Tim McCarver said what?!?!

[bosshogg23]

So im barely watching the pregame on Fox for the Dodgers vs Mets game. I have a book open and im sorting through old photographs(well im supposed to be doing that). I am hearing the broadcast but not really watching. Kenny Albert initially said the game was between "two historic rivals" or something similar. That caught by ear, seeing as the Mets didn't exist until 1962. I guess he was referring to how the Mets were a NY expansion team after the Dodgers left NY......anyways.....

Tim McCarver said that Jose Reyes is one of the top 10 players of the last 50 years.......my jaw dropped. I know he is prone to say some dumb shit but WOW. Jose Reyes may be great now and all but he is in his 3rd full friggin' year.

So my first reaction was I bet there are 10 Yankees better than Jose Reyes in the last 50 years, let alone all teams combined. So here goes, tell me if im wrong or add your own Yankees, or other teams top 10(I used 4 years as a minimum to play for the Yankees, so no ARod until the year is over).

Whitey Ford
Mickey Mantle
Yogi Berra
Elston Howard
Reggie Jackson
Don Mattingly
Dave Winfield
Rickey Henderson
Derek Jeter
Roger Clemens

[DaddyTorgo]

mrcarver is a boob

[sterlingice]

mrcarver is a boob

""

SI

[Schmidty]

mrcarver is a boob

I love boobs; therefore, I must love Tim McCarver.

[Atocep]

Things Tim McCarver has actually said this season:

I only care about on-base percentage if you can run. If you can't run, I could care less about on-base percentage.

A-Rod just fouls that ball off beautily.

On-base percentage? How about contact percentage?!

In Scrabble, W's are worth 4 points. S's are only worth 1 point. But as far as Papelbon is concerned, S's are worth a lot more than W's.

A Mark Wohlberg fastball. Catch me if you can.

I think if Norman Rockwell were alive the guy that he would paint more than anyone else would be David Eckstein.

[DaddyTorgo]

the point where mccarver really jumped the shark to me was with joe buck in 03/04 with the postseason red sox v. yankees games. mccarver came off as the biggest yankee-homer in the world (which IMO is inexcusable as a national broadcaseter...if he wants to be a yankee homer he should go be a yankee broadcaster and stay off broadcasting other teams)

[st.cronin]

If Tim McCarver could trade places with Phil Rizzuto, I would watch much more baseball.

[DaddyTorgo]

If Tim McCarver could trade places with Phil Rizzuto, I would watch much more baseball.


but phil rizzuto is....ohhhhhhh...i get it :D

[Young Drachma]

Baseball commentators are so annoying. But the game is so damn long, you need someone to fill the time in between commercials. But if they're not bored in the booth most days, who is?

[Crapshoot]

Tim McCarver is proof that stupidity can be a blessing for one's career - instead of a curse.

[Chief Rum]

You know, I am thinking this could be the new Max Football thread. After all, we're going to constantly be getting new material.

[DeToxRox]

Best part is Reyes isn't even the best SS in the NL East.

[rowech]

Best part is Reyes isn't even the best SS in the NL East.

I'm not saying Ramirez is better just yet and I'm not saying Reyes is either. I don't think we'll figure out which one of these guys is better for another 10 years. So many had decided Nomar was so much better than Jeter and I'm pretty sure nobody would say that over their careers.

[MikeVic]

Best part is Reyes isn't even the best SS in the NL East.

I'm not saying Ramirez is better just yet and I'm not saying Reyes is either. I don't think we'll figure out which one of these guys is better for another 10 years. So many had decided Nomar was so much better than Jeter and I'm pretty sure nobody would say that over their careers.

[Desnudo]

Best part is Reyes isn't even the best SS in the NL East.

[clintl]

Baseball commentators are so annoying. But the game is so damn long, you need someone to fill the time in between commercials. But if they're not bored in the booth most days, who is?

One great thing about being a Giants fan is that the Giants' broadcasting team (Jon Miller, Duane Kuiper, Mike Krukow) approach covering the game like it's a game, and it's supposed to be fun, rather than something to be overanalyzed. Not that there's no analysis, but you can always count on them to tell a half dozen funny stories per game, and make fun of a few fans. McCarver actually came out to SF and joined the team for a season a few years ago, and the chemistry was awful. Fortunately, he did not stick around.

