Thread: Opening Day Lineup

Originally Posted by mrmpls

Totally agree, only problem is Gardy. for some ?? reason why does he always bat a weak hitting middle infielder 2nd. drive me nuts!!!

Hilarious. Yep, definately Gardy. He likes to do it because he thinks middle infielders are sexy. He does it because they have the keys to the box that Drew Butera owns containing photos of Gardy thinking middle infielders are sexy. Amazing he ever has managed the team to a win with his concentration on photographs of boxes of photographs of sexy Drew Butera and low on base percentage middle infielders.

Like I said, hilarious.

Originally Posted by 10PagesOfClearBlueSky

Yes, it does. It clearly illustrates the concept. It does it in a way that is easily digestable. I was simply trying to show you how it is CONCIEVABLE that a player with lower OBP scores more runs due to factors like speed. I would think that instead of saying it illustrates nothing, that you would first say something like: "I understand the concept that you illustrated. But have you seen it anywhere in factual occurences?" That would suggest that you're interested in seeing if the concept is viable, not just in simply looking for a reason to outright dismiss my hypothetical scenario.

If I showed you a situation in which it actually was feasible that it occured, would you state that my findings "prove everything"? I doubt it.

I'll show you a scenario like that anyhow, in hopes that an objective observer would admit I have done so and begin to lesson their stubborness about the ultimate importance of OBP. Since this is Twins Daily, and Gardy we're talking about, I chose some names we're all familiar with.

From 2001-2002 Cristian Guzman and Doug Mientkiewicz played on the same team, both often hitting at the top of the lineup, and mostly against the same pitchers and defenses. They also had a conveniently similiar amount of plate appearances.

During this time, Mientkiewics made 1180 plate appearances and posted an excellent .376 on base percentage. Mientkiewicz was a pretty slow runner, even in his prime. I don't think anybody would really argue that point, but I wouldn't put it past the posters on this board. Anyhow... Mientkiewicz was decent at getting around the basepaths, and scored a run at about 31% of the time.

During that same time period, Guzy made 1183 plate appearances. He posted a mediocre .312 on base percentage. The thing of it is, Guzy was a very fast runner. Not neccessarily a great base stealer even, but he was undeniably fast. Guzy scored 43% of the time.

Who would you rather have? Dougie, the slower, high OBP guy? Or Guzy, the much faster, much lower OBP guy?

During this time, Mientkiewicz scored 137 runs. Guzman scored 160 runs.

Obviously the rest of the lineup, the situations in which each player was on base and many other factors went into the difference in runs being scored. With the huge advantage Mientkiewicz had in amount of scoring opportunities (444 to 369) it would be foolish to not see that speed was very likely a substantial factor resulting in a very good OBP guy who was slower footed scoring less actual runs than a pretty mediocre OBP guy who was pretty darn fast.

Does it always work out like this? No. Just look down the batting order a bit and you'll find Corey Koskie, who made 1225 plate appearances with a very good .365 OBP. Koskie wasn't a speed demon by any accounts, but he scored more than both Mientkiewicz and Guzman, 171 times. The homerun numbers helped Koskie, but it shows a slower OBP guy scoring quite a bit, facing many of the same pitching and defense conditions. See? I'm fair with my arguments about the "Get to Know 'Em" Twins...

Anyhow, even if you're not, I'm confident that I have proven there is at minimum very likely more than just a "billy hamilton to Matthew Lecroy" validity to my perspective on this subject.

I didnt need your example to understand that the concept exists. Who would deny that there is a % threshold that a baserunner could theoretically cross that would give him an advantage at scoring runs? For that reason I thought you were trying to illustrate that a faster runner DOES score more, not that he COULD.
However, even if you could show the exact % advantage that a faster baserunner has, it would still be almost impossible to prove that your lineup overall scores more runs with that baserunner near the top of the order.
For example, a faster runner could steal second base, then advance to 3rd on a wild pitch that wasnt far enough away from the catcher to advance a slower runner, then come home on a fly ball that wouldnt have been deep enough to score a runner.
In this example the faster baserunner clearly scored a run that the slower baserunner probably wouldnt have, BUT, it wouldnt have mattered where in the order he was in this instance, since he created his own advantage, and wasnt necessarily driven in by the meat of the lineup.

