I don't understand something - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2015 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

I don't understand something

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby Phatferd » Mon Jan 30, 2006 1:02 am

Ensberg was on a nasty pace 3 years ago. A lot of people predicted that 2 years ago he would have a moster year, however, he didn't it happened a year later.

A lot of people on here tought Ensberg was gonna break out.
You have no frame of reference, Donny. You're like a child who walks into the middle of a movie...
Phatferd
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 4058
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Highway 10

Postby Ender » Mon Jan 30, 2006 1:03 am

What exactly are you trying to prove with that post? Most of those guys you posted had a spike in their late 20's like they are supposed to, almost universally the players who spiked in HR's regressed the next year on that list and then regained the power the year after, its what I've been stressing with Utley. I fully expect Ensberg's power to regress some next year as well.

Kent didnt' really have a power spike, just a playtime spike. Mattingly's career headed south because of back problems making him lose his power.

Most of the guys in your last list of players kept their power but lost their playing time, guys like Grieve. I'm either not sure what you were trying to prove with those links or I think your conclusions were wrong, not sure which one.

I'm also not sure why you are looking at age 27, a lot of players spike in power at 28 and 29, by around 30 its pretty unlikely to see a spike. However you seem to just be looking at HR totals, not at HR rate which is what matters and you need to look at 2B's as well since they are a precursor to HR power.
Ender
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

CafeholicFantasy Expert
Posts: 7733
Joined: 30 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby J_Cuz » Mon Jan 30, 2006 1:35 am

Ender wrote:Kent didnt' really have a power spike, just a playtime spike.


I'm pointing out the same thing with Utley and the crew in here REFUSES TO ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THIS EVEN HAPPENED.

Did you know that Utley SAT OUT ELEVEN STRAIGHT GAMES while they were showcasing Polanco last season? Is that in your sabermetric "barameters?"

Immediately after that, he had a playing time spike and he produced 28HRs, it was his first full time in the lineup since 2002 because he was buried behind Polanco. HOW IS THAT UNLIKE KENT'S Situation?

As far as all of those examples I used, they are simply serving to dispell this guy running around here saying that 5% of players who show early power continue to show it... and if you don't think Grieve and Kittles lost their power you are mistaken.

My point here is that it is downright stupid to bash the one player in order to prop up the other player. Wright may be the slightly better option, I really have little opinion on the issue because I'm pretty sure neither of these players have peaked.

But the arguing in here that Utley has somehow peaked at 27 is discredited with EVERY SINGLE POST I've made.

You may not like the fact that Utley, LIKE KENT, got a playing time increase but don't ever claim that it serves as legitimate excuse for one player not producing prior to age 26 but not the other, because that makes no sense to anyone.

Furthermore, I have no obsession with the age 27, it holds no bearing to me; I am using it in response to the bizarre crowd in here who actually believe that stats posted at age 23 are somehow more legitimate than stats posted three years later.

They are not and I have proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt by producing some THIRTY ODD EXAMPLES of different trends.

Everyone arguing that Utley has "peaked" has come to the table with NOTHING, no historical examples that this occurs anymoreso than a younger player falling off the face off the earth.

And save me the pliable sabermetric NONSENSE because it has never been proven for one second to predict ANY TRENDS whatsover, all it serves is to better understand past statistics. It shows compilations of past stats, nothing more.

Sooner or later fantasy spots comes down to production trends and THOSE are heavily in Utley's favor (and Wright's as well).
www.igglephans.com
J_Cuz
College Coach
College Coach


Posts: 140
Joined: 21 May 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby GotowarMissAgnes » Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:01 am

Excuse me, but who are you arguing with? No one wrote three-quarters of the things you allege they wrote. It might be more productive if you have a chat with the voices in your head.

Cite all the individual examples you want. No one has ever said that some players do not improve at later ages.

Other people have already looked not at individual examples, but at ALL PLAYERS WHO HAVE PLAYED. And their research shows exactly what I have stated.
GotowarMissAgnes
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy Expert
Posts: 5516
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Happy Valley

Postby davidmarver » Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:09 am

Ender wrote:Yeah you can't blame all of Sosa's stats on steroids, some of them are from the corked bats.