[jeff061]

Doesn't get better than Jerry Remy. It's painful to watch the national guys.

[MrDNA]

Best part is Reyes isn't even the best SS in the NL East.

For my vote, it's Rollins. But... I don't get a vote :(

[DaddyTorgo]

Doesn't get better than Jerry Remy. It's painful to watch the national guys.

remy's losing it though. He spends 90% of the game now talking about his website or shilling all the other crap, the bobblehead dolls, the dating show, red sox nation, all that crap.

IMO it hasn't been the same since it was remy+ sean mcdonough

frankly i'd rather listen on the radio to Castig (even without Trupe)

[Lathum]

For once I agree with McCarver

[Crapshoot]

Doesn't get better than Jerry Remy. It's painful to watch the national guys.

Yes, yes it does. 3 years of listening to Remy made me yearn for anyone else. Kruk and Kuip are by the best of the 3 sets of broadcasters I've heard (Giants, Padres, Red Sox).

[Lathum]

Best part is Reyes isn't even the best SS in the NL East.

Hanley is having a great year but

1. He plays for a team no one cares about with zero expectations
2. I watch a ton of Mets games and baseball in general. no one changes the complexion of a game when he gets on the bases more then Reyes. The effect he has is so unique.

[Lathum]

lol,

I am watching the replay of the game and as we I was typing the last post he stole second :)

[Lathum]

and third. and Wright singles him home proving my point

[stevew]

Whitey Ford
Mickey Mantle
Yogi Berra
Elston Howard
Reggie Jackson
Don Mattingly
Dave Winfield
Rickey Henderson
Derek Jeter
Roger Clemens

Mariano Rivera
Catfish Hunter

[Crapshoot]

Hanley is having a great year but

1. He plays for a team no one cares about with zero expectations
2. I watch a ton of Mets games and baseball in general. no one changes the complexion of a game when he gets on the bases more then Reyes. The effect he has is so unique.

That's no excuse, and a ridiculous attitude. Ramirez is today at least as good as Reyes, and quite possibly better. The "complexion of the game" and "knows how to win with pressure" arguments have no bearing on value.

[Lathum]

That's no excuse, and a ridiculous attitude. Ramirez is today at least as good as Reyes, and quite possibly better. The "complexion of the game" and "knows how to win with pressure" arguments have no bearing on value.

How can you seriously say that?

You don't think the ability to disrupt a game when on the basepaths contibutes to a players value?


Watch a Mets game sometime, when Reyes is on base the game changes drasticly. But if you want to sell his 70 stolen bases short thats your buisness.

[Lathum]

dola- and don't undersell the expectation to win effecting a players performance.

How many guys have gone to the Yankees and turned to shit because they can't handle the pressure.

[sterlingice]

Maybe McCarver has him on his fantasy team

SI

[Atocep]

Best part is Reyes isn't even the best SS in the NL East.

Hanley Ramirez and Jose Reyes will be compared until Florida decides they can't afford Ramirez and he ends up playing for Boston or some other big market club. They were neck and neck last year in production and this year even though Ramirez has the edge offensively, its still just as close.

However, Ramirez is not a good shortstop defensively. He's actually not even an average SS at this stage of his career while Reyes is quite possibly the best in NL.

Both players are among the best in the NL. Both players are still young and improving. When you factor in defense I'd give Reyes and edge, but not a big one.

[Crapshoot]

How can you seriously say that?

You don't think the ability to disrupt a game when on the basepaths contibutes to a players value?


Watch a Mets game sometime, when Reyes is on base the game changes drasticly. But if you want to sell his 70 stolen bases short thats your buisness.

Yes, and Hanley Ramirez is hitting .332/.390/.561 , while Reyes is hitting .301/.374/.445. Reyes 69 SB's are great and all (and Ramirez has 41 this year at roughly the same rate), but it takes an impressive Mets-tinted view to assume Reyes is anywhere close to the offensive player Ramirez is. Reyes is better defensively, but Ramirez has the 3rd highest VORP in baseball - he's roughly 20 runs better offensively than Reyes.

[Crapshoot]

dola- and don't undersell the expectation to win effecting a players performance.

How many guys have gone to the Yankees and turned to shit because they can't handle the pressure.

Oh god - how appropriate that you're tossing out these cliches in a McCarver thread. Ironic, but appropriate.

