Better Team?

[trutrojan8]

Position: Player (AVG/HR/RBI in the Majors this year)

-------------------

Team A

C: Varitek (.234/13/39)

1B: Youkilis (.304/17/56)

2B: Pedroia (.302/4/40)

SS: Green (.249/4/30)

3B: Lowell (.289/10/41)

LF: Bay (.255/20/72)

CF: Ellsbury (.293/5/29)

RF: Baldelli (.266/4/15)

DH: Kotsay (.271/1/5)

COMBINED STATS: .277/78/327

-------------------

Team B

C: Ianetta (.228/11/36)

1B: Helton (.324/10/58)

2B: Barmes (.274/12/48)

SS: Tulowitzki (.252/16/39)

3B: Stewart (.227/17/47)

LF: Smith (.304/8/27)

CF: Fowler (.254/4/25)

RF: Hawpe (.322/15/61)

DH: Spilborghs (.256/6/34)

COMBINED STATS: .275/99/375

-------------------

So, hitting wise, Team A's average is .8% better than Team B's. Team B's home run total is 21.21% better than Team A's. Team B's RBI total is 12.8% better than Team A's.

-------------------

Position: Player (W/ERA/K) ([s/H]/ERA/K) for relievers

Team A

SP: Beckett (11/3.35/110)

SP: Lester (8/3.87/137)

SP: Buchholz (1/1.59/3)

SP: Wakefield (11/4.31/61)

SP: Penny (6/5.02/65)

RP: Smoltz (0/6.31/22)

RP: Bard (2/2.42/32)

RP: Okajima (19/3.23/38)

RP: Delcarmen (5/2.31/25)

RP: Saito (2/3.41/29)

COMBINED STATS: 37 Wins, 3 saves, 28 Holds, 3.90 ERA, 522 Strikeouts

-------------------

Team B

SP: Cook (9/3.85/63)

SP: Jimenez (7/3.82/111)

SP: De la Rosa (7/4.95/105)

SP: Marquis (12/3.49/61)

SP: Hammel (5/4.26/68)

RP: Street (23/2.68/45)

RP: Daley (5/3.96/22)

RP: Fogg (0/1.77/9)

RP: Corpas (7/5.88/24)

RP: Flores (7/5.63/10)

COMBINED STATS: 40 Wins, 23 Saves, 19 Holds, 4.33 ERA, 518 Strikeouts

-------------------

So, pitching wise, Team B's win total is 7.5% better than Team A's. Team B's saves total is 766% better than Team A's. Team A's holds total is 32.2% better than Team B's. Team A's ERA is 10% better than Team B's. Team A's strikeout total is .8% better than Team B's.

-------------------

So, based upon further calculation, Team B's hitting is 33.21% better than Team A's (assuming batting average, home runs, and RBI were all equal in value, which is debatable) Pitching is a little lopsided though, since Team A doesn't have a for sure closer. Throwing out the saves stat, Team A's pitching is 36.5% better than Team A's (again assuming all stats counted for are equal, and saying the saves stat doesn't count for anything)

-------------------

So I did this all to prove to ECN, that if the Boston Red Sox had the same team salary as the Colorado Rockies, that the Rockies would win. He got to pick his entire roster, and if stats were the only thing accountable for the outcome of the game, it isn't as much of a pushover as one would assume.

[The Great iBoldin]

It's not even debatable, it's obviously Boston.

[trutrojan8]

It's not even debatable, it's obviously Boston.

Obviously? Why?

[The Great iBoldin]

Because stats don't tell half the tale between these teams.

 

Individually and as a team, the Red Sox are miles and miles away from Colorado.

[trutrojan8]

Because stats don't tell half the tale between these teams.

 

Individually and as a team, the Red Sox are miles and miles away from Colorado.

The Red Sox have four more wins than the Rockies, and the Rockies have been the hottest team in baseball since late May. Something like 32-10, and the Red Sox are miles and miles better?

 

Again, can you explain why a Red Sox team without Dice-K, Papelbon, Drew, or Lugo is better than the Rockies?

