From: zuhars@madrone.eecs.ucdavis.edu (Gary Owners' Lackey Huckabay)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Defensive Positions and Offensive Contribution.
Summary: Introducing Roger Maynard and his inflatable friends...
Keywords: Oh please... is this your feeble attempt at wit?
Date: 10 Sep 92 17:19:36 GMT
Organization: Bud Selig L'il Commissioners' Club [Rising Division]

Roger "Lustig's PROUD to share a first name with me!" Maynard writes:
>>Are you going to tell me that if you have two players with identical
>>offensive stats and ages, say .300/.400/.500, and one is a SS while
>>one is a LF, it doesn't matter which one you take?
>
>The arguments I have seen state that Whitaker and Tettleton have contrib-
>uted more to the tiger offense than Cecil has.  Nothing to do with the
>positions they play.  But this is SO OBVIOUS that even you, Mr. Huckabay,
>must be able to grasp this. 

Oh, I grasp it fine, thank you.  I just think it's looking at half the
argument, and for the record, despite their positions, Whitaker and
Tettleton DO produce more than Fielder does.  And when it comes to
grasping, Rog, I defer to your plentiful experience.  No one's done
more of it than thou.

>>My premise is simple: A shortstop who produces 100 runs in a season is
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>goes without saying...

Oooo.  Very Noel Coward.  Did your comedy writing class let out early
or something?  That new Crayola [tm] workstation seems to be working
out fairly well.

>The relative offensive contribution each player makes and that player's
>over-all value to the team are two separate issues. 

True enough.  Must have had someone help you with that one.  Have a
cookie, Rog.  Good boy.

>Whether or not Cecil's
>RBI totals are a misleading indicator of his talent (and that IS the original 
>issue) has nothing whatsoever to do with his defensive position.

You're right again.  Hot streak.  It depends on whether your logic
processes are arrested enough to believe that RBI are a meaningful,
valid method of measuring a player's value.  I would imagine that you
qualify on this count, so I won't tell you about the tooth fairy,
either.  Why shoot down two of your precious beliefs at once?

>In fact the
>person who might disagree that a player playing the key defensive position 
>is the more valuable player (all things being equal) is perhaps yourself
>because: 
>
>>...Your propensity for arguing is fine.  You really seem to enjoy
>>it, and I think that's great.  But do you REALLY believe this, or are
>>you simply trying to eliminate any remaining credibility?

This from someone who resides in the KILL files of more worthwhile
posters than Al Feldstein.  I only want credibility in the minds of
the readers who can think for themselves, not the media puppets.  I'm
perfectly happy to be ignored by you, and most of your ilk.  I arrived
here with a closed mind, but was swayed by the logic and evidence
presented that RBIs are virtually worthless in individual player
evaluation.  Of course, that means I had to actually consider
evidence, so I don't expect you to make that leap.  But there is
ANOTHER leap I could suggest... Contact Dave Kirsch for details.

>>Allow ME to answer this, then.  Joe Shmoe, noted Shortstop, is about
>>2.5 runs per 27 outs better than a league average SS.  Fatt Butt,
>>noted RBI monger and first baseman, is 2.0 runs better per 27 outs
>>than a league average 1B.  If Shmoe is out for the season, the
>>offense, relative to league average, will suffer more of a drop than
>>if Butt were out.
>
>Assuming of course that the replacement players are league average.  And
>that is a big "if" isn't it? 

Not particularly.  There are hundreds of replacement level players all
over the place.  In the majors, minors, hell, crawling out from under
rocks.  If we call league average 4.2 RC27 or replacement level
3.7RC27, it doesn't really matter which definition we use, does it?

>Since approximately half of the STARTERS are
>at or below league average.  You are making a prediction and unless you 
>can tell us just who the replacement players are and what their respective 
>abilities are then your prediction is merely idle speculation.  I guess
>you must be getting real tired of the word "merely" eh?

Only after the rather personal discussion with your immediate family.

>
>rm
>

Roger, why don't you just put me in your kill file, as you claimed to
do some time ago?  You aren't interested in what I have to say, and it
would save you a lot of public humiliation by causing you to post
less.

Care to go another round?

-- 
* Gary Huckabay * 'The thing that I'll miss most about Dave Parker's *
*  "Not often   *  leadership is his 25 home runs.  Leadership falls *
* mistaken for  *  on my shoulders.  Anyone who tells you different  *
*  Joe Lundy."  *  is selling papers.' - Tony LaRussa.               *