Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Hall of Merit > Discussion
Hall of Merit
— A Look at Baseball's All-Time Best

Thursday, June 09, 2011

Most Meritorious Player: 1962 Discussion

In 1962, the National League followed the American League’s 1961 lead and expanded by two teams. They put the Metropolitans in New York, and the Colt .45s in Houston. The National League also gained one of the great stadiums of baseball in the shape of Dodger Stadium, bringing the Dodgers out of the rather inappropriately shaped Coliseum into a purpose-built ballpark.

The baseball season opened on 9 April 1962. By then, Gary Powers had been exchanged for a capture Soviet spy, the first K-mart store opened in Garden City, Michigan, and Shelley Fabares had the #1 hit with “Johnny Angel”. During the season, the first Wal-Mart store opened in Rogers, Arkansas, Marilyn Monroe died, and Johnny Carson became host of the Tonight Show.

The National League was largely dominated by two teams, the Dodgers and their California rivals the San Francisco Giants. At various time Pittsburgh, St Louis and Cincinnati made a run at first place, but in the end it came down to a three-game playoff between the Dodgers and the Giants.

The American League showed some signs of parity, with the Los Angeles Angels, in their sophomore season, standing three games behind the mighty Yankees as late as 26 August. The Twins similarly tracked the Yankees as the season neared its final month. Neither team could make up those elusive three games in September, and the Yankees secured yet another AL pennant.

The Giants defeated the Dodgers in the playoff, but broke the hearts of Joe Shlabotnik’s biggest fan: “Why couldn’t McCovey have hit the ball three feet higher?“in losing a thrilling seven-game series to the Yankees. The season ended on 10 October. Four days later, the Cuban Missile Crisis began.

Here are some of the top players ranked by Win Shares, BB-ref WAR, DanR’s WARP2 and WPA/LI.

                   WS	BB-Ref	DanR 	WPA/LI
Mays, Willie	   41	10.6	8.3	6.7
Robinson, Frank	   41	8.5	7.9	6.2
Davis, Tommy	   36	6.8	5.4	4.7
Aaron, Hank	   34	8.8	7.5	5.6
Mantle, Mickey	   33	7.1	9.7	7.2
Wills, Maury	   32	6.1	5.4	1.9
Callison, Johnny   27	5.6	5.7	3.5
Robinson, Brooks   27	5.6	6.5	2.1
Siebern, Norm	   27	5.5	5.2	5.3
Robinson, Floyd	   27	3.9	4	2.7
Purkey, Bob	   26	7.2	5.7	3.9
Colavito, Rocky	   26	5.8	4.5	2.9
Mathews, Eddie	   26	5.7	5.7	3.7
Romano, John	   26	4.8	4.9	2.1
Pinson, Vada	   26	4.2	4	2.5
Skinner, Bob	   26	3.5	4.4	3.7
Cepeda, Orlando	   26	3.1	3.5	3
Alou, Felipe	   25	5.4	4.1	3.9
Tresh, Tom	   25	4.7	4.9	2
Demeter, Dom	   25	4.2	4.7	2.8
Maris, Roger	   25	4.2	3.8	1.9
Howard, Frank	   25	4	3.9	3.6
Drysdale, Don	   24	5.7     6.1	4.1
Cunningham, Joe	   24	4.5	3.7	3.1
Runnels, Pete	   24	3.5	4.2	3.2
Moran, Billy	   24	3.3	4.8	1
Killebrew, Harmon  24	2.7	3.3	4.2
Wagner, Leon	   24	2.6	3.4	3.3

The ballot thread will follow in about three weeks.

EDIT: The DanR numbers are incorrect, owing to me reading the wrong column. Please see post 31 below for the correct numbers. My apologies. /fra paolo

fra paolo Posted: June 09, 2011 at 03:25 AM | 103 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

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.

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. bjhanke Posted: June 09, 2011 at 12:03 PM (#3849094)
I took a look at pitchers over in BB-Ref, and came across Turk Ferrell, leading everyone with a tremendous WAR (7.1, equal to Mickey Mantle's) that does not seem consistent with any of his IP, ERA+ or component stats. Ferrell had been a good closer for the Phillies before 1962, so it's not as if he were just a lousy pitcher. He was a good one whom the Astros drafted early because the Dodgers, for some bad reason, left him out there. But I don't see anything to justify the WAR that BB-Ref gives him. Can anyone who knows how BB-Ref's WAR system works explain what Ferrell did that impressed the system so much? