Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bobby Abreu... has won a Gold Glove Award

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Androctus
    Am I saying he's not a good hitter? NO. Yes, he's above the league norm in almost every area. He scores, drives in runs, yadda yadda but when its crunch time and the games on the line, I'm just hoping someone else is on deck, because in spite of what your stats say, when it really matters, he's really not there.
    So regardless of what the historical record of what really happened says, you'll think what you want.

    How truly common of you.

    Oh, and remember- you were the guy who asked for the numbers you're now choosing to ignore.

    Stats even out that a guy may go 10 for 10 in april in close games and 0 for 20 the rest of the way down a pennant race. But on paper he's hitting .333 and looks like a clutch God. Remember also he hit almost half his home runs in a single month. Don't beleive? Fine. Trust your stats, get him on your team and come talk to us in a year.
    Baseball is a game of streaks. Great players have them. Good players have them. Bad players have them. The year before, Abreu posted .326 BA/.483 OBP/.500 SLG numbers in September and finished the season on a tear.

    I might just hang around a bit because it's obvious you really don't know a whole lot about how this whole "baseball" thing really works.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by donzblock
      I am willing to experience the tragedy of losing this clutch hitter. In the late innings of close games, Abreu alters his swing and strives mightily to draw walks.
      And not making Outs is bad why?

      We have been watching Abreu for his entire career...
      All that tells me is that you've spent a lot of time watching a game you don't understand. Kudos to you.

      ...and he is miserable in the clutch, magnificent when the game is out of reach.
      Prove it. That's right. Prove it. If your contention is true, the hisorical event record (some folks call them "statistics") will demonstrate it.

      If your stats suggest that Abreu is at his best with runners on base in the late innings of close games, then your stats are wrong.
      LOL! Yeah...the historical event record is wrong because your brain misinterprets what it sees. That's a good one.

      He is a lousy clutch hitter, an abominable fielder, and I hope he ends up playting for a team that one of of you statistically minded Abreu fans roots for. The tragedy will be yours.
      Any team would be lucky to have Bobby Abreu. The fact that you can't figure that out truly speaks to your ignorance level.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by ed hardiman
        Perhaps the latest wave of metrically challenged youth would care to justify such nonsense...
        Or perhaps we'd rather sit back and watch you build strawmen. It's pointless for you to do so, but somewhat amusing to watch you create opposing arguments out of thin air that have nothing to do with Bobby Abreu.

        Endy Chavez? Good lord.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by SteelSD
          And not making Outs is bad why?
          Abreu does make out in clutch situations. Furthermore, by drawing a walk, he makes it possible for somebody else to make the crucial out. He does not drive in a run when he walks unless the bases are loaded, but if the bases are loaded in a close game, Bobby will not walk.



          All that tells me is that you've spent a lot of time watching a game you don't understand. Kudos to you.
          No, I've never understood the game. That is why I am so grateful that a genius like you has condescended not only to explain it to me but to stick around and continue to explain it to me even after you have explained it to me.



          Prove it. That's right. Prove it. If your contention is true, the hisorical event record (some folks call them "statistics") will demonstrate it.
          If I understand what you are saying, proof to you constitutes numbers or statistics. What is the stat that appears when Abreu loafs after a fly ball and fails to catch it? What number registers when Bobby sees an outfield wall and slows down so that he will not hit it? Do you have the figures that tell us in feet per second how much speed Bobby loses each time Bobby slows down when the fear in his veins causes alarm bells to go off in his brain? And do you have the figures that measure how much Bobby fails to elongate when the parabola of a fly ball requires him to do so? How far beyond his nose can Bobby reach, and precisely how fast does he run when he finds himself in a circumstance that requires him to stretch?

          Apparently, you have the numbers that prove Bobby is a superb outfielder. Give us those numbers, Statistician Magician. Prove it with numbers. Prove it, big shot. Show us how keenly intelligent you are as you teach us all about the great game of baseball.



          LOL! Yeah...the historical event record is wrong because your brain misinterprets what it sees. That's a good one.
          Your LOL has already been canceled out by my SOL (Snore Out Loud).



          Any team would be lucky to have Bobby Abreu. The fact that you can't figure that out truly speaks to your ignorance level.
          Yes, it does, but with you doing the educating, I am confident that my ignorance level will soon rise a few inches to the oblivion level. With your help, my goal is to reach by the end of next summer the barely conscious level. After that, I might even be able to emerge from the abyss and reach up and touch Charlie Manuel's big toe.

