some facts/opinions on A-rod

[Neuge]

I finally get what you are saying (I think). You're not satisfied with the definition of clutch/non-clutch as playoffs/non-playoffs and would like to change it to something like game-on-the-line/non-game-on-the-line (Is this right?). That's all well and good, even though that's not really what the debate is about ARod, at least in the media.

What's good about your hypothesis is that we can analyze it! It of course depends on what you define as "game-on-the-line." THE BOOK did a nice analysis and defined game-on-the-line as down 3 runs or less, in the 7th inning or later, with RISP (this may not be exactly accurate, I don't it on hand at the moment). They found, on average, that hitters performed just as well in those situations as they did in all others. This is of course just a MLB average, but they also found that the worst "clutch/non-clutch" performers lowered their wOBA about 40 points. That's not insignificant, but it's basically the same as average LHP/RHP platoon splits.

Crapping on ARod for having a 400 wOBA, but only 370 in "clutch" situations (even if that's true, I don't have ARod's splits) in favor of someone who has a 300 wOBA but 330 in the "clutch" is just retarded.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not claiming great predictive value... This year, it's obvious he would have choked in Game 5 if given the chance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then there's this. It's completely laughable that you can be so sure of the second statement alone, but predicating it with the first just makes you look insane.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
Did you guys here that Boras thinks A-Rod will hit 1,000 HR's and be the all time hit leader by the time he retires? For that reason, Boras is saying A-Rod will play until he is 45 and can command $500 million to $1 Billion in salary.

I can't find the link but it's on ESPN.com.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here it is.

ESPN.com article

Alex is 32 years old and keeps himself it very good physical condition. It's very reasonable to think he can play 10 more seasons at a very high level. (Bonds is 43)

He's got 518 home runs and 2,250 hits in 12 1/2 seasons. That's an average of 41.4 homers and 180 hits.

The home run record is his if he stays healthy. By 2014, he should be approaching 800 home runs at the age of 39.

He also has Hank Aaron's RBI record of 2,297 within site. ARod is at 1,503 RBIs and averaging 120 per year. At that pace, he'll break Aaron's RBI record at about the same time he's breaking the home run record. 2014 is going to be a big ARod year.

The hits recrod is tougher. He's 2,006 hits away from Pete Rose's 4,256. At 167 hits per year (less than his average), he'd have to play 12 more seasons and break the record at the age of 44.

[disjunction]

I am aware of that study if it's what I think it is.

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not claiming great predictive value... This year, it's obvious he would have choked in Game 5 if given the chance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then there's this. It's completely laughable that you can be so sure of the second statement alone, but predicating it with the first just makes you look insane.

[/ QUOTE ]




Haha, thanks for pointing that out. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] First, I was being a bit dramatic. Second, my statement should be clarified to say that the further out you go, the less the predictive value. Great predictive value a minute before the upcoming AB if he looks nervous, good predictive value if he looks nervous in Game 1 for the rest of the series, moderate predictive value for next year (for the contract). Bad predictive value for 1995 ARod's ability to predict 2007 ARod. I'm not the same guy I was 12 years ago, I don't know about ARod.

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
I finally get what you are saying (I think). You're not satisfied with the definition of clutch/non-clutch as playoffs/non-playoffs and would like to change it to something like game-on-the-line/non-game-on-the-line (Is this right?). That's all well and good, even though that's not really what the debate is about ARod, at least in the media.

What's good about your hypothesis is that we can analyze it! It of course depends on what you define as "game-on-the-line." THE BOOK did a nice analysis and defined game-on-the-line as down 3 runs or less, in the 7th inning or later, with RISP (this may not be exactly accurate, I don't it on hand at the moment). They found, on average, that hitters performed just as well in those situations as they did in all others. This is of course just a MLB average, but they also found that the worst "clutch/non-clutch" performers lowered their wOBA about 40 points. That's not insignificant, but it's basically the same as average LHP/RHP platoon splits.