[The Great iBoldin]

The Red Sox have four more wins than the Rockies, and the Rockies have been the hottest team in baseball since late May. Something like 32-10, and the Red Sox are miles and miles better?

 

Again, can you explain why a Red Sox team without Dice-K, Papelbon, Drew, or Lugo is better than the Rockies?

 

You took my quote out of context. Individually, I meant the best players of Boston are better then the best players of Colorado is what I meant.

 

The Red Sox play in the most competitive division in baseball, that would explain the wins. They would be by far the best team in baseball, it wouldn't even be funny. Look at some of the teams you played in that stretch.

 

Washington, Houston, Pittsburgh, Oakland, San Diego, Arizona, average teams in Milwaukee, Atlanta, Seattle, etc.

 

Good teams they played in this stretch? St. Louis, Tampa Bay, LA Angels, and the Dodgers. In this stretch? 8-6. Cool, that's fairly average. Not to discount the team, because they've played well, but it's not going to continue, and every single non homer Rockie fan is going to tell you that Colorado is no where near the same level as Beantown. You're just making yourself look foolish.

[trutrojan8]

You took my quote out of context. Individually, I meant the best players of Boston are better then the best players of Colorado is what I meant.

 

The Red Sox play in the most competitive division in baseball, that would explain the wins. They would be by far the best team in baseball, it wouldn't even be funny. Look at some of the teams you played in that stretch.

 

Washington, Houston, Pittsburgh, Oakland, San Diego, Arizona, average teams in Milwaukee, Atlanta, Seattle, etc.

 

Good teams they played in this stretch? St. Louis, Tampa Bay, LA Angels, and the Dodgers. In this stretch? 8-6. Cool, that's fairly average. Not to discount the team, because they've played well, but it's not going to continue, and every single non homer Rockie fan is going to tell you that Colorado is no where near the same level as Beantown. You're just making yourself look foolish.

I'm not saying the Rockies are on the same level as the Red Sox. I'm saying, that if you give the Red Sox a 71 million dollar pay roll, that the teams aren't as far apart as you may think.

[EastCoastNiner]

I get the point you are trying to make, but it is dumb beyond belief.

 

It's stupid because I'm not just going to be taking payroll away from the Boston Red Sox, but I'm taking some of their best players away.

 

 

However, even with taking all of the players away from the Boston Red Sox, the are still the superior team, and it's not as close as you would like to think it is.

 

 

The Colorado Rockies play in the worst division in baseball, in the NL.

 

The Boston Red Sox play in the toughest division in baseball, in the AL.

 

 

If you swap the teams and divisions, the Boston Red Sox are running away with the NL West, and the Colorado Rockies are probably sitting in 4th place in the AL East.

[fly3rs18]

I get the point you are trying to make, but it is dumb beyond belief.

It's stupid because I'm not just going to be taking payroll away from the Boston Red Sox, but I'm taking some of their best players away.

 

 

However, even with taking all of the players away from the Boston Red Sox, the are still the superior team, and it's not as close as you would like to think it is.

 

 

The Colorado Rockies play in the worst division in baseball, in the NL.

 

The Boston Red Sox play in the toughest division in baseball, in the AL.

 

 

If you swap the teams and divisions, the Boston Red Sox are running away with the NL West, and the Colorado Rockies are probably sitting in 4th place in the AL East.

 

 

agreed

[EastCoastNiner]

You can try the same thing with the New York Yankees, and I'd love to see what their team looks like.

 

It's just not fair to pose a question like this, even though I understand what you are saying.

[Phightins]

This thread is an absolute joke from top to bottom.

 

If your point is essentially "if baseball had a $70 mil salary cap, the Rockies would be better than the Red Sox", that is bogus because there is no way of proving it. How do you know how the Red Sox would be constructed in such a situation? I mean, congrats to the Rockies for scouting and drafting well, but in today's game that will only take you so far. See: the Florida Marlins.