Originally Posted by Mr. Brooks

I didnt need your example to understand that the concept exists. Who would deny that there is a % threshold that a baserunner could theoretically cross that would give him an advantage at scoring runs? For that reason I thought you were trying to illustrate that a faster runner DOES score more, not that he COULD.
However, even if you could show the exact % advantage that a faster baserunner has, it would still be almost impossible to prove that your lineup overall scores more runs with that baserunner near the top of the order.
For example, a faster runner could steal second base, then advance to 3rd on a wild pitch that wasnt far enough away from the catcher to advance a slower runner, then come home on a fly ball that wouldnt have been deep enough to score a runner.
In this example the faster baserunner clearly scored a run that the slower baserunner probably wouldnt have, BUT, it wouldnt have mattered where in the order he was in this instance, since he created his own advantage, and wasnt necessarily driven in by the meat of the lineup.

You're obscuring the conversation a bit. A faster base runner DOES often score more as a percentage of the opportunities that he has to score. That is not in doubt.

Take two players that have the same OBP. Undoubtedly you would assume that if everything else is equal, including the outcomes of the at-bats that follow them getting on base, the faster baserunner will score more runs than the slower baserunner.

Now take a baserunner that is fast enough to often times score runs from 2nd and fairly often score from 1st, and put him on base slightly less than a player that can sometimes score from 2nd and can hardly ever score from 1st. It is possible to imagine that faster player still scoring more runs, even though he has slightly less opportunities than the player who has more opportunities to do so but is less fast.

Now gradually increase the numbers either way until you reach a point where a substantial amount of On Base skills are being overcome by the speed of the lesser OBP guy. This happens in Baseball all the time, one example of which is the Mientkiewicz/Guzman example. To what do you attribute the clear percentage of scoring per On Base opportunity that Guzman displays compared to Mientkiewicz (43% to 31%)? If speed is at least any part of what you attribute the difference to, then you must acknowledge that OBP does not neccessarily trump SPEED in every instance.

Therefore, OBP from top to bottom is not a smart lineup constructing system.

Now ask yourself: Is it possible that my team would score runs with a player who is faster but has a less high on base percentage in a higher spot in the order? How often could your guy who "created his own advantage" benefit from also being in front of hitters who will more often give him an opportunity to go from 2nd to home, 1st to 3rd, and 1st to Home? Very often, perhaps, but you would never find out because his somewhat lower OBP demands that a slower player with a somewhat higher OBP take the more advantagous place of batting in front of the power hitters in a lineup.

The Mientkiewicz/Guzman example isn't neccessarily able to single out how much of Guzman's increased scoring was directly due to SPEED, but it at least indicates the ability for SPEED to be a significant factor in determining a players usefulness and deservedness at the top of a batting order despite other options for that lineup spot having higher OBP's.

Simply put, SPEED can trump OBP. It probably happens more often than we realize, and certainly happens more often than you seem willing to admit.

Again, I've already said that of course there is some threshold that can be crossed where speed can overcome OBP.
I'm just saying we don't know where it is.
The Mientkiewicz/Guzman example is far too small of a sample size to determine anything. We don't know how many of those runs can be attributed to speed, and how many to pure happenstance.

Outs are a valuable commodity in baseball. You only get 27 of them. Its not like basketball where you can foul to lengthen the game, or like football where you can manipulate the clock or kick an onside kick. I dont want guys who are more likely to make an out, getting 1 more AB per game than guys who are less likely to make an out. For me, that is the bottom line in its simplest form.
I've already said there are exceptions, what more do you want me to say? But as a general rule, I want to give that extra AB to someone who is less likely to make an out.

To what do you attribute the clear percentage of scoring per On Base opportunity that Guzman displays compared to Mientkiewicz (43% to 31%)?

This is the key statement to see the flaw in your argument. You're answering with "speed" because you seem pre-determined to look at the player in question's skillset rather than seeing run production for what it is: a team effort. A speedy runner can create more run-scoring opportunities, no one will deny that, but unless the player in question is stealing home frequently (I'm going to assume even in your case you're going to accept that this is not happening) than scoring runs is dependent upon the actions of the hitters that follow the player more so than with the player themselves. Hence why the more you bunch players at the top of your lineup that avoid outs (thus getting on base) the better your chances.

Part of why using counting stats like runs and rbis is not a good way to evaluate a player is because those statistics are contingent on other players. Your analysis may be true, but you are using a woefully inept sample size to prove it. And it should be across the league, not a two player comparison.

What may account for the difference in your example here might be totally different for the next pair. So, as a general rule, it's better to defer to guys that can get on base at a higher rate before you worry about how well they translate that into scoring.

