tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post8557623325050318417..comments2024-02-13T06:56:14.486-05:00Comments on Walk Like a Sabermetrician: A Jim Rice Post (sorry)phttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18057215403741682609noreply@blogger.comBlogger52125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-7131275166771292952009-01-06T21:55:00.000-05:002009-01-06T21:55:00.000-05:00Although I can appreciate the fact that you were r...<I>Although I can appreciate the fact that you were responding to another's assertion about walks, you chose to ignore those sluggers who played most of their careers at the same time as Rice - at least 2 of whom are in the HOF.</I><BR/><BR/>True, and acknowledged. <BR/><BR/><I>So when OBP's are comparable, explain again how a walk is as good as a hit or better than a hit as OPS+ will state.</I><BR/><BR/>OPS+ states no such thing. OBA weights walks and hits equally; SLG ignores walks entirely. Singles are valued more highly, relative to walks, by OPS+ than by more advanced sabermetric measures. I don't like or use OPS or OPS+.<BR/><BR/><I>and smacks of revisionism and historical study absolutely demands that one make allowance for the way players were taught in their time.</I><BR/><BR/>Does historical study also demand that one pretends as if walks are worthless just because people at the time thought they were (which, again, is a premise that I reject and consider to be historical revisionism at its finest)?phttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18057215403741682609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-36520741991995272802009-01-06T15:00:00.000-05:002009-01-06T15:00:00.000-05:00Although I can appreciate the fact that you were r...Although I can appreciate the fact that you were responding to another's assertion about walks, you chose to ignore those sluggers who played most of their careers at the same time as Rice - at least 2 of whom are in the HOF. This is an interesting omission. Winfield w'd once every 9 ab and finished with a 353 OBP. Rice walked once every 12 AB and finished with a .352 AB. But yet we want to reward the mighty walk over the hit. This is significant when one considers Rice hit .308 with men on compared to Winfield's .287. This becomes all the more significant b/c what's the relative value of a walk vs. a hit when you are in a lineup with other guys with good OBP's who get on base? Conversely, if you're in a good lineup, then it would seem to make sense that you would be walked less. Murray walked once every 8 AB to Rice's 12.2. But despite this large % difference, Murray only got on base .7% more than Rice. So when OBP's are comparable, explain again how a walk is as good as a hit or better than a hit as OPS+ will state. Sorry, but this all smacks of holding players to post 1993 OBP philosophies (and obviously OBP's have gone up significantly) and smacks of revisionism and historical study absolutely demands that one make allowance for the way players were taught in their time.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-49234542978776884382008-12-21T18:39:00.000-05:002008-12-21T18:39:00.000-05:00fact: jm rice was in the top 5 for mvp 6 times fac...fact: jm rice was in the top 5 for mvp 6 times <BR/><BR/>fact: the other 9 players who have done this and are eligible for the hall are in the hall<BR/><BR/>soon to be fact : walks or no walks rice will be in the hall. rice basher will have to deal with it and move on to your next player to target.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-30605402729330447562008-12-21T01:39:00.000-05:002008-12-21T01:39:00.000-05:00"And the 100 walk season standard is arbitrary."Ye..."And the 100 walk season standard is arbitrary."<BR/><BR/>Yep, we can even look a little closer and see this more clearly... Dewey had 3 100+ walk seasons, but had 6 95+ walk seasons. He also led the AL in walks in strike shortened 1981 with 85.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-17126693548754045912008-12-20T16:13:00.000-05:002008-12-20T16:13:00.000-05:00I have watched a lot of baseball games, and I have...I have watched a lot of baseball games, and I have never seen a batting coach, manager, GM, or owner at the plate swinging the bat for a hitter. <BR/><BR/>Teams may have different approaches, but you've failed to provide any evidence that the Red Sox forced Jim Rice to swing the bat. And again, his teammates like Yaz, Dewey, and Lynn were certainly not averse to drawing walks.<BR/><BR/>If the Red Sox had ordered Rice to try to be a slap hitter, would you be here trying to wipe away his resulting lack of home runs as relevant to his value as a player? Ultimately, the results the player produces on the field are what he is judged on. Anything else and you end up twisted around like a pretzel, flailing away. Which is where you are now.phttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18057215403741682609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-10914151322379503062008-12-20T15:04:00.000-05:002008-12-20T15:04:00.000-05:00How in the hell would you know if a hitters approa...How in the hell would you know if a hitters approach is "ultimately up to him". Different teams have different approaches. If you dont know that you have never watched the game. <BR/>Saying that the greatest hitter of all time did it his own way and did not listen to the critics so rice and others should as well is foolish.