          Clearly, there is now cause for optimism since you have acknowledged how important it is for you to stick around and infuse a little brilliance into this forum. I think I speak for everybody in expressing to you my humble gratitude.
          Last edited by donzblock; 11-10-2005, 11:49 AM.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by SteelSD
            So regardless of what the historical record of what really happened says, you'll think what you want.

            How truly common of you.

            Oh, and remember- you were the guy who asked for the numbers you're now choosing to ignore.
            I think what I want based on what I see and I make my conclusions based oon what my eyes tell me, and I'm not ignoring your precious numbers, what I'm trying to explain and you cant grasp is that they don't tell the whole story, and those of us who follow the Phillies like myself who have either seen or heard almost every game this year, are obviously in touch with what is not shown across from the funny papers because we've seen it, not on one occasion, but again and again and again, and are not deceived by glittery statistics. The Fact the Mr. Abreu has a gold glove now is direct evidence of this, because while on paper he looks like a viable outfielder, those of us who actually seen him in the field know for certain he is not in the same category as say, Andruw Jones or Jim Edmonds. You sir,and Mr Ravenlord, have not even indicated yet if you have even actually witnessed Bobby Abreu play one inning of baseball.

            I might just hang around a bit
            Please do. This is the longest forum debate I've ever seen where someone didn't take a shot at someone else's mother yet.

            because it's obvious you really don't know a whole lot about how this whole "baseball" thing really works.
            Oh I think I do, and on some higher level that apparently you havn't come to grips with yet. I understand baseball here in Philly is played, won and lost on a field of grass, and not in the offices of the Elias Sports Bureau or some website.
            I AM ROSTERDAMUS!!!

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by donzblock
              Abreu does make out in clutch situations. By drawing a walk, he makes it possible for somebody else to make the crucial out. He does not drive in a run when he walks unless the bases are loaded, but if the bases are loaded in a close game, Bobby will not walk.
              Then that will be tracked in actual game records. Your charge is to go find those game records and give me some demonstrable evidence that what you say is true.

              If not, you're done because all the relevant factual information thusfar leads us in a direction opposite that of your position.

              No, I've never understood the game. That is why I am so grateful that a genius like you has condescended not only to explain it to me but to stick around and continue to explain it to me even after you have explained it to me.
              Actually, the ultimate in condescencion was your truly funny "If the actual game records don't say what I think they should say then they're wrong!" exclamation (paraphrased of course).

              Could you get any more childish than that? That's like a kindergarten student vehemently arguing with their teacher that 1+1 equals 3 just because they think so.

              If I understand what you are saying, proof to you constitutes numbers or statistics.
              All offensive performance is tracked- even in individual game log records that can be easily found at espn.com. The game doesn't just exist in your brain after it's over.

              Apparently, you have the numbers that prove Bobby is a superb outfielder. Give us those numbers, Statistician Magician. Prove it with numbers. Prove it, big shot. Show us how keenly intelligent you are as you teach us all about the great game of baseball.
              That's strange. I've never mentioned Abreu's defense. If you were as adept at processing non-statistical information as you claim to be, I can't see how that little fact slipped your mind.

              If your brain plays tricks on you like that with something as simple as words on a screen, I'm not sure why we'd ever believe you're able to know what's happening during a game as complex as baseball while you're watching it.

              Your LOL has already been canceled out by my SOL (Snore Out Loud).
              Well, golly. A variation on the age old "I know you are but what am I?"

              I swear that someone needs to write a book called "Internet Smack for Dummies" just to help out a guy like you.

              Yes, it does, but with you doing the educating, I am confident that my ignorance level will soon rise a few inches to the oblivion level.
              Oh, you need not look forward to that as you're already at the PINNACLE of both "ignorant" and "oblivious".

              In fact, you should plant a flag there, build a little hut, and start a garden because it doesn't appear that you'll be coming down from there anytime soon.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Androctus
                I think what I want based on what I see and I make my conclusions based oon what my eyes tell me, and I'm not ignoring your precious numbers...
                They're not "my" numbers. They're accurate historical game records. Those numbers flow from the game because they're what actually happened.

                ...what I'm trying to explain and you cant grasp is that they don't tell the whole story...
                Of course they don't. But then, as neither of us have the ability to accurately perceive, store, and recall every play from 162 games during a season, that doesn't matter. Those numbers are history and they can validate our perceptions or blow them up if we know how to read the historical record.

                If we could only have real knowledge about players we watched constantly, then none of us would be remotely qualified to talk about anything other than our own teams. And that's just stupid.

                ...and those of us who follow the Phillies like myself who have either seen or heard almost every game this year, are obviously in touch with what is not shown across from the funny papers because we've seen it, not on one occasion, but again and again and again, and are not deceived by glittery statistics.
                On the flipside, you're not allowing yourself to be enlightened by those statistics either. Ignoring them is far worse than over-reliance on them.

