OT - New Hall of Famers: Bagwell, Raines and Ivan Rodriguez

Louieman · #1 01-23-2017, 06:00 PM

Of course that's your contention, you're a first year grad student.
You just got finished reading some Marxian historian, Pete Garrison probably. You're gonna be convinced of that until next month when you get to James Lemon, talking about, ya know, how the economies of Virginia and Pennsylvania were entrepreneurial and capitalist way back in 1740. That'll last you until next year, you're gonna be here regurgitating Gordon Wood, talking about, ya know, the pre-revolutionary utopia and the capital forming effects of military mobilization...

bravos4evr · #2 01-23-2017, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louieman

Of course that's your contention, you're a first year grad student.
You just got finished reading some Marxian historian, Pete Garrison probably. You're gonna be convinced of that until next month when you get to James Lemon, talking about, ya know, how the economies of Virginia and Pennsylvania were entrepreneurial and capitalist way back in 1740. That'll last you until next year, you're gonna be here regurgitating Gordon Wood, talking about, ya know, the pre-revolutionary utopia and the capital forming effects of military mobilization...

wrong........

I'm 44 been involved in metrics for over 10 years (after a few years of reluctance to them as well) the simple fact is that they are better at telling us the statistical story of baseball.

Life evolves, sports evolve, stats evolve. You have a choice to either evolve along with it or get left behind.

JollyElm · #3 01-23-2017, 06:46 PM

Why don't you tamp back your constant anger and realize when someone is quoting 'Good Will Hunting.' Jesus.

Louieman · #4 01-23-2017, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Why don't you tamp back your constant anger and realize when someone is quoting 'Good Will Hunting.' Jesus.

+1

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=azM6xSTT2I0

itjclarke · #5 01-23-2017, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louieman

+1

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=azM6xSTT2I0

Ibid your honor

itjclarke · #6 01-23-2017, 08:13 PM

To prior reference of there being no such thing as clutch hitting... Please

. Try digging in against Mariano Riviera in the 9th inning of the 7th game of the WS and say that. Many/most will be affected by the stage, whereas the best, the "clutch" are not. For every guy like Jeter, whose numbers look very similar in the post season, which seemingly leads people to presume the situation doesn't affect the player and his stats... There are guys like Jose Canseco, Rick Ankiel, etc, whose postseasons could never come close to matching their regular seasons. When Ankiel airmails 3-4 pitches in the 1st inning, I think it's fair to say anecdotally that there is a such thing as being "clutch", or it's evil twin- to "choke".

To prior reference about these numbers not being used for purpose of winning a championship.. Huh

Isn't that what this whole thing is about???? What the hell is the point then? I don't think Billy Beane got knee deep in his moneyball methodology to gauge players' HOF worthiness. He did so to find unique, undervalued ways to measure player value, so he could close the gap with rich teams... And WIN in the post season.

Theo Epstein clearly understands something some seem to deny. He understands this takes more than just crunching numbers to best his probability to win a WS. I'm sure he gives the analytics their fair weight, but also takes into account player/manager intangibles, personalities, etc.

bravos4evr · #7 01-23-2017, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Why don't you tamp back your constant anger and realize when someone is quoting 'Good Will Hunting.' Jesus.

funny, I haven't been angry at all, in any part of my posts. stop projecting your own personal inadequacies there pawpaw

only saw it once, had no interest in seeing it again. so I didn't recognize it. but it was an obvious attack by a flat earther against superior information. kinda like when jesus freaks lose their mind over evolution.

JollyElm · #8 01-23-2017, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

funny, I haven't been angry at all, in any part of my posts. stop projecting your own personal inadequacies there pawpaw

only saw it once, had no interest in seeing it again. so I didn't recognize it. but it was an obvious attack by a flat earther against superior information. kinda like when jesus freaks lose their mind over evolution.

Awww�the angry Braves fan, who can't even read a simple movie quote without insulting everybody, thinks I'm inadequate. Isn't that cute? Does somebody need a hug?

packs · #9 01-24-2017, 08:30 AM

What superior information ever concluded an RBI wasn't worth much? No one ever won a game 0 to 0.

bnorth · #10 01-24-2017, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

What superior information ever concluded an RBI wasn't worth much? No one ever won a game 0 to 0.

My favorite part is when the new stat guys say batting average is useless as are walks. Then in the next line use on base percentage as a important stat.

