No 99 August Tatis Collection reward
-
@the_dragon1912 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
Yep. Look no further than Harper for a reason not to fully rely on RBI as a main point in a player discussion. Fact is if Harper had more than 2 quality teammates, he easily has 100 RBI. Its amazing that literally 3 offensive players (Harper, JT, Segura) got the Phillies as close to a playoff spot as they did. The rest of that offense is not good
Absolutel
@the_dragon1912 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
Yep. Look no further than Harper for a reason not to fully rely on RBI as a main point in a player discussion. Fact is if Harper had more than 2 quality teammates, he easily has 100 RBI. Its amazing that literally 3 offensive players (Harper, JT, Segura) got the Phillies as close to a playoff spot as they did. The rest of that offense is not good
Yes, agreed, I jumped on the meaningless designation but I do agree it is reliant partially on the lineup around that player.
-
@the_dragon1912 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
Yep. Look no further than Harper for a reason not to fully rely on RBI as a main point in a player discussion. Fact is if Harper had more than 2 quality teammates, he easily has 100 RBI. Its amazing that literally 3 offensive players (Harper, JT, Segura) got the Phillies as close to a playoff spot as they did. The rest of that offense is not good
Exactly. Another big reason Harper had less RBI than someone like Duvall is because of his 23.2 BB% with RISP. He had a .488 OBP with RISP as well, compared to Duvall’s .367 OBP and 5.7 BB%. Also, 25 of Duvall’s 38 HR were with runners on base. Only 8 of Harper’s 35 HR were with runners on base.
You can’t say it was because Harper wasn’t “clutch” either, because he still had a .977 OPS in high leverage situations. The thing is, that OPS is comprised of a .577 OBP and .400 SLG, with that OBP being so high due to his 36.5 BB% in those situations (along with his .300 AVG as well). Just for some context, Harper saw 222 pitches in high leverage situations this year. Of those 222, 124 were balls and 98 were strikes. Compare that to his insane 2015 season, when he saw 248 pitches comprised of 112 balls and 136 strikes, which really gives you an idea of just how much he was pitched around in 2021.
So yeah, even when Harper did have RISP or even just runners on base, he was pitched around much more than someone like Duvall would be, resulting in the much higher BB% with fewer RBI.
-
@twisted-_-tea-_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@the_dragon1912 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
I mean who else would be the padres finest? That team had one of the worse collapses I've ever seen
Machado had a career year. Probably gonna win the gold glove and maybe platinum even over Nolan. Musgrove was great same with cronenworth. Rest of the team swung noodles. And don’t get us padre fans started on hosmer
Probably going to win the gold glove and plantinum glove??? You do realize that Austin Riley posted a better defensive season than Machado did by all meaningful metrics!!! The only stat Machado has over Riley is errors and Riley had 1 more than Machado with more chances. Every other stat Riley has Machado. So if you think Machado is better than Arenado than by your logic Riley is better than both at least this year he was. Go look it up. Oh and Riley’s offensive season was also better than Machado’s according to all meaningful metrics.
-
@twisted-_-tea-_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@twisted-_-tea-_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@the_dragon1912 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
I mean who else would be the padres finest? That team had one of the worse collapses I've ever seen
Machado had a career year. Probably gonna win the gold glove and maybe platinum even over Nolan. Musgrove was great same with cronenworth. Rest of the team swung noodles. And don’t get us padre fans started on hosmer
I don’t think a guys 5th best full season out of like 7 counts as a career year.
I mean 2nd highest rbi total if im not mistake not to mention how crazy he’s been defensively this year.
Austin Riley had more RBI’s than Machado
-
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
I agree with that. It is definitely not the end all on great hitters. Trout for instance has never had more than 111 rbis. I certainly wouldn't say Duvall was better this year than Trout any year much less his best.
It's definitely a contextual stat. Certainly not meaningless but also not the ultimate barometer.
I also want to mention that wRC+ doesn't take into account situational stats. It’s a bulk stat metric. Duval was a significantly better hitter in situations which one would consider to be clutch situations such as at bats with runners in scoring position and runners on third with less than 2 outs and batting average in 2 out situations with runners on base. wRC+ only looks at the end numbers results so it bases it formula on his stats when his at bats have less meaning. I’ll take a guy who comes up clutch in the most meaningful moments in the game than the guy who goes 2-3 at the plate but flies out or strikes out with runners on and the game on the line.
-
@killerpresence4 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
I agree with that. It is definitely not the end all on great hitters. Trout for instance has never had more than 111 rbis. I certainly wouldn't say Duvall was better this year than Trout any year much less his best.
