Chris Davis Baltimore Orioles

Age: 35 (March 17, 1986) | 6' 3" | 245lbs. | Bats: Left 1B-15 PH-1
BAL A 2017 1 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 25 0.00 n/a
BAL A+ 2017 1 4 1 1 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 .250 .400 .500 20 40 .500 n/a
BAL AL 2017 128 456 65 98 61 195 15 1 26 61 1 1 .215 .309 .423 12 37 .301 37/23/40 9 10
BAL AL 2018 128 470 40 79 41 192 12 0 16 49 2 0 .168 .243 .296 8 37 .237 40/21/39 -0 0
BAL AL 2019 105 307 26 55 39 139 9 0 12 36 0 0 .179 .276 .326 11 39 .270 38/23/39 -0 0
BAL AL 2020 16 52 3 6 3 17 3 0 0 1 0 0 .115 .164 .173 5 31 .171 49/20/31 -6 -4
BAL AL 2021 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 n/a 0 0
Career 14yrs 1417 4978 707 1160 555 1852 228 5 295 780 19 11 .233 .315 .459 10 33 .301 n/a
Welcome! You are invited to wander around and read all of the comments that have been posted here at Patton & Co., but as soon as you register you can see the bid limits that Alex, Peter and Mike propose for each player, and you can post your own comments. Registering is free, so please join us!
No longer on the table.  Boras pissed Angelos off.  Moving on to a worse player.  Maybe significantly worse.  We'll see if Davis exceeds $150/7 when all is said and done.
Eugene Freedman EugeneFreed
Dec 10 '15

Cash on the table.  (some deferred).  We will see... tick toc.

Eugene Freedman EugeneFreed
Dec 9 '15

The bars of standard deviation are the same in both directions, so the math answer to your question is no. You have a middle and the deviations in both directions are the same.

From a practical standpoint, when you're analyzing the quality of a population, you have the problem that good performers keep performing, while bad performers lose their jobs. So the level of general achievement is continually being dragged up.

I guess if you're talking about extremes, however, you are right. It takes more skill for a pitcher to get everyone out than it would for him to give up a hit or walk to every hitter.

It would be easier for Chris Davis to strikeout every at bat than it would be for him to hit a homer each time. 

Peter Kreutzer Rotoman
Oct 19 '15

My math is this sketchy: Isn't it harder to deviate from the mean when the lower number is what you are striving for? Just taking OPS, for example -- without worrying about park effects, quality of opponent, etc etc -- isn't it harder for a pitcher to deviate in the "good direction" (down) than it is for a hitter to deviate in the other direction? So that 10 percent above the mean isn't the same as ten percent below the mean.

Alex Patton Alex
Oct 19 '15

The interesting thing about the HR/FB% is that Davis had at least 4 HR taken away from him.  Balls over the wall that were caught by the OF.  He could have easily had an even higher percentage - one that was outrageously high and he would have had 50+ HR again, which would have put him in a really select group.

He has incredible power.  His swings that look like he missed the barrel or were just light swings sometimes go out of the park.

Eugene Freedman EugeneFreed
Oct 19 '15

For years there was a guy in USA Today who published RC/9 under his name, showing how many runs a team of nine Rickey Henderson's would score. That doesn't really help us get to a Batter ERA.

But the formula for RC/9 is: RC*9/(Outs/3), which is the same formula as ERA, subbing RC for ER. So his RC/9 is 7.456.

Davis's FIP is 6.365.

I was going to do xFIP, which adjusts HR rate per fly ball to the league average. Davis would be seriously penalized by this, he knocked 29 percent of his fly balls last year out of the park. Same as he did in 2013. That may not be sustainable, as his career average is 23 percent, but it is decidedly above league average.

If he hit homers on fly balls at his career rate Davis would have had 38 homers this year.

Peter Kreutzer Rotoman
Oct 19 '15

It used to be called RC/9.  The powers that be must have just changed it to RC/G.  See: Baseball Reference Chris Davis More Hitting Stats Page.

The stat is described thusly:  RC/G -- Runs Created per Game

Runs created per (approximately) 27 outs used.
Can be thought of as the runs produced by a lineup of 9 of this player.

But, to compare hitters to pitchers, one would need some kind of standard deviation from the mean.  Knowing what Davis produces in RC/9 only compares him to other hitters.  

Eugene Freedman EugeneFreed
Oct 19 '15

I've combed through Fangraphs looking for RC/game. Is it there?

Whatever it is, it must be over 5.00; the equivalent ERA would have to be under 3.00.

The starting pitcher who's most similar to Davis might be Chris Sale. Same BABIP, lots of strikeouts, a groundball pitcher (compared to a flyball hitter) who's pretty good at keeping the ball in the park.

Sale's ERA was 3.41 but both FIP (2.73) and xFIP (2.60) say that was unlucky.

Since Davis's RC/G -- whatever it is -- is completely theoretical, we can say they are the same!

The interesting thing, for me, about comparing hitters to pitchers has always been which one actually "plays" more?

Davis had 670 plate appearances spread out over 160 games.

Sale only played in 31 games but faced 854 batters.

Who played more (leaving fielding out of it)?

To me, the clear answer (leaving fielding out of it) is Chris Sale.

That doesn't mean he was better at suppressing runs than Chris Davis was at creating runs. I don't know how you answer that.

WAR, of course, attempts to.

And the answer is...

Chris Sale 6.2

Chris Davis 5.6

I think the WAR that's shown for Davis is his oWAR (leaves fielding out of it) but I'm not sure.

Alex Patton Alex
Oct 18 '15

Yes. RC/game ERA equivalent.

van wilhoite LVW
Oct 17 '15

I missed this question, LVW... and now I'm not exactly sure what it is? What is the ERA equivalent of Chris Davis's runs created per game?

Meanwhile, Matthew Trueblood, rubbing mud at BP,  puts Chris Davis at the top of the list of "guys who will absolutely receive and decline QOs," a QO being the $15.8 million qualifying offer teams will need to make to free agents in order to get a draft pick when they lose them.

$15.8 million is the average of the 125 highest-paid players this year and is a mere 3.2% bump over the QO last year ($15.3 million).

From which we can infer that the sky-high payrolls of major league teams aren't coming close to keeping up with the sky-rocketing revenues.

Alex Patton Alex
Oct 16 '15