I like the metric or whatever they are called stats if used to compare players of the same position that played during the same exact time.

bnorth · #11 01-23-2017, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louieman

Of course that's your contention, you're a first year grad student.
You just got finished reading some Marxian historian, Pete Garrison probably. You're gonna be convinced of that until next month when you get to James Lemon, talking about, ya know, how the economies of Virginia and Pennsylvania were entrepreneurial and capitalist way back in 1740. That'll last you until next year, you're gonna be here regurgitating Gordon Wood, talking about, ya know, the pre-revolutionary utopia and the capital forming effects of military mobilization...

Best post in the thread. Definitely made me LOL.

That is one of my top 5 favorite movies.

BengoughingForAwhile · #12 01-24-2017, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Louieman

Of course that's your contention, you're a first year grad student.
You just got finished reading some Marxian historian, Pete Garrison probably. You're gonna be convinced of that until next month when you get to James Lemon, talking about, ya know, how the economies of Virginia and Pennsylvania were entrepreneurial and capitalist way back in 1740. That'll last you until next year, you're gonna be here regurgitating Gordon Wood, talking about, ya know, the pre-revolutionary utopia and the capital forming effects of military mobilization...

Ha! How do you like them apples?

Louieman · #13 01-24-2017, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BengoughingForAwhile

Ha! How do you like them apples?

Hey, you got that from Vickers, er, no, "Vickahs"

sycks22 · #14 01-24-2017, 10:58 AM

I'm onboard with walks being pretty useless. Adam Dunn led the league in walks twice and averaged over 100 / year with his career .237 batting average. Someone compared Raines to Gwynn saying they had the same numbers if you combine walks / hits together. Is it tougher to walk 70x's / year or hit .338 for a career? Is Adam Dunn a similar player to Jeter as some years they had the same walks/hits? What a joke.

nat · #15 01-24-2017, 11:22 AM

Whether its easier or harder to walk vs. hit for average isn't really germane to the discussion. Raines and Gwynn reached base almost exactly the same number of times, and contributed very similar amounts of value to their teams. It's true that a walk isn't as good as a hit, but it's almost as good as a single (what Gwynn was hitting), and the fact that Raines would then go on to steal second helped him a lot.

On Dunn versus Jeter: Jeter was a slightly better hitter than Dunn. Jeter got on base at a better rate than Dunn, Dunn hit for more power. The reason that Jeter will be a deserving hall of famer, and Dunn will not, is that Jeter was a good base runner and could play shortstop, whereas Dunn was a horrific base runner, and possibly the worst fielder of all time.*

*Note for Bravesfan: I know that Jeter had a lower Rfield/G than Dunn, but the positional adjustment more than makes up for it. (Dunn at shortstop would have been hilarious in a tragic sort of way.)

ejharrington · #16 01-24-2017, 03:20 PM

The Hall of Fame by definition should be geared towards FAMOUS players whose careers were deemed elite. There are different ways to measure whether they were elite (i.e., WAR and SABR-metrics, traditional stats, etc.) but statistics alone cannot be the determining measure otherwise there would be no need to have a vote; there would be bright statistical lines to determine who gets in (e.g., JAWS).

As a 47 year old who has watched baseball my entire life, Curt Schilling, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Manny Ramirez, and Sammy Sosa were some of the best ballplayers I have ever saw, are well-known to both fans and non-fans of baseball, have elite statistics, and were central figures in some of the most memorable moments in baseball history.

These players, along with no-longer eligible Mark McGuire, Pete Rose, and Keith Hernandez, should clearly be in the Hall of Fame.

No offense to Tim Raines, Vlad Guerrero, Trevor Hoffman, etc., but when you look at their bodies of work they simply are not on the level of the players I noted above.

sycks22 · #17 01-24-2017, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ejharrington

The Hall of Fame by definition should be geared towards FAMOUS players whose careers were deemed elite. There are different ways to measure whether they were elite (i.e., WAR and SABR-metrics, traditional stats, etc.) but statistics alone cannot be the determining measure otherwise there would be no need to have a vote; there would be bright statistical lines to determine who gets in (e.g., JAWS).

As a 47 year old who has watched baseball my entire life, Curt Schilling, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Manny Ramirez, and Sammy Sosa were some of the best ballplayers I have ever saw, are well-known to both fans and non-fans of baseball, have elite statistics, and were central figures in some of the most memorable moments in baseball history.

