2
2012
MMO Fair or Foul: Mets Should Cut Justin Turner
An article by 
Chris McShane of Amazin Avenue get’s the nod in this weeks edition of Fair or Foul after arguing that the Mets should designate Justin Turner for assignment in all due haste. He writes,
Last night, Terry Collins inexplicably started Justin Turner over Ike Davis at first base. He shouldn’t have had the option.
In limited playing time this year, Turner has been even worse than he was last year. He didn’t exactly set the bar high, hitting .260/.334/.356 with a .311 wOBA in 2011, but he is hitting .258/.302/.326 with a .280 wOBA this year.
It’s hard to figure out why exactly Turner has been on the Mets’ roster all along. While he’s been a good hitter in high-leverage situations, there’s no reason to believe Turner is capable of maintaining such production. And although Turner has played all four infield positions this season, calling him a utility player is really a misnomer since he’s not particularly adept at playing any of them.
The Mets have a pair of players readily available in Buffalo, each of whom could probably provide an upgrade over Turner in the same role: Valentino Pascucci and Josh Satin. Both are right-handed hitters who have shown an ability to get on base and hit for power in the minors.
Of course, the Mets had a player a lot like Pascucci and Satin in Vinny Rottino, but he is now with theCleveland Indians because the Mets chose to designate him rather than Turner for assignment when Ronny Cedeno and Ruben Tejada returned to the active roster. Still, the Mets have the opportunity to atone for a bad decision by making a better one now.
I think it’s very unfair for McShane to say there’s no reason to expect Justin Turner to continue performing well in high-leverage situations, but not applying the same standard to the inverse? Who’s to say that Turner will continue to perform below average in non-high leverage situations? Where’s the objective value of saying Turner probably won’t continue to do well in high-leverage at-bats, but will continue to do poorly in low-leverage at-bats? I believe a little fairness is in order here.
Furthermore, who’s to say that Val Pascucci or Josh Satin would be an improvement over Justin Turner?
One look at their major league equivalencies gives one great cause for concern. And what about the chemistry factor, a factor that is non-existent in most sabermetric circles, but nevertheless alive and well in the majority of clubhouses regardless?
Turner is one of the most intense presences in that clubhouse. He’s the first one to jump out of the dugout in a win, and although I’m not a fan of the whipped cream pies, there’s no doubt it has had a bonding effect on the team and is well received. He is one of the most respected and likable guys on the team, and while some fans put no value on that, I certainly do.
But let’s talk numbers…
In 2011, Justin Turner put up a slash of .378/.457/.537/.994 in 94 high-leverage (clutch) plate appearances. In 2012, he has ramped that up to .500/.556/.643/1.198 in 18 high-leverage plate appearances.
Is Josh Satin or Val Pascucci going to replace that? In 85 plate appearances Pascucci has batted .192 and there isn’t a scout who doesn’t believe he’s anything but your classic AAAA player, and at 33 years old nobody expects him to cut it in the majors in the twilight of his career. Satin on the other hand, has an identical .192 average after a couple of cups of coffee in the majors, but at least shows signs that he could eventually get a shoat at a major league bench gig, but at 27 time is running out quickly for him and his 70 strikeouts in 257 at-bats doesn’t quite seem like an indication of future major league success. In fact, Satin’s 70 strikeouts are three fewer than Justin Turner’s 73 in 559 at-bats over the last two seasons! Satin strikes out more than twice as much as Turner does!
Who do you want up in the ninth inning with the tying run at third base and two outs, Justin Turner, Josh Satin or one of the all-time strikeout leaders in minor league history, Vall Pascucci (1,332 K’s)?
“Justin Turner is a money player. When the game is on the line and you need a clutch at-bat in a huge spot, there’s only one player on this team you want up in that situation and that’s Justin Turner. That’s what what makes Turner such a money player.” – Bobby Ojeda
When asked about Turner’s ability to turn on the adrenaline in a critical at-bat, Terry Collins had this to say:
“Of all the guys on the team Turner is probably the most disciplined in those situations. He just wants to put the ball in play and he doesn’t care where it goes.”
Until you give me a name that I know will outperform Justin Turner in clutch situations, I don’t want to hear any talk about releasing or cutting him.
The Mets have plenty of areas to worry about, but our backup utility infielder who is the team’s best pinch-hitter over the last two seasons isn’t one of them.
About the Author: Joe DeCaro
I'm a lifelong Mets fan who loves writing and talking about the Amazins' 24/7. From the Miracle in 1969 to the magic of 1986, and even the near misses in '73 and '00, I've experienced it all - the highs and the lows. I started Mets Merized Online in 2005 to feed my addiction. Follow me on Twitter @metsmerized.
107 Comments + Add Comment
NL East Standings
| Team | W | L | Pct. | GB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Braves | 23 | 18 | .561 | - |
| Nationals | 23 | 19 | .548 | 0.5 |
| Phillies | 20 | 23 | .465 | 4.0 |
| Mets | 16 | 24 | .400 | 6.5 |
| Marlins | 11 | 31 | .262 | 12.5 |
Last updated: 05/18/2013
Recent Comments
- DrDooby: on Is Marlon Byrd Finally Coming Around?: One can certainly argue about keeping Reyes...
- ill_egl: on Prima Donnas and Clubhouse Chemistry: A Met Perspective: Good read. I enjoyed this post. It...
- ill_egl: on Is Marlon Byrd Finally Coming Around?: I feel the Beltran trade was one...
- DrDooby: on Is Marlon Byrd Finally Coming Around?: The 2011 payroll actually ended up right...
- DrDooby: on Hefner Lasts Just Four Innings In Mets 8-2 Loss To Cubs: Hefner is what he is. A pedestrian...
MMO Mets Chat
Need Tickets To The Mets Game?
Check Out These Great MLB Links!
Photographs From Gordon Donovan
5357 Fans Follow Us On Twitter!
1270 Fans Like Us On Facebook!
2341 Fans Read Our Feed!
1702 Fans Subscribe via Daily Email!
Of the list of things one could make as Mets problems Turner in my opinion isn’t one of them. To simply dfa him and cross your fingers that Satin or Pascucci can do better is a mistake as far as I am concerned.
Someone needs to tell the author that those stats are above average for a bench player.