[EagleFan]

Bah!!! My favorite announcer line was Joe Morgan ponsering why the Braves first baseman was playing behind Pat Burrell at first and not holding him on with the follow up quote of "Pat Burrell can run".

Ironically two batters later Burrell was thrown out trying to score from second on a two out single, and thrown out by a whole city block.

Yeah Joe, Pat can run...just not at a pace much quicker than a brisk walk.

[DaddyTorgo]

Hanley Ramirez and Jose Reyes will be compared until Florida decides they can't afford Ramirez and he ends up playing for Boston or some other big market club. They were neck and neck last year in production and this year even though Ramirez has the edge offensively, its still just as close.

However, Ramirez is not a good shortstop defensively. He's actually not even an average SS at this stage of his career while Reyes is quite possibly the best in NL.

Both players are among the best in the NL. Both players are still young and improving. When you factor in defense I'd give Reyes and edge, but not a big one.


man I miss hanley. I hope the sox can get him back. Don't get me wrong though...beckett/lowell was a great return for him.

[SackAttack]

I'm not saying Ramirez is better just yet and I'm not saying Reyes is either. I don't think we'll figure out which one of these guys is better for another 10 years. So many had decided Nomar was so much better than Jeter and I'm pretty sure nobody would say that over their careers.

I'm not saying Ramirez is better just yet and I'm not saying Reyes is either. I don't think we'll figure out which one of these guys is better for another 10 years. So many had decided Nomar was so much better than Jeter and I'm pretty sure nobody would say that over their careers.

:confused: :confused:

[Chief Rum]

Best part is Reyes isn't even the best SS in the NL East.

I'm not saying Ramirez is better just yet and I'm not saying Reyes is either. I don't think we'll figure out which one of these guys is better for another 10 years. So many had decided Nomar was so much better than Jeter and I'm pretty sure nobody would say that over their careers.

[k0ruptr]

Thats a retarded statement by McCarver

[larrymcg421]

What the hell? I don't think I dropped acid before coming in to work this morning?

[rowech]

I originally had double posted and everyone has made me very aware of that.

[Lathum]

Yes, and Hanley Ramirez is hitting .332/.390/.561 , while Reyes is hitting .301/.374/.445. Reyes 69 SB's are great and all (and Ramirez has 41 this year at roughly the same rate), but it takes an impressive Mets-tinted view to assume Reyes is anywhere close to the offensive player Ramirez is. Reyes is better defensively, but Ramirez has the 3rd highest VORP in baseball - he's roughly 20 runs better offensively than Reyes.

clearly your not getting my point.

When Ramirez is on base it's just another guy with speed on base, when Reyes is on base the entire game and the way the pitcher goes about it changes.

[larrymcg421]

clearly your not getting my point.

When Ramirez is on base it's just another guy with speed on base, when Reyes is pon base the entire game and the wat the pitcher goes about it changes.

Can't the pitcher just pretend it's Ramirez on base and go about his normal routine?

[rowech]

This is a pointless argument guys. Both guys are GREAT players but hold this argument for another ten years.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Jose Reyes is so good that he ran from his shortstop position in New York and caught Barry Bonds' 756th home run ball in the outfield seats in San Francisco. Beat that.

[larrymcg421]

Jose Reyes is so good that he ran from his shortstop position in New York and caught Barry Bonds' 756th home run ball in the outfield seats in San Francisco. Beat that.

But he didn't do this in the 9th inning or in a Game 7, therefore he is not "clutch", nor could he ever be a "true Yankee (or Met)".

[Logan]

But he didn't do this in the 9th inning or in a Game 7, therefore he is not "clutch", nor could he ever be a "true Yankee (or Met)".

Please don't lump us Met fans in with the moron Yankee fans who love that extremely homosexual "true Yankee" phrase. No one ever says that.

[Logan]

I'm going to agree with Lathum on how Reyes changes the game when he's on the bases. It's just something you have to see on an everyday basis to understand. I know that sounds as bullshit as the "this guy is sooo clutch" arguments, but whatever...

Some thoughts on Reyes from Buster Olney in a recent column:

Jose Reyes should be part of any conversation about the NL MVP. Consider some of these numbers: He became the first NL player since Tony Womack in 1999 to steal 70 bases, and the impact of his baserunning is real. In the games in which he's stolen a base, the Mets have a .625 winning percentage, according to Mark Simon of ESPN research, and when he doesn't steal a base, their winning percentage is .528.

