Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2019 14:02:52 GMT -5
The truth of the matter is he actually had 4 great months with us. His last two months of 2018 were really bad. The rest of his time with us was extremely mediocre at best.
His WAR by season with us was 1.4, 1.2, 0.5 and 2.6.
And starting with his last season in Baltimore, 2014, and working backwards, his WAR by season was 2.3, 0.5, 2.0, 1.4, 2.4 and 2.1.
Meh. That's ten seasons of meh.
Baseball-Reference says his WAR was 1.7,1.7,0.7,2.4 1.7 is pretty close to the 2.0 that is the measure for a starting player Its an arbitrary number to use given all the other numbers given - I really do not care about it anyway - there are other variables to measure a player by Who the H can really compute WAR anyway, its more of an abstract number than solid numbers that traditional stats give you
|
|
|
Post by Fumbduckery on Jan 22, 2019 14:06:30 GMT -5
It's not that they "don't count," it's that they have been determined to have too many outside variables to make it one of the major ways to assess any player.
I've posted the numbers several times that show Jason Heward has hit as well or better than Nick with runners on base and runners in scoring position over the last 8 years, as a real good source of proof that is true. Yet Markakis is lauded for being a good RBI guy and Heyward is criticized for being the opposite. So how could that be? Too many outside variables to make it a really important individual stat.
To each his own but in fairness, Heyward did bat leadoff at times so those RBI numbers were down We never will know how good Heyward could have been cause he was never the same after he got hit with that foul ball For sure he had all the tools to be a 25 HR 35-40 double guy - he never amassed the power after the facial injury I would at least like to see him be the player he was in STL where he had one of his better yrs - maybe his second best season My point wasn't about Heyward.
And he had all but one season where he didn't hit leadoff, still hit as well or better than Nick with runners on and runners in scoring position, and had a lot fewer RBI's. Because there's a lot of things out of the control of the hitter that go into RBI's. There are a LOT of articles out there discussing this topic any time you care to consider joining the modern and more improved ways to evaluate players. But I'm sure like always you won't open your mind enough to even consider it and I'm just wasting my time.
|
|
|
Post by Fumbduckery on Jan 22, 2019 14:10:27 GMT -5
Baseball-Reference says his WAR was 1.7,1.7,0.7,2.4 1.7 is pretty close to the 2.0 that is the measure for a starting player Its an arbitrary number to use given all the other numbers given - I really do not care about it anyway - there are other variables to measure a player by Who the H can really compute WAR anyway, its more of an abstract number than solid numbers that traditional stats give you Abstract or arbitrary? There are many variables that go into it. Just like there are many variables that go into your traditional RBI stat. So your RBI stat is abstract or arbitrary too.
|
|
|
Post by Fumbduckery on Jan 22, 2019 14:17:23 GMT -5
And I can tell you very simply what the biggest variable by far when comparing RBI totals from one player to the next is how many chances did each guy get with runners on 2nd or 3rd or both? I'd love to see a stat that showed us the percentage of runs driven in in those situations rather than an actual RBI number--that would give us a much better idea of who is really good at "driving in runs" or not. Even then there are other variables in play, but this would give us a better rough idea than just looking at RBI totals. That's primitive.
|
|
|
Post by PABraveFan on Jan 22, 2019 14:24:47 GMT -5
St. Nick would not cost a prospect, be reasonably priced ( I assume)and offer much greater consistency than pederson,mazara,schebler,Granted less power Pederson is awful against LHP and not good enough against RHP to offset that deficit Bottom line is that we need to get younger and better at the position. Nick served his purpose for the rebuilding Braves but these are now the contending Braves. If you want status quo, Nick is definitely your man. If you want the Braves to move to the next level, he’s not. Nothing against Nick, but we need a corner outfielder who is younger, more athletic and who is at least a viable threat to leave the yard. The question is WHO? It's not Pollock, who is always hurt (101 Games/266 AB's per year average) and has had only one very good season in six years and would cost is a draft pick and likely at least $15M/yr!
