THIS PAST SEASON: Frank Thomas v Jason Giambi

[ChrisLDuncan]

Okay who was better offensively last season Giambi or Thomas, now there is a sinister alterior motive behind this post that will be revelaed later ;)

By the way I go Giambi unless someone can sway me otherwise

[Stumanji]

I go Thomas...

I think Giambi probably had it easier in New York than Thomas in Oakland based entirely on the fact that when you have a roster that's that bloated with offensive skill, you're going to get more pitches to hit.

And with more pitches to hit, he had 13 fewer hits and 25 more K's.

Plus, I'm in love with batting average and .270 is sexier than .253.

[GiambiJuice]

giambi 37hr 113rbi .253/.413/.558 OPS+ 154
thomas 39hr 114rbi .270/.381/.545 OPS+ 141

It's close, but giambi was better. Thomas was more valuable though.

[ChrisLDuncan]

Umm...Giambi had a low average but a .410+ OBP Thomas' wasn't even .400, also Giambi had the higher slugging percentage aswell...more power and more patient. Thomas had a higher average but that's it...Giambi was the walk king, he broke down some pitchers.

[GiambiJuice]

Umm...Giambi had a low average but a .410+ OBP Thomas' wasn't even .400, also Giambi had the higher slugging percentage aswell...more power and more patient. Thomas had a higher average but that's it...Giambi was the walk king, he broke down some pitchers.

Umm....I said Giambi was better, but Thomas was more valuable. Thomas wasn't surrounded by stars like Giambi was.

[Old Sweater]

Went Frank Thomas. He like Giambi pulled that nail outta his coffin.

[ChrisLDuncan]

Umm....I said Giambi was better, but Thomas was more valuable. Thomas wasn't surrounded by stars like Giambi was.

Didn't disagree with you, just those who voted Thomas...Thomas was more valuable but Giambi is (was) the better hitter

[FatAngel]

I´m undecided.
I don´t think Giambi would have superior numbers if he had to play in the Coliseum.
On the road he was .387/.515 batting .233 .
Thomas´numbers were depressed by his home park, his road numbers are clearly superior to Giambi´s.

[hudsonharden]

Call it a homer pick, but I had to go with Thomas. I love both of these guys for what they did in Oakland, and although Giambi scored more runs than Frank did, he also had much better hitting around him. Thomas was the standout player on the Athletics and basically carried them into the playoffs. His offense meant more to his team than did Giambi's, if that means anything to anyone.

[Colorado Express]

I'll take the Big Hurt. Thomas' numbers were better considering the lineup and support around him.

[KCGHOST]

Giambi had the better year by a modest margin.

[GiambiJuice]

Based on their salaries, Thomas was about 40 times more valuable than Giambi

2006 Salaries

Giambi $20,428,571
Thomas $500,000

[hellborn]

Big Hurt's road numbers were quite a bit better than Giambi's. Jason was also an afterthought of sorts in the Yankee lineup, not that that's exactly his fault. I've gotta go with the gimp on this one.
I'm probably not objective because I'm so tired of watching Jason hit those towering flies JUST over the RF fence in Yankee...

[ChrisLDuncan]

Wow strange to see this hughe Thomas bonus even though that Giambi had a far higher OBP and a higher PARK ADJUSTED OPS+

[dl4060]

I have to think there is alot of lingering Giambi hatred because of the roids thing. They were close, but I don't think Thomas quite matched up. Per dollar value would be very different.

[EvanAparra]

Wow strange to see this hughe Thomas bonus even though that Giambi had a far higher OBP and a higher PARK ADJUSTED OPS+

Hurt's offense was much more needed in Oakland than Giambi's in NY imo, which is why I voted for Thomas.

[ChrisLDuncan]

Hurt's offense was much more needed in Oakland than Giambi's in NY imo, which is why I voted for Thomas.


Hey that's cool, put that aside though...who was the better offensive player in your views?

