Arizona wins Defensive team of the year

[da55bums]

looks like the NL is superior in defense.

should be, more pitchers ground out.

 

[Arizona_Sting]

Dbacks, Royals and O's are the three best defensive teams in the MLB, imo.

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

Nope, I didn't, and I don't need to....fans have selective memory when it comes to their team, and I don't see how it's any different here. Your selective memory led you to think Puig hit .350 in July when he was only at .287. Fans tend to overrated the teams/players they like, that's just the way it is.

Stats on the other hand record what actually happened, not what someone remembered/felt happening. When it comes to something like this, I will take what the stats say over the fan's selective memory every time.

You ask Yankee fans for example, and many will tell you Jeter was a good fielder...those fans will remember the great plays more than the bad plays. I'll take the stats that show he wasn't a good fielder over what those fans felt, just as I'll take the stats that say Puig wasn't that good in July over your thought that he dominated in July. Nothing against you personally, but all fans have that bias.

I don't disagree with Stats because they tell alot about whats going on in the game obviously, but numbers don't show how a player's presence alone makes everybody else have energy or how a player in that line up helps the rest of the line up see better pitches wich was huge when Han am was in the line up & obviously you see the differnce when you watch the games, because in the end what's the point if you don't watch baseball games *& just go only by stats or by what fat ass John Kurks says & if you didn't atleast see most of the games then you didn't see the impact they had in the dug out ass much as a stat will tell you. Derek Jeter was a Gold Glove regardless, if you want to only go by stats once again i tell you it doesen't tell everything & i'm pretty sure the experts would say your on crack if you didn't think he was a great SS in his career IMO
.
I just gave you a clear example on how Hanley being out of the line up also effcted the Dodgers big time even though the Cards pitching staff did great also.they where pretty much an avg. team after that & stats didn't show that.

If you have your best players go down any any sport it effects the whole team many times not just in stats, but emotionally also. Look at the Packers baaannngg!! Aaron Rodgers goes down & they lose that game Vs the Bears & now who knows how they will play with out him.

If you have more question ask me an an hour...i m missing some of the Laker game

 

[Jonas_steven]

Arizona and Baltimore were vying for best defensive team through at least the Allstar break. KC has a great defense as well. All three could have easily won the award.

 

[StanMarsh51]

I don't disagree with Stats because they tell alot about whats going on in the game obviously, but numbers don't show how a player's presence alone makes everybody else have energy or how a player in that line up helps the rest of the line up see better pitches wich was huge when Han am was in the line up & obviously you see the differnce when you watch the games, because in the end what's the point if you dont watch baseball games *& just go only by stats.

I just gave you a clear example on how Hanley being out of the line up also effcted the Dodgers big time even though the Cards pitching staff did great also.they where pretty much an avg. team after that & stats didn't show that.

If you have your best players go down any any sport it effects the whole team many times not just in stats, but emotionally also. Look at the Packers baaannngg Rodgers go down & they lose that game Vs the Bears

The Rodgers comparison doesn't really compare b/c sport like baseball is way different than football or basketball in the sense that a football/basketball player can control every offensive play, but that can't happen in baseball. That's one of the problems when I hear a baseball fan say 'player X carried the team'....player X got 4 plate appearances out of possibly 35 for the lineup in the game, a small %..Kobe has a greater effect on a basketball game than Mike Trout does on a baseball game.

In the playoffs, it's way too small a sample size to show what impact an individual player has..players go hot and cold just like that in the playoffs, as we've seen throughout the years....the Dodgers pitching was not good the last couple games of the NLCS, so we could also give them a good part of the blame.

 

[Fountain City Blues]

should be, more pitchers ground out.

That shouldn't matter in theory actually, as it wouldn't be an above average play and therefore 0 runs saved.

Edit: Or is your point that AL defenses are under more stress due to a DH?

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

The Rodgers comparison doesn't really compare b/c sport like baseball is way different than football or basketball in the sense that a football/basketball player can control every offensive play, but that can't happen in baseball. That's one of the problems when I hear a baseball fan say 'player X carried the team'....player X got 4 plate appearances out of possibly 35 for the lineup in the game, a small %

In the playoffs, it's way too small a sample size to show what impact an individual player has..players go hot and cold just like that in the playoffs, as we've seen throughout the years....the Dodgers pitching was not good the last couple games of the NLCS, so we could also give them a good part of the blame.