Here's more: When he's been on base during David Wright's at-bats this year, the third baseman is hitting .400, according to the Elias Sports Bureau; when Reyes is not on base, Wright is hitting almost 100 points lower, at .307. Carlos Beltran is hitting .329 with Reyes on base, .260 when he's not. Wright and Beltran are more apt to see fastballs with Reyes on base, of course, because opposing catchers and pitchers must combat Reyes' base-stealing threat.

And, oh by the way, Reyes has the second-highest fielding percentage of any shortstop in baseball. That's a good year.

[Lathum]

great write Logan, thanks.

[DaddyTorgo]

In the games in which he's stolen a base, the Mets have a .625 winning percentage, according to Mark Simon of ESPN research, and when he doesn't steal a base, their winning percentage is .528.

--- I havn't taken statistics since HS but even I can tell you that stat isn't necessarily indicitive of his baserunning and what it does. It's an example of cherry-picking a stat without demonstratable significance that supports one's argument. there are SO MANY other factors that feed into whether they win or lose any given game.

the argument about other batters hitting better...that IMO has some statistical significance.

[Logan]

Agreed...it would be cool to see some analysis on when the steals came, if they resulted in runs, would it have changed the game if he didn't take the base (i.e. someone hitting a double after he stole third), etc. Not that this would necessarily tell the whole story either.

[Lathum]

In the games in which he's stolen a base, the Mets have a .625 winning percentage, according to Mark Simon of ESPN research, and when he doesn't steal a base, their winning percentage is .528.

--- I havn't taken statistics since HS but even I can tell you that stat isn't necessarily indicitive of his baserunning and what it does. It's an example of cherry-picking a stat without demonstratable significance that supports one's argument. there are SO MANY other factors that feed into whether they win or lose any given game.

the argument about other batters hitting better...that IMO has some statistical significance.

what you need to understand about Reyes isn't how many steals he has but the fact that the potential is always there for him to steal that it changes the whole complexion af an at-bat when Reyes is on base.

[DaddyTorgo]

no no...i agree with the batting-average thing. And that's a correlation that's obvious.

But the connection between say...him stealing a base in the first inning and the mets winning 12-2 isn't.

there's less correlation in the "he steals a base and the mets win" thing. Because a single steal is such an isolated event in the context of a ballgame.

[Lathum]

no no...i agree with the batting-average thing. And that's a correlation that's obvious.

But the connection between say...him stealing a base in the first inning and the mets winning 12-2 isn't.

there's less correlation in the "he steals a base and the mets win" thing. Because a single steal is such an isolated event in the context of a ballgame.

I completely disagree with this.

You could just as easily turn it around and say Ramirez went 3-4 tonight but the Marlins won 7-1 so they didn't need his 3 hits.

[Lathum]

dola=
this argument just illustrates the beauty of baseball

[DaddyTorgo]

lol true that.

although I suppose you could run a r-squared thing on it to get a coefficient of correlation if you gathered a ton of data points.

but I frankly don't care enough to do that :D

[DaddyTorgo]

I care enough to google though

http://www.philly.com/dailynews/sports/20070510_THOU_SHALT_NOT_STEAL.html
http://espn.go.com/mlb/columns/mcadam_sean/1333246.html

quick point though: The reality is that over baseball history there is a negative correlation between stolen bases and run scoring . Stolen bases may be exciting, but only about 25 players in history have added at least 5 wins to their teams with stolen bases over their careers. Stolen bases have fallen in popularity because they don't win baseball games

You can see the correlations of stolen bases and other stats to runs at http://danagonistes.blogspot.com/2005/01/mathematician-at-ballpark.html

The values of stolen bases during players careers comes from the 2007 ESPN Baseball Encyclopedia

[TroyF]

For once I agree with McCarver

OK, I can live with the Reyes worship. He's a terrific player and is having a fantastic year. He's a sensational young baseball player. I can even live with the MVP candidate thing. He's been that good.

But. . .

1) I'd imagine anytime a good leadoff hitter gets on base and is able to steal a base, his team has a pretty damned good chance to win the game. The Rockies have a winning percentage of 67% when Kaz Matsui gets on and steals a base. When he doesn't, they win about 48% of their games.