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-71782937917941497372008-12-19T10:56:00.000-05:002008-12-19T10:56:00.000-05:00Again, even if I grant that it's true (I don't), w...Again, even if I grant that it's true (I don't), why should I care? The only goal of the team should be to maximize its wins. If they take some counter-productive approach, I see no reason to make allowances when evaluating the value of their players. And the 100 walk season standard is arbitrary. As the data above shows, Dewey and Yaz had excellent walk rates. Lynn's is not in the class, but it was above average. <BR/><BR/>Ultimately, a batter's plate approach is up to him. People whined that Ted Williams took too many pitches, passed the buck too much, etc. Guess what? He ignored it and played the game the way he felt was best.<BR/><BR/>The underlying assumption of your post seems to be that anybody could walk if they wanted to. I don't accept that as fact. There are differences among players in eyesight, hand/eye coordination, and other factors that affect "plate discipline" just as there are differences in strength and speed. I am not claiming that Rice was a fool or a failure because he didn't draw a lot of walks; but HAD he been able to, he would have been a better player. So would have Mario Mendoza if he could hit.phttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18057215403741682609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-13482207311492259742008-12-19T10:27:00.000-05:002008-12-19T10:27:00.000-05:00for the first 7 years(rices prime) of his career r...for the first 7 years(rices prime) of his career rice hit way more hr and extra base hits than yaz dewey and lynn and fisk. he was the sox big bat his job bas to swing the bat.yes lynn was hurt alot but RICE played hurt and was almost always in the lineup. almost no sox had a 100 bb season. I think dewey miight of had ane or two . I dont recall off hand. wone boggs got there things changed of course. but the other sox hardly walked burleson hobson g.scott later hr leader tony armas don baylor. maybe it was as a result of the old school managers the sox had during rices career d. johnson d zimmer ralph houk j mac. joe morgan. But they wanted him to hit.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-66658008225676340002008-12-19T10:18:00.001-05:002008-12-19T10:18:00.001-05:00just like with your stats that you throw out there...just like with your stats that you throw out there. you seem to be just as one sided with what personal attacks you allow to post.but thats ok it is your post.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-89667290906835662482008-12-19T03:02:00.000-05:002008-12-19T03:02:00.000-05:00I think you have a troll on your hands with Ananym...I think you have a troll on your hands with Ananymous. Although his refusal to listen to any of your well-thought out arguments does make for some comical reading.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-11020436217130642402008-12-18T21:50:00.000-05:002008-12-18T21:50:00.000-05:00something that you do not take into account is tea...<I>something that you do not take into account is teams approach. some teams want their player to walk others do not.</I><BR/><BR/>If the Red Sox didn't want players to walk, they did a poor job of passing this on to Dewey, Yaz, and Lynn, all teammates of Rice.<BR/><BR/>Even if they did, so what? What if a team didn't want it's players to hit for power? Would we just ignore that a player only averaged say, 10 homers a year when evaluating his career?<BR/><BR/><I>to say that he lacked pitch recogniton is crazy he was a .298 career hitter.</I><BR/><BR/>I never said he lacked "pitch recognition"; I just said he didn't walk a lot, and that's a fact.<BR/><BR/><I>I dont buy that he would be a hofer only if he walked 25 more times a year</I><BR/><BR/>If he would have traded 25 outs for walks a year, he would have gone from a career line of 298/351/502 to a career line of 311/390/523, which is a big difference.<BR/><BR/>That's not to say that he COULD have, but in a world where you could waive a magic wand and turn outs into walks, it would be extremely valuable.phttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18057215403741682609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-68777115356328118572008-12-18T19:53:00.000-05:002008-12-18T19:53:00.000-05:00FACT: Jim Rice has a lower OPS than Neifi Perez an...FACT: Jim Rice has a lower OPS than Neifi Perez and Tony Womack over the last 10 years.<BR/><BR/>(Of course, this has nothing to do with Jim Rice being worse than these guys, just the fact that he hasn't played)<BR/><BR/>Picking specific years is a problem, no matter how you do it, this is why I hate the "during the 12 years I've selected, Jim Rice was X Y Z" type arguments. He was a tremendous player, but he's borderline. I remember how much of a pleasure it was to watch him hit, but I also remember watching Keith Hernandez hit (I still have his 1988 "Starting Lineup" figure).<BR/><BR/>It doesn't take anything away from Jim Rice's career...no one can argue that he was a BAD player. However, there simply has to be a line somewhere, and maybe he's destined to be the one of the best guys on the outside.Professor Cameronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08683440304854324235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-23969229173140445792008-12-18T19:31:00.000-05:002008-12-18T19:31:00.000-05:00See the pitch, determine whether strike or ball. S...See the pitch, determine whether strike or ball. Strike in players comfort zone=swing, put ball in play. Ball or pitch player can't handle=don't swing, walk or force pitcher to make perfect pitches.