I understand but that's your opinion & beliefs & not everybody will agree with you or disagree with you, but i know this take Puig & Hanley off that team After June 22 & they would be below Avg. even with a good starting rotation...the 1st 2 months of the season I believe the Dodgers where 2nd to last in RISP next to the Marlins..

And also baseball Experts say it all the time how one player carried a team..wich i also agree with many times if its obvious that baseball player has been MVP!..Maybe you should get in too being a sport journalist & change the minds of experts too not think this way & then maybe fans will too someday & then we can all tell Yankee fans that Jeter sucks ass at SS

 

[StanMarsh51]

I understand but that's your opinion & beliefs & not everybody will agree with you or disagree with you, but i know this take Puig & Hanley off that team After June 22 & they would be below Avg. even with a good starting rotation...the 1st 2 months of the season I believe the Dodgers where 2nd to last in RISP next to the Marlins..

And also baseball Experts say it all the time how one player carried a team..wich i also agree with many times if its obvious that baseball player has been MVP!..Maybe you should get in too being a sport journalist & change the minds of experts too not think this way & then maybe fans will too someday & then we can all tell Yankee fans that Jeter sucks ass at SS

Once again, I don't know what makes you think these post-game/commentary personalities and journalists are "experts." The journalists are usually beat writers...doesn't make one an expert. The other guys tend to be former players, and if you think being an ex-player makes you an end all authority expert, I suggest you hear some of the things that come out of the mouths of John Kruk, Mitch Williams, Joe Morgan, David Justice, Tim McCarver, etc.

Shoot, do you also consider the likes of Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews 'political experts?' Because that's essentially the same logic you're using when you say those guys listed above are baseball experts. They're people paid to give their opinion to the average viewer, who on average isn't very sophisticated.

 

[BigDDude]

Dbacks, Royals and O's are the three best defensive teams in the MLB, imo.

And, MLB agrees, with the Royals and O's splitting A.L honors, I see after checking today.

 

[da55bums]

That shouldn't matter in theory actually, as it wouldn't be an above average play and therefore 0 runs saved.

Edit: Or is your point that AL defenses are under more stress due to a DH?

yes, the NL, on paper, will always appear better defensively...just like the NL generally will always have lower ERA's...

the point is, saying the NL is better defensively is really pointless....its actually better to individualize the stats to at least make it someone comparable.

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

Once again, I don't know what makes you think these post-game/commentary personalities and journalists are "experts." The journalists are usually beat writers...doesn't make one an expert. The other guys tend to be former players, and if you think being an ex-player makes you an end all authority expert, I suggest you hear some of the things that come out of the mouths of John Kruk, Mitch Williams, Joe Morgan, David Justice, Tim McCarver, etc.

Shoot, do you also consider the likes of Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews 'political experts?' Because that's essentially the same logic you're using when you say those guys listed above are baseball experts. They're people paid to give their opinion to the average viewer, who on average isn't very sophisticated.

This is not to say that many of them don't know what they are talking about...for one thing John Kruk is a fucken idiot who any day will get a heart attack on the set..But IMO opinion agree more with the Dodgers Journalist then those idiots at ESPN because they are with the team on a day to day basis & give wonderful insights here in LA, But like i also told you, you should get involved in sports journalist to show those guys you mentioned that they are not experts & you have a greater knowledge on stats then them...kudos to you

 

[StanMarsh51]

This is not to say that many of them don't know what they are talking about...for one thing John Kruk is a fucken idiot who any day will get a heart attack on the set..But IMO opinion agree more with the Dodgers Journalist then those idiots at ESPN because they are with the team on a day to day basis & give wonderful insights here in LA, But like i also told you, you should get involved in sports journalist to show those guys you mentioned that they are not experts & you have a greater knowledge on stats then them...kudos to you

Well for starters, I'm not crazy enough to pursue something with a poor job market...I wouldn't have wasted my college education on something like journalism, when it's a field largely about connections. And like I said, most of these guys are beat writers who for the most part report the news (how does that make one an expert), and former players (which for a lot of teams/networks, if their English is good enough, they can be a post-game analyst).



