Oct 10 2007 03:08 AM
I'VE BEEN WAITING TO GET IN ON THIS FOR 45 SEASONS!
Wheres the line start?
Oh, right here.
I shall prepare my submission(s) for your(s) perusal.
Master Index of Archived Threads
2007 Crane Pool Forum Rankings Thread
| Frayed Knot Oct 09 2007 08:42 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 09 2008 07:49 AM |
|
Well I'm ready to start taking a crack at this.
|
| Frayed Knot Oct 09 2007 08:49 PM |
|
I like to start these by sorting out the position players from the pitchers and then combine them later.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 09 2007 09:13 PM |
|
I'm not going to respond/debate/read this thread until I've had a chance to my own list, then I'll join in.
|
| Valadius Oct 09 2007 11:05 PM |
|
Awesome! Can't wait to start number-crunching.
|
| Zvon Oct 10 2007 03:08 AM |
|
I'VE BEEN WAITING TO GET IN ON THIS FOR 45 SEASONS!
|
| Frayed Knot Oct 10 2007 07:25 AM |
|
And then the pitchers:
|
| Edgy MD Oct 10 2007 07:33 AM |
|
Smith's batting average against seemed shockingly high. He was seemingly redeemed by a similarly high gb/fb ratio. Maybe the Mets should put five infielders out there when he's pitching.
|
| Vic Sage Oct 10 2007 08:26 AM |
|
|
Perez was better than Maine overall, and Green was better than LoDuca. And whether Glavine's full season of mediocrity was slightly better or worse than Alou's abreviated season of excellence is also open to debate. Other than that, i agree with your list.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 10 2007 08:29 AM |
|
So, Norrin/Vic gives us:
|
| seawolf17 Oct 10 2007 08:38 AM |
|
Okay, I'm in.
|
| TransMonk Oct 10 2007 08:39 AM |
|
My List:
|
| Vic Sage Oct 10 2007 08:42 AM |
|
Norrin/Vic actually gives you:
|
| G-Fafif Oct 11 2007 12:54 PM |
|
I'm going with my cumulative Schaefer standings. I went back the last couple of days and added them up (didn't keep track during the season because I didn't trust myself to not manipulate their points to maybe nose one Met I liked in front of another Met I didn't like as much) for FAFIF purposes, but since we're doing this, I'll throw 'em in here. I imagine if I were starting from scratch without this database, it would come out differently in spots. This way it's presented without prejudice or agenda.
|
| Valadius Oct 11 2007 02:18 PM |
|
All right, here we go. So we start out with 49 players. Let's work them down to 30.
|
| Frayed Knot Oct 11 2007 05:25 PM |
|
|
Yeah but is it accurate? Do you really want to make the case for Easley being more important to this season than Wagner; or Chavez more than Heilman; or Newhan more than, well ... anyone?
|
| Zvon Oct 11 2007 06:13 PM Re: 2007 Rankings |
|
|
How do older non active players get to move up this list? Or do they?
|
| Edgy MD Oct 11 2007 06:44 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 11 2007 07:28 PM |
|
The only way to move up is for us to reconsider a past year. But obviously, your legacy is in place when you're done playing. The best you can do is hope hold your place for a long time.
|
| Zvon Oct 11 2007 07:12 PM |
|
|
Oh. So that's how someone like Trachsel ends up being a top 50 all time Met. Hmmmm... Don't seem right to me but I'm just along for the ride. WEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeee~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
| Edgy MD Oct 11 2007 07:30 PM |
|
He's started the twelfth most games of any Mets pitcher, eleventh until Glavine passed him this month.
|
| Zvon Oct 11 2007 07:47 PM |
|
I suppose thats something.
|
| metsmarathon Oct 11 2007 07:55 PM |
|
name 50 or more mets who should be ranked more highly than trachsel.
|
| Zvon Oct 11 2007 08:03 PM |
|
|
....ask me a more ridiculous question.
|
| Zvon Oct 11 2007 08:04 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 11 2007 08:42 PM |
|
30- Wright
|
| Valadius Oct 11 2007 08:24 PM |
|
Um... Z?
|
| Zvon Oct 11 2007 08:36 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 11 2007 08:51 PM |
|
|
That is a mistake. I did some last minute changes and I knew id screw up. He was pretty high on my list too. Ill fix that--thanks Val On edit: I first wrote up a list off the top of my head. Then I typed it up. Then I went to take a look at the seasonal stats, which compelled me to make some changes. Conine got bumped.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 11 2007 08:49 PM |
|||||
|
Clearly, that's why I quoted his all-time ranking
What's top-50 material? Are there 20 more accomplished pitchers?
