Big Z: We Should Trade Hanley

[nny]

So you think it is accurate to say he was a 1 win player for that 8 game stretch?

I think it's accurate to say he played those games and accumlated those numbers.

Chris Coghlan had 8 games of 1.115 OPS ball as a rookie.
Hanley Ramirez had 8 games of 1.174 OPS ball
Uggla had 8 games of 1.237 OPS! as a rookie

Could go on and on

Maybin was nearly 100 points lower at 1.105 but he doesn't count?

If those 8 games happened in one season rather than standing alone, no one would be talking about them.
--------------------
I mean, you guys are better than this. MBA removes starts to make Volstad look better and gets railed, but then you guys are doing it now to make Maybin look worse.

Players have hot 8 game stretches. Why the fuck does Maybin's not count?

Because it happened in one season so it sticks out, that's why

[Bobbob1313]

Because 8 games is statistically irrelevant. To say he was a 2.7 WAR player is misleading, because he accumulated 40% of that in 8 games.

Almost 1/4 of his total defensive value for his career was picked up in that 8 game stretch. So yeah, I'm gonna toss that out.

I'm not even talking 100% about his offense; I'm talking about the inability of advanced statistics to handle small sample sizes. Isn't that a cornerstone of the SABR community?

[nny]

So why do those 63 innings not count even though they were part of the entire whole of his career as a fish?

You pick the biggest sample size. You don't pick and chose what goes in the sample size. That's what you're doing.

Again, if those 65 innings happened as a total in one season you're not talking about it. You're talking about it because it stands alone so it sticks out.
--------------------
I mean fuck just like offense that happens to every player on defense too. But it only counts against Maybin?

[Bobbob1313]

I'm saying I don't think the formulas these statistics use are capable of accurately assigning value based on small data sets. When a guy has a good 8 game stretch in the middle of a season, it is taken into a larger equation, thus it will not be as prone to fluctuation. These equations are designed to take much larger data sets into account, so there is a margin of error when dealing with the smaller sample sizes.

Thus, just saying "He has a full season's worth of playing time" doesn't really get the whole picture, because it's three smaller sample sizes simply added together, with the inherent issues with those small sample sizes not removed by the larger.

[DropkickAlex]

Baseball is the most individual team sport there is.

Manny Ramirez was a "cancer", Boston did just fine.

[Swifty]

I agree with bobob in that, while every baseball player has good weeks and bad, those weeks are taken in the totality of a full season, and therefore are appropriately weighted. When time frames are pieced together to accumulate to a full season's worth of time, it unfairly (and I'd argue inappropriately) mischaracterizes a player's ability/worth when that time is marked by incredible inconsistency.

I'd argue that a performance such as Maybin's 2008 is so remote that it possesses no evaluative worth aside from simply saying he's not a complete invalid as his '09 and '10 would suggest.

[Metes]

Can someone Cliffnote this thread for me?

kthx

[Beef]

Hanley is a douche and it is ruining the Marlins and will always ruin the Marlins.

Douches can be great baseball players, but only if they have bigger douches on their team to keep them in line. A group of douches > a single douche.

If one douche his .450 with 40 homeruns, the team for which that douche plays will not make the playoffs because he is a douche (unless maybe there is another douche on the team that hit .500 with 50 homers(but then that guy is the biggest douche and he would ruin the team because the biggest douche always needs a bigger douche)).

You see?

[Metes]

I knew I could count on you

[HUGG]

We're 50-39 (.561) when Hanley starts this year and 17-44 (.279 (! (fucking hell))) without him. Score 4.2 runs a game with him, 3.4 runs a game without him.

He's gonna be NY Times MVP

We definitely should get rid of him, so we can win 45 games next year.

[Beef]

He's gonna be NY Times MVP

Hugg did it

[HUGG]

I'm not naive enough to really think Hanley makes a .8 run a game difference or that we'd be a playoff team with him, but anyone who can't see we're better with him than without him is blinded by the fact he doesn't fit into some stupid mold where every athlete is a great guy and busts his ass every play (90% of baseball players are douchebags, they've been spoiled since they were kids, they're rich as fuck...most rich people are assholes. Not because they try to be, they're just used to getting their way and so to us, they look like dicks. If I ever get rich, fuck will you guys hate me).

[Ralph]

I like Huggles. And I agree. BTW I would definitely be a diva type player.

[AdamRavs]

Our heads would be so big we couldn't walk through the door. But We would be RICH bitch!