220
If you are in the belief that Runs and RBI are the most important stats, then you would pick player B. Sure the two players above are close, but you might as well pick the one with higher Runs & RBI because those are really the “only two stats that matter” Congratulations, you just picked Adrian Gonzalez over Albert Pujols. In 2008, Albert Pujols put together one of the most dominating seasons in the past 10 years. But how you ask? He had less Runs and RBI’s than Adrian Gonzalez, so how was his season so dominating? If Albert had better hitters behind him, he probably would’ve scored another 20-30 runs. If Albert had better OBP guys ahead of him getting on base, he probably could’ve driven in 30-40 more runs. You see runs and RBI depend on the guys before and after you. But OPS has to do with only one person’s performance: the person in the box. Ok, now let’s look at some new and improved stats to go along with these “old school” stats.
Player A: OBP: .462; SLUG: .653; OPS: 1.114
Player B: OBP: .361; SLUG: .510; OPS: .871
You see Albert got on base at a rate 100 points (10%) higher than Adrian Gonzalez. Basically, every month that season, Albert would get on base 10 more times than Adrian. In that same month, Albert would get 14 more total bases than Adrian. So, even if they had the same amount of hits per month, maybe Albert hit 14 more doubles, or maybe 7 more triples, or how about 4 HR’s and 2 doubles. As you can see, Albert was a much, much better hitter than Adrian last year. There are no if’s, and’s, or but’s about it. It is clear as day. But if all you saw were Runs, HR’s, and RBI’s, you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference!
Next example, from the 2005 season…
Player A:
RBI: 101
BA: .247
Player B:
RBI: 117
BA: .286
Again, if I’m looking at these two players and I’m a “baseball” guy, I’m gonna take player B here because he clearly delivered more with guys on base. He also hit 40 points higher in regards to batting average, so he definitely is doing a better job of getting on base and moving guys around, right? Wrong.
Player A: OBP: .387; OPS: .927
Player B: OBP: .311; OPS: .808
You see Jorge Cantu (Player B) got on base 196 times that season. Sure he drove in 117 runs and had a pretty good season, but batting average doesn’t tell the whole story. Adam Dunn (Player B) got on base 260 times that season! The only reason Dunn has less RBI’s than Cantu is because pitchers pitch around him all the time when guys are on base. Though it limits his RBI opportunities, he takes a walk and prolongs the inning and leads to creating more runs. It’s a no brainer who to choose if you had to pick between Dunn and Cantu.
Final example, also from the 2005 season…
Player A:
Runs: 95
RBI: 128
Player B:
Runs: 95
RBI: 108
Player A is cleary better at driving runners in as he drove in 20 more runs than Player B, right? Wrong
Player A: Base runners during AB’s – 503; RBI % - 15.31%
Player A: Base runners during AB’s – 378; RBI % - 20.11%
RBI % is calculated by dividing the number of runners you drove in by the number of runners you had on base. It also removes the RBI's where a player drives himself in (HR's). You see Andruw Jones (Player A) drove in a lot of runs that year, but he also had 503 guys on base throughout his season. Of the 503 guys on base he only drove in 77 of them. Vladimir Guerrero (Player B) drove in 76 base runners that same year and did it with 125 less runners than Jones! If he were given the same amount of base runners as Jones and kept his RBI % the same, he would’ve driven in 101 runners compared to 77. If you were a manager and you could choose between having Vlad or Jones up to bat with runners on base, who are you picking?
Ok, so I hope those examples help show why OPS and other advanced stats are important and why Bill James is on to something here. I wish Earl Weaver would come out of retirement and take the reigns from Hillman. Seriously – read that article.
Posts
Hey Hatt, where we at?- offensive line edition
15 hours ago
27 comments:
Prior to responding, I want to FORMALLY apologize to Grapes. That post was meant to be more commical, and it did come off rude. I apologize, and hope you still respect my opinions...as I truly do respect yours. In short, I am stubborn and love to debate. But, in reality I don't really believe I'm better because I played baseball. Do I think I have a more enhanced viewpoint..sure, but by NO MEANS does that make me better. You don't see Sweeney on here saying that type of stuff. He may think it at times...but is mature and doesn't state it like I do. I apologize.
