Don’t Blame Ryan Howard
Even before Ryan Howard struck out looking to end the NLCS on Saturday, he was already being fitted with goat horns, especially by broadcasters Joe Buck and Tim McCarver. If you watched any of the last few games of the series, you heard some version of the following phrase every time Howard stepped into the box:
“Here’s Ryan Howard, who does not yet have an RBI in the series.”
You could count on one hand the number of times the Fox crew said his name and failed to mention his series RBI total. So, when Howard took strike three on a nasty slider from Brian Wilson in the ninth inning, the narrative was confirmed, and Ryan Howard has now become the reason the Phillies lost the series.
There’s only one problem – besides Jayson Werth, he was the only guy who did anything offensively against the Giants. The Phillies lost in spite of Ryan Howard’s performance, not because of it. Here are the individual NLCS lines for each Philadelphia starter.
Shane Victorino: .208/.296/.250
Placido Polanco: .250/.360/.350
Chase Utley: .182/.333/.227
Ryan Howard: .318/.400/.500
Jayson Werth: .222/.375/.611
Jimmy Rollins: .261/.320/.304
Raul Ibanez: .211/.250/.263
Carlos Ruiz: .167/.318.333
Howard led the team in batting average, on base percentage, and extra base hits in the NLCS. And yet, because he didn’t knock in a run, Fox decided that he was struggling at the plate. Usage of the statistic like this is why the sabermetric community has spent so much time working to explain its faults – if it was put in context, it’s not the worst proxy for offensive prowess, but too often it is used to tell a story that is simply not true.
The Phillies lost not because Ryan Howard didn’t hit when it mattered, but because all of his teammates except for one failed to bring the offense when the season was on the line. Howard had some noticeable failures, but on the whole, he did his job. In this case, RBIs are more deceptive than descriptive.
Good stuff. I am pretty sure I saw him hit two doubles off of lefties during the series as well. It clearly wasn’t his fault they lost this series. Still, the contract is way more than he deserved.
Fact: Ryan Howard struck out 2,471 times during the NLCS alone. Okay, slight exaggeration (only slight). You cannot ignore the fact that Howard fails to make contact with offspeed pitches on a consistent basis. He may not be the reason the Phillies lost (making your column on point), but I think it’s time we started to look at Howard as a player with GAPING holes in his swing – which means he will be inconsistent – which means in the post-season, he will be a liability. Watching his at-bats, I find it very difficult to believe this is an elite hitter.
Honestly, only Lopez and Lincecum really made him look bad, and nobody should feel bad striking out against Tim Lincecum.
Howard actually hit well this series (though not swinging there was pretty ugly), so it is hard to blame him.
I posit that not swinging was less ugly than if he had swung. Wilson made a perfect pitch there — one that Howard has consistently looked foolish flailing at. I suspect Howard recognizes that low, outside corner breaking pitch, knows he can’t get his bat on it, and hoped he’d get the call. He didn’t.
howard has always had holes in his swing, so why are you only now saying he has them? also howard could have had an rbi with a hit he had but the 3rd base coach stopped rollins from potenially scoring from first base, not that the rbi even matters
The coach stopped him because of how well Torres played the carom. Rollins would have been out by 30 feet had the third-base coach sent him.
@ WY he would not have been out by thirty feet
Rollins was around third by the time the SS even got the ball fairly deep in the outfield
Zach B, a couple things:
1) Hes always been strike-out prone, so that’s nothing really new; his career K% is 32%.
2) I guess this is more debatable, but with how susceptible he is to striking out and his putridity vs LHP, I don’t consider him an elite hitter at all.
To answer those that ask “why say this now?,” I have bemoaned Ryan Howard’s Melky-Cabrera-like wailing and missing pitches for his entire career. I mention it now because he is the subject matter of the post, and during the entire SF series, I found myself secretly excited when Utley would walk to bring up Howard. The book on Howard is so clear – he should almost never see a fastball because he can’t hit offspeed pitches! Run a fastball over his head once in an AB just to let him see it, but then through breaking balls on the outside of the plate! You will strike him out 7 out of 10 times.
