the JAWS system sort of tries to account for that, but agreed that a denominator of some sort could be widely used
― twist boat veterans for stability (k3vin k.), Thursday, 7 November 2013 22:15 (ten years ago) link
I am not sure I like the idea of a player being less "impressive" because he hung on for an extra 4 years to get that $$$
― I've Seen rRootage (Will M.), Thursday, 7 November 2013 22:16 (ten years ago) link
what if cars only had odometers and not speedometers? the officer would pull you over and say "sir, do you know how far you have driven?", and you'd say "yes, the odometer says just over 34,000 miles", and then the officer would say "hmmmm, so it does. and i suppose we'll have to leave it at that, as i cannot prove any wrongdoing here with respect to your current speed without a denominator."
― reckless woo (Z S), Thursday, 7 November 2013 22:19 (ten years ago) link
isn't one of the things people look at the avg WAR/y during peak years & length of peak?
all i'm saying is I don't say I drove an average of 35 mph because I sat in my driveway for 15 minutes listening to that one last jam before going in the house
― I've Seen rRootage (Will M.), Thursday, 7 November 2013 22:24 (ten years ago) link
Haha, yeah. I'm not advocating for using WAR/playing time to replace just plain WAR, just that it should also be taken into consideration, especially when comparing players with differing career lengths
― reckless woo (Z S), Thursday, 7 November 2013 22:27 (ten years ago) link
career v peak value, both are good to look at
― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 7 November 2013 22:29 (ten years ago) link
i think WAR/yr wouldn't be incredibly valuable (better at least if it were by PAs or innings pitched)
i'm guilty of just using career WAR as a barometer of should vs shouldn't and i wish that'd stop, i wish we'd all stop trying to replace old HOF milestones with new ones and act like grownups who can process and analyze different sets of information without forcing it into some big pretty grand total
― my whole family is catholic so look at the pickle i'm in (zachlyon), Friday, 8 November 2013 01:36 (ten years ago) link
nothing against WAR it's just that these arguments always happen with all these players between 55 and 75 WAR, which seem to be the extreme ends of the ? zone, and i don't think WAR is a useful tool in figuring out those players or where that line 'should' be
― my whole family is catholic so look at the pickle i'm in (zachlyon), Friday, 8 November 2013 01:39 (ten years ago) link
and honestly, i'm a big-hall guy, but if there are so many players who live in that zone and they're all a bunch of question marks maybe the line should just be higher
― my whole family is catholic so look at the pickle i'm in (zachlyon), Friday, 8 November 2013 01:42 (ten years ago) link
for the record no i have no idea what i'm saying rn
― my whole family is catholic so look at the pickle i'm in (zachlyon), Friday, 8 November 2013 01:50 (ten years ago) link
lol no i think most would agree that WAR is a starting point, and much better at separating players far apart than close together
― twist boat veterans for stability (k3vin k.), Friday, 8 November 2013 01:53 (ten years ago) link
no, you are both wrong
a player who hits a homerun in his only at bat in the major leagues is more valuable than a guy who averages 5 WAR per year for an 18-year career, because his WAR per at bat is higher
the end, that's my story
― reckless woo (Z S), Friday, 8 November 2013 02:03 (ten years ago) link
when FG and BR synchronized their replacement level or w/e it added/subtracted like 8+ WAR to some players, and we still don't have a grasp on UZR before 2002 (or 1B/C UZR at any point), and we can't even decide on ERA or FIP for pitchers, urgh
xp
i don't really know what you're sarcasming at ZS
― my whole family is catholic so look at the pickle i'm in (zachlyon), Friday, 8 November 2013 02:09 (ten years ago) link
obv didn't mean WAR per plate appearance but WAR per 600-or-so plate appearances, etc
― my whole family is catholic so look at the pickle i'm in (zachlyon), Friday, 8 November 2013 02:10 (ten years ago) link
seeing as WAR per year wouldn't know the difference between a cup of coffee at age 20 and a full season at 30
― my whole family is catholic so look at the pickle i'm in (zachlyon), Friday, 8 November 2013 02:11 (ten years ago) link
changing the denominator wouldn't matter xp
ZS was just goofing tho i think
― twist boat veterans for stability (k3vin k.), Friday, 8 November 2013 02:12 (ten years ago) link
oh, i'm just sarcasming at no one in particular, sorry!
― reckless woo (Z S), Friday, 8 November 2013 02:12 (ten years ago) link
but yeah, if there was going to be a WAR/time stat, i think WAR/AB would actually work. or maybe (WAR/AB) x 100, just to make things less decimalized. if you average 5 WAR per 500 AB, that would leave you with a (WAR/AB) x 100 of 1.0. or WARservicegoamericawarisgood for short. of course it would be totally meaningless in small samples. but that's also true of tons of baseball statistics. when pete kozma was jesus for the last month of 2012, only total fucking idiots who nonetheless filled the airwaves of sportstalkradio believed that it meant anything.