Corked bats don't physically allow you to hit a baseball farther.

Kinetic (moving) energy is equal to .5mv^2 where m is the mass of the moving object, and v is the velocity of the moving object. Cork has less mass than wood of an equal volume, so any increase in velocity from swinging a lighter object is offset by the decrease in mass.

I do realize your comment was made playfully, but I just thought I'd point it out anyway.
Image
davidmarver
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 ChampionLucky Ladders Weekly WinnerTrivia Time Trial Monthly Winner
Posts: 6154
Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: 5.5 Hole

Postby davidmarver » Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:14 am

Utley hits in just as good a lineup and in a much, much better hitting park.

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but this actually works in Wright's favor. Utley's 27 homeruns won't all the sudden become 35...you don't re-factor in the ballpark. Also, if they put up equivalent stats, but Wright had it harder, it's fairly obvious he's the more talented of the two. Wright's also four years younger, has an improved lineup around him, and a move to most other ballparks (although highly unlikely) would favor him; that is not the case for Utley.
Image
davidmarver
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 ChampionLucky Ladders Weekly WinnerTrivia Time Trial Monthly Winner
Posts: 6154
Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: 5.5 Hole

Postby Niffoc4 » Mon Jan 30, 2006 9:15 am

davidmarver wrote:
Utley hits in just as good a lineup and in a much, much better hitting park.

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but this actually works in Wright's favor. Utley's 27 homeruns won't all the sudden become 35...you don't re-factor in the ballpark. Also, if they put up equivalent stats, but Wright had it harder, it's fairly obvious he's the more talented of the two. Wright's also four years younger, has an improved lineup around him, and a move to most other ballparks (although highly unlikely) would favor him; that is not the case for Utley.

Yeah I tried to make that point, but I think you put it a bit better...

J_Cuz... have you ever taken a class on statistical analysis? If so were you listening? If not wait until you take the class... then you will realize what is being argued here... and even without the class most of GTWMA's points should work logically... I believe earlier he told you that 2/3's of players spike before the age of 30, so showing any number examples of players over the age of 30 spiking DOES NOT MATTER... like he said the analysis was of all major league baseball players, Kent is an interesting example, and maybe Utley will be the next Kent, but most people tend to shy away from betting on someone becoming a statistical anomaly.
Niffoc4
Major League Manager
Major League Manager


Posts: 1700
(Past Year: 9)
Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Ender » Mon Jan 30, 2006 10:17 am

As far as all of those examples I used, they are simply serving to dispell this guy running around here saying that 5% of players who show early power continue to show it... and if you don't think Grieve and Kittles lost their power you are mistaken.


Grieve had one year of 1 HR every 17 AB, his next year was 1 every 22 AB's, his had an off year then had 1 every 25 AB. He started losing playtime at that point. What this shows is exactly what I said, he had a big power spike, regressed towards his old power numbers and then maintained that level. This is exactly what I think will happen with Utley and its completely normal.

Kittle 1 HR every 15 AB, his power stayed at that level or better his entire career, the only thing that slipped was his playtime. You can't just look at HR totals, he never lost any power in there.


But the arguing in here that Utley has somehow peaked at 27 is discredited with EVERY SINGLE POST I've made.


Utley hasn't peaked and nobody really is saying he has, they are simply saying his liklihood of growth is smaller than Wrights.

You may not like the fact that Utley, LIKE KENT, got a playing time increase but don't ever claim that it serves as legitimate excuse for one player not producing prior to age 26 but not the other, because that makes no sense to anyone


Kent is a good example of what I said about spikes being followed by a regression. Usually a large spike in power is a combination of two things, the player actually getting better and the player having a 'lucky' year for HR's. In Utley's case the culprit is most likely his 8% increase in flyball rate that will cause a dip in his power next year.

1993 - 1 HR per 23 AB
1995 - 1 HR per 23 AB
1997 - 1 HR per 20 AB
1998 - 1 HR per 12 AB (this is a spike)
1999 - 1 HR per 22 AB (the expected dip the next year)
2000 - 1 HR per 18 AB (the new power level slightly regressed from his spike year)


And save me the pliable sabermetric NONSENSE because it has never been proven for one second to predict ANY TRENDS whatsover, all it serves is to better understand past statistics. It shows compilations of past stats, nothing more


Only because you don't understand sabermetrics.

