Next on the list Chad Paronto

[pravata]

32 year old free agent righthander signed a one-year deal worth $500,000 plus incentives.

Link

[Noe]

32 year old free agent righthander signed a one-year deal worth $500,000 plus incentives.

Link

He was very good reliever in Cleveland a very long time ago.

[Jacksonian]

He was very good reliever in Cleveland a very long time ago.

5 years ago, but in just 35 innings.

His numbers with Atlanta last year look good, except for the 19BB/14K.  I don't know how well he actually threw though.

More depth for the bully.

[Froback]

He was very good reliever in Cleveland a very long time ago.

He was pretty decent the last couple of years in Atl too.  But he only had 35 App in Cle back in 02 (mostly) and 03.  But in Atl.

06: 65 games, 56.2 IP and 3.18 ERA
07: 41 games, 40.1 IP and 3.57 ERA

Not exactly a big IP type guy though, so not sure what slot he takes in the bullpen.  And if not the ML roster, seems like a pretty good bullpen type to settle for a minor league contract...  just curious I guess.

[coop]

 And if not the ML roster, seems like a pretty good bullpen type to settle for a minor league contract...  just curious I guess.

Based on the article in the link, I believe it was a Major League contract ($500k + incentives) that he signed.

[pravata]

"Chad provides us with another experienced bullpen arm to put into our mix," said Wade. "We believe that the off-season additions combined with the returning relievers give us a solid relief corps, something winning teams need."

The Astros 40-man roster now stands at 35 players.
Link

Wade is hoping to get 5 innings from the starters 4 out of 5 days and turn the game over to the bullpen with 6 or 7 runs on the board.

[SaltyParker]

5 years ago, but in just 35 innings.

His numbers with Atlanta last year look good, except for the 19BB/14K.  I don't know how well he actually threw though.

More depth for the bully.

Look how his K's fell off from 06 to 07 
06 41Ks 56 IP
07 14Ks 40 IP

[MusicMan]

Wade is hoping to get 5 innings from the starters 4 out of 5 days and turn the game over to the bullpen with 6 or 7 runs on the board.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but that's a far cry from "pitching and defense".

If this is the route they wanted to take, why trade for Bourn?  Why not send Lidge for a power bat in RF if you think Scott can't hold the every day job?

[Jacksonian]

I'm not disagreeing with you, but that's a far cry from "pitching and defense".

If this is the route they wanted to take, why trade for Bourn?  Why not send Lidge for a power bat in RF if you think Scott can't hold the every day job?

Am I the only one who thinks Tal couldn't talk Drayton out of Tejada?

[BUWebguy]

Somebody here (I think) early on identified Wade as a "bullpen tinkerer." Whoever that was, they were dead on.

Jacksonian - that makes an awful lot of sense.

[Bench]

Am I the only one who thinks Tal couldn't talk Drayton out of Tejada?

Not at all.

[pravata]

I'm not disagreeing with you, but that's a far cry from "pitching and defense".

If this is the route they wanted to take, why trade for Bourn?  Why not send Lidge for a power bat in RF if you think Scott can't hold the every day job?

I agree.  At least Purpura waited a month into the season to abandon his plan.

[MusicMan]

Am I the only one who thinks Tal couldn't talk Drayton out of Tejada?

All he had was to say was, "it is 99.99% certain that Miguel's name will be in the Mitchell Report."

[Noe]

All he had was to say was, "it is 99.99% certain that Miguel's name will be in the Mitchell Report."

McLane: "So is that good or bad?"

[Jacksonian]

All he had was to say was, "it is 99.99% certain that Miguel's name will be in the Mitchell Report."

While Gardner is whispering in McLane's ear, "It won't matter to the fans when he's hitting the cover off the ball.  They'll all be standing and cheering."

[Froback]

While Gardner is whispering in McLane's ear, "It won't matter to the fans when he's hitting the cover off the ball.  They'll all be standing and cheering."

I almost want to hit you up side the head for putting those kind of thoughts in my head, but then I realize how close to true that might be!

And 5IP from your starters would be horrible!  I don't care how good a Bullpen you have in April, if you only get that, your bullpen will be toast by the end of July!