[cardsfanatic]

It's amazing how many people are using _VALUE_ to answer this poll when the creator clearly asked who was the better offensive player -- not most valuable to his team, mind you. One could even argue that when the Yankees were going three ways to badsville in the early part of the season, that offensively, Giambi and Jeter carried that team. But that's neither here nor there given the topic.

Just going by offensive prowess this year and not factoring in anything else... Giambi was the better offensive player. While the gap isn't huge it's certainly an easy call.

[plask_stirlac]

Yeah I would have to say Giambi hit better and that's really all we have with this two, so he played better. Fewer outs, more XBHs.

[hellborn]

Wow strange to see this hughe Thomas bonus even though that Giambi had a far higher OBP and a higher PARK ADJUSTED OPS+
Hurt's OPS was .958 on the road, Giambi's was .903. Hurt was just about .900 at home, Giambi was over 1.000. I think that Giambi's style just matches Yankee well, it's not like he's made any special adjustments as a lefty power pull hitter who lofts the ball a lot to adjust to Yankee. Most lefty power hitters are going to do better in Yankee. Based on this, I think that Thomas was a better AND more valuable hitter.
I understand that home/road splits for a given player will vary wildly from year to year, but also feel that generic park effects analyses can be misleading when applied to individual players. I prefer to make my judgment on the raw player home/road data.
I'm actually not too fond of Thomas as a player, so I hope that my dislike for Giambi is not coloring this too much.

[EvanAparra]

It's amazing how many people are using _VALUE_ to answer this poll when the creator clearly asked who was the better offensive player -- not most valuable to his team, mind you. One could even argue that when the Yankees were going three ways to badsville in the early part of the season, that offensively, Giambi and Jeter carried that team. But that's neither here nor there given the topic.

Just going by offensive prowess this year and not factoring in anything else... Giambi was the better offensive player. While the gap isn't huge it's certainly an easy call.

Its amazing that you think that 5 out of 30 voters using value is amazing to you. When it comes down to it, value is the only thing that matters, not who the better 'offensive' player was. I'll vote the way I please.

To answer Chris, who wasn't a jerk in his response --- Giambi was the better offensive player, even though the road splits say Hurt was better. I'm not a big fan of splits.

[cardsfanatic]

Its amazing that you think that 5 out of 30 voters using value is amazing to you. When it comes down to it, value is the only thing that matters, not who the better 'offensive' player was. I'll vote the way I please.


Heh, when the _question being asked_ isn't about _value_ but about who the better offensive player is, then, eh... whatever. There's so few straight shooters in the world anymore. It must be too hard to be asked a direct question and give a direct answer... instead, you gotta dance around it and change the question to what you want it to be.

[sopclod]

Heh, when the _question being asked_ isn't about _value_ but about who the better offensive player is, then, eh... whatever. There's so few straight shooters in the world anymore. It must be too hard to be asked a direct question and give a direct answer... instead, you gotta dance around it and change the question to what you want it to be.

I was just going to say the same thing, everyone is ignoring the question that was actually asked. Oh well, don't post a poll like this again.

[EvanAparra]

And there's always people that will cry about it too. I guess that's the new definition of straight shooter. Best offensively.... if Thomas' offense was worth more than Giambi's then how isn't he better offensively? That's the way I see it.

[cardsfanatic]

And there's always people that will cry about it too. I guess that's the new definition of straight shooter. Best offensively.... if Thomas' offense was worth more than Giambi's then how isn't he better offensively? That's the way I see it.

Well, if you take a team that has their best hitter who hit .275 with 18 HR and 80 RBI with a .340 OBP but it was double that of their next best player, and compared him to a player with a line os .300/25/100 with a .375 OBP but his team was loaded with players better than him, then by your logic the .275/18/80 guy is better because his _team_ was worse and he was more valuable to them? Yeah, go you!