It's a book written on consensus.
That sucks. It's also a small sample.
Nobody goes backwards. That doesn't make sense. It's a cumulative total.
|
| Zvon Oct 11 2007 09:10 PM |
||||||
|
Those two small samples were his two biggest assignments in a Met uniform. I'm all for the consensus method. I'm simply stating my opinion. In reference to pitchers in Met history I'm not sure what top 50 material is. Where is the current overall list, I'd like to take a look at it. My point is that as far as overall all-time Mets go, older non active players should be able to be re-evaluated as to their place. Not simply brushed aside for current crop. Just sayin.... How is this new list factored in to the existing list?
|
| Edgy MD Oct 11 2007 09:19 PM |
|
They are re-evaluated. Feel free to go the rankings forum and add your voice to any season in which Trachs is ranked.
|
| Zvon Oct 11 2007 09:36 PM |
|
|
wow. very interesting. very kool. I will go check that out. Thanks 
|
| metsmarathon Oct 11 2007 10:33 PM |
|
see, the current players aren't evaluated against past mets, they are evaluated against their teammates.
|
| Zvon Oct 11 2007 10:40 PM |
|
That does make me understand a lot better MM.And it makes sense.
|
| G-Fafif Oct 12 2007 05:16 AM |
||
|
I'm going by their performances as they happened, so yes, it's accurate enough for my taste.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 12 2007 06:09 AM |
|
Sure, but in the heat of the moment, the closer tends to get screwed in PotG voting. It's something we've observed every year.
|
| G-Fafif Oct 12 2007 07:12 AM |
|
Closer-screwing observed, including my own closer-screwing. Except that I never really felt I was gypping Wagner when I'd issue (mostly) half-point after half-point. I think living with it 162 times clued me in to how truly overrated closers are in the scheme of things. Wagner's greatest skill in 2007 was not being Looper, Benitez and Franco. That was a pretty valuable skill in and of itself, but there were relatively few games where I felt Billy Wagner's hand made the big difference. I didn't do POTG voting in past years but even in '06 I sensed Wagner was a larger game-to-game presence. It was probably the nature of the wins the Mets were collecting early on in '07. When they really and desperately needed an All-Star closer later (though, yes, wins in April count the same as wins in September), Billy had back spasms.
|
| Benjamin Grimm Oct 12 2007 07:32 AM |
|
I agree, G. I'm not sure that Schaefer is gypping the closer as much as it's exposing that it's not such a role that gets credited with more importance than it deserves.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 12 2007 07:36 AM |
|
I can't understand how cloers are bemoaned for decades (at least in Sisk's case, and Franco and Benitez are working on it) when they screw up, and dismissed when they succeed.
|
| Frayed Knot Oct 12 2007 07:48 AM Re: 2007 Rankings Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Oct 12 2007 07:53 AM |
|
|
Un-retire and play again!! Think about it; a retired player has already been judged to be below the also-retired guys ahead of him on the list so it's not like that's going to change short of us reviewing and changing past scores. So all he can do is hold his place or drop as he gets passed by active and future players. If you want to argue specifically about Trachsel you can fish up the lists where he played and make a case why he shouldn't as high as he was. The 2003 list would be a good one to start since that's where he racked up much of his ponts. More discussion of this topic took place HERE if you want read a similar exchange between myself and 'Slugger' which has a few more details on the same subject. Funny how it's usually Trachsel that stirs folks into action. On the other hand if it makes you feel any better, he'll certainly drop at least 3 spots this winter as Wright, Reyes and Beltran pass him by -- which reminds me that we'll soon need icons for both Reyes & Beltran and I believe you're the guy in charge of those.
|
| Benjamin Grimm Oct 12 2007 07:52 AM |
|
Because all they're contributing is a lack of failure.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 12 2007 08:22 AM |
|
Which (1) in fairness, isn't always as simple as that*, (2) isn't easy to do perfectly fifty times a year, (3) is generally against better competition than any other pitcher is asked to face, (4) is a rhetorial trick, as virtually all success can be termed a "lack of failure," certainly all success by pitchers
|
| Benjamin Grimm Oct 12 2007 08:35 AM |
|
I know that some saves are more difficult than others, but many of them are not all that difficult.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 12 2007 08:56 AM |
|||||
|
But, as you see, in general they've been more difficult than you categorize them.
