Jackson Merrill
-
@BiigD008_XBL Don’t blame you at all for voting for a guy from your team and most probably aren’t aware of that accomplishment. I think his seasons award card was a 93.
-
Soler will win
-
@Ericulous1_PSN said in Jackson Merrill:
Agreed completely. Maybe he’ll get the Season award this week. He is on fire and honest I’m sure I’ll get ridiculed for this but he is the rookie of the year not Skenes.
Yes Skenes is a bigger star and story. And yes he is phenomenal. He’s also pitched 15 games.
Merrill has played all season and is clutch AF
Merrill's 2024 WAR: 3.0
Skenes 2024 WAR: 3.8 -
@SaveFarris_PSN And that’s why it won’t happen. Voting has devolved into a catch all stat. No context necessary.
-
Merrill's season awards card rakes. Can't wait until the 99 comes out.
-
Merrill walked off the game with a diving catch.
Come on, this kid is having some summer.
-
I’m not disagreeing. Paul Skenes is the reason the Pirates are watchable this year and is absolutely electric. It just feels weird to give an award to a guy who has played in like 10% of his team’s games. But that is the crux of a starting pitcher vs position player argument.
-
I want the better Skenes 99. But that doesn't mean that Merrill can't get one another way.
-
@Ericulous1_PSN said in Jackson Merrill:
It just feels weird to give an award to a guy who has played in like 10% of his team’s games. But that is the crux of a starting pitcher vs position player argument.
If the argument of "who is more valuable, the starting pitcher who goes once every 5 days or the everyday player?", 99% of the time the every day player is going to win that argument.
If you look at career WAR, only 2 of the Top 10 are pitchers and only 6 of the Top 20. In the 2024 rankings, only 2 of the Top 10 are pitchers (3 if you include Ohtani, but...)
So yeah, it's very very rare for a pitcher to be more valuable than a position player.
Skenes is that rare...
-
Another game winning hit from the rookie.
-
@GoozeFn_PSN said in Jackson Merrill:
@SaveFarris_PSN And that’s why it won’t happen. Voting has devolved into a catch all stat. No context necessary.
It's not that simple
War numbers
Masyn Winn - 3.9
Paul Skenes - 4.0
Jackson Merrill - 3.4Winn will get some votes for ROY but if it was only based on stats like WAR then he would come in above Merrill in the voting which won't happen. Merrill gets almost all of his war from Offense, Winn is a little more balanced between offense and defense and Skenes obviously gets his from pitching. Is it fair that Winn will get discounted because his more of his WAR total comes from his Defense than Merrill's. Probably not but it is what it is.
I have nothing against Merrill and if SDS wants to give him a 99 card for his achievements then I have no problem with that.
But they all have valid claims of being a deserving ROY, however the voting may go.
-
@Dolenz_PSN Good points. I just fundamentally have issues with WAR and think there too big an emphasis on it.
-
Definitely. All the new metrics have their place but there's something to be said for the basics too. It's really disappointing when a guy hits over .300 one year and is out of the league the next because of underlying metrics. You can't convince me that he doesn't have more value than rotating through multiple players hitting .215 or some such.
-
As much as I think some advanced stats have a place...way too much importance is placed on most of them. It used to be "see the ball, hit the ball", now advanced stats have turned it into "How well can he see the ball in day games in August when the temp is below 85 degrees when facing a lefty from Venezuela who's FB is 98 mph?"
BA(all three of overall, vs Lefties, and vs Righties), OBP, RBI, H, RISP, BARO(average with runners on) and SLG should really be the ones that carry the most weight for hitters. Pitchers I give a little more leeway with regarding advanced stats...but ERA, Runners/9, Flyball rate, WHIP, K/9, BA Against, and WAR should be heaviest for pitchers...but that's just my opinion
-
I say take rbi out of the equation. It's too reliant on outside factors. Are other players getting on base before you? Do you bat 1st or 4th.
Hits. Do you get a ton of walks? Then your hit total is affected. Even Average is not always a great indicator. Is a player who hits .330 but mainly hits singles more valuable than a player who hits .280 but cranks out 30 or 40 Hrs?
The BARO you mentioned seemed like a better metric
-
@Dolenz64_XBL A better way to do it could be average with runners in scoring position. That way it doesn’t matter where they hit in the order or how often they get those opportunities.
-
@GoozeFn_PSN said in Jackson Merrill:
@Dolenz64_XBL A better way to do it could be average with runners in scoring
This is gonna come across more d1ckish than intended, but that's exactly what RISP is, average with Runners In Scoring Position
-
@Dolenz64_XBL said in Jackson Merrill:
Hits. Do you get a ton of walks? Then your hit total is affected. Even Average is not always a great indicator. Is a player who hits .330 but mainly hits singles more valuable than a player who hits .280 but cranks out 30 or 40 Hrs?
But to be fair, isn't that the job of guys hitting at the top of the lineup? Get on base for the boppers coming in behind them? That's where I suppose Runs scored would be a better metric for leadoff guys. Maybe OBP and Runs, and Average. If he's hitting mainly singles but getting knocked in by the .280 guy hitting 40 HR, he's creating runs by being on base
The BARO you mentioned seemed like a better metric
I'm not even sure it's a real one to be honest, it's one I know I tracked with my hardball team last year, we nicknamed it the "clutch average"
-
@Sarge1387_PSN I wasn’t responding to you and I was suggesting clutch being avg with runners in scoring position rather than RBI, so yeah it does come off that way.
-
@GoozeFn_PSN said in Jackson Merrill:
@Sarge1387_PSN I wasn’t responding to you and I was suggesting clutch being avg with runners in scoring position rather than RBI, so yeah it does come off that way.
It wasn't intentional. Your comment also came across like you had no [censored] clue what you were talking about, so my reply was intended to be educating. Apologies for that.