Someone also needs to tell Terry Collins that Turner should never play 1B ever again…
Sorry, but that’s the most ridiculous thing the Mets could do right now is cut Turner. Bad hair day at Amazin Avenue.
Our biggest problems are the bullpen and the catching… yet we’re talking about a bench guy who had a bad game yesterday… Please…
This is what happens when you put too much emphasis on minor league stats. Pascucci and Satin? Why not bring up Brad Emaus too. SMH
terrible, terrible piece by a writer who evidently knows nothing about baseball and bases anything he knows about this game solely on numbers in and of themselves.
Pascucci and Satin stink and don’t compare to Turner in any way. Justing Turner is a fine backup and excellent player to have up in big spots. Todd Pratt used to be like that, only better, though. He would just come off the bench and deliver big hit after big hit (btw the Mets could use Pratt’s catching experience right now )
Did the dumb, dumb, dumb, STUPID (and i use the term loosely – more like some fan who wrote an opinion than being an actual writer) take into consideration that maybe Turner is in a little batting slump too?
He should not have started last night but that wasn’t his fault. He’s just not a first baseman. But to say it would be better to have Satin or Pascucci instead of Turner? That’s just plain old stupid
Instead of “Fair or Foul” this piece should be titled “SABR-GOONS SAY THE DARNEDEST THINGS”
Amazin Avenue is full of A** Clowns
Chris McShane of Amazin Avenue joins the list of over-the-top reactionaries there. I’m undecided it Chris’ suggestion should be viewed as poor judgment, as contemptible, or as a nutjob comment. We’ve got much bigger problems than Justin Turner.
Of all the lamest knee-jerk reactions I’ve ever read this season, McShane’s might be the worst of 2012. I’ll say one thing, thanks to him we finally found something me, Des, Bayonne, Mr. North Jersey, Alex and most of MMO can agree on. LMAO You should have this post bronzed.
Lol, yes… I think THAT is even more amazing than the actual post itself…
You can add me to that too! lol
Idiotic
“Of all the lamest knee-jerk reactions I’ve ever read this season”
You should read more.
Hi All,
Yes, I was thinkng this is one thing we could 100 percent agree with.
Is it creating changes for the change sake?
In the immortal words of Hit Girl, “What a doushe.” (Got it in that time!)
Who is the Met starting 1st baseman? Ike Davis or Justin Turner?
Who is the Met starting 2nd baseman? Danie Murphy? or Ronny Cedano?
Who is the Met starting catcher Mike Nickleous? or Josh Thole?
Who is the Met starting LF w/Bay out? Newbie? or Scott Harriston?
Yesterday the Mets had a chance to sweep the Dodgers, true the Mets were facing a tough lefty but Terry Collins choose not to play his best line-up.
Scott Harriston starts in place of Newbie ok that makes sense………
Turner over Ike Davis? Why? Davis is a rookie all the sudden who can’t hit tough lefty’s?
Daniel Murphy can’t hit tough lefties? Josh Thole is not going to play agansit leftys?
In the 7th inng Omar Quintallia made the first out pinch hitting aganist a right handed pitcher..?
Was Collins saving Murphy? for………? 9th inng heroics maybe? I don’t know.
All I know is we had the chance to sweep the Dodgers and fly back across the country feeling great and full of confidence to continue the winning strike agonist the Phillie’s on Tuesday!
So, when the Mets play the Phillies this week and Cole Hamels pitches Ike Davis does not play? Ronny Cedano plays over Daniel Murphy??
I just don’t get it.
and what makes it worse Lifelong is that Kershaw didn’t even have his A stuff. He was not unhittable at all – even for lefties. And think of what 2 hot hitting lefties could have done with him when the Mets had him on the ropes early?
Collins is to blame for this loss.
Sorry to response, I know how you hate it, but I have to agree
I think if TC wanted to give a lefty off because of the lefty on left concern, he should have chosen ONE of them, not three of them…………
Tuna Casserole almost ready………….
Terrible lineup decisions last night. No question!
Don’t really get the hate for him. I mean, he’s a bench player; what exactly do these people expect from him? I do think that Davis needs to play every day – against the righties and lefties – but I have no problem with Turner on the bench.
It’s hard to knock Collins because of the job he has done but sometimes… we see glimpses of the “Evil-Angel-Manager-Collins” appear.
Go Away-1990-s-TerryCollins!”
FOUL…OUT!
But kind of what I have come to expect from Alderson Avenue….
Turner is one of the most clutch hitters we have…Far better than Cedeno
But cedeno is a Sandy singing and could never be a mistake under any circumstances!
We should scrap the younger and more versatile Turner who can play 1B, 2B, SS, and 3B, Hits .336 with RISP in favor of the Sandy guy who is two years older, can only play 2B and SS and hits .233 with RISP….
Yeah thats the guy we want to have on the bench when we need to score a run or cover a position in case someone like Ike Davis, David Wright, Rueben Tejada and/or Daniel Murphy get hurt or need a day off!
But thats why that place is called Alderson Avenue!
Cedeno is here as the BU MI because he is a vastly better defender at SS and 2B than Turner. And that is a prime consideration for that particular bench job.
Can’t base every player decision purely on the bat, right? Have to consider defense.
so I have no problem with Cedeno for that reason, but Turner fills a bit different role (just need to take BU 1B of his resume).
Well then why isn’t he being used as a late defensive replacement with the better hitter starting the game?
A error or two every 10 games is not qas costly as an Out 4 times out of 5 ABs.
Defense can’t overcome a lead you don’t have!
Bench guys should be picked more for the bat than the glove. The majority of thier use will be as a PH not a fielder!
Metsie, Spot on..
No mention of cedeno who’s been a complete BUST of a signing by alderson… No, let’s keep him because the genius got him.. SMH
He is a bench guy that has shown a knack for getting a PH. That is important. He also can back up the MI (including SS) which those other guys can’t.
what he should not be doing, however, is starting at 1B. If Ike needs a day off, they have other guys with a lot more experience at 1st that can cover it for a day.
they should have though (especially if they wanted to keep Rotino) dumped one of the redundant MI spares. Who really needs 2 good glove, no hit BU SS/2B on the bench? Sorry Omar, it’s a numbers game!
and I expect that when (I assume it is actually going to happen now in the near future) Bay comes back, it will be Omar taking the walk.