It's definitely a contextual stat. Certainly not meaningless but also not the ultimate barometer.
I also want to mention that wRC+ doesn't take into account situational stats. It’s a bulk stat metric. Duval was a significantly better hitter in situations which one would consider to be clutch situations such as at bats with runners in scoring position and runners on third with less than 2 outs and batting average in 2 out situations with runners on base. wRC+ only looks at the end numbers results so it bases it formula on his stats when his at bats have less meaning. I’ll take a guy who comes up clutch in the most meaningful moments in the game than the guy who goes 2-3 at the plate but flies out or strikes out with runners on and the game on the line.
Hahaha, I wasn't the one arguing in favor of Machado. I would give Riley or Arenado the better season easily.
I just wanted to point out that while not the end all on greatness, RBIs are far from meaningless. I wasn't comparing it favorably to wRC+ which I believe is an incredibly valuable stat.
-
@killerpresence4 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
I agree with that. It is definitely not the end all on great hitters. Trout for instance has never had more than 111 rbis. I certainly wouldn't say Duvall was better this year than Trout any year much less his best.
It's definitely a contextual stat. Certainly not meaningless but also not the ultimate barometer.
I also want to mention that wRC+ doesn't take into account situational stats. It’s a bulk stat metric. Duval was a significantly better hitter in situations which one would consider to be clutch situations such as at bats with runners in scoring position and runners on third with less than 2 outs and batting average in 2 out situations with runners on base. wRC+ only looks at the end numbers results so it bases it formula on his stats when his at bats have less meaning. I’ll take a guy who comes up clutch in the most meaningful moments in the game than the guy who goes 2-3 at the plate but flies out or strikes out with runners on and the game on the line.
You would have a very bad team if you’d willingly choose a guy with a 103 wRC+ over a guy with a 170 wRC+
The guy with a 170 wRC+ will always be more valuable to his team than an essentially league-average hitter, period.
-
@killerpresence4 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@twisted-_-tea-_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@twisted-_-tea-_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@the_dragon1912 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
I mean who else would be the padres finest? That team had one of the worse collapses I've ever seen
Machado had a career year. Probably gonna win the gold glove and maybe platinum even over Nolan. Musgrove was great same with cronenworth. Rest of the team swung noodles. And don’t get us padre fans started on hosmer
I don’t think a guys 5th best full season out of like 7 counts as a career year.
I mean 2nd highest rbi total if im not mistake not to mention how crazy he’s been defensively this year.
Austin Riley had more RBI’s than Machado
2nd highest of HIS career.
-
@killerpresence4 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
I agree with that. It is definitely not the end all on great hitters. Trout for instance has never had more than 111 rbis. I certainly wouldn't say Duvall was better this year than Trout any year much less his best.
It's definitely a contextual stat. Certainly not meaningless but also not the ultimate barometer.
I also want to mention that wRC+ doesn't take into account situational stats. It’s a bulk stat metric. Duval was a significantly better hitter in situations which one would consider to be clutch situations such as at bats with runners in scoring position and runners on third with less than 2 outs and batting average in 2 out situations with runners on base. wRC+ only looks at the end numbers results so it bases it formula on his stats when his at bats have less meaning. I’ll take a guy who comes up clutch in the most meaningful moments in the game than the guy who goes 2-3 at the plate but flies out or strikes out with runners on and the game on the line.
Alright bro we get it braves still getting bounded by the brewers anyways
-
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@killerpresence4 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
I agree with that. It is definitely not the end all on great hitters. Trout for instance has never had more than 111 rbis. I certainly wouldn't say Duvall was better this year than Trout any year much less his best.
It's definitely a contextual stat. Certainly not meaningless but also not the ultimate barometer.
I also want to mention that wRC+ doesn't take into account situational stats. It’s a bulk stat metric. Duval was a significantly better hitter in situations which one would consider to be clutch situations such as at bats with runners in scoring position and runners on third with less than 2 outs and batting average in 2 out situations with runners on base. wRC+ only looks at the end numbers results so it bases it formula on his stats when his at bats have less meaning. I’ll take a guy who comes up clutch in the most meaningful moments in the game than the guy who goes 2-3 at the plate but flies out or strikes out with runners on and the game on the line.
You would have a very bad team if you’d willingly choose a guy with a 103 wRC+ over a guy with a 170 wRC+
The guy with a 170 wRC+ will always be more valuable to his team than an essentially league-average hitter, period.
Well we see where teams like the Padres, Phillies, Reds, Angels, and Blue Jays ended up with guys that had season that were considered to be 30-70% better than league average offensively. Like. I said there is a big difference between a guy that performs when it matters than someone who just fills the stat sheet and has a good season but goes home after the final game in September. I’m pretty sure the measure of a seasons success is not what an individual players does but what a team as a collective whole does. And that means going to the playoffs and hopefully coming home with the Championship in November. Bryce Harper, Manny Machado and Mike Trout are great individual players but are not great historically at propelling their teams to higher aspirations and this may or may not be through any fault of theirs but to this argument they are ultimately failing at the ultimate goal. Atlanta may not have many elite offensive performers (based on your argument of what is considered to be elite) but the sum is greater than the parts. Need we look any further than Tampa. One of the lowest payrolls in baseball. Their offensive metrics (not including this year as they have taken a significant step forward offensively this year) we’re league average at best but for some reason they perform at a much higher level overall. Both of these teams are cohesive and gel together on the field. They have great locker rooms and their franchises/organizations promote a winning atmosphere and the coaching/administration/scouting staffs hold themselves accountable when things go wrong. That is more important than any individual stat period.. Have a good day!!!
-
@twisted-_-tea-_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@schwizzle_nizzle said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@twisted-_-tea-_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@the_dragon1912 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
I mean who else would be the padres finest? That team had one of the worse collapses I've ever seen
Machado had a career year. Probably gonna win the gold glove and maybe platinum even over Nolan. Musgrove was great same with cronenworth. Rest of the team swung noodles. And don’t get us padre fans started on hosmer
I don’t think a guys 5th best full season out of like 7 counts as a career year.
Plus he's dirty and will never be in the HOF. He's a chump.
If you legit think machado is a dirty player you watch baseball via YouTube compilations and have zero credibility
Riiiiight. I've seen him play. Thank you.
-
@twisted-_-tea-_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@schwizzle_nizzle said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@twisted-_-tea-_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@the_dragon1912 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
I mean who else would be the padres finest? That team had one of the worse collapses I've ever seen
Machado had a career year. Probably gonna win the gold glove and maybe platinum even over Nolan. Musgrove was great same with cronenworth. Rest of the team swung noodles. And don’t get us padre fans started on hosmer
I don’t think a guys 5th best full season out of like 7 counts as a career year.
Plus he's dirty and will never be in the HOF. He's a chump.
If you legit think machado is a dirty player you watch baseball via YouTube compilations and have zero credibility
I watched Machado play hundreds of games as an Orioles fan in Baltimore and outside of the dirty plays he is a clean player that doesn't always hustle. But the dirty plays he has made make him dirtier than most players. He is gifted talent (as was ARod), but that doesn't make him a clean player.
-
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
And which one went to the playoffs this year???
-
According to @GixxerRyder750, Yuli Gurriel > Trout.
-
@gixxerryder750 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
And which one went to the playoffs this year???
Hmm wow you’re saying the all-around better team went to the playoffs, while the worse team didn’t? It’s almost like even the best player in baseball will never get his team to the playoffs without good teammates around him. Insinuating that someone like Duvall was even marginally close to Harper this year based on one being in the playoffs and the other not would be the biggest meathead take I’ve ever seen.
-
Maybe he’ll get a good Postseason card.
Oh, wait… -
@killerpresence4 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@killerpresence4 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
I agree with that. It is definitely not the end all on great hitters. Trout for instance has never had more than 111 rbis. I certainly wouldn't say Duvall was better this year than Trout any year much less his best.
It's definitely a contextual stat. Certainly not meaningless but also not the ultimate barometer.
I also want to mention that wRC+ doesn't take into account situational stats. It’s a bulk stat metric. Duval was a significantly better hitter in situations which one would consider to be clutch situations such as at bats with runners in scoring position and runners on third with less than 2 outs and batting average in 2 out situations with runners on base. wRC+ only looks at the end numbers results so it bases it formula on his stats when his at bats have less meaning. I’ll take a guy who comes up clutch in the most meaningful moments in the game than the guy who goes 2-3 at the plate but flies out or strikes out with runners on and the game on the line.
You would have a very bad team if you’d willingly choose a guy with a 103 wRC+ over a guy with a 170 wRC+
The guy with a 170 wRC+ will always be more valuable to his team than an essentially league-average hitter, period.
