Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- From: Kenny1111 <kcyanks1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 08:50:14 -0500
Lyford wrote:
> "Vinnie S." <none@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:mumqt1tvc3u8faf9e4qdmuind7p9gb1d9d@xxxxxxxxxx
>>
> http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/baseball/mlb/players/6983/career_by_all_batting_splits.html
>> I would not call Crisp, Damon's equal just yet.
>
> By OPS+, he was actually better last year, 119 vs. 113. And when you look
> at just the road numbers, Crisp was vastly superior. Damon was extremely
> helped by Fenway, and Crisp was extremely hurt by Jacobs. Outside of those
> two ballparks, last year, Damon hit .297/.340/.428/.768 and Crisp hit
> .328/.375/.529/.904. Big, big advantage to Coco.
>
If you are looking at OPS+, there is no need to then look at the road
numbers. OPS+ is generally park-adjusted. Looking at splits can help
grasp park effects, but it doesn't necessarily lead to a good way to
compare players especially from different divisions.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- From: Keith Willoughby
- Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- References:
- Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- From: slatconsulting
- Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- From: eric
- Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- From: jc
- Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- From: Shant M
- Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- From: jc
- Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- From: eric
- Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- From: jc
- Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- From: The Cat
- Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- From: eric
- Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- From: Vinnie S .
- Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- From: Lyford
- Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- Prev by Date: Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- Next by Date: Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- Previous by thread: Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- Next by thread: Re: Lupica: Crisp and Damon are equal
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|