Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

jimmer

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10,027

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by jimmer

  1. jimmer
    The RBI stat itself, by itself, doesn't tell you how a guy hit with men on base. In fact, if there's a guy at 1B, and the batter gets a hit and and that guy on 1B doesn't score, there is no RBI. The guy on 1B falls under the 'men on base' category, but the batter didn't get an RBI. So how does RBI measure how well that guy hit with men on when he got no RBI? BA/OBP/SLG% with RISP measures how well someone with with RISP. You can get an RBI while grounding out to 2B, he didn't hit well with RISP, but he got one.
  2. jimmer
    I went out of my way to say it was a severe short sample size, and he beat the shift on the hit, which he should get some credit for. Again, I don't overly care about the RBI stat (actually, practically not at all), my post was talking about how he performed in those situations (men on and men is scoring position) in regards to OPS relative to the league. RBI isn't part of OPS, so knock him for getting 3 RBI, fine, but that's more a shot on overvaluing the RBI as a way to evaluate a player than anything else, not a shot in how he performed with men on or men with RISP.
  3. jimmer
    Mauer's got an sOPS+ (which is OPS + relative to the league) of 158 with men on (and 175 with RISP which might be more applicable since we are talking about RBI). Remember league average is 100. So, while I'd disagree with the idea that Mauer has only been a bit better with men on, I'd agree with the part that it can't last because it's so high. And we need to remember, severe short sample size. It's only 52 PAs.
  4. jimmer
    And this is why I like wRC+ more than traditional stats. Gives us a better picture of how many runs the player created with his offensive contributions, not just HR and RBI. And I will go back to this scenario, which comes up quite a bit. Guy gets a walk, the next guy gets a single to RF and the guy goes from 1st to 3rd. The next guy creates an out by hitting the ball just deep enough to score the guy on 3B. The guy on first gets a run scored, the guy who flew out gets an RBI, and the guy who put the runner at 3B where he would be able to score on a SAC fly gets no credit, at all, in traditional stat line in regards to that guy scoring, yet he was vital to the guy scoring.
  5. jimmer
    Brock, I get what you're saying and I'm just enjoying the conversation. BTW, for his career, Mauer's OPS is 20% better than his normal OPS with a .362 BABIP.
  6. jimmer
    all I'm saying is this, and I probably wasn't clear, just because a league does a bit better as whole in RISP doesn't mean 'almost every batter does better with RISP'. Some do way better, which skews the numbers, some do slightly worse or way worse, etc. I think what's mostly been determined is that over the course of a long career, hitters will bat close to their career overall numbers norms, whether it's with RISP or not. So the great hitters will hit great with RISP and the bad hitters won't.
  7. jimmer
    And even so, how many do better than Joe has done over the course of a career so long? Because that's truly the main point in regards to this thread when talking about how he's all of a sudden become and RBI guy this year or clutch this year.
  8. jimmer
    The year is early, some players do so much better that it skews the averages But to say almost every batter does better with RISP for a few months and then can maintain that kind of much better numbers over a long career is a different thing, IMO.
  9. jimmer
    Please read this http://stats.seandolinar.com/risp/ in the wrap-up the writer says: ' I don’t exactly have an explanation, but it appears that there are more MLBers that bat worse with RISP than overall. My one thought is that pitchers are pitching more cautiously or that fresh relief pitchers are more likely to come into the game when there’s a runner in scoring position.'
  10. jimmer
    Do you have supporting evidence to support that theory? Please read this http://stats.seandolinar.com/risp/ in the wrap-up the writer says: ' I don’t exactly have an explanation, but it appears that there are more MLBers that bat worse with RISP than overall. My one thought is that pitchers are pitching more cautiously or that fresh relief pitchers are more likely to come into the game when there’s a runner in scoring position.' In any event, how many have players have numbers that are that good over the course of a career that long. Even if the theory is correct, which I've never heard until now, they'd still need to be a better line than Mauer's numbers with RISP, on average, to show he hasn't been very good in those situations.
  11. jimmer
    For his career, does he take a lot of walks in those situations because some pitchers/teams would rather not give him anything decent to hit in those situations (especially if it's in a critical situation). because he does so well in those situations (and because he's such a good hitter, period)? Notice 1/3 of the walks he has in those situations are intentional walks? I wonder how many more are because they nibble around and say, 'well, if I can get him to swing at something bad and get weak contact or a strikeout, that's fine, but If not putting him on base isn't as bad as the alternative?' If I was someone who thought the RBI stat was a good way to judge a hitter, I would be pretty happy with the amount Mauer has right now, but he's been below average at creating runs this season, so overall, his overall offensive performance has been bad, which hurts me to say.
