Author Topic: Stats. Giggity!  (Read 28047 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline welch

  • Posts: 12458
  • 2018: The Fight for .500
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #175: January 02, 2014, 06:26:35 PM »
I blame it on shoulder problems.  Lots of good young pitchers have run into shoulder issues and were never the same.  Doc supposedly started on drugs in '86, and had several more good years, although none as good as '85 of course.  It was after the shoulder issues in '91(? -- going from memory), that his career really fell apart.  He won almost 200 games, and I think without the shoulder issues (rather than without the drug issues) he would have won another 50 or so games and be a borderline HOFer.

In '86, we kept execting Gooden to be El Supremo of the NL, and The Guy to choke the Red Sox in the World Series. He just wasn't quite the pitcher he had been in '84 and '85. There are more strikeouts now, but is was astounding, in '84 (best I remember) when Gooden had the bases loaded with no outs and the struck out the next three hitters. Almost as if Gooden could reach back for "something more", a something no other pitcher had.

Offline welch

  • Posts: 12458
  • 2018: The Fight for .500
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #176: January 02, 2014, 06:40:08 PM »
To clarify the "pitch to contact" point: I think of a "pitch to contact" pitcher as a ground ball pitcher. Often a sinker-ball pitcher. I doubt that number of time through the order helps a batter if he can't lift the ball out of the infield.

On "park neutrality", it seems likely that parks have closer fences because fans expect to see home runs, and the evening sports shows almost always center on who "went yard" or took a pitcher "deep" or whatever term is popular. That would explain why Nats Park might have fewer triples...and, if I'm right, why there would be fewer triples overall.

Until about 1954, Griffith Stadium had such deep fences that few homeruns were hit into the seats (in left. Center was so far that the few himers there are marked out and remembered; the RF wall was so high that many drives bounced off the wall, but would have been homers in, say Detroit.). About 1933, a CF was traded to the Nats. He said something like: I'm happy to go to Washington becvause I won't have to worry about hitting the wall. 

Check the Washington all-time list for doubles and triples. I think the only current player who makes the list is Ryan Zimmerman, who is far down the doubles list, below Sam Rice, Joe Judge, Mickey Vernon, and others.

Now it seems like a batter gets a triple only when the ball takes an odd bounce in a corner.

Offline Ray D

  • Posts: 10073
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #177: January 02, 2014, 09:19:04 PM »
Check the Washington all-time list for doubles and triples

There's one thing that that  triggered, that sticks out in my mind to this day:   in 1959, Bob Allison led the league in triples.  with 9! (He was Rookie of the Year too.)

Offline Terpfan76

  • Posts: 3920
  • ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #178: January 03, 2014, 12:12:35 AM »
There's one thing that that  triggered, that sticks out in my mind to this day:   in 1959, Bob Allison led the league in triples.  with 9! (He was Rookie of the Year too.)
Harper had 9 triples as a rookie too

Offline welch

  • Posts: 12458
  • 2018: The Fight for .500
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #179: January 03, 2014, 04:01:57 PM »
Harper had 9 triples as a rookie too

It will be good for the New Nats if Harper matches Old Nat Bob Allison's power. In adition to the nine triples, Allison hit 31 homers in 1959, when the LF line was about 350 feet, and the bleachers stood at the top of a ten-foot fence. RF? A mere 320 feet straight down the line, but angling to 370 or so in right-center with a 30 foot fence that held the scoreboard.

Giffith Stadium dimensions at: http://www.baseball-almanac.com/stadium/st_griff.shtml
(Other sites picture the dimensions, and show the different configurations from different years)

For many years, Griffith Stadium had the fewest home runs of any park. See:

http://griffithstadium.com/GRIFFITH_STADIUM_HR.pdf


Offline stiffler

  • Posts: 114
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #180: January 04, 2014, 12:23:39 PM »
harper can do it for sure should lead in a lot of stats

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 17776
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #181: February 16, 2014, 08:07:38 AM »
I think anybody that ever uses non-traditional stats should read this article.


http://mglbaseball.wordpress.com/





Offline Minty Fresh

  • Posts: 19638
  • #DCU
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #182: February 16, 2014, 09:43:49 AM »
I think anybody that ever uses non-traditional stats should read this article.


http://mglbaseball.wordpress.com/


I think it shows that sabrmetrics work well for evaluating talent when determining how and why to acquire a player you may like, but for HoF arguments they just come across as silly.

Offline PebbleBall

  • Posts: 3440
  • Now that right there is baseball.
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #183: February 16, 2014, 10:14:02 AM »
I think it shows that sabrmetrics work well for evaluating talent when determining how and why to acquire a player you may like, but for HoF arguments they just come across as silly.

I think it has more to do with the use of statistics in general.  He made the point that nobody needs advanced statistics to know that Jeter is a hall of famer, but then again he also debunked Posnanski's position with statistics.  I think sabermetrics have value in HOF debates, especially if pushing an under-appreciated or fringe player over the top.  But if you use any statistic - traditional, sabermetric, or otherwise, to rag on a consensus Hall of Famer you're probably setting yourself up for a takedown.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19630
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #184: February 16, 2014, 10:35:09 AM »
I think it shows that sabrmetrics work well for evaluating talent when determining how and why to acquire a player you may like, but for HoF arguments they just come across as silly.

