White Sox Interactive Forums
Sox Clubhouse
 Soxogram: 
GO SOX! DSNB!

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Sox Clubhouse
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 07-21-2019, 05:07 PM
TDog TDog is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Modesto, California
Posts: 18,456
Default

The norm is ridiculously irrelevant because it is a statistical construct that doesn't actually exist in practice, at least as it pertains to such things as hitting with runners in scoring position. The norm factors in the losing teams with the winning teams. It also counts as failures teams that fail to get hits with runners in scoring position after already posting big leads and situations where the team doesn't need the runs to win. It also doesn't reflect the success in driving in runs with non-sacrifice outs with a runner on third and less than two outs. In 1959, the White Sox beat Sandy Koufax in a game where the only run was scored on a ground-ball double play. It wasn't the biggest win in White Sox history, not even the biggest 1-0 win, but it was the biggest win for the White Sox in nearly a quarter of a century, made possible because Sherm Lollar put the ball in play against Sandy Koufax with Nellie Fox on third and nobody out.

The idea that a game where teams combined to go 0-for-12 with runners in scoring position is only a couple of hits from the norm is ridiculous. Obviously, if you want to win, you take advantage of scoring opportunities, even if it means executing a hit-and-run with your best home run hitter up and a man on in a tie game in extra innings. Not scoring runners who get into scoring position was how both teams got into extra innings, perhaps waiting around for the home run, of which each team only had one.

Trying to hit home runs and trying to win the game are not always compatible. In 2000, Frank Thomas (in a should-have-been MVP season long after his two MVP seasons) hit 43 home runs. He drove in 143 because that's what helped the White Sox win games. He got 191 hits and 8 sacrifice flies and had walk-off hits that stayed in the park. He hit more doubles than home runs. Maybe with today's juiced ball, half of his doubles would have been home runs and his average would have been .350 instead of .328. How far he was above the norm isn't relevant. He did what he needed to do to win, and didn't need to st4rike out more than 100 times in an effort to accomplish it. But for the jucier ball and more juiceless players, the game is no different today. Drive in the runs, get strong pitching and you're going to win games.

Winning, winning with your offense is not just about home runs, regardless of what the norms tell you.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 07-21-2019, 05:48 PM
LITTLE NELL LITTLE NELL is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sebring Florida
Posts: 11,211
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Falstaff View Post
I was on the small bandwagon of disbelief when the White Sox released him. That bat and OF would have been handy on the current roster... oh well.
I was with you thinking Avi should have not been released. I'm pretty sure Avi was the guy who went to management and pleaded for the club to keep him, it could have also been Davidson.
__________________
Batting in the second position for the White Sox, number 2, the second baseman Nelson Fox.

Last edited by LITTLE NELL; 07-21-2019 at 05:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 07-21-2019, 05:52 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 11,615
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asindc View Post
15 runs could be the difference between winning the division rather than missing the playoffs.
...And if I increase the lineupís home run total by about 10, I get those 15 runs back, but with far less difficulty.

Itís a lot harder to be the best team in baseball in a particular facet of the game than it is to just add a few more home runs.

Itís like going in for a nose job and ignoring your two broken legs.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horsemaster Fred
This is the major leagues so get it how you live and letís fight tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 07-21-2019, 06:03 PM
Mohoney Mohoney is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Palos Hills, IL
Posts: 11,615
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDog View Post
The norm is ridiculously irrelevant because it is a statistical construct that doesn't actually exist in practice, at least as it pertains to such things as hitting with runners in scoring position. The norm factors in the losing teams with the winning teams. It also counts as failures teams that fail to get hits with runners in scoring position after already posting big leads and situations where the team doesn't need the runs to win. It also doesn't reflect the success in driving in runs with non-sacrifice outs with a runner on third and less than two outs. In 1959, the White Sox beat Sandy Koufax in a game where the only run was scored on a ground-ball double play. It wasn't the biggest win in White Sox history, not even the biggest 1-0 win, but it was the biggest win for the White Sox in nearly a quarter of a century, made possible because Sherm Lollar put the ball in play against Sandy Koufax with Nellie Fox on third and nobody out.
1) The norm exists in practice. The statistic is constructed out of what is happening on the field. Being better than that norm means that there is not much ground to be gained by improving in an area. Youíre already at a point where youíre extracting surplus value from your performance in that area. Itís better to lament the teamís glaring deficiencies rather than lament itís lack of perfection in an area where it is actually performing better than average.

2) Your example is 50 years old. You use a lot of 50-year-old examples to decry the three true outcomes, despite the fact that itís nowhere near as easy to make contact against todayís pitchers. You know what types of 1-0 victories occur a lot more frequently than that Sherm Lollar example? 1-0 victories fueled by solo home runs.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 07-21-2019, 06:54 PM
Grzegorz Grzegorz is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Suburbs
Posts: 4,863
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoney View Post
2) Your example is 50 years old. You use a lot of 50-year-old examples to decry the three true outcomes, despite the fact that it’s nowhere near as easy to make contact against today’s pitchers. You know what types of 1-0 victories occur a lot more frequently than that Sherm Lollar example? 1-0 victories fueled by solo home runs.
As if the evolution of pitchers (if they're lucky enough to stay healthy) outstrip the modern day hitters exponentially. The game is slower (BB and SO combined), there is less strategy (no hit and run) and the game is less athletic (triples, SBs, H&R all down). Not to mention the regression in players having a fundamental grasp of the game. It is really defining the beauty of the game down to meet today's satisfy me now consumer.

But I give you credit, you see the game for what it is and try to leverage its current philosophy to produce a winner.
__________________
ďThere were a few hard rules, but everybody was unique, and he understood that. Georgeís great strength was he didnít overcoach. Thereís no place for panic on the mound.Ē - Jim Palmer on George Bamberger ďArms and the man,Ē Sports Illustrated, April 19, 2004
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07-21-2019, 09:06 PM
asindc asindc is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Washington, DC area
Posts: 9,049
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoney View Post
...And if I increase the lineup’s home run total by about 10, I get those 15 runs back, but with far less difficulty.

It’s a lot harder to be the best team in baseball in a particular facet of the game than it is to just add a few more home runs.

It’s like going in for a nose job and ignoring your two broken legs.
No, I’m advocating getting the nose job along with getting the broken legs fixed. Again, they are not mutually exclusive. The Sox won this game because the team’s best HR hitter purposely chopped a grounder through the unoccupied 2nd base hole while Moncada was in motion. I’m glad he has the skill (and inclination) to do that. Can’t imagine Adam Dunn or Chris Davis doing that.
__________________
"I have the ultimate respect for White Sox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Red Sox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country." Jim Caple, ESPN (January 12, 2011)


"We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the (bleeding) obvious is the first duty of intelligent men." ó George Orwell
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:45 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.