DeuceBaseman

I literally read nothing after this statement. I love it. Why? It's completely true. I was a .500 hitter in HS. A high .300 hitter in college. But I had no home runs. Give me an extra 100 pounds and I'd be batting .500 in college with 20 HRs. That equals mlb and further. Come on, we can say this about so many other players too. Why do you think everyone turned to steroids? Because if you are big in baseball you have that much more of an advantage.

Hits are more likely to occur by chance while walks are not? I completely disagree. Walks are WAYYYY more about luck than hits are. You get a hit if your a good hitter end of story. You take a walk if the pitcher happens to throw you balls.

I think guys with better batting averages are better pure hitters than guys with a lot of HRs. The guys like Adam Dunn are good because they are big and strong. If I was Adam Dunn's size, I'd be a MLB All-Star right now. I would take Adam Dunn over David Eckstein any day. But when we were talking about comparing 2 players we just talked about AVG and OBP. No one ever mentioned slugging. If you just take the 2 stats alone and you have one guy batting .240 with a .370 OBP (very rare) and a guy batting .300 with a .320 OBP (even more rare) then heres what you get: In 500 at bats the 1st guy gets 99 hits and 86 walks while the 2nd guy gets 146 hits and 14 walks. That equals 47 extra hits and 72 fewer walks. So the guy with more walks gets on base 25 more times over the course of the year. Out of those 47 extra hits, if 25 of them are for extra bases then you already get the same amount of total bases. Or if he steals one base then its an extra total base for him because hes probably fast. Plus hits also drive in runs where walks usually don't. Based on those 2 stats alone, i'd take the guy with the .300 avg. But it is highly likely that the guy with the .240 avg is also hitting 40 HRs and thats why he is walking so much. But thats not what were talking about. We're talking about batting average and OBP. Guys with .240 averages and .370 obp are not good hitters. They are big strong guys who swing as hard as they can and more than half of the time miss the ball completely. If you take a lot of walks it doesnt mean your a good hitter. It means that you are big and strong so the pitcher is afraid of you because you can hit the ball a long way, and it means that you know how to lay off a pitch out of the strike zone for the most part. That means you have good plate discipline, but doesnt mean your a good hitter. Albert Pujols is a good hitter. Miguel Cabrera is a good hitter. Todd Helton is a good hitter. Ichiro is a good hitter. These guys have high averages. If there is a guy on 1st and 2nd base in a tie game in the last inning with 2 outs, who would you rather have up; Orlando Cabrera or Rickie Weeks. You want the better hitter up. One bats .300 with a lower OBP but low k's. The other one has a low average but high OBP but a ton of k's. Cabrera is your best bet. Guys with higher averages are the better hitters. But they might not take many pitches because they know what they want and hit the ball when they see it. That's my opinion, I might be a little biased because I was a high average low power hitter in HS and College, but that's just how I see it. You guys can have your opinion but I'll stick with mine.

Huh? What does this even mean? The way it's phrased, it seems like it's intended as an insult, but U of I is a very good school, so I don't really get it. I went to U of I, but I hate that school right now. Everyone there is so cocky, teachers and students. Their acceptance procedures are off the wall, and most likely just pick names out of a hat. So I'm just pissed at U of I right now and thats why I had to insult the school. Someone I know got rejected with a 29 ACT, 3.9 GPA and involved in every activity, while someone else I know got accepted with a 21 ACT, 3.8 GPA and not very involved. Into the same major as well.

