MLB Thread

[Week]

[quote name='Jaxom 1974' post='1359917' date='May 18 2008, 20.39']I think we can agree that we'll never agree on the DH. Though it is really dumb.

The team scoring more runs still wins, whether the pitchers are batting or not. But the fact that a [u]Zambrano or Owings[/u] or any number of other guys can go to the plate and help their own cause (or have the added benefit to a manager of being able to pinch hit) gives the NL an added layer that the bluntness of the AL just can't match.[/quote]
Great you've noted 2 of (16 teams x 5 starters) 80 pitchers that generally do a good job of helping their own cause (probably still won't even hit .270 or OPS more than .800).

[Caliban]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1359913' date='May 18 2008, 19.34']Manny gets a bad rap, but actually can play pretty well in the field. Particularly in Fenway. His main issue is his speed which limits the balls he gets to.[/quote]

You pick any advanced defensive metric for LFers and Manny is at the bottom. I like revised zone rating, and i think Manny has been by far the worst in the league for the past few years. Thats also ignoring the fact that you cant statistically account for left fielders cutting off throws from the CFer.

That said, the proper answer to anybody attacking Manny's defense would be to say, "who cares, he plays left field and is a career 1.0 Ops and has been over 150 OPS+ basically every year". Id take Manny any day over Matt Holiday. Ill take Adam Dunn over most Lfers

[Week]

Carlos Zambrano career OPS .588
Micah Owings career OPS 1.009 (unbelievably rare)
Jason Marquis career OPS .522

Name me other pitcher that is considered a good hitter. They will be far worse than a below average positional player, I guarantee you.

eta- Looking for RZR for the last few years, I at least found this quote:
[quote]Mark Teahen ranks 16th out of 19 players in the majors who qualify as regular leftfielders. That puts him behind the likes of Raul Ibanez, Adam Dunn and Manny Ramirez.[/quote]

[Jaxom 1974]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1359918' date='May 18 2008, 19.41']Great you've noted 2 of (16 teams x 5 starters) 80 pitchers that generally do a good job of helping their own cause (probably still won't even hit .270 or OPS more than .800).[/quote]

Weak, Week. So it was two names. I won't claim to know the names of every starting pitcher on all 16 NL teams, it doesn't devalue the argument.

[Caliban]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1359922' date='May 18 2008, 19.47']Carlos Zambrano career OPS .588
Micah Owings career OPS 1.009 (unbelievably rare)
Jason Marquis career OPS .522

Name me other pitcher that is considered a good hitter. They will be far worse than a below average positional player, I guarantee you.[/quote]

You are missing the point. Nobody here doesnt know that pitchers are bad hitters. We are saying that having pitchers in the lineup adds another layer to the game, mitigating the negatives of having a pitcher in the lineup.

When Jax brought up Big Z and Owings, he did so to comment how a pitcher that can at some points help themselves, it makes it that much more fun. When Kerry Wood hit that 3 run homer in game 7 of the 2003 NLCS it was greatest moment of my baseball viewing life. Because he was a pitcher, not an unskilled baseball player that cant play a defensive position. You cant recreat that moment in the AL. Sure, those moments are extremely rare, but they are special. Im saying my favorite baseball moment ever occured with a pitcher in the batters box.

Thats all just about pitchers actually hitting. Ha ing that automatic out in the lineup makes the game more interesting then having a generic .850 Ops guy that will get you 30 homers and be hilarious when he tries to slide. We have those guys to, they are usually called left fielders, first basemen and most often left handed pinch hitters. I know what they bring to the game. I also know what having a pitcher in the lineup (and all that that entails) brings to the game. I like our version better.

[Caliban]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1359922' date='May 18 2008, 19.47']eta- Looking for RZR for the last few years, I at least found this quote:[/quote]

[url="http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/main/index.php?view=fielding&linesToDisplay=50&orderBy=zone_rating&direction=DESC&qual_filter=1&season_filter%5B%5D=2007&league_filter%5B%5D=All&pos_filter%5B%5D=7&Submit=Submit"]2007 RZR[/url]

[url="http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/main/index.php?view=fielding&linesToDisplay=50&orderBy=zone_rating&direction=DESC&qual_filter=1&season_filter%5B%5D=2006&league_filter%5B%5D=All&pos_filter%5B%5D=7&Submit=Submit"]2006 RZR[/url]

[url="http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/main/index.php?view=fielding&linesToDisplay=50&orderBy=zone_rating&direction=DESC&qual_filter=1&season_filter%5B%5D=2005&league_filter%5B%5D=All&pos_filter%5B%5D=7&Submit=Submit"]2005 RZR[/url]

There is one common denominator: Manny Ramirez takes last.