On to the rebuttal...to Diet Pepsi,
First off, I ENJOYED reading that post more than any other post in the history of this blog. I think you made some great points.
I immensely respect Bill James, and feel he absolutely contributes to winning.
Also, prior to assessing statistics, one must realize that baseball is often times a game of luck.
OPS is without a doubt a good barometer, but not something that's going to 'take over baseball' by any means. The weakness in the OPS is that it does not factor in other methods of advancing around the bases: Ie. Stolen Bases. Ricky Henderson and Lou Brock are definitely more valuable than their OPS shows.
Another interesting factor of OPS, and what makes it suspect is the way 'slugging percentage' is calculated. A home run is 4 bases, but is the value of a home run the same value as 4 singles? 4 singles makes the pitcher throw more, leads to 'potentially' more runs, uses bullpens which leads to stressed bullpens later in series/years, etc.
In addition, when calculating OPS, some parts are counted once, while some items are counted twice or more! For example, a single counts towards both OBP & Slugging percentage, so all singles are counted twice in the final OPS. In reality...how can you count the result of one AB twice in any statiscal measure? Then...Walks are counted once in OPS, only counting towards OBP but not counting towards Slugging. So, in conclusion we are trying to say a single is worth twice as much as a walk? Is a double worth 3 times as much as a walk (doubles count twice in Slugging and once in OBP vs. walks counting once - only in OBP)?
I believe that OPS is very useful, but I would not personally identify it as the most important statistic when identifying a ball player.
In conclusion, great post...and believe it or not...I am definitely more opened up to statistics in the game. I'm not all about grinders, I just like watching them. But, I'll take talent/grinding any day of the week. To be in agreement with Eggs...grinding provides no factutal evidence, I just think it's an unidentifiable important quality in a ball player.
And, lastly...I must admit that I read Bill James book and loved it. Absolutely loved it.
I had a Royals dream last night. I guess this must have come from Rany's last post because in my dream, we brought up some right-handed submariner who maxed out at like 83. He was black but he spoke Japanese and he was just killing it...batters couldn't touch him. I guess we got him from the Diamondbacks.
Apology accepted, let's move on.
Grapes
How much is Greinke regretting that contract extension? He must really hate pitching for this bunch of fucking losers.
Also, did you guys all read Dayton Moore's "I believe in the process" interview? DP quoted it above, but I think the most embarrassing part was when Moore referenced the 18-11 start and said, "If the process is so wrong, then how did we put together such a good team in the offseason?" Uh-oh. He actually thinks he put together a good team in the offseason. Seriously, thats trouble.
Basically he is under the delusion that the past 70 games don't matter as much as the first 30 did. Blaming everything on injuries. The thing is, JoPo actually called this in a blog post like 3 days before the interview. He said he got the feeling the Royals front office thinks they put together a great team that was just snake-bit by injuries*. Dayton's quote proves JoPo was absolutely right. If this front office is under the impression that they did a good job this offseason, I think we probably need a new front office. Refusing to recognize and take responsibility for (and learn from) such obvious failure is not a good sign for the Royals future.
*Incidentally, JoPo's blog post goes on to prove, in a number of legit ways, how this "inujuries killed us" theory is total bullshit. It's also pretty embarrassing for a team to publicly blame injuries for their shortcomings (the Chiefs also did this last year. If we aren't careful our city will become known for that). Other front offices are laughing at us, I promise you. Maybe even harder than they were laughing at us after the Betancourt trade.
I once made the joke that players like Juan Gonzalez, benito santiago, and now Jose Guillen sat around and joked about being a royal. The joke was they would tell other "older" players in the game that were once good players to "come on down to KC and get a 3 year deal, then fake weird injuries, no one cares, it is great, you can literally get paid for doing nothing. Don't worry about performing well, they are used to people not panning out. It is great." I don't know how this fits in, but it came to mind after reading Eggs' post.