And let's add some numbers to show how much better the offense and pitching got before June 22, and post June 22 (for the 50 game stretch):

Pitching staff before June 22 - 4.2 runs allowed/game
Pitching staff 6/22 to 8/17 - 2.8 runs allowed/game

Lineup before June 22 - 3.5 runs scored/game
Lineup before June 22 - 4.9 runs scored/game

So the lineup scored 1.4 more runs during the 50 game stretch than before, and the pitching staff allowed 1.4 more runs.

If you know anything about incremental value, you can't possibly argue that Hanley and Puig were fully responsible for that 1.4 increase in runs scored....to which, you can't logically argue that they were more responsible than an entire pitching staff for allowing 1.4 less runs/game. Puig and Hanley were great during those 50 games and may have helped add protection for a few games around them, but you're certainly not going to attempt that those two were fully responsible for the entire +1.4 runs/game during the 50 games, and thus as/more important than the entire pitching staff. Hanley's a relatively mediocre fielder and Puig is very solid in the field, but he's not saving runs every night in the field, let's be realistic here.

The math doesn't add up in your argument.

"I saw the games" doesn't explain that simple math above.

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

Well for starters, I'm not crazy enough to pursue something with a poor job market...I wouldn't have wasted my college education on something like journalism, when it's a field largely about connections. And like I said, most of these guys are beat writers who for the most part report the news (how does that make one an expert), and former players (which for a lot of teams/networks, if their English is good enough, they can be a post-game analyst).



And let's add some numbers to show how much better the offense and pitching got before June 22, and post June 22 (for the 50 game stretch):

Pitching staff before June 22 - 4.2 runs allowed/game
Pitching staff 6/22 to 8/17 - 2.8 runs allowed/game

Lineup before June 22 - 3.5 runs scored/game
Lineup before June 22 - 4.9 runs scored/game

So the lineup scored 1.4 more runs during the 50 game stretch than before, and the pitching staff allowed 1.4 more runs.

If you know anything about incremental value, you can't possibly argue that Hanley and Puig were fully responsible for that 1.4 increase in runs scored....to which, you can't logically argue that they were more responsible than an entire pitching staff for allowing 1.4 less runs/game. Puig and Hanley were great during those 50 games and may have helped add protection for a few games around them, but you're certainly not going to attempt that those two were fully responsible for the entire +1.4 runs/game during the 50 games.

The math doesn't add up in your argument.

"I saw the games" doesn't explain that simple math above.

This why i tell you numbers don't tell the whole story even though it's a big part of the game..& i will not agree with you because yes i did see the games & saw the impact that they had on the team, all Dodger fans saw this..I gave credit to the pitching staff for what they did, but because you look at stats & see aplyer go 1-5 you might assume he had a bad game, when for example you didn't see him hit the grand slam in the bottom of the 9..this is where stats alot of time are irrelevant...& like i said before if you believe Hanley did not lift the team & was huge during the that streak then your on crack..that's why i said you also need to see the games.

If you want to make the choice to just go off stats then thats your choice whatever waggs your tail, but i'm a fan of the game & i rather see the games instead then to rely on only stats becuase i'ma fanatic.

And yes they where great because i saw the impact they had on the team...fact!! weather they had 1 great game or a bad game..the energy was way different all around. This Dodger team was God awfull with RISP all Doddger fan would talk about this we couldnt get nobody in, believe me where frustated & where 9.5 gmaes back & falling fast, i even lost count on how many times also Belaasrio & Legue where just blowing games away, everyday we hated those 2 ask any Dodger fan...Don Mattingly almost got fired you should of saw how we where playing it was garbage..that's why you need to watch the games everybody in LA was pissed...trust me!!

 

[StanMarsh51]

like i said before if you believe Hanley did not lift the team & was huge during the that streak then your on crack..that's why i said you also need to see the games.

And for the 50th time, I never said Hanley/Puig weren't great during that stretch....I'm saying there's no way they were more important than the entire pitching staff.

but because you look at stats & see aplyer go 1-5 you might assume he had a bad game, when for example you didn't see him hit the grand slam in the bottom of the 9

What? The numbers I provided show runs per game....someone hitting a grand slam would have an effect on runs per game, so how am I ignoring that.



So back to my original point....Puig and Hanley combined would need to account for at least 1.4 runs per game for those 50 games (on average) in order to say they had as big an impact as the entire pitching staff. Saying "ask Dodger fans" and "watch the games" doesn't show that they accounted for at least 1.4 runs/game.