Well the truth is Turner is starting there due to the missing baxter isn’t he?
Now I can’t say Baxter would have started yesterday since he bats Left as well, But Baxter was the guy they went to when Ike needed a day off.
And I’ll be honest I would rather see Turner play 1B than have them mess with Duda and play him there…
Duda has enough on his hands learning RF and he really needs to get practice with positioning vs different batters because he doesn’t have the speed to get to the ball if he isn’t positioned correctly.
Too Many balls just out of his reach and anything down the line or into the RF side of the gap is not going to get caught and lead to extra bases.
Duda’s speed is a bit of a liability and learning to position is key and the only way to do that is to play the position and where to position to give himself a fighting chance to get to the ball.
If Bay wasn’t constantly on the DL and was hitting even remotely close to career numbers, Turner as a right handed hitter off the bench probably wouldn’t even get a mention.
What bothered me more specifically last night was Turner playing first. No reason Ike shouldn’t have started that game but if for some reason Ike is out of the line-up, Turner should not be the back-up. IMO, he plays 1st base about as well as he does SS – which to say should be in an emergency situation only.
LOL Srt…
The guy has a 1.000 FP at all three positions he has played this year except 1B where it is .975
Last year had a FP breakdown of:
.978 at 2B, .949 at 3B and his lowest (SS at .800) consisted of a grand total of ONE GAME!
So I don’t know eere this he notion that the guy is a defensive liability comes from!
Anything he may have screwed up on the field has been more than made up for with his RBIs and BA with RISP!
I think we all agree that Turner should not have been playing 1B last night. The problem there wasn’t Turner, it was Terry Collins. That’s the guy AA should have railed against, not Turner who serves a tiny but significant role on that bench and has had a propensity for coming through when it matters most. I get a little leery when this site takes the high ground over AA when it comes to objectivity. Maybe it’s a sign of how far MMO has come of late and for that I must commend you.
What an absolutely assinine post. Pascucci and Satin upgrades over Turner? Are you fkn kidding me. Turner makes an error in a game is shouldn’t have even been playing in to begin with but that’s for another thread, and we should cut Turner because of an error and for Pascucci and Satin who both make Murphy look like Ozzie Smith. Now I know why Alex68 calls theses guys sabergoons. Amazin Avenue, what else is new. Somebody should give that site a “Baseball for dummies” book. All Turner has done since he’s been a Met is help them win games.
This has to be one of the worst and most thoughtless posts in recent memory at MMO. And no surprise it comes from a website is home to a bunch of geeks who couldn’t tell an outfielder’s glove from an enema glove who put digits on excel spreadsheets ahead of common sense and good old fashioned smart baseball judgement and acumen.
He’s got a point. Probably should’ve been Satin to start the season even once they signed Cedeno.
Think of it. Ronny Cedeno – an everyday player who wasn’t even wanted anymore by Pittsburgh and signed for the Mets with a $650,000 cut in salary – this is a guy who is more valuable on the bench than Turner? In addition to Justin is one thing, but a more valuable role player?
As many have pointed out, Turner comes through in big spots.
I get what he is trying to say, but it doesn’t fly. Turner has hardly played any 1B in his career. You can’t get mad that he bobbled one play starting there.
Offensively, I’m not sure what we can get better. Big Val and Satin have both had their chances. I’m not drooling for either of them. Sure Val has power if he does hit the ball cleanly, but that is a big if.
Now, before we all lie prostrate before Saint Justin the Ginger, lets remember who we are all getting outraged about. Yes, he’s a fun, scrappy guy who is very easy to root for. I like him a lot. But, he’s not that great a player. He doesn’t really have any position and very little pop in his bat. He’s best described as a reliable bench guy. We have a few of those already, all who do at least one thing better than Turner.
Of course, neither Big Val nor Satin are on the 40 man roster, so to cut Turner in favor of them also forces some roster shuffling, and I don’t think any of these guys are worth that headache. I’d rather something like that be done to make room for say Harvey or Familia.
I just can’t get too excited about this one way or the other. The bench hasn’t been a big problem when you look at the big picture.
“We have a few of those already, all who do at least one thing better than Turner.”
yeah but one key thing they do NOT do better than Turner…
Hit with Runner in Scoring Position and drive them in!
The guy is about as clutch a hitter as you can get….
Should he be a regular starter? No probably not but thats the kind fo guy you want on the bench ready to pinch hit for a pitcher or a Cedeno when you have RISP and need the runs scored!
I’m not blaming Turner, I’m blaming TC.
Thing is that’s not the first time Turner played first and fumbled this year.
If for some explicable reason TC wanted to sit Ike last night, I’d much rather have seen Murphy at first and Turner at second.
This is why I don’t take McShane’s stuff seriously whenever I’m on there (AA). You gonna cut one of the best guys on your bench? Are you ****ing kidding?
Hmmm, so you’re part of AA? no wonder .. Now i understand why you are the way you are…
Count your blessings Alex! At least we finally got rid of the ones you refereed to as the desert nomads. LOL
I’m actually on every Mets blog, not just one, dickweed. I understood how you became the way you are now a long time ago. Shame your parents dropped you on your head so many times when you were little.
Ok. .. Keep it up.. It’s no wonder to me now…
If by “keep it up”, you mean making you look like the constant hypocritical village idiot you are, don’t worry. Keep those “Marlins will be WS Champs” hopes alive LOL.
Listen, the only idiot in this website is you, no wonder people call you Even Bl**, you do nothing but to bring up useless facts and comments, you are the ultimate baiter and a saberidio.. errr sabergooner, it’s good that once in a while you come here to get educated on numbers, i imagine it must be devastating to know how numbers in baseball can not be use in a lot of occasion.. But hey, i understand why you’re such an idiot now, coming from AA explains it all…
Oh look, the same old Alex68 “I have nothing significant to say, so I’ll just do my old you’re a sabergooner” rant. How did I know this was coming? You’re as obvious as Anderson Cooper being in the closet. Tell me, who are these “people” coming me “Even blow”? Only you, dingus, because you have a 3rd grade education not to come up with anything better. It’s a shame you’re not as bright as Metsie. He actually gives me a compelling debate without going into “SABERGOONERZ SUXORS SANDY IZ THA DEVIL” rants. Maybe one day, you’ll get it….nah.