Well we see where teams like the Padres, Phillies, Reds, Angels, and Blue Jays ended up with guys that had season that were considered to be 30-70% better than league average offensively. Like. I said there is a big difference between a guy that performs when it matters than someone who just fills the stat sheet and has a good season but goes home after the final game in September. I’m pretty sure the measure of a seasons success is not what an individual players does but what a team as a collective whole does. And that means going to the playoffs and hopefully coming home with the Championship in November. Bryce Harper, Manny Machado and Mike Trout are great individual players but are not great historically at propelling their teams to higher aspirations and this may or may not be through any fault of theirs but to this argument they are ultimately failing at the ultimate goal. Atlanta may not have many elite offensive performers (based on your argument of what is considered to be elite) but the sum is greater than the parts. Need we look any further than Tampa. One of the lowest payrolls in baseball. Their offensive metrics (not including this year as they have taken a significant step forward offensively this year) we’re league average at best but for some reason they perform at a much higher level overall. Both of these teams are cohesive and gel together on the field. They have great locker rooms and their franchises/organizations promote a winning atmosphere and the coaching/administration/scouting staffs hold themselves accountable when things go wrong. That is more important than any individual stat period.. Have a good day!!!
You keep trying to sound like you know what you’re talking about and that you’re making some profound point that no one else has ever thought of, but you don’t and you aren’t.
I can 100% guarantee that if you ask any GM in baseball if they’d rather have the guy with a 170 wRC+ or the guy with a 106 wRC+ that’s easily replaceable, they’ll laugh in your face because of how absurdly obvious that question is. You seem to think one individual player can lead a team to the playoffs in baseball, which is impossible. You say Harper, Machado, and Trout aren’t historically great at propelling their teams to the playoffs, but you literally cannot blame that on them. You say to this argument they are ultimately failing at their goal, which is just blatantly ignorant. They help their teams win more games than a worse player would, which is the actual ultimate goal. Whether the rest of the team is good enough to make the playoffs is entirely irrelevant. You say the braves didn’t have many elite offensive performers, but they had freeman with a 135 wRC+, Acuna with 157 for half a season, Riley with 135, Soler with 132 since joining the team, and Rosario with 133 since joining the team. That’s much, much better than what Harper had around him with the Phillies this year, and astronomically better than anything trout has ever had around him. As for the rays, everybody knows they’ve been extremely reliant on pitching in recent years, so that’s a pretty terrible example.
At the end of the day, someone like Harper and the season he had will always be more valuable to any team, regardless if they make the playoffs, than someone like Duvall and the season he had. The braves could easily replace someone like Duvall with another league-average hitter if they wanted to, and wouldn’t notice a difference in the lineup. Duvall did have value this year with 2.4 fWAR, but it was basically all from defense, not offense.
-
@gixxerryder750 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
And which one went to the playoffs this year???
Are you legitimately trying to say Duvall is better than Harper?
-
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@killerpresence4 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@killerpresence4 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
I agree with that. It is definitely not the end all on great hitters. Trout for instance has never had more than 111 rbis. I certainly wouldn't say Duvall was better this year than Trout any year much less his best.
It's definitely a contextual stat. Certainly not meaningless but also not the ultimate barometer.
I also want to mention that wRC+ doesn't take into account situational stats. It’s a bulk stat metric. Duval was a significantly better hitter in situations which one would consider to be clutch situations such as at bats with runners in scoring position and runners on third with less than 2 outs and batting average in 2 out situations with runners on base. wRC+ only looks at the end numbers results so it bases it formula on his stats when his at bats have less meaning. I’ll take a guy who comes up clutch in the most meaningful moments in the game than the guy who goes 2-3 at the plate but flies out or strikes out with runners on and the game on the line.
You would have a very bad team if you’d willingly choose a guy with a 103 wRC+ over a guy with a 170 wRC+
The guy with a 170 wRC+ will always be more valuable to his team than an essentially league-average hitter, period.
Well we see where teams like the Padres, Phillies, Reds, Angels, and Blue Jays ended up with guys that had season that were considered to be 30-70% better than league average offensively. Like. I said there is a big difference between a guy that performs when it matters than someone who just fills the stat sheet and has a good season but goes home after the final game in September. I’m pretty sure the measure of a seasons success is not what an individual players does but what a team as a collective whole does. And that means going to the playoffs and hopefully coming home with the Championship in November. Bryce Harper, Manny Machado and Mike Trout are great individual players but are not great historically at propelling their teams to higher aspirations and this may or may not be through any fault of theirs but to this argument they are ultimately failing at the ultimate goal. Atlanta may not have many elite offensive performers (based on your argument of what is considered to be elite) but the sum is greater than the parts. Need we look any further than Tampa. One of the lowest payrolls in baseball. Their offensive metrics (not including this year as they have taken a significant step forward offensively this year) we’re league average at best but for some reason they perform at a much higher level overall. Both of these teams are cohesive and gel together on the field. They have great locker rooms and their franchises/organizations promote a winning atmosphere and the coaching/administration/scouting staffs hold themselves accountable when things go wrong. That is more important than any individual stat period.. Have a good day!!!