|
|
|
Post by mauibravefan on Jan 22, 2019 14:31:06 GMT -5
Nick is certainly not a flashy fiery option but one that would not cost us any prospect talent and be affordable. I gotta agree with the chasm of woe in his new found enthusiasm and cheerful posts. Nick seems to be a steady predictable presence, a bridge to the more youthful blazing future unless our budget is gonna allow us to get a legitimately better player
|
|
|
Post by littlebeast1 on Jan 22, 2019 14:33:55 GMT -5
Bottom line is that we need to get younger and better at the position. Nick served his purpose for the rebuilding Braves but these are now the contending Braves. If you want status quo, Nick is definitely your man. If you want the Braves to move to the next level, he’s not. Nothing against Nick, but we need a corner outfielder who is younger, more athletic and who is at least a viable threat to leave the yard. For what is out there in FA, its not worth losing a draft pick compensation (Pollock) Some of the other choices are not that much more productive (if they are) than Nick - some are in decline (Cargo, Adam Jones) We will get younger in RF when Pache/Waters are ready Now, if you talk about Carmago for the position (if he can play the OF and he might but we have to see) that would get us younger and makes sense & we do not have to give up ANY prospects My thing with bringing Nick back is for only ONE year -- for what he has done I do not see it hurting anything given that is costs no talent and he can be had for less than what he was paid last yr (I think) I took a look at Schebler's numbers -- he has a worse WAR than Nick Joc Pederson, nah, does not excite me too inconsistent and he cannot his LHP at all, almost a strictly platoon player I can live with Nick for 1 year but I wouldn't want to see him in the cleanup spot. We'd have to count on either Inciarte or Albies being able to bat leadoff so Acuna could slide into the #4 spot.
vs. RHP CF Inciarte (L) 3B Donaldson (R) 1B Freeman (L) LF Acuna (R) RF Markakis (L) 2B Albies (S) C McCann (L) SS Swanson (R)
vs. LHP 2B Albies (R) 3B Donaldson (R) 1B Freeman (L) LF Acuna (R) RF Duvall (R) C Flowers (R) SS Swanson (R) CF Inciarte (L)
|
|
|
Post by mauibravefan on Jan 22, 2019 14:35:04 GMT -5
And I can tell you very simply what the biggest variable by far when comparing RBI totals from one player to the next is how many chances did each guy get with runners on 2nd or 3rd or both? I'd love to see a stat that showed us the percentage of runs driven in in those situations rather than an actual RBI number--that would give us a much better idea of who is really good at "driving in runs" or not. Even then there are other variables in play, but this would give us a better rough idea than just looking at RBI totals. That's primitive. Go to www.mlbtraderumors.com pick a player and go to splits and you'll find more stats than you can digest along those situational lines
|
|
|
Post by keystone61 on Jan 22, 2019 14:45:07 GMT -5
Moving Acuna out of the leadoff spot is not a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by PABraveFan on Jan 22, 2019 14:46:27 GMT -5
And I can tell you very simply what the biggest variable by far when comparing RBI totals from one player to the next is how many chances did each guy get with runners on 2nd or 3rd or both? I'd love to see a stat that showed us the percentage of runs driven in in those situations rather than an actual RBI number--that would give us a much better idea of who is really good at "driving in runs" or not. Even then there are other variables in play, but this would give us a better rough idea than just looking at RBI totals. That's primitive. There are many variables in any stat you use. Unless every player batted against every pitcher that threw the exact same pitches and the exact same players played defense and shifted or not shifted in the exact same way in the exact same ballpark under the exact same weather conditions it's impossible to project exactly what each player would have done. How do you factor in how many hanging sliders someone got or how many times you had to face Scherzer and deGrom instead of bottom of the rotation pitchers? All stats are what they are, a numerical representation of a players performance. Some try to incorporate other factors but the truth is that there are so many variables it's hard to make a truly accurate comparison but they do give you a general idea of a players performance.
|
|
|
Post by PABraveFan on Jan 22, 2019 14:47:13 GMT -5
Nick is certainly not a flashy fiery option but one that would not cost us any prospect talent and be affordable. I gotta agree with the chasm of woe in his new found enthusiasm and cheerful posts. Nick seems to be a steady predictable presence, a bridge to the more youthful blazing future unless our budget is gonna allow us to get a legitimately better player Exactly!
