Comments on: The 2009 Carter-Batista Award

By: PhD Brian

PhD Brian — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:52:31 +0000

LOL seriously made me laugh

By: Jonah Keri

Jonah Keri — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 22:42:18 +0000

I (sort of) inspired something this awesome? Sweet.

The Carter-Batista Award ranks well above the Ted Stepien Rule, The Bush Doctrine, or Lou Gehrig’s Disease.

By: Matt Klaassen

Matt Klaassen — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:13:04 +0000

alright, everyone, let’s chill. It’s all in fun, right?

Any benchmark for RBI is “arbitrary” in the sense that “100″ as a number isn’t “statistically” significant. It’s just a social convention we have due to the .300/30/100 Triple Crown tradition. I would have preferred using 100, but not that many interesting people get it, I picked 90 as the next step down. I could have used 80, or not had any minimum,but just eyeballing it, 90 seemed to get the most interesting group of guys tending to hit in the middle of the order and stuff. BUt I also wanted to restrict the group — guys like Jason Kendall have extreme numbers, but does anyone really care?

So, yeah, you could pick whatever benchmark you want. I was just try to find a medium between getting no one and getting everyone.

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 16:58:12 +0000

maybe teams will stop shifting on Howard if Utley gets on a few times and steals 2 bases on one pitch…

if they need video on how to do this, i can point them to their website.

By: Werthless

Werthless — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 16:19:57 +0000

“Would be” is the operative phrase, otherwise, I “is” would have been the chosen word. It wasn’t a critique of the article, but a critique of Feliz. I should have added that 90 RBI was an odd, arbitrary benchmark. 100 is a round number, while 80 RBI represents almost an RBI per 2 games.

By: Bill

Bill — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 16:01:41 +0000

I don’t think anyone is saying Ryan Howard is that much better with runners on, simply that often the defensive team cannot employ a superior defensive shift against him with runners on.

It’s especially true with w/ RISP, because often teams still shift with a runner on first.

By: Michael

Michael — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:51:07 +0000

Simple math is what you do best!

By: Michael

Michael — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:48:30 +0000

Anything with Mike Jacobs involved makes me feel sad.

By: Joe R

Joe R — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:45:27 +0000

Howard has 1521 PA’s with no one on and goes .269/.343/.545. Runners on? .290/.406/.628 in 1624 PA. In 1014 PA w/ RISP, he’s .278/.416/.587.

His unintentional walk rate with no one on is (146-4)/1521 = 9.33%. For men on? 9.79%.

How about strikeouts? 28.5% with no one on, 27.4% with men on.

So a little better w/ men on in the two main areas, but 63 points of OBP and 83 of SLG better? His HR rate doesn’t spike, his BABIP increases slightly, but that’s expected with men on. And I doubt he’s phoning it in when no one’s on. But a RE24 – wRAA of 27.73 in his career is huge.

By: Jeff Zimmerman

Jeff Zimmerman — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:16:14 +0000

Sweet can’t wait for the “+3 offense -1 defense -7.5 position = value” thing