This is stubborn. Of course, they're more dangerous. Ether a team trying to come back in a save situation in the ninth has their better hitters come up, or they empty their bench to get their worst hitters out. Some pinch-hitters are better than others. All pinch-hitters are up there because they're considered more of a threat than the guy they're replacing. When was the last time you saw a closer face a pitcher?
I don't blame you. This is no reason to derogate the closer himself or his performance.
Or, in Damion Easley's case, the guy who was a dangerous pinch-hitter for a month. How many Mets had an eight-inning start in 2007? Who would argue that a spotless save is more valuable than that. I wouldn't. But a bunch of them might be. I certainly haven't placed any single performance by a closer above any quality start of even six innings. But a closer's performances come more frequently.
I'd argue that the featured guy in the pen throwing the highest leverage innings all year, almost flawlessly the first half of the year, being worth more than a guy who was the best pinch-hitter for a month is pretty compelling.
|
| Benjamin Grimm Oct 12 2007 09:06 AM |
|
Well, then maybe Easley has too many points. That doesn't mean that Wagner has too few.
|
| seawolf17 Oct 12 2007 12:23 PM |
|
This is going make no sense out of context once JD/JCL jumps up a player designation, but if Valadius wants to bitch about a player ranking, how about we get Garry Templeton out of the Top 500? What a waste of a roster spot. Let's get these 2007 rankings up STAT and get him outta there.
|
| Frayed Knot Oct 12 2007 12:40 PM |
|
Leaving aside the value of closers for a second, my main concern is one of producing a list through a particular method and sticking with that list even if it produced some illogical answers simply on the basis of, 'well, that's how things turned out'. The idea here is to produce a list where the order can be explained so even if no one else agrees with it, it should at least make sense to you.
|
| Frayed Knot Oct 12 2007 12:44 PM |
|
|
Figuring that there'll be about 9 or 10 new names up once this year gets added, one could follow along with JCL's assigned players and get a good look at the ones who are destined to go bye-bye.
|
| Valadius Oct 12 2007 01:12 PM |
|
Who said I was doing any bitching? All I've done is pointed out an oversight on Zvon's part in his rankings. I haven't said a thing about players from previous seasons.
|
| seawolf17 Oct 12 2007 01:46 PM |
|
Wait! Sorry Val. I get you and Zvon confused sometimes. My bad.
|
| Valadius Oct 12 2007 02:30 PM |
|
LOL. No problem seawolf. I can see where you might get us confused, seeing as we both showed up here around the same time.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 12 2007 02:53 PM |
|
Both of you are a pretty good score in Scrabble.
|
| dgwphotography Oct 12 2007 05:04 PM |
|
30 - Wright
|
| Zvon Oct 12 2007 05:18 PM |
|
|
You consider my observations, questions and opinions "bitching" ? Cripes. Tough crowd. FK: Reyes is a done deal. Edgy has it. Ill make a Beltran during tonights games.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 12 2007 05:31 PM |
|
Hitters: Wright, Beltran, Reyes, Delgado, Alou, Green, Easley, Gotay, Milledge, Castro, Castillo, LoDuca, Anderson, Chavez, Valentin, Gomez, Ledee, Difelice, Franco, Newhan, Conine, Ambres, Hernandez, Johnson, Alomar.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 12 2007 07:36 PM |
|
What's catching worth?
|
| Nymr83 Oct 12 2007 11:35 PM |
|
nothing so far. i'll make position adjustments once i integrate the hitters and pitchers into 1 list
|
| Kid Carsey Oct 14 2007 11:08 AM |
|
|
| Vic Sage Oct 15 2007 08:23 AM |
|
|
Well, LoDuca kept the ball from rolling to the backstop. So there was that.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 15 2007 09:12 AM |
|
That implies it's not worth anything and I know you don't believe that.
|
| Valadius Oct 15 2007 02:36 PM |
|
Well, to give us an update on where we feel, on average, taking the 9 submissions made thus far:
|
| Nymr83 Oct 15 2007 09:31 PM |
|
Hitters: Wright, Beltran, Reyes, Delgado, Alou, Green, Easley, Gotay, Milledge, Castro, Castillo, LoDuca, Anderson, Chavez, Valentin, Gomez, Ledee, Difelice
|
| Nymr83 Oct 15 2007 09:36 PM |
|
ok so heres the questions i have to ask:
|
| Frayed Knot Oct 15 2007 10:01 PM |
|||
|
Just speaking for myself ...
