And it doesn't make Tejada look similar to Brett.  9 more hits a season is significant.   Especially when you couple it with 25 more opportunities where he didn't make an out(walked).    That's 5% as compared to 3%(22 more outs). 

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 2:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 2:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 1:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 12:59:00 PM (view original):
Another one??? What? No way.

Player Q   H 180; 2b 35; 3b 2; HR 23; BB 41
Player R   H 189; 2b 40; 3b 8; HR 19; BB 66

The difference is 1 hit every 18 games and 1 walk every 6.5.

Basically the same player offensively, right?

This time I'll give you the answer. Player Q is Miguel Tejada. Player R is George Brett.
 
Tejada's line: 285/336/456 with a 108 OPS+
Brett's line:     305/369/487 with a 135 OPS+

According to Mike, George Brett and Miguel Tejada were basically the same offensively.

Yes, the guys with NINE MORE HITS and TWENTY FIVE MORE WALKS is basically the same.

Idiot. 

That's one more hit every 18 games. BFD.

Over an entire year, 1 more hit and 21 more walks =  basically the same.
Over an entire year, 9 more hits and 25 more walks = way different

Sure, biz.

OR

Prorating walks and hits isn't the best way to evaluate two hitters???

I think I'll go with the later.

Yeah, 8 more hits makes things different when you're talking about 9000 PA and pro-rating down to a single season.    One hit is neglibile.   Certainly not MASSIVE.

Then why prorate?

Unless you're only presenting the stats in a way that you think helps your argument and ignoring reality?

Prorating raw totals is stupid and misleading. It makes Miguel Tejada look similar to George Brett. We have rate stats. We should use rate stats.

Because both players would be getting 700 PA.   It's obvious you place MASSIVELY more weight on walks than I do.    As I said earlier, when EM was walking with Griffey, A-Rod and Buhner in the line-up, it was probably a good idea.    When he was walking with O'Brien, Reynolds and Davis in the line-up, he wasn't helping the team.  I'd argue he was hurting it by passing the buck. 

"We" should use whatever stats we want.    You use what you want, I'll use what I want.   Deal?

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 2:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 2:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 1:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 1:49:00 PM (view original):
If I'm starting a season and telling two guys "You have 700 PA.  Do something with them', I'm not interested, come contract time with a DH saying "I got 21 more walks, one more hit, 6 more doubles and two more homers.  I deserve a MASSIVE raise over the CF who only got three more triples than me!!!!"

How about my career OPS+ is 41st ALL TIME, I'm massively better offensively than a guy whose OPS+ is 236th all time?

It's hilarious that you denied ever saying they were comparable offensive players for several posts before giving up and diving head first into that stupidity.

IF if were possible for you to RETAIN anything, and I don't think it is, you'd have seen that I said EM was a more effective hitter and that 22 less outs per season is better.   MASSIVELY better is dipshit-level retarded.  

Which is what I think you're claiming. 

Using your WAR math, where a 30% difference is "basically the same", don't you think they're comparable?

22 points of career OPS+ over 9000 plate appearances is a massive difference.

22 OPS+ is less than 30%.    Does WAR math and OPS+ math work differently?

WAR math??? You mean rounding?

Like saying a 7.4 WAR player is the same as a 7.1 WAR player? What's 30% have to do with it?

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 2:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 2:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 1:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 1:49:00 PM (view original):
If I'm starting a season and telling two guys "You have 700 PA.  Do something with them', I'm not interested, come contract time with a DH saying "I got 21 more walks, one more hit, 6 more doubles and two more homers.  I deserve a MASSIVE raise over the CF who only got three more triples than me!!!!"

How about my career OPS+ is 41st ALL TIME, I'm massively better offensively than a guy whose OPS+ is 236th all time?

It's hilarious that you denied ever saying they were comparable offensive players for several posts before giving up and diving head first into that stupidity.

IF if were possible for you to RETAIN anything, and I don't think it is, you'd have seen that I said EM was a more effective hitter and that 22 less outs per season is better.   MASSIVELY better is dipshit-level retarded.  

Which is what I think you're claiming. 

Using your WAR math, where a 30% difference is "basically the same", don't you think they're comparable?

22 points of career OPS+ over 9000 plate appearances is a massive difference.

22 OPS+ is less than 30%.    Does WAR math and OPS+ math work differently?

WAR math??? You mean rounding?

Like saying a 7.4 WAR player is the same as a 7.1 WAR player? What's 30% have to do with it?

You keep a catalog of discussions.  I don't.  Go look it up.    You kept saying this guy and that guy were essentially the same player despite a 30% difference in their WAR. 

In every other aspect of life, 30% is a lot.   Not so, apparently, with WAR. 

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 2:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:24:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 2:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 2:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 1:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 1:49:00 PM (view original):
If I'm starting a season and telling two guys "You have 700 PA.  Do something with them', I'm not interested, come contract time with a DH saying "I got 21 more walks, one more hit, 6 more doubles and two more homers.  I deserve a MASSIVE raise over the CF who only got three more triples than me!!!!"

How about my career OPS+ is 41st ALL TIME, I'm massively better offensively than a guy whose OPS+ is 236th all time?

It's hilarious that you denied ever saying they were comparable offensive players for several posts before giving up and diving head first into that stupidity.

IF if were possible for you to RETAIN anything, and I don't think it is, you'd have seen that I said EM was a more effective hitter and that 22 less outs per season is better.   MASSIVELY better is dipshit-level retarded.  

Which is what I think you're claiming. 

Using your WAR math, where a 30% difference is "basically the same", don't you think they're comparable?

22 points of career OPS+ over 9000 plate appearances is a massive difference.

22 OPS+ is less than 30%.    Does WAR math and OPS+ math work differently?

WAR math??? You mean rounding?

Like saying a 7.4 WAR player is the same as a 7.1 WAR player? What's 30% have to do with it?

You keep a catalog of discussions.  I don't.  Go look it up.    You kept saying this guy and that guy were essentially the same player despite a 30% difference in their WAR. 

In every other aspect of life, 30% is a lot.   Not so, apparently, with WAR. 

Aren't you the one bringing up something from the past here???

Who were the players that were the same despite a 30% difference?

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:28:00 PM (view original):
A walk is pretty useless when the next guy can't hit.    As I said earlier, I prefer my middle of the order guys to actually hit.   Why the **** would I want Robinson Cano looking for a walk with Lyle Overbay on deck?

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:34:00 PM (view original):
http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?topicID=472619&page=26

Somewhere before page 26.    That's as much looking as I'll do.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/4/2013 2:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/4/2013 2:28:00 PM (view original):
A walk is pretty useless when the next guy can't hit.    As I said earlier, I prefer my middle of the order guys to actually hit.   Why the **** would I want Robinson Cano looking for a walk with Lyle Overbay on deck?

Well, Martinez's career slugging percentage is .515 and 38 points higher than Bernie's, so I think it's fair to say that he hit better than Williams.

Posted by burnsy483 on 12/4/2013 2:39:00 PM (view original):
You all are great at taking a decent argument/conversation and making it terrible.