Pierre vs. Podsednik

OK, I admit I am more of a casual baseball fan,especially compared to the nuts on here! I bought BM and enjoyed it and now I am taking more of an interest in baseball. I'm starting to learn more of the so called sabr stats, although mostly I just get a headache. I usually judge players based on traditional things like RBI, HR, AVG, etc. I see that kinda thing gets you ridiculed on here real quick!! So I was reading in the paper about the White Sox pickup of Juan Pierre. The White Sox GM was saying he thought of Pierre as an upgrade over Podsednik. He sighted him as being a superior leadoff hitter, better fielder, better baserunner and having alot of "grit an determinaton." He also went on to say that Pierre was Ozzie's kind of player. Now I was wondering what you guys thought? How much of an upgrade is Pierre over Podsednik? If he even is an upgrade. My understanding money wise is they would've cost about the same since LA is paying a big portion of Pierre's salary and Podsednik was looking for a multi year deal. So money shouldn't factor into it.

Neither of them are very good, actually. They both dont deserve starting jobs, and their offensive success is based totally on average and speed. I would have taken Podsednik merely because he would have been cheaper contract wise, though I would prefer not to use either. They are both miscast as leadoff hitters, as they don't walk much.

They're pretty much the exact same player. And not very good. Quality fourth outfielders, below average starters.

What are the stats you guys are using to judge this?

obP for 1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yomamaimontv

What are the stats you guys are using to judge this?

---

OBP, OPS, Slug %, SB%, pretty simple ones can tell you they are both poor players

In ranking leadoff hitters, start with on-base percentage, and you don't need to look at much else.

To me... Posednick is just ryan church with speed. Pierre is better IMO as he is even in OBP with Scott but has a higher BA meaning he has more of a change to KNOCK in a run where Scott gets on the same amount of time but will not knock in as many.

His OPS is better to I think. he IS an upgrade but tahts like Oliver Perez over John Neese Both are decent... but its not like you are gong to set the world on fire

Yeah OPS is a pretty intersting stat I have started to use in BM to evaluate players. I know their SLG% is low but their leadoff hitters not power guys. Their OBP is not great but not terrible either. Pierre was .365 last year not bad...

my ideal team has a .370-.380+ OBP guy with Speed.
NOT either of those 2 leading off... Pierre I would take as my #8 hitter tho... walk him to get to the pitcher... and he steals 2nd base :D and if you pinch hit the pitcher... you have a speed guy on in front of him if he gets on... plus may knock in a few down in the lineup

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kenny1234

In ranking leadoff hitters, start with on-base percentage, and you don't need to look at much else.

---

yes and no... you dont want Adam Dunn leading off

How are they defensively since fielding % is no longer considered a good way to evaluate defense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet

yes and no... you dont want Adam Dunn leading off

---

I'd prefer Dunn to Pierre.

And Pierre had a good year last year, primarily because he got lucky when he did hit the ball - a BABIP 30 points higher than normal. I'd expect that he will drop back to .330-.340 OBP this year - which is OK for a very good defensive centerfielder, especially if he is hitting 7th or 8th in your lineup. Whether he is a very good centerfielder is another question - I would probably project him as above average.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yomamaimontv

How are they defensively since fielding % is no longer considered a good way to evaluate defense?

---

Pierre is the better fielder. He is above average in center, probably very good in left. Posednik is probably below average in center, and OK in left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yomamaimontv

Yeah OPS is a pretty intersting stat I have started to use in BM to evaluate players. I know their SLG% is low but their leadoff hitters not power guys. Their OBP is not great but not terrible either. Pierre was .365 last year not bad...

---

You have to consider that with players like Pierre, the OBP is inflated by batting average. He hits for hig averages. But if his average slips to say... .275-.280 (Not bad averages) His OBP will look like something around .310-.320. That is pretty bad for a player that relies on getting on base to make use of his greatest talent, speed. You must also realize Pierre and Podsednik get caught stealing a lot

Podsednik does walk at a non horrid rate, but he also hits for considerably lower average then Pierre

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kenny1234

I'd prefer Dunn to Pierre.

And Pierre had a good year last year, primarily because he got lucky when he did hit the ball - a BABIP 30 points higher than normal. I'd expect that he will drop back to .330-.340 OBP this year - which is OK for a very good defensive centerfielder, especially if he is hitting 7th or 8th in your lineup. Whether he is a very good centerfielder is another question - I would probably project him as above average.

---

no dispute there.. id take a team of dunn's before a team of Pierre's... tho to me the pierre's would be more fun to watch lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FloydtheBarber

Podsednik does walk at a non horrid rate, but he also hits for considerably lower average then Pierre

---

which makes it a moot point...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet

no dispute there.. id take a team of dunn's before a team of Pierre's... tho to me the pierre's would be more fun to watch lol


which makes it a moot point...

---

That is why i said "but"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yomamaimontv

What are the stats you guys are using to judge this?