I agree with you NM, Ryan Howard is NOT an elite hitter.
Well Zack B, if what you say is true then perhaps you can explain to me why he has positive values hitting curves and sliders throughout his career?
Against lefties you may have a point, but what you’re saying is just bad scouting.
“it’s not the worst proxy for offensive prowess”
Then what is? RBIs are almost completely meaningless. Worse than pitcher wins and saves. They are almost entirely dependent on opportunity and the mainstream media eats them up like they are the greatest thing in the world. I’ve heard talking heads call the RBI the most important statistic in baseball. You would have to be dumber than a box of rocks to think this, but some people still do.
“if it was put in context, it’s not the worst proxy for offensive prowess”
Ironic that Dave is talking about putting something in context and some takes part of a sentence and takes it out of context. By itself, the RBI is basically useless but when put in context, it CAN show offensive prowess.
Obviously there are much better ways to show offensive prowess.
Go add up every team’s RBI totals. The teams with high RBI totals correlate strongly with winning teams. If the statstic was totally meaningless and random, as you imply, then that shouldn’t happen.
is this a troll attempt?
on aggregate, yes, scoring runs (and consequently often driving them in means success)
but the longstanding poing is this:
batter one hits 300, takes walks, hits 40 homeruns and has 90 rbis.
still alot better than the batter who hits 270, takes walks at the same rate (and hits singles at a comparable rate), hits 25 homeruns and has 115 rbis.
The 2nd one is a beneficiary of a team that has runners on, feasting off pitchers who are throwing less hard from the stretch.
even in barry bonds berserko years, he didnt have as many RBI’s as you’d expect. that didn’t make him any less beastly.
Scoring more runs helps you win games? That’s a shock.
The point is that you can’t judge an individual player by their RBI totals without looking at the team context. If Miguel Cabrera was batting 9th for the Mariners (Sorry Dave), he would not have nearly as many RBI. RBI as a statistic in indicative of what runners in from of you do.
I actually gave this comment a thumbs up, when i meant to reply to it… sorry for getting your hopes up.
What I wanted to say, though, is that RBI correlation to a winning team is irrelevant when you can count almost exactly the same thing with pure run production. If your team knocks in a lot of runs, it most likely also scores a lot of runs… they’re pretty inseparable. The only use of RBI on the team level is in contrasting it with runs scored, and using the difference to see how many times the team was able to score on an error or run-scoring double play.
well, if you add up every team’s pitcher’s wins, I imagine they would correlate perfectly to the team’s overall record. Doesn’t mean its a good way to judge individual performance.
Fellas, I’m not disagreeing with you.
Are there more relevant, germane statistics for individual player performance? Absolutely. Should we use those stats wherever possible? Certainly.
But are RBIs absolutely meaningless are correlate to nothing at all, especially at a team level?
Well, that’s not entirely true either.
I think this is a little like saying that pitchers that run support is a non-negligible measure of pitchers. Watch:
Go add up every team’s pitcher run support. The teams with pitchers with high run support correlate strongly with winning teams.
That’s true, but pitchers have very little control over their run support. The existence of a stat doesn’t make it meaningful, even if it’s correlated with something meaningful.
Well don’t measure it in RBIs. RBIs is a counting stat that gives in information as to opportunity. Here’s an example of when an RBI is actually the less desired outcome:
Runner at 3rd, no outs. Is it better to have a SF/SH/FC the scores the run and makes an out or to have a BB or HBP that does not score the run but also creates another runner and does not make an out? I’m going to take the runner in every situation except a 1 run deficit or tied game in the 9th.
@Andrew
What happens when the next batter strikes out and the following bounces in to an inning ending double play? A bird in the hand…
Of course rbis correlate with winning teams. Winners score more runs! But rbis are not correlated with hitting just hitting with runners on base.
I feel like runs are the worse, which makes Jim Caple’s article about Jeter pretty much the worst thing I’ve ever read.