The majority of Guzman's PAs during 2001-2002 were hitting from the 1st or 2nd spot in the order. Meaning, he more often got on base with 0 or 1 out. Whereas Doug, batting in the 3 hole and to a lesser extent, the 6 hole, he more often got on base with 2 outs. Thus there were fewer opportunities for him to be driven in.

Its the same reason Willingham scored more runs than Mauer last year despite Mauer having a .050 advantage in OBP. More often when mauer got on, there were already two outs. By contrast, Willingham lead off the 2nd inning quite a bit, got on base quite a bit, and had 3 full outs where he could be driven in.

Incidentally, this is why you don't squander a high OBP guy by putting him in the 3 hole.

Originally Posted by Willihammer

The majority of Guzman's PAs during 2001-2002 were hitting from the 1st or 2nd spot in the order. Meaning, he more often got on base with 0 or 1 out. Whereas Doug, batting in the 3 hole and to a lesser extent, the 6 hole, he more often got on base with 2 outs. Thus there were fewer opportunities for him to be driven in.

Its the same reason Willingham scored more runs than Mauer last year despite Mauer having a .050 advantage in OBP. More often when mauer got on, there were already two outs. By contrast, Willingham lead off the 2nd inning quite a bit, got on base quite a bit, and had 3 full outs where he could be driven in.

Incidentally, this is why you don't squander a high OBP guy by putting him in the 3 hole.

Really? Willingham scored 85 runs to Mauer's 81. I tend to think that the 25 more times that Willingham drove himself in by hitting a home run had quite a bit to do with the higher runs scored number. If we subtract self created RBI, which are home runs and not contingent upon how many outs there are when they occur, Mauer scored 71 times from the base paths, while Willingham scored 50 runs from the base paths. Despite the confidence with which you share your theory, and despite its general validity in many comparisons, I just don't think your theory holds much water in this particular scenario.

Originally Posted by 10PagesOfClearBlueSky

Really? Willingham scored 85 runs to Mauer's 81. I tend to think that the 25 more times that Willingham drove himself in by hitting a home run had quite a bit to do with the higher runs scored number. If we subtract self created RBI, which are home runs and not contingent upon how many outs there are when they occur, Mauer scored 71 times from the base paths, while Willingham scored 50 runs from the base paths. Despite the confidence with which you share your theory, and despite its general validity in many comparisons, I just don't think your theory holds much water in this particular scenario.

As I've illustrated in other threads, I like the AL East's collective approach to the #2 batter- OPS, not speed is their imperative for the 2-Hole.

Though the difference in run production wasn't as dramatic as it usually has been- given Boston had a major down year, and JJ Hardy had an uncharacteristic BABIP meltdown- the AL East continued to be the biggest run producers in 2012, and all take the exact opposite tack to Gardy's approach of a preference for speed and bunting ability in the 2-spot.

AL East#2 hitter OPS: .730 Average Runs Scored: 733
AL West#2 hitter OPS: .698 Average Runs Scored: 727
AL Cent#2 hitter OPS: .688 Average Runs Scored: 703

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

This is the key statement to see the flaw in your argument. You're answering with "speed" because you seem pre-determined to look at the player in question's skillset rather than seeing run production for what it is: a team effort. A speedy runner can create more run-scoring opportunities, no one will deny that, but unless the player in question is stealing home frequently (I'm going to assume even in your case you're going to accept that this is not happening) than scoring runs is dependent upon the actions of the hitters that follow the player more so than with the player themselves. Hence why the more you bunch players at the top of your lineup that avoid outs (thus getting on base) the better your chances.

Part of why using counting stats like runs and rbis is not a good way to evaluate a player is because those statistics are contingent on other players. Your analysis may be true, but you are using a woefully inept sample size to prove it. And it should be across the league, not a two player comparison.

What may account for the difference in your example here might be totally different for the next pair. So, as a general rule, it's better to defer to guys that can get on base at a higher rate before you worry about how well they translate that into scoring.

I think that you meant I was using a woefully inadequate sample size, meaning not large enough. Clearly a larger sample size would be preferable, but I wouldn't say that over 1000 plate appearances would be woefully inadequate. In this particular case, however, it seems somewhat difficult to do just "do it across the league". One problem is that I am trying to compare specific types of players (slower OBP guys to faster guys) who also faced similar competition within similar conditions. Not sure how I would sort that type of information out of or into a league-wide analysis. In order to do so I would need to be able to label SPEED guys and OBP guys. Seeing as how these are often one in the same, it would be hard to get relevant data. Those are the reasons I chose Mientkiewicz and Guzman. I felt that they were two players that Twins Daily forum would easily recognize for what they were during 2001-2002, a pretty good on base guy and a pretty darn fast guy who had a very similar number of plate appearances.

