Another dominant performance by Kei Igawa!

[Scott Dierking]

Well since he retired when I was 3 I didn't see much of him but that doesn't mean I can't look at his stats and get a pretty good idea of what kind of player he was.

Kinda what I thought.

Trust me, he is Dave Kingman reincarnate.

[madmike1]

Kinda what I thought.

Trust me, he is Dave Kingman reincarnate.

I'm going to trust the facts over your subjective opinion.

[Scott Dierking]

It's not a question of stats out of context, it's a question of knowing what stats are important and have predictive value.

But, here you are, comparing a ball player from the 70's to a ball player in 2007, and comparing numbers and stats like they are a biblical reference and serve as equaling quantities.

THAT is taking out of context.

[madmike1]

But, here you are, comparing a ball player from the 70's to a ball player in 2007, and comparing numbers and stats like they are a biblical reference and serve as equaling quantities.

THAT is taking out of context.

Not really because the stats that i'm looking at adjust against the league avg so that the same year in 06 is different from a year in the 70's that has the same value in the context of the time period.

[Scott Dierking]

I'm going to trust the facts over your subjective opinion.

That is your right. BUT, it doesn't make you RIGHT on tthe subject. Nor me.

THAT is what you need to learn in these forums. That YOUR opinion is not the be all end all as you present it.

[madmike1]

That is your right. BUT, it doesn't make you RIGHT on tthe subject. Nor me.

THAT is what you need to learn in these forums. That YOUR opinion is not the be all end all as you present it.

Whats the be all end all is FACTS, not opinions.

[Scott Dierking]

Whats the be all end all is FACTS, not opinions.

You use STATS, Not FACTS> There is a big difference. You have not learned that, as we all can see.

[madmike1]

You use STATS, Not FACTS> There is a big difference. You have not learned that, as we all can see.

Stats are facts. If you know how to read them right.

[Scott Dierking]

Stats are facts. If you know how to read them right.

You are very mistaken.

Just given the premise that you feel you have to attach "if you know how to read them right" immediately dismisses a stat as a fact.

FACTS do not have qualifers. Facts do not need sample size or adjustments as you told me you did in your comparison. FACTS are actual.

This is easy stuff Mike.

Mike where do you pull FACTS. Do they call them baseball facts or statistics? Just curious?

[madmike1]

You are very mistaken.

Just given the premise that you feel you have to attach "if you know how to read them right" immediately dismisses a stat as a fact.

FACTS do not have qualifers. Facts do not need sample size or adjustments as you told me you did in your comparison. FACTS are actual.

This is easy stuff Mike.

Mike where do you pull FACTS. Do they call them baseball facts or statistics? Just curious?

Is it a fact that Adam Dunn has a 893 career OPS?

[Scott Dierking]

Is it a fact that Adam Dunn has a 893 career OPS?

That is a statistic. Based on a sample size and giving a percentage with weighted attributes.

A fact would be that Adam Dunn had xx Home runs in 2006, FACT.

You are supplying formulas which are the exact decscription of a Stat.

Mike-Show many any refernce ANY, which describes OPS as a baseball FACT, and not a STAT>

I will await your response.

[madmike1]

That is a statistic. Based on a sample size and giving a percentage with weighted attributes.

A fact would be that Adam Dunn had xx Home runs in 2006, FACT.

You are supplying formulas which are the exact decscription of a Stat.

Mike-Show many any refernce ANY, which describes OPS as a baseball FACT, and not a STAT>

I will await your response.

It's a FACT that in Dunn's career. He's got on base 38% of the time. it's also a fact that his Slg% is 51.3% It's also a fact that if you add those numbers together you get His OPS. Which is also a fact.

[mbn007]

I agree with you here SD. While I do see some of the logic behind the statement..I"ve wathced the game enough to know that some guys just know how to win, and some guys just know how to lose.

A few examples that immediately come to mind.

Andy Petitte---had some big years with the Yanks where it seemed if the Yankees scored 8 runs, he'd give up 6. Other games where the Yanks might only score two or three and he'd give up one or two. He did enough to win more times than not.

Anthony Young--- Man was this guy unreal. As a Yankee fan I actually feared what this guy was capable of. Had very good stuff and somehow managed to go 3-30 with an ERA of just around 4.00. I mean, 99.9% of the time if a pitcher posts an ERA of 4.00 he's going to be around .500. Anthony Young just always did enough to lose. Score five, I'll give up six...score three and I'll give up four...etc.

Tim Leary--- A lot of people called him a hard luck pitcher when he lost 19 games with a 4.11 ERA but the guy just knew how to lose. Had a lifetime record of 78-105 with a not so terrible ERA. He'd always keep his team in the game, but had a knack for giving up enough runs to lose.