Can Grienke win the Cy Young? I still think he deserves it, but he may have some interesting numbers at years end with this stupid line up.
yeah..I'm thinking 15-7 with like a 1.89 ERA...2nd in strikeouts.
All the stats vs. baseball has been pretty entertaining.
I’ll get to where I stand shortly, but first let’s briefly address one of the games top organizations in Boston. They have put together a baseball staff that clearly covers both sides – many get the impression that they lien toward stats simply because they employ the big name in that business. There’s plenty on the baseball side there as well.
The bottom line with Boston is that they have found a combination of both views that is working. We can debate until the Royals win the division about what the right combination of the two is but there’s only one answer: the combination that wins.
Baseball guys get defensive when people who have not been a part of the day to day mental and physical challenges of the game take numbers to analyze, project and predict. The same goes for stat guys who cannot believe that someone would rather have a player with worse quantifiables because they “play the game the right way.”
Those following baseball have major strides in giving stats a true role in how organization personnel and fans alike break down the game. There is no question that these major advancements have helped open new ways to analyze the game. Although I believe that many baseball stats are imperfect, that’s a topic for another day.
For arguments sake, let’s assume that we all agree on the most important statistical categories, whatever they are. As a group, our goal is to put together the best team possible. We have access to all of these stats for every player available. In extremely general terms, here’s how my thoughts on the role of stats vs. baseball in the process.
I believe that ignoring past production would be failing before you’ve even begun. How we measure what players have done and will do is definitely a piece to the puzzle. Somewhere in the process, stats must play a role in defining the black and white information: player A does this and player B has never done this. I would call this a starting point.
If I’m putting together a fantasy team, I might, might be fine with just going with the best stats available. Putting together a stats All-Star team is different than putting together a championship team. If I’m trying to put together a championship team, I want to know a lot more than what the numbers say. I want to see someone practice, see someone play, talk to people who have coached someone previously and interact with the player.
I can tell you much more having been around someone every day than by breaking down his baseball card. Again, there is a balance. I believe that the stats are an excellent place to start, but only tell you a part of the story.
When hiring people in the business world, why are there references, interviews and background checks? Why not just allow the resume to show sales figures, positions held and salaries attained?
Go tell Theo Epstein that Josh Beckett’s BABIP is trending down and doesn’t project well against a left-handed heavy Yankee lineup and I’m guessing he’s still wouldn’t mind having him out there in a game seven this fall. Certainly, circumstances and options would play into the decision. Nonetheless, I know what the GM who “emphasizes” stats would tell you and it wouldn’t be, “Great, let’s see if someone else projects well.”
You can’t measure why Beckett elevates his game or what kind of confidence his teammates have in him. The list goes on. Statisticians have done a nice job with what is available to them. Unfortunately, there are far more intangibles that you cannot quantify than the ones you can. There is no winning formula waiting to be derived. That’s not how baseball or life works.
The objective is to win, and if winning is on the line, I’m going with my gut every time.
Johnny,
BEST POST IN THE HISTORY OF THIS BLOG:
JOHNNY- JULY 27, 12:26 PM
That post was absolutely incredible. You just conveyed exactly what I've been trying to convey....but, because you were less combative/argumenative than ol CABG, you got the message across much more effectively than myself.
Great examples, great points, great post.
Best Quote: There is no winning formual waiting to be derived. That's not how baseball or life works'.
Sigh of relief here for Ol CABG...
Real subtle, Cabby.
Obviously I can't speak for these guys, but I think what makes the Royals so frustrating to statisticians like JoPo, Rany, and Mellinger (and to a lesser extent ol' Eggs) is that they make no effort at finding the balance Johnny speaks of. It's their way or the highway, which is a ridiculous attitude to have when your franchise is perenially terrible.
