Who Would You Pick?

[61in61]

Here is another thought. If you were a GM and starting a new team and had the pick of any player in the Major Leagues,, whom would you chose? Would it be a pitcher or a position player?

[BuzzBuzzard]

Starting a team, I take a position player. I want someone who's going to play 162 games, not 31. That is not to say my first ten picks are going to be position players, but I want someone who will contribute more to my team.

[NetShrine]

Agreed Buzz.

61 - this one deserves a life of its own - so, I spilt it off.

[jpalexa]

(Is the question regarding which ONE player do you get to pick, or is it which is the FIRST (of 25) players you get to pick?)

I'll continue my obsessive tirade on "good pitching beats good hitting"!

I take Pedro Martinez. Who else has a higher (mythical) Wins Created Differential -- that is, the number of wins created by Pedro Martinez vs. the number of wins created by the average starting pitcher? (Note: The ERA differential is 2.81 (AL avg 4.33 minus Pedro's 1.52 (before today))!!!

(Somehow I need to figure out the mythical Wins Created Differential for:

-- position players; that is, how Runs Created translates into Team Wins
-- pitchers; that is, how ERA (or K or Avg-Against, or something) translates into Team Wins

)

[BuzzBuzzard]

My logic kind of went like this. Is there one pitcher that is head and shoulders above all other pitchers, a true night and day comparison and the answer is no. Same for position players. Therefore, all things being equal, I want a guy who plays every day.

[jpalexa]

I guess the questions could be these:

Does the very best pitcher win you more games than the very best offensive player?
Does a good pitcher win you more games than a good offensive player?

The "good pitching beats good hitting" manta is chanted with respect to an entire team contribution. I truly don't know how (or if) it applies to one guy vs. one guy -- or the contributions of a single player....

A rough calculation had Pedro Martinez with a (mythical) Wins Created Differential of ~8. Derek Jeter had a WCD of ~4. Granted, Derek Jeter was probably not the best offensive player in the league, but I am kind of doubting that anyone had 4 more WCD points than Jeter....

[baseballtodd]

Generally, you should always choose a position player over a pitcher around which to form a team. A position player can form the nucleus of your team day-in and day-out. Pitchers only perform and affect the outcome of a game every five days. Obviously, for me, a position player is a must first pick for me. And, specifically, if I were to pick one player today, I would pick Pudge Rodriguez of the Rangers. Catching's the most important position on the field. At the plate, Rodriguez does things with a bat that are uncommong for a catcher to do. In fact, there are few hitters in the game today better than Rodriguez in all aspects of the offensive half of baseball. He hits for average, hits with power, is productive at driving in and scoring runs, and is adept on the basepaths. Defensively, what can you say about Mr. Rodriguez. The only other catcher who may have been better was Johnny Bench. That's a big maybe, however. If I were picking a team, my first guy would Rodriguez. Second? Randy Johnson, for obvious reasons. Third? Probably Jeff Bagwell. I have no use for Barry Bonds, Ken Griffey, Jr., etc. These types of guys are detrimental to the clubhouse and, like it or not, stuff that goes on "in the clubhouse" gets carried onto the field of play and can ruin a team. Look at their Mariners now? They seem much better with Griffey gone than with him. The Reds? They still languish despite having G-man. To fill in my team, I would fill in with guys like Jeff Cirillo, Jim Edmonds, Rusty Greer, etc. Proven players with good attitudes. Don't let a rotten apple spoil the whole bushel.

[NetShrine]

Todd, Buzz, JP - - I see all your points. Here's a wrinkle to consider - relativity, in the sense of position scarcity.

As I stated, in a vacum, I would go with the position player - as they have a chance to impact more games.

That said, you could make the agrument that a position player - one of them - could have the greatest day on MLB history - say 5 HRs and 13 RBI - but, if his pitcher gives up 14 runs that day, his effort is moot.

So, given "who" really controls the game - and factoring in there are so few great pitchers - - maybe pitcher should be the number one pick? Just a thought............

[jpalexa]

The hard thing about this discussion is trying to make the argument that a *single* player is going to have enough impact to win "X" number of games for you. I think we all agree that it takes a balance of good to very good players -- both pitching and position -- to win a division.

Just having Pudge Rodriguez isn't good enough. Ask the Rangers.

Nor is just having Randy Johnson good enough. Ask the Diamondbacks.

At any rate, wouldn't you want the single player that had the largest (mythical) Wins Created Differential, over an entire season, regardless of whether that player was a pitcher or a position player (which makes the whole "position player - everyday; pitcher - every 5 days" argument moot)?

[NetShrine]

"At any rate, wouldn't you want the single player that had the largest (mythical) Wins Created Differential, over an entire season, regardless of whether that player was a pitcher or a position player?"

Yes. And I know who he is - - Roy Hobbs.

[jpalexa]

Of course!

"People would see me walking down the street and say, 'There goes Roy Hobbs - the best there ever was in the game.'"

I wonder what his WCD was?!

[BuzzBuzzard]

Originally posted by jpalexa
At any rate, wouldn't you want the single player that had the largest (mythical) Wins Created Differential, over an entire season, regardless of whether that player was a pitcher or a position player (which makes the whole "position player - everyday; pitcher - every 5 days" argument moot)?

Not sure I understand the mythical WCD, but first it is mythical. Second, and more important, what good does a seasonally adjusted WCD do for me when in reality a pitcher takes the hill every five days. The fact is, you can't send a starting pitcher out there every game. If you tried, the actual WCD would not live up to the seasonally adjusted number.

[jpalexa]

My bad -- I should have clarified that the WCD *is* indeed seasonally adjusted. The number refers to the number of wins a player created above what an "average" player would have created -- for an entire season.

Offensive players and pitchers (obviously!) have different formulas. And, if I ever get brave enough to have more than just passing confidence in my math, I just might post those formulas! Not that they are 100% accurate, but I *do* believe they give a general idea.

Mostly, for offensive players, it is a comparison of Runs Created between the player and the "average."
Mostly, for pitchers, it is a comparison of Runs Allowed between the pitcher and the "average."

Mostly.

Back to the question posed in this thread: Assuming that the (inherently-seasonally-adjusted, though for-now-mythical) Wins Created Differential was relatively accurate, wouldn't it make sense (if you had only one pick) to choose the player (regardless of whether a position player *OR* pitcher) who had the highest WCD?

[HistoricBBall]

In today's form of baseball, position players can come a dime a dozen. Look at just about any AAA team and you will find a couple of players capable of 20 HR, 100 RBI at the Major League level. Baseball's expansion screwed up the pitching depth. Maybe that's why pitchers such as Mike Maddux and Jesse Orrosco keep getting jobs. I would definitely take a pitcher.

[NetShrine]

Is Mike Maddux still around too?