ETA: It really doesnt matter though. Marginal upgrades defensively in LF are extremely small. Bill James' win shares supposedly takes into account all contributions that a player can make, and Manny is second in active career win shars to Griffey Jr, and is still usually a top 15 outfielder. Manny is a bad man.

[Whiskeyjack]

[quote name='Caliban' post='1359931' date='May 18 2008, 19.58']Thats all just about pitchers actually hitting. Ha ing that automatic out in the lineup makes the game more interesting then having a generic .850 Ops guy that will get you 30 homers and be hilarious when he tries to slide. We have those guys to, they are usually called left fielders, first basemen and most often left handed pinch hitters. I know what they bring to the game. I also know what having a pitcher in the lineup (and all that that entails) brings to the game. I like our version better.[/quote]

It's just a matter of personal preference. The problem comes when people start acting as if one way or the other is the only [u]right[/u] way. Which is what people on both sides of this debate are trying to do.

I personally prefer seeing good hitters in the batters box. I want to see Ortiz, Hafner, Thomas, etc. hit. I know that some of those guys would have been denied a chance, or would have been given a much more limited opportunity, if not for the DH. And if they were playing in the field, then some other position player would have been on the bench. To me, that would be a shame.

You guys feel differently. That's fine. It's just the way you like it. Doesn't mean it's wrong or right.

[Week]

One of the names had a .588 career OPS. You realize how pathetic that is. If that is the name of one of the GOOD hitting pitchers, think of all the bad ones.

Here I'll pull up 10 that I think of randomly:
Gorzelanny: .132
Lilly: .291
Hudson: .388
Maddux: .399
Suppan: .412
Webb: .254
Olsen: .371
Jurrjens: .347
Backe: .719
Myers: .311
Glavine: .455

Those are OPS numbers. How fucking pathetic is that? Why does ANYBODY want to see that? There is no entertainment in seeing people with an OPS below .700 and even then those barely above are pretty awful.

eta- [url="http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/main/index.php?view=fielding&linesToDisplay=50&orderBy=zone_rating&direction=DESC&qual_filter=1&season_filter%5B%5D=2008&league_filter%5B%5D=All&pos_filter%5B%5D=7&Submit=Submit"]2008 RZR[/url]- Ha, sucka!

[Jaxom 1974]

A .588 career OPS based off of probably 3-6 ABs a week?

WJ's right though. Just because you prefer the wrong way to play the game doesn't make it any less right than what we prefer. You know. Pure baseball. ;)

[Caliban]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1359938' date='May 18 2008, 20.06']One of the names had a .588 career OPS. You realize how pathetic that is. If that is the name of one of the GOOD hitting pitchers, think of all the bad ones.

Here I'll pull up 10 that I think of randomly:
Gorzelanny: .132
Lilly: .291
Hudson: .388
Maddux: .399
Suppan: .412
Webb: .254
Olsen: .371
Jurrjens: .347
Backe: .719
Myers: .311
Glavine: .455

Those are OPS numbers. How fucking pathetic is that? Why does ANYBODY want to see that? There is no entertainment in seeing people with an OPS below .700 and even then those barely above are pretty awful.[/quote]

Is your baseball enjoyment derived from OPS? By your argument games taking place at Coors field are the best, and games at Petco suck.

Ozzie Smith's career Ops was .650.

Pitchers are going to each hit 2-3 times a game. Thats a max of 6 PAs per game. They will probably be bunting 1-2 of those PAs. Is it that pathetic?

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1359938' date='May 18 2008, 20.06']eta- [url="http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/main/index.php?view=fielding&linesToDisplay=50&orderBy=zone_rating&direction=DESC&qual_filter=1&season_filter%5B%5D=2008&league_filter%5B%5D=All&pos_filter%5B%5D=7&Submit=Submit"]2008 RZR[/url]- Ha, sucka![/quote]

Small sample size, bro.