We can't know what would happen if a GM used only sabermetrics to put a team together. We might speculate that the team would have terrible "intangibles" and would be incapable of "grinding", but a team has never been put together that way, so we don't really know. We can guess, and our guess might be educated and well-reasoned, but we can't know for sure.
On the other hand, if you want to see what happens when a GM puts a team together using only the old-school method, look no further than the current Kansas City Royals. We're witnessing the results of a GM refusing to use stats, and it isn't pretty. A sabermetrics-only approach might be doomed to failure, but would it be doomed to this kind of failure? I have my doubts.
I feel like whats been lost in all this debate is that basically every statistician around, myself included, realizes that both methods have their faults and ultimately need help from each other to function effectively. Many "baseball guys", however, refuse to recognize that, which I find pathetic and sad. If an ol' CABG can learn new tricks, why not an ol' Dayton*? Seriously, it should not be this hard for him to realize the faults in his method. They're right in front of his fucking face and he doesn't see them. That's scary.
*I guarantee Dayton Moore never took the time to read a book by Bill James, and he's a professional GM. I find that unacceptable.
Also, "going with your gut" is exactly what Dayton Moore does. And he knows more about baseball* than any of us, and he has access to all the things Johnny references. And it isn't working. Something has got to change.
*I really hate this term due to a) its overall vagueness and b) the fact that it can't be quantified in any way. But I wanted to use the baseball guy vernacular since I'm addressing that mindset.
Here's a question...let's say you had 2 captains and they each had to pick a team. 1 captain was a stat guy and another was a baseball guy. They pick from a pool of, say, 100 players to fill out a roster. Who would end up having the better team?
I'm guessing the stat guy's team would be like the Yankees and the baseball guy's team like the Royals.
Sweetums...not even close...just refer back to Johnny's post. It's dead on.
Now...Who can argue with that?!?
Blazing Saddles reference by the way.
I like Johnny's posts too, but lets not act like his latest one ends all discussion, Cabby. Simply invoking Johnny's post is by no means a trump card.
Also, I'm pretty sure a "stats all-star team" would win a hell of a lot of games.
I just think he hit the nail on the head. There's nothing I can say that will make it sound any better...
Comforting to see us clear salary space for Seattle to that they can acquire one of the game's best defensive shortstops in Jack Wilson ...
FYI: Betancourt has a higher average (.128) than OBP (.125). I didn't know that was possible until now. I guess his sac bunts count against his OBP.
The contrast of having two people pick teams strickly based on stats vs baseball is over the top. What works is a healthy combination. After taking everything into consideration about a player or decision between different players, I would recommend accounting for things you can't calculate.
You can't equate anything said with, "Well that's exactly what the Royals have done and they've failed." Figure it out.
It has been a long absence since my last post, but I have definitely been keeping-up on the posts, comments and ensuing debate. It's a boring Friday afternoon so I'm going to fill my dead-time w/ some random thoughts regarding the recent debates/discussions...
1. - Greinke: It really is too bad that he has received such terrible run and bullpen support. He very well could end-up 14-8. A terribly underwhelming record for a guy that might make 35 starts, have a sub 3.00 ERA, and 225+ I.P. & strikeouts.
As for Greinke’s Cy Young prospects, Halladay getting traded might be his BEST hope. If he's not traded, in order for Greinke to (re)solidify himself as the Cy Young favorite he has to have a 5-game run similar to his 10-game string to start the season. What is concerning is that Zack has not really shown the same form he did in the first 10 starts of the season; no CG, CGSO, or 0 E.R. starts since. He’s been consistently great, but not the phenom he was in that stretch. What IS encouraging though is that historically the 2nd half of the season he has been better than the 1st half which could mean a great finish to the season. If it comes down to Halladay (pitching in the A.L. East) vs. Greinke (in the worst division in baseball)...I'm afraid his chances aren't great unless he ends the season how he started. Getting to 20 wins no-longer seems remotely possible, and he’s going to have a VERY tough time tracking down the wins leader if he falls more than 2 behind the pace.
...Continued on next post
Continued...
