Do 'splits' or 'game logs' matter?

[DiMag4Life]

I'm wondering; do they? For example:

One player has a 'good' year. However, his stats are puffed up by one GREAT month, surrounded by five mediocre/average/good months. Sabermetrics reward him with a great year, but in reality, he only had a great month. To a smaller extent, a great month can also be magnified with one great game. I'm not sure what to make of it. Should we put any stock to it?

[Edgartohof]

I'm wondering; do they? For example:

One player has a 'good' year. However, his stats are puffed up by one GREAT month, surrounded by five mediocre/average/good months. Sabermetrics reward him with a great year, but in reality, he only had a great month. To a smaller extent, a great month can also be magnified with one great game. I'm not sure what to make of it. Should we put any stock to it?

Well, for just ONE month to make a year 'good', it has to be AMAZING.

In general, it would take more than 1 great month to make a whole season. A couple months sure, but just one...I'm not so sure about that.

Case in point.

A-Rod had one of the best April's on record, but he also had 2 not so great months thrown into the season (May and July - where he only hit .221 between the two months). But if all the rest were only mediocre, he wouldn't have won the MVP. He was supported by June, August, and September, which were also great months.

So 4 out of 6 months were great...and 2 were not so great (they were okay by most other's standards, but not for him).

[DiMag4Life]

Well, for just ONE month to make a year 'good', it has to be AMAZING.



Not really. Someone can post a 150 OPS+ one month, and could still have a 'good' year as a hitter, even if his OPS+ is 93-95 the other five months.

[Edgartohof]

Not really. Someone can post a 150 OPS+ one month, and could still have a 'good' year as a hitter, even if his OPS+ is 93-95 the other five months.

Okay, here's some quick numbers I just made:

Player A:

April: 150 OPS+, 125 PA (more offense, more PA...)
May: 95 OPS+, 115 PA
June: 95 OPS+, 115 PA
July: 95 OPS+, 115 PA
August: 95 OPS+, 115 PA
September: 95 OPS+, 115 PA

Do you know what you come up with?

A 105 OPS+. Which technically is above average, but not great.

Even if you turn that 1st month to a 200 OPS+ (which is a REALLY great month), and the rest average (100 OPS+), you only come up with a 118 OPS+, which is a marked improvement, but still not "great" (maybe great for a formerly below average hitting infielder, but still not "great" by real hitting standards.

Obviously that one month will have an effect, but not that big of one.

Can you really name me a couple players who had outstanding years, despite only having one good month?

I bet that would be hard to find; for several reasons. If a player is hot enough to have one amazing month, they are probably good enough to have at least one more, if not a couple. Also, injury can't play a part in this equation. If a player has full playing time in a month and plays great, but then has 5 partial months due to injury, the numbers would be skewed.

I'm not saying it would be impossible, but just improbable. If you CAN show me a couple legitimate examples, then I will back down, but until I see them, I will stand where I am at right now.

[fenrir]

I'm wondering; do they? For example:

One player has a 'good' year. However, his stats are puffed up by one GREAT month, surrounded by five mediocre/average/good months. Sabermetrics reward him with a great year, but in reality, he only had a great month. To a smaller extent, a great month can also be magnified with one great game. I'm not sure what to make of it. Should we put any stock to it?

splits matter because a park can make a year look better then it should of been. take a look at larry walker in 1997 as an example.

[Edgartohof]

splits matter because a park can make a year look better then it should of been. take a look at larry walker in 1997 as an example.

You do realize that Walker hit better AWAY from Coors field in '97 don't you?

Or did you just assume he hit worse (like most other years).

Walker 1997:

Home: .384/.460/.703/1.169
Away: .346/.443/.733/1.176

[brett]

I'm wondering; do they? For example:

One player has a 'good' year. However, his stats are puffed up by one GREAT month, surrounded by five mediocre/average/good months. Sabermetrics reward him with a great year, but in reality, he only had a great month. To a smaller extent, a great month can also be magnified with one great game. I'm not sure what to make of it. Should we put any stock to it?

If a player's stats are contentrated in fewer games, he can be less valuable because he is potentially piling on production. It still probably does not radically alter his value though. If a player hit 4 home runs in one game, he would be worth about .85 wins above average in that game alone. That is impossible because a team can only win .5 games above average, but its not like he is picking up 4 wins worth for one game.