Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Classic TA Workplace -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Freep who wrote (50547)	8/18/2002 10:44:18 AM
From: reaper	Respond to of 209892

as always i of course want the last word.... <<So during 1998-2000, how do you quantify Erstad's suckiness? Or is this just your bias (and the addition of his injury marred 2001)? >> one, i am slightly biased to say that Erstad sucks, 'cause the Angels just signed him to the third most laughable contract in major league baseball (#1 being Derek Bell's deal and #2 being Neifi Perez). the problem with baseball is not the big money that Giambi and ARod make, the problem w/ baseball is the almost big money that major-league stiffs like Erstad and Perez make. so yeah, i'm on a bit of a bender about Erstad recently. that said, here is his OPS for his career... 1997 .826 1998 .839 1999 .683 2000 .951 2001 .691 2002 .718 (so far) so in three of the last 4 years he's been a 700 +/- OPS guy. i would also note that in 1997 and 1998 when he put up better OPS years, he only played 139 and 133 games in those years. Erstad is a lefty. check his splits. he didn't play against lefty pitchers in 1997 and 1998, and only very rarely in 1999. and his OPS against lefty pitchers has been simply TERRIBLE since he started playing against them on a decenly regular basis. so the point is that the stats suggest that as a PLATOON player who doesn't play against left-handed pitching Erstad is a +/- 825 OPS player who will play 135 +/- games a year. but as an EVERY-DAY player who has to take his hacks against lefties as well (which is what they are PAYING him to do with this new contract) Erstad looks to me like a 700-725 +/- OPS player which frankly sucks. and it also explains why i discount the OPS from early in his career as not relevant. on the other hand, lets look at Garrett Anderson. 1996 .719 1997 .743 1998 .780 1999 .806 2000 .827 2001 .792 2002 .868 (so far) so Anderson is an 800 +/- OPS guy who except for a modest step backward in 2001 has gotten better every year (which you would expect, as he is now 30 years old). and Anderson plays EVERY day and always has (games played 150; 154; 156; 157; 159; 161; missed one game so far this year so on pace for 161 again). i never said that Anderson was great, just that he is under-appreciated. and the facts are glaringly obvious that Garrett Anderson is a MUCH better player than Darin Erstadt but you would never hear the sports-writers characterize it that way. and yes, Salmon at least WAS much better than both of them. but he had a terrible year last year and started off aweful this year, but he has gotten back some so maybe he's not getting old (he's 34; most players skills deteriorate after 30). but Salmon is also widely regarded as a great player. <<So let me get this straight. You actually think Rickey Henderson raises the level of play of those around him, >> i don't 'think' this, the numbers say it. i pointed it out 'cause it shows that people's biases are generally wrong. Rickey Henderson is regarded as a clubhouse cancer, but there is NO statistical evidence to show that this is true and in fact there is some evidence to show that teams improve their performance above and beyond what he adds. on the other hand, guys like Edmonds and Erstadt are regarded as clubhouse saviors when again there is no evidence that this is true (teams get better when Edmonds goes there because he is one of the top 10 players in baseball, not because he makes other guys play better). <<human nature makes baseball what it is >> of course that is true. human nature is what made Rickey Henderson a great player. human nature is why Erstad sucks. and players human nature is captured in their numbers. this all started out when somebody said "he's better than his numbers". what i am saying is that that's not true. there is no such thing as 'clutch hitting', there are not pitchers who make their team-mates play better, and there is very little statistical evidence that any managers over time cost their teams wins or losses (there are exceptions to this, Dusty Baker being the most recent example. sorry MM, Joe Torre is not). players excellence, by and large, is REFLECTED in their numbers, if you know where to look. Cheers