2. - Stats Guy vs. Baseball Guy: Prior to the start of this blog I was pretty new to a lot of the advanced statistics that have since been discussed ad nauseam. I definitely consider myself analytical & a numbers/math guy...not related just to baseball, but in life. I've never read any books on Sabermetrics. Even so, I would probably be able to hold my own in a debate about the value of Sabermetrics solely based on the principle that numbers are factual interpretations of events.
The past 2 posts and ensuing comments have definitely been the best I've read on the blog. D.P. substantiated a lot of very interesting statistical analysis, especially with his “Player A” vs. “Player B” scenarios. CABG and Johnny have also given a lot of quality insight into the short-comings of some statistics, and provided great “baseball guy” insight into the unquantifiable (intangible) side of the sport. After everything that I have read, absorbed and digested, it’s clear that any organization that refutes the value of either party would be purely ignorant.
As for the recent debate about “Stat Guy” drafting versus “Baseball Guy”, logic tells me that both parties would pretty much value players the exact same until late in the draft. It doesn’t take advanced statistics to tell anyone that knows something about baseball that Pujols is the best player in the sport.
On a related note there was a really interesting article that I recently read in ESPN the Magazine that was all about the baseball draft and how it has advanced over the past few years, but not solely on the merits of Sabermetrics. In addition to mentioning a “dream scenario where the Royals have both Greinke & Porcello, or Greinke & Weiters” it went into great detail about how player evaluation has completely changed. In one section the article touched on drafts of just a decade ago where some teams would have “Player A” rated in the top 20, and another team would have “Player A” in the 100’s. Now, however, player evaluation is much more astute and consistent throughout organizations. It’s a good read for Sabermetric and baseball guys.
Ultimately, statistics do not help identify a clubhouse cancer like T.O. or Bonds; nor do they identify the mental deficiencies of a player like Ryan Leaf. Teams need both statistical analysis & player evaluation; the Royals need more than both. Our team/market cannot compete using the same formula as every other team in baseball. I want to be AHEAD of the curve not behind it. All you hear about from the Twins organization is how well-coached and fundamentally sound they are from top to bottom. I see NO continuity in our organization. I want an identity that is not associated w/ perpetual losing. Even if that identity is that we play unbelievable fundamental baseball, put-out great effort and show-up to play. We cannot claim half of those qualities. With inferior players & restricted financial resources you need to find a way to set us apart…and no, Trey, it’s not God.
-mitch
Excellent post Mitch...this blog is started to find some unity and I like it. All eyes have been opened.
In regards to Anderson...what a great trade! No, he's not a star, but I think he can develop in to a very good everyday player. Exactly what we need...spee/athleticism/defense
here is the beginning of the latest post on royalsauthority.com, another blog on the Royals. Not that intuitive but goes along with what we have been talking about.
"You know what's funny about Zack Greinke's outing yesterday? If you define it as 'Zack just didn't have it', you are a baseball man. If your analysis is that Zack's fastball was, on average, two miles per hour slower than normal (he topped 94 mph just once all day), then you are a stathead. Yet, both are saying basically the exact same thing."
That's all I got.
Grapes
Call me crazy...but I am stoked about this Anderson trade. I watched qutie a few of his bats in detail, and he's got AWESOME hands. He takes the inside pitch and drives it right back up the middle (take a clue Mike Jacobs) all while keeping his hands relaxed. I also watched him get down in the count, battle, battle..etc. and then flick a low and away slider in to the right field for a single. I think with his defense, speed, and ability at the plate...we just got a steal.
He reminds me a lot of a fast Darren Erstad.
I stumbled on to a royals blog today called firedaytonmoore. It's really good. You guys should check it out:
http://www.firedaytonmoore.blogspot.com
maybe you meant this one:
http://firedayton.blogspot.com/
This blog is finished.
Interesting Joe Posnanski article on Betancourt today. I wanted to say that I could see this with my own eyes after balls to both sides routinely get by. Skip the first third of the article and check it out if you have a minute.
Post a Comment