YES!!!!! Thank god… Notice how without T agee, JesseP sniffing around, donal posting less and those desert people we have been a much nicer blog, disagreeing a bunch of times without the sniveling insults and baiting… Amazing…
So…when are you leaving?
sigh……………….
LOL yet I’m the one they blame for a 200 comment thread…Funny we haven’t really had one since have we?
I been here everyday I wonder what is different?
Metsie, that we talk baseball, and debate baseball as it should be… This place had a lot of disagreement during my time here up until the baiters came in and a lot of good people were banned for defending themselves…
Me and you disagree all the time and it has never devolved into the crap it has with others.
Show respect and you get some.
Problem is most are brainwashed on all those other sites and form opinions to fit in and then when they get here where the ideas are a bit more varied and open as opposed to limted by Sabers and Moneyball they have to resort to disrespecting because the arguments everyone agreed with and patted them on the back for having over at Alderson avenue actually got debated and questioned here by those who are not so brainwashed to buy everything they read in some book a guy wrote.
Doesn’t matter to me really I am not here to teach them but I will defend myself when they attack!
uhhuh. brain washed.
have you even read the book, to proscribe ti everyone that realizes there’s more to baseball than RBI?
Yep… and I can tell you the book was wrong…Lot more to it than OBP!
and RBI is WAY more important!
But thats all you guys took from the book!
Beane focused on OBP which was the Undervalued stat 15 years ago but no more!
So your whole philosphy from that book is just flat out wrong!
the team with the higher OBP will almost always have more RBI.
regardless, Beane identified it as one of the ways the 2002 Oakland A’s could get good return on investment. That’s all. No mantra. no overwhelming creed.
The society for american baseball research has been around a lot longer than that and is a lot more in depth that one random case.
Thats a pile of Bull I debunked well over a year ago!
Texas Rangers and Toronto Blue Jays explain why OBP failed to beat them out in the years discussed and reviewed in the piece…EWxplain why there seems to be no rhyme or reason to High OBP in relation to RS and why you don’t need high OBP at all to score more runs than someone who has it!
http://metsmerizedonline.com/2011/10/does-ops-correlate-better-to-runs-scored-than-rbi.html
http://metsmerizedonline.com/2011/10/r-i-p-moneyball.html
http://metsmerizedonline.com/2011/10/r-i-p-moneyball-part-ii-%e2%80%93the-undervalued-stat.html
The last two are an explanation of Moneyball and how it REALLY works when you pretty much cut out all the chapter and verse on Sabermetrics and see exactly what they did to find who they found!
heh. you’re hilarious. RBIs. Here’s a tip. Look up how many runs score in an inning when a team has first and third and no out, and the batter hits a sacrifice fly. Now look up how many runs that team scores when the batter walks instead.
Tell me how many score if the batter doesn’t get an RBI in that situation? Answer NONE!
you look up who scores the most runs EVERY year the guy who gets on base the most or the guy who drives in more runs!
How many runs does a guy with a .350 OBP drive in a year?
Can you say? No? Wonder if thats because there is NO correlation between OBP and RS at all…
How you get the runs is doesn’t matter!
What is key is getting them and it’s the guy who drives them in that makes it possible for those OBs to score!
If he doesn’t you got squat!
BTW I did my reasearch showing how it doesn’t correlate at all…Time for you to show yours that proves it does!
Dare to take that challenge and submit a fan post?
you know there is endless data out there on this already right?
Here’s the run expectancy matrix for ’93-’10.
http://www.tangotiger.net/re24.html
first and third no outs scores you 1.853. Sac fly gets you a run, but drops that number to 0.562. So you’ve decreased your total runs scored for the inning with a sac fly. I wonder what happens with a OBP boosting walk that doesn’t score a run? 2.390! It appears the walk is worth more than half a run whereas the sac fly costs you a little less than a third of a run.
Not obviously these are just the averages. there will be cases where the walk leads to no runs and after the sac fly you score 5. But that’s the randomness in baseball. You repeat that situation 50 times over a season and the team that walks will score 38 or so more runs than the team with the RBI.
happy now?
Actually, you just keep claiming you did. when people explain to you the difference between correlation and cause or show the breaks in your logic, you just go on long bizarre rants and repeat the same debunked nonsense.
As has been stated repeatedly, RBIs seem to correlate with Runs Scored because Runs Scored create RBIs, not the other way around.
You can score runs without awarding RBIs, but you can’t award RBIs without runs scoring.
Ah yes a Sac Fly which nets the batter a what again?
Oh yeah right an RBI!
Does any OB score that run from third?
How about a walk?
How about an infield hit?
Both are OBs do they score a run?
Nope it takes an RBI doesn’t it!
Tango Tiger is not what you should be using as a source…
He thinks it is a greater accomplishment of a batter to reach base on error than it is by an actual hit!
Check out his wOBA equation!
All slanted to make OBP seem more important!
((0.72 x NIBB) + (0.75 x HBP) + (0.90 x 1B) + (0.92 x RBOE) + (1.24 x 2B) + (1.56 x 3B) + (1.95 x HR) / PA
Funny counts non intentionals but not intentionals, aren’t they OBs?
Being hit by a pitch means he is a better batter than a guy who DRAWS a walk?
a Single you earned is only weighted .90 but an RBOE is weighted .02 higher? Really the Batter gets credited with CAUSING the error?
Why does a guy who hits a Home run only get credited with twice the act of a single? Why not 4 times? Same question for Doubles and Triples?
This is your source of knowledge and the guy who has you believing in bullshit that simply doesn’t add up because he uses arbitrary numbers that make walks singles hbp and ROE count close to half what the best thing you can do at the plate is!
Sure singles hitters and high OBP guys are going to look good in his research he gave them more credit than he gave someone who actually gets a hit!
No Doanl I ACTUALLY did by showing how teams with higher OBP than some other teams did not score more runs than those teams who had a lower OBP than them!
It was ARBITRARY had nothing to do with how many Runs they scored!
But the RBI’s correlated better because the OBs are worthless untill such time as they are driven in!
