DL, just to be clear, I agree that Davey B's play at SS could make him overall more valuable than Nellie - I was only speaking of offense before.

Fox vs. Bancroft/Concepcion...Fox was a better hitter at his peak in '57 and '59 than the other two. His in-season durability was remarkable. He's kind of the anti-Reggie Smith...didn't draw walks, didn't hit for power, played every game while he was young, was done by 35.

I suppose that it comes down to defence, and the measures for the careers of Fox and Bancroft are particularly inexact. Fox had a somewhat better defensive reputation than the other two, although that and five bucks will get you some coffee. I suppose that it is important to note for the benefit of some of the younger voters that Fox' reputation at the time was probably enhanced by his high batting averages, to a greater degree than would likely be true now.

As hitters, I see them as pretty much equal, maybe with Concepción slightly behind. But, once I consider the variable baseline, I rank them clearly Concepción ('70s shortstop) > Bancroft ('10s-'20s shortstop) > Fox (second baseman)

Assistance Needed: I just realized I forgot to fill out a couple of spots in my spreadsheet. If anyone has a copy of Win Shares handy, and can tell me, for Dwight Evans: 1)His defensive grade, and 2)How many years he was a WS Gold Glove winner, it would be appreciated. (I doubt it will change anything, but I'd like to have the info handy.)

TomH, Fox's AL wasn't integrated either! Sure, there were a few black players, but the vast majority of the black talent was in the NL.

Devin:

B- and no WS Gold Gloves.

Mike Green, but *even if* you posit that Fox fielded his position as well as Bancroft and Concepción did (and neither FWS nor FRAA agree with that), he still played second while they played shortstop! So again, with the bats equal, the positional advantage of Bancroft, Concepción, and Rizzuto is decisive.

Juan V., you are a good man.

Fox had 111 FWS, second most by a second baseman (Maz had 112).

Concepcion 117 FWS (5th most) and Bancroft had 103 (13th most).

Thanks, John. Ballot is coming...probably pretty close to 8:00.

Dan R, the possibility exists that Fox fielded his position better than Concepcion and much better than Bancroft. FRAA and Fielding WS are extremely crude tools for measuring defence. And the bats are not exactly equal, depending on how you address peak/prime/career issues and the weight given to in-season durability. Fox's peak was noticeably better than Concepcion's in particular.

With Dwight Evans vs. Singleton, we know that they played the same position during the same era, and we can compare them using a variety of tools. We know that Evans was a much, much better fielder (and a much better baserunner) than Singleton. To say that Singleton's modest peak hitting advantage outweighs Evans' other advantages, including career length, is, to me, much more surprising than the middle infield comparison.

> Dan R, the possibility exists that Fox fielded his position better than Concepcion and much
> better than Bancroft.

Bancroft was lauded as the best SS glove of his era and the best ever until that point. He was the Ozzie Smith of his era (unless Dick Lundy was). Fox never measured up to Mazeroski. Concepcion was in the mix for the best fielding SS year after year but there were contemporaries just about as good.

DL from MN, sorry this is so late, but here is the *right* way to calculate the DH adjustment to use on BP's season-adjusted BRAA and BRAR.

A guy produces 90 runs in 452 outs. He would do so regardless of whether he is in the AL or the NL, since the quality of pitching is assumed to be equal. In a "neutral" league, one halfway between AL and NL run scoring (.199 runs per out), he'd be a league average hitter. An AL team will, on average, score 3.7% more runs than neutral (.206 runs per out), and an NL team will score 3.7% fewer (.192 runs per out).

BP defines replacement as a .230 EqA, which is (.23^2.5)*5*Out = 57.33 EQR in those 452 outs. One EQR is 1/9 of a win. In a .206 runs per out league, one win equals 10.69 runs, while in a .192 runs per out league, one win equals 10.16 runs. Thus, according to BP, a replacement hitter would generate 57.33*10.69/9 = 68.1 real runs in the AL, and 57.33*10.16/9 = 64.7 real runs in the NL. BP would thus have the hitter at 90-68.1 = 21.9 real runs above replacement in the AL, and 90-64.7 = 25.3 real runs above replacement in the NL. Converting those back to wins, the AL hitter is 21.9/10.69 = 2.05 wins above replacement, while the NL hitter is 25.3/10.16 = 2.49 wins above replacement. So the answer is a 2.49-2.05 = 0.44 win adjustment per 452 outs.

Belanger was certainly as great a fielder as Concepción and perhaps greater, but I wouldn't hold that against David. Other than that I don't see anyone close to Concepción, at least not with any sort of consistency...Burleson was phenomenal but didn't last long.

(referring to the Ballot thread)
'zop
9. Edd Roush- The $ added system has him slightly below the in/out line, but I like the peak and the all-around play.

It seems that he was one of the stars who did not "adapt" well to the 1920s style of play. (The word is in scare quotes because I am not sure where there was adaptation, where merely a change in conditions favorable to the player's style.) Maranville is another, albeit at a lower level, a good offensive player during the teens, a poor one in the twenties.


14. Elston Howard- My ballot slants strongly Yankee; coincidence that I'm a Yankee fan? Either way, this is another guy who's not getting proper credit from the electorate... how many catchers peak in their 30's without external influences that hinder their development? If only Howard were white...

There was a fine players families panel at the NJ SABR meeting one or two winters ago. The chapter meets at the Yogi Berra Museum, Montclair State U. The Berra & Howard story is interesting. The other panelists were Berra's wife and his namesake son and Monte Irvin's daughter. Every one is worth hearing if you get a chance, the best baseball panel I've experienced.


DanR #112:
112. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: April 16, 2007 at 01:04 PM (#2336250)
I do find the support for Fox, a second baseman, over all-time great defensive shortstops with similar OPS+ like Concepción, Rizzuto, and Bancroft entirely inscrutable--given equal bats, the preference has to go to the player whose defensive value is overwhelmingly superior.

I suppose Fox supporters agree with that generalization about batting for Bancroft only, and he did not play every day like Fox. Many voters do value playing "every day" and Fox is in the second tier there, where the first tier is Gehrig, Ripken, and maybe Everett Scott.

BTW I rank Fox below those three. I thought he was a marginal choice for the Hall of Fame (As I thought of Rizzuto, whom I know how has the "lost peak" argument --a recognized argument for the Hall of Merit if not Fame-- that Fox does not have.)

> So the answer is a 2.49-2.05 = 0.44 win adjustment per 452 outs.

So that's 4.70 BRAR/BRAA per 452 outs or .01 per out. Seems a bit strange to be crediting players with a DH bonus for making more outs. Could we get this back to runs/plate appearance or do I have to use outs now?

Paul, so what did the panel say about Yogi and Ellie?

0.44 wins*9 = 3.96 per out. Yeah, the problem is that BP uses outs as its denominator. On average, that should work per 685 PA, but it might differ slightly for extremely high or low OBP cases, I'd have to figure out how to account for that.

Man, that downward adjustment makes Dwight Evans a dead ringer for Bob Johnson.

Dewey is a dead ringer for a lot of guys.