Comments on: Ramon Santiago signs 2 year deal

By: Keith (Mr. X)

Keith (Mr. X) — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 20:22:29 +0000

He just might. Inge was an All-Star, with 27 HR’s, 84 RBI’s, 71 Runs scored all while hitting 6th or 7th. He was 1 run more productive with his bat than Polanco. His defense was amazing also.
I’m hoping we get the MVP type of player that Inge was in the 1st half of last season. If he can do what he done in the 1st half for the whole season, then he’ll be one of the best values in the game “any way you slice it”.

What he did in the 2nd half was terrible though, and not worth MLB minimum.

By: jcm

jcm — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 02:06:52 +0000

DD has been surpassed by the Mariners and Cubs GMs

By: Scott

Scott — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 01:27:12 +0000

His ERA was nearly 5… for a pitcher of his ability, that’s awful.

By: Joel in Seattle

Joel in Seattle — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 00:11:07 +0000

Baseball continues to be a game, regardless of how you want to analyze it. Sabermetric tools are just a way of analyzing the game. If you choose to analyze the game with less informative or reliable methods, go ahead, but with the sums of money going to these players, I really hope that the Tigers front office is using something besides their gut feel and the old eyeball test to make these decisions.

It’s about seeing what isn’t obvious to everyone, and that’s what sets your analysis (or your GM decision making) apart from everyone else’s.

By: Joel in Seattle

Joel in Seattle — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 23:52:58 +0000

Inge is not a good value for the Tigers, any way you slice it. Arguing that other disasters on other teams were worse doesn’t make it better. Crap may be better than diarrhea, but it’s still crap.

I will appreciate Brandon Inge for the things he has done for the team, but I will never agree that he’s a good value at $6 million a year. Do you think, if he was up for arbitration, he would get anything close to that, based on his performance?

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 20:27:55 +0000

Verlander wasn’t awful in 2008. His K rate fell a little from the year before (8.2 to 7.3) and his BB rate increased a little (3.0 to 3.9) and he got a lot more unlucky and got some poor run support. So while he lost a lot of games, he wasn’t pitching that terribly.

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:52:41 +0000

Thanks, Kathy. Yes, I agree, numbers don’t always tell the whole story. Take Justin Verlander. In 2008, Verlander was awful and performed much below his career averages. But how much of that was him and how much of it was all of the position shifting and nonsense going on behind him? How much does a superior fielder like Laird or Inge help a pitcher like Verlander? Some things are hard to quantify.

For a hitter, to me the most useful stats are still runs scored and runs batted in. Unless you’re a defensive whiz, you had better come close to one of those numbers as a full-time player or I’m looking to replace you. I actually do like one of the newer stats, too, for pitchers, which is WHIP. Generally, the guys that dominate that stat are the real studs. Not too many flukes.

By: Keith (Mr. X)

Keith (Mr. X) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 17:05:44 +0000

Perhaps pitchers should get +17.5 runs to balance the adjustment. One way or another, it should all add up to zero.

By: Keith (Mr. X)

Keith (Mr. X) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 17:03:02 +0000

Inge will probably be a nice value again for whoever wants him the most.

By: Kathy

Kathy — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:30:09 +0000

Geez, we have a guy with some class here. Apology accepted Scott. Being mathematically challenged myself, billfer’s stats and analysis have helped me understand players’ performance. Also, they come in useful when looking at an overall picture of a player’s performance, and comparing them to another player who might play the same position. Another reason why they are good is because the hard data makes people who know nothing about baseball look at some facts. That’s just my simplified version, that I use them for. But I also believe stats don’t tell the whole story, especially when looking at very young players and envisioning what tools a guy might posses. And as we all know, numbers can be manipulated. Not that billfer does, god forbid! Just sayin.

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:09:29 +0000

My appolgies for being such a crank last night. I enjoy Billfer’s site very much as well as the discussions that go along with it. I shouldn’t criticize stats I don’t fully grasp. Actually, I do remember buying Bill James’ abstract in early or mid 80s. I think stats that are talked about now have evolved since then … don’t remember UZI or WAR ratings back then.

By: Vince in MN

Vince in MN — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:31:22 +0000

Speaking of being out-of-state, I thought you were in California, or was that only a temporary situation. I remember this past summer at one point you were posting from some bar on the west coast while trying to hustle…. oh, never mind.

The Inge posts never peak. They can, and usually do, arise out of nowhere: “Hey, did you hear Santiago got a two year contract?” “Yeah, that Inge is sure a crappy thirdbaseman!” And the Lions are no excuse. Besides being football (zzzzzzz), they have been so pathetic for so long I can’t understand why anyone pays any attention at all – must be some kind of self-loathing pathology or something.

By: scotsw

scotsw — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 07:24:44 +0000

The reasons you like baseball are going to differ from the reasons other people like baseball. Some people just like to go and watch — most paying fans probably fit that description. But some people love the stats. Why shouldn’t they talk about those stats? The explosion of baseball statistics over the past few years gives some fans new insights into the game, and into each player’s strengths and weaknesses.

By: Coleman

Coleman — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 06:31:41 +0000

Vince in MN brings up a good point…but being in MN (I assume) he may be missing some subtleties here…like how in December one could be inclined to latch onto ANYTHING Tiger related to bandy about, anything to block out the mind-numbing consciousness of all things Lionish…

The Inge-ing pattern is pretty standard though. Topic: Santiago…Comment: he’s actually better than Everett….anti-Inge addition: and speaking of which, Inge is pretty lame also…pro-Inge reaction: what are you talking about? Inge can help a pitcher strike guys out by just staring at them…I don’t know what the solution to this is, and I don’t know that one is desirable…because, you know–Lions.

(Offhand I’n guessing the proportion of Inge-related comments spikes in the off-season…just a guess…only billfer knows for certain…)

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 03:11:35 +0000

Call me Old School, call me a Dino, but I freaking hate OPS and WAR and all this other stuff. Baseball is a game, not a science. I’ve seen thousands of games in my life and I know a good player from a bad one. I don’t need his “replacement value” or some other contrived stat to tell me. Santiago is a decent part-time player who really shouldn’t get more than about 200 at bats (if that) on a good team. Really, does it need to broken down any further?