Rox Talk - Holliday and Offensive HOKE

Holliday Gone...

In a trade with the Oakland A's, the Roxs finally part ways with Holliday and in return get 23 year old outfielder Carlos Gonzalez, 24 year old left hand pitcher Greg Smith, and 25 right hand reliever Huston Street. After last week, it became apparent that Holliday had no desire to re-sign with the Roxs and due to the fighting words between management and Holliday any sort of leverage the Roxs might have kind of faded away. I think this was a better trade for what the Cardinals were offering but youth is always tricky and you have to think why Mr Moneyball gave away these players. The key to this trade had to be Street has a back up to Corpas and set up man. Smith becomes another log jam pitcher for the 4th and 5th spot in the rotation. Gonzalez is a young star that is probably iffy. I for one am not disappointed by Holliday's departure...see post here.

I think Holliday is one of those players simply out for the contract. And that is ok. I can't begrudge a person with the ability to hit a little ball who wants to go for the gusto. That is part of baseball but in this case I would say be careful what you wish for because you aren't always guaranteed the limelight...you might get traded to a team with no more upside then the team you are leaving. With the Angels in the AL West, I just don't see Holliday going to anymore playoffs then hanging out with the Roxs. The interesting question is what did Mr Moneyball see in this deal? Certainly he doesn't have the long-term cash...but perhaps he see Holliday as a 2009 trade deadline bonaza to a team like the Yankees who want to win now and will give up the moon and stars to get another bat (?). Have fun in Oakland Matt and thanks for the "Slide"...you will always be a Rox Star in Denver.

2008 Offensive Hoke

In last week's post on the Rox, I went through a study to find the total bases that a player got when counting their RBIs. In earlier studies, I simply picked a number which I estimated to be around 2. In determining my "Hoke" I established the formula of:

Total Bases (1B, 2B, 3B, HR) + RBI (minus HR) * RBI base factor (see last week's post) + Hit By Pitch + Walk + Stolen Base - Caught Stealing - Double Plays - Field Errors = HOKE

Note: One thing the above formula doesn't take into account is bases that a player moves up but doesn't account for an RBI. Also although we add total bases for an RBI we are not taking bases away if the player doesn't get a hit when a runner is in scoring position.

An additional step was that I took the MLB Hoke and divided this number of possible HOKE (Total Plate Appearances x 4 bases). This percentage (15.1%) became 100 and then I scored each of the players to get a HOKE+ number which makes 100 average. So for instance Holliday had 501 HOKE and 623 plate appearances (or 2,492 possible HOKE) which gave him a percentage of 20.1% or 135 HOKE+. See the chart below for this year's offensive prowness (compared to last year's). HOKE, followed by HOKE (or base) per plate appearance, HOKE+, RC or Runs Created, WPA, and WS or Win Shares (a win is worth 3 win shares).

In regards to Matt's trade and Atkins impending trade it is going to be tough to lose 931 bases (or 36 win shares...that is 12 wins!).

Postscript: In googling Travis Hoke, I came across this article. Written by the man himself he does have an interesting thing to say about his counting of bases, "I had realized by then that it was not accurate to credit a hitter with one unit for each base, because all bases are not equally important. It is more than twice as valuable to the team, for instance, to hit a double than a single, because a man on second is in position to score on a following single. It is more valuable to hit safely with a man on second that with one on first, and there should be recognition of the difference, in the figures. So I had revised the system to fit. If a man singled with the bases empty he was credited with one—from home to first counted one base—but from first to second counted two bases, so that if he doubled he received credit for three, not two bases. A triple got him six bases, and so on. A home run with the bases empty meant ten out of a possible ten bases." So it would appear that Hoke had his doubts about the simplicity of the system. I think a base is a base. People with more bases tend to be better players so I'm sticking with it. As Hoke says this game is called baseball and thus the base in its singularity is the ultimate essence of what it means to play this game...the offensive tries to get them and the pitcher tries to prevent them! Doesn't it make sense to have a stat that compares apples to apples...not week I will throw up the Pitching HOKE....