Better OBP and better defense
But he was the everyday catcher which counts for something. 3x the ABs of Castro
Not many of them were. He started with 17 scoreless then gave up 18 runs in his next 27 innings and was essentially finished for the season by the end of June.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 15 2007 10:05 PM |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By what measure is he bad?
Unless you want to hang your hat on zone rating --- mostly insignificant for catchers --- he's the best performing Met catcher, with a handshake to Sandy Alomar for catching three of three basestealers. You can believe all you want that Castro would have sustained his hitting superiority given the same PT. It may be true, and I won't argue. But we're measuring what actually happened, and it's a tough job to give the team more with 32% of the plate appearances and 34% of the innings behind the plate.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 15 2007 11:58 PM |
|
|
they were all pretty bad defensively, but he was bad offensively too and he did it over more innings (hurting them more.) i'd really like to argue more about 2B though... Castillo (199 ABs) .296/.371/.372 (98 OPS+) Easley (193 ABs) .280/.358/.466 (116 OPS+) Gotay (190 ABs) .295/.351/.421 (103 OPS+) even if castillo was so great on defense, which i'm not sure about, Easley was so far superior as a hitter that Castillo would have to be Roberto Alomar in his prime for the defense to even come close to making up the offensive difference. can someone help me out with the Win Shares (both from defense and overall) on these guys? thanks.
|
| Kid Carsey Oct 16 2007 06:33 AM |
|
|
| Edgy MD Oct 16 2007 07:32 AM |
||
|
That's absurd. 1) It's almost impossible to be on the extreme right side of the defensive spectrum and be a net negative defensively. Just by being there and allowing better hitters to play other positions you're a positive. 2) By what standard are you claiming he (and everyone else the Mets ran out there) performed defensively beneath a replacement level catcher, let alone a general replacement level player? That's just a shocking disaster to consider and I'd imagine we wouldn't have all missed it.
Of course you would.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 16 2007 08:26 AM |
|
Here’s my 6-tier list. I am willing to argue -- between the asteriks!
|
| Benjamin Grimm Oct 16 2007 08:35 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 16 2007 11:18 AM |
|
30 David Wright
|
| metsmarathon Oct 16 2007 09:04 AM |
|
wouldn't lawrence be a 0 and the remainder of the negatives be one point higher?
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 16 2007 09:05 AM |
|
Question for the room:
|
| Nymr83 Oct 16 2007 10:37 AM |
|
Easley, Castillo, and Gotay have 1.4, 1.0, and 0.9 win shares from defense respectively. so you can take "defense" off your list of excuses for placing Castillo higher.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 16 2007 10:41 AM |
|
|
i had Delgado 3 spots above Green (with Alou and a pitcher between them.) The difference to me is that Delgado had about 90 ABs more than Green. they were very close on a per-ab basis. Alou is between them for me because he just didnt have the ABs for me to place him higher than delgado (who was a net positive at 104 ops+) but he had just enough ABs where i lt comfortable placing him above Green.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 16 2007 10:43 AM |
|
And the score at catcher was Lo Duca 3.4so, using your logic, you can do the same with "they were all pretty bad defensively, but he was bad offensively too and he did it over more innings (hurting them more.)"
|
| Nymr83 Oct 16 2007 10:45 AM |
|
they (the catchers) were all pretty bad defensively and Loduca was bad offensively too, therefore he was just BAD. Castro made a significant offensive contribution.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 16 2007 10:51 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 16 2007 11:12 AM |
||
|
No, they weren't. Nor should this statement lead logically to the implicit, "therefore they were a wash as far as their defensive contributions." They weren't.
In far fewer at-bats, which gives him about an equal score offensively (checking win shares here, and they say exactly the same) while LoDuca's defensive win shares is a much larger number. I think you're using this thread to hammer home your position on who should have been playing.
|
| Frayed Knot Oct 16 2007 11:12 AM |
|
Yancy,
|
| Benjamin Grimm Oct 16 2007 11:19 AM |
|
Oops!
|
| Nymr83 Oct 16 2007 01:03 PM |
||
|
but contributing more wins in fewer at-bats makes you BETTER. i only used the win shares to compare the 3 secondbasemen because i knew they played roughly the same amount. contributing more defensive wins in far more playing time doesnt make you better. dividing the win shares by playing time might give a better idea of who was contributing more, because you'll rack up win shares the same way a shooting guard racks up points...by playing alot or taking alot of shots, but if you shoot 5-23 for 12 points did those 12 points really help your team when taking into account your 18 missed opportnities, opportunities that could have gone elsewhere if not for your ineptitude? i feel we had this same argument when matsui was stinking up the joint, at least loduca is stinking up the joint at a more valuable position.
