2015 baseball HOF ballot. Topic

burnsy483
Posts: 6848 (0)
Veteran
1 1 26
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/10/2014 4:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 2/10/2014 4:10:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/10/2014 4:05:00 PM (view original):
1 run games, 4368 PA, 692 BB  .158%
Innings 7-9, 2551 PA, 394 BB   .154%

Walk rates:
1-3:  .161(he drew a lot of walks in the 1st and I have no problem with that)
4-6:  .141
7-9:  .154

Looks like he was taking a lot of pitches in the last three innings.

This post doesn't tell me too much.  I don't get what you're driving at here.  He was taking "a lot of pitches" in a lot of innings.

His walk rate was up in close games and late in games.  

His walk rate in the 9th inning is 14.7%.  Meh.
2/10/2014 4:16 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by burnsy483 on 2/10/2014 4:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/10/2014 4:10:00 PM (view original):
Honestly, if you look at some of his splits, EM wasn't the same hitter in the "clutch" situations.    He might have been doing the right thing by looking for a walk and passing it on to the Russ Davis' of the world. 

Another check mark in the "No HOF for you!!!" column.
Maybe he was getting pitched around and was trying to do too much to drive in runs.  You said that would be a good thing for him, right?
Maybe he was a choker and knew he couldn't make an out if he walked.    Dude was horrible with 2 out and RISP. 
2/10/2014 4:17 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
He was also very ordinary as a hitter when he played the field. 

NO HOF FOR YOU!!!!
2/10/2014 4:17 PM
burnsy483
Posts: 6848 (0)
Veteran
1 1 26
Prospect
Posted by burnsy483 on 2/10/2014 2:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/10/2014 2:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 2/10/2014 2:28:00 PM (view original):
You actually ******* believe this.  For a little but I figured you guys were being hardcore trolls.  But wow.
Yeah, it's insane to prefer my good hitters hitting instead of passing it down to a lesser hitter.    Crazy thinking, I know.
What's insane is:

A) You think Edgar Martinez wasn't looking to swing at balls he could hit well, because he was looking to walk.  Why you think you know this is beyond me.  Especially when he had guys who couldn't hit behind him (which has been what you said - no good hitters behind him).  You'd think he'd get pitched around.

B) That you don't see how 1st and 2nd with a .250 hitter up isn't better than guy on 2nd with a .300 hitter up.

Those 2 points actually make more sense than anything else you said. 

In conclusion, see A and B above.  Insane arguments.  Moving on?  
2/10/2014 4:21 PM
burnsy483
Posts: 6848 (0)
Veteran
1 1 26
Prospect
EDGAR MARTINEZ WALKED 48% OF THE TIME WITH GUYS ON 2ND AND 3RD.  TAKE THE ******* BAT OFF YOUR SHOULDERS AND GET OFF MY LAWN
2/10/2014 4:22 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by burnsy483 on 2/10/2014 4:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/10/2014 4:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 2/10/2014 4:10:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/10/2014 4:05:00 PM (view original):
1 run games, 4368 PA, 692 BB  .158%
Innings 7-9, 2551 PA, 394 BB   .154%

Walk rates:
1-3:  .161(he drew a lot of walks in the 1st and I have no problem with that)
4-6:  .141
7-9:  .154

Looks like he was taking a lot of pitches in the last three innings.

This post doesn't tell me too much.  I don't get what you're driving at here.  He was taking "a lot of pitches" in a lot of innings.

His walk rate was up in close games and late in games.  

His walk rate in the 9th inning is 14.7%.  Meh.
And that's inflated by IBB. In down by one or tied games with no runner on 1st but any combo of runners on 2nd/3rd in the 9th or extra innings and any out, Martinez walked 24 times. All but one were intentional.

I think we can put to bed the notion that he looked to walk in situations where a walk did no good.
2/10/2014 4:23 PM
burnsy483
Posts: 6848 (0)
Veteran
1 1 26
Prospect
The argument was an insane one with no evidence that made any sense.  Was biz-like.
2/10/2014 4:25 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

Odd that YOU think YOUR points make more sense than a counter argument.    That almost never happens on the internet.

I simply wanted a good hitter swinging the bat when I had runners on base.    At this point, after looking at his splits, he might not be as good of a hitter as I thought.

2/10/2014 4:25 PM
burnsy483
Posts: 6848 (0)
Veteran
1 1 26
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/10/2014 4:25:00 PM (view original):

Odd that YOU think YOUR points make more sense than a counter argument.    That almost never happens on the internet.

I simply wanted a good hitter swinging the bat when I had runners on base.    At this point, after looking at his splits, he might not be as good of a hitter as I thought.

Edgar's a great one.  Don't rip on him because he walked and assume he didn't swing at good pitches to hit.  That's moronic.
2/10/2014 4:28 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 2/10/2014 4:25:00 PM (view original):

Odd that YOU think YOUR points make more sense than a counter argument.    That almost never happens on the internet.

I simply wanted a good hitter swinging the bat when I had runners on base.    At this point, after looking at his splits, he might not be as good of a hitter as I thought.

Just a tip, it's always better to argue based on what the hitter actually did or didn't do, instead of some made up hypothetical that never happened.

You're welcome.
2/10/2014 4:31 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18996 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 154 32 129
Prospect
Posted by bad_luck on 2/10/2014 3:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/10/2014 3:46:00 PM (view original):

To summarize my part of this discussion (since the folks on the other side seem confused):

If I have a hitter of EM's caliber, with a lesser hitter on deck (as most everybody who batted behind him was), if the game is on the line and I need a base hit, I want him to be agressive at the plate.  If there's a ball in the strike zone, I want him swinging at it and trying to put the ball in play.  I don't want him working the count and drawing a base on balls, especially if he's passing on hittable pitches to do that.  Because by doing that, he's just passing the buck to the lesser guy behind him to get the job done.

Now if he puts the ball in play and makes an out . . . that's baseball.  But at least he's trying to do his job, which is to be a hitter in a situation in which a hit is called for.

If he walks because he was not given any hittable pitches . . . that's also baseball.  Let's hope the guy behind him gets it done.

I'm not sure why this is so baffling to some folks here.

I guess my confusion stems from your (or maybe Mike's) belief that that isn't exactly what happened. No one has shown any evidence that Martinez looked to walk when the game was on the line.
Yet you (or somebody) argued that his walking "improves their chances of winning".
2/10/2014 4:37 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 2/10/2014 4:37:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 2/10/2014 3:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/10/2014 3:46:00 PM (view original):

To summarize my part of this discussion (since the folks on the other side seem confused):

If I have a hitter of EM's caliber, with a lesser hitter on deck (as most everybody who batted behind him was), if the game is on the line and I need a base hit, I want him to be agressive at the plate.  If there's a ball in the strike zone, I want him swinging at it and trying to put the ball in play.  I don't want him working the count and drawing a base on balls, especially if he's passing on hittable pitches to do that.  Because by doing that, he's just passing the buck to the lesser guy behind him to get the job done.

Now if he puts the ball in play and makes an out . . . that's baseball.  But at least he's trying to do his job, which is to be a hitter in a situation in which a hit is called for.

If he walks because he was not given any hittable pitches . . . that's also baseball.  Let's hope the guy behind him gets it done.

I'm not sure why this is so baffling to some folks here.

I guess my confusion stems from your (or maybe Mike's) belief that that isn't exactly what happened. No one has shown any evidence that Martinez looked to walk when the game was on the line.
Yet you (or somebody) argued that his walking "improves their chances of winning".
In almost all situations a walk increases the likelyhood of a run scoring and the amount of runs a team can expect to score.
2/10/2014 4:41 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 2/10/2014 4:37:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 2/10/2014 3:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/10/2014 3:46:00 PM (view original):

To summarize my part of this discussion (since the folks on the other side seem confused):

If I have a hitter of EM's caliber, with a lesser hitter on deck (as most everybody who batted behind him was), if the game is on the line and I need a base hit, I want him to be agressive at the plate.  If there's a ball in the strike zone, I want him swinging at it and trying to put the ball in play.  I don't want him working the count and drawing a base on balls, especially if he's passing on hittable pitches to do that.  Because by doing that, he's just passing the buck to the lesser guy behind him to get the job done.

Now if he puts the ball in play and makes an out . . . that's baseball.  But at least he's trying to do his job, which is to be a hitter in a situation in which a hit is called for.

If he walks because he was not given any hittable pitches . . . that's also baseball.  Let's hope the guy behind him gets it done.

I'm not sure why this is so baffling to some folks here.

I guess my confusion stems from your (or maybe Mike's) belief that that isn't exactly what happened. No one has shown any evidence that Martinez looked to walk when the game was on the line.
Yet you (or somebody) argued that his walking "improves their chances of winning".
Also, what?

You're completely ignoring the point. There's no evidence that Martinez didn't do exactly what you're saying a hitter should do.
2/10/2014 4:43 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Accept your victory.   I said maybe it wasn't such a bad thing to pass the buck to Davis, Wilson, Buhner, etc, etc.    Not because they suddenly got better but because EM's "clutch" stats made him very ordinary(or worse).   Hell, Seattle probably should have pinch hit for him in close games or late in games.

Not sure that's a convincing argument to include him in the HOF but it's good to know that crappy players gave SEA a better chance to win that Martinez did. 
2/10/2014 4:45 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18996 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 154 32 129
Prospect
Posted by bad_luck on 2/10/2014 4:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/10/2014 4:37:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 2/10/2014 3:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 2/10/2014 3:46:00 PM (view original):

To summarize my part of this discussion (since the folks on the other side seem confused):

If I have a hitter of EM's caliber, with a lesser hitter on deck (as most everybody who batted behind him was), if the game is on the line and I need a base hit, I want him to be agressive at the plate.  If there's a ball in the strike zone, I want him swinging at it and trying to put the ball in play.  I don't want him working the count and drawing a base on balls, especially if he's passing on hittable pitches to do that.  Because by doing that, he's just passing the buck to the lesser guy behind him to get the job done.

Now if he puts the ball in play and makes an out . . . that's baseball.  But at least he's trying to do his job, which is to be a hitter in a situation in which a hit is called for.

If he walks because he was not given any hittable pitches . . . that's also baseball.  Let's hope the guy behind him gets it done.

I'm not sure why this is so baffling to some folks here.

I guess my confusion stems from your (or maybe Mike's) belief that that isn't exactly what happened. No one has shown any evidence that Martinez looked to walk when the game was on the line.
Yet you (or somebody) argued that his walking "improves their chances of winning".
In almost all situations a walk increases the likelyhood of a run scoring and the amount of runs a team can expect to score.
Does it really?  Or is this just another misapplication of your beloved stats and probability matrices?
2/10/2014 4:50 PM
◂ Prev 1...24|25|26|27|28...56 Next ▸
2015 baseball HOF ballot. Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.