Moderators: peeker643, swerb, pup, paulcousineau
by consigliere » Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:57 pm
by consigliere » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:39 pm
by pup » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:52 pm
by consigliere » Thu Feb 01, 2007 1:58 pm
by pup » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:04 pm
by consigliere » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:34 pm
Pup wrote:I jsut e-mailed the author to see if he has taken it that far. Hopefully he responds with an answer.
by pup » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:45 pm
by British_Pharaoh » Thu Feb 01, 2007 2:53 pm
by consigliere » Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:04 pm
Dannycrisp wrote:Doug Mientkiewicz is the definition of average
by British_Pharaoh » Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:08 pm
Doug Mientkiewicz is the definition of averageYou misspelled "awful."
Doug Mientkiewicz is the definition of average
by pup » Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:39 pm
You misspelled "awful."
by pup » Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:52 pm
Jeff,> Great read on the Average is average article. I was wondering, have> you looked at this same type of breakdown within each league, or even> further, within a division? I have actually been working on an angle along> these lines to compare teams within a division, to show who has the leg up> if each position was to play to their "par". For an example, I am from> Cleveland and get a lot of Victor Martinez is valuable despite his defensive> problems, because he is a top 5 hitting catcher. I claim it does not matter> that he is top 5 overall, since he is quite possibly number 3 within his own> division, which is where most games are played.
I didn't break down by league or division. I don't think thosenumbers would be as valuable, because the smaller the sample, the morea single player throws things off. For instance, the DH average inthe AL central would be much higher than avg because of Hafner andThome--it doesn't really mean that Mike Sweeney is less valuable thanif he played in a different division, even those the higher averagewould suggest that it does.
I understand the sample size problem, but I believe there is more to it. Not to be argumentative, but what does it really matter if the Cleveland Indians have a better hitting catcher than the Colorado Rockies? Wouldn't it be more prudent, forgetting the sample size problem, to rate each position against its most common opponents. When you play half of your schedule against the same 4 teams, wouldn't those comparisons give you a more accurate depiction of what to expect from an individual team? I am sure your article was not meant to be used as a predictor of things to come, but I see some value in it for doing exactly that. Wouldn't Mike Sweeney provide the Royals more bang for the buck if he was the best at his position within a division, opposed to the third best in his division?
Once a guy is on your team, his bang for the buck is measured in runs, regardless of whether he plays DH or catcher. Where this stuff matters is on the free agent market, where the rockies and the indians ARE competing against each other. I suppose you could use this method to compare offenses within a division, but it seems like more work than is necessary to simply look at the rosters, add up their production, and compare the total numbers.
by consigliere » Thu Feb 01, 2007 4:04 pm
by British_Pharaoh » Thu Feb 01, 2007 4:17 pm
Consigliere wrote:I still don't follow the whole division ranking and all that, but without even researching it, out of the 5 teams in the division, offensively the Indians probably rank like this out of the 5 teams:DH: 1stC: 2nd (so close to #1)1B: 4th2B: 4thSS: 2nd3B: 5thLF: 1stCF: 1stRF: 3rd
by consigliere » Thu Feb 01, 2007 4:30 pm
Dannycrisp wrote:how is barfield 4th??Foxsports has him 5th overall in the AL and only Iguchi ahead of him in the central division
by consigliere » Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:56 pm
Return to Cleveland Indians & MLB
Users browsing this forum: gbot and 2 guests