[Lurch]

While Gardner is whispering in McLane's ear, "It won't matter to the fans when he's hitting the cover off the ball.  They'll all be standing and cheering."

I feel dirty.

[Noe]

I almost want to hit you up side the head for putting those kind of thoughts in my head, but then I realize how close to true that might be!

And 5IP from your starters would be horrible!  I don't care how good a Bullpen you have in April, if you only get that, your bullpen will be toast by the end of July!

"Oh really!?!?" - Trader Jack McKeon, circa 1999

[DVauthrin]

I'm not disagreeing with you, but that's a far cry from "pitching and defense".

If this is the route they wanted to take, why trade for Bourn?  Why not send Lidge for a power bat in RF if you think Scott can't hold the every day job?

because a power bat in RF doesn't solve the top of the lineup issues.   bourn was acquired because they needed a CF and someone who could bat leadoff.

[VirtualBob]

because a power bat in RF doesn't solve the top of the lineup issues.   bourn was acquired because they needed a CF and someone who could bat leadoff.

Deja post all over again.

[Jacksonian]

because a power bat in RF doesn't solve the top of the lineup issues.   bourn was acquired because they needed a CF and someone who could bat leadoff.

Pence, Matsui, Tejada, Berkman, Lee, Power RF, Wigginton, Towles, P  would add even more offense.  Why not if you're going to downgrade starting pitching to the level MM addressed?  Then when its 12-10 in the 9th inning put in your defensive replacements.

[DVauthrin]

I agree.  At least Purpura waited a month into the season to abandon his plan.

Who said the plan was abandoned?   Matsui is an elite defender at 2b, Bourn has gold glove ability in CF, and you added a lot more range in RF.    That is why they could afford to make the shift at SS.   If Tejada can just be league average at the position, then they got what they wanted.

Also in other news:  It's likely Tejada won't be suspended for his HGH use.  Only cases after 2003 are in jeopardy according to ESPN.   http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3159943

[DVauthrin]

Pence, Matsui, Tejada, Berkman, Lee, Power RF, Wigginton, Towles, P  would add even more offense.  Why not if you're going to downgrade starting pitching to the level MM addressed?  Then when its 12-10 in the 9th inning put in your defensive replacements.

Pence is not a leadoff hitter, neither is matsui.   They don't work counts as is necessary to perform said duties.  Not to mention your defense up the middle is still way above average with bourn.  With this lineup you propose it would be near the bottom in baseball.  The astros pitching would get killed because of it and relying on only offense to win games is a foolish proposition.

With the addition of tejada, matsui and bourn, you added plenty of offense while still improving the defense over last year.

[otterjb]

honest question:

Which is better defensively?

Pence/Everett/Biggio/Scott

or

Bourn/Tejada/Matsui/Pence

[MusicMan]

honest question:

Which is better defensively?

Pence/Everett/Biggio/Scott

or

Bourn/Tejada/Matsui/Pence

IF Bourn and Matsui are as advertised, then the latter.  But I have very real concerns about teams running on Pence in RF.

[Froback]

honest question:

Which is better defensively?

Pence/Everett/Biggio/Scott

or

Bourn/Tejada/Matsui/Pence

Pence->Bourn : Significant upgrade
Everett->Tejada: Significant downgrade (pre injury Everett, recent Tejada)
Biggio->Matsui: Significant upgrade
Scott->Pence: about the same, maybe sight down-grade

Given how important SS is defensively it is probably a slight to moderate upgrade overall, but the loss at SS is probably the biggest change, but the gain in CF is probably closer than people might think.

[DVauthrin]

Pence->Bourn : Significant upgrade
Everett->Tejada: Significant downgrade (pre injury Everett, recent Tejada)
Biggio->Matsui: Significant upgrade
Scott->Pence: about the same, maybe sight down-grade

Given how important SS is defensively it is probably a slight to moderate upgrade overall, but the loss at SS is probably the biggest change, but the gain in CF is probably closer than people might think.

While pence has a weaker arm than Scott, I think he still ends up better in RF than Scott because he can cover more ground.   

[DVauthrin]

IF Bourn and Matsui are as advertised, then the latter.  But I have very real concerns about teams running on Pence in RF.

Those concerns are valid, but it's not like Luke Scott did much to stop the running game either.

