Theriot vs Fontenot

[SouthSideRyan]

I don't understand why it matters if a player goes through hot and cold streaks. If a more consistent player puts up the same numbers as a streaky player, what would make him better?

 

seriously? You wouldn't rather have a guy that puts up a .900 OPS every month than a guy that goes .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 over the course of the 6 months? You realize you don't just add up the runs at the end of the season and the teams with the best run differential makes the playoffs, right?

 

It's not like everyone on the team goes through the same peaks and valleys.

[Rob]

I don't understand why it matters if a player goes through hot and cold streaks. If a more consistent player puts up the same numbers as a streaky player, what would make him better?

 

seriously? You wouldn't rather have a guy that puts up a .900 OPS every month than a guy that goes .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 over the course of the 6 months? You realize you don't just add up the runs at the end of the season and the teams with the best run differential makes the playoffs, right?

 

I'd rather have the inconsistent one, and just sub in another player when he's on a cold streak.

 

Math'd

[davearm2]

I don't understand why it matters if a player goes through hot and cold streaks. If a more consistent player puts up the same numbers as a streaky player, what would make him better?

 

seriously? You wouldn't rather have a guy that puts up a .900 OPS every month than a guy that goes .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 over the course of the 6 months? You realize you don't just add up the runs at the end of the season and the teams with the best run differential makes the playoffs, right?

One of the popular sabermetric sites (can't recall which one) did an analysis that showed that the streaky player generates more wins.

[Rob]

I don't understand why it matters if a player goes through hot and cold streaks. If a more consistent player puts up the same numbers as a streaky player, what would make him better?

 

seriously? You wouldn't rather have a guy that puts up a .900 OPS every month than a guy that goes .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 over the course of the 6 months? You realize you don't just add up the runs at the end of the season and the teams with the best run differential makes the playoffs, right?

One of the popular sabermetric sites (can't recall which one) did an analysis that showed that the streaky player generates more wins.

 

I'm fairly certain that pops up in The Book, by Tom Tango. Can't recall anywhere else it might've been, or the extent of how much the streaky player really adds over a consistent one.

[Tracer Bullet]

I don't understand why it matters if a player goes through hot and cold streaks. If a more consistent player puts up the same numbers as a streaky player, what would make him better?

 

seriously? You wouldn't rather have a guy that puts up a .900 OPS every month than a guy that goes .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 over the course of the 6 months? You realize you don't just add up the runs at the end of the season and the teams with the best run differential makes the playoffs, right?

 

I'd rather have the inconsistent one, and just sub in another player when he's on a cold streak.

 

Math'd

 

coaches are always great at identifying streaks and making the switch.

[Tracer Bullet]

I don't understand why it matters if a player goes through hot and cold streaks. If a more consistent player puts up the same numbers as a streaky player, what would make him better?

 

seriously? You wouldn't rather have a guy that puts up a .900 OPS every month than a guy that goes .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 over the course of the 6 months? You realize you don't just add up the runs at the end of the season and the teams with the best run differential makes the playoffs, right?

One of the popular sabermetric sites (can't recall which one) did an analysis that showed that the streaky player generates more wins.

 

I'd like to see that.

[Tracer Bullet]

I don't understand why it matters if a player goes through hot and cold streaks. If a more consistent player puts up the same numbers as a streaky player, what would make him better?

 

seriously? You wouldn't rather have a guy that puts up a .900 OPS every month than a guy that goes .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 over the course of the 6 months? You realize you don't just add up the runs at the end of the season and the teams with the best run differential makes the playoffs, right?

 

It's not like everyone on the team goes through the same peaks and valleys.

 

Of course not, but don't fight the hypo. It's not logical; the 2 players I set forth don't actually exist. But if they did, I'd prefer the consistent one. Though, if tango can prove that the inconsistent one produces more wins, I'd be interested in reading that.

[SouthSideRyan]

 

Of course not, but don't fight the hypo. It's not logical; the 2 players I set forth don't actually exist. But if they did, I'd prefer the consistent one. Though, if tango can prove that the inconsistent one produces more wins, I'd be interested in reading that.

 

What I meant is that on a team of inconsistent 900 OPS players, not all are going to put up a 700 at the same time and an 1100 at the same time. I guess I don't understand the logic behind the consistent player being more valuable. In a sport like basketball where one player can carry the team, I get it, but when you have 8 other hitters in the lineup, it doesn't seem to be a big deal.

[Rob]

I don't understand why it matters if a player goes through hot and cold streaks. If a more consistent player puts up the same numbers as a streaky player, what would make him better?

 

seriously? You wouldn't rather have a guy that puts up a .900 OPS every month than a guy that goes .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 over the course of the 6 months? You realize you don't just add up the runs at the end of the season and the teams with the best run differential makes the playoffs, right?