Crapping on ARod for having a 400 wOBA, but only 370 in "clutch" situations (even if that's true, I don't have ARod's splits) in favor of someone who has a 300 wOBA but 330 in the "clutch" is just retarded.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also 2 more comments:

(1) Nobody is crapping on ARod and saying you'd rather have Scott Brosius at bat. That's a strawman that other people are using.
(2) OK, so .40 points gives us the equivalent of a platoon split. But no doubt, some of those situations will have pressure and others won't for whatever reason (pennant races, home crowd heckling, etc). So if we were omniscient and could take the correct subset, could we double that effect? Triple it?

[SBR]

[ QUOTE ]

Your tone is not appreciated. I have no doubt that I am better at "math" (I use the word you choose, although it's a strange selection since there are a lot of branches), than anybody in this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Care to law some odds on that?

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Your tone is not appreciated. I have no doubt that I am better at "math" (I use the word you choose, although it's a strange selection since there are a lot of branches), than anybody in this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

Care to law some odds on that?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. I have better things to do than to refresh my memory on dynamical systems and topology (which is probably what I'd need to do since the problems I work on right now are completely unrelated to those) in an effort to prove something on the Internet.

Although I like my odds against anyone who does not have anything better to do. Unless the baseball fans in this thread happen to be out-of-work Russian mathematicians. Then I might worry.

Anyway this is not related to ARod. I was merely calling someone out on being rude and making nonsense accusations that anyone who disagrees with him must not know statistics. I hate that crap. I get it anytime I say something non-standard here, and let's face it, if you're just nodding your head and agreeing with everybody else, you're not saying anything interesting.

[Oski]

[ QUOTE ]


And the trump card is that the Yankees can offer him the highest annual salary. Not only due to their enormous resources, but also because they get to keep the $30M subsidy from Texas as long as they sign him to an extension of his current deal. For example if Anaheim offers him a 6 year $150M deal ($25M per year), the Yankees could match it by offering a 3 year $70M extension, for a total cost of only $120M over 6 years ($20M per year). Or they could offer him $30M per year at the same cost as Anaheims deal.



[/ QUOTE ]

Boras can get more money for A-Rod if he negotiates a discount with Texas regardless of whether A-Rod stays with the Yankees. For example, Boras can cut a deal that would have Texas subsidize the contract by only 25 mil no matter what. In that case, A-Rod will get the 25 mil and it would put all the rest of the (elite) teams on equal footing to bid for A-Rod.

Under that scenario, A-Rod will easily make up the "lost" 5 mil. over three years (or whatever discount they negotiate) and keep all his options open.

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]

Boras can get more money for A-Rod if he negotiates a discount with Texas regardless of whether A-Rod stays with the Yankees.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can Boras do this?

He can't negotiate with Texas or any other MLB team while ARod is still under contract with the Yankees.

Once ARod opts out of the contract, Texas is no longer obligated to pay a dime. ARod will be a free agent.

[DesertCat]

If Texas paid A-Rod to opt out, it's tampering. Ain't gonna happen.

[Kneel B4 Zod]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not only due to their enormous resources, but also because they get to keep the $30M subsidy from Texas as long as they sign him to an extension of his current deal. For example if Anaheim offers him a 6 year $150M deal ($25M per year), the Yankees could match it by offering a 3 year $70M extension, for a total cost of only $120M over 6 years ($20M per year). Or they could offer him $30M per year at the same cost as Anaheims deal.

[/ QUOTE ]

my understanding is that this is wrong.

other teams can't negotiate like this until A-Rod opts outs (and yes, tampering is a HUGE deal). once he opts out, negotiations like this would go on, but the Texas subsidy would be gone.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think we are on the same page. Let me put it another way, if the Yankees offer a 4/$100m extension, Boras has to be very certain he can get at least a 7/$180m deal ($26m per year) to let ARod opt out. And he can't be too certain of that. Also IIRC, the Yankees have threatened to drop their total amount offered by $30m if he does opt out. So its going to be hard for him to opt out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Boras is looking for 10 years, $300m.