|
| m.e.t.b.o.t. Oct 16 2007 01:33 PM |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
m.e.t.b.o.t. is not yet prepared to commit to utilizing any specific method in the ranking of new york met baseball players in 2007. however, m.e.t.b.o.t.'s cumulative schaeffer voting totals make for a logical starting point.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 16 2007 01:46 PM |
|
Maine-Perez 10-11? yikes.
|
| sharpie Oct 16 2007 02:05 PM |
|
And Sosa ahead of both of them?
|
| Edgy MD Oct 16 2007 02:34 PM |
|||
|
No need to capitalize it for me. I can read. We're not measuring who is or was better. We're measuring who contributed the most.
No, it makes you a larger contributor to the effort.
So, Pedro Martinez is at the top of your pitching list? Playing time is already factored in to win shares, and you're dividing it out.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 16 2007 02:43 PM |
|
Player A goes .400/.500/.600 in 100 ABs
|
| m.e.t.b.o.t. Oct 16 2007 02:58 PM |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
as a robot, m.e.t.b.o.t. finds that there can be no such thing as too much data. as a result, m.e.t.b.o.t. has compiled additional data which may be of limited utility to human rankers of the 2007 new york mets baseball season. m.e.t.b.o.t. has maintained a tally of the win probability added by each new york met in the 2007 season. m.e.t.b.o.t. has also calculated the frequency with which players contribute positively and negatively towards a winning outcome.
relief pitchers are observed to contribute positively to wins with a better success rate than either starting pitchers or hitters, 67% to 49% to 44% the average positive contribution of a relief pitcher is 0.057 per game, compared to 0.086 for hitters and 0.209 for starters. the average negative contribution of a relief pitcher is 0.113 per game, compared to 0.060 for hitters and 0.219 for starters. m.e.t.b.o.t. also looked at these contributions in wins and losses. the below table shows these results as well.
the first three columns show starting pitchers in wins, relief pitchers in wins, and hitters in wins. the next three columns show the same in losses. WP+ means win probability added. WP- means win probability subtracted. TOT is the net win probability added or lost by each category of player in a win or loss. m.e.t.b.o.t. is not yet capable of interpreting, or even correctly defining the above terms. m.e.t.b.o.t. merely presents the data, and allows human posters to decide if it is meaningful at all. m.e.t.b.o.t. regrets that m.e.t.b.o.t. has not yet been programmed with the ability to change the size of text within tables embedded into online fora, as the below table may occupy far more window space than is required. m.e.t.b.o.t is designed to perform tasks in an efficient manner, and this lack of utility runs counter to that directive.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 16 2007 03:02 PM |
||
|
The second one, and isn't that close. There's only so much you can help your team if you don't play. Sorry to the secret slugger. The second guy gave his team about 40% more. Feel free to draft Player A in your simulated league and play him more.
No it doesn't. But you sure like framing things in black and white.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 16 2007 03:17 PM |
||
|
so a guy who is actually a negative at the plate is more helpful than a guy who was positive in a small sample size? i guess you're a big fan of "chuckers" in the NBA who score lots of points by ball hogging and you hate those guys who quietly go 6 for 10 for 12 points.
|
| Chad Ochoseis Oct 16 2007 03:21 PM |
|
|
Two cents...
I'd think that a player who sits is about equal in value to a replacement player. So add in replacement value performance (call it .230/.300/.310) for 500 ABs for Player A. That gives him the equivalent of .258/.333/.358 in 600 ABs. So I'd take Player A in the extreme example, but not by much.
|
| Kid Carsey Oct 16 2007 03:39 PM |
|
...
|
| metsmarathon Oct 16 2007 04:11 PM |
|
ramon castro's VORP (value over replacement player) is 13.1 - that is ramon castro contributed 13 runs more in his plate appearances than a replacement player would have been expected to have contributed.
|
| Valadius Oct 16 2007 04:43 PM |
|
Yeah, but a guy who plays more while putting up slightly worse numbers can have contributed more than a guy who plays less while putting up better numbers. It's not Castro's fault he was hurt. But that still doesn't mean he contributed more than Lo Duca. I'm sorry, not buying it. Lo Duca over Castro.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 16 2007 08:34 PM |
|||
|
Can we just stop posting about the NBA? I honestly don't know what you're talking about. A guy with a .625 OPS is not a negative contributor. He's not helping his team win too many games, but he's producing above replacement level.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 16 2007 08:47 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 16 2007 08:48 PM |
|
|
why the obssession with replacement level? if everyone was replacement level we'd win 50 games. you should be comparing guys to the average player to determine whether they are helping or hurting
i'm trying to make the point that below-average production over a larger number of chances is hurtful not helpful.