Maybe it shows that the argument for Jeter is championships + playing for the Yankees rather than numbers?

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 17776
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #185: February 16, 2014, 10:42:30 AM »
IMO, the main take away is that defense is far easier to replace than offense. That and the "replacement player" isn't that good of a benchmark in the first place. 

Offline UMDNats

  • Posts: 14656
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #186: February 16, 2014, 10:44:11 AM »
Maybe it shows that the argument for Jeter is championships + playing for the Yankees rather than numbers?

also over 3,000 hits, lifetime .312/.381/.446 slash, lifetime .308/.347/.465 postseason slash.

i don't really get why people are trying to analyze jeter's accomplishments and value, he's clearly one of the best of all-time

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 17776
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #187: February 16, 2014, 10:46:44 AM »
also over 3,000 hits, lifetime .312/.381/.446 slash, lifetime .308/.347/.465 postseason slash.

i don't really get why people are trying to analyze jeter's accomplishments and value, he's clearly one of the best of all-time

That was why Litchtman lit into Pos.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19630
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #188: February 16, 2014, 10:50:55 AM »
also over 3,000 hits, lifetime .312/.381/.446 slash, lifetime .308/.347/.465 postseason slash.

i don't really get why people are trying to analyze jeter's accomplishments and value, he's clearly one of the best of all-time

which makes him great, but the people who want to insert best or greatest of all time, perhaps there is more than a little media bias


Offline comish4lif

  • Posts: 2868
  • Too Stressed to care.
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #189: February 16, 2014, 12:08:32 PM »
I hate Jeter. Hes clearly a great player, but I think he's really overrated. If you gave me an HOF ballot in 6 years, I'd put his name on my ballot.

Offline mitlen

  • Posts: 58484
  • Beat Jacksonville
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #190: February 16, 2014, 12:13:04 PM »
I hate Jeter. Hes clearly a great player, but I think he's really overrated. If you gave me an HOF ballot in 6 years, I'd put his name on my ballot.

Phil Rizzuto type?

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19630
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #191: February 16, 2014, 12:17:11 PM »
Put Jeter in a Mariners uniform,  and he's clearly hof,  but best probably isn't a word you associate with him

Offline comish4lif

  • Posts: 2868
  • Too Stressed to care.
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #192: February 16, 2014, 06:30:20 PM »

Offline UMDNats

  • Posts: 14656
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #193: February 16, 2014, 06:45:35 PM »
which makes him great, but the people who want to insert best or greatest of all time, perhaps there is more than a little media bias



i dont see a problem with saying he's one of the best 5 shortstops of all time

Put Jeter in a Mariners uniform,  and he's clearly hof,  but best probably isn't a word you associate with him

i don't understand this argument. who knows how his career would have been different? he is/was a yankee, there's zero reason to say "WELL IF HIS ENTIRE CAREER WAS DIFFERENT I BET I'D THINK DIFFERENTLY ABOUT HIM"

the media is 100% biased, and mostly useless, sadly. 99% of media articles are not worth the time to read. posanski has gone pretty downhill recently. used to be a fan of his, now i'm pretty indifferent. the whole penn state thing rubbed me the wrong way. also, have heard some negative stories about what he's like to work with.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19630
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #194: February 16, 2014, 06:46:48 PM »
Not saying his career would be different,  but the media coverage would be

Offline UMDNats

  • Posts: 14656
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #195: February 16, 2014, 06:48:52 PM »
Not saying his career would be different,  but the media coverage would be

sure, if he played in seattle he would never have gotten the attention he gets in new york. so what? if he put up the same exact career but in a mariners uniform he'd still be adored

Offline mitlen

  • Posts: 58484
  • Beat Jacksonville
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #196: February 16, 2014, 07:54:13 PM »
Huh?

As in overrated, played for the Yankees and may be admitted to the hall by the Veteran's Committee?    Trying to get a sense of your "hatred" of Jeter.

Offline comish4lif

  • Posts: 2868
  • Too Stressed to care.
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #197: February 16, 2014, 09:12:42 PM »
As in overrated, played for the Yankees and may be admitted to the hall by the Veteran's Committee?    Trying to get a sense of your "hatred" of Jeter.
Rizzuto in the Hall is a joke.

Jeter is clearly (in my mind) a Hall of Famer, I don't hate him enough to deny him his due. It's just the adulation and all of the Captain Jeter stuff that I hate. In NY he's treated as if he were the best player in MLB history.

Offline blue911

  • Posts: 17776
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #198: February 16, 2014, 09:14:10 PM »
Rizzuto in the Hall is a joke.

Jeter is clearly (in my mind) a Hall of Famer, I don't hate him enough to deny him his due. It's just the adulation and all of the Captain Jeter stuff that I hate. In NY he's treated as if he were the best player in MLB history.

Well he's had sex with at least 75% of them

Offline nobleisthyname

  • Posts: 2159
Re: Stats. Giggity!
« Reply #199: February 16, 2014, 10:00:11 PM »
That and the "replacement player" isn't that good of a benchmark in the first place.

Why is it not a good benchmark? What would be a better benchmark?