New design added to the RAB Shop

Looking Way Ahead: The 2013 Free Agent Class
Soriano turns to an old friend for help

Yesterday we unveiled our new online shop, and we’ll be rolling out some new designs in the coming weeks. I added the Evolution design you see above this afternoon, which was designed by Tyler Wilkinson. Remember, you can customize the color and style of the shirt, or hell, you don’t need to buy a shirt at all. The logo is available on hoodies, clocks, bumper stickers, coffee mugs, tons of stuff. Click through and check it out.

Thanks in advance.

email
Looking Way Ahead: The 2013 Free Agent Class
Soriano turns to an old friend for help
  • Mike Myers

    Thats awesome! haha. Although RBI should be replaced with AVG no?

    • jon

      with a high avg at least youre getting on base

      the only thing an RBI means if youre on a good team

  • jon

    very funny

  • Tom Swift

    There’s something wrong with WAR man.

    • southeryankeefan

      I think it’s just a banana in his pocket.

      • Thomas

        He must really be a fan of fisting.

      • Mike HC

        And RAB man is fully endowed. Props to the guys for adding an inch or two to the probable RAB average.

  • Mister Delaware

    I really don’t like OPS being ahead of OBP.

    • MikeD

      I don’t know if you were serioius, but I was about to write the same thing.

      OPS is a flawed statistic. OBP is not.

      • http://www.riveraveblues.com Mike Axisa

        OBP is not.

        Sure it is. OBP says HBP=BB=1B=2B=3B=HR

        • Guest

          This was a much more succint way to say what I did below.

          Well played, Axisa.

        • Gonzo

          Sorry for the double post, but isn’t that why OPS should be replaced by wOBP?

          • Mister Delaware

            Yes. Another more concise but proper point.

          • Mister Delaware

            RBI OPS VORP WAR RAB

            That would probably be our actual progression.

            • http://twitter.com/TylerWilkinson T-Dubs

              I tried the 4 letter acronyms. The design suffered. Style or substance, m’man.

        • MikeD

          I’m not buying you snake oil, Axisa, but I still might buy a shirt!

        • Sweet Dick Willie

          While it’s true that OBP doesn’t differentiate amongst the various ways of getting on base, it also says the percentage of time you didn’t make an out.

          This is incredibly valuable (despite the propensity of some most managers to give one of their final 3 outs away), as your team is only allotted 27 per game, and to the extent you don’t make one, you “keep the line moving.”

      • Guest

        Yeah, but OPS is a flawed stastic that I think gives you a more complete picture than the less flawed OBP statistic.

        In the end, I think I would take the more comprehensive and less perfect stat than the way less comprehensive but more accurate stat.

        Think about it, based on OBP alone, Brett Gardner had a slightly better year as a hitter in 2010 than Robinson Cano. OPS, while imperfect, is a better indicator of the fact that Robinson Cano did more, as a hitter, to help the Yankees score runs than Brett Gardner did — a fact born out by the differences in their WAR at the plate.

        • Mister Delaware

          But OBP doesn’t mislead what you’re trying to state like OPS does. OBP is saying “how often did X reach base” and, aside from that little sac bunts issue, OBP says just that. OPS is viewed as catch-all hitting stat but its more flawed than it is correct (diff denominators, has the same weighting issues OBP does, SLG’s higher league average and lesser value than OBP is ignored, etc, etc).

          To counter your example: OBP alone just tells you Gardner made outs less often than Cano. That’s valuable knowledge. Take these three guys from 2010 …

          Butler: .318/.388/.469 = .857 OPS
          Heyward: .277/.393/.456 = .849 OPS
          Wells: .285/.331/.515 = .846 OPS

          … ignoring the flaws OBP and OPS share (ignore position, semi-park dependent), I’d argue OPS is even more misleading than your Gardner/Cano example due to the additional sin of masquerading as an all-encompassing offensive stat. Heyward got on base more than Butler and hit for more power but the double counting of singles gives Butler 8 more points. Wells’ 62 point OBP gap is nearly made up by a 59 point SLG gap despite OBP being the more valuable %.

          (Basically, one seems out of place in an evolutionary model. Going OBP -> WAR in terms of “most focused on stat” or OPS -> WAR for “best overall stat” is fine but OBP -> OPS just rubs me the wrong way.)

          (I should have my wife read this so she can reconsider staying with me long term.)

          • Mister Delaware

            (Yes, singles are more valuable than walks/HBP, but not to the extent that OPS valued Butler over Heyward. wOBA gets it right with Heyward at .376 and Butler at .372. 12 point swing in the proper direction.)

          • MikeD

            All of this.

            I’m a longtime fan of sabremetrics, but I don’t buy into certain stats. From the start, I never liked OPS because it is not an improvement over the two stats that comprise it: OBP and SLG. It doesn’t provide greater clarity on the value of a player. OBP and SLG individually will tell me more about a player than will OPS.

            OPS is misleading. Worse, if some believe that OBP and SLG are flawed, then creating another stat from two flawed stats is worse, especially since OPS adds yet even worse flaw in that it treats both OBP and SLG equally. I really could care less if it was eliminated. OPS was not an improvement over OBP.

            • Mister Delaware

              To tweak your point just a little, give me OBP and isoP and I’m pretty sure I’ve got an accurate picture of the guy we’re talking about.

          • Guest

            I don’t disagree with any of your assertions about OPS.

            But if you had just one stat, OBP or OPS, to figure out a hitter–literally no other information was available to you–would you choose OBP over OPS?