I agree wholeheartedly about the RBI stat as well as the team’s overall production. Having said that, Howard’s strikeout percentage was just unacceptable.
reds series
game 1…-.024 WPA
game 2…-.068 WPA
game 3…+.018 WPA
giants series
game 1…-.097 WPA
game 2…+.025 WPA
game 3…-.012 WPA
game 4…+.183 WPA
game 5…-.114 WPA
game 6…-.170 WPA
total…-.259 WPA
his only good game by WPA was a game the phils went on to lose. this all just reminds me of the fuss over a-rod a few years back on how he only hit meaningless hr when the yanks already had a big lead.
WPA like RBI ignores what your team mate does. In 6-2 game if a player comes up who has been 0-4 with like 2 GIDP his WPa would be well negative. if he hits a HR his WPA would still be negative. Now imagine a similar scenario where the same player comes up but the guys in front of him got on bases and loads it. The guy hits HR and suddenly his WPA jumps to positive and is considered “clutch” . The result of the action is the same (HR) but because of the teammates the overall result (6-3 games vs a 6-6 tie) of the game differs.
yeah, i get what wpa is and how it works. i am acknowledging that though he had a decent line over the series, he didn’t do too much for his team in the ‘clutch’, leading to his poor wpa and the negative views of his performance on the series.
A few points:
1) Comparing Howard’s offensive production to other players is a bit misleading. Carlos Ruiz, Shane Victorino, Jimmy Rollins, etc. aren’t paid as much as Howard and also contribute a substantial portion of their value on defense. Ryan Howard stinks on defense at a non premium position. He is paid the most money on the team to do one thing, and one thing only: be a premier power hitter. Did his numbers this postseason correlate with the numbers of a premier power hitter? I would say no.
2) Aren’t Little Leaguers told not to take a close pitch on a 2 strike count? Now add in the fact the game, the series, and the season were on the line, and Howard’s backward K becomes much more unacceptable.
So, certainly, was Ryan Howard *the* reason the Phillies lost? Absolutely not. Was his performance disappointing? Absolutely.
Right, judging players in a 2-week sample based on their 5-year contracts.
Good analysis.
Overall, he had an off year. How much of that is injuries and how much was just him declining?
Should be an interesting 2011 for him. Maybe he can keep the good numbers vs. LHP and rediscover how to hit for power.
You’re totally right, it’s unfair to judge Ryan Howard exclusively based on a 2 week sample. Let’s look at this season’s stats:
.276/.353/.505
A one year WAR of 2.0 over 143 games.
Hmmm…that’s a little over $10 million per win right there.
Thanks for inviting the more detailed analysis.
Hunter, you’re totally right that Howard is getting overpaid for his production overall.
But you can’t look at his postseason line and say “whoa, he’s getting paid so much, he has to be better than that.” That’s freaking two weeks, and it was actually a pretty good two weeks.
You pay guys based on their production during the season, and then hope like hell they play well in the playoffs.
Little Leaguers don’t see 90 MPH fastballs, much less 90 MPH sliders (or maybe a cutter? gameday said slider and on TV it looked like it had a lot of movement). When you get fooled in the bigs, it looks ugly.
Well, what makes it worse (to me) was when asked about it after the fact, he didn’t say, “I got badly fooled.”
He said something along the lines that he knew for sure it was a ball and the ump was wrong for calling it a strike.
Blaming others for your failure is an interesting tactic…
Well…it WAS a ball so he was correct. It was definitely low. He still should have fouled it off as it was way way too close to take in that situation.
There’s no normalized strike zone in baseball — only the real strike zone of each umpire on each night. You can’t definitively say that the final pitch to Howard was a ball. Even strike zone plots provided retroactively aren’t worth nearly as much in objective analysis as a lot of people seem to think — they’re based on a one-size-fits-all strike zone (i.e. Ryan Howard and Shane Victorino are the same size at the plate) and they don’t on their own take into account what the umpire’s actual pattern of balls and strikes is on a given night.
