great gretzky wrote:hmm, how is it a fallacy that a home run also provides arun and an rbi?
A stolen base may lead to a run, but it doesn't necessarily have to. And it certainly doesn't provide a home run or rbi.
I'm not implying that there is some double dipping going on. Christ, sometimes people miss a larger point in their effort to nitpick.
It's not nitpicking, it's a common misconception that somehow a HR is more valuable than a SB in today's standard 5 x 5 fantasy because you also recieve a run and rbi.
I do not think it is a misconception...example: you used Cap Ansons 2000 plus RBI and sub 100 HR numbers as more valuable then Gehrigs 1995 and 493 was it? Anyway...lets say that Cap had another 150 HR...but less steals...how does that NOT make him more valuable? That is AT LEAST another 150 RBI...PLUS another 150 runs. A HR is more valuable that a steal in every aspect...it is a hit, a run, an rbi (up to 4 possible) and a HR itself. To me, it totally trumps a steal. Plus with the HR, no one can get hurt, and no one can get thrown out on the basepaths. PLaying for the three run homer as Billy Beane puts it...is not a bad thing. Sure we all love to see "real" baseball with 3-2 games, and hitters moving runners over...but when it all comes down to it...in this day and age, it is the home run that dominates and their are no ifs ands or buts.
All I know is, when one of my guys hits a homerun, I see a +1 in runs, hr, rbi. When one of my guys gets stolen base, he gets a fraction of one point for the hit (maybe, unless he walked), a stolen base, and maybe a run if he is batted home.
If stolen bases were TRULY worth 2hrs as has been suggested here (not a blanket stereotype, just a "fact" I have seen before) crawford, pierre, reyes would be the first picks, as they would be the equivalent of triple digit homers.
The thing with anything rendered valuable because of scarcity is this:
IT is only valuable because of its scarcity in an evenly distributed league. If you have a league where one or two teams hoard the bulk of the steals, saves, catchers etc. commodity, then the initial investment for the remaining teams to score just as well as if it were evenly distributed is less.
MEANING: they aren't really always worth 2x a HR or whatever "extra" value SBs in roto get assigned. They COULD be, depending on distribution.
If for some reason two teams had crawford, figgins, pierre and reyes between them, and two other teams had a few 30 steals guys, what is the incentive to really go for it? Not much. You aren't ever going to catch the top two guys, so forget that. Each team can ignore the others and battle out steals amongs themselves, because fantasy is ultimately relative to the other teams in your league, NOT to the stats as distributed in MLB.
bceagles04 wrote:I do not think it is a misconception...example: you used Cap Ansons 2000 plus RBI and sub 100 HR numbers as more valuable then Gehrigs 1995 and 493 was it? Anyway...lets say that Cap had another 150 HR...but less steals...how does that NOT make him more valuable? That is AT LEAST another 150 RBI...PLUS another 150 runs. A HR is more valuable that a steal in every aspect...it is a hit, a run, an rbi (up to 4 possible) and a HR itself. To me, it totally trumps a steal. Plus with the HR, no one can get hurt, and no one can get thrown out on the basepaths. PLaying for the three run homer as Billy Beane puts it...is not a bad thing. Sure we all love to see "real" baseball with 3-2 games, and hitters moving runners over...but when it all comes down to it...in this day and age, it is the home run that dominates and their are no ifs ands or buts.
Sure there are ifs ands and buts. There are very few absolutes. If the HR dominated the game the way you imply in that post, then why didn't the Yankees or the league leader in HR, the Rangers, win the MLB World Series? Cincy hit the most in the NL and they sucked. Chicago was next best and they sucked too. No WS from the top four.
You're not thinking about the HR in the context I am. I'm looking at 5 possible catagories and their totals. One catagory wins you only 14 points with a first place finish in a 14 team league. If you win the HR catagory you do not recieve "extra" points in the RBI or Runs catagories. Because a player scores 100 runs by having a high OBP and top quality baserunning skills, versus a lower OBP power hitter who scores 100 runs because he hits more double and HR, the speedier player's 100 runs would not be less valuable because he does not hit HR.
I really don't understand where you're going with the Cap Anson comparison. It wasn't a great one to begin with, so maybe we should forget about it.
I overspoke when referring to the way that the HR dominates the game. I did not mean it as the team that hits the most wins the most games...more in that way that the HR has come to be the most popular way for scoring runs. Gone is the way of bunting, sac flys, and moving runners over...(most) teams are ok with simply walking to the plate and smacking the big fly. It is easier and more efficient, and their is less chance of a baserunning mistake. I dont like this route the game has taken, but I accept it as how the game is played in this age.
In terms of fantasy...lets use Player A and Player B. They each get 175 hits. Player A has 120 singles, 40 doubles, and 15 home runs. He has 25 steals as well. Respectable numbers, but not a power hitter by any means. Player B has 175 hits with 90 singles, 40 doubles, and 45 home runs with only 5 steals. My point is...that by isolating just the HR statistic...I would take player B any day of the week. You just cant compare the productivity of 45 HR - 15 HR. Player B has 30 more HR...lets say 20 are solo, 5 are 3 run and 5 are 2 run...thats an additional 55 RBI just from the extra 30 HR. Now sure...Player A could get some RBI from the 30 more singles he has...but surely he cannot get anywhere near 55 RBI from 30 singles. Player A may steal more bases but by getting to first...then needing to steal to get around the bases makes it much more difficult than PLayer B's method of simply hitting the homer.
