Was the sole job for any of those guys to hit?  

Posted by tecwrg on 2/10/2014 7:55:00 PM (view original):
I'm quite amused that BL, who argued the age of the earth with biz for about four months, bailed on his argument with me so quickly.

I can't possibly imagine why.

So quickly? We're on page 30. Pardon me for showing the slightest bit of restraint. Even I can only argue with idiots for so long before giving up.

Posted by tecwrg on 2/10/2014 8:47:00 AM (view original):
Tony Gwynn was not batting cleanup.  Edgar Martinez was.  Tony's job was to get on base.  Edgar's job was to drive them in.

3-1 count.  Gwynn is swing 74% of the time.  Edgar is swinging 52% of the time.  I want those numbers reversed.

Well Tec...this would be a lot more fun if you actually had data to support what you were talking about. I thought every hitter was trying to drive in runners who are on base. But I'll play.  Gwynn scored 92 runs per 162 games. Edgar scored 96 runs...and had a higher OBP. So he was better at Gwynn's offensive job than Gwynn was. Gwynn usually hit #2 or #3.  The only time any one is guaranteed a hitting spot is in the first inning...so to say that Tony's job was to get on base and Edgars was to drive runners only applies if no one is on base in Gwynn's case, and runners are on base in Edgar's. That seems a pretty silly thing to base an argument on. In any case....the scoring of runs, the driving in of runners, and of getting on base...Edgar was better than Gwynn.   But sure....Russ Davis.... what ever the hell that has to do with anything.

So how will you argue now that we have established Edgar did a better job scoring runs, driving in runs, and getting on base than Tony Gwynn. I've got popcorn, so have at it.

Another genius who has no idea what I've been arguing.

Posted by tecwrg on 2/11/2014 5:56:00 AM (view original):
Another genius who has no idea what I've been arguing.

sadly...neither do you...and it's your argument.

Um, OK, sure.

Here, I'll break it down(and I think this is tec's argument too):

A runner on 2nd with two down and a .320 hitter at the plate.   Assuming he doesn't choke like EM apparently did during his career(.269), you have a 32% chance of scoring a run.  If there's a .250 hitter at the plate, you have a 25% chance of scoring a run.   

Obviously, if the .320 hitter walks, you still have a 25% of scoring a run but the odds of scoring two runs increases.   And you now have a chance to score three runs which was not possible without the walk.    And this is where everything went bonkers.  No one has disputed the possibility of multiple runs increasing with the walk.

But, if I'm in a close game, or there are two aces battling it out that day, I want that ONE run.   And I want the better hitter attempting to get me that run.

Yep.  That's exactly my argument.

And then seamar jumped in with "Hey everybody, Tony Gwynn scored a lot of runs!"  I'm not quite sure how he thinks that fits in to the discussion.

Are tecwrg + Mike the same guy, or just butt-buddies?

And, of course, those percentages are just rounded numbers to keep it simple.   A hit doesn't guarantee that a runner will score from 2nd.   But, either way, it's still a 7% difference with all things being equal.

Posted by tecwrg on 2/11/2014 8:26:00 AM (view original):
Yep.  That's exactly my argument.

And then seamar jumped in with "Hey everybody, Tony Gwynn scored a lot of runs!"  I'm not quite sure how he thinks that fits in to the discussion.

There's been a lot of that.   "But....but.....Mickey Mantle!!!!"

Posted by bronxcheer on 2/11/2014 8:27:00 AM (view original):
Are tecwrg + Mike the same guy, or just butt-buddies?

Two people who understand the common sense aspect of baseball.    We're not so buried in a stat book that we don't understand that a .320 hitter(if he doesn't choke like EM) is more likely to drive in a run with 2 out, runner on 2nd than a .250 hitter.

Are you burnsy/BL's ball polisher?

I have no dog in this snooze......hunt

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/11/2014 8:49:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bronxcheer on 2/11/2014 8:27:00 AM (view original):
Are tecwrg + Mike the same guy, or just butt-buddies?

Two people who understand the common sense aspect of baseball.    We're not so buried in a stat book that we don't understand that a .320 hitter(if he doesn't choke like EM) is more likely to drive in a run with 2 out, runner on 2nd than a .250 hitter.

Are you burnsy/BL's ball polisher?

I do need one of those.

Posted by tecwrg on 2/11/2014 8:26:00 AM (view original):
Yep.  That's exactly my argument.

And then seamar jumped in with "Hey everybody, Tony Gwynn scored a lot of runs!"  I'm not quite sure how he thinks that fits in to the discussion.

So your argument is that, with the exception of a few rare instances, it's always better to have guys on 1st and 2nd and the lesser hitter up?

Wow, that sounds a little familiar.