2) Reyes has a long, long way to go before we need to start comparing him to one of the ten best players of the last 50 years. That's a hell of a lot of hall of famers to go through. I won't put ANY 24 year old in that category. Let's see how he ages and watch him rack up numbers before we start comparing him with the all time greats. (and there's where I think you're nuts Latham, Tim is NOT right in that regard. He wants to PREDICT he'll be one of the top ten when we look back on his career? Fine. To say it as fact now? Ridiculous)

3) It's great to have so many talented young SS again. After the Jeter, A-Rod, Nomar grouping it seemed to die down for a few years with just the occasional star popping up. Now we have Reyes, Ramirez, Tulowitzki and Hardy all 25 or under. All have different skillsets and are a blast to watch play. I'm not putting any of em in the top 10 of the last 50 years though.

[Lathum]

(and there's where I think you're nuts Latham, Tim is NOT right in that regard. He wants to PREDICT he'll be one of the top ten when we look back on his career? Fine. To say it as fact now? Ridiculous)

I was being sarcastic

[Shkspr]

You could just as easily turn it around and say Ramirez went 3-4 tonight but the Marlins won 7-1 so they didn't need his 3 hits.

:shrug: They may not have. On the other hand, one base is qualitatively much different than three fewer outs, three hits, and five bases.

Could a team that won their game 7-1 still win that game with their shortstop going 0-4 rather than 3-4? Sure. Could those three hits have been the difference makers? Sure.

Could a team that wins 12-2 still wn their game without a stolen base in the first? Sure. Could that stolen base have been the difference maker? Maaaaaybe...once in fifty years.

So, yeah, you could turn it around if you wanted to. I wouldn't.

[Shkspr]

Speaking of running stat checks, I'd bet that the David Wright tidbit, if it still held up through the current point of the season, would be about 2.5 standard deviations above the norm. I don't know if having Reyes on base is worth more than about 5-8 runs a season to Wright's numbers, but it does look like there might be a small benefit. I'd still want more data to be sure.

[rkmsuf]

Tim McCarver is only rivaled by David Beckham and Chuck Norris.

And there is a big gap to #4.

[JS19]

I have to agree with Logan and Lathum here. It's already been said, but it's something you have to see on a regular basis. It's not only his stats, but when this guy is on base you see pitchers rush their deliveries to the plate, the guys the plate seem to get more fastballs, pitchers seem to worry more about Reyes on base they don't pitch Beltran or Wright how they probably should. Also, when he's batting, fielders rush there throws more often which result in errors that shuldn't have been made. There are many things he brings to the table that change the game that don't show up in the stats.

[Crapshoot]

I have to agree with Logan and Lathum here. It's already been said, but it's something you have to see on a regular basis. It's not only his stats, but when this guy is on base you see pitchers rush their deliveries to the plate, the guys the plate seem to get more fastballs, pitchers seem to worry more about Reyes on base they don't pitch Beltran or Wright how they probably should. Also, when he's batting, fielders rush there throws more often which result in errors that shuldn't have been made. There are many things he brings to the table that change the game that don't show up in the stats.

And that makes all 3 of you wrong. The "you have to see it on a basis" crowd doesn't recognize the bias of anecdotal evidence over unbiased data - by your own accounts, none of you see Hanley Ramirez play all that often. Reyes is a very good player - all that these cliches do is unfairly diminish the case for him. Study after study has shown the effect of SB on a runner is limited, at best.

In fact, here's a good summary about SB's in general - Sheehan makes the point that the vaunted effects don't really seem to exist.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2607



Do I think Reyes has an impact? Absolutely. But what will make him a great player is an increase of that OBP to the .400/.420 levels, not stealing a 100 bases at a 70% clip.

[Crapshoot]

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/base-stealer-intangibles-part-2/

A wonderful look at the SB "intangibles" effect overall.

[lordscarlet]

dola=
this argument just illustrates the beauty of baseball

It makes me want to argue about how the 3B with the most errors in the NL(last I checked but mlb.com is loading very slowly for me right now) is one of the greatest defensive 3B to come up in many years. :)

[Travis]

Tim McCarver is only rivaled by David Beckham and Chuck Norris.

And there is a big gap to #4.

You must research Terry Tate and Alexyss Tylor. I'd take either over Beckham (even with a run-in by his wife).