Sorry, its gone now. But it is not correct. Average is very important. There's a reason why that is the 1st stat shown when a player comes up to bat. It shows how good a hitter is. There are other stats that might tell more about a player, but there is no way that average isnt an important stat. You are a very good hitter if you can bat .300 over a season. Hopefully you have some other tools as well besides being a batting average hitter, but having a high average is a good stat to have. The reason average isn't that important is that it can't stand on it's own. If a guy has a .300 average but a (let's say) .320 OBP, he is not a good offensive player. It doesn't matter that he can hit for high average because overall he's making outs too often because he doesn't get on base in other ways. On the other hand, if a guy has a .240 average but a .370 OBP, he's a pretty good offensive player (might even be very good, depending on how much power he hits for), regardless of the low average. OBP encompasses BA and tells you more about the hitter on top of it. There's really not that much of a reason to look at his BA, other than if you want to evaluate how likely a player is to continue to perform at the level he has previously exhibited. In other words, you might want to look at it to see if a given player's OBP is highly batting average dependent, because if it is, without getting too far into detail about stuff like BABIP, it's probably less repeatable, particularly as the player ages. If a guy hits .240 hes a terrible hitter regardless of his OBP. Hits are better than walks. Hits can get you more than one base, and can actually drive in runs. Id rather have the .300 .320 guy, but it depends on his power and speed too.

How so? You can say that about any stat then. If a guy hits .300 one year, then there is no reason to expect him not to hit .300 the next year. Same with HRs. If a guy hits 30 HRs one year, then there is no reason not to expect him to hit 30 the next year. Except that HR's can dramatically decrease with age while average actually can stay close to the same, so i dunno. Every stat can be expected to be repeated, but it might not happen.

How many of those at bats with runners on occurred when he was hitting in the middle of the order as a regular? Huh? That's irrelevant. He struggles with men on. He always has and always will. So, where will he get the most at-bats with runners on? The middle of the order, of course. How is that irrelevant? You never know what Soriano is thinking when he comes to bat with runners on to make his stats lower. What if hes thinking that he is still a leadoff hitter and he doesnt need to drive in runs in those situations? What if he thinks differently as a #5 hitter. You DONT know how he will do as a #5 hitter for us, and its stupid to think that his stats will go way down in the #5 hole. So stop pretending your psychic.

Good response, you probably go to U of I with a response like that.

How many of those at bats with runners on occurred when he was hitting in the middle of the order as a regular?

Sorry, its gone now. But it is not correct. Average is very important. There's a reason why that is the 1st stat shown when a player comes up to bat. It shows how good a hitter is. There are other stats that might tell more about a player, but there is no way that average isnt an important stat. You are a very good hitter if you can bat .300 over a season. Hopefully you have some other tools as well besides being a batting average hitter, but having a high average is a good stat to have.

If any adjustments need to be made he can make them, just like the move to the OF. HE DOESN'T HIT WELL WITH RUNNERS ON BASE. That can change! It's not like it is much of a different skill to hit with runners on base. It shouldnt be any different than hitting with no one on. It can easily be coincidence to why he doesnt hit well with runners on. He also is a way more patient hitter with runners on. He has more walks with runners on base over the past 3 years than he does with no one on, and thats in half the at bats. This can lead to more stolen bases by him as well. Hitting in different spots in the order shouldnt affect the player. You see players get moved around all the time.

I never said that a walk by Roberts is better than a Soriano HR. The other guy did. But I'd rather have a walk by Roberts followed by a Soriano HR a few at bats later, than a Soriano HR to start the inning. And to Dex: I'm sorry but I just don't think that a few random past at bats with Soriano in the middle of the order tells the whole story. I think that if you give him time and have him bat the whole year in the #5 spot then he will do just as good as the #1 spot. He just needs to start there and bat there the whole year, and he will be fine. If any adjustments need to be made he can make them, just like the move to the OF.

You don't know that. 500 at bats (ie. 1 year) doesnt tell everything. There is no reason to think that Soriano cant hit the same amount of HR's in the 5 hole as in the 1 hole. And if you say he needs protection, then bat him 4th with Aramis behind him. Aramis doesnt need protection. And Soto is good protection.

A HR is also better when there are people on base. And Soriano would be up with people on base more often in the 5 hole. These arguments arent about whether Soriano gives us value in the leadoff spot. Of course he gives us value there because he is a great player. But guys like him should be batting lower so that those HRs are not all solo shots. I think we need to move him out of the leadoff spot (only if we get a legit leadoff hitter like Roberts) so that he is more valuable to us.