You keep trying to sound like you know what you’re talking about and that you’re making some profound point that no one else has ever thought of, but you don’t and you aren’t.
I can 100% guarantee that if you ask any GM in baseball if they’d rather have the guy with a 170 wRC+ or the guy with a 106 wRC+ that’s easily replaceable, they’ll laugh in your face because of how absurdly obvious that question is. You seem to think one individual player can lead a team to the playoffs in baseball, which is impossible. You say Harper, Machado, and Trout aren’t historically great at propelling their teams to the playoffs, but you literally cannot blame that on them. You say to this argument they are ultimately failing at their goal, which is just blatantly ignorant. They help their teams win more games than a worse player would, which is the actual ultimate goal. Whether the rest of the team is good enough to make the playoffs is entirely irrelevant. You say the braves didn’t have many elite offensive performers, but they had freeman with a 135 wRC+, Acuna with 157 for half a season, Riley with 135, Soler with 132 since joining the team, and Rosario with 133 since joining the team. That’s much, much better than what Harper had around him with the Phillies this year, and astronomically better than anything trout has ever had around him. As for the rays, everybody knows they’ve been extremely reliant on pitching in recent years, so that’s a pretty terrible example.
At the end of the day, someone like Harper and the season he had will always be more valuable to any team, regardless if they make the playoffs, than someone like Duvall and the season he had. The braves could easily replace someone like Duvall with another league-average hitter if they wanted to, and wouldn’t notice a difference in the lineup. Duvall did have value this year with 2.4 fWAR, but it was basically all from defense, not offense.
Kid I’m not going to sit here and have an argument about advanced offensive metrics with someone who can’t be reasoned with. Ordinary Joe’s don’t drive in 113 RBI’s in a season. Sorry it doesn’t happen!!! Period, full stop!!! For someone to drive in that many runs they not only have to have opportunity but they also have to perform. Adam Duval is a different animal with runners on then he is when there are no runners on. He proved it time after time after time after time. Getting lucky once or twice can be explained. What can’t be explained by your “advanced” metrics is why he performed so much better in the situation that actually mattered. This is something YOU haven’t answered either. All you’ve done is called me and several others names and screamed “advanced” stats this and “advanced” stats that. YOU still haven’t provided an explanation as to why your “advanced” stats penalize a guy like Duval while rewarding your stat stuffers. Based on your definition of a league average run producer Duval with his paltry .228 batting average should’ve driven in approximately 60-70 runs. But for some reason he drove in approximately 50 more RBI’s than someone who is batting .230 should have driven in. So please spare me the bs about who is more valuable based on a stat that doesn’t take into account situational hitting. By the way, your stat sweetheart Bryce Harper was held hitless in the most important series of his season. Not only was he held hitless he was also only issued 2 walks and he struck out in 7 of the 12 plate appearances. Do I need to tell you what Adam Duval did in that same series? The answer won’t help your argument. Have a good day acting like a homer chump.
-
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@gixxerryder750 said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@jogger171717_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
@ericulous1_psn said in No 99 August Tatis Collection reward:
Ugh, I can't stand when people say RBIs are meaningless. If they were meaningless then why are the top players in RBIs 5 of in history 5 of the best players in history? Advanced stats are obviously valuable and I'm not arguing that rbis carry more weight. I actually agree that Machado was good not great this year. But the Padres had an awful offense this year compared to last and Machado was a bright spot. Yes, RBIs require good obp from the guys in front but to dismiss the process of successfully hitting with guys on base is fairly off center.
Good hitters are generally going to have higher RBI totals. That’s just natural. There’s a lot of amazing hitters that end up with much lower rbi totals than worse hitters though, due to no fault of said amazing hitter.
For instance, Harper had the highest wRC+ in baseball this year at 170. He only had 84 RBI though. Adam Duvall had a 103 wRC+ this year, meaning he was just barely above league-average. He had 113 RBI.
There’s nothing wrong with mentioning a guys RBI total along with other stats, but it should never be used as the justification for a hitter being good or not.
And which one went to the playoffs this year???
Hmm wow you’re saying the all-around better team went to the playoffs, while the worse team didn’t? It’s almost like even the best player in baseball will never get his team to the playoffs without good teammates around him. Insinuating that someone like Duvall was even marginally close to Harper this year based on one being in the playoffs and the other not would be the biggest meathead take I’ve ever seen.
Have taken into consideration that those player are the reason why their teams haven’t gotten to the playoffs. Their bloated contracts might possibly be hampering their teams from being able to put a playoff caliber lineup on the field. Have you even considered that possibility?
