Bruce Chimes In

[Derwood]

how about we replace Freel with Sizemore?

 

.277/.390/.462

 

Higher OBP, lower SLG, OPS+ just 1 point behind Soriano (122 vs. 123)

 

Who would you rather have leading off?

 

Now you're doing this: Replacing a hitter with a better hitter. I wouldn't keep OPS constant because I know that OPS that is OBP driven means more than OBP that is slugging driven. However, in this case the only way Soriano shouldn't bat lead off is if there's a realistic choice and that choice is a better hitter than him. Sizemore is a poor comparison and you justify this by saying they have the same OPS+ (which is a worthless statistic). You tried to prove your point by saying hey this guy is better thus obp kills soriano. the perfect comparison would be someone with an identical EqA and a higher OBP (lower SLG). When looking at this our choice is:

 

.299/.337/.560 - Alfonso Soriano

.258/.351/.459 - Nate McLouth

.306/.353/.488 - Robinson Cano

.263/.355/.441 - Ian Kinsler

.265/.364/.463 - Josh Willingham

.283/.369/.445 - Bobby Abreu

 

As you can see we're looking at mainly .260/.360/.450 guys who OPS around 810 compared to Soriano's 897.

 

i was just looking at another guy who, at first look, wouldn't normally be considered a leadoff guy (Sizemore)

[Mephistopheles]

Sizemore is normally looked at leading off.....he can steal bases, he's fast and gets on base.

[RynoRules]

the hand-wringing about who should hit where ignores the overall problem, which is that there are not enough high-obp players on the roster

 

Ahh, sweet logic.

[DivineBovine]

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=59921

 

Bruce makes a few good points that have been keys around here for a while: a patient approach/high OBP is important and player development being important since it allows for quality league minimum players.

 

Finally, the Cubs get tired of hearing it, but they've got to start developing an offensive philosophy based on high on-base percentage. Manager Lou Piniella knows this.

 

Does Lou really know this? If so, why were guys like Theriot when he was struggling and OBPing .327 at the top of the lineup? Soriano leading off with a .337 OBP? (Yeah, Soriano might be a different situation.)

 

 

Yes, I don't doubt Lou knows this. He has to play the hand he's dealt, and Hendry dealt him a low OBP lineup. Hendry's teams have consistently been at or near the bottom of the league in walks. He has made remarks that he can't get the players to change their free-swinging tendencies. I absolutely agree that there's almost no way to do it. The guys Hendry acquired were free swingers before they were Cubs and are free swingers now.

 

About the leadoff thing, I don't know if Lou not knowing the importance of OBP in the leadoff spot necessarily implies he doesn't know the importance of OBP. I think he does.

[Elrhino]

Lou made a comment in August that he would like to have more OBP at the top of the order, but you don't just decide in August to have more OBP in the lineup. It's decided in the offseason when you aquire players or you instill it in your minor leagues. It may not have been a public shot at the Hendry/Hughes philosophy, but it was at least a suggestion.

[TruffleShuffle]

Lou made a comment in August that he would like to have more OBP at the top of the order, but you don't just decide in August to have more OBP in the lineup. It's decided in the offseason when you aquire players or you instill it in your minor leagues. It may not have been a public shot at the Hendry/Hughes philosophy, but it was at least a suggestion.

 

the cubs need more obp everywhere in the order. Why do you think Mike Lowell led the Red Sox in RBI this year? Yeah he had an outstanding year, but it probably had something to do with hitting behind Youk/Pedroia (2), Ortiz (3), Manny (4) and Drew (5), all guys with an OBP above .370. When the middle of the order hitters get on base, they'll get knocked in too.

[frostwyrm]

I'm not sure Sizemore is a realistic option. Given his age, productivity, position, and fantastically desirable contract, we'd have to trade the cream of the farm system to get him. The Cubs are facing a major budget crunch in the winter of 2008. If the farm is gutted this offseason Hendry will have to go the FA route to fill holes, only there won't be any money for it.

[CubColtPacer]

I'm not sure Sizemore is a realistic option. Given his age, productivity, position, and fantastically desirable contract, we'd have to trade the cream of the farm system to get him. The Cubs are facing a major budget crunch in the winter of 2008. If the farm is gutted this offseason Hendry will have to go the FA route to fill holes, only there won't be any money for it.