[Noe]

Those concerns are valid, but it's not like Luke Scott did much to stop the running game either.

True enough and also, the truth is anywhere on the field where Pence is playing... teams will run on his arm.  That is usually when you start to talk 1st baseman or DH for a player.... but I digress.  What Pence needs to do desperately better than he did last year is hit the cut off man correctly.  He rarely gave Mark Loretta or Biggio a chance to help him by tossing the ball well over their heads or about ten feet to either side of them.

Classic case of missing the cut-off man... I mean *really* missing the cut-off man.  He has only one cut-off man to concern himself with now as a right fielder: Kaz Matsui.  CF offers so much more to concern yourself with for Pence, I'm actually glad he's got less to think about and more of chance to help with his defense now in right field.  Still not the best option in right, but it's better than Pence being in CF.

That last statement is not really a good reason to say he's going to do well in right.  In fact, it says just the opposite.

[DVauthrin]

True enough and also, the truth is anywhere on the field where Pence is playing... teams will run on his arm.  That is usually when you start to talk 1st baseman or DH for a player.... but I digress.  What Pence needs to do desperately better than he did last year is hit the cut off man correctly.  He rarely gave Mark Loretta or Biggio a chance to help him by tossing the ball well over their heads or about ten feet to either side of them.

Classic case of missing the cut-off man... I mean *really* missing the cut-off man.  He has only one cut-off man to concern himself with now as a right fielder: Kaz Matsui.  CF offers so much more to concern yourself with for Pence, I'm actually glad he's got less to think about and more of chance to help with his defense now in right field.  Still not the best option in right, but it's better than Pence being in CF.

That last statement is not really a good reason to say he's going to do well in right.  In fact, it says just the opposite.

I'm not suggesting he will contend for any GG's anytime soon.   I just think if I had to choose between scott and pence in RF, i'd lean slightly towards pence because his speed lets him cover more space.   If he was decent at throwing a baseball, i'd easily rather have Pence there, but he isn't so I digress.

And by no means do I think pence in RF is his best position(he's better suited for LF/1B).   I would hope that he could learn how to hit the 2b on a cutoff in one offseason.  That's not that hard of a skill for a big leaguer.

[Arky Vaughan]

I wonder how much the difference between a strong arm, an average arm and a poor arm in right makes in terms of extra bases surrendered. Is it 10 runners a year, 25 runners a year or 50 runners a year?

[pravata]

Who said the plan was abandoned?   Matsui is an elite defender at 2b, Bourn has gold glove ability in CF, and you added a lot more range in RF.    That is why they could afford to make the shift at SS.   If Tejada can just be league average at the position, then they got what they wanted.

Also in other news:  It's likely Tejada won't be suspended for his HGH use.  Only cases after 2003 are in jeopardy according to ESPN.   http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3159943

I say the plan was abandoned.  Pitching, defense, speed.  Who have they added to the pitching?  They put Tejada in at short only because he hits better than Everett.  I dont think we can argue that.  They thought it was the better thing to do.  But lets not pretend it was anything other than improvising.  They ran into a road block with the pitching and they changed course. 

[DVauthrin]

I say the plan was abandoned.  Pitching, defense, speed.  Who have they added to the pitching?  They put Tejada in at short only because he hits better than Everett.  I dont think we can argue that.  They thought it was the better thing to do.  But lets not pretend it was anything other than improvising.  They ran into a road block with the pitching and they changed course. 

Fair enough, I see your point.   I think they accomplished the defense part if bourn is as good as advertised, even with the switch at short.   Bourn/matsui covered the need for speed so losing everett was tolerable in that regard.   So i'd say everything was accomplished other than the needs in the rotation.

[Arky Vaughan]

For the three seasons 1998-2000, Major League right fielders held runners to taking an extra base about 48% of the time. In other words, when runners were on first or second and a single was hit or on first and a double was hit, 48% is about how often they took the extra base.

The best right fielders over that span were Raul Mondesi (36.3%), Bobby Abreu (36.8%), Manny Ramirez (41.4%), Jose Guillen (43.9%) and Vladimir Guerrero (44.0%). The worst was Matt Stairs (56.4%).

The right fielder with the highest number of opportunities to stop/allow extra bases in 2000 was Jeromy Burnitz, who faced 157 such opportunities. A few other right fielders faced over 100 such opportunities.

