Kiki Cuyler cards are awesome

[nat]

The 1930s were an exceptionally forgiving time for hitters. Surpassed only by 1993-2004ish. Cuyler's on-base plus slugging percentage was only about 25% better than league average. Compare to Matt Holliday at 32% better. While they are obviously very different players (Holliday isn't about to lead the league in stolen bases, which Cuyler did several times), in terms of over all value, Cuyler and Holliday are pretty similar. Cuyler was certainly a good player (so is Holliday), but he's on the weaker end of the hall of fame.

Unfortunately I don't have any Cuyler cards to show, but I liked that DeLong.

[jb217676]

Here's a cool 1931 PV Reyes Real Photo Postcard of Kiki Cuyler.

[trdcrdkid]

Originally Posted by nat

The 1930s were an exceptionally forgiving time for hitters. Surpassed only by 1993-2004ish. Cuyler's on-base plus slugging percentage was only about 25% better than league average. Compare to Matt Holliday at 32% better. While they are obviously very different players (Holliday isn't about to lead the league in stolen bases, which Cuyler did several times), in terms of over all value, Cuyler and Holliday are pretty similar. Cuyler was certainly a good player (so is Holliday), but he's on the weaker end of the hall of fame.

Jay Jaffe's new book "The Cooperstown Casebook" makes the same point, which is similar to what Bill James said in his Hall of Fame book 25 years ago. I don't have Jaffe's book at hand right now, but in terms of Wins Above Replacement (WAR) as calculated on baseball-reference.com, Cuyler had a lifetime total of 46.7. That's the 223rd best lifetime WAR total among position players, tied with Roy White, just behind Tommy Leach and Gene Tenace, just ahead of Mike Cameron and Matt Williams.

[SAllen2556]

We have a cottage near Harrisville, Michigan. If you're ever up there stop by Ki Cuyler's restaurant. It's across the street from Harrisville state park, which is right on the shore of Lake Huron.

ki-cuyler-s-dugout-1.jpg
ki-cuyler-s-dugout.jpg

[timn1]

My friend Chris found this at the Natl and kindly sold it to me - one of the coolest cards I've ever seen.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by timn1

My friend Chris found this at the Natl and kindly sold it to me - one of the coolest cards I've ever seen.

cool card

[tedzan]

Ki Ki Cuyler's 1934 Hi # series card......






TED Z
.

[nat]

This needs a reply.

"The problem with WAR is that it yields premiums attached to players who clearly do not deserve them. That is precisely how the Cubs got stuck paying Jason Heyward 184 million dollars over 8 years."

Heyward's problem was just a total collapse. His hitting fell off a cliff (and his fielding took a hit too). Dropping from a 117 OPS+ to a 68 OPS+ is going to hurt your value. WAR recognizes this (Heyward was a below average player last year by its measure). There are issues with measuring defense (see below), but the real problem with Heyward isn't so much that his defense was over-valued, it's that he forgot to how to hit as soon as he showed up in Chicago.

"both OPS+ and wRC+ give more accurate results regarding true player value, although you then have to make mental adjustments for defense and baserunning."

A mental adjustment isn't going to do it, you need a way to measure defense and base running. Without measurements you get people thinking that Derek Jeter was actually a good defensive shortstop and similar crazy talk. Rfield and Rbaser are attempts to measure these things (and inputs into the WAR calculation for fielding and running, respectively). They're not perfect - centerfielders stealing catches from corner outfielders is a known issue, for example - but they're better than just watching the guys play and sliding your evaluation up or down. We've got people working on the defensive stats, and they'll improve with time. (As they have already. UZR is much better than fielding percentage.)

"With regard to defense, I found it most interesting that about a month ago, Ken Rosenthal, confronting the gent who is in charge of calculating "defensive runs saved" (a key component of the current WAR), got the latter to admit on MLB Now that a defensive run saved is not actually a defense run saved, because the context of the defensive play is totally ignored."

This isn't a problem with WAR, it's really a philosophical choice. The wins that WAR measures are the wins that you could expect a player to generate if he was dropped down into a random team. That's why replacement level is a generic figure and not scaled to the actual guy in AAA who would replace the player. And it's why the context of the play is ignored.

"Personally, I do not believe the creation of single stat to measure overall player value in such a way that it may be compared to all other players is even possible. It is based on the premise that the "five-tool" player (one who can hit, hit with power, throw, run and field) is more valuable than one who lacks one of the five or more. This is a fallacy for two reasons: (1) all tools are not equally valuable--they never have been and never will be; and (2) the value of each of the tools varies with the player's position."