Excellent post. Another recent example would be a Jack Morris. He just beat you.

My Father tells me many times about the Yankees from the early 1950s. They could hit, but they had a solid staff. There was a guy named Eddie Lopat. He would win all the big games. He rarely had "Cy Young" type seasons, but he always beat the top pitchers in the game.

There was another fellow named Vic Rashi (sp??). Again, looking over his career stats, he was very good, but rarely a "Cy Young" pitcher, from a stat-wise view. But he would win, come what may. The Yankees scored 8, he would lazily give up 5 over 7-8 innings. The Yankees faced Bob Feller, and scored 2, he would give a complete game 3 hitter, allowing 1 run. He just won. A real winner.

Anthony Young had all the stuff in the world. But he always pitched well enough to lose.

[mbn007]

Well since he retired when I was 3 I didn't see much of him but that doesn't mean I can't look at his stats and get a pretty good idea of what kind of player he was.

I saw Dave Kingman. He could hit a baseball 500 feet, but he was one of the worst clutch hitters in the WOrld. He was the classic "stat-padder". You did not want him up whenever the game was on the line.

If Kingman would have hit 500 HRs, he would have been teh first player to reach that lofty total and not get elected to the HOF. Anyone who saw him play quickly realized what he really was.

[madmike1]

I saw Dave Kingman. He could hit a baseball 500 feet, but he was one of the worst clutch hitters in the WOrld. He was the classic "stat-padder". You did not want him up whenever the game was on the line.

If Kingman would have hit 500 HRs, he would have been teh first player to reach that lofty total and not get elected to the HOF. Anyone who saw him play quickly realized what he really was.

his stats aren't that great. He really didn't do much padding except for like 2 years... His career OBP is 302 thats putrid.

[mbn007]

his stats aren't that great. He really didn't do much padding except for like 2 years... His career OBP is 302 thats putrid.

This is why you can't look at stats and make opinions about players as a "be-all-end-all". Kingman never got a late inning hit. But he got a ton of late inning, clutch Ks. His HR totals were not a help to his team, almost every year.

Sure, I bet he hit a few late inning HRs, and maybe even moved a runner over with a long fly ball every now and then. But he was one player with some impressive stats, who was putrid, to be charitable.

[madmike1]

This is why you can't look at stats and make opinions about players as a "be-all-end-all". Kingman never got a late inning hit. But he got a ton of late inning, clutch Ks. His HR totals were not a help to his team, almost every year.

Sure, I bet he hit a few late inning HRs, and maybe even moved a runner over with a long fly ball every now and then. But he was one player with some impressive stats, who was putrid, to be charitable.

I just said his stats weren't impressive... He had 2 good years and about 17 bad ones.

[Scott Dierking]

It's a FACT that in Dunn's career. He's got on base 38% of the time. it's also a fact that his Slg% is 51.3% It's also a fact that if you add those numbers together you get His OPS. Which is also a fact.

Mike-I will concede this point to you -If you can show me ANY baseball site, ANY baseball site that lists these numebrs as FACTS, rather than STATS, I will concede.

Just ONE baseball site Mike-That should be easy for you

[PFSIKH]

Mike-I will concede this point to you -If you can show me ANY baseball site, ANY baseball site that lists these numebrs as FACTS, rather than STATS, I will concede.

Just ONE baseball site Mike-That should be easy for you

www.madmike1sbaseballsaberemathemiticianstatsandotherstuff.com

[madmike1]

Mike-I will concede this point to you -If you can show me ANY baseball site, ANY baseball site that lists these numebrs as FACTS, rather than STATS, I will concede.

Just ONE baseball site Mike-That should be easy for you

I'm not getting into another semantical argument over nothing. If you can't understand my last post i'm not going to waste my time explaining it over again. if you don't understand that a guys OPS is a fact there is nothing i can say that will do anything.

[Scott Dierking]

I'm not getting into another semantical argument over nothing. If you can't understand my last post i'm not going to waste my time explaining it over again. if you don't understand that a guys OPS is a fact there is nothing i can say that will do anything.

Uh-huh.

You can't show ONE example, yet it is me how is getting semnatical.

Good one. very entertaining.

All I asked is one supposrting reference for what you claim.ONE. And you back away and recoil.

Nuff said.

[madmike1]

Uh-huh.

You can't show ONE example, yet it is me how is getting semnatical.

Good one. very entertaining.

All I asked is one supposrting reference for what you claim.ONE. And you back away and recoil.

Nuff said.

I don't need to show you a website to teach you common sense. If you can't realize that the fact that Dunn got on base 38% of the time over his career is a fact then well.. I won't bother.

[Scott Dierking]

I don't need to show you a website to teach you common sense. If you can't realize that the fact that Dunn got on base 38% of the time over his career is a fact then well.. I won't bother.

