Orlando Cepeda RIP

I apologize right off the top, I stated above that the opportunity difference between the two was 973 PAs rather than 993. This was just something that I mistyped in the post and it did not flow through any of my calculations (you can doublecheck this and see).

jvett77 said:
First of all, I never said that Cepeda's stats show that he was equivalent to McCovey. McCovey had better stats overall, and Cepeda was not that far off. Their slash numbers show that.
Click to expand...

Are you familiar with Secondary Average? McCovey's SecA is .410 while Cepeda has a SecA of .285. Can you explain/show how you determined that the value gained from 125 points of secondary average is actually "not that far off" from the value in 27 points of batting average? Because while "not that far off" and some of these other terms that we are discussing are a bit subjective I simply can't see it.

jvett77 said:
It's significant that Cepeda's numbers were achieved with 464 fewer games. However, also significant is that McCovey's WAR was 25% greater than Cepeda's, 64 vs 50.
Click to expand...

Why did you use "464 fewer games" rather than "993 fewer PAs" here to describe the gap? Stating it as a 464 game difference seems to be a disingenuous attempt to suggest that the PA difference between the two players is much larger than it actually is. You are also understating McCovey's WAR advantage, it is 28.5 percent. And as I said before, if the PA difference is such a significant factor here why aren't their rates closer than they are?

jvett77 said:
Cepeda .297/.350/.499/.849
McCovey .270/.374/.515/.889
Click to expand...

You really don't need to cut and paste this twice if you're not going to do anything with it or add anything, I read it the first time and we can all read it at bbref or any other site that displays basic stats. But the gap here is bigger than you seem to realize. There are 112 names between McCovey and Cepeda in the career OPS rankings. Once again we are arguing about subjective terms here but I would not describe that as "half a step" (this is also why I included the Garvey info before, to provide some perspective).

jvett77 said:
I actually have looked at it. I said Cepeda with 1,000 more PAs would have been closer to McCovey in both HR, RBI, and BB (near McCovey's 521 HR and but nowhere near his 1,345 BB). With 1,000 more PAs, Cepeda may have reached 450 HR and only 100 more BB, a little more respectful in the power category.
Click to expand...

Can you please tell me how you came up with these estimates? When I used Cepeda's career averages I got 43 more HRs (not 58) and 67 more BBs (not 100) in 993 PAs. As I said before this seemed more than fair to Cepeda given that the reason he had fewer PAs than McCovey was that he washed out of the league at 36. Since both of the totals that I got are significantly smaller than what you suggest I'm just curious how you came up with the numbers that you posted since you say that you "looked at it" and I don't want to think that you are being disingenuous. In fact here's a challenge: if you can find a 993 PA stretch anywhere in Cepeda's career during which he drew 100 BBs I will shut up right now.
 
Last edited:
DragonFromTo said:
I apologize right off the top, I stated above that the opportunity difference between the two was 973 PAs rather than 993. This was just something that I mistyped in the post and it did not flow through any of my calculations (you can doublecheck this and see).



Are you familiar with Secondary Average? McCovey's SecA is .410 while Cepeda has a SecA of .285. Can you explain/show how you determined that the value gained from 125 points of secondary average is actually "not that far off" from the value in 27 points of batting average? Because while "not that far off" and some of these other terms that we are discussing are a bit subjective I simply can't see it.



Why did you use "464 fewer games" rather than "993 fewer PAs" here to describe the gap? Stating it as a 464 game difference seems to be a disingenuous attempt to suggest that the PA difference between the two players is much larger than it actually is. You are also understating McCovey's WAR advantage, it is 28.5 percent. And as I said before, if the PA difference is such a significant factor here why aren't their rates closer than they are?



You really don't need to cut and paste this twice if you're not going to do anything with it or add anything, I read it the first time and we can all read it at bbref or any other site that displays basic stats. But the gap here is bigger than you seem to realize. There are 112 names between McCovey and Cepeda in the career OPS rankings. Once again we are arguing about subjective terms here but I would not describe that as "half a step" (this is also why I included the Garvey info before, to provide some perspective).