Sooner or later fantasy spots comes down to production trends and THOSE are heavily in Utley's favor (and Wright's as well).


Yes they do come down to trends, only you are looking at the wrong stats to try to spot trends. AVG, HR, ERA are all skills with way too much noise behind them, you need to dig deeper and look at the trends of the players raw skills.

I don't think anyone is saying Utley won't get better with time, the assertion is that Utley had more of a break out year and the majority of the time after a breakout year the player repeats the year or slightly regresses and then grows some more. Wright did not have a breakout year, he if anything slightly regressed from a skills standpoint last year, its just must more likely that he sees major improvement than it is for Utley.

Sorry if you disagree but nothing you have posted has shown this to be otherwise, every single player you posted as an example saw a power spike followed the next year by a slight dip. In many cases the players didn't even have a spike or dip, they just gained or lost playtime and you were looking at their HR total and not anything else.

Now granted Utley's history is spotty at best with his limited major league experience and I'm looking at his major league expected stats based off of his minor league stats which can be an iffy situation so there is a bit more room for error than with an experienced player. I will freely admit I could be wrong. Also in Utley's favor is the fact that he plays in a left handed power hitters dream park.

Anyway I think this topic has been beaten to death, you obviously disagree and there will be no real way to tell who is correct until at least mid season. I'm saying pay for last years stats for Utley at most, don't expect major improvement, pay for slightly better than last years stats for Wright which puts him probably $2-3 more in value than Utley, either player you pick is going to put up good numbers for you.
Last edited by Ender on Mon Jan 30, 2006 10:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ender
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

CafeholicFantasy Expert
Posts: 7733
Joined: 30 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby J_Cuz » Mon Jan 30, 2006 10:29 am

Niffoc4 wrote:
davidmarver wrote:
Utley hits in just as good a lineup and in a much, much better hitting park.

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but this actually works in Wright's favor. Utley's 27 homeruns won't all the sudden become 35...you don't re-factor in the ballpark. Also, if they put up equivalent stats, but Wright had it harder, it's fairly obvious he's the more talented of the two. Wright's also four years younger, has an improved lineup around him, and a move to most other ballparks (although highly unlikely) would favor him; that is not the case for Utley.

Yeah I tried to make that point, but I think you put it a bit better...

J_Cuz... have you ever taken a class on statistical analysis? If so were you listening? If not wait until you take the class... then you will realize what is being argued here... and even without the class most of GTWMA's points should work logically... I believe earlier he told you that 2/3's of players spike before the age of 30, so showing any number examples of players over the age of 30 spiking DOES NOT MATTER... like he said the analysis was of all major league baseball players, Kent is an interesting example, and maybe Utley will be the next Kent, but most people tend to shy away from betting on someone becoming a statistical anomaly.


But Utley is 27 and not thirty.

It is not statistically nor logically sound to claim that since a spike is unlikely after thirty it is equally unlikely after 26, and therefore much more likely after 23.

It may be a bit more likely but this guy's logic of an ABSURD 95% v. less than 50% ration has no statistical value.

I hope you understand this.
www.igglephans.com
J_Cuz
College Coach
College Coach


Posts: 140
Joined: 21 May 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Niffoc4 » Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:50 pm

The point is that Utley's stats now are *probably* nearer his peak than Wright's, since statistically speaking, it is more likely that Utley will decline in the next 5 years than Wright. Thus, Wright is more valuable in a keeper league than Utley, because he should maintain or improve his hitting stats for an extended period of time, while Utley should start to decline within the next five years...
There is some discussion that Utley will decline next year, and that is possible, but I thinkt he main reason people consider Wright more valuable is that he is much further from his peak and putting up stats equal to if not better than Utley.
Niffoc4
Major League Manager
Major League Manager


Posts: 1700
(Past Year: 9)
Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2015 MLB season starts in 20:44 hours
(and 91 days)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact