Also, although I'm not really a fan of the stat, for the two years that Hanley has reached elite level, Utley has posted more Value Wins than Hanley.

 

Yes, Hanley is at an upward trend whereas Utley has likely peaked, and with out a doubt Hanley is the better player to start a franchise with. But we're talking about a single season here, so it doesn't matter that Utley is entering the last legs of his prime years, he's still in his prime. Do I think Hanley will be more valuable than Utley next year? Yeah, but it's absolutely ridiculous to just completely discount Utley.

Is there any players in baseball that is better than anyone who plays for the Marlins, all i hear is every player here is better than none Marlins, well i feel good because that means we will win the world series hands down.

And even with how great Hanley is, the Marlins are going NO WHERE. Stuck in the bottom of the NL East.

 

We'll see you Mariners fan you.

And even with how great Hanley is, the Marlins are going NO WHERE. Stuck in the bottom of the NL East.

lol you better wait on that one your muts still have no pitching lol waiting for (pedro) lol!!! he been lights out since with the bo sox

k rod will flop in ny under the lights!!!!

Also, although I'm not really a fan of the stat, for the two years that Hanley has reached elite level, Utley has posted more Value Wins than Hanley.

 

Yes, Hanley is at an upward trend whereas Utley has likely peaked, and with out a doubt Hanley is the better player to start a franchise with. But we're talking about a single season here, so it doesn't matter that Utley is entering the last legs of his prime years, he's still in his prime. Do I think Hanley will be more valuable than Utley next year? Yeah, but it's absolutely ridiculous to just completely discount Utley.

 

First, can you tell me what you don't like about Win Values? There isn't a more robust way to measure a player's overall value. It incorporates position, defense(UZR), offense(wOBA, including base-running), and durability(plate appearances).

 

The major weakness of Win Values (presented at Fangraphs), is that the offensive portion isn't adjusted for ballpark. Utley is in an extreme hitters park, and Ramirez is in an extreme pitchers park. The Win Values you see, are not ballpark adjusted. If we make the adjustment, Hanley is more valuable than Utley.

 

Only Albert Pujols is a head of Hanley when taking into account: Position, Defense, Offense, Base Running, Position Scarcity, and Durability. And this isn't some subjective opinion, it's a robust calculation of each components actual run impact.

 

And yes, that's a head of:

 

Alex Rodriguez, Chase Utley, David Wright, Ryan Howard, [enter in any famous/superstar player here besides Pujols]

 

Hanley is only 25 (players don't peak until 26-27), so he still has at least 1-2 more years of actual improvement. There isn't a better, younger, more talented player in all of baseball -- right now. David Wright being the only other position player, somewhat-close.

And even with how great Hanley is, the Marlins are going NO WHERE. Stuck in the bottom of the NL East.

 

 

Don't you do this every year? Talk up the Mets, and then when they choke you don't show up again till February.

First, can you tell me what you don't like about Win Values? There isn't a more robust way to measure a player's overall value. It incorporates position, defense(UZR), offense(wOBA, including base-running), and durability(plate appearances).

 

I'm just not that big of a fan of "value" stats. Same goes with VORP. I certainly think they're useful but I don't think they should be lived and died by, which I guess is where my general dislike for them comes from as a lot of people do. I dislike the UZR stat since, unless something has changed in the past few years, it is just a glorified zone rating. And you yourself point out the problem with wOBA, as park factors certainly should be taken into account. So, I mean, you already have two faults with the system, both of which awarding and discounting the most important thing: runs a player creates.

 

Hanley is only 25 (players don't peak until 26-27), so he still has at least 1-2 more years of actual improvement. There isn't a better, younger, more talented player in all of baseball -- right now. David Wright being the only other position player, somewhat-close.

 

But this isn't the topic at hand. The topic at hand is 2009 MVP, aka, who will be the most valuable player in 2009 and 2009 only. And Utley is certainly #3 favorite, but you can not just completely discount him.

And even with how great Hanley is, the Marlins are going NO WHERE. Stuck in the bottom of the NL East.

 

 

Why are Mets fans so stupid?

And even with how great Hanley is, the Marlins are going NO WHERE. Stuck in the bottom of the NL East.

 

 

Why are Mets fans so stupid?

 

Inbreeding.

Since his rookie campaign in 2006, Hanley has a .906 OPS. Second in the majors is Derek Jeter, down at .838 OPS. So Hanley is 70 points better than the second shortstop. Only three others also were above .800 (Tejada, Reyes, Rollins).

 

Pujols is 90 points ahead of the next best 1b in that same time frame (Howard), but there's also five with OPS's over 900, and 11 more with OPSs over 800.

 

The only other player who dominates a position is Utley, who's 100 points ahead of the next best 2b. Seven have OPSs over 800.

 

Can't really forget though that Hanley is at best an average defensive short stop but Utley and Pujols are the best fielders for their respective positions. It'd certainly be interesting to see if Utley could play shortstop. Utley is certainly going to lose a lot of value though considering the current crop of 2b (Uggla, Kinsler, and Pedroia) developed to the point of OPSing in the high .800's last year. But still, we're talking about a 2B who, in the past four years, has OPsed in the .900's and saved about 15 runs with his glove per year.

You could argue that Tex is a better defensive 1B than Pujols, but your point is obviously taken.

We don't need to "argue" anything. There's comprehensive data to support these types of discussions.

 

Teixeira has been +2.7 runs above average in his career at 1B, Pujols has been +7.3 in his career.

 

Pujols 1B defense is about a half a win better at the position (which is pretty significant).

We don't need to "argue" anything. There's comprehensive data to support these types of discussions.

 

Teixeira has been +2.7 runs above average in his career at 1B, Pujols has been +7.3 in his career.

 

Pujols 1B defense is about a half a win better at the position (which is pretty significant).

Yes, because there is no argument about the accuracy of defensive metrics.

 

Plus, in 2008 Tex was +24 and Pujols was +20 per +/-.

 

Now then, that's a huge spike over Tex's previous numbers, but a position like 1B is all about technique and can be learned and improved easier that others.

And even with how great Hanley is, the Marlins are going NO WHERE. Stuck in the bottom of the NL East.

 

 

Don't you do this every year? Talk up the Mets, and then when they choke you don't show up again till February.

yep

The most dominant player position-wise by far is Joe Mauer and i believe he even has a GG

And even with how great Hanley is, the Marlins are going NO WHERE. Stuck in the bottom of the NL East.

 

You know, at times Starbrownies, you really are a ?*$!

 

I love you too. :whistle

Yes, because there is no argument about the accuracy of defensive metrics.

 

Plus, in 2008 Tex was +24 and Pujols was +20 per +/-.

 

Now then, that's a huge spike over Tex's previous numbers, but a position like 1B is all about technique and can be learned and improved easier that others.

 

Defensive stats can be just as irregular as offensive ones due to "luck" (for lack of a better word) and other factors.

 

You have to default to the higher sample size until otherwise proven wrong, or if there's an actual explanation (not a presumed one like you mention) (i.e. Hanley has had roughly two average seasons, and one "I'm worst defender ever" season. Due to the huge decline in defense throughout the entire team from 06 to 07, where there were no mandatory fielding drills, and then the increase in 08 back to the 06 numbers, where mandatory fielding drills were introduced again, we can easily point to that as Hanley's downfall. So even though Hanley has a -40 the past three years, we can default him to average until he otherwise proves that 07 wasn't a 'fluke')