"So, as a general rule, it's better to defer to guys that can get on base at a higher rate before you worry about how well they translate that into scoring"

Worrying about "how well they translate that into scoring " is exactly what managers who want to score the most runs possible should be doing. Managers who want to get guys on base but aren't concerned with how often those guys come around to score would be woefully neglectful of the true objective of lineup construction, which is scoring runs. If anyone is predisposed to focusing on one particular skill-set, it is you regarding OBP.

Originally Posted by 10PagesOfClearBlueSky

I think that you meant I was using a woefully inadequate sample size, meaning not large enough. Clearly a larger sample size would be preferable, but I wouldn't say that over 1000 plate appearances would be woefully inadequate. In this particular case, however, it seems somewhat difficult to do just "do it across the league". One problem is that I am trying to compare specific types of players (slower OBP guys to faster guys) who also faced similar competition within similar conditions. Not sure how I would sort that type of information out of or into a league-wide analysis. In order to do so I would need to be able to label SPEED guys and OBP guys. Seeing as how these are often one in the same, it would be hard to get relevant data. Those are the reasons I chose Mientkiewicz and Guzman. I felt that they were two players that Twins Daily forum would easily recognize for what they were during 2001-2002, a pretty good on base guy and a pretty darn fast guy who had a very similar number of plate appearances.

"So, as a general rule, it's better to defer to guys that can get on base at a higher rate before you worry about how well they translate that into scoring"

Worrying about "how well they translate that into scoring " is exactly what managers who want to score the most runs possible should be doing. Managers who want to get guys on base but aren't concerned with how often those guys come around to score would be woefully neglectful of the true objective of lineup construction, which is scoring runs. If anyone is predisposed to focusing on one particular skill-set, it is you regarding OBP.

That's why OPS is a better representation of run-producing productiviy and easily more quantifiable, than "speed".

Originally Posted by jokin

As I've illustrated in other threads, I like the AL East's collective approach to the #2 batter- OPS, not speed is their imperative for the 2-Hole.

Though the difference in run production wasn't as dramatic as it usually has been- given Boston had a major down year, and JJ Hardy had an uncharacteristic BABIP meltdown- the AL East continued to be the biggest run producers in 2012, and all take the exact opposite tack to Gardy's approach of a preference for speed and bunting ability in the 2-spot.

AL East#2 hitter OPS: .730 Average Runs Scored: 733
AL West#2 hitter OPS: .698 Average Runs Scored: 727
AL Cent#2 hitter OPS: .688 Average Runs Scored: 703

Taking the overall run production of the three divisions and positioning their run totals as a function of their 2-hole hitters' OPS numbers is not relevant to the discussion of whether or not a fast guy can make up for and exceed his higher On Base peer-players runs scored totals. Not sure what your analysis really proves at all, as the OPS of number two hitters in the lineup is far from the only difference between the three divisions that contribute to their runs scored totals.

Originally Posted by jokin

That's why OPS is a better representation of run-producing productiviy and easily more quantifiable, than "speed".

Sure, more easily represented and quantifiable. That doesn't mean that it is more of a contributing factor. Just because an attribute isn't easily tracked and sortable doesn't mean that it isn't greatly influential in the actual outcomes of games.

Originally Posted by 10PagesOfClearBlueSky

Sure, more easily represented and quantifiable. That doesn't mean that it is more of a contributing factor. Just because an attribute isn't easily tracked and sortable doesn't mean that it isn't greatly influential in the actual outcomes of games.

Originally Posted by 10PagesOfClearBlueSky

To what do you attribute the clear percentage of scoring per On Base opportunity that Guzman displays compared to Mientkiewicz (43% to 31%)?....

What if it had something to do with Guzman being really bad at hitting?

In 2002, the Twins managed a stable, if unconventional, top of the order. Jacque led off almost every game, with a respectable .346 OBP and 25(!) home runs. Guzman batted over 600 times in the 2 spot, posting an abysmal .292 OBP there. Mientkiewicz settled into the third spot and took most of his plate appearances there, posting an exceptional OBP.

As alluded to by Willi and others, that's where Mr. Run Expectancy Matrix enters the picture. Guzman batted in front of Minky pretty often. And Guzie made an out reeeally often. So that means that, as far as scoring a run himself, Minkie was bucking casino odds quite a bit thanks to Guz. Really. Check it out. Flash Guzman made a ton of outs. Flash Guzman usually batted in front of Minkie. A ton of outs in front of Minkie made it hard for him to score runs. Really.