You don't need to because you CAN'T.

OBP is a statistic that factored by a sampling size that can by changed and affected.

A fact is something that is absolute and actual

Please do not confuse these. Statistics are numbers that can change and will change.

You can prove me wrong by showing any site that tells me Dunns OBPO is a FACT rather than a statistic.

As vehemently as you are arguing this, that should be easy to supply.

I await

[oxscott]

Excellent post. Another recent example would be a Jack Morris. He just beat you.

My Father tells me many times about the Yankees from the early 1950s. They could hit, but they had a solid staff. There was a guy named Eddie Lopat. He would win all the big games. He rarely had "Cy Young" type seasons, but he always beat the top pitchers in the game.

There was another fellow named Vic Rashi (sp??). Again, looking over his career stats, he was very good, but rarely a "Cy Young" pitcher, from a stat-wise view. But he would win, come what may. The Yankees scored 8, he would lazily give up 5 over 7-8 innings. The Yankees faced Bob Feller, and scored 2, he would give a complete game 3 hitter, allowing 1 run. He just won. A real winner.

Anthony Young had all the stuff in the world. But he always pitched well enough to lose.

How bout the polar opposite . . . Andy Hawkins throws no hitter and loses the game . . .

"Signed by the Yankees after the season to a big free agent contract, Hawkins became their number-one pitcher and had another hot streak in the middle of the 1989 season after a bad start. But 1990 brought nothing but bad luck for the expensive hurler. He pitched a no-hitter against the White Sox on July 1, 1990 but walked five and lost 4-0. In his next start, Hawkins tossed eleven shutout innings and lost again. Hawkins finished the season 5-12."

http://www.baseballlibrary.com/baseballlibrary/ballplayers/H/Hawkins_Andy.stm

[madmike1]

You don't need to because you CAN'T.

OBP is a statistic that factored by a sampling size that can by changed and affected.

A fact is something that is absolute and actual

Please do not confuse these. Statistics are numbers that can change and will change.

You can prove me wrong by showing any site that tells me Dunns OBPO is a FACT rather than a statistic.

As vehemently as you are arguing this, that should be easy to supply.

I await

So when I say that his CAREER OBP is 380 i'm changing and affecting it? Do you read the crap you write?

[Scott Dierking]

So when I say that his CAREER OBP is 380 i'm changing and affecting it? Do you read the crap you write?

I will leave it at this-If you can supply one citation that agrees to your point, I will concede.

Otherwise, you should give it up.

Oh, Mike, when you were comparing Kingman's numbers and Dunn's numbers, were those FACTS you were using?

LOL

[madmike1]

I will leave it at this-If you can supply one citation that agrees to your point, I will concede.

Otherwise, you should give it up.

Oh, Mike, when you were comparing Kingman's numbers and Dunn's numbers, were those FACTS you were using?

LOL

OK i understand now. You completely misread this argument. You think i'm saying that there is only one way to read stats. I said NOTHING OF THE SORT. What i said was that the arguments that i'm presenting are based on stats which are facts and can be viewed many different ways which could all be valid. However your arguments are based on anecdotal evidence and your opinion with no basis in anything other then your opinion.

[Scott Dierking]

You think i'm saying that there is only one way to read stats.

The only correct thing you have said in pages and pages of threads.

Good backpedal.

[madmike1]

The only correct thing you have said in pages and pages of threads.

Good backpedal.

It's not backpedaling pal. I just didn't realize that you would make such a moronic argument.

I'll say it again.

Your arguments have ZERO factual OR STATISTICAL BASIS. That better?

[Scott Dierking]

It's not backpedaling pal. I just didn't realize that you would make such a moronic argument.

I'll say it again.

Your arguments have ZERO factual OR STATISTICAL BASIS. That better?

No reason to get huffy because you can't back-up with any supporting evidence. I only asked for one source. Alas, none was provided that agreed with your premise that a stat is a fact.

Mike-It only is a web site. No one expects you to be right all the time. Heck, we are quite content in seeing you founder in the attempt.

Mission accomplished. Again.

[madmike1]

No reason to get huffy because you can't back-up with any supporting evidence. I only asked for one source. Alas, none was provided that agreed with your premise that a stat is a fact.

Mike-It only is a web site. No one expects you to be right all the time. Heck, we are quite content in seeing you founder in the attempt.

Mission accomplished. Again.

What you do is make stupid statements based on nothing but your opinion and then when you can't be proved 100% wrong (opinion can't be proven wrong) you claim victory.

Your BASEBALL ARGUMENTS are based on NOTHING. Period. Thats why it's impossible to argue with you and why i'm done trying to do it.

Say hello to my ignore list.