If you switch them out and put Giambi in Oakland and Thomas in New York last year then... hey, hey! Giambi is more "valuable". Big whoop. That's not the question being asked because value is all relative. A good player on a team with fewer of them will alway be more valuable to _his_ team but that doesn't mean he's more valuable to _all_ teams. Use value judgements for the MVP but if you're going to base talent assessments on value then my gosh, I wish I was a real GM and you were too... in my division.

[EvanAparra]

Well, if you take a team that has their best hitter who hit .275 with 18 HR and 80 RBI with a .340 OBP but it was double that of their next best player, and compared him to a player with a line os .300/25/100 with a .375 OBP but his team was loaded with players better than him, then by your logic the .275/18/80 guy is better because his _team_ was worse and he was more valuable to them? Yeah, go you!

If you switch them out and put Giambi in Oakland and Thomas in New York last year then... hey, hey! Giambi is more "valuable". Big whoop. That's not the question being asked because value is all relative. A good player on a team with fewer of them will alway be more valuable to _his_ team but that doesn't mean he's more valuable to _all_ teams. Use value judgements for the MVP but if you're going to base talent assessments on value then my gosh, I wish I was a real GM and you were too... in my division.

Hm... quite the hyperbole. Nice job. :rolleyes:

Yes, value is a 'big whoop'. I dont see anywhere where I said Thomas was more talented than Giambi, so what are you talking about there? Take a deep breath and then give me a nice long unnecessary response.

[cardsfanatic]

Hm... quite the hyperbole. Nice job. :rolleyes:


Well, hyperbole is common practice when trying to prove something is stupid. You want to factor in a team to decipher how good two players are. When comparing players their teams and value to said teams should not matter.



Take a deep breath and then give me a nice long unnecessary response.

Heh, yes, because on the internet anything with more thought put into it than "haha, kewl d00derz" is obviously unnecessary.

[-Kyle-]

The question asked:

"Who was better offensivly last year?"

Break it down simple.
Giambi was a better offensive player, the stats show. Those stats correlate with more runs then Thomas. Who is more valuble was not really a question imo.

[hellborn]

I was just going to say the same thing, everyone is ignoring the question that was actually asked. Oh well, don't post a poll like this again.
I said that I thought that Thomas was better (and more valuable) because his numbers were better than Giambi's in neutral parks. A simple park effects analysis is not going to account for Yankee being tough on righties and forgiving to lefties. Oakland is not as bad as it used to be, but it is still a tough hitter's park. Giambi put up good numbers there years ago, but I don't think he would do so anymore with his eroded skills...of course, Thomas isn't what he used to be, either. I guess I might actually give Giambi a slight edge for baserunning, since Frank can barely even run, but Jason is still so comically inept on the bases (and in the field) that it doesn't mean much of anything.
I answered the question, and backed up my analysis, and the Giambuddies whine that their guy was really better and everybody else can't understand the numbers. Do some frickin homework and come up with some real arguments...or, put up or shut up!!! :grouchy

[Sliding Billy]

I said that I thought that Thomas was better (and more valuable) because his numbers were better than Giambi's in neutral parks. A simple park effects analysis is not going to account for Yankee being tough on righties and forgiving to lefties. Oakland is not as bad as it used to be, but it is still a tough hitter's park.
Still, Giambi's home lefty advantage was a real advantage that put real runs on the board and led to real wins for his team. Here's the best I can do for team home road splits:


HOME: RUNS ERA
NY 450 3.96
OAK 372 3.96

AWAY:
NY 480 4.98
OAK 399 4.47
Obviously, like the Yankees in general, Giambi's offensive road production was worth a lot less than his home production, but his home production was worth an awful lot. I don't see the equity in just tossing it, though I can see its predictive value if, say, you were the Oakland GM and considering a trade.