In other words, as much as it might seem like sabr snobs are not getting your obvious point, consider the fact that Minkie 2002 often came to the plate with a below-average or less chance to score a run mostly because he was batting behing a speedy, incompetent hitter named Christian Guzman.

If that's not enough, there's the tidal wave of generic statistical evidence that isoloated speed is insignificant compared to OBP/OPS/wWhatever/etc. Of course speed matters, all things being equal. But other things are seldom equal, and they almost all matter more.

Also, Guzman was a middle infielder who often batted at the top of the Twins order despite a bad OBP, and it's a huge joke to you that someone could dare to question Gardy's alleged(?) tendency to bat an OBP-unqualified MI there. So if you couldn't explain Guzman's presence there with "speed", you'd have a lot to answer for, wouldn't you, doctor?



Not a trial, and you've raised some valid and interesting points about statistical vacuums in a game (or at least a chunk of its fan base) that abhors them. Well done.

Originally Posted by 10PagesOfClearBlueSky

I just don't think your theory holds much water in this particular scenario.

At this point, if you're eliminating players who hit for more power, have "everything else being equal", ignore general factors about the production and tendencies of players around them, and want to speak in generalities about being "speedier" -

How relevant is your scenario exactly? Because hypotheticals are great, but if they aren't relevant or generalizables.......than they don't have much weight as recommendations. Which, if you remember originally, was your point. Again, what you are saying might be true, but you have so narrowly defined and defended it that it is virtually irrelevant.

In baseball, all things are not equal. And in baseball run production is contingent upon more than isolated hitters - it is a team effort. I don't hide from the idea that I rely most on OBP/OPS to determine a lineup - those are the statistics with the best reflection of how well a batter avoids outs and does damage on their own. It requires far less irrelevant scenario-building.

I'm not sure if bothers fact checking but Dougie glove only hit 3rd (or higher) in 61% of his PA's in these heavily debated seasons. Unexpectedly his RS% didn't change a lot moving from the #3 to the #6 spots in the lineup. I also checked Luis Rivas and he scored about 42% of the time he was on base (not taking into account FC and E's). It's possible that Gardy has been using these advanced sabr stats all along.

I'm still in the camp that would like to see the <.320 OBP speedy guy hitting in the #8 and #9 spot than the #9 and #2 spots. The reasoning is that I want each of the better hitters (Mauer, Willy, Morneau) to get the extra plate appearances.

Originally Posted by kab21

I'm still in the camp that would like to see the <.320 OBP speedy guy hitting in the #8 and #9 spot than the #9 and #2 spots. The reasoning is that I want each of the better hitters (Mauer, Willy, Morneau) to get the extra plate appearances.

Sure, if you want to see guys get on, and then stand on a base. Those kind of guys will only even attempt to run toward the next base 53% (rough estimation) of the time when the person at bat puts the ball in play, because they don't understand the finer points of the game.

The point has been undeniably made, and backed by the rock solid science of made-up facts, that a lineup of Guzmans is far superior to a lineup of guys like Mauer/Willingham/Morneau with their useless, tangible "on-base percentage" and lack of the important factor in baseball, which is, of course, the chronically undefinable "speed".

Sure, they get on base at a ridiculously low clip, but when they do, there's a slightly better chance of them scoring, provided that the guys behind them can also find ways to effectively get on base at a solid clip. Wait a minute... that would almost mean that it has more to do with the linup composition than the individual players. Nah, that couldn't be. Rock solid science. 9 Guzmans > 9 Mauers.

Originally Posted by 10PagesOfClearBlueSky

Really? Willingham scored 85 runs to Mauer's 81. I tend to think that the 25 more times that Willingham drove himself in by hitting a home run had quite a bit to do with the higher runs scored number. If we subtract self created RBI, which are home runs and not contingent upon how many outs there are when they occur, Mauer scored 71 times from the base paths, while Willingham scored 50 runs from the base paths. Despite the confidence with which you share your theory, and despite its general validity in many comparisons, I just don't think your theory holds much water in this particular scenario.

That's a fair point and something I should have accounted for.

If you eliminate home runs from the equation, you are left with Mauer getting on base 257 times and Willingham 190 times. Of these, Mauer scored 71 runs and Willingham 50 runs. Or, 27.6% of appearances for Mauer, and 26.3% of appearances for Willingham.