[Whiskeyjack]

[quote name='Jaxom 1974' post='1359945' date='May 18 2008, 20.13']A .588 career OPS based off of probably 3-6 ABs a week?[/quote]

Thanks for making the argument for why you are jumping the gun on Felix Pie. Appreciate it. :D

[Week]

What does it matter how many ABs it is? There are plenty of utility players that get that many ABs and still put up better numbers. So are you saying that a limited number of ABs make it harder for a pitcher to be effective batters? Well, there is another reason to not let them hit.

Chicks dig the long ball...not the double switch...

Even though that may be a joke, there is a lot of truth to it. Why should a positional change be so exciting when you could have a talented hitter in the batter's box more often? It is often said that the hardest thing to do in sports is hit a baseball, so why should we look down upon those that excel at that talent but are not as talented in the field (or don't have a place on the team they've been drafted/signed by)?

[the silent speaker]

Carlos Delgado is starting to get hot. How many players have ever gotten two base hits in the same at-bat?

[Week]

[quote name='Caliban' post='1359949' date='May 18 2008, 21.17']Is your baseball enjoyment derived from OPS? By your argument games taking place at Coors field are the best, and games at Petco suck.[/quote]
Games at Petco do suck because the size of the field allows for bad pitchers to pitch effectively.
[quote name='Caliban' post='1359949' date='May 18 2008, 21.17']Ozzie Smith's career Ops was .650.[/quote]
He was a tremendous fielder and a terrible hitter. Are you arguing otherwise? Because to argue otherwise would be very foolish
[quote name='Caliban' post='1359949' date='May 18 2008, 21.17']Pitchers are going to each hit 2-3 times a game. Thats a max of 6 PAs per game. They will probably be bunting 1-2 of those PAs. Is it that pathetic?[/quote]
Yes, it is.
[quote name='Caliban' post='1359949' date='May 18 2008, 21.17']Small sample size, bro.[/quote]
I bet he doesn't end up last this year. Fact is though, somebody has to. There are several players that show up near the bottom each year that aren't nearly the hitter that Manny is.

[Jaxom 1974]

[quote name='Whiskeyjack' post='1359951' date='May 18 2008, 20.18']Thanks for making the argument for why you are jumping the gun on Felix Pie. Appreciate it. :D[/quote]

:lol: Touche.

However:

2007 - 87 games, 177 ABs, 38 H, 2 HRs, 43 SO, .271 OBP, .333 SLG, .215 AVG

2008 - 30 games, 63 ABs, 14 H, 1 HRs, 23 SO, 286 OBP, .286 SLG, .222 AVG

A small sample to be certain, but shouldn't a 5 tool player be able to show us a little more than that in 240 ABs?

[Caliban]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1359956' date='May 18 2008, 20.23']He was a tremendous fielder and a terrible hitter. Are you arguing otherwise? Because to argue otherwise would be very foolish[/quote]

Right. Im not using a slippery slope argument; but by your logic baseball would be best suited if the SS and C positions would be DHed also. Taken further, it would be best to have a football style specialized offense and defense.

Week and WJ are saying theyd rather see another talented hitter in the batters box who might not be able to see the field otherwise do to poor defense. I like players justifying bad defense by mashing the ball or just flat out be able to play baseball well, which includes fielding.

I kinda feel like Week has no choice because he is an AL fan and WJ has no choice because he knows Miguel Cabrera is about to fail at the last defensive position left for him (Fla and Detroit have tried everthing, and its just not working) and is going to play out that contract as a DH (though id happily take him and stick him in left or first and deal with the defense to get that bat in the lineup.)

[Caliban]

[quote name='Jaxom 1974' post='1359964' date='May 18 2008, 20.34']:lol: Touche.

However:

2007 - 87 games, 177 ABs, 38 H, 2 HRs, 43 SO, .271 OBP, .333 SLG, .215 AVG

2008 - 30 games, 63 ABs, 14 H, 1 HRs, 23 SO, 286 OBP, .286 SLG, .222 AVG

A small sample to be certain, but shouldn't a 5 tool player be able to show us a little more than that in 240 ABs?[/quote]

I could dig up a bunch of future hall of famers and actual HOFers that were similiarly bad in there first 240ABs (in many cases way more then 240) at the age of 22-23. Look at A Rod's first 2 seasons.