None of you have showed any proof of this correlation mind you…All that has been put forward to date is some useless tripe from the OBP Bias king Tango Tiger!
The guy who thinks reaching base via error is a better accomplishment of a hitter than an actual single is!
These are the guys whose research you DO buy into!
Maybe you should take some Math classes and figure out why their claim doesn’t work in the real world!
“Nope it takes an RBI doesn’t it!”
No, it takes a specific set of circumstances. A wild pitch or passed ball will score the run as well, but no one gets the RBI. Same as an error.
RBI is a post facto statistic.
“Tango Tiger is not what you should be using as a source…
He thinks it is a greater accomplishment of a batter to reach base on error than it is by an actual hit!”
Not what he said. He said errors tend to produce runs more frequently than singles (probably because many errors end up extra base errors, especially when an outfielder drops a ball). That is what this is all about.
“This is your source of knowledge and the guy who has you believing in bullshit that simply doesn’t add up because he uses arbitrary numbers that make walks singles hbp and ROE count close to half what the best thing you can do at the plate is!
Sure singles hitters and high OBP guys are going to look good in his research he gave them more credit than he gave someone who actually gets a hit!”
So, you can sit there and insult him like you always do, or for once, you can take me up on my dare and
Prove. Him. Wrong.
Because that is what it all comes down to. What you can prove. Show us where he went wrong.
You can’t just point at the results and declare them wrong simply because they contradict what you expected/believed. What you do is go over the work and point out where he went wrong.
Say all the mean and nasty things you want about him or anyone else. It is all you can do because the actual proof is beyond you. He put his work out there. Your one attempt was a laughable failure.
“No Doanl I ACTUALLY did by showing how teams with higher OBP than some other teams did not score more runs than those teams who had a lower OBP than them!”
No, you showed one team bucking the trend. You had one team with a lower OBP scoring a lot of runs and claimed the invalidated all the other teams lining up rather well. You also assumed 1 point of slugging was equal to 1 point of OBP.
“But the RBI’s correlated better because”
They are products of the runs scoring. The very definition of an RBI is a run that scores under specific circumstances.
“OBs are worthless untill such time as they are driven in!”
And RBIs don’t exist until the run scores. Runs create RBIs, not the other way around.
“None of you have showed any proof of this correlation mind you…All that has been put forward to date is some useless tripe from the OBP Bias king Tango Tiger!
The guy who thinks reaching base via error is a better accomplishment of a hitter than an actual single is!”
that you can’t prove wrong. How bad does that eat at you?
“Maybe you should take some Math classes and figure out why their claim doesn’t work in the real world!”
Maybe you should take an English class and learn what “cause”, “correlate”, “prove” and “arbitrary” all mean.
Yeah circumstances where anOB can relate to RS…But not for RBI doesn’t take ANY circumstance just a PA!
A guy can hit a HR without anyone on base, Get an OB an RBI and an RS without anything else having to happen!
But a guy OB can’t score unless the batter does something that drives him in and gets him an RBI!
Here are some numbers to ponder while you have your head up Tango Tiger’s Ass…
27% of all OB that is not a HR actually scores a run
21% of all RS is via the HR that gets counted alone! (not even counting the guys on base at the time!
95% of RS is the result of an RBI!
NINETY FIVE PERCENT!
vs your 27%
What a hoot!
“But not for RBI doesn’t take ANY circumstance just a PA!”
No, an RBI is only awarded after the runs scores under specific circumstances.
“But a guy OB can’t score unless the batter does something that drives him in and gets him an RBI!”
No, the fielders can make an error, there can be a wild pitch or a passed ball…
There are a few ways a runner can score without an RBI be awarded.
“95% of RS is the result of an RBI!”
No, 0% of runs score as a result of an RBI. It is the other way around. RBIs are post facto. They are awarded after the run has scored.
Actally it shows a lot more than just one!
Maybe you should look at the chart data don’t worry a little knowledge wouldn’t kill that pea brain of yours…Might explode but trust me no one here would notcie the difference considering your usually posting intelligence.
I.E. rangers beat TWO tgeams Detroit and Cards who had better OBP,
Toronto beat 13 teams who had higher OBP.
reds beat Rockies and Royals despite them having higher OBP
Ny Mets 6th in OBP didn’t even make the top 10!
Lets count shall we?
One…Two…OOps I mean One, One, One…ROFLMAO!
And NO and RBI is awarded whenever a batter does something that scores a run with the lone exception hitting into a DP or an error!
All other circumstances the batter gets an RBI if a Run scores!
Nicde try slappy but you really are not up to the task of debating this, You have NO RESEARCH and can’t do anything but play semantical language games because if you tried to use statistical analysis everyone who see you for the liar you are here!
I would however like to Thank both Donal a Ceetar for admitting that all they really got out of reading Moneyball was that OBP was thre most important thing to scoring runs!
Just goes to show that reading a book is not as important as comprehending it!
It must be wonderful living in your crazy little world. Just declare something and it is so.
RBIs create runs! The Moon is made of tapioca! Bragging about a 303 IQ on the internet is not 8 kinds of pathetic!
Unfortunately, I have to live in the real world. that means I have to obey the rules of logic and actually deal in facts. And the fact here is RBIs are a product of runs while OBP is a component.
RBIs creates more runs than OBs do!
You can get on base and not score a run, You can’t get an RBI and no score one!
And no one needs to be on base to get that RBI and score the run either!
But you keep showing everyone how dumb you are!
Yep you read a book and all you got from it some fantasy about the importance of OBP!
And then accuse the rest of us of not reading! ROFLMAO!
In the about 150 year history of professional baseball, there has never been a run scored because an RBI was awarded. You will never find such an instance.
None.
Zip.
Zero.
Zilch.
Nada.
Until they drastically redefine what RBI means, it will not happen.
Yeah you go right on believing in Santa Claus!
In the 100 Year history of baseball no OB has been recorded as an RS either!
It’s recorded as an RS at the same time it’s recorded as an RBI!
Which means RS and RBI are recorded simultaneously and the OB has nothing to do with it because when you get the OB you still have not scored a single run!
All you go to was 1st base!
Want to play Temporal semantics some more?
I can make you look stupid all nite long!
” You can’t get an RBI and no score one!”
finally, you got something right. I’m so proud of you.
