Archive

Would a combined Reds and Indians team win the world series?

  • Laley23
    Terry_Tate;1455815 wrote:Brett Gardner had a higher WAR than Joey Votto in 2010. Whether you're a WAR fan or not that gets a big fat LOL.
    Well, offensively Votto was at like 7 WAR. Defensively he was negative.

    Gardnder was split 3 and 3 on offense and defense. I have no clue, but was Votto that bad defensively? I mean, he won a GG the next year...
  • Azubuike24
    He did really improve on D, really quick...
  • Terry_Tate
    lhslep134;1455818 wrote:No he didn't

    Joey Votto 2010: 6.8

    Brett Gardner 2010: 6.0

    Gardner has never had a higher WAR than Votto.

    http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=4314&position=1B
    [URL="http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=9927&position=OF#fielding"]http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=9927&position=OF#fielding

    S    c[/URL]roll to the botton to value.

    http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting/_/year/2010/sort/WARBR

    That is where I got it. Must be just offense I guess. ESPNs is immediately discredited with that.
  • se-alum
    lhslep134;1455818 wrote:No he didn't

    Joey Votto 2010: 6.8

    Brett Gardner 2010: 6.0

    Gardner has never had a higher WAR than Votto.

    http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=4314&position=1B
    http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=9927&position=OF#fielding

    S    croll to the botton to value.
    Baseball-Reference has Gardner at 7.4 in '10 and Votto at 7.2. In 2010 Votto hit 37 HR's, 113 RBI's, .324 BA, .424 OBP, and 1.024 OPS. Gardner went for 5 HR's, 47 RBI's, .277 BA, .383 OBP, and .762 OPS. LOL...Gardner obviously the more valuable player.
  • lhslep134
    se-alum;1455828 wrote:Baseball-Reference has Gardner at 7.4 in '10 and Votto at 7.2. In 2010 Votto hit 37 HR's, 113 RBI's, .324 BA, .424 OBP, and 1.024 OPS. Gardner went for 5 HR's, 47 RBI's, .277 BA, .383 OBP, and .762 OPS. LOL...Gardner obviously the more valuable player.
    I know what you mean but the actual inference of what you're saying is that baseball is purely offense and baserunning and defense don't come into play at all.

    So, uhm, keep on thinking that.
  • Laley23
    Keep in mind that WAR doesnt compare players really. It compares players versus players at their positions.

    So, did Gardner have a better year than a back-up CF would have...versus...Vottos year versus what a backup 1B would have.

    I mean, I still dont see it as close. But we should make sure we are looking at it correctly. Gardner also had like 60 steals. BB, RS and SO were about even.
  • lhslep134
    Laley23;1455831 wrote:Keep in mind that WAR doesnt compare players really. It compares players versus players at their positions.

    So, did Gardner have a better year than a back-up CF would have...versus...Vottos year versus what a backup 1B would have.
    Absolutely true. Thanks for adding that.
  • Commander of Awesome
    Nope I'm a big reds fan homer and don't know anything about other teams/advanced stats, and will continue to deny your stats/argurments and not offer a retort other than a sumg snide comment bc Votto is the best. Also Mt.dew is the greatest thing ever. /SE
  • se-alum
    Laley23;1455831 wrote:Keep in mind that WAR doesnt compare players really. It compares players versus players at their positions.

    So, did Gardner have a better year than a back-up CF would have...versus...Vottos year versus what a backup 1B would have.

    I mean, I still dont see it as close. But we should make sure we are looking at it correctly. Gardner also had like 60 steals. BB, RS and SO were about even.
    Yea, but it's still saying that Joey Votto (league MVP) was less valuable over his replacement than Brett Gardner was over a replacement outfielder.
  • Terry_Tate
    Runs created per 27 outs looks to be the best offensive saber metric stat to me. From year to year it seems to have a true reflection of the best hitters compared to offensive WAR.
  • se-alum
    Commander of Awesome;1455839 wrote:Nope I'm a big reds fan homer and don't know anything about other teams/advanced stats and Votto is the best. Also Mt.dew is the greatest thing ever. /SE
    Dynamite drop-in Monty.You have yet to add any substance to the thread, which isn't surprising.
  • Laley23
    se-alum;1455841 wrote:Yea, but it's still saying that Joey Votto (league MVP) was less valuable over his replacement than Brett Gardner was over a replacement outfielder.
    I agree. Im just saying looking at WAR vs WAR is wrong. It is what made me so made about Trout vs Miggy last year. Miguel having a WAR that high at 1B was astounding. Typically, the best hitters are at 1B/corner OF. So Trout at CF was going to have an astronomical WAR cause CFs typically suck at offense lol.

    Same thing in this case. I dont think Votto is worse than Gardner that year, but thats not really what the WAR is measuring. Gardner in CF being that good offensively and solid on defense was going to amount to a huge WAR. Votto was good offensively, but only a little better in comparison to Gardner, in terms of what WAR measures. The typical 1B will have closer numbers to Votto than the typical CF will to Garnder.

