quote:Originally posted by ammo:
Focus on outs.
We already tried that approach.
We already tried that approach.
We already tried that approach.
quote:Originally posted by ammo:quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
What if Dunn maintains his same approach but lays off a few breaking balls and walks 10 more times in a season. Are you telling me he's worse off converting 10 Ks to BBs?
Once again the arguement is changed. Of course 10 BB is better than 10 Ks, but that is not the point. The point is for Dunn to change to K less and ground out or fly out more. Focus on outs.
And once again you're not up to speed. My very first statement about this talks only about making contact and raising OBP. Nothing about comparing Ks to other outs. He doesn't have to change his style to walk one more time every 16 games. Snap out of it.
If you don't strike out it means you put the ball in play or walk by not swinging at that pitch out of the strike zone. That contact could mean a hit, reaching on an error, or a productive out that moves a runner into scoring position. It's only logical that putting the ball in play more often will lead to a higher BA and/or OBP.
quote:Originally posted by Coach:quote:Originally posted by ammo:
Focus on outs.
We already tried that approach.
That's right. It was never the point I was trying to make. It was always making more contact and reaching base more. I think it's safe to say Braun would be a much more productive hitter the last few weeks if he stop whoofing on pitches 2 feet outside and in the dirt. Should we change the approach he's currently using?
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
Are you telling me he's worse off converting 10 Ks to BBs?
just as much as you are telling me getting 10 singles is better than getting 10 home runs.
quote:Originally posted by TD:
Ground out RBI for Braun. More support vs the K by Joe.
Actually it's just one play. Using your logic, we can assume that because Craig Counsell hit a home run that one time that he will hit a home run with every subsequent at bat.
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
If a player has a .360 OBP and he makes contact 40 more times in a season, 40 less Ks, do you think he'll make out all 40 times? Of course not. He'll reach base an extra 10-12 times and be a more productive offensive player. It's indisputable.
If a player strikes out 10 more times, but hits 12 more home runs his production will go up.
indisputable and equally not part of the arguement
quote:Originally posted by Coach:
It's (the fantasy league) is simply an easy to understand example (using a run based scoring system).
Don't duck the question because it doesn't support what you believe.
If K's are inversely related to offensive production, then how is what is happening in my league possible?
1/3/5 in OBP and yet 1-2-3 in K's (actually 1-2-4 now including tonight's action)....how is that possible? Remember, also 1-2-3 in runs.
The answer is right in front of your face, and you still can't see it.
Your hypothetical player in your example doesn't have to make an out all 40 times, but over the course of a season it won't statistically matter if he struck out, lined out, or popped out. An out is an out.
What's indisputable is that you don't understand statistics.
I understand stats and an out is an out. What I don't understand is why a player isn't more productive by turning 15 out a season into becoming a baserunner.
You fantasy league is just that, a fantasy. And if you're going to continue using that as the backbone of your argument I'll agree with your original assessment that it's for craps and giggles.
How can you assume more contact mean less outs (and more runs) when teams/players that do that don't have less out and score more runs that team/players that do strike out more?
quote:Originally posted by Coach:quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
Don't quit your day job.
No plans to, thanks.
I for one hope that yours isn't teaching.
It's hard to teach people that can't learn.
quote:Originally posted by El-Ka-Bong:
How can you assume more contact mean less outs (and more runs) when teams/players that do that don't have less out and score more runs that team/players that do strike out more?
It's simple. If a player reaches base 40% of the time he makes contact and he makes contact 40 more times in a season he'll reach base ____ more times in a season? I'll let you get your calculator and figure it out.
The other day a heard an announcer, seldom watch on the Brewers channel, how much better of a leadoff hitter Weeks would be if he cut down his Ks. Where do you think he was going with that statement?
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
That's right. It was never the point I was trying to make. It was always making more contact and reaching base more. I think it's safe to say Braun would be a much more productive hitter the last few weeks if he stop whoofing on pitches 2 feet outside and in the dirt. Should we change the approach he's currently using?