---

I personally like OPS for hitters 3-7. For my leadoff hitter I like OBP with good, smart speed. For my second hitter I like a very high contact rate. OBP and a low strike-out % (Pedroia). If you want to get a decent explanation of the stats used around here, then sift through the big argument that is the "How does one define the greatest hitter of all time?" thread. It is on the third page of sports talk. HGM and another guy are arguing the whole thread, but they are throwing stats at each other like bullets.

Also read Jeffy's current top 9 position threads.

I don't think Juan Pierre is above average as a center fielder anymore. He's only had 1 above average defensive season at CF since 2003.

Guys be nice Juan Pierre is like 12 years old

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rexington

I personally like OPS for hitters 3-7. For my leadoff hitter I like OBP with good, smart speed. For my second hitter I like a very high contact rate. OBP and a low strike-out % (Pedroia). If you want to get a decent explanation of the stats used around here, then sift through the big argument that is the "How does one define the greatest hitter of all time?" thread. It is on the third page of sports talk. HGM and another guy are arguing the whole thread, but they are throwing stats at each other like bullets.

Also read Jeffy's current top 9 position threads.

---

Thanks everybody for the imput. From what I gather, Pierre is an upgrade even if it is slightly. He might not be an ideal leadoff hitter, but after looking at what else is around the league, only a handful of teams have what many of you guys would consider an ideal leadoff man. So all things considered I think it was a good pickup. I actually did read through the above mentioned thread and several like it. I chuckled to myself, thinking only on the internet could these arguments really take place. The thought of two guys in a Chicago sports bar arguing about stats such as WAR or VORP or BABIP , over a beer is a funny thought. Maybe though someday it will come to that as I see these stats seem to be coming more and more mainstream. Thanks again for the introduction to these interesting stats and their use. One thing I was wondering does anyone know how much of this stuff do GM's consider in real life?? Obviously it must vary team by team, but I would like to think that Ken Williams is pretty well schooled in the application of the sabr stats. You would think that would have to be a prerequisite.

Besides the obvious of rickey...

good leadoff guys are guys like Lofton in his prime, even Jeter is I think a very good leadoff hitter. Furcall was decent... tho I dont think he got On base enought if IRC.

Damon is like the PERFECT OBP tho with his lowish SO rate he is a better #2 in my opinion... I like speed if possible in the #2 hole as well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet

Besides the obvious of rickey...

good leadoff guys are guys like Lofton in his prime, even Jeter is I think a very good leadoff hitter. Furcall was decent... tho I dont think he got On base enought if IRC.

Damon is like the PERFECT OBP tho with his lowish SO rate he is a better #2 in my opinion... I like speed if possible in the #2 hole as well

---

+1
Its funny whenever I hear leadoff hitter..I think Rickey (as I assume Rickey thinks Rickey too).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yomamaimontv

Thanks everybody for the imput. From what I gather, Pierre is an upgrade even if it is slightly. He might not be an ideal leadoff hitter, but after looking at what else is around the league, only a handful of teams have what many of you guys would consider an ideal leadoff man. So all things considered I think it was a good pickup. I actually did read through the above mentioned thread and several like it. I chuckled to myself, thinking only on the internet could these arguments really take place. The thought of two guys in a Chicago sports bar arguing about stats such as WAR or VORP or BABIP , over a beer is a funny thought. Maybe though someday it will come to that as I see these stats seem to be coming more and more mainstream. Thanks again for the introduction to these interesting stats and their use. One thing I was wondering does anyone know how much of this stuff do GM's consider in real life?? Obviously it must vary team by team, but I would like to think that Ken Williams is pretty well schooled in the application of the sabr stats. You would think that would have to be a prerequisite.

---

Believe it or not, there are a few GMs that either have no concept of SABR stats, have no desire to understand them, or actively dislike them.

All of the good GMs embrace them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by haveacigar

Believe it or not, there are a few GMs that either have no concept of SABR stats, have no desire to understand them, or actively dislike them.

All of the good GMs embrace them.

---

Well also remember not all GM's have the same deck of cards (money) to work with. Plus if a manager's personality isn't taken into effect, then that would be absurd also. Managers have a preference in a certain style of play they like to us (or at least they like to say so)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reflections

Well also remember not all GM's have the same deck of cards (money) to work with. Plus if a manager's personality isn't taken into effect, then that would be absurd also. Managers have a preference in a certain style of play they like to us (or at least they like to say so)

---

well certainly, and that's often where the Strawman of Sabr haters have it wrong.
No one really advocates using only Sabr stats .. most would say to never, under any circumstance not take into account any statsitc or scouting report. .. instead use as as many sources as a possible to form a more complete picture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reflections

Well also remember not all GM's have the same deck of cards (money) to work with. Plus if a manager's personality isn't taken into effect, then that would be absurd also. Managers have a preference in a certain style of play they like to us (or at least they like to say so)

---

Sure, but I think I can comfortably say that any GM who makes no attempt to understand or takes an active distaste of SABR stats is a bad GM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reflections

Well also remember not all GM's have the same deck of cards (money) to work with. Plus if a manager's personality isn't taken into effect, then that would be absurd also. Managers have a preference in a certain style of play they like to us (or at least they like to say so)

---

The ones with less money would probably find it more prudent to expand their horizons than the ones with more money.