                The Fact the Mr. Abreu has a gold glove now is direct evidence of this, because while on paper he looks like a viable outfielder, those of us who actually seen him in the field know for certain he is not in the same category as say, Andruw Jones or Jim Edmonds. You sir,and Mr Ravenlord, have not even indicated yet if you have even actually witnessed Bobby Abreu play one inning of baseball.
                Yes, I've seen Bobby Abreu play baseball. In fact, I tune into Phillies games every once in a while with the MLB ticket package on Dish.

                And you might be surprised to note that I actually agree with you. Bobby Abreu did not deserve the Gold Glove (which is often given to the best hitter or a formerly excellent fielder based on reputation). In fact, only four Right Fielders in MLB produced a lower percentage of Outs on balls they could be reasonably expected to field. Over time, all fielders lose a step here and there as they age. It's happening to Abreu but folks haven't figured it out because of his reputation and prowess with the bat.

                But I didn't need to watch 162 Phillies games to notice that.

                Please do. This is the longest forum debate I've ever seen where someone didn't take a shot at someone else's mother yet.
                Oh yeah? Well your mom...

                Oh I think I do, and on some higher level that apparently you havn't come to grips with yet. I understand baseball here in Philly is played, won and lost on a field of grass, and not in the offices of the Elias Sports Bureau or some website.
                Baseball doesn't start and end with a spreadsheet. But it's not accurately stored in our brains either. That's the truth.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by SteelSD
                  "Close And Late" - Results in the 7th inning or later with the batting team either ahead by one run, tied or with the potential tying run at least on deck.

                  Here's Abreu from 2002-2004, BTW:

                  None On: .264 BA/.382 OBP/.450 SLG- .832 OPS
                  Runners On: .332 BA/.449 OBP/.548 SLG- .997 OPS
                  With RISP: .329 BA/.450 OBP/.566 SLG- 1.016 OPS
                  w/RISP- 2 Out: .328 BA/.487 OBP/.563 SLG- 1.050 OPS
                  Close and Late: .288 BA/.431 OBP/.464 SLG- .895 OPS

                  If Bobby Abreu is such a choker, why does his performance (BA, OBP, and SLG) escalate across the board situationally? Even in "Close and Late" situations, Abreu has a history of producing a BA nearly 25 points higher than when he walks to the plate with no one on base in front of him and he was even better than that in 2005. His OBP is nearly 50 points higher. Over the past four seasons when the game is on the line, Abreu finds a way to get himself on base around 43% of the time. Does that not help the Phillies? And all of that is happening while he's facing, in large part, the best bullpen pitchers the opposition has to offer.

                  If Abreu is so bad situationally, why does he hit better with Runners On? Why does he perform even BETTER than that with Runners in Scoring Position? Why does his performance CONTINUE to escalate with RISP and Two Out?

                  If "clutch" were real, there's not a possible argument any rational person could make that would not include Bobby Abreu as a player who has that intangible quality as a hitter.

                  We see donzblock infer that Abreu's RISP performance is isolated to "blowouts". Where is the evidence to support that contention? Did Abreu's "Close and Late" 400+ Plate Appearances of escalated performance over the past four seasons somehow happen in "blowouts" as well? Of course not- just as his RISP performance wasn't limited to scenarios after games got out of hand.

                  You guys get to watch one of best hitters in baseball at work game after game after game. You could slice your pinky off and still count on one hand the players worth more Runs to their team in 2005 than Abreu. Yet there's nary an ounce of appreciation for exactly how good Abreu is with a bat in his hand.

                  That's just plain tragic.
                  First of all, let's start at the END of your statment. This thread is about his defensive capabilities. However, it has diverted into the entirety of his package, thus the dicsussion of his lack of clutch hitting.

                  Now, to the rest of your data.

                  It's full of crap. I'd LOVE to see the source of it and take it apart based on CLOSE and BLOW OUT, because it's totally incomprehensible that those numbers are correct. Either that or I only watch the games where he dribbles the ball to second base in the 8th with runners at second and third and one out trailing by a run, which seems to me like virtually every game.

