7 minutes ago, wegner said:

To argue that RBI's are not important is ridiculous imho.

Scoring runs is important. Doesn't mean RBI is remotely effective at gauging performance. 

2 minutes ago, mqr said:

Scoring runs is important. Doesn't mean RBI is remotely effective at gauging performance. 

How about a .343/.370/.606 line with RISP?

1 minute ago, Dick Allen said:

How about a .343/.370/.606 line with RISP?

Get the crap out of here.  Everyone is exactly the same at driving in runs.  It is only a function of opportunity.  Didn't you know that people can't focus differently in different situations?  Don't you know that everyone handles pressure in the exact same manner?  Cmon man.  Join the revolution.

3 minutes ago, mqr said:

Scoring runs is important. Doesn't mean RBI is remotely effective at gauging performance. 

Of course not RBI's alone , however most guys who consistently get 100 RBi's (Thomas and Konerko in Sox history) usually are pretty good hitters in one way or another whether it's hitting with RISP or just a good hitter over all.  Plenty of guys come up with men on base and don't have the bat control , hitting skills. power or knowledge to do what's necessary to get runs home. In those 5 years Jose has got 100 RBI's who else has driven in 100 even once ?

1 minute ago, turnin' two said:

Get the crap out of here.  Everyone is exactly the same at driving in runs.  It is only a function of opportunity.  Didn't you know that people can't focus differently in different situations?  Don't you know that everyone handles pressure in the exact same manner?  Cmon man.  Join the revolution.

Yes. There obviously is a randomness in baseball. You can hit the snot out a ball and roll into or line into a DP. You can bloop one over the infielder and drive in a couple of runs, but since the math is impossible to really quantify without small sample size being used as a caveat, it does not exist. The fact is, since Abreu came to the White Sox 3 players, who everyone here would say are or were really good hitters have more RBI. Arenado, Encarcion, and Nelson Cruz. No one else. 

14 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

Get the crap out of here.  Everyone is exactly the same at driving in runs.  It is only a function of opportunity.  Didn't you know that people can't focus differently in different situations?  Don't you know that everyone handles pressure in the exact same manner?  Cmon man.  Join the revolution.

I'm not sure if you are serious or mocking in this post so I can't really reply.

Edited August 26, 20196 yr by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

11 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

How about a .343/.370/.606 line with RISP?

Just to play devil’s advocate, but what’s his line without RISP?

4 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

Yes. There obviously is a randomness in baseball. You can hit the snot out a ball and roll into or line into a DP. You can bloop one over the infielder and drive in a couple of runs, but since the math is impossible to really quantify without small sample size being used as a caveat, it does not exist. The fact is, since Abreu came to the White Sox 3 players, who everyone here would say are or were really good hitters have more RBI. Arenado, Encarcion, and Nelson Cruz. No one else. 

I was trying to be facetious.  I was completely agreeing with you.

Just now, Chicago White Sox said:

Just to play devil’s advocate, but what’s his line without RISP?

Not so good. But I would rather have a guy a bit better with runners on than the bases empty. The guy produces runs. The Sox don't have many of those. He's been a really good player for the White Sox. I

4 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Just to play devil’s advocate, but what’s his line without RISP?

Those numbers (RISP slash) are higher than his totals, so obviously they (his RISP numbers) will be better than his other numbers.  

WIth no one one his slash is .253/.294/.465

With a runner on first his slash is .262/.307/.439

That seems to indicate a guy that is better at hitting with runners in scoring position than he is when there aren't runners in scoring position.  There used to be a word for that.  I forget what it was.  Was it the gas?  No that isn't right... the brake?  No... Oh well I thought it was something remotely automotive.

Edited August 26, 20196 yr by turnin' two

13 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

Get the crap out of here.  Everyone is exactly the same at driving in runs.  It is only a function of opportunity.  Didn't you know that people can't focus differently in different situations?  Don't you know that everyone handles pressure in the exact same manner?  Cmon man.  Join the revolution.

I came here to say pretty much all of this. Some people perform better in different situations. Being able to drive in runs is important.

Edited August 26, 20196 yr by soxfan2014

10 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

I'm not sure if you are serious or mocking in this post so I can't really reply.

Hahah sorry.  Too close to both sides.

15 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

Not so good. But I would rather have a guy a bit better with runners on than the bases empty. The guy produces runs. The Sox don't have many of those. He's been a really good player for the White Sox. I

 

14 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

Those numbers (RISP slash) are higher than his totals, so obviously they (his RISP numbers) will be better than his other numbers.  

WIth no one one his slash is .253/.294/.465

With a runner on first his slash is .262/.307/.439

That seems to indicate a guy that is better at hitting with runners in scoring position than he is when there aren't runners in scoring position.  There used to be a word for that.  I forget what it was.  Was it the gas?  No that isn't right... the brake?  No... Oh well I thought it was something remotely automotive.