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-80873138854961119252008-12-18T19:21:00.000-05:002008-12-18T19:21:00.000-05:00something that you do not take into account is tea...something that you do not take into account is teams approach. some teams want their player to walk others do not. another thing about the strikezone rice murdered the ball that was up at the letters and was usually called a strike if he took it in his day. with the srtike zone being much larger in his day he would swing more often. to say that he lacked pitch recogniton is crazy he was a .298 career hitter. ( dont bother I know ba means nothing too you) some players of his time were actually praised for their swing at all cost approach such as sanguillen and a little before his time clemente. anyone who ever saw Rice play knows he did not hack at anything like Vlad G.<BR/>I dont buy that he would be a hofer only if he walked 25 more times a yearAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-43241933517058774422008-12-18T18:46:00.000-05:002008-12-18T18:46:00.000-05:00i love it when admitted red sox fanatics accuse so...i love it when admitted red sox fanatics accuse someone else of bias. absolutely hysterical. uh, would this conversation be going on if rice played for the texas rangers? the sabes (a new one to me) try to remain calm and use objective analysis while the red sox spazes scream foul and spew wholly subjective nonsense. kind of goes with the whole you-cant-prove-anything-with-numbers-and-to-prove-that-i-will-use-numbers, argument.<BR/><BR/>and so another quality discussion about baseball is ruined by jim rice super fans. hence my hatred for jim rice.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11671678376746502328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-25349090191029922812008-12-18T17:54:00.000-05:002008-12-18T17:54:00.000-05:00To the 4:26 poster: Gotcha. Sorry I misunderstoo...To the 4:26 poster: Gotcha. Sorry I misunderstood which group you were referring to.<BR/><BR/>To the 4:53 poster: <BR/><BR/>1) The idea that looking at walks/PA compared to the league average causes you to bust out the old "abacus" line (what, are slide rules chopped liver?) is hilarious.<BR/><BR/>2) Get off the walks? That's the whole point of the original post, which was not meant to take a stand on Rice's candidacy but instead to respond to Mr. Abraham's argument about walks. If you're not interested in that topic, why did you read this in the first place? There are plenty of other blogs out there where people have explicitly gone after Rice's candidacy as a whole, and if you feel that they are overstating the importance of walks, than that would be a good place to focus your energy.<BR/><BR/>I don't accept the premise that Rice would have to adjust his plate discipline if he played in 2008. There are still middle of the order hitters with a liberal approach (Carlos Lee, Vlad Guerrero, Jose Guillen to name a few). There is not a monolithic approach to hitting in any era.<BR/><BR/>For all I know, Rice may have maximized his talent using the approach that he did. The real question is how much value did his actual performance have when he played.phttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18057215403741682609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-45605376680587096022008-12-18T16:53:00.000-05:002008-12-18T16:53:00.000-05:00there you go with your abbacus again.Do you honest...there you go with your abbacus again.<BR/><BR/>Do you honestly believe that a 6 time top 5 finisher for mvp whould not have been able to walk more ao adjusted to todays game if he wanted to. My god he had seasons with over 670 ab and did not strike out 200 times like todays sluggers do. He would have adjusted. Giambi and his like walk all the time because with todays small ballparks and watered down pitching and small strikezone it is easier to and there is a more of a benefit to than there was in the past. get off the walks. the strike zone was at the letters in his rices day. jim palmer probably never threw a ball below a hitters waist in his career.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-22768500247229893362008-12-18T16:26:00.000-05:002008-12-18T16:26:00.000-05:00I meant they weren't that good compared to Hall of...I meant they weren't that good compared to Hall of Famers. The Hall of Fame players from that era were plenty good. I mean the people with bad pitch recognition.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-29478488639493986212008-12-18T16:12:00.000-05:002008-12-18T16:12:00.000-05:00That's certainly what you and Mr. Abraham would ha...That's certainly what you and Mr. Abraham would have us believe, but I'm not buying it (nor do I buy "they just weren't that good", which is silly).<BR/><BR/>In 2008, the 3-4-5 hitters in the AL had a walk rate W/(AB+W) of .111; the league average was .096, so they were 15% above it. In 1978, the 3-4-5 hitters in the AL had a walk rate of .104 versus a league average of .095, or 9% better.<BR/><BR/>So today's heart of the order hitters are walking, relative to the league average, 115/109 ~ 6% more than those of 1978. 6%, and to hear the arguments from the Rice crowd you might think it was 60%.