Its probably worth noting two things: Mauer is an above average baserunner and Willingham is a below average baserunner. In 2012, Mauer took the extra base 46% of the time to Willingham's 40%, scored from 2nd on a single in 16/17 chances to Willingham's 7/14. Mauer just flat out hit more doubles (and triples) too so he was in scoring position more often. Similarly with Mauer advancing to 2nd on a single (advancing 23/35 times when a single is hit to Willingham's 18/32) Small beans but it counts. All around, Mauer ran the bases better and in a small way that did contribute to him scoring more than Willingham. But I still believe that all things being equal, the guy hitting 3rd will score less often than the same hitter, in the same lineup, batting 4th, although I admit the difference is probably smaller than I initially indicated.

I think the really large elephant in the room here is this, baseball is about TEAM runs scored not INDIVIDUAL runs scored. In your Guzman/Mientkiewicz example you only looked at individual runs. But Guzman also created an out >8% more times when at the plate. Add onto that his 13 times caught stealing and you're looking at many more outs. How many times did he prevent other teammates from scoring because he created an out?

Originally Posted by 10PagesOfClearBlueSky

Taking the overall run production of the three divisions and positioning their run totals as a function of their 2-hole hitters' OPS numbers is not relevant to the discussion of whether or not a fast guy can make up for and exceed his higher On Base peer-players runs scored totals. Not sure what your analysis really proves at all, as the OPS of number two hitters in the lineup is far from the only difference between the three divisions that contribute to their runs scored totals.

Yeah, because a guy with a higher OBP and a higher SLG than the "speedy" guy, who thus produces more total bases, and thusly, more run-scoring opportunities, and then, oh yeah, justifiably batting more often at the top of the lineup and getting more PAs to achieve the multiplier effect, will have nothing to do with the higher runs-scored totals.

It's funny to me how often the chosen mode of debate in this thread has been to pretend I am making an extreme argument, and then argue against that made up extreme argument.

FrodaddyG,

Since you seem to be one of those incredibly pleasant people who are very often inclined to use the well respected and exceedingly sophisticated humor and communication style of sarcasm as your chosen method of discourse, I will try to respond in a similar manner in hopes that the communication is successfully received.

Yes, Frodaddy, you got me. Despite making clear statements like "I'm not saying SPEED should be prioritized over OBP", I secretly think that lineups should be made up entirely of "9 Guzmans". You nailed it there. In fact, despite saying things like "combinations of high OBP and SPEED are obviously most desirable" I actually secretly despise OBP. In fact, I like guys that exclusively posses the skill of speed, and who get on and off base as quick as possible because I just don't even like the part where they're on base. I have been waiting for somebody to tell me that the actual stats I discussed were the "rock solid science of made up facts". You're right, I created those 2000 plate appearances from thin air. In fact, Meintkiewicz and Guzman didn't really exist. I knew I was going to have this discussion with the ever convincing and insurmountably sarcastic FrodaddyG, so I went back in time and faked these two player's existences for the sake of then having their fabricated stats at my disposal. My motivation? Because of how much I love Gardy, of course.

I'm sorry, but I have to stop the sarcastic tone. It is just exhausting to keep up, and it makes me feel like I should be sitting in a dimly lit room eating Doritos and watching Anime. The way you go about your argument makes you seem like you either don't pay full attention to the conversation, or aren't capable of the type of intellectual honesty that people who disagree with me, like Willihamer and Lobombo, display within their posts. The arguments that you are attempting to belittle me for making have quite simply never been made by me. But don't let that get in the way of another of your hilarious and high-brow sarcastic responses.

I think it is clear that OBP is one of the most important factors in determining the amount of runs a player or team scores. OBP is also very easy to quantify.

I think that SPEED is another factor which has a substantial impact on the amount of runs a player or team scores. Sometimes, a player or teams speed can even make up for somewhat lower OBP when in regards to actual runs being scored. I also think that SPEED is a skill that is very difficult to quantify. Here's the real problem though, and the difference between "Sabermetric minded thinkers" and "Sabermetric adherents". Thinkers would say, "Speed is hard to quantify, but it exists and definitely has to impact games in certain significant ways, even though an excellent way to quantify it hasn't been found yet. How can we find it?". Adherents.... They would just ignore it as a factor unless somebody has found a way to quantify it. If it's not presented in a nicely packaged statistic, it just doesn't exist in their world view. So, adherents say things like "You would prefer a whole lineup full off Guzmans, 'cause you love Gardy."