Is Miguel Cabrera the best hitter ever

[broncosmitty]

Hahahaha, they have to get up the nerve to go outside first. And there's grass outside. Not good for the allergies....

 

[StanMarsh51]

He got a double, 2 total bases, a hit, he raised his batting ave, slugging pct, and obp. Those are all good stats that he will be credited for.

OK, but was he not a pretty big factor in that run scoring?

 

[navamind]

Great post

walking is the new holy grail.....

....even though the other team many times wants good hitters to walk.

A walk isn't as good as a hit, but walks are still valuable.

I really don't care how a guy gets on base as long as he's getting on base a lot.

 

[navamind]

He got a double, 2 total bases, a hit, he raised his batting ave, slugging pct, and obp. Those are all good stats that he will be credited for.

But he wasn't credited for that run scoring even though he had more to do with him scoring than the other guy did.

 

[rokketmn]

Then again, how about this example which we do see:

Player A singles
Player B doubles, moving player A to 3rd
Player C gets a sac fly, scoring player A

So, we never see a guy drive a man in from 3rd base without a base hit, like in my example? Funny.

The difference is that sabermetricians think the guy who drove in the run from 3rd while making the out should get no credit, because he did not generate a positive OBP. So naturally his RBI would be a meaningless, archaeic statistic that really shows nothing.

You guys are much funnier on the "Big Bang Theory" than in real life.

 

[soxfan1468927]

I thought about that, but if they left their mom's basement they might encounter a girl on the way to my house and be frightened away.

Is Sabermetrics the new Scientology?

Was that supposed to be clever?

 

[soxfan1468927]

So, we never see a guy drive a man in from 3rd base without a base hit, like in my example? Funny.

The difference is that sabermetricians think the guy who drove in the run from 3rd while making the out should get no credit, because he did not generate a positive OBP. So naturally his RBI would be a meaningless, archaeic statistic that really shows nothing.

You guys are much funnier on the "Big Bang Theory" than in real life.

The point is that many people claim "producing a run" is done by either scoring a run or driving that in. That's not the case all the time however. Are there instances when an out would be better than a walk? Sure there are, your situation demonstrates that. However, your situation (runner on 3rd, less than 2 outs) comes up in maybe 8% of a player's career plate appearances. In the vast majority of cases, a walk is better than an out.

But honestly, to try to dismiss sabermetric stats by throwing out the nerd/acne/mom's basement comments, you just come off as childish. You want to have an actual baseball discussion? That's great, but don't be a 12-year old

 

[JR Hart]

A walk isn't as good as a hit, but walks are still valuable.

I really don't care how a guy gets on base as long as he's getting on base a lot.

Not all walks are walks are created equal. Ricky Henderson walking to lead off the game is not the same as pitching around Barry Bonds to get to Reggie Sanders.

 

[da55bums]

NO, he is currently the best hitter in the game, presently, there are always, the best hitter in the game players....before Miggy, Pujols (heard same thing in his prime also), Bonds, ETC.....the best hitter ever, will still be Ted Williams, until someone proves otherwise....mainly, IF, you give Williams stats for the years he was gone, at actual WAR...3 years completely and 2 years where he had under 40 games...(just add the year before he left and the year after he returned and divide by 2, a good average, even after not hitting MLB pitching for years, go ahead) his stats would be incredible.

in a nutshell, everyone always brings up the "Greatest Hitter of ALL TIME" while someone is currently the Best Hitter in baseball during a stretch.......and it never can be determined, til careers are done....people thought at one point Dale Murphy was incredible after 2 consecutive MVPs on a terrible team....then he crashed at 31/32 yrs old...hold on til his career is over.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

And what have you provided? A stat that doesn't properly account for ballpark home run factors, one that treats every at bat the same no matter the situation, and one that treats walkis the same as hits, no matter the situation.

Seems kinda sketchy.

At least my archaeic stats are something you can actually see. Remember, the name of the game is producing runs.

If my guy gets a groundout with a runner on 3rd to drive in a run, that is one for me. Your guy gets a walk with a runner on 3rd, and the next guy hits into a DP. No run.

In this scenario, you denigrate my guy and his "rbi" because he really didn't do anything to deserve that RBI , in your opinion (and other sabrmetricians). Your guy is the cat's meow because he drew a walk, and increased his OBP and OPS, and OPS+. Seems like real baseball to me. LOL.

Stats can work anyway you want them to.

I've provided AVG/OBP/SLG and OPS+. Three of the most important stats in determining a hitter's performance, then one old-timer to please the masses. You'll notice that I haven't gone to wOBA, RC/27 or wRC+, which are also better measures than the ones you've been using.

I also never said anything to denigrate RBI or even mildly suggest that Rice didn't do anything to deserve his RBI. All I did was state the obvious and apparent flaws in the statistic, and state my opinion that RBI is not a primary stat to evaluate hitters by. It's a secondary stat to be used once put into proper context.

We've also established that your grasp on the concept of run production isn't terribly firm.

You really suck at putting words in other peoples' mouths.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

I hate to jump in at the end of a discussion, but did someone say this?

No one even mildly suggested it.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

Great post

walking is the new holy grail.....

....even though the other team many times wants good hitters to walk.

Good to see you, JR. Hope all has been well.

We're not talking about Darrell Evans or Gene Tenace vs. Jim Rice here. If that were the case, your response would be appropriate. We're talking about guys like George Brett and Eddie Murray who hit for good average, good power, AND took walks. I think even you could admit that the walks provide additional value.