And he has been his whole career, but I still think it’s important to point out his numbers in non-RISP situations are not great and have slowly gotten worse with time.  That being said, I love Abreu and think it’s important we bring him back for next couple years if the price is right.

clutch is REAL GUYZ.  I'm back in a 2004 sabermetrics debate I think.

15 minutes ago, turnin' two said:

Hahah sorry.  Too close to both sides.

No problem I wasn't sure where you were at but you told Dick you were being facetious so it's all good. 

You know I try really hard to be aware of advanced stats and think they are quite fascinating and useful but I do not blindly disparage things like RBI's because  Abreu has a knack for driving them in . I don't even know if a single guy on the Sox has had 100 RBI's in the 5 seasons he has had 100. Doing that on bad teams is pretty impressive to me. For a guy who just got his 1000 th hit and has 5 seasons with 100+ RBI's he is someone who should be celebrated on those accomplishment instead of ridiculed.

Having said all that I still think he should be given a contract 1 year at a time. I think we can all acknowledge that he isn't a good fielder and his best years are probably behind him. It is still a business and there's no sense throwing money around like a drunken sailor. With the Sox needing to spend elsewhere and  already having used future payroll as an excuse not to pay Machado I don't want excessive Abreu money used as an excuse not to extent younger players . i know that sounds ridiculous but that's how down I am on the Sox ownership..

Edited August 26, 20196 yr by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

1 minute ago, chitownsportsfan said:

clutch is REAL GUYZ.  I'm back in a 2004 sabermetrics debate I think.

Sabremetrics has a stat for CLUTCH do they not ?

1 minute ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

Sabremetrics has a stat for CLUTCH do they not ?

numerous studies have shown clutch doesn't exist.  it's a small sample bias.   But FWIW (and it's not much) here's Jose's:

 

Go figure: it almost perfectly aligns with his career OPS.  Those late and close numbers tho ;-)

2 minutes ago, chitownsportsfan said:

numerous studies have shown clutch doesn't exist.  it's a small sample bias.   But FWIW (and it's not much) here's Jose's:

 

Go figure: it almost perfectly aligns with his career OPS.  Those late and close numbers tho ?

Now I know I saw something on MLB Tonight just last week that said sometime about how clutch was measured and Bryce Harper was at the top. Unfortunately I never saw what the stat was I thought it was xwOBA  or something like that but it's hard to find a replay of that particular show since I can't recall the date they did it.

1 minute ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

Now I know I saw something on MLB Tonight just last week that said sometime about how clutch was measured and Bryce Harper was at the top. Unfortunately I never saw what the stat was I thought it was xwOBA  or something like that but it's hard to find a replay of that particular show since I can't recall the date they did it.

It was probably WPA

11 minutes ago, chitownsportsfan said:

clutch is REAL GUYZ.  I'm back in a 2004 sabermetrics debate I think.

Of course you are a guy who though Yonder Alonso was good. Yet if you looked at his advanced numbers, he's pretty much sucked his entire career, save one season. But go on a rant telling me I am stupid and using some slang to call me a girl. The bottom line is you have no idea what you are writing about. 

 

I'd much prefer Jose get his hits when nobody is on base. Why score? 

2 minutes ago, mqr said:

It was probably WPA

Harper leads all major-league hitters in “clutch,” a stat that measures how a player performs in high-leverage situations by using both win-probability added and leverage index.

https://www.prosportsdaily.com/articles/bryce-harper-is-baseballs-most-clutch-hitter--584817.html

5 minutes ago, chitownsportsfan said:

numerous studies have shown clutch doesn't exist.  it's a small sample bias.   But FWIW (and it's not much) here's Jose's:

 

Go figure: it almost perfectly aligns with his career OPS.  Those late and close numbers tho ?

His career wRC+ with RISP (in nearly 1,000 plate appearances) is significantly higher than without RISP.  Are you saying that is a small sample size bias?

My view is in the analytics community there is oftentimes confusion that certain things don’t exist or aren’t true because they can’t be validated due to sample size limitations.  I feel strongly that certain players perform at higher or lower level in clutch situations whether it can be measured or not.

3 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said:

Harper leads all major-league hitters in “clutch,” a stat that measures how a player performs in high-leverage situations by using both win-probability added and leverage index.

https://www.prosportsdaily.com/articles/bryce-harper-is-baseballs-most-clutch-hitter--584817.html

Abreu is 11th in the league, which pencils out between great and excellent. But he sucks, just ask chitownsportsfan. 

17 minutes ago, chitownsportsfan said:

clutch is REAL GUYZ.  I'm back in a 2004 sabermetrics debate I think.

2004  ? I found something on it from 1977. And you're the Saber guy and I'm just a guy trying to play catch up without abandoning the old way since most of TV still uses traditional stats they still serve a function for the non mathematicians in most of us.