Ronald Acuña

[brios8]

Originally Posted by whitmm

If you crack that and re-sub it and it gets a better grade, are you going to disclose that it received a 6 previously?

It's funny how everyone screams about how shady it is for someone to not disclose a previous grade on a raw card, but those same people have no problem not disclosing a previous grade if it was resubbed.

It 100% doesn't matter. If you buy a raw card, you should be buying it for raw prices. That's your own damn fault if you want to pay graded prices. If somebody cracked a PSA 10, for whatever reason, and they sold it raw, nobody is going to pay them PSA 10 prices.

If you don't see that resubbing and not disclosing previous grades is just as shady as not disclosing them on raw cards, then wow.

????

A PSA 6 is a quite badly damaged card. Absolutely needs to be disclosed if cracked.

Its waaaay different cracking an 8 to try to get a 9 or a 9 for a 10.. grading is subjective so it could have been close and another grader bumps it, or could lower it as well. But an 8+ is in much better condition than a 6

At the end of the day grading is subjective. And we are “supposed” to trust the grading company. However if selling it raw and its 8 or below the damage should be noted.

[Ra3]

Originally Posted by jdung17

Big mail day! I have wanted this one for a long time.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Congrats! Awesome card…still has my vote as his best RC, barely beating out the sapphire bat down

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by brios8

????

A PSA 6 is a quite badly damaged card. Absolutely needs to be disclosed if cracked.

Its waaaay different cracking an 8 to try to get a 9 or a 9 for a 10.. grading is subjective so it could have been close and another grader bumps it, or could lower it as well. But an 8+ is in much better condition than a 6

At the end of the day grading is subjective. And we are “supposed” to trust the grading company. However if selling it raw and its 8 or below the damage should be noted.

The grade absolutely does not need to be disclosed. That's not the same thing as disclosing damage. Yes, a crease, a scratch, whatever, should be disclosed. That 6 grade is meaningless. As soon as that card is cracked from that case, it's no longer a 6. Just like when you crack a 9 to try and get a better grade, it's no longer a 9 when it's not in that slab.

What I responded to was Brandon making a comment about the grade not being disclosed. Had nothing to do with the condition not being disclosed.

[wharfrat7624]

Originally Posted by jdung17

Big mail day! I have wanted this one for a long time.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

My favorite card. Love it! Congrats!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wharfrat7624]

Originally Posted by Biohazarddfl

Does anyone actually believe this sale? It was being shilled around $900 and we didn't get to see any real bids. There was a buy it now at 4k that the shillers seemed to have forgotten about. It's likely a $2300ish card

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

Yeah I wasn’t sure if it was Shilled or not. There was a BIN for $3k that got hit….


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Biohazarddfl]

Originally Posted by wharfrat7624

Yeah I wasn’t sure if it was Shilled or not. There was a BIN for $3k that got hit….


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That was the first victim of the Shill. I fear that is a real sale and that they got caught in the hype.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[SupermanBrandon]

I looked at RF Outs Above Average rankings for the first time in my life today. It will be the last time. Ronald is ranked as the worst RF in all of baseball. Kyle Tucker (2022 Gold Glove winner) is ranked the 2nd worst. What a joke.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[zworykin]

You don't believe in "advanced" metrics. We get it. You don't have to keep bringing it up. Nobody else is. Nobody else cares.

[SupermanBrandon]

Originally Posted by zworykin

You don't believe in "advanced" metrics. We get it. You don't have to keep bringing it up. Nobody else is. Nobody else cares.

I’ll keep posting what I want


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[zworykin]

Originally Posted by SupermanBrandon

I’ll keep posting what I want

Of course. And you'll keep sounding like an old man shouting at clouds if it's the same nonsense. Just trying to help you out. We can all benefit from someone holding up a mirror for us once in a while. You're welcome.

[dream34]

While advanced stats and the newer metrics are great for pointing out value that is hard to see and track, they obviously have their flaws too. Let's not act like everything is absolutely perfect already.

[comicbooksgo]

I care. Clearly that ranking system is trash. How many runners stay their ass at 2nd on a fly ball with Ronald catching it in right? Are actual putouts calculated? Ronald makes all of the routine plays and every few nights does something spectacular. The Kyle Tucker ranking is more evidence that this ranking system is trash at evaluating outfield defense.

[BigSlim16]

Arm strength has nothing to do with outs above average. Routes and jumps are weighted much more heavily

[comicbooksgo]

Seems like OAA is missing something then.

[BigSlim16]

Originally Posted by comicbooksgo

Seems like OAA is missing something then.

It’s just an entirely different statistic. It’s like saying that batting average is missing something because it doesn’t factor in walks/HBP like on base %

Acuna has incredible arm strength, which is why he’s ranked 1st in RF arm strength. Acuna gets bad jumps and takes bad routes to balls, which is why he’s last in OAA. It’s apples and oranges

[SupermanBrandon]

Originally Posted by zworykin

Of course. And you'll keep sounding like an old man shouting at clouds if it's the same nonsense. Just trying to help you out. We can all benefit from someone holding up a mirror for us once in a while. You're welcome.

I get it. And I agree on the mirror analogy. Although the mirror might break with my mug. I find it relevant that some of these advance metrics are complete crap. Some are obviously flawed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by comicbooksgo

Seems like OAA is missing something then.

Outs Above Average is a purely catch related metric, and it's based off of catch probability. Here's a simple example of how it works.

