Alright, it was a bad argument. Unlike some people on TGG, I can admit when I am wrong. That did not make much sense in retrospect. I would probably take David Wright over Longoria since he is proven and still young. Tough choice though since Longoria's future looks so bright.
both are fantastic young players, but would longoria be able to deal with everything that comes with living/playing ball in new york as well as wright has??? wright's record is perfect, seemingly does no wrong off the field, and knows what to say when the vultures/reporters attack.
It's from 2007, but the trend for the past couple of decades[/i has been clear. You'd need to see a pretty damn big shift in the past season in order for this to no longer be relevant. And the reason that study was posted was because you (Yisman) said something that was incorrect. You said, "Playing in the AL for a hitter is probably more of an advantage than a disadvantage." This has not been true for many years. Unless you have information to show that the trend listed in that study is incorrect, I don't know why you're trying to defend your initial comment. Hitting in the AL has not been an advantage. This is true regardless of who you think is the better hitter.
Wrong. The initial post was that Longoria plays in the AL, ergo he's better. I said it's "probably" more of an advantage than a disadvantage. I'm willing to concede that it's not, but I don't see it as a disadvantage. It's pretty clear that the original post I was responding to was wrong, and that was my point to begin with. "you (Yisman)" I know my name, but thanks.
I'll take Longoria, he's a better defensive player and I can see Longoria winning multiple MVP's. Wright is great, but being in NY, he's probably overrated a bit.
This is the quote from you where I came into the conversation: This post is incorrect. Playing in the AL for a hitter is not an advantage. It is a distinct disadvantage. This is what I was responding to, and all I was responding to. Nothing from my previous post was incorrect. Or, if it is incorrect, you'll need to show me where. In my post, I responded to posts from two different members; that is why I made the clarification.
It's incorrect because you attacked my post instead of addressing where it came from. You can't jump in in the middle of the conversation. 2K07 said Longoria was better because he plays in the AL. I replied, calling that absurd. You need to look at the quotes in the context of the broader conversation. Using your own verbiage, what's "terrible logic" is saying one player in better than another simply because of the league he plays in. "Playing in the AL for a hitter is not an advantage. It is a distinct disadvantage. " "Distinct disadvantage"? Now, that is wrong, because the study you linked to does not show that. As discussed previously, it focuses on a period before Longoria even played MLB and there is no distinct disadvantage. Even if you swallow the study whole, it's outdated and shows a slight advantage for NL hitters. Certainly not enough to be significantly relevant in the comparison of the two players at the present moment.
thats a bit of a misconception. in clutch situations late he usually comes up pretty big. early in the game, though, i believe he muffs up a lotta opportunities with runners on. he had 124 rbis last year, but a lotta them seemed weak (ie reyes on third, man on 2nd, a groundout by wright to get just 1 in). that was really the first season it was like this, idk. if he had a normal year batting he shoulda had like 160 rbis
Why not? I read the entire thread. I saw your post at the end of it. The claim you made was incorrect, however tertiary to the central argument. If you have a problem with this, that's not my issue. We could make it a separate thread if you like... but batting in the AL is not an advantage. The "terrible logic" was actually taken from your initial quote. Incidentally, I don't think it was "simply" because of the league. He was saying that he thought they were equal, but the league gives Longoria an edge... with the idea being that he would put up better numbers in the NL. The data suggests that this would be true, if they were equally skilled players. I make no claim to this. Actually, the study did, in fact, show that the advantage was distinct. And while it did focus on a period before Longoria was in the league, you'll also notice that the AL vs. NL trend has been fairly consistent over the past fifteen years... so although the data doesn't cover the time period that Longoria has been in the league, it's still a safe bet to say that it's a disadvantage to hit in the AL. Here are a few of the relevant sections, in case you missed them: ------------------------------------ "The result for the period 2004-2006 is that two-league players hit better in the National League by .029 points of OPS. The result is significant: the uncertainty (one standard deviation) is .008. In other words, the probability that the true level of pitching/defense in both leagues is actually equal in this period is 0.000015, i.e. pretty darn small. So we can say with a high degree of certainty (keeping in mind, though, the assumption about AL/NL park effects) that the AL had significantly stronger pitching/defense than the NL during the last three seasons." --------------------------- How big is the .029 advantage in OPS that we found for 2004-2006? Well, at the team level, an increase of .029 in OPS would correspond to about 60 more runs scored over the course of the season. That would increase the winning percentage of an average team from .500 to about .540, (or six wins). Of course, pitching/defense is only half of the story. This method could also be used to evaluate the relative strength of hitting in the two leagues by looking at pitchers who have pitched in both leagues. There is a complication due to the designated hitter in the American League?we expect pitchers to fare worse in the AL, even if the leagues have similar offensive quality (excluding the designated hitter). One way to take this into account, may be to exclude pitchers and designated hitters from the analysis. Note that once we address the issue of offense, the assumption about park factors will become irrelevant, since the sum of offense plus defense will be largely independent of such effects. -------------------------