|
| Frayed Knot Oct 16 2007 08:48 PM |
|
|
Higher for the extra 100 ABs and the 24-10 HR gap. IsoP = .190 vs .139
|
| metsmarathon Oct 16 2007 08:58 PM |
||
|
quick question: kaz matsui. has he helped or hurt the rockies this year?
|
| Edgy MD Oct 16 2007 09:10 PM Edited 4 time(s), most recently on Oct 16 2007 10:04 PM |
||||
|
I'm not obsessed with anything.
Fewer, but how is that relevant? We're not talking about replacement level player. We're talking about a guy who produced below league average but above replacement level. How many games would we win if everyone got 157 plate appearances and left the rest of the appearances to guys picked up off the waiver wire?
No I shouldn't.
Hurtful relative to what? It's a key question. If somebody is struggling along at eighty-ninety percent of the league average, do you think most teams have a guy on the bench at every position who will produce at league average to replace him. It doesn't work that way. The Mets had a better hitter this year backing up Lo Duca, but he didn't get the playing time to claim he outproduced him. Several men, a robot and a couple of databases have averred this as being clearly the case. I once was slow figuring this out (It's probably in the archives), but a guy producing below league average is not a negative --- not positive enough to build a championship around, but not a below zero contributor either. League average isn't your zero point. The logical extension of your reasoning is that (1) Pedro Martinez is the top performing Met pitcher, whle you know he isn't, and (2) I was more productive than Paul LoDuca this year by sitting home and doing nothing.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 16 2007 09:19 PM |
|
|
thats not a quick question, its a pretty hard one... he had an OPS+ of 87 but stole 32 bases while only being caught 4 times. he played the 3rd or 4th hardest of the 8 defensive positions and i'm not really sure how well he played it. if you told me that his defense was very good along with the good baserunning i'd say he helped. if you told me that along with the 87 ops+ he was a bad defender i'd say he hurt.
|
| Vic Sage Oct 17 2007 09:17 AM |
|
|
(C) Norrin Radd 2002 (?), all rights reserved.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 17 2007 09:31 AM |
|
It was Wide BeeGee who pants me for treating league averageness as an entitlement, and anybody below average as actually counter productive and worth less than a guy who slugged .650 in a handful of at-bats. i was ranking Rey Ordoñez; 27th or something, behind Rich Becker. Wrongly.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 17 2007 10:08 AM |
|
dont tell me you believe that ordonez wasn't hurting the team the entire time he was here. his OPS+ (career) is SIXTY!
|
| Edgy MD Oct 17 2007 10:15 AM |
|
Really, you've got to stop using that all-caps thing.
|
| metsmarathon Oct 17 2007 10:17 AM |
|
the rankings are not based on who else could've done a given player's job, but how much a given player contributed while doing his job.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 17 2007 01:06 PM |
|
|
his best season here was 69+, was he helpful even in that season? i still say no. yeah we're judging comparative contributions, which why the guy who hit .300 as a pinch hitter whatever year that was was still deserving of a higher ranking than ordonez
|
| Edgy MD Oct 17 2007 01:23 PM Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Oct 17 2007 02:13 PM |
|
Ignored questions: By what measure is he bad?
|
| Kid Carsey Oct 17 2007 02:00 PM |
|
Nymr: >>>guy who hit .300 as a pinch hitter whatever year that was was still deserving of a higher ranking than ordonez<<<
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 17 2007 02:09 PM |
|
Regardless of all the particulars, guys who get 500 PAs should be judged against guys who got 500 PAs, you know? I don't know why the rest of you are all "No More Tiers" -- shit works.
|
| metsmarathon Oct 17 2007 04:32 PM |
|
i'm curious. what would you consider to be "zero-level" contribution?
|
| Nymr83 Oct 17 2007 04:58 PM |
|
if you're asking me how i'd rank contributions i'd sort the hitters by OPS+ and then make reasonable adjustments for playing time, baserunning, and defense. the bigger the difference in OPS+ between 2 players the more ABs i'd need to see to leapfrog a guy...so Delgado manages to leap ahead of Alou (though i am starting to rethink that) while Green doesnt.