 

I don't believe anybody suggested Sizemore as a realistic option, he was simply a hypothetical alternative to Soriano at the leadoff position to decide who would be more productive in that spot. In fact, I think his name was only picked out of the air because he his OPS+ is very close to Soriano. I don't think anybody thinks that the Cubs would be able to trade for him.

[brinoch]

I'll take 8 really slow guys who draw lots walks, hit lots of home runs, and mock managers for calling bunts and hit-and-runs.

[BigSlick]

I'll take 8 really slow guys who draw lots walks, hit lots of home runs, and mock managers for calling bunts and hit-and-runs.

 

Billy Beane's fantasy.

[javy knows my name]

I'll take 8 really slow guys who draw lots walks, hit lots of home runs, and mock managers for calling bunts and hit-and-runs.

 

Billy Beane's fantasy.

 

Yup.

[Outshined_One]

I'll take 8 really slow guys who draw lots walks, hit lots of home runs, and mock managers for calling bunts and hit-and-runs.

 

Billy Beane's fantasy.

 

Yup.

 

This is not a knock against anyone in particular in this thread, but I hate how people have mischaracterized Billy Beane since Moneyball...

 

The book was about economics and exploiting markets more than anything else. Beane's philosophy as A's GM is about exploiting undervalued parts of the market, not just about finding guys who won't be selling jeans any time soon. At the time, on base percentage was grossly undervalued in the market and allowed Billy Beane not only to acquire these productive players, but also to pay them less than they should be paid for their production.

 

That last part is critical to his philosophy, especially considering the Athletics operate on a limited budget. You have to find ways to work within a market to get a relative bargain. Considering OBP was one of the things Beane and his people thought was undervalued at the time, the book spent a good portion talking about OBP.

 

However, as anyone who has ever taken Econ 101 will tell you, markets will move to correct these deficiencies. OBP has become a much more acceptable metric to gauge a player's productivity. Guys Beane could once acquire for a relative bargain are now valued at a level closer to what they should be paid.

 

For this reason, Beane has to find other ways to exploit deficiencies in the market. I don't know what standards he is using to determine value and future productivity for players these days, but I'm willing to hazard a guess that OBP is not nearly as important in making those determinations as it was when Moneyball was written.

[CubColtPacer]

I'll take 8 really slow guys who draw lots walks, hit lots of home runs, and mock managers for calling bunts and hit-and-runs.

 

Billy Beane's fantasy.

 

Yup.

 

This is not a knock against anyone in particular in this thread, but I hate how people have mischaracterized Billy Beane since Moneyball...

 

The book was about economics and exploiting markets more than anything else. Beane's philosophy as A's GM is about exploiting undervalued parts of the market, not just about finding guys who won't be selling jeans any time soon. At the time, on base percentage was grossly undervalued in the market and allowed Billy Beane not only to acquire these productive players, but also to pay them less than they should be paid for their production.

 

That last part is critical to his philosophy, especially considering the Athletics operate on a limited budget. You have to find ways to work within a market to get a relative bargain. Considering OBP was one of the things Beane and his people thought was undervalued at the time, the book spent a good portion talking about OBP.

 

However, as anyone who has ever taken Econ 101 will tell you, markets will move to correct these deficiencies. OBP has become a much more acceptable metric to gauge a player's productivity. Guys Beane could once acquire for a relative bargain are now valued at a level closer to what they should be paid.

 

For this reason, Beane has to find other ways to exploit deficiencies in the market. I don't know what standards he is using to determine value and future productivity for players these days, but I'm willing to hazard a guess that OBP is not nearly as important in making those determinations as it was when Moneyball was written.

 

As far as now, Beane said in an interview a couple of years ago that it has really shifted to pitching and defense that is slightly undervalued that he's going after.

 

He even said that if speed players became undervalued, he'd happily take a complete speed lineup that all stole 50 bases and played small ball.

 

In many ways, Beane does not agree with the sabermetric community. The saber community would say that there are certain ways to construct a team that will be most effective. To Beane, it's all about the dollar. If the parts are undervalued, he'd happily take any of a high OBP offense, a high power offense, a great defensive team, or a heavy speed team. It really doesn't matter to him.