[larrymcg421]

I have to agree with Logan and Lathum here. It's already been said, but it's something you have to see on a regular basis. It's not only his stats, but when this guy is on base you see pitchers rush their deliveries to the plate, the guys the plate seem to get more fastballs, pitchers seem to worry more about Reyes on base they don't pitch Beltran or Wright how they probably should. Also, when he's batting, fielders rush there throws more often which result in errors that shuldn't have been made. There are many things he brings to the table that change the game that don't show up in the stats.

I really don't understand arguments like this. What good is this supposed "effect" if it doesn't translate to significantly more hits/runs than in normal situations? It seems to me that these pitchers who you see pissing their pants because Reyes is hopping around the bases like the Road Runner somehow manage to recover and get a similar outcome.

[Lathum]

I really don't understand arguments like this. What good is this supposed "effect" if it doesn't translate to significantly more hits/runs than in normal situations? It seems to me that these pitchers who you see pissing their pants because Reyes is hopping around the bases like the Road Runner somehow manage to recover and get a similar outcome.

that's wrong and that is what we've been saying. As Reyes goes so go the Mets

[Crapshoot]

that's wrong and that is what we've been saying. As Reyes goes so go the Mets

Dude, look at the studies above. You can argue that this effect exists till the sky is blue - it won't change reality. Reyes is a very good player, and the Mets are very dependent on him. Offensively though, Reyes is probably the 2nd best player on the team these days behind David Wright, and probably generates runs at Beltran's pace.

[JS19]

Don't get me wrong, I think Ramirez is a great player and has lots to offer. I'm just not a "numbers" guy. I've been in many discussions on this board that go nowhere bc i dont care so much about stats and other guys swear by them. For example, I remember there was a "clutch" discussion and I argued in '99, if game 7 of the World Series was on the line, I would want Olerud batting. If you look at the numbers, sure Olerud had a good line, however, it wasn't an ARod type line, but I would want Olerud batting nontheless bc he always came through when it mattered that yr, and I can say the same for Alfonzo. Reyes is similar this yr. There have been many games, between this yr and last, where I would say to myself "if Reyes didn't do this or that", things that don't always show up in the boxscore, the Mets probably wouldn't have won.

[larrymcg421]

that's wrong and that is what we've been saying. As Reyes goes so go the Mets

Except the post I was responding to said that stats shouldn't matter, so whatever "we" was saying was certainly not the same as what he was saying.

[John Galt]

Crapshoot has won this argument hands down.

And to show the futility of the "you have to watch him everyday" crap, I have watched Reyes a ton living in NYC (live and on TV). I don't think he completely changes the game (anymore than any other really good player). And since I watch him all the time, I can't possibly be wrong.

I probably think the gap between Ramirez and Reyes is less than Crapshoot (I think the defensive gap is larger and more important), but arguing that Reyes is this revolutionary, MVP-caliber player who is one of the top players of the last 50 years is crazy-talk. Reyes may yet be worthy of an MVP (as he has developed so much in the last two years), but right now he still has to improve (or at least regain his power stroke).

[Logan]

Crapshoot has won this argument hands down.

And to show the futility of the "you have to watch him everyday" crap, I have watched Reyes a ton living in NYC (live and on TV). I don't think he completely changes the game (anymore than any other really good player). And since I watch him all the time, I can't possibly be wrong.

I probably think the gap between Ramirez and Reyes is less than Crapshoot (I think the defensive gap is larger and more important), but arguing that Reyes is this revolutionary, MVP-caliber player who is one of the top players of the last 50 years is crazy-talk. Reyes may yet be worthy of an MVP (as he has developed so much in the last two years), but right now he still has to improve (or at least regain his power stroke).

There isn't one person besides Tim McCarver saying this (outside of the MVP-caliber part), so please get that right.

Crapshoot, those studies you cite won't be able to convince me that Jose Reyes does not do things to aid his team in ways that other guys don't. Yes, the statistics that you show might say exactly that...but these are statistics based on X number of years, analyzing Y number of players. As a result, you're going to have some base-stealers that create more runs than the average guy, some base-stealers that create fewer runs than the average guy, and a whole boatload of guys who are somewhere in the middle. We're not arguing whether stealing bases is historically beneficial or not; rather, we're arguing that Jose Reyes stealing bases, and his other patterns on the basepaths, are beneficial. My point is, just because 500 players that are studied average out to adding 0.23 (or whatever) more wins than the typical guy doesn't mean that Jose Reyes doesn't add more than that.