<BR/><BR/>Jim Rice simply did not a lot of walks relative to his peers, whether you consider his peers to be the whole player population, the heart of the order hitters, or big sluggers throughout history.phttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18057215403741682609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-16753234786009888472008-12-18T15:05:00.000-05:002008-12-18T15:05:00.000-05:00no the middle approach the middle of the order guy...no the middle approach the middle of the order guys had at that time were to swing the bat. They were the guys paid to deliver the offense. now a days the ss and 2b men are paid to hit and the lineups are more offensive. anyone in the lineup can drive in runs so a 3 or 4 hitter can wait for his pitch if he does not get it who cares the 678 hitters will drive him in. The game is played different today.There are no Mario mendozas mark belangers. if you cant hit there is little room for you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-80540465731881057862008-12-18T13:48:00.000-05:002008-12-18T13:48:00.000-05:00It seems like this is being made waay to complicat...It seems like this is being made waay to complicated. If a pitch is a strike and the player knows its a strike he can hit then thats when a player swings. If its a ball then they do not or should not swing. Its not like balls and strikes are a new rule. Did players from Rice's era decide to swing a bad pitches? I don't think so. They just weren't that good.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-36720682266615111032008-12-18T10:49:00.000-05:002008-12-18T10:49:00.000-05:00i guess that discussing rice is like complaining t...i guess that discussing rice is like complaining to your mother in law about her daughter . It wont do any good no matter what you say.<BR/>that goes both ways (pro and anti rice)<BR/>every point brought up by either side gets brushed aside for a counter stat. the bombardment has made for an impossiable discussion.<BR/><BR/>we will have to agree to disagree and it will be interesting to see if the rice discussion does end with his election (on non election).I will be pulling for him on dec 12th he has been at the center of the storm for too long.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-44359609094679188082008-12-18T09:55:00.000-05:002008-12-18T09:55:00.000-05:00you cant write an article about the subject and ex...<I>you cant write an article about the subject and expect the discussion to go any other way than it has unless you want to just preach to your believers and have them say good job with the article. and pat you on the back.</I><BR/><BR/>I have no problem with critical responses; believe me, if I did, I would be rejecting many of these comments. However, I don't think it's too much to hope that the responses deal with the real point, which I reiterated in the last comment.<BR/><BR/>One could reject Mr. Abraham's particular argument in favor of Rice while still supporting Rice's candidacy. If someone tried to argue that Tim Raines should be in the HoF because he stole X bases over some period of time, I would consider that a very poor argument, despite the fact that I think Raines was a terrific player.<BR/><BR/>One of the comments from the Rice supporters, the one about him being 12th in OBA from 75-86, did touch on the main point of my post. And one (which did not specify whether they were pro, anti, or neutral towards Rice) raised the issue of intentional walks, which is certainly related to my post. The rest have been about the general topic of his HoF worthiness.phttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18057215403741682609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-32639424786979410372008-12-18T09:46:00.000-05:002008-12-18T09:46:00.000-05:00once the sabes idol Bill James stated that Roy Whi...once the sabes idol Bill James stated that Roy White was as good a player as jim rice it has been a heated discussion. numbers can be massaged in different ways to generate any outcome. the rice 75-86 totals leading everything offensively can be misleading(he was not the best offensive player of that era but was in the discussion) and any formula that sabes use ca nalso be misleading (yes including the almighty ops+) bottom line is rice was a much better player that roy white and is a borderline candidate for the hall and if he gets in would not diminish the hall in the least. <BR/><BR/>you cant write an article about the subject and expect the discussion to go any other way than it has unless you want to just preach to your believers and have them say good job with the article. and pat you on the back.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12133335.post-41112290147952248582008-12-18T09:30:00.000-05:002008-12-18T09:30:00.000-05:00Darn, you figured us out. The entire existence of...Darn, you figured us out. The entire existence of sabermetrics is all a big plot against Jim Rice.<BR/><BR/>Rice is in the discussion because he is in the news. It's just that simple. You can't have it both ways; you can't try to seek the ultimate baseball honor for your guy and expect the rest of the world to just say "OK, whatever".<BR/><BR/>As for me, I can assure you that this is the first post I've ever made about Jim Rice (I may have had a sentence in one or two other posts, but certainly nothing like this). And it wasn't even supposed to be about Rice's HoF candidacy, it was supposed to be about Mr. Abraham's specific argument, with Rice serving as the example because that's who Abraham used.<BR/><BR/>Unfortunately the Rice supporters who have commented here have really not grasped the difference, and thus have changed the topic of the discussion.phttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18057215403741682609noreply@blogger.com