Making more contact (not striking out) does not directly correlate to higher OBP if the extra contact results in an out.
Outs are bad whether it is a K or screaming liner. Neither one helps OBP.
Walks and hits are better than any kind of out. Stipulated. Never been disputed.
There are many examples of players that have high K rates as well as a high OBP. Putting more balls in play does not necessarily increase OBP (because outs also happen on batted balls....normally I wouldn't feel the need to explain that).
High K rates also do not statistically have an inverse relationship to overall offensive production (runs). You may not like it, but the numbers don't lie.
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
It's hard to teach people that can't learn.
That's the best self-assessment I've read around here in quite a while.
quote:Originally posted by El-Ka-Bong:
How can you assume more contact mean less outs (and more runs) when teams/players that do that don't have less out and score more runs that team/players that do strike out more?
Because he's Rick.
And don't be knocking Coach's Fantasy numbers. Those are real stats from real players. If those same players were all on real teams the numbers would or should be the same.
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
I understand stats and an out is an out. What I don't understand is why a player isn't more productive by turning 15 out a season into becoming a baserunner.
You fantasy league is just that, a fantasy. And if you're going to continue using that as the backbone of your argument I'll agree with your original assessment that it's for craps and giggles.
It's not "the backbone" of anything, it's an example. So much for "easy to understand".
You still haven't answered the question, and again it's literally right in front of your face (and was even referenced in an earlier post that had nothing to do with that example).
Please at least pretend to think.
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
It's simple. If a player reaches base 40% of the time he makes contact and he makes contact 40 more times in a season he'll reach base ____ more times in a season? I'll let you get your calculator and figure it out.
The other day a heard an announcer, seldom watch on the Brewers channel, how much better of a leadoff hitter Weeks would be if he cut down his Ks. Where do you think he was going with that statement?
It's possible he would cut down on walks and lose the power numbers and drop the OBP. In every counter argument you present, you assume that they will cut walks and everything will magically improve, but that just doesn't play out in reality.
If coach can't use fantasy, how come you can?
If Rickie Weeks didn't strike out so much he may not hit as many home runs.
quote:Originally posted by El-Ka-Bong:
reality.
If coach can't use fantasy, how come you can?
quote:Originally posted by Coach:
Because he's Rick.
quote:Originally posted by Coach:quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
It's hard to teach people that can't learn.
That's the best self-assessment I've read around here in quite a while.
I'll aim a little lower the next time so you get it.
quote:Originally posted by ammo:
If Rickie Weeks didn't strike out so much he may not hit as many home runs.
Rickie Weeks
OBP: .374 (3)
OPS: .843 (4)
Runs Created: 74 (1)
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
I'll aim a little lower the next time so you get it.
I find the idea of you questioning anyone's ability to learn after this display more than just a little bit ironic.
Laughable, actually.
quote:Originally posted by ammo:
And don't be knocking Coach's Fantasy numbers. Those are real stats from real players. If those same players were all on real teams the numbers would or should be the same.
You're serious?
quote:Originally posted by El-Ka-Bong:quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
Are you telling me he's worse off converting 10 Ks to BBs?
just as much as you are telling me getting 10 singles is better than getting 10 home runs.
Straaaaaawman.
quote:Originally posted by Coach:quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
I'll aim a little lower the next time so you get it.
I find the idea of you questioning anyone's ability to learn after this display more than just a little bit ironic.
Laughable, actually.
When you put the mirror down you'll stop laughing.
quote:Originally posted by Coach:quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
I understand stats and an out is an out. What I don't understand is why a player isn't more productive by turning 15 out a season into becoming a baserunner.
You fantasy league is just that, a fantasy. And if you're going to continue using that as the backbone of your argument I'll agree with your original assessment that it's for craps and giggles.
It's not "the backbone" of anything, it's an example. So much for "easy to understand".
You still haven't answered the question, and again it's literally right in front of your face (and was even referenced in an earlier post that had nothing to do with that example).