                  BTW, here are Brian Giles comparable stats:

                  None On: .230 BA/.323 OBP/.381 SLG- .544 OPS
                  Runners On: .381 BA/.637 OBP/.629 SLG- 1.020 OPS
                  With RISP: .368 BA/.520 OBP/.644 SLG- 1.236 OPS
                  w/RISP- 2 Out: .417 BA/.629 OBP/.747 SLG- 1.330 OPS
                  Close and Late: .544 BA/.699 OBP/.834 SLG- 1.534 OPS

                  They came from the same place yours came from! I believe.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by SteelSD
                    Over time, all fielders lose a step here and there as they age. It's happening to Abreu but folks haven't figured it out because of his reputation and prowess with the bat.
                    This one paragraph demonstrates how you pidgeonhole aspects of a player that you think are analytically proven by these spewed stats.... Fact is that Abreu has NOT demostrated any perceived loss of speed or jump. He is in fact just a dog who lolly gags after balls, is petrified of the fence and never leaves his feet except to do a quarterback's slide on occasion.

                    His prowess with the bat was best exemplified in the exhibition that was the All-star Game HR Derby, which goes to show the power of marketing and suggestion. It's is absolutely amazing how much that did for this guy's credentials and why I wrote on this site the very next day that he should be traded immediately because his value would never be higher.

                    In the relative scheme of things this is obviously trivial, but it really demonstrates for me how much of American life has been reduced to image, perception and marketing and no longer does intelligent subjectiveness rule judgement. Reality is so skewed by these sermons on the mount about the virtues and validity of every lame-brain new age artifical stat.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Androctus
                      I Please do. This is the longest forum debate I've ever seen where someone didn't take a shot at someone else's mother yet.


                      Originally posted by Androctus
                      Oh I think I do, and on some higher level that apparently you havn't come to grips with yet. I understand baseball here in Philly is played, won and lost on a field of grass, and not in the offices of the Elias Sports Bureau or some website.
                      Tou*****che

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Lets try a controlled test then. Will all members of the Academy, formerly known as The Academy, please answer the following question:

                        Bottom of the ninth, two outs, man on second, down by one, please indicate below which Philadelphia Philly (2005 roster) would you most like to see at bat?
                        Last edited by Androctus; 11-10-2005, 01:03 PM.
                        I AM ROSTERDAMUS!!!

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by johncap
                          ...thus the dicsussion of his lack of clutch hitting.
                          And we are still waiting breathlessly for someone to demonstrably prove this ascertion is in fact true. Instead of repeating the same tired dogma, why dosen't someone do a little research and try proving their point once in awhile. The only problem with that is, and it's been clearly pointed out, the research already shows the assumption to be what it is, false. What I find to be truly laughable about all of this, you Philly fans want to get rid of one of the best hitters on your team, not to mention in the league, because of a perceived inability to perform in what amounts to 16% of his plate appearances over the last four seasons.

                          Originally posted by johncap
                          Now, to the rest of your data.

                          It's full of crap.

                          BTW, here are Brian Giles comparable stats:

                          None On: .230 BA/.323 OBP/.381 SLG- .544 OPS
                          Runners On: .381 BA/.637 OBP/.629 SLG- 1.020 OPS
                          With RISP: .368 BA/.520 OBP/.644 SLG- 1.236 OPS
                          w/RISP- 2 Out: .417 BA/.629 OBP/.747 SLG- 1.330 OPS
                          Close and Late: .544 BA/.699 OBP/.834 SLG- 1.534 OPS

                          They came from the same place yours came from! I believe.
                          The data did indeed come from the same place. It came from the games being played on the field. The data only becomes crap when it doesn't tell you what you want to hear or, as in this case, totatlly blows your misconceptions out of the water. The mere fact that you would call the data crap and then turn right around and use the same data as a comparable for Giles tells me that you are way in over your head in this discussion. Not to worry, you seem to have plenty of company.
                          "He gave up 40 home runs last year and we play in a homer park."--Blue Jays GM J.P. Ricciardi, on why he didn't go after Eric Milton (Toronto Sun)

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by johncap
                            Now, to the rest of your data.

                            It's full of crap.
                            Um...no. It's what actually happened in those situations from 2002-2004. RL posted the numbers from 2005.

                            I'd LOVE to see the source of it and take it apart based on CLOSE and BLOW OUT, because it's totally incomprehensible that those numbers are correct.
                            Just because you can't comprehend it, that doesn't mean it's untrue. And if you'd like to break down the data further, links to every PA of every game for the 2005 season is available on the Phillies page at espn.com.

                            Either that or I only watch the games where he dribbles the ball to second base in the 8th with runners at second and third and one out trailing by a run, which seems to me like virtually every game.
                            That's understandable. Because our brains are unable to perceive, store, and recall non-degraded information, our perceptions are often driven by what we think happened rather than what actually did.