Now, for your homework, I just want you to dwell on that statement. Just think about it and what it actually means. Maybe after many many years, you will understand and then, only then, you will be able to participate in the conversation with the grown ups.
“temporal semantics”? Is that what you call it when someone tries to teach you how cause and effect really work?
Guys, there are going to be times when a walk is the one thing the hitting team would rather not get.
If there is a runner on third and one out, other than a base hit, I would want the batter to get a sacrifice fly rather than a walk. This way we do get the run whereas there is the chance a double play ball could be served up to the next batter. Don’t forget, even the best hitters make out seven out of ten times.
With a runner on first and nobody out, a base hit is more preferable than a walk for even though both result in two runners on base, the hit could advance the runner to third whereas a walk only guarantees the runner getting to second.
And with a power hitter at the plate with runners in scoring position, one wants him pitched to rather than being pitched around and having the bat taken away from him – depending upon which part of the batting order is coming up.
In turn, pitchers often want to pitch around the batter to set up the above situations the hitting team would rather avoid.
So in many ways, one’s OBP could be looked at in terms of a combination of things — how often the batter comes to the plate in a strategical situation calling for a walk, the wildness of the opposing pitchers and yes, his own ability to foul off pitches and not chase after border line pitches just off the plate.
And since we all know even the best hitters fail seven out of ten at-bats, more base runners can result in either more runs scored or more runners left on base.
That’s why I think OBP in itself is a limited reflection of a hitter’s overall ability since those extra times getting on base occur for a multitude of reasons – yes, the hitter’s batting eye but also the situation as well as the pitcher’s control. There are just too many factors that lead to a walk to give credit to the hitter most of the time. Except, of course, for those like Rickey Henderson who have such a small strike zone they are indeed going to eek out a large amount of walks just on their own.
Cause and effect? When has an act of touching first base caused anything?
The Act at the plate CAUSES it! And it’s the act at the plate that gets the RBI not the OB that results after it! Cause you can get an RBI without an OB!
No OB has ever caused a run to score! Touching first base does not CAUSE a run to score!
So your lesson is the lesson of a fool not worth squat to anyone with a shred of intelligence!
Cause…The guy HITS THE BALL SOMEWHERE!
Effect a run scores and the guy who hit the ball gets an RBI!
Cause a guy hits a ball SOMEWHERE
Effect he gets an OB
He does not get an RS unless something else happened!
You are showed the fool as is usual for you!
Perhaps PAs correlate better than OB too, Can’t score a run without first having a PA rght?
Such a fool and this will turn to a 300 Comment thread you will blame on me for bothering to argue with a guy who has NO DATA, NO RESEARCH and is relying totally on Temporal Semantics!
Well you lost there too!
OB happens but RS does not unless something OTHER than OB is present!
And that something is RBI…NINETY FIVE PERCENT OF THE TIME!
27% of all OB that is not a HR actually scores a run
21% of all RS is via the HR that gets counted alone! (not even counting the guys on base at the time!
95% of RS is the result of an RBI!
NINETY FIVE PERCENT!
Vs your 27%
Yeah your as smart as a Pakled!
Of all the wacked out illogical, inane arguments you’ve been involved in here on MMO, this has to be the most ridiculous of all.
See, how it works is, the more baserunners you get, the more runs you score. If 30% of all baserunners(OB) score then it’s pretty obvious that the more you get on the more you score.
If you get 1000 baserunners you score about 300 runs. If you get 2000 baserunners then you score about 600. If you get 3000 on base you score about 900. So on and so forth. Pretty simple stuff.
The RBI gets awarded after the run is scored. It does not create runs, runs create RBI’s. baserunners create the runs whether they’re driven in or scored by an error.
Another thing, when you compare teams statistics you should seperate the leagues. You don’t add the NL amd AL statistics together. They’re 2 different leagues. There’s that thing in the AL called the designated hitter.
It’s amazing how you think you made a valid argument when all you did was show you lack simple baseball knowledge.
You showed an exception to the rule with Toronto scoring more runs than some teams with higher OB percentages but you failed to mention the extraordinary amount of HR’s that team hit. Common sense would tell you that if that team had a good OB% they would’ve outscored every team in MLB with that type of HR power.
You still haven’t learned that the teams at the bottom of the league in runs scored are the teams that don’t have good OB%’s. The teams that are tops in the league in runs scored have good OB%’s. Occasionally there’s an aberation like Toronto but history shows the OB% is the key component in scoring runs.
I guess when you failed to debunk it with Batting Average you figured you would give RBI a shot but it makes no sense and makes you look like you don’t understand the sport at all..
“See, how it works is, the more baserunners you get, the more runs you score.”
Really? then why does that not actually happen in the MLB?
Why did the Blue Jays score more run than the reds Rockies Diamond backs Royals, Brewers and us if what you said is true?
Why did the texas Rangers score more run than the Cardinals Huh?
Yeah you go right on telling me how rediculous my argument is when you actually have to go and LIE to explain it!
The team who gets more guys on base does NOT score the most runs!
But the guy with the most RBI ALWAYS DOES!
Even when they don’t get many guys on base! Like the Blue Jays!
Just the fact that you’re using RBI as a component to create runs is not only comical but it shows your utter lack of simple baseball knowledge.
Again comparing NL teams to AL teams is just plain dumb but that’s how you operate when you have no basis for an argument.
Explain why teams that are good at getting on are good at scoring runs and why teams that are bad at getting on are bad at scoring runs. What I see is the Top OB team in the AL and the top OB team in the NL leading their leagues in runs. Odd hah?
Yes how rediculous to think that something thats involved in 95% of all RS is not important but what comprises only 27% of RS and only 6% more than a HR is more important!
I know baseball obviously much better than you OBP guys!
And have the data to prove it!
OBP does not CORRELATE at all! Absoloutly no relation to how much OBP you have to how many runs you score!
But you go right on believing your fantasy!
You have every right to look like a fool all you want!
Tell me something does the guy who gets the RBI get it because he touched 1st base?
Or because he did something at the plate that scored an OB that could not score itself?
NINETY FIVE PERCENT of ALL RS is due to an RBI not an OB!
Only 27% of OB actually results in a run and a HR by itself accounts for 21% of all RS even if you don’t count the guys on base when he hit it!