Please at least pretend to think.
What question?
quote:Originally posted by Coach:
Please at least pretend to think.
Maybe I should pretend to be smart like you're attempting.
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
When you put the mirror down you'll stop laughing.
So says the voice of experience.
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
Maybe I should pretend to be smart...
It won't work, but go ahead and give it a try.
quote:Originally posted by Coach:quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
When you put the mirror down you'll stop laughing.
So says the voice of experience.
That's right. You're not the first one I've seen put themself into that position.
quote:Originally posted by Coach:quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
Maybe I should pretend to be smart...
It won't work, but go ahead and give it a try.
The sign of desperation. Altering my posts. Weak, but what I would expect.
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
What question?
Sharp as a bowling ball.
Using the example provided, how is it possible that the teams (using real ML stats) can be 1-2-3 in runs, 1-3-5 in OBP, yet be 1-2-3 in K's?
I'll give you a hint: the answer has already been posted in this thread and you're too dim to understand it.
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
That's right. You're not the first one I've seen put themself into that position.
Does he treat you well at least?
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:quote:Originally posted by El-Ka-Bong:quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
Are you telling me he's worse off converting 10 Ks to BBs?
just as much as you are telling me getting 10 singles is better than getting 10 home runs.
Straaaaaawman.
irrrrrrrrrrrony.
quote:Originally posted by Coach:quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Coach:
What question?
Sharp as a bowling ball.
Using the example provided, how is it possible that the teams (using real ML stats) can be 1-2-3 in runs, 1-3-5 in OBP, yet be 1-2-3 in K's?
I'll give you a hint: the answer has already been posted in this thread and you're too dim to understand it.
Was that example provided from your fantasy league? That's why I didn't answer.They call it fantasy for a reason. Ask me a baseball question not some hypothetical crap.
Coach and Rick, I'm not sure what to call your current dance, but can we keep it to some real points please?
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
The sign of desperation. Altering my posts. Weak, but what I would expect.
Desperate? No.
Taken aback at how obtuse you are?
You betcha.
quote:Originally posted by PackerRick:
Was that example provided from your fantasy league? That's why I didn't answer.They call it fantasy for a reason. Ask me a baseball question not some hypothetical crap.
The teams don't exist, but the stats themselve are 100% real.
Just take a wild guess.
quote:Originally posted by El-Ka-Bong:
Coach and Rick, I'm not sure what to call your current dance, but can we keep it to some real points please?
Trying to, boss.
My apologies.
All I can think of when it is said a K is equal to any other out is:
1) Ben Sheets 18K day against the Braves. Pretty sure the Braves would of disagreed on that day.
2) Fans damn near coming out of the stands after Jose Hernandez when he was the whiff king. Pretty sure Jose would of gave his kingdom for a thimble full of ball contact during that time. Actaully, Jose is a good example because the stat guys will show how his K's didn't mean much because of his OPS but it had a deep impact on fans.
IMO, K's can be a psychological impact to a pitcher, a batter or a team.
What if the Kendall's K more ... they are out of the league compared to the Dunns of the league, yet their stats are lumped together in 52 years worth. I know I'm comparing apples to oranges but when you talk K, IMO you have to look at the player to compare the K value.JMO.
1) Ben Sheets 18K day against the Braves. Pretty sure the Braves would of disagreed on that day.
2) Fans damn near coming out of the stands after Jose Hernandez when he was the whiff king. Pretty sure Jose would of gave his kingdom for a thimble full of ball contact during that time. Actaully, Jose is a good example because the stat guys will show how his K's didn't mean much because of his OPS but it had a deep impact on fans.
IMO, K's can be a psychological impact to a pitcher, a batter or a team.
What if the Kendall's K more ... they are out of the league compared to the Dunns of the league, yet their stats are lumped together in 52 years worth. I know I'm comparing apples to oranges but when you talk K, IMO you have to look at the player to compare the K value.JMO.