Can you please tell me how you came up with these estimates? When I used Cepeda's career averages I got 43 more HRs (not 58) and 67 more BBs (not 100) in 993 PAs. As I said before this seemed more than fair to Cepeda given that the reason he had fewer PAs than McCovey was that he washed out of the league at 36. Since both of the totals that I got are significantly smaller than what you suggest I'm just curious how you came up with the numbers that you posted since you say that you "looked at it" and I don't want to think that you are being disingenuous. In fact here's a challenge: if you can find a 993 PA stretch anywhere in Cepeda's career during which he drew 100 BBs I will shut up right now.
Click to expand...

You're digging and digging when the answers are right in front of you. We already established that McCovey was a half-step or even a full step above Cepeda in performance stats. Good luck.
 
jvett77 said:
You're digging and digging when the answers are right in front of you. We already established that McCovey was a half-step or even a full step above Cepeda in performance stats. Good luck.
Click to expand...

Once again it seems that you are being somewhat disingenuous. Here is what you wrote that I disagreed with.

jvett77 said:
Few are in the class of the greats Mays and Musial. Cepeda was a half step behind McCovey in a similar class.
Cepeda
2,124 games, .297 BA, 2,351 hits, 379 HRs, 1,365 RBI, 50 WAR
McCovey
2,588 games, .270 BA, 2,211 hits, 521 HRs, 1,555 RBI, 64 WAR
Click to expand...

You then backed off that stance a bit here but seemed to still be defending your original statement

jvett77 said:
Half or full step, yeah, with McCovey winning over Cepeda with far more BBs and HRs. They are close based on their slash numbers.

Cepeda .297/.350/.499/.849
McCovey .270/.374/.515/.889
Click to expand...

But I am still disagreeing with the "or". I think that Cepeda is a full step behind McCovey.
 
DragonFromTo said:
But I am still disagreeing with the "or". I think that Cepeda is a full step behind McCovey.
Click to expand...

I can go with that but "the same tier" is where they are with McCovey the better of the two because he has the edge in stats. Neither had 3,000 hits so they're not in the tier of the immortals like Mays. If I were 4 runs behind in the ninth inning with the bases loaded, to pinch hit, I'd call on a .300 power hitter rather than a .270 power hitter. My opinion.
 
I think you guys are looking at it all wrong. If someone were to join a sports message board and wanted a username that combined the names of three Giants and had already picked Mays and Marichal, who would get chosen as the third?
 
jvett77 said:
I can go with that but "the same tier" is where they are with McCovey the better of the two because he has the edge in stats. Neither had 3,000 hits so they're not in the tier of the immortals like Mays. If I were 4 runs behind in the ninth inning with the bases loaded, to pinch hit, I'd call on a .300 power hitter rather than a .270 power hitter. My opinion.
Click to expand...

Over their respective careers how many times did Willie and Cepeda each come to the plate in that situation? You are cherry picking a handful of PAs out of 9,000 PA careers with this.

If it's the 9th inning you only have (at most) three outs left. Willie would be more likely to 1) not use up one of those outs 2) hit a HR and tie the game and 3) not hit into a DP (which is the result that you are really trying to avoid in that situation). I know the point that you are trying to make here but at first glance I'm inclined to say that Willie is probably still the better choice here.

I mean, hypothetically speaking if I were tied with none out and a man on 3rd base I might choose Joe Sewell over Babe Ruth. But Joe Sewell is not close to Babe Ruth as a hitter.
 
DragonFromTo said:
Over their respective careers how many times did Willie and Cepeda each come to the plate in that situation? You are cherry picking a handful of PAs out of 9,000 PA careers with this.

If it's the 9th inning you only have (at most) three outs left. Willie would be more likely to 1) not use up one of those outs 2) hit a HR and tie the game and 3) not hit into a DP (which is the result that you are really trying to avoid in that situation). I know the point that you are trying to make here but at first glance I'm inclined to say that Willie is probably still the better choice here.

I mean, hypothetically speaking if I were tied with none out and a man on 3rd base I might choose Joe Sewell over Babe Ruth. But Joe Sewell is not close to Babe Ruth as a hitter.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with cherry picking in hypotheticals. In this case, the guy with the higher average is my choice regardless of outs. I would prefer an RBI hit over a walk because then you don't depend on the next guys in the lineup. I'll be a great manager some day. BTW, I was looking at HR/AB stats. It's interesting where they fit.