Whether the subjectivity of umpiring balls and strikes is right or wrong isn’t my point here. I’m just saying that to cling to some conception that Ryan Howard was right that that pitch was a ball doesn’t account for the way balls and strikes are actually called. Sorry if I seem a little defensive about this — it’s just that I’m really, really sick of how much attention the strike zone is getting this year and how, for instance, so many people blamed the entire outcome of NLCS Game 1 on that one pitch to Pat Burrell.
Graham,
I’m with you on your rant about the strike zone. We should think of more like a probability distribution. Where maybe the actual edge of the plate simply repressents the 50:50 strike:ball crossover point, or something like that. Then if we could actually measure and normalize the hight of the zone for each batter we could do the same thing on the vertical axis.
And if we go even farther, we probably have to create a new probability plot for each pitch type, as the umps are going to be fooled by the different movements of the ball and at what point in those vertical/horizontal movements the ball actually crosses the plate.
So applying this to Howard’s final pitch, that pitch was definately on the fringe of what was very likely to be called a strike, and it was also in place where its going to be difficult for hitters to hit that ball very hard, much less even make contact. Thus, I think that non-swing by Howard was completely justified. In another parallel universe that pitch was called a ball, and we see Jayson Werth come to the plate with the bases loaded.
IMO, no discussion of major league baseball should refer to Little League. I actually think a lot of incorrect perceptions are caused by interpreting MLB through the eyes of LL.
LL’s are taught to swing at anything close with 2 strikes because pitchers have such little control, that umps expand the strike zone to get the game moving, and well … you never know what you’re going to get with umps at the LL level.
In the majors, umps should be consistent and accurate … and the pitchers are of such high quality that hitting a borderline pitch becomes essentially a give away anyhow (look at BA’s for pitches in various zones, note the low and away or low center zones).
I do have issues with his high rate of K’s … because 200 K’s is only tolerable when there’s ~ 50 HRs to go with it. Actually, I just looked it up, his K’s this year was a career low (157), and so was his HRs (31) in 620 ABs. BABIP was in line with career rates. ISO was down.
I have concerns over the 1B fielding aspect of WAR, but the only way Howard is going to come close to his former value is with HRs.
IMO, the series shows more about the Giants pitching than it does the Phillies hitting.
I did not watch the series, but based on the news I heard on TV, I would have guessed that Howard had a horrible series. 12 K’s in 25 AB’s or something like that.
Had he grounded out to 2B 12 times out of 25, would broadcasters and fans felt any different about it? No, they would not.
We’re seeing some pretty good offense shut down in the playoffs, actually the two favorites. I think it has more to do with quality pitching , than luck, or choking.
1) He had a .900 OPS. That’s pretty darn good. Sure great hitters can put together better 6 game stretches, but since he hit pretty much along his career norms I don’t really see what you have to complain about.
2) That pitch was amazing. There’s really not much point in Howard attempting to swing at, because I don’t think he’d make contact with it enough to justify giving up on the chance that it is called a ball.
Brian Wilson has a 11+ K/9 rate. At some point you just have to understand that he’s up against a damn good pitcher and thus Howard is not as likely to succeed as he usually would.
And finally, was his series disappointing? To me, not really. I can understand that it might be disappointed in Howard’s final strike out and not be able to look past anything else, but that is an emotional reaction, not a rational one. So, be as disappointed as you like, but understand that your disappointment is not logical.
The 1B fielding aspect of WAR (the fangraph variety) is a mess in my view… I still don’t see how Tex is the 2nd worst defensive 1st baseman in the AL this year.
I’m not sure how the Range R works at first… especially on balls hit to the 2nd baseman which smart 1st basemen will let go (to avoid having the pithcer covering) vs ones that “Cabrera” the ball (see last out of almost perfect game. I’m also not sure how foul territory differences come into play… do places with large areas of foul territory help the Range R component of UZR? Similarly double play run is seemingly somewhat dependent on both the SS and pitchers for 1st baseman so is a team with poor covering pitchers penalized if they can’t turn 3-6-1 DP’s?
