Comments on: Tenth-highest payroll in MLB http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/tenth-highest-payroll-in-mlb/ People don't think it be like it is, but it do. Sun, 20 May 2012 08:54:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: shtiny http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/tenth-highest-payroll-in-mlb/#comment-255 Sun, 22 Apr 2007 19:31:20 +0000 http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/tenth-highest-payroll-in-mlb/#comment-255 Duly noted....although it says far superior player, I meant that Kingman was a far superior home run hitter. The numbers seem to support that they were fairly equal players, although Sexson will likely age slightly better than Kingman did, due to advances in health/fitness Duly noted….although it says far superior player, I meant that Kingman was a far superior home run hitter. The numbers seem to support that they were fairly equal players, although Sexson will likely age slightly better than Kingman did, due to advances in health/fitness

]]> by: Cliffy http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/tenth-highest-payroll-in-mlb/#comment-246 Thu, 19 Apr 2007 12:08:12 +0000 http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/tenth-highest-payroll-in-mlb/#comment-246 Danny, you confuse me. I can generall count on you to take a reasoned and logical approach to things based on concrete analytical tools. Can you do better than "the HRs in his era were more impressive" in asserting that Kingman's a better overall player than Sexson? If you want to say that he was a more prolific HR hitter, I agree - but Sexson is *clearly* the better player, as I've pointed out. Did you really mean to say Kingman was a better *player*? Danny, you confuse me. I can generall count on you to take a reasoned and logical approach to things based on concrete analytical tools. Can you do better than “the HRs in his era were more impressive” in asserting that Kingman’s a better overall player than Sexson? If you want to say that he was a more prolific HR hitter, I agree - but Sexson is *clearly* the better player, as I’ve pointed out. Did you really mean to say Kingman was a better *player*?

]]> by: shtiny http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/tenth-highest-payroll-in-mlb/#comment-245 Thu, 19 Apr 2007 03:41:31 +0000 http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/tenth-highest-payroll-in-mlb/#comment-245 How can you not love Rob Deer? The year after Deer left Milwaukee to go to Detroit, he hit .179 with 175 strikeouts. How cool is that? How is it possible to let a guy like that play every day (and a couple more years after)? Anyway, I actually think that Kingman is the far superior player to Sexson. The HRs in his era were very impressive. Sexson was in the right place at the right time to sign that ridiculous contract. First, he was the key piece that Melvin used to revamp the team (The remnants left from that deal are Dave Bush, Chris Capuano, Tony Graffanino). Then he was hurt right from the get-go in ARI, and became a free agent right at the time that Seattle had a ton of money to spend on corner infielders (the Beltre signing is arguably worse than Sexson) How can you not love Rob Deer? The year after Deer left Milwaukee to go to Detroit, he hit .179 with 175 strikeouts. How cool is that? How is it possible to let a guy like that play every day (and a couple more years after)? Anyway, I actually think that Kingman is the far superior player to Sexson. The HRs in his era were very impressive. Sexson was in the right place at the right time to sign that ridiculous contract. First, he was the key piece that Melvin used to revamp the team (The remnants left from that deal are Dave Bush, Chris Capuano, Tony Graffanino). Then he was hurt right from the get-go in ARI, and became a free agent right at the time that Seattle had a ton of money to spend on corner infielders (the Beltre signing is arguably worse than Sexson)