Mark McGuire 10.6 AB/HR
Babe Ruth 11.7 AB/HR
Barry Bonds 12.9 AB/HR
McCovey 15.7 AB/HR
WilieMays 16.5 AB/HR
Cepeda 20.9 AB/HR
 
jvett77 said:
Nothing wrong with cherry picking in hypotheticals. In this case, the guy with the higher average is my choice regardless of outs. I would prefer an RBI hit over a walk because then you don't depend on the next guys in the lineup. I'll be a great manager some day.
Click to expand...

I understood the kind of specific situation that you were trying to set up but you did not really think it through. If you are down by 4 runs and the bases are loaded the "next guys in the lineup" are going to have to find a way to tie up the game for you anyway unless the hit is a HR. A single presumably scores you two runs instead of one. But after that single you will still need two more runs to extend the game and three more runs to win. McCovey is more likely to tie the game with a HR, McCovey is more likely to put the go-ahead run on base by not making an out and McCovey is less likely to hit into a rally-killing DP.

jvett77 said:
BTW, I was looking at HR/AB stats. It's interesting where they fit.

Mark McGuire 10.6 AB/HR
Babe Ruth 11.7 AB/HR
Barry Bonds 12.9 AB/HR
McCovey 15.7 AB/HR
WilieMays 16.5 AB/HR
Cepeda 20.9 AB/HR
Click to expand...

Let's get some perspective here. If we remove active players from the pool here's how they rank overall in AB/HR:

1. McGwire
2. Ruth
3. Bonds
27. McCovey
41. Mays
158. Cepeda
 
jvett77 said:
Nothing wrong with cherry picking in hypotheticals. In this case, the guy with the higher average is my choice regardless of outs. I would prefer an RBI hit over a walk because then you don't depend on the next guys in the lineup. I'll be a great manager some day.
Click to expand...


Shorter and simpler version of what I wrote above... after a walk the tying run will be on first base. After a single the tying run will be on first base. How is the latter situation much better for the team than the former?

Also a minor correction that I just noticed:

"McCovey is more likely to put the go-ahead run on base by not making an out"

Should have been "tying run".
 
Last edited:
DragonFromTo said:
I understood the kind of specific situation that you were trying to set up but you did not really think it through. If you are down by 4 runs and the bases are loaded the "next guys in the lineup" are going to have to find a way to tie up the game for you anyway unless the hit is a HR. A single presumably scores you two runs instead of one. But after that single you will still need two more runs to extend the game and three more runs to win. McCovey is more likely to tie the game with a HR, McCovey is more likely to put the go-ahead run on base by not making an out and McCovey is less likely to hit into a rally-killing DP.



Let's get some perspective here. If we remove active players from the pool here's how they rank overall in AB/HR:

1. McGwire
2. Ruth
3. Bonds
27. McCovey
41. Mays
158. Cepeda
Click to expand...

Very good. Here's how BA rankings look, just for the heck of it. Willie's such a slouch! LOL!

8. Ruth .342
154. Mays .301
201. Bonds .298
213. Cepeda .297
886. McCovey .270
___ McGwire .263 (Ranks end at 1,000)
 
jvett77 said:
Very good. Here's how BA rankings look, just for the heck of it. Willie's such a slouch! LOL!

8. Ruth .342
154. Mays .301
201. Bonds .298
213. Cepeda .297
886. McCovey .270
___ McGwire .263 (Ranks end at 1,000)
Click to expand...

Have I ever posted anything suggesting otherwise?

It's very interesting how you select which things you are going to respond to. I would still like to hear some explanation for why a single is better/more valuable than a walk when you are down by 4 runs in the 9th with the bases loaded and you are the tying run at bat. Or are you backing off of that stance?
 
DragonFromTo said:
Have I ever posted anything suggesting otherwise?

It's very interesting how you select which things you are going to respond to. I would still like to hear some explanation for why a single is better/more valuable than a walk when you are down by 4 runs in the 9th with the bases loaded and you are the tying run at bat. Or are you backing off of that stance?
Click to expand...