And you're right: teams want the opponents' best hitter to walk. They pitch around them and don't give them pitches to hit. Why were they so willing to pitch to Jim Rice?

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

He got a double, 2 total bases, a hit, he raised his batting ave, slugging pct, and obp. Those are all good stats that he will be credited for.

But I thought all that matters is run production? He doesn't get a run or a RBI even though he had the biggest role in that run scoring.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

So, we never see a guy drive a man in from 3rd base without a base hit, like in my example? Funny.

The difference is that sabermetricians think the guy who drove in the run from 3rd while making the out should get no credit, because he did not generate a positive OBP. So naturally his RBI would be a meaningless, archaeic statistic that really shows nothing.

You guys are much funnier on the "Big Bang Theory" than in real life.

Again, you really suck at putting words in other peoples' mouths. No one has ever said this, ever.

I love how you keep knocking peoples' intellect as if being intelligent is a bad thing. At least it's an acknowledgment that your intellect is inferior, I guess. Not that that wasn't already abundantly clear.

 

[ImSmartherThanYou]

Not all walks are walks are created equal. Ricky Henderson walking to lead off the game is not the same as pitching around Barry Bonds to get to Reggie Sanders.

The difference is that Henderson was trying to draw the walk. Barry Bonds didn't have much of a choice in the matter. Should he swing at bad pitches?

 

[rokketmn]

But honestly, to try to dismiss sabermetric stats by throwing out the nerd/acne/mom's basement comments, you just come off as childish.

That was actually brought up by another poster. I just had some fun with it.

 

[rokketmn]

I love how you keep knocking peoples' intellect as if being intelligent is a bad thing.

My comments had nothing to do with anybody's intellect.

 

[soxfan1468927]

That was actually brought up by another poster. I just had some fun with it.

You should also have fun with our MVP/Cy Young revote project. Submit a ballot for the 2012 MVP and Cy Young Awards. You seem like someone with an interest in baseball history so I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

 

[rokketmn]

Again, you really suck at putting words in other peoples' mouths. No one has ever said this, ever.

Actually, I don't. I re-hash what other people say. I really didn't want to have to find that comment in all of these posts.

It is you that contradict yourself with such statements that Eddie Murray was a great hitter in his prime, and yet don't give Rice that same consideration when his stats were better.

The stats I showed for Murray encompassed his prime, and I even made up for the fact that he didn't break into the league until 1977 by using stats from his best seasons in his career. Thus, double-counting his BEST seasons in the comparison.

For RBI, I used his 1980 (116) and 1985 (124) totals twice. He still fell 21 RBI short of Rice.
For Hr's, I used his 1980 (32) and 1983 (33) totals twice. He still fell 10 Hr short of Rice.
For Hits, I used his 1980 (186) and 1990 (184) totals twice. He still fell 96 hits short of Rice.
For Slugging, I used his 1982 (.549) and 1983 (.538) totals twice. He still fell .004 points short.
For Total Bases, I used his 1980 (322) and 1983 (313) totals twice. He still fell 195 TB's short
For Avg, I used 1990 (.330) and 1995 (.323) totals. He still falls .002 short (.303 to .301).

What Murray did more than Rice (or better than) was walk. Even if you want to say because of that Murray was better overall, I will still disagree, but I won't argue it any longer because it is just your opinion.

But...when you say that Murray was a great hitter in his prime years and Rice is right along side him, you have to say Rice was also great for that same time.

You keep saying Rice had a few great seasons clustered together but didn't do it for his career. Well...from 1975 to 1986, Rice didn't drive in at least 100 runs only 4 times. One time was because of the strike in 1981. Another was in 1980 when he only played 124 games because he broke his wrist, and he still drove in 86 runs. In the other 2 seasons, he drove in 85 and 97 runs. It's pretty safe to say he would have driven in over 100 in 1980 and at least 90 in 1981 had he played a full season, given his career averages.

In that period, Rice never hit below .280. He hit .300 7 times, and above .290 2 more times. That is 9 of 12 seasons.

Other than the strike season of 1981, Rice never hit fewer than 20 HR's. His lowest totals were actually 22 in his rookie year of 1975 and 20 in his final good season in 1986. In between, he never hit fewer than 24. This is an era when hitting 20 hr's was considered good.

It seems to me that Murray's best seasons were also clustered together (1980-1985).

You're just penalizing Rice because when he had a great season, it was really GREAT, so everything else pales in comparison.

Murray's 162 game averages were: .287/87 runs/27 hr/103 rbi/.476 slg/.836 OPS
Rice's 162 game averages were: .298/97 runs/30 hr/113 rbi/.502 slg/.854 OPS

These averages pretty much coincide with what each did in the prime of their careers, so longevity wasn't the only issue.

Thank you very much.

 

[rokketmn]

You should also have fun with our MVP/Cy Young revote project. Submit a ballot for the 2012 MVP and Cy Young Awards. You seem like someone with an interest in baseball history so I'm sure you'll enjoy it.

I think I did glance at it the other day. This may shock some (especially IMSmarter), but I thought Trout should have won the MVP last season. Not because I don't value the Triple Crown stats, but because Trout was the better defender and baserunner. I thought Cabrera was clearly the better hitter, but Trout was clearly the better player, IMO.

I think some underestimate what speed can do to a pitcher, catcher, and defense.