The RBI is what determines how many runs you score not OBP!
And my data PROVED that!
Read it again slappy! Or continue to play the fool…I really don’t care!
First off you need to learn how to spell ridiculous. It’s not spelled with an “E”. Tell me dope how do you get an RBI without baserunners.
You still have to touch bases on a HR. Hence the HR that scores a run is still an ON Base Before He Touches Home. RBI’s do not create runs. Runs create RBI’s. OB% creates runs that create the RBI. It’s not fantasy it’s fact.
There’s a reason why the teams that can’t score runs have low OB%’s and there’s a reason why the teams that score a ot of runs have high OB%’s. You think you proved something cause Toronto outhomered everybody else? They still didn’t lead the league in runs scored because they had a poor team OB%. If they had a good OB% they would’ve led the world in runs scored.
You are so cluless to how this game works it’s embarrasing. That 95% of runs scored by RBI’s are from baserunners scoring on that RBI. Duh. Like I said your data proves nothing but your lack of baseball knowledge. RBI’s are rewarded for the run that scores. The run that scores is from being on base.
This is one of your dumbest questions and that’s saying something.
“Tell me something does the guy who gets the RBI get it because he touched 1st base”?
The guy gets the RBI because of the guy that was already on base Slappy.
Now you tell me something. How does the guy get the RBI without baserunners? Can’t even use the HR can you? The guy that hits the HR touches 1B which is an on base before he comes around to score, therefore you can’t get an RBI without the on base. Baseball 101 but you haven’t gotten that far.
OB% correlates to runs scored and you have no data to debunk that like you claim you have. You can score runs without RBI’s you cant get an RBI without the run. Pretty simple stuff. I can’t even say nice try because you made zero sense with this ridiculous claim. Oh I’m sorry you understand it as rEdiculous.
Yeah and ypou have to walk up to the plate too before you can score a run so I guess PA is the most important stat to RS than OB is now isn’t it?
Tell Mr Spelling Bee…
Does the player get awarded an RBI for touching a base or does he get it for CAUSING the run to score?
You who claims to be teaching everyone a lesson on CAUSE and EFFECT!
LOL
HI Fonzie,
I think the problem might be in the way on-base is perceived as in the form of a percentage for so often it is situational (minus those times the pitcher is missing the plate or the batter has the great eye to lay off or foul off border line pitches late in the count).
Why the percentage itself can be deceiving is because sometimes a walk is advantageous to the team in the field in order so to snuff out rallies.
For example, an open base with a runner on third and a walk sets up many possibilities – a double play by the next batter getting out of the inning (whereas the same ground ball before would have driven scored the runner and getting only one out on the same play) or the one who got the walk could score on an extra base hit by the next batter.
Also, many a times a great hitter is walked simply because the pitcher wants no part of him under certain circumstances. Joey Votto is more apt to be pitched to in the early innings of a scoreless game than the late stages of a close one with the game then on the line.
So the point is that getting on base other than a base hit can at times be advantageous and other times be disadvantagous for the hitting team and vice versa for the team in the field. And so often the walk is a bonafide percentage move made by the manager.
Yet, at the same time, consider what led to the Yankee scoring last night in the eighth inning off of Farnsworth:
- E. Chavez walked
- D. Jeter struck out looking
- C. Granderson walked, E. Chavez to second
- M. Teixeira walked, E. Chavez to third, C. Granderson to second
- A. Rodriguez walked, E. Chavez scored, C. Granderson to third, M. Teixeira to second
Now without those walks, the Yankees lose. But, as you said, getting the runners on base lead to them scoring where otherwise Cano might have instead had a two out single in the ninth. So, who gets the credit? Is that reflective of Chavez, Granderson, Teixeira and Rodriguez getting themselves walked or Farnsworth not being able to find the plate?
That’s why I believe getting on base beyond a hitter’s ability to hit safely cannot be properly understood in terms of an individual percentage because so often it is a strategic part of the game or reflective of the pitcher’s lack of control. Like last night with the Yankees, with their lineup, the last thing any Tampa Bay pitcher wanted to do was to give one a free pass to first
But if a pitcher is throwing bullets, a good hitter tries to foul off those border line pitches and hoping that leads to going deep into the count forcing the pitcher to throw that extra inch or so inside the strike zone insted of outside it. And if the pitcher has over-whelming stuff in a tie-game, a speedster forcing that walk can therefore create a run without a hit – lead off walk, stolen base, sacrifice to third and score on a sacrifice fly. That credit goes to the batter completely and this does indeed show how trying to get on base other than a hit has to be credited to the batter.
But often so many runners are also left stranded on base – how often do we see a team score one or two runs and leave a slew of runners on base. And how often do we see a team score five or six runs with just maybe seven or eight base runners total. How often did we a batter pitched around and get two or three walks in a game?
That is why I say that of course, getting base runners is vital but that often the importance of the walk in and out of itself is in terms of selected strategy and less than either the pitcher’s inability or the batter’s ability. And often that strategy on the part of the team on the field backfires on them.
If OBP is to be used as a stat to be reflective of an individual player’s ability, perhaps it should be seen in terms of the pitcher minus intentional walks than that of the batter. Why? Because a hitter has a better chance of being walked facing an Oliver Perez rathern than a R.A. Dickey even though both could be pitching the equivalent of a five hitter over nine innings.
Regarding the argument that more base runners produce more runs, I would rather have a team that can score five runs and leave five runners on base than a team that can score four runners leaving ten.
It all depends upon the makeup of the team, the type of hitters they have – a team that is able to group hits and walks together rather than get on base and be stranded are those are the teams with the clutch hitters, the ones who get their base hits when they count, whether or not those in front of them got on via walk or a hit. They do not need as many runners on base as other teams that don’t have the ability to bunch their hits and walks to make them count instead of needing more runners on base and hitting as individuals instead of team work.
It also depends upon who is pitching. Some pitchers are going to keep runners off base no matter what.
Bottom line, it is a combination of getting on base and hitting. Other than the solo home run, they both work hand in hand.