I hope this sheds some light on how I feel about the SB-HR thoughts you had. How do you feel about the PLayer A-PLayer B comparison?
23 wins, 4 losses, 313 k's, 2.07 era, .923 whip over 213 IP. that has to be massive for your staff. I mean a lot of higher end guys are only getting 150-170 k's. Its like pedro is a whole extra starter in k's, and has a sub 1 whip in that many innings? WOW.
1) Babe Ruth’s 1921 season — .378 average, 59 homers, 171 RBIs, 177 runs, 17 steals. — The Great Bambino’s second year in pinstripes tops the list. Ruth hit 35 more home runs than any other player that year. He also drove in 32 more runs and scored 45 more runs than any other player that season. Ruth homered once every 9.15 at-bats while the average for all other players was one homer per every 96.43 at-bats. The Red Sox, who sold Ruth to the Yankees only two seasons earlier, hit only 14 homers as a team in 1921 — and the Curse of the Babe began. It was at this point that Boston owner Harry Frazee started to regret selling Ruth to the Yanks for $100,000 to finance his Broadway musical “No, No Nanette.”
2) Rogers Hornsby’s 1922 season — .410 average, 42 homers, 152 RBIs, 141 runs, 17 steals. — Hornsby, the 1922 National League Triple Crown winner, became the first NL player to hit at least 30 homers in a season. He also led the majors in runs scored, and tossed in 17 steals for good measure. These statistics would be great for an outfielder — but Hornsby was putting up these gaudy numbers as a second baseman, where talent was thin.
3) Ty Cobb’s 1911 season — .420 average, 8 homers, 127 RBIs, 147 runs, 83 steals. — Imagine a blend of Miguel Tejada and Scott Podsednik and you would have a guy that leads the league in RBIs and steals. That guy would be Cobb, who accomplished the rare double-double in the 1911 season, when he led the majors with 127 RBIs and 83 steals. He also led the league in batting average and runs scored, and strung together a then-AL record 40-game hit streak. It all added up to the Georgia Peach’s only MVP season.
4) Lou Gehrig’s 1931 season — .341 average, 46 homers, 184 RBIs, 163 runs, 17 steals. — After eight season batting in the shadow of Ruth, Gehrig was finally able to match his teammate’s production in the 1931 season. Gehrig and Ruth tied for the home run crown (the first time Gehrig hit as many homers as Ruth in a season) and Gehrig edged Ruth for the RBI title. The 184 RBIs is still the second-highest single-season total in baseball history. The Iron Horse also led the majors in runs scored.
5) Hack Wilson’s 1930 season — .356 average, 56 homers, 191 RBIs, 146 runs, 3 steals. — Wilson was only 5-foot-6 tall and wore a size 51/2 shoe, but he was a monster at the plate. He drove in a single-season record 191 runs while also leading the majors in home runs by seven round trippers. In fact, Wilson’s season was so stellar that baseball officials credited him with another RBI in 1999 after finding a scoring error in an old box score.
6) Jimmie Foxx’s 1932 season — .364 average, 58 homers, 169 RBIs, 151 runs, 3 steals. — Foxx nearly matched Ruth’s old record of 60 homers in a single season, falling just two short and posting the third-best home run total at the time. He still managed to top the majors by 17 homers, lead the majors in RBIs and finish second in average and runs scored. Double X also picked up the first of his three MVP awards.
7) Larry Walker’s 1997 season — .366 average, 49 homers, 130 RBIs, 143 runs, 33 steals. — Coors Field is a fantasy owner’s dream. The thin air even turned the weak-hitting Neifi Pérez into a star for a brief period. So when you put somebody as talented as Walker in that stadium, you get great numbers. Walker was just one homer short of becoming the first member of the 50 homer/30 steal club. The 1997 MVP also finished second in the league in batting.
8) Ken Williams’ 1922 season — .322 average, 39 homers, 155 RBIs, 128 runs, 37 steals. — Who’s Ken Williams? He’s baseball’s first 30/30 man, and there wasn’t another for 34 years. There have been 22 30/30 men in the past 10 seasons, but it was unheard of when Williams accomplished the feat. The St. Louis Browns slugger also led the league in RBIs and finished in the top five in homers, runs scored and steals. Williams was the first true five-category player.
9) George Sisler’s 1920 season — .407 average, 19 homers, 122 RBIs, 137 runs, 42 steals. — Sisler was probably the second-best fantasy player of the 1920 season (Ruth being the best), but he still registers in the top 10 single seasons. Sisler led the majors in batting average, and trailed only Ruth in homers, RBIs and runs scored. Sisler’s 42 steals were the third most in the majors. If Ichiro had a season similar to Sisler’s 1920 year, we would anoint him the best player in league history. But Sisler still gets little credit for his Hall of Fame career.
10) Barry Bonds’ 2001 season — .328 average, 73 homers, 137 RBIs, 129 runs, 13 steals. — Bonds’ record-breaking 2001 season is arguably the seven-time MVP’s best season. He out-homered all players by nine dingers and drew a single-season record 177 walks. Bonds also finished in the top 10 in the bigs in runs scored and RBIs. Bonds homered once every 6.52 at-bats while all other players hit a homer every 30.78 at-bats. Not as impressive as Ruth’s spread but solid nonetheless.