[hellborn]

Still, Giambi's home lefty advantage was a real advantage that put real runs on the board and led to real wins for his team. Here's the best I can do for team home road splits:


HOME: RUNS ERA
NY 450 3.96
OAK 372 3.96

AWAY:
NY 480 4.98
OAK 399 4.47
Obviously, like the Yankees in general, Giambi's offensive road production was worth a lot less than his home production, but his home production was worth an awful lot. I don't see the equity in just tossing it, though I can see its predictive value if, say, you were the Oakland GM and considering a trade.
A real answer...I like it!!!
You have a good point that Giambi's ability to produce in his home park resulted in real wins for his team, especially given that scoring overall was lower at home for the Yanks. I assume that what righties lose more than make up for what lefties gain there, I would like to try to find a LH/RH hitter breakdown for Yankee last year. I am trying to compare the two hitters in a neutral context, but not quite in the way I would if I were thinking about trading them...Hurt would probably lose more in Yankee than Jason would in Oakland. Trading them for each other might result is lower production for both teams.
So, to clarify, I see Thomas as being the better hitter in a "neutral" park. I guess I should give Giambi some credit for producing a lot of runs in a park that isn't increasing overall scoring. I just feel obligated to look at things this way to avoid saying things like Bichette, Galarraga, and Walker were the top hitters of the '90s because their "numbers" were so good.

[-Kyle-]

I answered the question, and backed up my analysis, and the Giambuddies whine that their guy was really better and everybody else can't understand the numbers. Do some frickin homework and come up with some real arguments...or, put up or shut up!!! :grouchy
I hope that's not directed to me, I dislike Giambi as well, being a Rsox fan.

[RoyallyWise]

And there's always people that will cry about it too. I guess that's the new definition of straight shooter. Best offensively.... if Thomas' offense was worth more than Giambi's then how isn't he better offensively? That's the way I see it.

That makes no sense, just so you know.

If Sam Bowie was picked ahead of Jordan, you cant say Jordan was a higher draft pic because he was worth more at his pick. Facts are facts, you cant implement worth just to appease your taste. Yeah you have the freedom to do what you want, its a poll...your just skewing it.

[EvanAparra]

That makes no sense, just so you know.

If Sam Bowie was picked ahead of Jordan, you cant say Jordan was a higher draft pic because he was worth more at his pick. Facts are facts, you cant implement worth just to appease your taste. Yeah you have the freedom to do what you want, its a poll...your just skewing it.

What the heck are you talking about? You're helping me make my case, btw. In the end, Jordan was more valuable than Bowie, even if he wasnt picked before him.

[EvanAparra]

A real answer...I like it!!!
You have a good point that Giambi's ability to produce in his home park resulted in real wins for his team, especially given that scoring overall was lower at home for the Yanks. I assume that what righties lose more than make up for what lefties gain there, I would like to try to find a LH/RH hitter breakdown for Yankee last year. I am trying to compare the two hitters in a neutral context, but not quite in the way I would if I were thinking about trading them...Hurt would probably lose more in Yankee than Jason would in Oakland. Trading them for each other might result is lower production for both teams.
So, to clarify, I see Thomas as being the better hitter in a "neutral" park. I guess I should give Giambi some credit for producing a lot of runs in a park that isn't increasing overall scoring. I just feel obligated to look at things this way to avoid saying things like Bichette, Galarraga, and Walker were the top hitters of the '90s because their "numbers" were so good.

Bingo. Or I guess Garret Atkins numbers should be taken at face value? Giambi was heavily helped by his home park, more than the average player, and that isn't shown in OPS+. I dont really like splits, but when you look at both of these guys, you have to take them into consideration. That being said, both these teams were smart to get these players, they both fit in well in their stadiums. Hurt's offense was worth more, IMO, to the A's and in his own stadium than Giambi's was with the Yanks in Yankee stadium. I dont care about either player, I actually might like Giambi a little more, but of course people will use that excuse instead of real reasoning like i'm trying to do.

[EvanAparra]

Giambi home - .274/.437/.601
Giambi away - .233/.387/.516

Thomas home - .242/.347/.549
Thomas away - .302/.417/.541

That's a ridiculous difference. I won't ignore it. Giambi was heavily helped by his stadium, Thomas dramatically hurt.

[hellborn]

I hope that's not directed to me, I dislike Giambi as well, being a Rsox fan.
Not really directed at anybody in particular...just thought that it was a little funny and irritating that "nobody" was answering the question when I felt I clearly was. Thought maybe I could get people inspired to put a little more into their posts than "Giambi was better". If I was really upset and wanted to start a fight, I wouldn't put a silly smiley thing at the end. :D

Anybody who is a Bosox fan and likes the Clash is OK with me, Kyle. Ever listen to Joe Strummer's "Earthquake Weather"? Or see him in "Mystery Train"?

[RoyallyWise]

What the heck are you talking about? You're helping me make my case, btw. In the end, Jordan was more valuable than Bowie, even if he wasnt picked before him.

No man, the question was who was the higher draft pick not who was the better player. Just like its who had a better batting year not who was worth the buck and more valuable to his team.

[EvanAparra]

No man, the question was who was the higher draft pick not who was the better player. Just like its who had a better batting year not who was worth the buck and more valuable to his team.

And given what I and Hellborn have both said I still think Thomas had a better year offensively. AND he was more valuable to his team. Is that ok?

[hellborn]

Okay who was better offensively last season Giambi or Thomas, now there is a sinister alterior motive behind this post that will be revelaed later ;)

By the way I go Giambi unless someone can sway me otherwise

OK, what was the ulterior motive?!?!??
I think that you are an agent and looking for arguments to help one of your clients.... :laugh

[cardsfanatic]

I never liked stadium/park factors. Let's just take a for instance. During their early years before the Astrodome was vacated for Minute Maid, Jeff Bagwell and Craig Biggio both hit better in the Astrodome than they did on the road. So, does that debunk the myth that the Astrodome was a pitcher's park? I mean, how on earth could two people hit better in the Astrodome than they did on the road when it was such a "run suppresor"? Or does it just mean that they were more comfortable at home? Or, does it mean that park factors are a bunch of garbage? Not to mention Soriano was supposed to struggle in RFK when people kept quoting park factors and what resulted was his best season to date. Call me skeptical on a park really having that big of an effect on a players performance, unless of course it's Coors where there's an actual geographical and atmospheric reason why it plays so different. The park itself isn't the factor in that instance. It's the plot of land the park is resting on.

There's no doubt that certain parks play differently than other's -- ie, the Monster in Fenway plays different than any other left field. But I think in most instances the effect is neglible on a year long sample size of stats. I think it mostly rests on the hitter/pitcher and their comfort levels.

Perhaps Giambi just liked playing at home better -- I personally always did. No travel, no checking in and checking out. No going to the park on 4 hours of rest after being jet lagged. Get to sleep in your own bed, be around your family and friends and eat home cooked meals. And perhaps Thomas can better adapt to a travel schedule? Perhaps it doesn't bother him as much? Plus, another thing that needs to be considered, is that he probably wasn't as comfortable in his _new_ confines as Giambi was in a park he's been playing in for six years.

EDIT: Perhaps you need to take a look at Giambi's career splits and how he nit in Networks while he played there. He mopped up. He's always been a better home player than road player. Even when hitting in Oakland. In fact, he hit better in Network Associates than any other park he's ever hit in. http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bsplit.cgi?n1=giambja01&year=00

[EvanAparra]

EDIT: Perhaps you need to take a look at Giambi's career splits and how he nit in Networks while he played there. He mopped up. He's always been a better home player than road player. Even when hitting in Oakland. In fact, he hit better in Network Associates than any other park he's ever hit in. http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bsplit.cgi?n1=giambja01&year=00