See, the thing is that a Soriano leadoff home run guarantees your team a run whereas a Roberts walk or single doesn't guarantee you anything other than a baserunner. Yes, a walk/single increases the odds that your team will score but a team always scores a run when a home run is hit. To take it a bit further, the player batting immediately after a guy who hits a home run has never grounded into a double play while that happens all the time after a single or a walk. Additionally, a team is slightly more likely to score multiple runs in an inning when an inning is kicked off with a homer versus a walk. I forget if it was Buck or McCarver who got schooled by stats inc on a national broadcast debating that point. Thats probably cuz if the guy hits a HR then its more likely that the pitcher sucks. And he'll give up more runs in the inning.

We are only arguing this based on us getting Roberts. Roberts would bat leadoff. If Roberts isnt on the Cubs then there is no argument.

Maybe he's terrible with runners on base because he is in the leadoff spot? Maybe if he was moved to the 5th he would understand hes now an RBI producer and actually do better in that spot. Hes a major league hitter he can hit anywhere. He already made a huge adjustment to the OF, now he can make a smaller adjustment in the batting order.

See it varies so much. In 2002 he batted basically just first, but he had way better numbers with runners on than no one on. You cant say he cant hit in the 5 hole based on past at bats there, when it isnt a huge difference. And he has about the # of at bats in the 5 hole as 1 full year doing it (around 500). Players vary from year to year. He is a Major league hitter, he can bat anywhere. But when hes getting those big hits, it would be better if people were on base, which is more likely in the 5 hole.

Wait, at first you say this: And now all of a sudden you're citing a tiny amount of past at-bats in a feeble attempt to prove your point? So it's okay to completely ignore huge career sample sizes, but appropriate to only look at a tiny number of at-bats he had 1 season? Yeah, that make a whole lot of sense. Umm, completely erroneous. Why don't you check the numbers before you say things. I said that above cuz i just assumed he had horrible stats in the 5 hole compared to leadoff based on how confident you are that soriano cant hit in the 5 hole, and i didnt look at the stats. Then I looked at those stats and they didnt seem like a huge difference to me. Thats why i think its just coincidence. Thats why some players bat well one year and dont another.

That looks like most his at bats in the one hole with Theriot or whomever behind him. Soto is a machine. Batting 300 with 25-30 HR's is great protection. And maybe he'll actually learn to take more pitches cuz he might not be seeing that many strikes so maybe he gets on base more, and actually steals more bases.

Soriano had better stats in the 5th hole than the leadoff spot in both 06 and 05. Batting 3rd in 04 he didnt have any worse stats than he did leadoff. So i dont know what your talking about.

I disagree. I dont think Soriano's numbers would go down at all in the 5 hole. I dont care about how a few at bats in the 5th spot or 4th spot in his past resulted in. They were on different teams, with different guys in front of him and different guys in back of him, and different leagues. He's a major league hitter, he should be able to hit anywhere in the lineup with the same skill.

I'm talking about replacing him with Roberts. If we don't get Roberts then Soriano bats leadoff.

Ok listen, we understand that Soriano can score runs just as well as Roberts can, but on our team Soriano would be much more valuable lower in the order. Why don't we just bat Aramis 1st? I'm sure he would score just as well as Roberts or Soriano. He's not there cuz we need him cleanup to drive the first few guys in. That is what Soriano should be doing. Why doesn't Carlos Beltran bat leadoff? He's got similar numbers to Soriano. Because the Mets are smart and actually know that different guys are suited for different spots in the order. So stop arguing about how Soriano produces the same amount as runs as Roberts. Cuz that isn't the argument. He would just be more valuable lower in the lineup with Roberts doing the getting on base part.

I agree that Roberts and Soriano can both score runs, which is what you want your top of the order guys to do. BUT, Soriano isn't a type of player that you use to score runs. He is the type of player that drives in runs. So he would be much more valuable lower in the lineup. If Roberts and Soriano are equal in run scoring, then DeRosa and Soriano are not equal in run producing. So it comes down to who would you rather have driving in runs in the 5 hole, Soriano or DeRosa? Plus, a lot of Soriano's runs last year came from HRs, like a third of them. Those could still be runs, but also more RBI for him. While Roberts, without the HRs, can still get more runs than Soriano just by getting on base more.