 

I'd rather have the inconsistent one, and just sub in another player when he's on a cold streak.

 

Math'd

 

coaches are always great at identifying streaks and making the switch.

 

That's a mark against the coach, not the player.

[Tracer Bullet]

I don't understand why it matters if a player goes through hot and cold streaks. If a more consistent player puts up the same numbers as a streaky player, what would make him better?

 

seriously? You wouldn't rather have a guy that puts up a .900 OPS every month than a guy that goes .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 over the course of the 6 months? You realize you don't just add up the runs at the end of the season and the teams with the best run differential makes the playoffs, right?

 

I'd rather have the inconsistent one, and just sub in another player when he's on a cold streak.

 

Math'd

 

coaches are always great at identifying streaks and making the switch.

 

That's a mark against the coach, not the player.

 

Why is that relevant. The question isn't which is the better player, it's which would you prefer. Knowing that coaches dont tend to sit superstars during cold streaks (maybe an extra day off here or there, but nothing too significant), I'd prefer the consistent guy.

[lumafia]

You can't answer definitively whether you would prefer the streaky hitter versus the consistent hitter. There are too many variables for which to account. Are the other players in the lineup streaky? Are the other players OBP heavy or SLG heavy? What park do they play in? Is the hitter in question heavy in either SLG or OBP? When he is on a hot streak, does his SLG or OBP improve, or both? When he is on a hot streak, how consistent is his hot streak? Blah blah blah.

 

Having played competitive baseball at many levels, I can tell you that I would prefer to play with more consistent players. It seems like a manager would prefer to manage consistent players also. It's one less thing you have to worry and/or think about. When a player is consistent, it exponentially reduces the number of decisions a manager has to make, which in baseball, is always a good thing. It also reduces the stress and/or pressure on the surrounding players on the team when one of their teammates can be counted on consistently. There would be fewer easy opportunities to assign blame. Which in the game of baseball (and society as a whole), generally outweighs the desire to offer praise.

 

Just my opinion.

[Tracer Bullet]

You can't answer definitively whether you would prefer the streaky hitter versus the consistent hitter. There are too many variables for which to account. Are the other players in the lineup streaky? Are the other players OBP heavy or SLG heavy? What park do they play in? Is the hitter in question heavy in either SLG or OBP? When he is on a hot streak, does his SLG or OBP improve, or both? When he is on a hot streak, how consistent is his hot streak? Blah blah blah.

 

Having played competitive baseball at many levels, I can tell you that I would prefer to play with more consistent players. It seems like a manager would prefer to manage consistent players also. It's one less thing you have to worry and/or think about. When a player is consistent, it exponentially reduces the number of decisions a manager has to make, which in baseball, is always a good thing. It also reduces the stress and/or pressure on the surrounding players on the team when one of their teammates can be counted on consistently. There would be fewer easy opportunities to assign blame. Which in the game of baseball (and society as a whole), generally outweighs the desire to offer praise.

 

Just my opinion.

 

I'm trying to reconcile the first sentence of each of your first two paragraphs.

[SouthSideRyan]

It seems when talking about consistency v. streakiness, everyone only focuses on the cold streaks, and not the hot streaks. Wouldn't a hot streak player put less pressure on a manager/teammates compared to a consistent one?

[lumafia]

You can't answer definitively whether you would prefer the streaky hitter versus the consistent hitter. There are too many variables for which to account. Are the other players in the lineup streaky? Are the other players OBP heavy or SLG heavy? What park do they play in? Is the hitter in question heavy in either SLG or OBP? When he is on a hot streak, does his SLG or OBP improve, or both? When he is on a hot streak, how consistent is his hot streak? Blah blah blah.

 

Having played competitive baseball at many levels, I can tell you that I would prefer to play with more consistent players. It seems like a manager would prefer to manage consistent players also. It's one less thing you have to worry and/or think about. When a player is consistent, it exponentially reduces the number of decisions a manager has to make, which in baseball, is always a good thing. It also reduces the stress and/or pressure on the surrounding players on the team when one of their teammates can be counted on consistently. There would be fewer easy opportunities to assign blame. Which in the game of baseball (and society as a whole), generally outweighs the desire to offer praise.

 

Just my opinion.

 

I'm trying to reconcile the first sentence of each of your first two paragraphs.

 

I'll do it for you then. It's a difficult debate that is very complex based on many factors. However, my OPINION is that a consistent hitter would be better. But my OPINION is not based on any statistical reference, only my experience. Better?

[biittner77]

It seems when talking about consistency v. streakiness, everyone only focuses on the cold streaks, and not the hot streaks. Wouldn't a hot streak player put less pressure on a manager/teammates compared to a consistent one?