 

And the statistics you posted barely scratch the surface. Wins, losses, ERA, Ks, AVG, HR, RBI do tell a decent amount about a player, but they are very novice comparison tools. If you really wanted to prove a point, I think you could have dug a bit deeper and found other numbers to support your claim. Also, in baseball (and all sports), numbers only tell part of the story. There is another nifty little tool that can come in handy when evaluating teams: your eyes. You actually have to open them and watch the games some times....the Red Sox are a better team and it is not close, and I'd be willing to bet they'd be better in a salary cap league as well. Money aside, they draft well and run their organization extremely well and there is no reason to think they wouldn't be successful under other conditions. Sorry you wasted your time here, but there is no point here whatsoever.

[EastCoastNiner]

I get his point, and you you actually said what I was trying to say, which is since the Boston Red Sox are one of the teams that has a big payroll, who knows how they would construct their team if they had to cut it down to $70 mil?

 

Again, I understand your point, but the only team losing players is the Boston Red Sox, which is not fair.

 

 

Kyle, lets see what the Colorado Rockies team looks like if you cut their payroll down to $36 mil.

[EastCoastNiner]

Damn, the New York Yankees would need to get rid of $127,449,189 worth of contracts in order to have the same payroll as the Colorado Rockies!

 

I'm looking at their roster and payroll right now, and it would be a [expletive] to get their payroll down to $74 mil.

Edited July 21, 2009 by EastCoastNiner

[Diesel]

lol someones mad the Red Sox own his [expletive]ty team. lol @ evening the pay roll

[fish7718]

This thread is funny . First of rockies play in Colorado in weak us a division in a very hitter friendly ball park. Fenway is hitter friendly but not as much as Coors. Boston plays in one of the most loaded pitching divisions in baseball with 2 of the best teams in baseball. Also your not including defense Boston is loaded with gold glove candidates all over the place.

 

Then your posting the stats of bench players which of course are going to be low because they don't play.

 

STOP CRYING BECAUSE THE ROCKIES FANS DON'T SPEND ENOUGH MONEY AND YOU DON'T HAVE AS MUCH FANS AS THE RED SOX METS OR YANKEES. THESE OWNERS HAVE MONEY THEY JUST DON'T SPEND IT LIKE TEAMS IN NEW YORK.

Edited July 21, 2009 by Fish7718

[fly3rs18]

lmao, trutrojan just got owned by 5 different people. no need for me to even post anything else haha

[trutrojan8]

This thread is funny . First of rockies play in Colorado in weak us a division in a very hitter friendly ball park. Fenway is hitter friendly but not as much as Coors. Boston plays in one of the most loaded pitching divisions in baseball with 2 of the best teams in baseball. Also your not including defense Boston is loaded with gold glove candidates all over the place.

 

Then your posting the stats of bench players which of course are going to be low because they don't play.

 

STOP CRYING BECAUSE THE ROCKIES FANS DON'T SPEND ENOUGH MONEY AND YOU DON'T HAVE AS MUCH FANS AS THE RED SOX METS OR YANKEES. THESE OWNERS HAVE MONEY THEY JUST DON'T SPEND IT LIKE TEAMS IN NEW YORK.

The sad thing is, the Mets may have more fans, but the Rockies have more wins.

 

And weak division?

First place = best record in all of baseball by 4 wins

Second place = Wild card leader

Third place = second in wild card.

 

How exactly is that weak?

[fish7718]

The sad thing is, the Mets may have more fans, but the Rockies have more wins.

 

And weak division?

First place = best record in all of baseball by 4 wins

Second place = Wild card leader

Third place = second in wild card.

 

How exactly is that weak?

Because you get to beat up on 2 of the the worst teams in baseball, anyway you cut it the AL East is the strongest division so it don't matter

[trutrojan8]

Because you get to beat up on 2 of the the worst teams in baseball, anyway you cut it the AL East is the strongest division so it don't matter

Yes the AL East is the strongest division in baseball, but there's no way the NL West is the worst division. 60% of the teams in the NL West would lead the AL Central's division by a couple of games.