2) The A’s were an experiment.

3) They were consitent play off contenders. Thats nothign sneeze at, considering how we root for a top 5 salaried failure. Look at what a team like Boston did with advanced metrics and a payroll. Look at what TB has been able to do.

4)Stop moving the goal posts.

Yes, a HR=RBI+RS. We don’t need RBI and RS.

“Who around him did he depend on?”

No one, this is why the HR is the single best thing a hitter can do.

“This is the problem with the OBP centric way of measuring.”

What is OBP centric thinking?

“it is WAY more dependent on others around them doing the work than either BA or RBI because OBP by itself can’t tell you if anyone scored nor forces a run to score by itself.”

Neither do RBI or BA by themselves. You’re being completely unfair. The reason OBP gets the attention it does is simply because it was an undervalued attribute that the A’s focused on in the late 90s early 2000s. ITs not the beall and end all of talent evaluation and it never was nor did any knowledgable person claim it was.

“OBP requires something happen from someone else in order for the theory to work.
RBI does not!
Sure others helping can contribute but it is not required to have help from anyone to get an RBI!”

Hey, great idea! Just have 9 guys in your lineup that will hit 70 HRs a year. Why didn’t anyone think of that before?

Who around him did he depend on?

This is the problem with the OBP centric way of measuring. it is WAY more dependent on others around them doing the work than either BA or RBI because OBP by itself can’t tell you if anyone scored nor forces a run to score by itself.

OBP requires something happen from someone else in order for the theory to work.
RBI does not!
Sure others helping can contribute but it is not required to have help from anyone to get an RBI!

You’re kind of arguing on a false premise, one I see a lot around here. You assume that OBP is being held up as a be all and end all. It is a better stat than BA, RBI or RS (as two of those are dependent on the people around the hitter in question), but no one says that it tells the whole story on any hitter. And no one says a walk is as good as a hit. A walk is maybe worth 65% of a single. It is still better than an out.

Of course it doesn’t tell you how the player reached base, much in the same way batting average doesn’t tell you what kind of hit was made.

WAR is an attempt to take it all into account. OBP, power, fielding, position etc etc. It’s not perfect. I don’t really agree with how they determine a “replacement level” player. And there is still controversy on how to weigh each stat. It is, however, pretty good.

Tejada can handle the fielding and if he hits he fits the same options young is being proposed to fill (gone reyes or 2B) and he doesn’t cost 10 mil nor will retire in 5 or 6 years…

I will be happy to give Havens his shot but until he is ready to come up and stay healthy he is a potential, not an option. I think Tejada can be coached to hit better. But considering we have two young guys who can play those positions we should not be wasting time and money on older less effective fielders just to get a little more bat.

We need to think about what is best for 2012 and beyond. Not what is best for 2011. Young is not going to change anything if Beltran Wright reyes and Davis don’t hit.

And if that happens 2B is going to be the least of our worries.

I say let it ride and see if we can grow one of the two to be our 2B core option and then we can wheel and deal for our OF and rotation.

This is why I say some metrics are biased. OBP is biased in it presumes a walk is as good as a hit. But a walk rarely can drive in a run unless the bases are loaded. A Walk is not something the batter accomplishes but something where the pitcher fails!

So by using OBP instead of BA you are in essence biasing your selections towards walks which are not as effective as hits.

But when used in combination you remove all that bias. Because you are also taking into account the better action of the HIT!

So no Metrics are not USUALLY biased by themselves. How they are used is where the bias enters into the equation!

And it really depnds on WHO you are replacing doesn’t it?

A guy could have a much better war but be worse in other areas such as power, HRs or RBI. If thats the guy your replacing not only will you lose his numbers but you lose protection of the guy in front of that batter!

I respect the idea of finding a common denominator to judge players I just don’t know that some arbitrary number is the way to do it.

better to judge each player based on PA ratios such as PA:RS PA:RBI PA:OB (which is what OBP is). Find out what each player’s potential is per PA and then determine which one gives you more per PA than the other!

And even after doing that you have to look deeper into who was batting around that guy when he generated those numbers before you believe them because HOW you get them is as significant as getting them!

A guy can have an OBP of .600 but if all he does is walk he is not going to contribute as much as a guy with a .500 OBP but a .300+ BA!
Because your not going to get him to drive in MORE runs that hitting will and walking won’t!

First it would make our entire infield homegrown and the new core.

Wright, Reyes, Davis and 2B would be a good solid core to build around because the most often found top sluggers in FA are always more likely to play OF because there are three on every team and it is a position that traditionally is filled by good hitters!

If the infield which is the part of the fielding most TEAM and familiar related. it will be easy to go after big bat OF and Pitching. Spending that could be sustained long term.

So in an ideal world they would get Tejada to start hitting or trade for a young 2B that could step up next year. Then we could avoid the long rebuild, resign Reyes and then just worry about replacing Beltran’s bat and getting an ace or two for the rotation.

Reyes TC 556
Young TC 379

THATS why Reyes has more errors!

Young 95 PO 265 Asst 26 DP 950 FPCT
Reyes 179 362 Asst 77 DP 973 FPCT

So look at the percentage of errors (which you used career numbers I used last season) and compare it to all the other plays Reyes is making and you clearly see NO COMPARISON!

Reyes is a way better fielder than Young.

and yeah, depending on what the replacement is considered to be, an individuals WAR could go up or down. But, everyone else’s would do the same thing. So if I understand the purpose of it, it is to compare players at a point in time, not be a target number of some kind. IOW, a ranking tool.

“normal” stats have the same bias. an ERA of 3.5 might be considered very good in 2004, but would have been way off the pace in 1968! so, the advent of relative equalization stats.