|
|
|
Post by Fumbduckery on Jan 22, 2019 14:47:30 GMT -5
And I can tell you very simply what the biggest variable by far when comparing RBI totals from one player to the next is how many chances did each guy get with runners on 2nd or 3rd or both? I'd love to see a stat that showed us the percentage of runs driven in in those situations rather than an actual RBI number--that would give us a much better idea of who is really good at "driving in runs" or not. Even then there are other variables in play, but this would give us a better rough idea than just looking at RBI totals. That's primitive. Go to www.mlbtraderumors.com pick a player and go to splits and you'll find more stats than you can digest along those situational lines I'm not sure it will be specific about runners on only third or only second or second and third versus runners on base....I haven't been able to find other stat places that are. And I'd really just like to see it listed so I didn't have to go do all the work. It would be a much better assessment than just "RBI's."
|
|
|
Post by keystone61 on Jan 22, 2019 14:48:12 GMT -5
And I can tell you very simply what the biggest variable by far when comparing RBI totals from one player to the next is how many chances did each guy get with runners on 2nd or 3rd or both? I'd love to see a stat that showed us the percentage of runs driven in in those situations rather than an actual RBI number--that would give us a much better idea of who is really good at "driving in runs" or not. Even then there are other variables in play, but this would give us a better rough idea than just looking at RBI totals. That's primitive. Did you ever see a 100-rbi guy that sucked? I mean, come on! The other stuff all evens out. Does a guy drive in runs, or does he not? You're complicating it where there's no need for overthinking. Guys get chances to drive in runs because they hit in a certain spot in the lineup, sure, but they hit in a certain spot in the lineup because they're trusted to drive in runs, too. Baseball ain't rocket science.
|
|
|
Post by Fumbduckery on Jan 22, 2019 14:51:53 GMT -5
And I can tell you very simply what the biggest variable by far when comparing RBI totals from one player to the next is how many chances did each guy get with runners on 2nd or 3rd or both? I'd love to see a stat that showed us the percentage of runs driven in in those situations rather than an actual RBI number--that would give us a much better idea of who is really good at "driving in runs" or not. Even then there are other variables in play, but this would give us a better rough idea than just looking at RBI totals. That's primitive. There are many variables in any stat you use. Unless every player batted against every pitcher that threw the exact same pitches and the exact same players played defense and shifted or not shifted in the exact same way in the exact same ballpark under the exact same weather conditions it's impossible to project exactly what each player would have done. How do you factor in how many hanging sliders someone got or how many times you had to face Scherzer and deGrom instead of bottom of the rotation pitchers? All stats are what they are, a numerical representation of a players performance. Some try to incorporate other factors but the truth is that there are so many variables it's hard to make a truly accurate comparison but they do give you a general idea of a players performance. I completely agree, but I do still think some ways are better than others to try to assess an individuals contributions. None are ever going to be perfect, but some are better than others.
And IMHO I think Camargo in RF this year would serve us better than Nick again. Then we could use that money elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by PABraveFan on Jan 22, 2019 14:53:18 GMT -5
And I can tell you very simply what the biggest variable by far when comparing RBI totals from one player to the next is how many chances did each guy get with runners on 2nd or 3rd or both? I'd love to see a stat that showed us the percentage of runs driven in in those situations rather than an actual RBI number--that would give us a much better idea of who is really good at "driving in runs" or not. Even then there are other variables in play, but this would give us a better rough idea than just looking at RBI totals. That's primitive. Go to www.mlbtraderumors.com pick a player and go to splits and you'll find more stats than you can digest along those situational lines What you won't find is WHO that were hitting against in those AB's and the quality of the pitches thrown in that situation. That is much more telling than just who came through in a particular situation unless you're assuming that all of that balances out in the long run (a big assumption). If you take a look at those stats I think you will find there are some seasons with big variations. Why would that be for the same player?
|
|