Year Ag Tm Lg G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG *OPS+ TB SH SF IBB HBP GDP
+--------------+---+----+----+----+---+--+---+----+---+--+---+---+-----+-----+-----+----+----+---+---+---+---+---+
1994 18 SEA AL 17 54 4 11 0 0 0 2 3 0 3 20 .204 .241 .204 16 11 1 1 0 0 0
1995 19 SEA AL 48 142 15 33 6 2 5 19 4 2 6 42 .232 .264 .408 72 58 1 0 0 0 0

Im sure seattle was glad they gave him 600 ABs in 1996.

Also, Patterson did not play nearly as well in Iowa as Pie has.

[Myshkin]

[quote name='Weekapaug' post='1359891' date='May 18 2008, 16.50']Ah, see I always thought that in baseball you were supposed to score more runs than the other team.

I guess you haven't read the statistical analysis of the benefits of stolen bases and sacrifices. Seriously, if the argument against the DH is that you want to see double switches, that is fucking pathetic. I can't even begin to tell you how stupid that is.[/quote]
You know what? You're right. The DH is awesome. In fact It would be even more awesome if there were 9 DH's on every team. That way we could see a bunch of ringers who didn't have the glove to make the bigs hit homers every day. Wouldn't that be awesome?!!

If you don't play the field you shouldn't be allowed to bat. And if you don't bat you shoudn't be allowed to play the field.

As for the double switch: I happen to enjoy the [i]strategy[/i] of baseball. But since you don't have strategy in the AL I guess I really can't blame you for not understanding it.

[Week]

[quote name='Caliban' post='1359966' date='May 18 2008, 21.38']Right. Im not using a slippery slope argument; but by your logic baseball would be best suited if the SS and C positions would be DHed also. Taken further, it would be best to have a football style specialized offense and defense.

Week and WJ are saying theyd rather see another talented hitter in the batters box who might not be able to see the field otherwise do to poor defense. I like players justifying bad defense by mashing the ball or just flat out be able to play baseball well, which includes fielding.[/quote]
Pitchers generally bat with an OPS BELOW .400-.500!!!! Other than Owings, the best hitting pitchers MIGHT crack .700 and that is rare as well.

There are 23 catchers that get regular or fairly regular time that have an OPS above .800. Including Soto at 1.036 and McCann at .958, both are fantastic hitters. You don't see that coming from any pitchers other than 1, whose OPS is only that high because he was still being pitched to as if he were a pitcher (read: all fastballs) so his OPS will drop significantly.

There are probably 15+ SS with an OPS above .700, again a plateau that almost no pitchers will hit. The weaker hitting catchers and shortstops may play on teams because an organization chooses to value their defense over getting offense from that position. Whereas with pitchers they have no choice, they need to go out and get the pitchers that will give them a chance to win from the mound not the plate. Planning a team the other way around would be idiotic to say the least.

I want someone capable to fucking hit for these pitchers that were drafted for their talent PITCHING and for no other reason (except for maybe a few 2 way players, but still they don't practice hitting enough to refine their skill). I can't believe you just tried to make that argument. DH for Hanley Ramirez? Fuck's sake.

[quote name='Myshkin' post='1360088' date='May 19 2008, 01.46']As for the double switch: I happen to enjoy the [i]strategy[/i] of baseball. But since you don't have strategy in the AL I guess I really can't blame you for not understanding it.[/quote]
Not understanding it? I've watched plenty of NL games with the double switch. I've played seasons of NL style baseball in MLB05-08 and would double switch nearly every game. None of it even begins to make up for the fact that watching (or hitting with) a pitcher fucking sucks. Calling it real [i]strategy[/i] is glorifying it to say the least. I prefer strategy on the basepaths and in the batter's box rather than on the lineup card. Adding a DH will not destroy that sort of strategy at all, hell have you ever watched a Twins or Angels game? There is no reason that a NL style of baseball can't survive with a DH. There is no rule that states that a DH has to be this big lumberjack that can only hit homers, unless I'm mistaken.