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

=StanMarsh51;3952030]And for the 50th time, I never said Hanley/Puig weren't great during that stretch....I'm saying there's no way they were more important than the entire pitching staff.

That's you opinion if you think the pitching staff was better...but not IMO

So back to my original point....Puig and Hanley combined would need to account for at least 1.4 runs per game for those 50 games (on average) in order to say they had as big an impact as the entire pitching staff. Saying "ask Dodger fans" and "watch the games" doesn't show that they accounted for at least 1.4 runs/game.

Han Ram alone in just Through June 22 - July 30 was averaging almost a run a game every other night..i think that covers a nice portion of 1.5 especially those 1st 35 games...the guys was on fire

Hanley Ramirez

From June 22 - July 30

Avg.375 HR 9 RBI 25 OBP 420 SLG 715 OBS 1.115

Yea i would say that's pretty impressive for just over a month

But hey if you want too stick to stats knock yourself out I will rather much enjoy the games live & see the real impact that players have

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

Puig’s best month (.436, 1.180 OPS) was June, when he jolted a team and energized a fan base.

 

[BigDDude]

...and who does not love a "I know you are, but what am I" thread.........

 

[StanMarsh51]

Puig’s best month (.436, 1.180 OPS) was June, when he jolted a team and energized a fan base.

Why did it take 22 days into June to 'jolt' the team? Puig did play before then, and hit better before June 22, no?

Puig from June 3 (his debut) to June 21 - .455 AVG, 1.251 OPS
Puig from June 22 to June 30 - .400 AVG, 1.047 OPS

How come the Dodgers weren't on fire for the near 3 weeks he hit .455? Does the Puig 'jolt' take 20 or so days to come into effect?

 

[LALakersboy24.7]

Why did it take 22 days into June to 'jolt' the team? Puig did play before then, and hit better before June 22, no?

Puig from June 3 (his debut) to June 21 - .455 AVG, 1.251 OPS
Puig from June 22 to June 30 - .400 AVG, 1.047 OPS

How come the Dodgers weren't on fire for the near 3 weeks he hit .455? Does the Puig 'jolt' take 20 or so days to come into effect?

Because if you would of watch the game & not just the inbox you would of seen that theystarted too pick up energy each game prior to the 22nd in the Yankees series you saw that they where looking much better even though they lost that series & then they went on a 7 game win streak to start in SD i remember & from their they took of & Hanley exploded, Butb you wuld of seen this if you saw the games, but you want to just rely on stats & what John Kurk says...since he is such a Dodgers expert...

Your asking me & i'm giving you pretty relevant answers as a Dodger fan & who better to ask then a Dodger fan if your not sure why this & why that questions that you ask about the Dodgers that your not sure about..i think ive given you some pretty reasonable explanation..it's up to you weather to agree or not...your free to your opinion

And dont forget what i told you earlier about your extra 1.4 runs added improvement & how Hanley was a huge factor...baaaanng!!!

Han Ram alone in just Through June 22 - July 30 was averaging almost a run a game every other night..i think that covers a nice portion of 1.5 especially those 1st 35 games...the guys was on fire

Hanley Ramirez

From June 22 - July 30

Avg.375 HR 9 RBI 25 OBP 420 SLG 715 OBS 1.115

Yea i would say that's pretty impressive for just over a month

But hey if you want too stick to stats knock yourself out I will rather much enjoy the games live & see the real impact that players have

 

[StanMarsh51]

And dont forget what i told you earlier about your extra 1.4 runs added improvement & how Hanley was a huge factor...baaaanng!!!

Han Ram alone in just Through June 22 - July 30 was averaging almost a run a game every other night..i think that covers a nice portion of 1.5 especially those 1st 35 games...the guys was on fire

Hanley Ramirez

From June 22 - July 30

Avg.375 HR 9 RBI 25 OBP 420 SLG 715 OBS 1.115

During the Dodgers 42-8 run, Hanley missed missed 9 games during the 42-8 run, so in those 41 games he did play, it'll have to be over 1.4 to cover those 9 games he missed (since he obviously can't create runs in games he doesn't play in).

And in those 9 games he missed, the Dodgers went 8-1 and scored 5.67 runs per game without Hanley....they seemed to be OK without him, during that run.....