User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.4171 seconds
40 querie(s) executed

Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
This doesn't seem that impressive. The model missed 21 or so people, or one every couple of years. How many players of the recent HoF classes have been even questionable? (I'm assuming this is BBWAA-only.)
Where does the 98.7% come from? It seems impossible when I look at it more carefully.
If there are 50 players score around 75%, and the model is perfect, it will miss on 12-13 of those cases. If there are 50 players that score 52%, then the model gets an A+ if only 26 of them are elected. But you missed on 48% of them, right? You don't know which of those guys would get the call and which wouldn't.
How do they massage these numbers into 98.7?
Also, allow me to be the first to point out the classic skeptical stathead point this hasn't been proven to have any actual predictive value because they are just running correlations on what has already happened.
The Corky Miller effect tells us there's always a risk that too many the senile half of the BBWAA forget that a player exists.
Because if there's one thing that settles baseball arguments, it's the use of advanced statistical methods.
If/when Vlad gets into the Hall, which cap does he wear on his plaque?
Obviously, given the handle, you know where I stand.
If Jeff Kent has only a 14.2% chance of election, it mustn't be quite the useful proxy they think it is.
You don't happen to be a Yankees or O's fan, huh?
Well, it's also a proxy for playing on bad teams.
If there's a worse player, he's probably a catcher.
How about Mark Parent's chance of being the worst player to play in 13 consecutive seasons?
Or Gary Bennett, 11 consecutive seasons?
All his best seasons were with the Expos, so that's where my vote goes.
He's actually gotten some PT in 9 consecutive seasons now; I wonder if he's the worst player to accomplish that feat.
I was going to suggest Paul Bako, but then I looked them both up, and Corky Miller makes Paul Bako look like Johnny Bench.
Also, if you search for "the Corky" at B-Ref, you get Corky Miller's page.
It wasn't consecutive but Matt Sinatro played parts of 10 ML seasons accumulating 276 PAs with a lifetime OPS+ of 34 (Miller is at 44).
Not the same thing but Dave Eiland, John Vukovich (career OPS+ of 20!) and Raul Chavez have the fewest career WinShares (5) of any player who played 10 or ML seasons.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main