As for K’s vs groundouts… groundouts give you a chance either an error or a grounder that might go through for a hit or even getting a runner to advance a base. The only downsides is a potential DP or a forceout which takes a fast runner off the base. But when Howard comes up 2nd and 3rd with 1 out (like he did in the NLCS) a groundout is better than a K…
Oops meant as a reply to circlechange’s comment… sorry.
“2) Aren’t Little Leaguers told not to take a close pitch on a 2 strike count? ”
What a dumb argument. Little Leaguers are told this because they SUCK and they’re told this cause Little League managers SUCK and Little League umpires may think anything is a strike cause they SUCK.
Scoring runs is overrated…particularly from your cleanup hitter.
He may not be the sole reason the Phillies lost, but he surely contributed to it. We signed him to a HUGE contract ealier this year. Because of this contract, the Phillies will probably lose multiple players, including Jayson Werth, who will undoubtedly be the club’s biggest loss this coming year. Howard has been established as a leader and should have acted that way when he came to the plate. Show us why we’re paying you a ridiculous salary.. Show us why we are losing Jayson Werth because of you! But back to my initial statement, he wasn’t alone. At one point in the game, Ibanez hit a nice double and then got bunted to third by Ruiz. With only 1 out, why the hell did Ben “San” Francisco try to kill the ball instead of bunting Raul home? We would have seen a completely different game if it wasn’t for that. The game would have been tied when Howard came to bat in the 9th, not Phils down by 1 run… Sometimes you have to play a little “small ball” to stay alive and that is the biggest contributor to our loss on Saturday in my opinion
More than anything, the Phillies lost as a team. Everyone played a part in the losing.
***With only 1 out, why the hell did Ben “San” Francisco try to kill the ball instead of bunting Raul home? ***
Well, because Francisco is a terrible bunter, the infield was playing way in and Ibanez is the slowest player on earth. A bunt wouldn’t have worked. Francisco NEEDED to make contact and he didnt. The true question is Why the hell wasn’t Mike Sweeney pinch-hitting?
The faster Francisco SHOULD have been pinch running for the lead-footed Ibanez and SWEENEY should have been batting for Oswalt.
@ Howard: I was thinking the same thing at the time. Score the run, then use Francisco for D in left.
The Phillies are not losing Werth because of Howard.
They are losing Werth because THE PHILLIES GAVE Howard that contract.
I don’t understand this notion that athletes shouldn’t take money offered to them. It’s not their responsibility to rescue ownership from their own stupidity.
The fact is that Howard was not an impending FA and there was no reason to sign him to that extension when they did. Howard had no where to go.
Stop blaming Howard for accepting tons of money. Everyone else on earth would do the same thing.
So very, very true. +74.
If my employer offers to lock me up to a 5-year, $5 million deal, I will try to stifle my cackles long enough to sign a contract faster than anyone has signed anything on the planet earth. Their fault, not mine.
plus they aren’t losing werth because they signed howard to an extension that starts in 2012, they lost werth when they gave ibanez a three year deal with a no trade clause. to reiterate the contract extension to hwoard hasn’t even started.
and bunting francisco are you nuts to score ibanez are you nuts?
Phils are likely to lose Werth because it costs a huge amount of money to keep the band together year after year, and Werth’s contract is about to go supernova. If you think Howard’s contract is to blame, you might as well lump Werth in there for not being satisfied with $2 million a year. But in reality, it’s the nature of the team they put together. A team of All-Star veterans is expensive all over the diamond.
Jesus Christ, the called third strike on Francisco was a foot outside, give him a break. And hey, if not for an incredibly lucky bounce right back to Torres, Howard would have had an RBI on his double.
RBI’s can correlate with strongly winning teams. But not always. No one on the Giants even had close to Howard’s RBI total of this year, which was a down year as far as RBI’s go for Howard.
Really any complaints about The Big Piece stem from his contract, and what that makes fans (the educated and the not alike) expect from him.
He had a good series in many ways, but when he came up with players on base he was just atrocious.