In any event, if you take the difference between the best (Mondesi) and worst (Stairs) on the list (56.4% - 36.3%) and multiply by 157 opportunities, you get a difference of about 32 extra bases. If you compare Stairs to the average (48% - 36.3%) and multiply by 157 opportunities, you get a difference of about 18 extra bases.

So that should give some idea of the order of magnitude, at least for that season. The league's worst-throwing right fielder allowed about 32 more extra bases than the league's best, and about 18 more extra bases than the league average, given an equally high number of opportunities.

I wouldn't be particularly pleased with Pence allowing 18 extra bases more than the league average, or 32 extra bases more than the league best, in 2008, but I'm not sure those figures are catastrophic, either.

[Arky Vaughan]

Fair enough, I see your point.   I think they accomplished the defense part if bourn is as good as advertised, even with the switch at short.   Bourn/matsui covered the need for speed so losing everett was tolerable in that regard.   So i'd say everything was accomplished other than the needs in the rotation.

It could also be that the change in plan was necessitated both by the dearth of reasonably priced available pitching as well as uncertainty about weather Everett post-injury could hold up his end of the bargain in the field.

[Twoniner]

Paronto doesn't look like too bad of an addition.

[Burzmali]

Pence, Matsui, Tejada, Berkman, Lee, Power RF, Wigginton, Towles, P  would add even more offense.  Why not if you're going to downgrade starting pitching to the level MM addressed?  Then when its 12-10 in the 9th inning put in your defensive replacements.

Or Loretta, Berkman, Pence, Lee, Scott, Tejada, Lamb, P, Towles.  Platoon Lamb/Wigginton, and Scott/righty. BEAST lineup.

[JackAstro]

Or Loretta, Berkman, Pence, Lee, Scott, Tejada, Lamb, P, Towles.  Platoon Lamb/Wigginton, and Scott/righty. BEAST lineup.

Oh my God. Are you really following up Berkman batting 2nd with the suggestion that Loretta should lead off? And is that the pitcher batting 8th, Tony?

[Burzmali]

Oh my God. Are you really following up Berkman batting 2nd with the suggestion that Loretta should lead off? And is that the pitcher batting 8th, Tony?

The best balanced hitter should hit 2nd, but you gotta move the pitcher to 8 to keep 2 slots between the worst and best hitters. And Lo has to hit leadoff, everybody else has too much power.

I'm too tired (and lazy) right now to run the numbers but I bet that lineup would score 900 runs easy.

[JackAstro]

The best balanced hitter should hit 2nd, but you gotta move the pitcher to 8 to keep 2 slots between the worst and best hitters. And Lo has to hit leadoff, everybody else has too much power.

I'm too tired (and lazy) right now to run the numbers but I bet that lineup would score 900 runs easy.

Congratulations, I'm speechless. When you perk up, be a dear and run the numbers so we can all know how next season turns out.

[MikeyBoy]

Or Loretta, Berkman, Pence, Lee, Scott, Tejada, Lamb, P, Towles.  Platoon Lamb/Wigginton, and Scott/righty. BEAST lineup.

I hate to take a shit on your innovative idea, but Scott was traded away last week. Back to the drawing board. I can't wait to see what's next.

[Noe]

I hate to take a shit on your innovative idea, but Scott was traded away last week. Back to the drawing board. I can't wait to see what's next.

I didn't have the heart to tell him Scott was traded.  Wait until he finds out his other love, Burke, was traded *this* week.

[Limey]

And 5IP from your starters would be horrible!  I don't care how good a Bullpen you have in April, if you only get that, your bullpen will be toast by the end of July!

See thousand, two.

[Bench]

I didn't have the heart to tell him Scott was traded.  Wait until he finds out his other love, Burke, was traded *this* week.

He's got Lamb in there as well, but no Bourn. Sometimes I wish I too could have a total break from reality. I sure could use it.

[Noe]

He's got Lamb in there as well, but no Bourn. Sometimes I wish I too could have a total break from reality. I sure could use it.