That's because Networks kills RIGHT HANDED hitters. Look at Miguel Tejada's splits.. His BA is much better on the road, just like other right handers Frank Thomas, Ramon Hernandez, and Jason Kendall ... now look at Giambi who had a much better BA at Networks, just like other left handers Eric Chavez, Mark Kotsay,

[Kevin Nix]

First let me say that Frank Thomas deserved this. He was dissed by his organization in a terrible way. The face of the Whitesox franchise is left off of the playoff roster by peers who played with him and were jealous of the attention he received. It was nice to see a healthy Frank stick it to his old mates and carry a team through the playoffs. Giambi's story is nice for the way he produced off the juice. I like the future HOFer's story better. Too bad the Tigers didn't pick him up in the off season. The Chisox's loss was the A's gain and now the Jay's. The Big hurt goes multinational!

[hellborn]

I never liked stadium/park factors. Let's just take a for instance. During their early years before the Astrodome was vacated for Minute Maid, Jeff Bagwell and Craig Biggio both hit better in the Astrodome than they did on the road. So, does that debunk the myth that the Astrodome was a pitcher's park? I mean, how on earth could two people hit better in the Astrodome than they did on the road when it was such a "run suppresor"? Or does it just mean that they were more comfortable at home? Or, does it mean that park factors are a bunch of garbage? Not to mention Soriano was supposed to struggle in RFK when people kept quoting park factors and what resulted was his best season to date. Call me skeptical on a park really having that big of an effect on a players performance, unless of course it's Coors where there's an actual geographical and atmospheric reason why it plays so different. The park itself isn't the factor in that instance. It's the plot of land the park is resting on.

There's no doubt that certain parks play differently than other's -- ie, the Monster in Fenway plays different than any other left field. But I think in most instances the effect is neglible on a year long sample size of stats. I think it mostly rests on the hitter/pitcher and their comfort levels.

Perhaps Giambi just liked playing at home better -- I personally always did. No travel, no checking in and checking out. No going to the park on 4 hours of rest after being jet lagged. Get to sleep in your own bed, be around your family and friends and eat home cooked meals. And perhaps Thomas can better adapt to a travel schedule? Perhaps it doesn't bother him as much? Plus, another thing that needs to be considered, is that he probably wasn't as comfortable in his _new_ confines as Giambi was in a park he's been playing in for six years.

EDIT: Perhaps you need to take a look at Giambi's career splits and how he nit in Networks while he played there. He mopped up. He's always been a better home player than road player. Even when hitting in Oakland. In fact, he hit better in Network Associates than any other park he's ever hit in. http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bsplit.cgi?n1=giambja01&year=00
You make a lot of interesting points, but I just can't buy into the idea that park effects are bogus except for extreme cases like Coors. There are mountains of evidence that parks like Griffith Stadium, old Yankee for RHs, Wrigley Field, Forbes Field, and Astrodome had serious effects on player's stats. Of course, parks can change...I believe that the fences were changed significantly in the Astrodome around the late '80s, Busch I had its fences brought in after Herzog's string of defense-oriented teams, Oakland changed somewhat after it was refurbished for the Raiders.
But, a simple analysis is never going to tell the whole story. Why did Giambi hit well in Oakland? Well, it isn't as bad a hitter's park since the renovations, and maybe lefties do like it there more (although Swisher didn't hit especially well there)...but my best answer is probably, gee, I don't know, that's weird. It really hasn't been his favorite park, though, he has reasonable numbers of PAs in Safeco, Kaufman, and Ameriquest with higher OPS results.
But, I agree that there certainly can be emotional and physical reasons why some players excel in certain parks that do not fit in with the general trends, and we may see that in Giambi. I think that Wade Boggs had a remarkable ability to pop the ball off the Monster that gave him a bigger home advantage than most lefties in Fenway, and McGwire fed off the love of the Cards fans to put up big numbers in Busch I (which was not quite the same park that McGee and Coleman were zipping around in 10 years earlier). I don't think that you can really hold this against them totally in evaluating them.
I tried to look at the question of evaluating these two players somewhat below the surface level of their raw numbers, well aware that looking at home/road splits for one year may be misleading, but the question was about one season...player's stats can vary dramatically from one year to the next without necessarily having clear reasons for why, but we still talk about players being good one year and bad the next. I tried to make my best conclusion from the numbers I chose to work with, but I can't say that you're wrong in saying that my approach is flawed and I could do more research and get a more meaningful answer.