                            That's where statistics (again, historical event records) can help validate our perceptions. It's just all too common that the lazy fan doesn't care and will throw out anything that doesn't support their too-often-inaccurate preconceived perception of what happened. Those fans don't actually care about reality. They just want to be right and often think that they have some kind of "higher level" of baseball knowledge as they "don't need" those nasty statistics. Problem is that they can't achieve that "higher level" until they understand how limited their brain is and actually start caring about validating opinions before accepting them as truth.

                            Folks might think that Abreu got to fewer balls in RF than he should have. We look at a record of events, and by golly- that's accurate. The historical record matches up with the perception. That's great, but...

                            The Abreu "un-clutch" position has been demonstrated to be inaccurate. Yet we still see resistance from folks because it's more important that they are able to continue to THINK Abreu's a choker than it is for them to know the truth.

                            That's just plain silly and it has nothing to do with actual baseball knowledge. Instead, it has everything to do with folks who'd rather sit back and think what they want to whether it be right or wrong. And that's fine. But those folks don't belong anywhere near a baseball discussion about what actually happened them.

                            BTW, here are Brian Giles comparable stats:

                            None On: .230 BA/.323 OBP/.381 SLG- .544 OPS
                            Runners On: .381 BA/.637 OBP/.629 SLG- 1.020 OPS
                            With RISP: .368 BA/.520 OBP/.644 SLG- 1.236 OPS
                            w/RISP- 2 Out: .417 BA/.629 OBP/.747 SLG- 1.330 OPS
                            Close and Late: .544 BA/.699 OBP/.834 SLG- 1.534 OPS

                            They came from the same place yours came from! I believe.
                            Uh, no. The performance numbers I posted for Bobby Abreu did not come from your ass. They came from here:

                            http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/player...ting&year=2005

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by donzblock
                              Abreu does make out in clutch situations. Furthermore, by drawing a walk, he makes it possible for somebody else to make the crucial out. He does not drive in a run when he walks unless the bases are loaded, but if the bases are loaded in a close game, Bobby will not walk.
                              No one said that Abreu doesn't make outs when the game is close and late. But in 2005, only Chase Utley made fewer outs in those situations. Abreu lead his team in out avoidance the prior three seasons in the close and late situations that seems to be coveted the most here. Abreu drawing a walk is not a failure on his part. Avoiding outs is a good thing. In fact, as the #3 hitter in the lineup that's his job.
                              "He gave up 40 home runs last year and we play in a homer park."--Blue Jays GM J.P. Ricciardi, on why he didn't go after Eric Milton (Toronto Sun)

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by SteelSD
                                Or perhaps we'd rather sit back and watch you build strawmen. It's pointless for you to do so, but somewhat amusing to watch you create opposing arguments out of thin air that have nothing to do with Bobby Abreu.Endy Chavez? Good lord.
                                Nice dancing around Cobb and Rose to get to Endy...What about Lance Parrish?
                                The perfect example of looks good on paper sucked for the Phillies.
                                Amusing?
                                I agree your stat-bot hysteria amply illustrates your all too amusing "Star Trek Factor" now that Kirk's too fat to worship you invented an arcane statistical abstract to replace the dialectic Klingon arguments that made your life worth living...
                                Originally posted by SteelSD
                                ...I've seen Bobby Abreu play baseball. In fact, I tune into Phillies games every once in a while with the MLB ticket package on Dish.
                                That's some pedigree...I've seen open heart surgery on the Discovery channel a couple of times but I don't churlishly lecture people who draw different conclusions than I do.
                                Originally posted by SteelSD
                                ...But those folks don't belong anywhere near a baseball discussion about what actually happened them.
                                I must have missed it. Did the dorks reach a quorem? If so when did they vote you arbiter of who can or cannot discuss baseball?
                                Originally posted by SteelSD
                                Baseball doesn't start and end with a spreadsheet.
                                This is an example of the law of averages proving even a blind squirrel can find an acorn...
                                Originally posted by SteelSD
                                I might just hang around a bit because it's obvious you really don't know a whole lot about how this whole "baseball" thing really works.
                                I know one thing you proved beyond a doubt we can whip your eyes but we can't make you see...such startling insight from one so shallowly acquainted with Bobby Abreu's last 900 games except for the few you caught on Dish TV.
                                Originally posted by SteelSD
                                ...truly speaks to your ignorance level....you're already at the PINNACLE of both "ignorant" and "oblivious".
                                Calling Don Block ignorant?
                                That's low class and entirely uncalled for.
                                You owe him an apology and maybe you should seriously consider going back to wading in the kiddie pool clearly you aren't fit to swim with adults.
                                Until such time as you do I'll consider you the nonpareil of "A paucity of knowledge can be dangerous."
                                The Phillies Barstool Lives!

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X