 

I think fans get frustrated with players that run hot and cold because they want the hot streaks all the time.

[lumafia]

It seems when talking about consistency v. streakiness, everyone only focuses on the cold streaks, and not the hot streaks. Wouldn't a hot streak player put less pressure on a manager/teammates compared to a consistent one?

 

You're right. But therein lies the problem. How and when do you determine if a player is on a cold streak? How is that defined, and more importantly, how do you define when he is no longer on a cold streak?

 

Then you have the issue of consistent playing time effecting a player's abiltity to be consistent. How can you expect a player to get hot when he isn't getting consistent plate appearances? But, does consistency automatically guarantee hotness? Obviously not, just ask Lee and Aramis.

[Tracer Bullet]

You can't answer definitively whether you would prefer the streaky hitter versus the consistent hitter. There are too many variables for which to account. Are the other players in the lineup streaky? Are the other players OBP heavy or SLG heavy? What park do they play in? Is the hitter in question heavy in either SLG or OBP? When he is on a hot streak, does his SLG or OBP improve, or both? When he is on a hot streak, how consistent is his hot streak? Blah blah blah.

 

Having played competitive baseball at many levels, I can tell you that I would prefer to play with more consistent players. It seems like a manager would prefer to manage consistent players also. It's one less thing you have to worry and/or think about. When a player is consistent, it exponentially reduces the number of decisions a manager has to make, which in baseball, is always a good thing. It also reduces the stress and/or pressure on the surrounding players on the team when one of their teammates can be counted on consistently. There would be fewer easy opportunities to assign blame. Which in the game of baseball (and society as a whole), generally outweighs the desire to offer praise.

 

Just my opinion.

 

I'm trying to reconcile the first sentence of each of your first two paragraphs.

 

I'll do it for you then. It's a difficult debate that is very complex based on many factors. However, my OPINION is that a consistent hitter would be better. But my OPINION is not based on any statistical reference, only my experience. Better?

 

not really. we're talking in preferences. that implies subjectivity. So your first sentence doesn't really make sense. You don't need to tell me its your opinion (and certainly not in all caps), you've said as much by saying it's your preference. But then again, so has everyone else, whose opinion is based on their experience (whether as a player, coach, fan, whatever).

[lumafia]

You can't answer definitively whether you would prefer the streaky hitter versus the consistent hitter. There are too many variables for which to account. Are the other players in the lineup streaky? Are the other players OBP heavy or SLG heavy? What park do they play in? Is the hitter in question heavy in either SLG or OBP? When he is on a hot streak, does his SLG or OBP improve, or both? When he is on a hot streak, how consistent is his hot streak? Blah blah blah.

 

Having played competitive baseball at many levels, I can tell you that I would prefer to play with more consistent players. It seems like a manager would prefer to manage consistent players also. It's one less thing you have to worry and/or think about. When a player is consistent, it exponentially reduces the number of decisions a manager has to make, which in baseball, is always a good thing. It also reduces the stress and/or pressure on the surrounding players on the team when one of their teammates can be counted on consistently. There would be fewer easy opportunities to assign blame. Which in the game of baseball (and society as a whole), generally outweighs the desire to offer praise.

 

Just my opinion.

 

I'm trying to reconcile the first sentence of each of your first two paragraphs.

 

I'll do it for you then. It's a difficult debate that is very complex based on many factors. However, my OPINION is that a consistent hitter would be better. But my OPINION is not based on any statistical reference, only my experience. Better?

 

not really. we're talking in preferences. that implies subjectivity. So your first sentence doesn't really make sense. You don't need to tell me its your opinion (and certainly not in all caps), you've said as much by saying it's your preference. But then again, so has everyone else, whose opinion is based on their experience (whether as a player, coach, fan, whatever).

 

You're right. A typo. My fault.

[JimSorgi]

I don't understand why it matters if a player goes through hot and cold streaks. If a more consistent player puts up the same numbers as a streaky player, what would make him better?

 

seriously? You wouldn't rather have a guy that puts up a .900 OPS every month than a guy that goes .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 to .700 to 1.100 over the course of the 6 months? You realize you don't just add up the runs at the end of the season and the teams with the best run differential makes the playoffs, right?

That's a pretty stupid question to ask, but yes, I do know how baseball works. If both players produce the same numbers, I'm not sure how we can determine that one was more valuable based on how they put those numbers up(though I guess Tango has a formula). It just doesn't make sense to me for a team to focus on consistency instead of just finding the best players.

 

And it isn't a discussion of preference. The poster who brought it up said the Cubs needed more consistent players, implying that he thought it would make them better.