He is kind of a one-plane swinger. He does make pitchers work and he can foul balls off like the devil. But he has no strengths as a hitter. And he is mediocre in the field. I fear that he is one of those dreaded “guys that players like having around.” I mean, he is the Whipped Cream Pie Guy and all………
P. S. Josh Satin has absolutely stunk at the pro level. Can we go elsewhere to find a replacement? Oh, and while they are at it, can they get rid of Torres? He looks like he is going on a Consecutive Games Getting Picked Off streak. The guy is an idiot.
he’s had like 4 AB. Satin’s swinging well now and actually can play 1B.
Well he has had more than 4, but you are right, he has not had many. He has just looked so helpless—but then, so did Duda his first 2 trips. Good point.
What is he hitting with RISP?
NEXT!
FOUL. Turner is a gamer. He was off to a slow start this year and steadly improved his numbers.
As to Pascucci, I was calling for him to be brought up while Ike was in his woefull slump. The right handed bats cost us some games in May that we’ll want back in September. I’m sure he will do some pintch hitting down the streach.
Honestly , im not a Turner fan, Id wouldve rather have Rottino and designated Turner, he plays a better 1b and can even catch in a pinch. Plus we have middle infs already in Tejada, Cedeno and Quintanilla Murphy Valespin (yes rather have Quintanilla im not sure if QUint has options to be sent down). And id rather them trade for someone or pick someone up as well then carry Turner
Turners plays poor defense at every position, has zero power for a guys that looks like a linebacker,,the one positive is he has hit w runners in scoring position but it’s more likey they’ll be a reversion to the mean and he wont hit as well in these situations going forward. Now we don’t have a righty 1b to compliment Ike ..Collins doesn’t help by overusing his bench becuase imo, Turner has been exposed and has little value fast becoming a negaitve..
You cannot judge high leverage situations for Turner this year with 18 appearances. That comparison does not fly just yet. Write back after about 100 situations and see where he is at. Irrespective of Turners offensive numbers, the bad plays last night were all made by the back-ups and sometimes you just have to go for the jugular. With Kershaw pitching, defense should have been at a premium and it wasn’t. Finally, Lucas Duda is looking more and more like a solid dh in the AL. I like the guy but is RF play is not up to par just yet.
The Mets should cut Miguel Batista and recall Perdo Beato from Triple-A Buffalo, so they will turn their bullpen around.
There you go, now that’s somebody the Mets should be cutting, not Turner.
The Mets should keep Turner as a backup infielder.
Instead of cutting Turner, why doesn’t Sandy use he legal expertise to find a loop hole in the contract with MLB to cut FOX and ESPN we can catch Gary, Keith and Ron and don’t have to be subjected to the banal nonsence of those two networks?
Now this is one suggestion I can get behind.
If only………I had a hard time the last two weekends trying to decide with broadcast annoyed me the most.
*which broadcast
Hi Srt,
I look at your dilemma two ways.
1) There are some decisions that are so close they have to be settled not by those involved but rather by a supreme court decision.
2) It’s like asking someone the type of execution they prefer.
The only real solution is what I suggested in the shout box. Due to the seven second delay, DVR the telecast, tape the radio broadast, avoid all contact with the outside world and then play both simultanesly the next day. Would be a modern version of the Vitaphone system!
LOL #2
I know many SAP the volume or mute it and synch it up with WFAN and Howie. The way my SNY feed is coming through my cable box to my PC, I don’t have either option. I find myself often yelling: ‘What? What did you just say?’ Or quite frequently: ‘Shut up, Orel’, who I cannot stand, going back to ’88. He was my least favorite Met to ever wear the uniform.
HI Srt:
RE: LOL #2
Would not work. The video feed we get from ESPN is at least seven second delay so you would hear things before seeing things.
On FOX there is a way around it. Often I notice the cable feed is affected by that delay while the over the air feed is aligned with radio. So whip out that old rabbit ear antenna, tolerate the usually quite blurry and shadowy standard definition picture quality and there ya go!
Unless Janet Jackson caused the networks to delay everything.
Or do what I sometimes do. Take the radio into the shower and run out soaking wet whenever something good happens in order to then see it on TV with the audio off. No, will not attach a picture of me doing that under any circumstances below an award of two million dollars (for two million bucks I’ll gladly humilate myself and it being an award instead of a gift or something I earned, the two million would not be taxable – I learned from the Marv Thronberrry experience!)
I could tell you why there is a difference….
Speed of Light is a constant but the differences in distance is what causes the delay!
Local Broadcaster gets the feed direct from the stadium. It’s encoded into MPEG2 so there is roughly a 2 to 3 second delay from actual events to decoded and broadcast signal.
This delay is present in ALL signals broadcast as it is delayed at the stadium.
The broadcaster then has to send the signal to the cable carriers which in many cases goes via satellite (3 second delay) to most people but may use fiber optics to the local cable provider. The cable provider has to encode this signal again to insert into their digital stream so add another 5-10 seconds.
Radio doesn’t usually use fiber optics they use TCP/IP so while thier audio is less delayed coming out of the stadium it suffers from Internet latency.
Many radio stations and TV broadcasters will add a 7 second delay for profanity so now your getting into the 20-25 second delay from actual events.
If you listen to Internet Audio then add another 30 Seconds of Delay to the mix.
Almost impossible to sync up Radio and TV unless you have a video and audio delay unit in your house to fine tweak the two streams together.
The Mets will assign Turner to Triple-A Buffalo and recall Valdespin from Buffalo.
That would be a very dumb move, We are shoorthanded on RH Batters so we would replace the only guy we have who can reasonably cover 1B and is a monster with RISP with a LHB that can play OF or 2B?
If they really want Valde back (and I have no problem with him) then Send Cedeno down!
Then you have a 2B replacement and Turner is your RHPH when you have runners on and need to drive them in.
But since the idea is so dumb to me chances are likely thats precisely what the GM will do!
“But since the idea is so dumb to me chances are likely thats precisely what the GM will do!”
Hi Metsie,
That was a good one!
In my opinion, the defense of Turner is well founded. He should continue as a member of the Mets and without a doubt should not vacate in favor of Pascucci or Satin.
Considering Justin has only 1 error at playing all four infield positions and the fact that his batting average is up to .284 as of today, whoever feels that Justin doesn’t deserve to be in the majors is an absolute idiot.
I just wish the Mets would trade him to the Dodgers so that we could have his bat as his multi-fielding positions…..