[haltz]

In many ways, Beane does not agree with the sabermetric community. The saber community would say that there are certain ways to construct a team that will be most effective. To Beane, it's all about the dollar. If the parts are undervalued, he'd happily take any of a high OBP offense, a high power offense, a great defensive team, or a heavy speed team. It really doesn't matter to him.

I don't really agree with this. Or at least that there's anything anti-sabermetric about it. There are certain ways to construct a team that are most effective, but it's not like you can just go to the OPS and defense tree and start picking position players. Like you said, what Beane is interested in is getting runs (or saving them) for the best value, regardless of how they are generated, how old the player is, what he looks like, if he's been injured, or is a clubhouse cancer. Sounds pretty sabermetric to me.

 

Anyway, the copy of Moneyball that I have has a new afterword that is pretty interesting (though I don't know when it was added). This sums it up pretty well, I think:

 

And the point is not to have the highest on-base percentage, but to win games as cheaply as possible. And to win games cheaply is to buy the qualities in a player that the market undervalues, and sell the ones that the market overvalues.

[Tracer Bullet]

In many ways, Beane does not agree with the sabermetric community. The saber community would say that there are certain ways to construct a team that will be most effective. To Beane, it's all about the dollar. If the parts are undervalued, he'd happily take any of a high OBP offense, a high power offense, a great defensive team, or a heavy speed team. It really doesn't matter to him.

I don't really agree with this. Or at least that there's anything anti-sabermetric about it. There are certain ways to construct a team that are most effective, but it's not like you can just go to the OPS and defense tree and start picking position players. Like you said, what Beane is interested in is getting runs (or saving them) for the best value, regardless of how they are generated, how old the player is, what he looks like, if he's been injured, or is a clubhouse cancer. Sounds pretty sabermetric to me.

 

Anyway, the copy of Moneyball that I have has a new afterword that is pretty interesting (though I don't know when it was added). This sums it up pretty well, I think:

 

And the point is not to have the highest on-base percentage, but to win games as cheaply as possible. And to win games cheaply is to buy the qualities in a player that the market undervalues, and sell the ones that the market overvalues.

 

I'm guessing Joe Morgan authored that, right?

[UBlink]

And the point is not to have the highest on-base percentage, but to win games as cheaply as possible. And to win games cheaply is to buy the qualities in a player that the market undervalues, and sell the ones that the market overvalues.

 

I'm guessing Joe Morgan authored that, right?

 

I'm guessing if Joe Morgan tried to read that his head would explode before he got to the end.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'll take 8 really slow guys who draw lots walks, hit lots of home runs, and mock managers for calling bunts and hit-and-runs.

 

You'd lose a lot of games with those guys in the field.

[Outshined_One]

In many ways, Beane does not agree with the sabermetric community. The saber community would say that there are certain ways to construct a team that will be most effective. To Beane, it's all about the dollar. If the parts are undervalued, he'd happily take any of a high OBP offense, a high power offense, a great defensive team, or a heavy speed team. It really doesn't matter to him.

 

This part I'm not so sure I agree with. He still has to find a way to make sure he gets the most run production and run prevention for his dollar. I would not be surprised in the least if he has people on his staff who compile statistics on more than just OBP and OPS, you know? That stuff fits with the SABR community quite effectively.

[CubColtPacer]

In many ways, Beane does not agree with the sabermetric community. The saber community would say that there are certain ways to construct a team that will be most effective. To Beane, it's all about the dollar. If the parts are undervalued, he'd happily take any of a high OBP offense, a high power offense, a great defensive team, or a heavy speed team. It really doesn't matter to him.

 

This part I'm not so sure I agree with. He still has to find a way to make sure he gets the most run production and run prevention for his dollar. I would not be surprised in the least if he has people on his staff who compile statistics on more than just OBP and OPS, you know? That stuff fits with the SABR community quite effectively.

 

True. Let me express it another way. The saber community looks for value on the playing field. Who can give you the most value for the amount of playing time that they are in? Beane looks at it the same way, but slightly slanted. Who can give the most value player on the playing field relative to the market?