[Scott Dierking]

What you do is make stupid statements based on nothing but your opinion and then when you can't be proved 100% wrong (opinion can't be proven wrong) you claim victory.

Your BASEBALL ARGUMENTS are based on NOTHING. Period. Thats why it's impossible to argue with you and why i'm done trying to do it.

Say hello to my ignore list.

Get out of town-You mean the discussion of sports and relative players can be based on opinion? And no one is ever 100% right?

That just can't be. How can that be possible?

See what you taught yourelf today?

[oxscott]

How to Calculate Slugging Percentage

Thanks. Your vote has been counted.

Difficulty: Easy

Slugging percentage is a classic baseball statistic and shows a hitter's power.

Instructions

• STEP 1: Add up all official at bats. Do not include those at bats that resulted in a walk, sacrifices or hit by pitch.
  
• STEP 2: Add up total bases. Total bases are how many bases you reached in all the times you hit safely.
  
• STEP 3: Divide total bases by official at bats.
  
• STEP 4: Round to the third decimal place. For example, .57051 is .571.

+

How to Calculate On Base Percentage

hanks. Your vote has been counted.

Difficulty: Easy

On base percentage is the baseball statistic that best shows how often you help your team by not making an out when you come to bat.

Instructions

• STEP 1: Add up all plate appearances. This is every time you come to bat.
  
• STEP 2: Subtract sacrifice bunts. The number you get is your total at bats.
  
• STEP 3: Add up all the times you reached base safely, which should include hits, walks and the number of times you reached base by a hit by pitch. This total does not include the times you reached base because of an error or a fielder's choice.
  
• STEP 4: Divide the times you reached base safely by your total at bats.
  
• STEP 5: Round to the third decimal place. For example, .41051 is .411.

Tips & Warnings

• Since 1984, Major League Baseball has included sacrifice flies in total at bats but has not included sacrifice bunts.
  
• Errors and fielder's choices are not included in times reached base safely, because they caused or should have caused an out.
  
• On base percentage is a better statistic for measuring the productivity of a leadoff hitter than batting average is.
  
• Ted Williams holds the major league record for on base percentage with .483.

=

YOU GUYS ARE MORONS AND WASTING OUR TIME, ARGUING ABOUT NOTHING!!!!!!!!

[oxscott]

expression is mathematically identical to the simple sum of OBP and SLG:

Interpretation of OPS

It should be noted that unlike many other statistics, a player's OPS does not have a simple intrinsic meaning, despite its usefulness as a comparative statistic.

One fault of OPS is that it weights on-base average and slugging percentage equally, although on-base average correlates better with scoring runs. Magnifying this fault is that the component parts of OPS are not themselves typically close to equal numerically (league-average slugging percentages are usually 75-100 points higher than league-average on-base percentages, while league-leading slugging percentages are often 200-300 points higher than league-leading on-base percentages). However, the simplicity of the formula, and its high correlation to offensive ability have made it popular among fans.

Discrepancies between published OPSes and the sum of on-base average and slugging percentage are due to rounding errors.

[Scott Dierking]

How to Calculate Slugging Percentage

Thanks. Your vote has been counted.

Difficulty: Easy

Slugging percentage is a classic baseball statistic and shows a hitter's power.

Instructions

• STEP 1: Add up all official at bats. Do not include those at bats that resulted in a walk, sacrifices or hit by pitch.
  
• STEP 2: Add up total bases. Total bases are how many bases you reached in all the times you hit safely.
  
• STEP 3: Divide total bases by official at bats.
  
• STEP 4: Round to the third decimal place. For example, .57051 is .571.

+

How to Calculate On Base Percentage

hanks. Your vote has been counted.

Difficulty: Easy

On base percentage is the baseball statistic that best shows how often you help your team by not making an out when you come to bat.

Instructions

• STEP 1: Add up all plate appearances. This is every time you come to bat.
  
• STEP 2: Subtract sacrifice bunts. The number you get is your total at bats.
  
• STEP 3: Add up all the times you reached base safely, which should include hits, walks and the number of times you reached base by a hit by pitch. This total does not include the times you reached base because of an error or a fielder's choice.
  
• STEP 4: Divide the times you reached base safely by your total at bats.
  
• STEP 5: Round to the third decimal place. For example, .41051 is .411.

Tips & Warnings

• Since 1984, Major League Baseball has included sacrifice flies in total at bats but has not included sacrifice bunts.
  
• Errors and fielder's choices are not included in times reached base safely, because they caused or should have caused an out.
  
• On base percentage is a better statistic for measuring the productivity of a leadoff hitter than batting average is.
  
• Ted Williams holds the major league record for on base percentage with .483.

=

YOU GUYS ARE MORONS AND WASTING OUR TIME, ARGUING ABOUT NOTHING!!!!!!!!

I tried to tell him