I don't know how to calculate these things. But I know that when Jose Reyes is dancing off of 3rd base, faking breaks to the plate and the pitcher balks him in as the tying and winning runs, that's a stat I can't find anywhere.

[lordscarlet]

I need to find a crazy quote for someone to take my bait. :)

[clintl]

quick point though: The reality is that over baseball history there is a negative correlation between stolen bases and run scoring . Stolen bases may be exciting, but only about 25 players in history have added at least 5 wins to their teams with stolen bases over their careers. Stolen bases have fallen in popularity because they don't win baseball games



I think you're getting cause and effect backwards. Stolen bases have historically been popular in eras where offense (particularly HR totals) are low, and unpopular when HR totals are high. If there is a big drop in HR totals, the popularity of the stolen base will return because that changes the risk/reward equation.

As for the sabremetric analysis of the stolen base - aside from the above problem in which I believe the sabremetrists have the independent and dependent variables backwards in their analysis - the value of a stolen base is highly situational. I'm not particularly impressed with analyses that don't recognize this fact. The Boston Red Sox, for example, probably don't make it to the 2004 World Series without a key Dave Roberts stolen base at the right time. How valuable was it on that night? To say that there are only 25 players who added 5 wins to their teams with the stolen base over their careers - I just don't believe that. I think the math is misleading.

As for Reyes, he's on his way to being a great player. But right now, he's not one of the 10 best active players, let alone one of the 10 best players of the last 50 years.

[SFL Cat]

Except on defense, I'd put Ramirez up against Reyes any day of the week.

[Lathum]

Except on defense, I'd put Ramirez up against Reyes any day of the week.

Well it's a good thing defense isn't important for a shortstop

[sterlingice]

Crapshoot, those studies you cite won't be able to convince me that Jose Reyes does not do things to aid his team in ways that other guys don't. Yes, the statistics that you show might say exactly that...but these are statistics based on X number of years, analyzing Y number of players. As a result, you're going to have some base-stealers that create more runs than the average guy, some base-stealers that create fewer runs than the average guy, and a whole boatload of guys who are somewhere in the middle. We're not arguing whether stealing bases is historically beneficial or not; rather, we're arguing that Jose Reyes stealing bases, and his other patterns on the basepaths, are beneficial. My point is, just because 500 players that are studied average out to adding 0.23 (or whatever) more wins than the typical guy doesn't mean that Jose Reyes doesn't add more than that.

This sounds an awful lot like "There's a lot of statistics about a lot of players but they don't apply to my player"

SI

[Logan]

This sounds an awful lot like "There's a lot of statistics about a lot of players but they don't apply to my player"

SI

Or you could try to refute what I said. Again, Crapshoot is citing historical studies that are attempting to judge whether it is historically beneficial to steal bases. Whatever the conclusion of said study is has absolutely no bearing on whether Jose Reyes, Hanley Ramirez, John Olerud, Manny Ramirez, etc have individually benefitted or hurt their teams due to their baserunning. If such a study were done, that would be fantastic.

When you have a statistical study, there are guys around the mean and there are others who are standard deviations away from it. That's a fact. These players who are above the mean are obviously aiding their teams in ways that the guys below the mean aren't. That is exactly what this study is saying. Why couldn't Reyes be one of those guys?

[DaddyTorgo]

Or you could try to refute what I said. Again, Crapshoot is citing historical studies that are attempting to judge whether it is historically beneficial to steal bases. Whatever the conclusion of said study is has absolutely no bearing on whether Jose Reyes, Hanley Ramirez, John Olerud, Manny Ramirez, etc have individually benefitted or hurt their teams due to their baserunning. If such a study were done, that would be fantastic.

When you have a statistical study, there are guys around the mean and there are others who are standard deviations away from it. That's a fact. These players who are above the mean are obviously aiding their teams in ways that the guys below the mean aren't. That is exactly what this study is saying. Why couldn't Reyes be one of those guys?

but the point that you are missing is that in this study, even the relatively small # of guys at the far end of the curve positively have a hard time contributing more than say...5 runs over the course of their career like i cited.

the studies do cite the outliers on the positive side. and sure reyes may be one of those...crapshoot + my's point is that even those outliers are not successful in a statistically significant way (figure 5 wins out of an average-length career for a non-scrub/solid ML player which is how many games?)