 

At the current time, saber principles are still not used by a majority of major league teams. Therefore, players that are valuable on the playing field are sometimes undervalued in the market, and Beane has picked up a lot of those types of players.

 

If sabermetric principles become much more common on major league ballclubs though, then the players who are valued now who sabermetric people say are way overrated (players like Juan Pierre, for example) will suddenly become not nearly as valued. Several of his interviews would indicate that Beane has absolutely no problem with going with a lineup that would be both average and speed driven with little power and not as much OBP, and if those players suddenly became bargains he would happily pick them up. He would still consider that to be a good team in that scenario, while the saber community would most likely conclude that the team doesn't have nearly the same value. That's where I believe the two split, although their premise is both similar and in two related areas.

[nilodnayr]

In many ways, Beane does not agree with the sabermetric community. The saber community would say that there are certain ways to construct a team that will be most effective. To Beane, it's all about the dollar. If the parts are undervalued, he'd happily take any of a high OBP offense, a high power offense, a great defensive team, or a heavy speed team. It really doesn't matter to him.

 

This part I'm not so sure I agree with. He still has to find a way to make sure he gets the most run production and run prevention for his dollar. I would not be surprised in the least if he has people on his staff who compile statistics on more than just OBP and OPS, you know? That stuff fits with the SABR community quite effectively.

 

True. Let me express it another way. The saber community looks for value on the playing field. Who can give you the most value for the amount of playing time that they are in? Beane looks at it the same way, but slightly slanted. Who can give the most value player on the playing field relative to the market?

 

At the current time, saber principles are still not used by a majority of major league teams. Therefore, players that are valuable on the playing field are sometimes undervalued in the market, and Beane has picked up a lot of those types of players.

 

If sabermetric principles become much more common on major league ballclubs though, then the players who are valued now who sabermetric people say are way overrated (players like Juan Pierre, for example) will suddenly become not nearly as valued. Several of his interviews would indicate that Beane has absolutely no problem with going with a lineup that would be both average and speed driven with little power and not as much OBP, and if those players suddenly became bargains he would happily pick them up. He would still consider that to be a good team in that scenario, while the saber community would most likely conclude that the team doesn't have nearly the same value. That's where I believe the two split, although their premise is both similar and in two related areas.

 

Sabermetrics goal is not to undervalue Pierre, but rather appropriately value Pierre.

 

Beane mixes the value of economics and sabermetrics as he has a limited amount of payroll.

Edited October 25, 2007 by nilodnayr

[BigSlick]

I'll take 8 really slow guys who draw lots walks, hit lots of home runs, and mock managers for calling bunts and hit-and-runs.

 

Billy Beane's fantasy.

 

Yup.

 

blah blah blah

 

I made a joke.

 

Also, its probably true, heck, I would love 8 guys that take lots of walks and hit lots of home runs, even if they can't run at all.

[frostwyrm]

I'm not sure if Beane is totally sincere. He probably knows that if you had a lineup full of speed/BA hitters such as Pierre they'd have to be cheap as dirt to make it work. Like, cheap enough that you'd save enough money to buy a killer pitching staff, because you'd need it.

[BigSlick]

I'm not sure if Beane is totally sincere. He probably knows that if you had a lineup full of speed/BA hitters such as Pierre they'd have to be cheap as dirt to make it work. Like, cheap enough that you'd save enough money to buy a killer pitching staff, because you'd need it.

 

As it is, speed is way overrated and overpriced, so I don't really see it as ever becoming a bargain. I doubt this will change any time soon.

[brinoch]

I'll take 8 really slow guys who draw lots walks, hit lots of home runs, and mock managers for calling bunts and hit-and-runs.

 

You'd lose a lot of games with those guys in the field.

 

There's a lot more to effective defense than speed. Positioning, good routes, good glove work, throwing arm strength, and reaction time are pretty integral to good defense, too. Speed helps, sure, but it's not the most important facet of the game.

[Outshined_One]

I made a joke.

 

Also, its probably true, heck, I would love 8 guys that take lots of walks and hit lots of home runs, even if they can't run at all.

 

Dude, it wasn't directed against you or anyone else on the board. It was just a nitpick.