― reckless woo (Z S), Friday, 8 November 2013 02:16 (ten years ago) link
god, if you think my sarcasming is insufferable tonight (and it is, i know), you should have had a conversation with someone last winter in STL who thought pete kozma was actually good. it honestly felt like a circle of hell, i couldn't help but try to scratch my skin off
― reckless woo (Z S), Friday, 8 November 2013 02:19 (ten years ago) link
Probably WAR/PA would be the way to go.
― Porto for Pyros (The Cursed Return of the Dastardly Thermo Thinwall), Friday, 8 November 2013 14:02 (ten years ago) link
the main point of WAR and all other non pitcher-win numbers is to laugh at Jack Morris For the HOF ppl.
― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Friday, 8 November 2013 15:12 (ten years ago) link
Can you name the MLB hitters who produced the most WAR per plate appearance?
No idea if this is accurate but i guess someone was thinking about it...
if you somehow actually "get" all 20 of them, you're an insane person
i typed in number 17 as a joke and it was right
― I've Seen rRootage (Will M.), Friday, 8 November 2013 15:27 (ten years ago) link
i only got 11, missed some really obvious ones (a.m. brainlessness)
#17 & 18 were hardest. I suspect #17 will fall out of the top 20 before long.
― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Friday, 8 November 2013 15:45 (ten years ago) link
actually his yearly totals are still pretty high! Good thing he misses 30-50 games every year.
― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Friday, 8 November 2013 15:49 (ten years ago) link
wish i could give it a shot but the website is blocked at my work. is there a minimum PA requirement, or is it just straight up WAR/PA?
― reckless woo (Z S), Friday, 8 November 2013 15:57 (ten years ago) link
doesnt specify min PA, just B-R as a source
― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Friday, 8 November 2013 16:00 (ten years ago) link
Only 14/20, but no wrong guesses. Missed #12, #14 (surprised), #15 (should have had it), #16 (a guy who probably gets overlooked a lot), #17 (yeah, shocking), and #20 (team sort of threw me off, but I guess that's the best designation).
― clemenza, Friday, 8 November 2013 16:08 (ten years ago) link
got 15/20, dumbest omission was aaron. kept trying to put "jones" for braves
― twist boat veterans for stability (k3vin k.), Friday, 8 November 2013 16:51 (ten years ago) link
there must be a minimum PA or WAR or else you'd think trout (or puig) would be #1
― twist boat veterans for stability (k3vin k.), Friday, 8 November 2013 16:53 (ten years ago) link
The first name I typed was "Henry Aaron," got nothing, gave up, said "just give me the fucking names already." Oh, you wanted HANK Aaron?!
― He got...JACKED UP!!!!! (WilliamC), Friday, 8 November 2013 16:58 (ten years ago) link
just figured it out and trout would actually be a distant second, with 13.96, just ahead of bonds. that baby ruth lady was good
― twist boat veterans for stability (k3vin k.), Friday, 8 November 2013 16:59 (ten years ago) link
those gams were so nice
― reckless woo (Z S), Friday, 8 November 2013 17:08 (ten years ago) link
you can just type the last name, geez. its like yall have never sporcled before.
― I've Seen rRootage (Will M.), Friday, 8 November 2013 18:00 (ten years ago) link
18/20. Missed #17 and 18.
― NoTimeBeforeTime, Saturday, 9 November 2013 21:15 (ten years ago) link
I was looking at the career leaders in XBH, and a benchmark that's close to infallible (if you adjust for one thing) in predicting induction is 1,000 XBH. Thirty-five guys have done it (Helton ended up two short). Of those 35, a) 21 are in the HOF, b) 6 will go in for sure (Pujols, Griffey, Thomas, Chipper, Biggio, Thome), and another 6 almost certainly would have gone in if not for other factors (Rose + 5 PED guys). That leaves Sheffield, who could be added to the 5 PED guys--I'm not 100% sure if he would have made it minus PEDs--and Luis Gonzalez, who was never going to go in regardless of PED suspicion. Ortiz is at 969, so barring sudden free-fall, he'll cross 1,000 with room to spare.
At that point, he either joins the 6 sure-things, the 5 who are in limbo, or Luis Gonzalez as the second (or third, if you count Sheffield) 1,000-XBH guy who's not in the HOF because he wasn't considered good enough.
That's all clear, right?
― clemenza, Sunday, 10 November 2013 16:21 (ten years ago) link
I hedged on including Thome in the sure-things, but I think I was over-compensating for the fact he comes out of the offensive boom years. When you look at his career box, he's got the HOF covered a number of different ways. And if he's in that category of vague-suspicion with Bagwell and Piazza, so be it. I'm positive Bagwell and Piazza are going in within the next 2-4 years--I know people want them in right now, but they're both near 60%, they will go in shortly.
― clemenza, Sunday, 10 November 2013 16:32 (ten years ago) link
I'd never noticed this post before:
The funny thing about Morris, as I recall, is that he always seemed to pitch just good enough to stay ahead. If his team had 7 runs he'd give up 6 and if his boys only managed 1 run he'd throw a shut-out. It was the weirdest thing.