            OBP is better at telling the story it tells than OPS. But the part of the story OBP tells is really short, more like a novella.

            Now, I guess if you are looking at stats in the context of the full panoply of stats we have at our disposal, then yes OBP > OPS because it is better at doing its job. You can use the other stats, IsoP, etc., to fill in the blanks.

            Which brings me to my final point in this far too long post:

            The shirt seems to focus on the evolution of the “single stat to which people pay attention” rather than the evolution of the “most accurate stat we have available.”

            The Joe Morgans of the world preached about RBI men, then Moneyball told us the importance of not making out, then the next generation focused on measuring both on base skills and power, we all feel comfortable-ish with WAR now, and RAB readers will be smart enough to keep moving forwards when we are presented with new and better ways to perform analysis.

            And, my Wife would certainly divorce me if she read this post. In a heart beat. (Can’t say I’d blame her *insert emoticon*)

            • Mister Delaware

              “But if you had just one stat, OBP or OPS, to figure out a hitter–literally no other information was available to you–would you choose OBP over OPS?”

              I see what you’re saying, but sabermetrics is about precision. You could get pretty close to the top players by ranking by R+RBI (7 of the top 10 are in the top 12 of wOBA) but that doesn’t make it a good means of measurement. If we know OPS is flawed and that OBP is incomplete but mostly not flawed, I don’t see it as a progression.

  • Esteban

    The shirt is awesome, but at the same time, I would feel like a huge nerd if I actually wore one.

    • Kennesaw Mountain Landis

      the nerds are ruining baseball…

  • Guest

    OPS is flawed, but I think its far worse to give no credence to slugging than to give too much credence to slugging.

  • Rookie

    Since you were so Neanderthal with your analysis of 37-year-old shortstops, here’s a Cro-Magnon version (or do I have that reversed?):

    With apologies in advance for the unreadable formatting, here are the Wins Above Replacement by year for the shortstops you identified in your BaseballReference.com screen for age 37, 38, and 39 (actually including only the ones with 500 or more plate appearances at age 37):

    Player Age 37 WAR Age 38 WAR Age 39 WAR Avg. WAR from age 37-39
    Ozzie Smith 4.3 2.5 1.9 2.9
    Omar Vizquel 3.1 1.9 3.1 2.7
    Maury Wills 0.9 2.0 -1.1 0.6
    Rabbit Maranville 2.3 1.2 0.4 1.3
    Dave Concepcion 0.0 0.3 1.3 0.5
    Larry Bowa 2.7 -1.1 0.1 0.6
    Pee Wee Reese 2.5 0.6 0.2 1.1
    Bill Dahlen -0.2 3.9 0.3 1.3
    Dave Bancroft 0.5 -0.7 -0.2 -0.1
    Average: 1.8 1.2 0.7 1.2

    Avg. WAR per year for the nine:
    At age 37: 1.8
    At age 38: 1.2
    At age 39: 0.7
    For the three years age 37-39: 1.2/year

    If you assume that a win is worth around $4 million, then Jeter has to generate about four wins per year (or a WAR of 4) to get close to earning his contract. Among those nine shortstops above, only two of them generated a WAR of 3.9 or more in ANY season from age 37 to age 39. And those two only averaged a WAR of 2.9 and 1.3, respectively, for their age 37-39 seasons.

    And those nine shortstops with the best seasons of all time (in the past 100 years anyway) averaged a WAR of 1.8 at age 37, 1.2 at age 38, and 0.7 at age 39, and 1.2 per year for their age 37-39 seasons. As I understand it, that would supposedly equate to a value of about $5 million per year in today’s market. So the Yankees are paying Jeter at LEAST $12 million per year for his iconic status — because these are the best of the best.

    It’s ironic then that watching him flounder past his prime is almost certain to sully his iconic status to some degree (even more so given the way he and his agent negotiated his deal and left a sour taste in the mouths of many fans including myself) and diminish the Yankee brand at least a little by hampering the team’s ability to win.

    Gotta hand it to Levine and the Steinbrenners…

    • MikeD

      You mean the Steinbrenners that keep putting a winning team on the field, including delivering a World Series title as recently as 2009?

  • Johnny On The Spot

    Why was “intangibles” left out? Isn’t that what the Yankees re-signed Jeter for?

    • vin

      Or veteran presents?

      • Johnny On The Spot

        Maybe every dollar represents every chick he’s banged in his entire Yankee career.

      • The209

        or presence.

        • Johnny On The Spot

          You missed the joke, grammar police.

  • Mike

    No Radio Show Today????

  • The209

    less busy, more elitism. love it.

  • Gonzo

    OPS should be replaced by wOBP.

    • Gonzo

      I don’t think the “w” would fit though.

  • UncleArgyle

    Just ordered one. F’ing sweet man.

  • thumper

    I think I just about wet myself. That is one cool shirt, so incredibly nerdy.

  • http://twitter.com/astrophunq Dax J.

    I WANT! That’s a really cool shirt. The only problem is that in DR, only a couple of people will know what WAR is. When will you guys start with the memes t-shirts? When’s the “Joba to the 7th” t-shirt coming?

  • YanksFan in MA

    Kind of obnoxious if you ask me. I prefer the Winning is our Business and Business is Good shirts of yesteryear.

    • El Anonimo

      /megadeth’d

  • Pasqua

    Very clever shirt. Makes ya’ laugh. Makes ya’ think. It has a good beat, and you can dance to it.

  • Jarrod

    BEST T-SHIRT EVER! BRILLIANT!!

  • Lupus

    Does this shirt come with a guarantee that if you wear it you will never have sex again?