If there is a break from reality to be had here, I say go all the way and quit pussy-footing around:

1. Ricky Henderson LF
2. Nap Lajole 2nd
3. Babe Ruth 3rd base (I don't care about defense)
4. Lou Gehrig 1st base
5. Ted Williams RF
6. Stan Musial CF (did I say I didn't care about defense?)
7. Johnny Bench C
8. Honus Wagner SS

Rotation:

1. Walter Johnson
2. Tom Seaver
3. Nolan Ryan
4. Roger Clemens
5. Steve Carlton

Of course, the reality is, I'd lose a ton of ball games because most of these guys are dead or retired and thus probably couldn't hit or run or throw worth a lick. 

[Andyzipp]

If there is a break from reality to be had here, I say go all the way and quit pussy-footing around:

1. Ricky Henderson LF
2. Nap Lajole 2nd
3. Babe Ruth 3rd base (I don't care about defense)
4. Lou Gehrig 1st base
5. Ted Williams RF
6. Stan Musial CF (did I say I didn't care about defense?)
7. Johnny Bench C
8. Honus Wagner SS

Rotation:

1. Walter Johnson
2. Tom Seaver
3. Nolan Ryan
4. Roger Clemens
5. Steve Carlton

Of course, the reality is, I'd lose a ton of ball games because most of these guys are dead or retired and thus probably couldn't hit or run or throw worth a lick. 

Morgan was better than Lajole.  Just ask him.

[kevwun]

You should have put Joe D in center.  Think of all the crowd shots we'd get of Marilyn Monroe.

[Burzmali]

I hate to take a shit on your innovative idea, but Scott was traded away last week. Back to the drawing board. I can't wait to see what's next.

I wasn't at the drawing board, I was just taking somebody's (Jacksonian's ?) post to the next level. If the Astros wanted to take the offense to the limit, that would be how I think it would be as dominant as possible.

[Bench]

I wasn't at the drawing board, I was just taking somebody's (Jacksonian's ?) post to the next level.

Next time stick to shrooming.

[jaklewein]

He was pretty decent the last couple of years in Atl too.  But he only had 35 App in Cle back in 02 (mostly) and 03.  But in Atl.

06: 65 games, 56.2 IP and 3.18 ERA
07: 41 games, 40.1 IP and 3.57 ERA

Not exactly a big IP type guy though, so not sure what slot he takes in the bullpen.  And if not the ML roster, seems like a pretty good bullpen type to settle for a minor league contract...  just curious I guess.

I checked around...Basically, Paronto was Atlanta's answer to Brian Moehler, minus the occasional multi-inning appearence. 

[mihoba]

I wasn't at the drawing board, I was just taking somebody's (Jacksonian's ?) post to the next level. If the Astros wanted to take the offense to the limit, that would be how I think it would be as dominant as possible.

Congrats, that is one of the most ridiculous lineups I've ever seen.

Lets see, Scott was used as a trading chip to acquire Tejada, but you have them batting 5-6. Loretta at leadoff is a wonderful idea, let's clog the bases with cement feet right off the bat. And Berkman in the 2 hole...

Quit Bogarting the peyote.

[Froback]

I checked around...Basically, Paronto was Atlanta's answer to Brian Moehler, minus the occasional multi-inning appearence. 

With his numbers it had me wondering "Is he a righty specialist?"  Seems like his numbers are very similar to the lefty in the pen that is used only to get 1 (or 2) lefties out and then taken out for the first Righty to come to bat.

[jaklewein]

With his numbers it had me wondering "Is he a righty specialist?"  Seems like his numbers are very similar to the lefty in the pen that is used only to get 1 (or 2) lefties out and then taken out for the first Righty to come to bat.

Also, keep in mind that he was also released or sent to the minors (can't remember which) in the latter part of the year.

[Froback]

Also, keep in mind that he was also released or sent to the minors (can't remember which) in the latter part of the year.

I was referring more to the less IP than appearances.

[jaklewein]

I was referring more to the less IP than appearances.

Oh, good point.

[Burzmali]

Congrats, that is one of the most ridiculous lineups I've ever seen.

Lets see, Scott was used as a trading chip to acquire Tejada, but you have them batting 5-6. Loretta at leadoff is a wonderful idea, let's clog the bases with cement feet right off the bat. And Berkman in the 2 hole...

Quit Bogarting the peyote.