Game 1: 0-2 2K
Game 2: 0-1 K, BB
Game 3: 0-0
Game 4: 0-1 K, BB, IBB
Game 5: 0-2 K
Game 6: 2-4 2K
Now I agree, more of the blame has to go to Victorino (for just not having good on-base skills) and Utley (for underachieving with his godly on-base abilities), but 7 K’s in 13 PAs is just unacceptable.
so you are judging him on 13 plate appearance, one of which is an intentionally walk?!?!? what’s he supposed to do while being intentionally walked, swing at it?
Worked for me.
I agree there too. Sweeney should have hit. It was a crucial point and they used Carlton from “Fresh Prince” who blew it! :-Þ
Like Carlton, Francisco definitely came up short.
excellent post
What should be evident to the media, but undoubtedly isn’t, is that the Phillies’ offense was way overrated coming into the series. The media acted as though it was one All-Star after another but it simply isn’t. Victorino is an average offensive player. Rollins is average at best. Polanco and Ibanez, to put it mildly, have seen better days. Ruiz is pretty good…for a catcher. Utley is a star who didn’t hit like one. Werth and Howard played well but weren’t able to overcome the poor performance of the remainder of the lineup.
Yep, that lineup sucks.
Now please mail it out here to Seattle.
overrated compared to what? An ideal team? Or other NL teams?
They’re rated highly because they’ve been a top tier offense for the last few seasons, and they have had quite a few all-stars.
Rank (Runs Scored)
2007: 2nd
2008: 9th
2009: 4th
2010: 7th
Rank wOBA:
2007: 2nd
2008: 8th
2009: 5th
2010: 11th
That’s pretty good considering they’re being lumped together with 14 teams that use a DH.
Here are their NL Ranks:
Runs Scored –
2007: 1st
2008: 3rd
2009: 1st
2010: 2nd
wOBA –
2007: 1st
2008: 3rd
2009: 1st
2010: 4th
So, basically, the best offense in the last 3 years was once again healthy, and people viewed that as a strength.
The real deal is that a lot of offenses are going to struggle facing Lincecum, Sanchez, and Cain. I mean, really, we’re expecting the Phils offense to produce at their season rate against 3 very good pitchers?
Why, as educated and informed people, would we expect such a thing?
Did we expect the NYY to priduce their usual 5 RPG against Lee?
I suppose you’d be surprised to know that the MLB team with the most runs scored in September/October this season was… the Phillies.
The MLB team with the highest wOBA in September/October was… the Phillies.
The MLB team with the highest team stats in each of the triple slash stats in September/October was… the Phillies.
So, overrated going into the post-season? No.
Was the season only 1 month long?
I didn’t say the Phillies’ offense wasn’t good; I said it was overrated. Some of their runs scored are due to park effects, of course. They’re 4th in the NL in wOBA, only .001 ahead of the Braves. The media makes the Phillies’ offense out to be along the lines of the Yankees and they’re simply not, regardless of how they may have performed during September.
Kind of reminds me of the guy who put up this line in an NLCS a few years ago but is seen as a goat:
.296/.387/.667/1.054, 3 HRs, a double and four RsBI.
Totally guessing, but…Carlos Beltran?
Yup
One option, since RBI is a dirty word around here, would be to look at RBI conversion rate (how many times did he drive a runner in from 2nd or 3rd vs team or league average?).
Sure the NLCS could have been random chance or variation but over 1/2 of his AB’s were with men on, and he was terrible in those situations…. it’s one thing to say that is unlikely to continue, but it doesn’t change the fact that he was awful hitting with men on base.
Using a slash line in a 6 game series as a sign of hitting performance is almost as egregious as Fox talking about no RBI.
Why would using a slash line be “egregious”? It sums up his PERFORMANCE in those six games. It may not be his true talent, but it tells you what he did in the box.
Because one more (or less) hit will or walk will change some of the slash line components by 40-45points? Are we crediting his OBP/OPS performance because of an IBB?
Howard struckout 12 times in 25 PA’s…. let’s call that about 50%. Not exactly ‘good’ hitting.