These players, along with no-longer eligible Mark McGuire, Pete Rose, and Keith Hernandez, should clearly be in the Hall of Fame.

No offense to Tim Raines, Vlad Guerrero, Trevor Hoffman, etc., but when you look at their bodies of work they simply are not on the level of the players I noted above.

You lost me at no Vlad and put Keith Hernandez on there. Outside of being a good fielding 1 bagger, what did he do? Average is every way. Will Clark was better is every offensive category and nobody is making an argument for him.

Snapolit1 · #18 01-25-2017, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ejharrington

The Hall of Fame by definition should be geared towards FAMOUS players whose careers were deemed elite. There are different ways to measure whether they were elite (i.e., WAR and SABR-metrics, traditional stats, etc.) but statistics alone cannot be the determining measure otherwise there would be no need to have a vote; there would be bright statistical lines to determine who gets in (e.g., JAWS).

As a 47 year old who has watched baseball my entire life, Curt Schilling, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Manny Ramirez, and Sammy Sosa were some of the best ballplayers I have ever saw, are well-known to both fans and non-fans of baseball, have elite statistics, and were central figures in some of the most memorable moments in baseball history.

These players, along with no-longer eligible Mark McGuire, Pete Rose, and Keith Hernandez, should clearly be in the Hall of Fame.

No offense to Tim Raines, Vlad Guerrero, Trevor Hoffman, etc., but when you look at their bodies of work they simply are not on the level of the players I noted above.

Your idea is basically just another way of saying big market guys from the east and west coast and Chicago who get a ton on hype and are better known personality wise (like Keith) should be in the hall, while guys who toiled in relative obscurity in San Diego and Montreal before small crowds and few reporters should get short shrift.

rats60 · #19 01-26-2017, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nat

Whether its easier or harder to walk vs. hit for average isn't really germane to the discussion. Raines and Gwynn reached base almost exactly the same number of times, and contributed very similar amounts of value to their teams. It's true that a walk isn't as good as a hit, but it's almost as good as a single (what Gwynn was hitting), and the fact that Raines would then go on to steal second helped him a lot.

This is the kind of disconnect that makes these discussions impossible. A walk scores a runner from 3rd rarely, never scores a runner from 2nd. A single almost always scores the runner from 3rd and most of the time from 2nd. A single is much more valuable than a walk. The goal of the game is to score runs not win at fantasy baseball.

bn2cardz · #20 01-26-2017, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rats60

This is the kind of disconnect that makes these discussions impossible. A walk scores a runner from 3rd rarely, never scores a runner from 2nd. A single almost always scores the runner from 3rd and most of the time from 2nd. A single is much more valuable than a walk. The goal of the game is to score runs not win at fantasy baseball.

It really is hard comparing straight up stats without taking it into context. Walks don't earn RBI, but when it was Raines he would get himself in position to score a run.

Raines did steal 808 times ranking him 5th all-time. This is ranked #1 all time for switch hitters.

For the top 10 in stolen bases he ranks 5th in BA behind Ty Cobb, Billy Hamilton, Eddie Collins, and Honus Wagner.

He ranks 54th all time in Runs Scored. His Runs scored 162 game average is 102 this would rank him 40th. Raines Stolen Base 162 avg was 52. Of the top 40 players with higher higher than 102 R/162 games only two have better base stealing averages. That is Billy Hamilton with 93 SB/162 games and Ricky Henderson with 74 SB/162 games.

There are also only two switch hitters higher on the Runs Scored / 162 games list. Mickey Mantle and Chipper Jones

Raines is the only switch hitter to have both a 162 game average of 100+ runs and 20+ bases stolen for a career.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Raines, Bagwell and IRod get the call	Griffins	Watercooler Talk- ALL sports talk	36	01-24-2017 11:07 AM
FS: Ivan Rodriguez and Roger Clemens 8x10's PSA	Sportskansascity	Autographs & Game Used B/S/T	2	06-27-2015 06:04 AM
FS: Ivan "Pudge" Rodriguez Signed Game Used Mizuno Bat	sprtsrul11	Autographs & Game Used B/S/T	0	06-15-2013 10:46 AM
Looking for hall of famers	jb217676	Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T	7	05-18-2011 10:44 AM
T-210 Hall of Famers?	M's_Fan	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	9	10-15-2010 05:24 PM