I didn't say that exactly. A single vs a walk can drive in two runs and avoids the DP, plus you have two guys in scoring postion. Of course the HR solves it all.
 
jvett77 said:
I didn't say that exactly. A single vs a walk can drive in two runs and avoids the DP, plus you have two guys in scoring postion. Of course the HR solves it all.
Click to expand...


When you say "you have two guys in scoring position" aren't you just repeating the "a single can drive in two runs" point? And as I said, in this specific situation you can't stay alive in the game unless you score four in the inning anyway. You can't really say "The walk is no good because I'm trying to avoid passing the torch to the next batter" and then be singing the praises of a single. If you want to tie it up without having to rely on the next batter then you need a HR.

In the situation that you described the batter himself has to come around and score. So you would want the guy who is more likely to get on base up to bat. And if the on-deck and in-the-hole batters hit like pitchers so you're trying to tie the game now before they bat then you probably want the guy who is more likely to hit a HR. But McCovey is both of these.

And how is "avoids the DP" a reason to favour the single over the walk? A walk is never a DP.
 
DragonFromTo said:
When you say "you have two guys in scoring position" aren't you just repeating the "a single can drive in two runs" point? And as I said, in this specific situation you can't stay alive in the game unless you score four in the inning anyway. You can't really say "The walk is no good because I'm trying to avoid passing the torch to the next batter" and then be singing the praises of a single. If you want to tie it up without having to rely on the next batter then you need a HR.

In the situation that you described the batter himself has to come around and score. So you would want the guy who is more likely to get on base up to bat. And if the on-deck and in-the-hole batters hit like pitchers so you're trying to tie the game now before they bat then you probably want the guy who is more likely to hit a HR. But McCovey is both of these.

And how is "avoids the DP" a reason to favour the single over the walk? A walk is never a DP.
Click to expand...

Obviously, we'd like a HR. But a single or any hit scores more than one run and puts two in scoring position. So a hit is preferred over a walk but a walk is not automatically a disaster.
 
jvett77 said:
Obviously, we'd like a HR. But a single or any hit scores more than one run and puts two in scoring position. So a hit is preferred over a walk but a walk is not automatically a disaster.
Click to expand...

A single is generally better than a walk for all of these reasons, yes. But the thing about this specific situation is that all that really matters here is scoring that 4th run. If you don't score 4 runs in this inning you are going home a loser. With his higher batting average Cepeda might give you a slightly better chance of knocking in those guys in scoring position but he also is a greater risk than McCovey is to make an out (or two) while attempting to knock them in. If you're down by 4 runs and only have 3 (or fewer) outs left I think that the extra OBP (which of course is just "out avoidance") that McCovey will bring to the plate is more important and more valuable (especially since there is also a better chance that McCovey will tie the game with one swing).

That being said there certainly are game situations where Cepeda would be a better choice than McCovey, no doubt about that. I just don't think that the example that you gave is one of them. I wouldn't trade the extra out avoidance ability and HR power that McCovey has just to maybe slightly increase the chances of scoring a couple of runs (when you need 4). Especially when you've already implied that we can't trust the guys coming up to do anything. I mean, if you think that they have little to no chance of knocking McCovey in from first base after he walks how do you think they are going to manage to knock Cepeda in from first base after he singles?
 
Last edited:
I was curious about how the Run Expectancy matrix might value all of this so I took a look at it. I used the 1950-1968 matrix (found here, thank you Tangotiger) because it seemed like the best option of those available.

Here are their respective rates per PA for each basic non-outmaking event. You can check that I did not err significantly by seeing that the totals more or less add up to the player's respective OBPs (I did not bother with sacrifices)

1720062898057.png

I ran each event through the Run Expectancy matrix and got the following values for them

1720062822938.png


If we plug these values in using the players' career event per PA rates we get a RE24 of 0.469 for Cepeda and 0.439 for McCovey. And this is without even subtracting the negative value of the outs (which Cepeda has more of). So McCovey in fact would appear to be a slightly superior choice in this situation if we are just trying to maximize runs.

It is more complicated to figure out which player would give our team a better chance of scoring the 4 (or more) runs that we "need" in the inning but I think that it is safe to conclude that McCovey would be the correct answer there as well even without the exact numbers.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top