Say a ball has a 75% catch probability. If the outfielder makes the catch, they get +.25 OAA. If they don't catch it, they get -.75. It's then a cumulative stat. Throws don't matter. Grounders that get through don't matter. Line drives matter very little.

The stat has nothing to do with trying to rate the overall ability of a defender.

Guys like Acuna and Tucker make up for it in other ways. And Gold Gloves are misleading as well. Nick Markakis won a couple, and Braves fans know he wasn't that great.

[comicbooksgo]

Totally get it. Had an idea before the last few posts, but now I have it. Thanks.
I guess the name is what bothers me really since outs above average sounds like an all encompassing defensive stat when in reality it tells an incomplete story about a fielder's defensive ability.

[FT35]

Originally Posted by whitmm

Outs Above Average is a purely catch related metric, and it's based off of catch probability. Here's a simple example of how it works.

Say a ball has a 75% catch probability. If the outfielder makes the catch, they get +.25 OAA. If they don't catch it, they get -.75. It's then a cumulative stat. Throws don't matter. Grounders that get through don't matter. Line drives matter very little.

The stat has nothing to do with trying to rate the overall ability of a defender.

Guys like Acuna and Tucker make up for it in other ways. And Gold Gloves are misleading as well. Nick Markakis won a couple, and Braves fans know he wasn't that great.

I’m not an advanced stat guy either, but this is an outstanding explanation. Thank you for posting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by comicbooksgo

Totally get it. Had an idea before the last few posts, but now I have it. Thanks.
I guess the name is what bothers me really since outs above average sounds like an all encompassing defensive stat when in reality it tells an incomplete story about a fielder's defensive ability.

I agree that some names of metrics aren't the greatest. OAA is a measure of things that most people know aren't Ronald's strong points on defense.

And other things you mentioned are pretty much impossible to quantify. Like whether or not the threat of his arm was the reason why a runner didn't try advancing. We know that it does factor in, but we can't put an exact number on it

[Rabs]

20 SBs!

[comicbooksgo]

Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeels

[jswest18]

Originally Posted by whitmm

Outs Above Average is a purely catch related metric, and it's based off of catch probability. Here's a simple example of how it works.

Say a ball has a 75% catch probability. If the outfielder makes the catch, they get +.25 OAA. If they don't catch it, they get -.75. It's then a cumulative stat. Throws don't matter. Grounders that get through don't matter. Line drives matter very little.

The stat has nothing to do with trying to rate the overall ability of a defender.

Guys like Acuna and Tucker make up for it in other ways. And Gold Gloves are misleading as well. Nick Markakis won a couple, and Braves fans know he wasn't that great.

The biggest issue I have with it is that there are sometimes flaws in the catch probability calculation. The Toronto series is a one example. There was obviously some issue that all of the Braves defenders were having in seeing and reading fly balls with the roof open. Even Harris was having issues with it. There were 2-3 balls that dropped close to RAJ which are normally easy catches that any RF would make in normal circumstances. I think that series alone was a major ding to his defensive metrics across the board. There's no way for that metric to calculate the issues everyone was having in that series but I don't think those missed catches were an accurate assessment of his defense even though they are factored in either way.

The "eye test" is something that definitely has merit when it comes to defense. Defensive metrics help us get a full picture a lot of times but they cloud the picture at times too. I don't think anyone should dismiss defensive metrics or the eye test approach when evaluating a guy's defensive ability.

[whitmm]

Originally Posted by jswest18

The biggest issue I have with it is that there are sometimes flaws in the catch probability calculation. The Toronto series is a one example. There was obviously some issue that all of the Braves defenders were having in seeing and reading fly balls with the roof open. Even Harris was having issues with it. There were 2-3 balls that dropped close to RAJ which are normally easy catches that any RF would make in normal circumstances. I think that series alone was a major ding to his defensive metrics across the board. There's no way for that metric to calculate the issues everyone was having in that series but I don't think those missed catches were an accurate assessment of his defense even though they are factored in either way.

The "eye test" is something that definitely has merit when it comes to defense. Defensive metrics help us get a full picture a lot of times but they cloud the picture at times too. I don't think anyone should dismiss defensive metrics or the eye test approach when evaluating a guy's defensive ability.

I never said it was perfect. But, yes, they do factor those types of things in. Having trouble reading a fly ball is part of the whole calculation of the catch probability. If a ball has a 95% catch probability that means that 5% of the time it falls in for a hit. That 5% includes a late break, a wrong break, not picking the ball up right away. 95% doesn't mean it's caught everytime.

Someone here was complaining about this a few pages ago with Corbin Carroll, about how they felt those probabilities were wrong, because on one particular play he wasn't even close to catching a ball with a high catch probability. Watching the play, Corbin broke back and two his left on a ball that ended up being weakly hit and fell it.

Saying you have an issue with a stat because you found one exception makes no sense. That's like saying you don't like OBP because a guy got on base in 80% of his PAs but his season number is only .375.

Here's a counter point to the eye test. Great defenders make a lot of plays look easier than they were. Bad defenders make the easier plays look more difficult. Getting a bad jump turns into a diving catch, instead of a ball they normally should have been under.

[comicbooksgo]

Decided to open 3 of my mini boxes...Hit an Acuna bat down! First one i've ever hit..Does anyone know if the bat down has a lower pr than the regular mini us250? NFS...I'm SO psyched to have pulled this!!!