I think Lidge could have gotten Tejada done in Scott's place, if it came to that. I don't really care about clogging the bases, that lineup would score many more runs than this one with a fast guy at the top.

But who cares, this one is still very good for the NL.

[subnuclear]

I think Lidge could have gotten Tejada done in Scott's place, if it came to that. I don't really care about clogging the bases, that lineup would score many more runs than this one with a fast guy at the top.

But who cares, this one is still very good for the NL.

You do realize player's OBP and SLG depend on who hits in front of them and behind them?  You can't just move them around and assume that the numbers will be the same.  It seems like this is an important piece of information you are missing.

[Noe]

I think...

Why?

[Noe]

You do realize player's OBP and SLG depend on who hits in front of them and behind them?  You can't just move them around and assume that the numbers will be the same.  It seems like this is an important piece of information you are missing.

Eggszactly, the context of *lineup construction*.

[JackAstro]

You do realize player's OBP and SLG depend on who hits in front of them and behind them?  You can't just move them around and assume that the numbers will be the same.  It seems like this is an important piece of information you are missing.

Incorrect. You just sort your lineup by career OBP. It really is that simple.

[Burzmali]

You do realize player's OBP and SLG depend on who hits in front of them and behind them?  You can't just move them around and assume that the numbers will be the same.  It seems like this is an important piece of information you are missing.

No doubt. But OBP and SLG are demonstrative of skill, agreed?

Who specifically are you suggesting might suffer in the lineup I mentioned.

[Reuben]

No doubt. But OBP and SLG are demonstrative of skill, agreed?

Who specifically are you suggesting might suffer in the lineup I mentioned.

I might suffer trying to watch it.

[MusicMan]

OBP and SLG are demonstrative of skill, agreed?

No, NO, NOOOOOOO!!!!!!

OBP and SLG are demonstrative of RESULTS.  Not SKILLS.

[Noe]

No, NO, NOOOOOOO!!!!!!

OBP and SLG are demonstrative of RESULTS.  Not SKILLS.

*sigh*  Baseball 101.

[dirty steve]

I think Lidge could have gotten Tejada done in Scott's place, if it came to that. I don't really care about clogging the bases, that lineup would score many more runs than this one with a fast guy at the top.

But who cares, this one is still very good for the NL.

thanks dusty.

[Arky Vaughan]

No, NO, NOOOOOOO!!!!!!

OBP and SLG are demonstrative of RESULTS.  Not SKILLS.

True, but don't skills (as well as context) have a bearing on results?

[subnuclear]

No doubt. But OBP and SLG are demonstrative of skill, agreed?

Who specifically are you suggesting might suffer in the lineup I mentioned.

You don't think Pence is going to hit into more FC and less doubles with Berkman and Loretta in front of him?  Do you think anyone is worried about Berkman stealing a base?  You would basically get no value from Loretta's bat control.  Has Towles got some speed because you have him in effectively lead off position?  Isn't Berkman going to hit a lot of solo home runs like this?  Those are things that popped into my head when I looked at it.

I mean you chose your line-up for its offensive value (and included an imaginary "righty") so you could arrange those players randomly and still score plenty of runs.   

However, and this was not the point I was making but its important nonetheless, you have constructed a line-up and not a baseball team.   A baseball team has to include players who can field a ground ball occasionally.   This is not that team.   Also, this is not the Astros as the trades you have imagined have not occurred.   

[MusicMan]

True, but don't skills (as well as context) have a bearing on results?

Yes, but context is key.  If Biggio had been asked to bat 2 for the last several years, his OBP would have been lower still because he was hitting on the ground behind the runner.  Would that have been an indicator that his skills at taking pitches was declining?

I ask you this not thinking that you would say it is so, but to try to get through to Barzmail on his third trip through BAS101.

[S.P. Rodriguez]

True, but don't skills (as well as context) have a bearing on results?

Is there any way to put an entire thread on Ignore?  No offense, as I do appreciate your point (it just has nothing to do with the argument put forth by the person de-railing this thread), but this is about to turn ugly.

[Noe]

True, but don't skills (as well as context) have a bearing on results?