Howard had 13 PA’s (I think) with men on base… and struck out 8 times (and one of the 13 PA’s was a IBB which he had no control over). That is simply terrible – no chance for runners to advance on an out, put pressure on the defense, get a ball to dunk in, etc…
RBI totals are widely criticized (and rightfully so) because a hitter has little control over RBI opportunities and someone hitting in front of guys with good OBP’s should get more RBI. However the 0 RBI from Howard was not a product of the men in front of him not getting on, it was a product of striking out 67% of the time he had a chance to hit in the NLCS with men on base.
1. He didn’t “get one more or one less hit” obviously. His triple slash is representative of his performance. “If”s don’t count for past performance
2. With a sample this small his K rate didn’t negatively effect his triple slash.
3. If you are going to say his rate stats can’t be given due credit because of the small sample size over the series, then don’t go and cherry pick a smaller sample size (ab with men on) to prove your point.
That’s my point… If you are going to quote actual performance… look at his perfomance with men on base (which was ~50% of his PA’s) and when he struckout 67% of the time when he was pitched to.
That is a complete failure… if you are impressed with his triple slash line with noone on base, great. Maybe they pitch him differently with noone on? (I know pitchers don’t pitch to situations in the SABR circle and context doesn’t matter)
Short series = small sample size and to quote rates which will go up or down 45pts on one outcome is lunacy. In the big spots in the series he put the ball in play TWICE in 13 PA’s.
But that .500 SLG% is pretty impressive with 23AB’s…..
@Joe: Exactly. In the NLCS, Howard got 7 hits. In the NLCS, Howard put 10 balls into play. Yeah, 5 of those were line drives, but if you take away just 1 of those hits, leaving him with a still ridiculous .600 BABIP, his line is suddenly .272/.360/.454. All of a sudden, .900 becomes .815
This isn’t to say Howard didn’t earn all of his hits, but rather to illustrate the folly of using rate stats with a sample size of 25.
Good point.
It still cracks me up that we use the season stats as a comparison for how the players should fare in the playoffs against much better teams and much better pitchers.
Why do we do that?
I thought the Phils lost cause they traded some guy named Cliff Lee for a poo poo platter from the AA cast off island, not because Ryan Howard was unable to get all his singles/doubles with guys on base.
Seems dubious. People were saying that for the Giants offense, every pitcher might as well be Roy Halladay. Since Halladay >= Lee, that means All Pitchers >= Lee when facing the Giants. Hence, Lee would have made no difference and might have even made things worse. QED.
I was just goofing around and you went all logical on me, next time I’ll just change my name to #XXorg or something so no one takes me serious..
And we’re seriously going to take jabs from McCarver and Buck? “Coattail” riders — one on a hall of fame pitcher, the other on his storied father — who have the guts to repetitiously (almost perseveratively, in true Rainman fashion) cast verbal critiques at players who got there on their own merits? Please! While the run-production component of this team did pretty much tank during the LCS, listening to these two ya-hoos try to pin it on any one player is both an insult and a joke. Timmy can thank Lefty for both his playing, and, subsequently, his broadcasting career (all those years in training as Steve’s mouthpiece), while Joe rode the daddy train into national broadcasting. Either one of them should live so long to be a fraction of the man Howard is; let us know when THEY achieve championship calibre IN THEIR OWN RIGHT.
If you’re going to be an idiot … at least be accurate. McCarver’s fame comes from catching Gibson, where he won 2 WS titles on 3 WS teams. Catching Carlton later AND winning another WS adds to it.
Your idiotic tact aside, I think you may actually be making a case FOR McCarver:
21 seasons
4 world series appearances
3 world series titles
2 all-star appearances
2nd in MVP in 1964
Played an important position
As a cather, once led the league in triples
I’m no McCarver supporter, even as a Cardinals fan, but when you look at HIS accomplishments, they certainly are far above what the typical broadcaster has achieved.
As for Joe Buck, I like him as an announcer. A poor man’s Bob Costas if you will. I don’t like the 2 guys together.
Using your reason, Joe Morgan should be able to say anything and be right, since he may be (position adjusted) one of the 5 best players in history.
