Perception of pre war baseball players vs other sports

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

^^^

On the other hand, wouldn't you just love to see Ty Cobb playing against today's comparative panty-waists?!

How many bases do you think Cobb would steal today?

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by Snowman

How many bases do you think Cobb would steal today?

Wow, that's a great question. My thoughts hadn't strayed beyond Cobb's being tough as nails vs. more modern players getting on the DL for a hangnail!

Fewer opportunities for an extra base due to bad throws of mashed-up Deadball Era baseballs, that's for sure. There are quite a few factors that would have to be taken into consideration. I don't have a good answer to your question! What are your thoughts?

Conversely, Cobb hitting only pristine, white Manfred balls would naturally lead me to wonder how many more hits he'd have today. His already staggering number would have to be even greater in my mind. Pitchers may be throwing faster now, but the perfect and predictable spheres of the modern game would have to be a much greater advantage to Cobb vs. the speed of delivery adding any hindrance.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by Snowman

How many bases do you think Cobb would steal today?

Actually, there is an easy answer. The number would be 5 or 6, but keep in mind that he'd be 136 years old!

[Seven]

Baseball itself is predicated on its history. Baseball has prided itself that it is nothing without its past. I think also being the National Pastime and the most popular sport for the majority of the 20th century also helps. The basics of the game have barely changed, I think it's well agreed upon that the hardest thing to do in any era is to hit a baseball. The gaudy numbers that players like Cobb, Ruth, Johnson, Gehrig, Wagner, put up also have a ton of staying power. Plus we have the mythos and legend that surrounds the pre-war era, which, only adds to the prestige of these players. Even at the nations worst moments, baseball was there. It provided an escape. It endured the first world war, the depression, it became the great equalizer.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Snowman

How many bases do you think Cobb would steal today?

Would and could are very different.

He played in an era where stealing bases was what was done by everyone who could. Getting a good jump I've been told is the key, maybe more important than speed.
So I think, given a perpetual green light like Henderson was Cobb would still steal a lot of bases.

But I also think he was all about the competition, and winning. If someone explained the concepts that usually a stolen base attempt isn't always "better" he would probably make fewer attempts.

And that's one of the big differences between the way it was played then and now.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by steve B

Would and could are very different.

He played in an era where stealing bases was what was done by everyone who could. Getting a good jump I've been told is the key, maybe more important than speed.
So I think, given a perpetual green light like Henderson was Cobb would still steal a lot of bases.

But I also think he was all about the competition, and winning. If someone explained the concepts that usually a stolen base attempt isn't always "better" he would probably make fewer attempts.

And that's one of the big differences between the way it was played then and now.

Yes, but isn't the idea to "get into scoring position" even more important? Back during Cobb's prime, there were very few home runs hit, so someone getting on 1st base wasn't actually a person considered in scoring position. Having a guy on 1st steal 2nd to get into scoring position was a big deal back then. Nowadays with all the big guns going for home runs, once a player gets on 1st base, to the home run hitters that may be coming up to bat behind them they are already in scoring position. So why take a chance on stealing and getting thrown out, and thus removing them from a scoring position in today's modern game, right?

In Cobb's case it would likely depend on the type of modern team he was playing on. A team like the Indians/Guardians this past year were not all about the home run, like most current MLB teams, and Cobb would have fit in a lot better. They were into players getting on base, and then moving them around via steals, hit and run, etc. Plus, if you had a guy that could steal bases like Cobb was able to, it could change some of the dynamic of the team, and how much stealing they would consider doing. Good food for thought question though.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by BobC

Yes, but isn't the idea to "get into scoring position" even more important? Back during Cobb's prime, there were very few home runs hit, so someone getting on 1st base wasn't actually a person considered in scoring position. Having a guy on 1st steal 2nd to get into scoring position was a big deal back then. Nowadays with all the big guns going for home runs, once a player gets on 1st base, to the home run hitters that may be coming up to bat behind them they are already in scoring position. So why take a chance on stealing and getting thrown out, and thus removing them from a scoring position in today's modern game, right?

In Cobb's case it would likely depend on the type of modern team he was playing on. A team like the Indians/Guardians this past year were not all about the home run, like most current MLB teams, and Cobb would have fit in a lot better. They were into players getting on base, and then moving them around via steals, hit and run, etc. Plus, if you had a guy that could steal bases like Cobb was able to, it could change some of the dynamic of the team, and how much stealing they would consider doing. Good food for thought question though.

Generally, but there's a whole thing about who is on what base and how many outs. Run expectancy.

So the risk/reward of a steal
Lets say cobb gets a single.
No outs, runner on first will expect .94 for the rest of the inning.
If he steals second that's good! 1.17
If he gets caught? Oh, down to .56

Generally the father the runners are and the fewer outs the better off you are.
But as those odds get better, the reward is less and the risk larger.

I'm not so sure I agree with the math, but the people that do calculate the expected runs for each season. And I'd bet that the teams get more detailed, like which pitcher and what runner/batter combination.

https://baseballwithr.wordpress.com/...omment-page-1/

[BobC]

Originally Posted by steve B

Generally, but there's a whole thing about who is on what base and how many outs. Run expectancy.

So the risk/reward of a steal
Lets say cobb gets a single.
No outs, runner on first will expect .94 for the rest of the inning.
If he steals second that's good! 1.17
If he gets caught? Oh, down to .56

Generally the father the runners are and the fewer outs the better off you are.
But as those odds get better, the reward is less and the risk larger.

I'm not so sure I agree with the math, but the people that do calculate the expected runs for each season. And I'd bet that the teams get more detailed, like which pitcher and what runner/batter combination.

https://baseballwithr.wordpress.com/...omment-page-1/

Steve, I agree with you, which is part of my point. Those factors/percentages they are using today, are based on today's game, and the number of HRs that are being hit. I did not, and don't have the data or resources to, do the math, and am only offering an opinion based on the use of some logic. My guess is that if you were to run the same kind of math using information and data from back in Cobb's prime playing days, the answers are going to definitely be different. Depending on what other teammates Cobb would have batting behind him if he were playing today, I agree with you that if he had some HR bashers coming up behind him, his manager would be screaming at him to stay put and not take as many chances as he may otherwise to steal a base. Now if he just had a bunch of singles hitters behind him.............