― Thermo Thinwall (Thermo Thinwall), Thursday, 23 December 2004 03:07 (8 years ago)
So that's where that theory started!
― clemenza, Sunday, 10 November 2013 18:38 (ten years ago) link
(And since Sutter and Candy Cummings are in the Hall for inventing pitches, I now elect Thermo for inventing one of the key theories of our time.)
― clemenza, Sunday, 10 November 2013 18:40 (ten years ago) link
Jack Morris says he would've had a better ERA if he'd been asked to
bonus reference to murray chass as a 'blogger'
― mookieproof, Sunday, 10 November 2013 19:30 (ten years ago) link
Long five-part James article on the expansion ballot, behind the paywall. I'll skip to the last paragraph:
My ballot: 1. Joe Torre (yes), 2. Bobby Cox (yes), 3. George Steinbrenner (yes), 4. Tony La Russa (yes), 5. Dan Quisenberry (yes), 6. Dave Parker (maybe), 7. Ted Simmons (maybe not), 8. Billy Martin (maybe not right now), 9. Steve Garvey (probably not), 10. Tommy John (I’m afraid not), 11. Dave Concepcion (no). Marvin Miller...certainly not right now; we can talk about it in a few years.
(His stance on Miller has only to do with Miller's expressed wish not to be inducted, not that he doesn't deserve to be inducted.)
― clemenza, Friday, 22 November 2013 15:42 (ten years ago) link
Team success mattered more to Jeff Kent than HOF candidacy
o rly
― mookieproof, Tuesday, 26 November 2013 19:25 (ten years ago) link
http://deadspin.com/deadspin-buys-hall-of-fame-vote-will-turn-it-over-to-d-1467003665
― balls, Tuesday, 26 November 2013 22:25 (ten years ago) link
lol have you ever seen a big internet poll on HOF voting? if they're going for 75% of the readers they'll be sending in a blank ballot. strds players still probably won't make 50%. and "deadspin readers" isn't some special, 'intelligent' fanbase it's like 50 billion people
― my whole family is catholic so look at the pickle i'm in (zachlyon), Wednesday, 27 November 2013 00:23 (ten years ago) link
Neyer on process, logjam etc
http://www.baseballnation.com/2013/11/27/5151640/baseball-hall-fame-ballot-candidates-deadspin-2014-bbwaa
― eclectic husbandry (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 27 November 2013 19:29 (ten years ago) link
Posnanski's "48,384th" Jack Morris post:
http://joeposnanski.com/joeblogs/more-more-morris-2/#comments
Reader comment: "Bo Jackson is famous. Jose Canseco is famous. Bill Buckner is famous. They're all more famous than Eddie Matthews. Don't get distracted by the word 'fame' in 'Hall of Fame.' It leads you to lousy places."
I do, on occasion, give a tiny bit of weight to fame. I'm not consistent, and I probably couldn't even articulate when I think it applies. I'd give Billy Martin a little credit, for example. But yeah, lousy places.
― clemenza, Saturday, 30 November 2013 17:13 (ten years ago) link
looking at the ballot, there are 18 guys I might throw a vote too. Don't think it will happen tbh but i wouldn't be surprised to see Maddux lose a few votes bc some folks want to save votes for guys they're worried would fall off the ballot. also I'm 50/50 on whether anyone besides Maddux will make it.
― christmas candy bar (al leong), Saturday, 30 November 2013 18:12 (ten years ago) link
Assuming you'd vote for Maddux, Glavine, Thomas, Mussina, and Kent from this year's group, which added to last year's holdovers would total 22. So you'd eliminate Mattingly, Lee Smith, Morris, and...McGriff maybe?
― clemenza, Saturday, 30 November 2013 21:17 (ten years ago) link
Those 5+ biggio, bagwell, piazza, raines, schilling, clemens, bonds, martinez, trammell, walker, mcgriff, mcgwire, sosa, palmeiro
so 19. I guess if I had to stick to ten: maddux, glavine, thomas, biggio, bagwell, piazza, raines, bonds, trammell, clemens. some strategic voting there.
― christmas candy bar (al leong), Saturday, 30 November 2013 21:35 (ten years ago) link
Glavine and Kent - personally would not vote for. Muss - I'm on the fence on.
xpost
― Porto for Pyros (The Cursed Return of the Dastardly Thermo Thinwall), Saturday, 30 November 2013 21:35 (ten years ago) link
i'd be happy if the HOF argument over the next 5-10 years expanded to included "let's stop underrating pitchers who didn't have pristine ERAs in the hardest pitching era maybe ever and let's stop overrating hitters in the same era"
mussina is way more deserving than many of these high OBP/HR 1Bs/corner OFs
― my whole family is catholic so look at the pickle i'm in (zachlyon), Saturday, 30 November 2013 21:40 (ten years ago) link