]]> by: Cliffy http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/tenth-highest-payroll-in-mlb/#comment-243 Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:45:45 +0000 http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/tenth-highest-payroll-in-mlb/#comment-243 But that's what's so useful about OPS+ - is that its adjusted for era, so that you *can* compare players from different eras. OPS+ is the actual OPS divided by the league-average OPS i.e. in 1978 Kingman had an OPS of .878 for an OPS+ of 131, while in 2004 Sexson had an OPS of .915 for an OPS+ of 128. In absolute terms, Sexson's 2004 season appears better... but in reality, when considered in context of the era, Kingman's 1978 season was *actually* better. I didn't look at their respective HR and hit totals, or career batting averages or slugging percentages. I started with OPS+, which shows that Sexson (at least to this point) has had a better career. Now, as Kingman's last five seasons showed (and common sense dictates), we should expect a decline as hitters get more into their 30s... like Richie. The K/hit ratio is a fun thing to point out just to highlight how one-dimensional these guys were as sluggers. Course, neither came *close* the career mark of Rob Deer - 1409 K, 853 hits... that's right... a 1.65 K/hit ratio. Think about that, for every two hits Rob Deer got, he struck out more than three times. On a related note, their respective walk totals: Kingman (16 seasons) - 608 walks; Deer (11 seasons) - 575 walks; Sexson (entering 11th year) - 494 walks. Oh and for comparison sake, Deer hit 230 HRs. Actually, here's each player - and his career numbers, per 100 plate appearances, of hits, HR, BB and K: Deer: 19.14 hits, 5.16 HR, 12.90 BB and 31.62 K Sexson: 24.08 hits, 5.82 HR, 10.46 BB and 23.98 K Kingman: 21.62 hits, 6.07 HR, 8.35 BB and 24.93 K Almost half the time (44.52%), Rob Deer would record a plate appearance and *not* put the ball in play. Sexson is the most prolific hitter [sic] of the three. Kingman is the most prolific slugger. And two of the three played for the Brewers. So they've got *that* going for them... which is nice. But that’s what’s so useful about OPS+ - is that its adjusted for era, so that you *can* compare players from different eras. OPS+ is the actual OPS divided by the league-average OPS i.e. in 1978 Kingman had an OPS of .878 for an OPS+ of 131, while in 2004 Sexson had an OPS of .915 for an OPS+ of 128. In absolute terms, Sexson’s 2004 season appears better… but in reality, when considered in context of the era, Kingman’s 1978 season was *actually* better. I didn’t look at their respective HR and hit totals, or career batting averages or slugging percentages. I started with OPS+, which shows that Sexson (at least to this point) has had a better career. Now, as Kingman’s last five seasons showed (and common sense dictates), we should expect a decline as hitters get more into their 30s… like Richie.

The K/hit ratio is a fun thing to point out just to highlight how one-dimensional these guys were as sluggers. Course, neither came *close* the career mark of Rob Deer - 1409 K, 853 hits… that’s right… a 1.65 K/hit ratio. Think about that, for every two hits Rob Deer got, he struck out more than three times. On a related note, their respective walk totals: Kingman (16 seasons) - 608 walks; Deer (11 seasons) - 575 walks; Sexson (entering 11th year) - 494 walks.

Oh and for comparison sake, Deer hit 230 HRs.

Actually, here’s each player - and his career numbers, per 100 plate appearances, of hits, HR, BB and K:

Deer: 19.14 hits, 5.16 HR, 12.90 BB and 31.62 K
Sexson: 24.08 hits, 5.82 HR, 10.46 BB and 23.98 K
Kingman: 21.62 hits, 6.07 HR, 8.35 BB and 24.93 K

Almost half the time (44.52%), Rob Deer would record a plate appearance and *not* put the ball in play. Sexson is the most prolific hitter [sic] of the three. Kingman is the most prolific slugger.

And two of the three played for the Brewers. So they’ve got *that* going for them… which is nice.

]]> by: Tank http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/tenth-highest-payroll-in-mlb/#comment-242 Thu, 12 Apr 2007 17:15:36 +0000 http://www.oscargamblesociety.com/tenth-highest-payroll-in-mlb/#comment-242 I knew Dave Kingman. Dave Kingman was a baseball card of mine. Richie Sexson, you're no Dave Kingman. Their numbers looks fairly similar only because they played in such vastly different eras with respect to offensive production. Kingman posted only a slightly lower OPS and materially better K/hit ratio in an era when pitchers remained ascendant (1971-1986). Kingman was an all-star 3 times and in the top 20 in MVP voting 4 times. Sexson was an all-star twice, if being the Brewers' all-star actually counts, which it shouldn't, and top 20 in MVP voting twice. Which is two more times than me, but still... I knew Dave Kingman. Dave Kingman was a baseball card of mine. Richie Sexson, you’re no Dave Kingman.

Their numbers looks fairly similar only because they played in such vastly different eras with respect to offensive production. Kingman posted only a slightly lower OPS and materially better K/hit ratio in an era when pitchers remained ascendant (1971-1986).

Kingman was an all-star 3 times and in the top 20 in MVP voting 4 times. Sexson was an all-star twice, if being the Brewers’ all-star actually counts, which it shouldn’t, and top 20 in MVP voting twice. Which is two more times than me, but still…

]]>