Having great batting mechanics is a skill very few have, but it's not going to prove out results of .300 hitting in it of itself.  See, there is this other team on the field that are not cutouts but actual human beings with skills themselves.  The less skill on defense by the opposition may actually mean your own results on offense are increased without even regard to your own skill.  A grounder up the middle is a hit against a weak defensive team and a ground out with a better defensive team.  Your skill to hit a baseball is still intact, the result is about all the variables.  So context is important and not just the results as indicators of skill.

[Arky Vaughan]

Yes, but context is key.  If Biggio had been asked to bat 2 for the last several years, his OBP would have been lower still because he was hitting on the ground behind the runner.  Would that have been an indicator that his skills at taking pitches was declining?

I ask you this not thinking that you would say it is so, but to try to get through to Barzmail on his third trip through BAS101.

Fair enough, as I realize that you are not making an all-or-nothing argument or even trying to engage me, rather than someone else, in this discussion. I just think it is worth pointing out that skills are the primary driver. If this were not so, then changing the places of two players in a line-up would have as much effect on results as the differences in their skill levels, and that is simply not the case.

[Arky Vaughan]

Having great batting mechanics is a skill very few have, but it's not going to prove out results of .300 hitting in it of itself.  See, there is this other team on the field that are not cutouts but actual human beings with skills themselves.  The less skill on defense by the opposition may actually mean your own results on offense are increased without even regard to your own skill.  A grounder up the middle is a hit against a weak defensive team and a ground out with a better defensive team.  Your skill to hit a baseball is still intact, the result is about all the variables.  So context is important and not just the results as indicators of skill.

But players tend to have many opportunities against poor fielders and many opportunities against great fielders, just as they tend to have many opportunities against poor pitchers and many opportunities against great pitchers, and on the whole, the batter with greater skills and/or talent is substantially likely to turn in results superior to those of the batter with lesser skills and/or talent. The gap between Lance Berkman and Adam Everett is not going to be significantly narrowed by differences in the defenses they face or shuffling them around in the line-up. If you're talking about the same player with the same skills and/or talent facing more favorable conditions or less favorable conditions, then I agree with you that context may be determinative. But results as a measure of performance should be highly related to skill and/or talent, with context providing somewhat of a mitigating factor.

[Noe]

But players tend to have many opportunities against poor fielders and many opportunities against great fielders, just as they tend to have many opportunities against poor pitchers and many opportunities against great pitchers, and on the whole, the batter with greater skills and/or talent is substantially likely to turn in superior results than the batter with lesser skills and/or talent. The gap between Lance Berkman and Adam Everett is not going to be significantly narrowed by differences in the defenses they face or shuffling them around in the line-up. If you're talking about the same player with the same skills and/or talent facing more favorable conditions or less favorable conditions, then I agree with you that context may be determinative. But results as a measure of performance should be highly related to skill and/or talent, with context providing somewhat of a mitigating factor.

Yes, and the very reason you cannot say that OBP and SLG are skills.  They are results influenced by skills meeting opportunity.  Mitigating factos and all.  You put the bat on ball (skill), what happens after that is not in your skill set (results).  You've done your job when you hit the ball, all else is out of your hands.

Context.

[Arky Vaughan]

Yes, and the very reason you cannot say that OBP and SLG are skills.

Totally agree.

They are results influenced by skills meeting opportunity.  Mitigating factos and all.  You put the bat on ball (skill), what happens after that is not in your skill set (results).  You've done your job when you hit the ball, all else is out of your hands.

Voros McCracken, is that you hiding in Noe's keyboard?

[Noe]

Totally agree.

Voros McCracken, is that you hiding in Noe's keyboard?

I remember him, Holly hates him!  Hmmmm... good or bad?

[Burzmali]

Voros McCracken, is that you hiding in Noe's keyboard?

That's exactly what I thought!

And yeah, context factors in, but I think placement in lineup will have much less effect on results than ability does.

[subnuclear]

That's exactly what I thought!

And yeah, context factors in, but I think placement in lineup will have much less effect on results than ability does.

Context is sometimes a big factor and sometimes a small one.   Its difficult to quantify.   You seem to ignore it all together, that's all I'm saying.

[Burzmali]

Context is sometimes a big factor and sometimes a small one.   Its difficult to quantify.   You seem to ignore it all together, that's all I'm saying.

Oh, sorry to give that impression, my mistake.