|
| metsmarathon Oct 17 2007 06:21 PM |
|
well, what i'm asking is how many at bats equal a 10 point difference in OPS+, defense & baserunning being equal
|
| Rockin' Doc Oct 17 2007 07:31 PM |
|
Reading through this thread start to finish made my head hurt.
|
| metsmarathon Oct 18 2007 09:18 AM |
|
i need to learn how to shrink a picture...
|
| Edgy MD Oct 18 2007 09:21 AM |
|
Why 3*IP for pitchers?
|
| metsmarathon Oct 18 2007 09:57 AM |
|
first thing that popped into my head. (250 ip being roughly equal to jose reyes' playing time, per my thinkinging at the time.)
|
| Edgy MD Oct 18 2007 10:06 AM |
|
I don't think it'd drastically change rankings at all, as the increase is on average offset, more or less, by the 33% reduction. Just trying to drive toward mintute accuracy. Good work.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 18 2007 10:15 AM |
|
i'm not sure i agree with the numbers used but i think this is a very good and creative step in the right direction (towards our player evaluation.)
|
| Edgy MD Oct 18 2007 10:31 AM |
|
It doesn't mean they sucked. It means they failed that time.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 18 2007 11:17 AM |
|
the difference is that by getting on base as a hitter you are creating another plate appearence for your team, when you make an out you are wasting one of the 27 you start out with. for a pitcher when you get an out you've gotten through 1/27th of the game, but when you give up a baserunner you've created an additional opportunity for the opponents.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 18 2007 11:26 AM |
|
I'm not pointing to the times batters reach base. I'm pointing to the times they didn't.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 18 2007 01:36 PM |
|
our graph has 2 axis, quality and quantity
|
| Edgy MD Oct 18 2007 01:44 PM |
|
I see so clearly that it would blow your mind.
|
| metsmarathon Oct 18 2007 02:25 PM |
|
its a shame baseballreference.com doesn't track OPSA+
|
| Edgy MD Oct 18 2007 02:28 PM |
|
It can certainly be calculated easily enough. It goes into my rankings.
|
| metsmarathon Oct 18 2007 02:32 PM |
|
well, sure it can be calculated. but it should be provided, is my point.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 18 2007 02:48 PM |
|
My work is at home. I guess over 100 is bad. When I come to that, I have to use an absolute value in my work to get a pitcher figure comparable to the batters' figure.
|
| Valadius Oct 18 2007 02:49 PM |
|
I have no freaking clue how to read that.
|
| metsmarathon Oct 18 2007 06:08 PM |
|
to get needlessly technical, i basically did a coordinate system conversion, going from ERA+/OPS+ versus playing time (quality vs. quantity), to something that measures contribution versus... um... something vertically.
|
| Rockin' Doc Oct 18 2007 07:41 PM |
|
Valadius - "I have no freaking clue how to read that."
|
| metsmarathon Oct 19 2007 12:07 PM |
|
sigh... i've noticed a critical flaw in my methodology.... the graphical method all hinges on the scaling.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 19 2007 12:35 PM |
|
i might not agree with that order but i think its a very reasonable one and very good work with the graph on your part
|
| Frayed Knot Oct 19 2007 01:19 PM |
|
|
If anyone wants to change an earlier vote they should put their new order into a new post. Editing the old one wouldn't get picked up.
|
| metsmarathon Oct 19 2007 01:43 PM |
|
|
well, one thing i could do is apply a smallish exponential to the playing time, maybe take the square root of the playing time or something like that. but then i'm just doing things arbitrarily i fear. also, i'm not thrilled with this method for one glaring reason... mr. adkins and his one inning of no runs given up. i mostly arbitrarily gave him an ERA+ of 100, and he's my 31st met as a result. any higher and he'd've edged mota - perhaps a popular move in fact! but that just wouldn't be quite right, would it? the other thing i could do is think of euqivalency in terms not of a linear relationship, but more of a hyperbolic relationship, whereby ranking = quality * quantity. this is a little harder for me to graph up, but here's an example of what it might look like... (also, it might, maybe, alleviate the scaling issue)  this is a project i'm kinda working on for fun, and cos i'm a loser with too much time on my hands. the middle curved line is a median hall of famer. the upper curved line is the top 25% of hall of famers, and the lower is the bottom 25% of hall of famers. (this is all hitters, btw - i've yet to do the pitchers as tehy'd be on a different scale i think) what this shows, off topically, is that ken griffey is a lock for the hall of fame (using career WARP3 and 5-year peak WARP3 as my criteria), jim thome is a solid candidate, and juan gonzalez doesn't have the greatest of cases. the other thing i really need to do with this is segregate out those guys who were voted in by the veterans comittee, or who got in seemingly just for having a career batting average over 0.300. but all that is besides the point. the really important thing is the methodology, and the curvey thingy. hmm... does that then get me to edgy's offensive metric thing, multiplying OPS+ by plate appearances? i think it might. dangit!