And I don't understand this part. Frank Thomas was not a five-tool player. He really only had two tools. But WAR loves him, because he was so good at hitting. The all-inclusive stats don't weight each tool equally - actually they don't talk about tools at all. They weight each run (produced or saved) equally, and not all tools contribute the same number of runs (for most players running is pretty marginal, for example), so they don't necessarily end up privileging the guys who have more tools over those who have fewer.

As to the second point. A HR from a shortstop is no more valuable than a HR from a left fielder. But of course it's also harder to play shortstop than it is to play left field (this is why I always played left field in little league, and the kids who were actually good at baseball played short). In WAR this is reflected in a positional adjustment - basically left fielders are penalized for playing an easy defensive position and shortstops are given a bonus for playing a hard one. So if you are a HR hitting shortstop, you both get credit for hitting home runs, AND you enjoy the positional adjustment for playing the harder defensive position.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by trdcrdkid

Jay Jaffe's new book "The Cooperstown Casebook" makes the same point, which is similar to what Bill James said in his Hall of Fame book 25 years ago. I don't have Jaffe's book at hand right now, but in terms of Wins Above Replacement (WAR) as calculated on baseball-reference.com, Cuyler had a lifetime total of 46.7. That's the 223rd best lifetime WAR total among position players, tied with Roy White, just behind Tommy Leach and Gene Tenace, just ahead of Mike Cameron and Matt Williams.

The problem with WAR is that it yields premiums attached to players who clearly do not deserve them. That is precisely how the Cubs got stuck paying Jason Heyward 184 million dollars over 8 years. Dollars to doughnuts Theo Epstein would love to unload the guy, but I highly doubt that he could even get a bag of used batting practice balls for him. When your methodology yields absurd results, the intelligent person knows to question the methodology. Bill James' runs created formula, originally generated as a means of accurately predicting the number of runs a team would score and proving to be extremely reliable, when utilized in the individual player context is much more reliable in terms of offensive stats. In addition, both OPS+ and wRC+ give more accurate results regarding true player value, although you then have to make mental adjustments for defense and baserunning.

With regard to defense, I found it most interesting that about a month ago, Ken Rosenthal, confronting the gent who is in charge of calculating "defensive runs saved" (a key component of the current WAR), got the latter to admit on MLB Now that a defensive run saved is not actually a defense run saved, because the context of the defensive play is totally ignored. An outstanding play made with two outs and the bases loaded to save a single and hence a run is counted precisely the same as the same play being made with two outs and only a runner on first. Clearly, the latter scenario involves merely a fraction of a defensive run saved, based on run probability. Much more promising is the newer Statcast "outs above average," which takes into account catch probability based on actual data, and thus does not over-inflate defensive value.

Personally, I do not believe the creation of single stat to measure overall player value in such a way that it may be compared to all other players is even possible. It is based on the premise that the "five-tool" player (one who can hit, hit with power, throw, run and field) is more valuable than one who lacks one of the five or more. This is a fallacy for two reasons: (1) all tools are not equally valuable--they never have been and never will be; and (2) the value of each of the tools varies with the player's position.

But, to each his own,

Larry

[sb1]

His middle name is his mothers maiden name, just the luck of the draw I guess.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by nat

The 1930s were an exceptionally forgiving time for hitters. Surpassed only by 1993-2004ish. Cuyler's on-base plus slugging percentage was only about 25% better than league average. Compare to Matt Holliday at 32% better. While they are obviously very different players (Holliday isn't about to lead the league in stolen bases, which Cuyler did several times), in terms of over all value, Cuyler and Holliday are pretty similar. Cuyler was certainly a good player (so is Holliday), but he's on the weaker end of the hall of fame.

Unfortunately I don't have any Cuyler cards to show, but I liked that DeLong.

+1, generally. Cuyler played in the greatest hitter's era ever (runs were actually easier to score in 1927, when Ruth hit his 60 HR's, than in 1998, when McGwire hit 70, when comparing teams' runs averages per game (I was curious about this several months ago, and actually checked). Hence the somewhat deflationary effect attached to players' stats established during the 1920's to early '30's. He was, however, an outstanding player, though probably in the lowest of the three echelons of HOF'ers I usually divide them into.

Happy collecting,

Larry