You mention that you liked playing at home...sounds like you were a pro. Care to give us any more information?

[mtortolero]

Hurt's OPS was .958 on the road, Giambi's was .903. Hurt was just about .900 at home, Giambi was over 1.000. I think that Giambi's style just matches Yankee well, it's not like he's made any special adjustments as a lefty power pull hitter who lofts the ball a lot to adjust to Yankee. Most lefty power hitters are going to do better in Yankee. Based on this, I think that Thomas was a better AND more valuable hitter.
I understand that home/road splits for a given player will vary wildly from year to year, but also feel that generic park effects analyses can be misleading when applied to individual players. I prefer to make my judgment on the raw player home/road data.
I'm actually not too fond of Thomas as a player, so I hope that my dislike for Giambi is not coloring this too much.

Giambi was better player in any kind of splits (left/right, clutch stats, risp) excepting Home/Road.
The problem is that those other kind of splits are subject to change depending your homefield.
Thomas had a handicap playing in the Mausoleum all the season and that is why I feel he has a better ofensive year. But Giambi´s season was very underrated because his lower average. I would like to see a season of any of this two guys in a funny hitters paradise as Fenway or Coors.

[Sliding Billy]

Giambi was better player in any kind of splits (left/right, clutch stats, risp) excepting Home/Road.
The problem is that those other kind of splits are subject to change depending your homefield.
Thomas had a handicap playing in the Mausoleum all the season and that is why I feel he has a better ofensive year. But Giambi´s season was very underrated because his lower average. I would like to see a season of any of this two guys in a funny hitters paradise as Fenway or Coors.
If Giambi is a dead-pull hitting lefty, I don't think Fenway would do him any favors.

[cardsfanatic]

You mention that you liked playing at home...sounds like you were a pro. Care to give us any more information?

Actually, no, I was not a pro. I played in college which is where I drew my reference from. I can only imagine a pro schedule would be even more draining while on the road.

[Beastay]

I never liked stadium/park factors. Let's just take a for instance. During their early years before the Astrodome was vacated for Minute Maid, Jeff Bagwell and Craig Biggio both hit better in the Astrodome than they did on the road. So, does that debunk the myth that the Astrodome was a pitcher's park? I mean, how on earth could two people hit better in the Astrodome than they did on the road when it was such a "run suppresor"?

The Astrodome of the 90's-2000's is a far cry from the Astrodome of the 1960's-80's.

The Astrodome got its bad rep back in the day based on the first few years it wasn't just not easy to hit, but it was IMPOSSIBLE.

When the A-Dome was first built, the dome was semi-transparent so grass could grow inside. They realized quickly that the glare caused by the tarnsparent roof reflections made it not only impossible to hit, but impossible to field as well. So guys were getting on base by errors as much as by hits.

Not only that, but home plate was much farther back than it was in its recent years, and there were seats in center field (imagine having to hit a ball coming out of a sea of those seats). Foul territory was huge, and guys like Joe Morgan were hitting below the Mendoza line.

Anyhow, after about a year or two, they got tired of the team leader hitting .220, and decided to paint the transparent roof to make it solid and kill the refelction problem. This also Killed the grass, so all the grass died, and the field turned to mud. This prompted them to start using "Astroturf" (that's where it got its name). Except they didn't have it down yet. For about 15 years the turf was too loose on the infield and any ball that was hit on it would lose speed, robbing hitters of hits (most parks with artificial turf had the opposite problem). For some reason, the turf on the outfield was like concrete, (maybe the dried mud underneath didn't help) and any ball that dropped in out there would move even faster, so good players like Jose Cruz would learn how to stop guys from taking extra bases as the ball would get to them quicker in the outfield.