    At least, thats how I am reading. Cause otherwise the stat just doesnt make sense too often.
  • se-alum
    Laley23;1455845 wrote:I agree. Im just saying looking at WAR vs WAR is wrong. It is what made me so made about Trout vs Miggy last year. Miguel having a WAR that high at 1B was astounding. Typically, the best hitters are at 1B/corner OF. So Trout at CF was going to have an astronomical WAR cause CFs typically suck at offense lol.

    Same thing in this case. I dont think Votto is worse than Gardner that year, but thats not really what the WAR is measuring. Gardner in CF being that good offensively and solid on defense was going to amount to a huge WAR. Votto was good offensively, but only a little better in comparison to Gardner, in terms of what WAR measures. The typical 1B will have closer numbers to Votto than the typical CF will to Garnder.

    At least, thats how I am reading. Cause otherwise the stat just doesnt make sense too often.
    So lets compare players of a like position, Brandon Phillips and Darwin Barney. BP had a WAR of 3.8 in 2012 and Barney had a 4.8. Is anybody really believing Barney was more valuable than BP?
  • Laley23
    se-alum;1455848 wrote:So lets compare players of a like position, Brandon Phillips and Darwin Barney. BP had a WAR of 3.8 in 2012 and Barney had a 4.8. Is anybody really believing Barney was more valuable than BP?
    No. And like I said, I dont like WAR.

    Just trying to point out everything about it since I was reading some arguments about why it was stupid that were incorrect themselves.
  • Commander of Awesome
    se-alum;1455843 wrote:Dynamite drop-in Monty.You have yet to add any substance to the thread, which isn't surprising.
    Coming from you, that's hilarious. Surprised you didn't just stick your hands to your ears and yell "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALA"
  • Ironman92
    se-alum;1455848 wrote:So lets compare players of a like position, Brandon Phillips and Darwin Barney. BP had a WAR of 3.8 in 2012 and Barney had a 4.8. Is anybody really believing Barney was more valuable than BP?

    Not a great comparison....Barney had a hell of a year on a hideous infield. His range is excellent.....BP's is also but we get swept by the Reds broadcasters a lot. BP is to 2nd base as Jim Edmonds is to CF, sensational but also creates highlights out of non-highlight plays.
  • Ironman92
    Commander of Awesome;1455855 wrote:Coming from you, that's hilarious. Surprised you didn't just stick your hands to your ears and yell "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALA"

    A 10 year old on my kids baseball team does that to his idiotic dad and I about wet myself every time.....so 20 months old
  • Commander of Awesome
    Ironman92;1455860 wrote:A 10 year old on my kids baseball team does that to his idiotic dad and I about wet myself every time.....so 20 months old
    lol'd
  • se-alum
    Commander of Awesome;1455855 wrote:Coming from you, that's hilarious. Surprised you didn't just stick your hands to your ears and yell "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALA"
    More good stuff. Keep it coming. I'm learning a lot from your highly informational posting.
  • se-alum
    Ironman92;1455858 wrote:Not a great comparison....Barney had a hell of a year on a hideous infield. His range is excellent.....BP's is also but we get swept by the Reds broadcasters a lot. BP is to 2nd base as Jim Edmonds is to CF, sensational but also creates highlights out of non-highlight plays.
    You have to look at offensive stats as well. So total package, you're taking Barney?
  • Commander of Awesome
    se-alum;1455865 wrote:More good stuff. Keep it coming. I'm learning a lot from your highly informational posting.
    Me too, I've learned how to come in and act like a total ass hat, not admit when I'm wrong, and continue to be a douche bag about it from you. I can only hope to halfway return the favor of the learning exp you've provided me little guy. Keep it up.
  • se-alum
    Commander of Awesome;1455867 wrote:Me too, I've learned how to come in and act like a total ass hat, not admit when I'm wrong, and continue to be a douche bag about it from you. I can only hope to halfway return the favor of the learning exp you've provided me little guy. Keep it up.
    What didn't I admit? I conceded the catcher argument a long time ago, and you continue to harp on it. Though I may not agree with lhslep, I respect his view on it, a we debated it cordially, and you just keep coming in with totally random posts about stuff we're not even talking about.
  • Ironman92
    se-alum;1455866 wrote:You have to look at offensive stats as well. So total package, you're taking Barney?

    No, Barney can't hit....but defensively he's right with BP, Cano and maybe Pedroia in there as well.
  • Commander of Awesome
    se-alum;1455868 wrote:What didn't I admit? I conceded the catcher argument a long time ago, and you continue to harp on it. Though I may not agree with lhslep, I respect his view on it, a we debated it cordially, and you just keep coming in with totally random posts about stuff we're not even talking about.
    More good stuff. Keep it coming. I'm learning a lot from your highly informational posting.

    Also should be noted, you completely ignored his post because they proved you wrong. You haven't said you were wrong once which you clearly were.
  • se-alum
    Commander of Awesome;1455874 wrote:More good stuff. Keep it coming. I'm learning a lot from your highly informational posting.

    Also should be noted, you completely ignored his post because they proved you wrong. You haven't said you were wrong once which you clearly were.
    If I say I was wrong, will you go troll elsewhere so us adults can talk?