|
| metsmarathon Oct 19 2007 01:57 PM |
|
i did a quick run at taking the square root of playing time. it seems to've had an effect primarily on the lower end of the scale.
|
| metirish Oct 19 2007 02:05 PM |
|
You lot are really drawing up plans to invade those Islands in the last graph, right, and the players names are code.
|
| metsmarathon Oct 19 2007 02:09 PM |
|
the seychelles'll never know what hit em.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 20 2007 12:46 AM |
|
marathon, i personally like that list (and the methodology) more than the old one, thanks again for the hard work.
|
| metsmarathon Oct 20 2007 08:43 AM |
|
if only this were how i planned on voting...
|
| Valadius Oct 27 2007 04:21 PM |
|
Let's start agreeing on some stuff.
|
| Edgy MD Oct 28 2007 06:51 PM |
|
Consensus is usually established by averagng the ranks of the various legitimate contributors, after successfully or unsuccessfully cajoling each other.
|
| John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 28 2007 07:17 PM |
|
What we oughta do (and by we I mean, someone other than me), come up with a forum average consensus with additional columns illustrating highest and lowest rank for each guy. Then we can take up the extremes.
|
| Frayed Knot Oct 28 2007 07:58 PM |
|
|
Already working on it.
|
| Frayed Knot Oct 29 2007 07:46 PM |
|
Well, here's a snapshot of where we stand now.
|
| Nymr83 Oct 29 2007 08:31 PM |
|
|
first, i dont think anyone's opinion should get discarded. second, are you including the "discarded" opinions in the list of who is high/low on each player? i'm pretty suprised that i'm the lowest on Sosa so far, i thought i was one of his bigger supporters
|
| metsmarathon Oct 29 2007 09:17 PM |
|
maybe i should get around to submitting my actual position on this thing instead of simply some theoretical position...
|
| Edgy MD Oct 29 2007 09:30 PM |
|
Turn the key, also.
|
| m.e.t.b.o.t. Oct 30 2007 09:45 AM |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
m.e.t.b.o.t. is experiencing something of a quandary in determining how to apply the win percentages utilized in m.e.t.b.o.t.'s schaeffer voting towards ranking the 2007 new york metropolitan baseball team.
|
| Frayed Knot Nov 27 2007 08:17 PM |
|
OK, this thing has been inactive for nearly a month now -- so anyone who
|
| Nymr83 Nov 27 2007 08:26 PM |
|
i think we usually count the schaffer voting as a person too right?
|
| Frayed Knot Nov 27 2007 08:48 PM |
|
Yes, but he rarely changes his vote after he casts it.
|
| Frayed Knot Jan 04 2008 07:30 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 05 2008 03:58 PM |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Final 2007 Rankings:
admins: This thread should be moved to the rankings forum at some point.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| metsmarathon Jan 04 2008 07:46 AM |
|
12 Raul Castro...?
|
| AG/DC Jan 04 2008 07:47 AM |
|
He filled in while Fidel was recovering from surgery for seven or eight months there. You don't think that's worthy of some 2007 points?
|
| Benjamin Grimm Jan 04 2008 07:47 AM |
|
He did a great job stepping in while Fidel was on the DL.
|
| AG/DC Jan 04 2008 07:50 AM |
|
Ooooh, jinx. Owe me a Rheingold.
|
| Frayed Knot Jan 04 2008 08:16 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 21 2009 08:17 AM |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Awwww, you know who I meant
|
| d'Kong76 Jan 06 2008 01:19 PM |
|
Here are some printable versions of Frayed's spreadsheet computations:
|
| Gwreck Jan 06 2008 03:01 PM |
|
Thanks KC.
|
| d'Kong76 Jan 06 2008 03:29 PM |
|
Nah, thanks to Mr. Knot and everyone who submitted lists or comments.
|
| Valadius Jan 06 2008 08:01 PM |
|
It's spelled "Ruben".
|
| Frayed Knot Jan 06 2008 08:18 PM |
|
Fortunately I spelled it correctly on the spreadsheet that we use to upload it into the system.
|