I'm not sure what years changes happened, but they gradually started to fix things. The center field seats were painted one year and those seats were cordoned off. Home plate was moved up and the fences were moved in (this helped the home runs and the foul territory problem). They put in better turf in the late 1980's or early 1990's, and reconditioned the field so that it played more true.

It was still not the best hitter's park, but in its recent years (for most of Biggio and Bagwell's careers) it was within the realm of normalcy.

It wasn't like back in the day when Jimmy Wynn would hit a 400 foot blast to right-right center and it would be caught before the guy got to the warning track.

To answer the topic of the thread, as a Yankee fan who watches Giambi regularly, he did play better last year than he has, but there's something about him where he is not a consistently focused hitter. He also makes the Big Hurt look like Hal Chase in the field. I'd take Thomas in a heartbeat.

[EdmondsFan#1]

Batting wise, that's a hard one, but I voted for Frank Thomas.

What I do know, is that Frank Thomas has struck out much less in 20 more AB's. Who cares if Jason Giambi has a slightly better RBI/AB ratio and HR/AB ratio. Of course Jason Giambi is going to get more RBI's then Frank Thomas, Jason Giambi is being backed up by the best lineup a power hitter could want. I also know, that Jason Giambi has a lower BA. Giambi might have more Runs scored then Frank Thomas, but again, look at the lineup he is being backed up by.

But, a player should definetly not be judged by only offense. Frank Thomas is a better defensive first basemen then Giambi. And, Frank Thomas is more clutch the Giambi.

Here are the stats from the ALDS (because that's all Yankees got to):

Frank Thomas:

BA: .500 ; OBP: .583 ; SLG: 1.200 ; HR: 2 ; BB: 2 ; Extra-base hits: 1 ; H: 5 ; AB: 10

Jason Giambi

BA: .125 ; OBP: .300 ; SLG: .500 ; HR: 1 ; BB: 2 ; Extra-base hits: 0 ; H: 1 ; AB: 8


Also, besides statistical reference if I was a manager I would rather want Frank Thomas on my team, anyday.

[FatAngel]

I understand that home/road splits for a given player will vary wildly from year to year, but also feel that generic park effects analyses can be misleading when applied to individual players.

I second that. Park factors should be split into two categories for lefthanded and righthanded hitters. Without having actual data, I speculate that Yankee stadium´s park factor is too low, because of the right-handers suffering from the left field cavern, although it is not "Dead Valley" anymore since the renovation.
As it has already been said, I think Giambi benefitted more playing in Yankee Stadium than its park factor might suggest.

Giambi became a pull hitter since he´s off steroids. Before, he was more of a spray hitter. In my opinion that´s the reason why he hit reasonably well in Oakland, but now he isn´t strong enough anymore to have the same success hitting the ball to center or even right.
His Avg. will never be .300 again, maybe not even 280. That´s the price you pay for trying to pull everything and being past your prime - and not having Ted Williams´ vision :D.
(I´m very interested how Ortiz will fare in the last years of his contract).

And no, I´m not biased against Giambi, I even liked him when he was in Oakland :).

[billyisgone14]

Thomas gets my vote because in a lineup starving for a hitter he was the guy. Plus, Thomas i think is a little better at making contact consistently than Giambi is now. Both had pretty good seasons overall but i just think Thomas has a better understanding of hitting. That's more because he's a pure hitter and if you look back over his long career he's always been so solid at getting on base. This year Thomas will have Glaus and Overbay behind him, i pray pitchers try and pitch to Thomas because they want no part of Glaus and Overbay because Thomas is going to make some of those guys cry on the mound.