I have also sort of become a default defender of Ryan Howard, since people tend to go overboard and extreme with their criticism, but really looking at all 3 of your complaints … I think you are likely wrong on all 3.
Wow.
The original post from Dave Cameron states that Ryan Howard “did his job” during the NLCS and that he is not the reason the Phillies lost. His lack of RBI production is “deceptive”. Wrong on both counts I think.
Did Ryan Howard do his job? DC says that .318/.400/.500 says he did. Science. He also struck out in over half his at bats, had an -.259 WPA, and was 2/13 with runners on. He also had zero steals, struck out zero batters, and was tied for the best ERA and WHIP on the team. Ryan Howard’s job as a cleanup hitter is to hit for power with runners on base. He did not do that. In this case, RBI are a good measure of his job performance. Ryan Howard is expected to hit for power and hit RBI. Small sample size? Yes. But we are discussing his performance in this one series, not his career, season or averages, so small sample size is relevant. We can compare his performance during this small sample size to these averages, but it is the small sample that is the topic of discussion. Although RH got a few hits and a few doubles, he was effectively neutralized by the Giants pitching staff. Expectation plays into job performance, and Ryan Howard did not perform to expectation which includes hitting for power and batting in runs. I would agree that a .500 SLG would be good for any other hitter BUT Ryan Howard (and a few others) but expectation for RH has to set at least at .550 if not his career .572, or even higher on the big stage with it all on the line. We are not discussing the contract value of RH, his place in history, if he is a good person, or if he going to heaven. We are discussing his job performance during the 2010 NLCS. Based on the job description of an elite cleanup hitter, he failed.
RBI in this case are not deceptive but very descriptive. They tell the story of this limited data. He did not perform when it counted. Small sample size? Yes. But we are discussing specifically his performance during it. Could we expect more or less from Ryan Howard during this series? I think we can. 12 Ks. 7 when it counted. Four doubles and no HRs. Ryan Howard was hired to excel at exactly the situation he did good at. Not to be average, or even good. He was hired to be great. I think this is one of those cases where good isn’t good enough. As much as we would like to stick to the stats, no RBI tells the story of his job performance better than more in depth stats. The slash numbers are filled with cotton candy and puppy dog tails. Ryan Howard did not contribute to his team winning a single game.
I agree, the rest of the offense failed the Phillies, more so than Howard. Yes Fox got stuck zeroing in on the lack of RBI without explaining more. But in this case, I think the lack of RBI shows better what happened in this series. It shows what is NOT there in the stats. No HRs. No heroics. No double with 2 on. No 1.xx OPS, No film clips for the highlight reel. In that way the stat is very descriptive. So was the final at bat: Ryan Howard, with bat on shoulder, watched a perfectly placed slider, in a full count, in the ninth inning, in the deciding game, with winning run on base, to end his at bat, the game, the series and the season.
No RBI, 12Ks says it much better than .312/.400/.500. In this case, statistics fail to deliver the story. Ryan Howard, despite his good looking stats, was neutralized out of relevance on the big stage. He failed at being a great cleanup hitter when it was needed most.
RBI and K are stats, I think.
In some circles.
I don’t think it’s completely silly to use RBIs as a metric for a cleanup hitter. There are better metrics to use, but RBIs should count.
The SSS aspect applies to everything in the playoffs. We could use that aspect to make all playoff accompishments seem trivial or lucky. I’m glad we don’t.
???????????????
http://www.evelseller.com/
???????????????
h ave so me che ap thi ngs …(Jew erly…)
ni k e sh o es , fa s h i on cl o th es ; br a nd ha n d b a gs , wa l l et …
I f y o u th ink o ur web site is go od , y ou c an p ut th is web site t o bookmarks or ot her pl aces, ea sy t o fi nd …
???????????????
http://www.evelseller.com/
???????????????
i was much more concerned to see Utley at the plate than Howard….sure, he had a few bases-empty doubles but whenever it really counted the Giants made him look a little silly…
also, even though the statheads may hate it, RBI’s do count in the real world…