  12. jimmer
    For his career, Mauer bats .333/.457/.480 with RISP. Those numbers are better than his career slashline in every category. Yes, this year his numbers with RISP are even better, but it's not like he's always been a slacker in RBI situations. RBI is a stat this is dependent on opportunities. Dependent on other players getting into scoring position. His clutch numbers are also very good across the board for his career, for those who talk about how clutch he has or hasn't been in his career. http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=mauerjo01&year=Career&t=b
  13. jimmer
    totally my fault.
  14. jimmer
    Forgive my not so clear post. I was talking about the treatment Plouffe has been given by what seems to be a good chunk of the fanbase. I know when you credited Bruno it was in regards to Dozier and not Plouffe and I can see how one might come to the conclusion Bruno deserves a lot of credit. It also could have been Dozier adjusted to the majors and started feeling more comfortable and the results came with hard work. What I like to call, the adjustment period most prospects need.
  15. jimmer
    Have you noticed how often people credit his offensive improvements to Bruno and his defensive improvements to Molitor. While good coaching is always a good thing, the player has to do the work, be receptive to the suggestions, and then implement the suggestions (which may often conflict with differing suggestion he may have received from previous coaches). It's mostly about what the player does when it comes to his performance. Thing is, Plouffe was a whipping boy for so long (and still is for some) that some are reluctant to give him the actual credit for becoming a pretty good ballplayer. BTW, I'm not saying you're doing this, just an overall observation.
  16. jimmer
    I was always high on Dozier and disliked the Plouffe drafting right away. He has turned out good, and I'm happy about that and am a backer of his, but for a first round pick, he took a long time. Again, I think this would have come sooner if the evalaution of his abilities was better in the farm system.
  17. jimmer
    Maybe it was Bruno, but I was speaking more to the defense. He was a guy who they wanted to play shortstop who didn't seem to be able to handle it and he went to another position and has gotten better and better.
  18. jimmer
    Would you say Dozier is doing the same thing?
  19. jimmer
    There are many issues with the eye test. -Fan bias. -Game sample size. Meaning how many games does the average fan watch? How many of them watch games when one of their teams isn't playing? How often do they do that? -The idea that most fans don't watch each game with the sole purpose of evaluating the defensive abilities of each player on the field to compare to the other players in the game at the same position. -no standard evaluation system. -different standards altogether. (example range more important or errors more important?) -not comparing a player's defensive abilities to other players across the league but rather to players on their own team from the recent past. (like two Detroit reporters did when they voted in MVP ballot a few years back. And the list goes on. To show how this relates to the topic of the thread, this guy, with whatever agenda he has against Plouffe, is using an eye test (or so he says) to make his evaluation. And when that's all one has to do, sometimes wacky opinions come out.
  20. jimmer
    We will agree to disagree.
  21. jimmer
    That could apply to a lot of different debates on a plethora of topics, some discussed on these threads. Yet the debates rage on.
  22. jimmer
    Yes, hey may have told you that. And I may agree with you, but that's not to say there aren't a huge number more who may agree with the politician and see his point of view as valid. We see this all over the world with 1000s of examples. You have people who believe that there is no God and even more who do believe in some form of a deity. And while I believe one side has a huge amount of data to support their view, it doesn't matter to those who disagree Now, I know, that's a faith issue, but it is also an opinion issue.
  23. jimmer
    Well, I haven't seen that polling data , not that I disagree that's how it would turn out :-) I think he's as wrong as can be, but when eye test is used as a valid tool for judging defense with nothing to back it up, this is what happens. And he can counter with popular opinion isn't always right, your eyes aren't better than mine, I'm better at evaluation than the 50 of you, etc. I, personally, believe not everything is a matter of opinion, some things are just plain true or not true. But eye tests are opinions, and when that's all that used without being supported other-wise (for whatever reason one might have for not trying to support their opinion), there is no right or wrong.
  24. jimmer
    His eye test is telling him one thing, while other people's eye tests are telling them a different thing. Who is to say which one is right and wrong? I could come out and say Arcia is an above average defensive player based on my eye test, use nothing to back it up, and it'd be a completely valid. Who is to say I'm wrong? I, personally, disagree with Tom in regards to Plouffe and think Plouffe's defense has improved a lot over the last couple years to the point where he's a top 10 defensive 3B.
  25. jimmer
    Yes, the meaning of your post was very clear.
×
×
  • Create New...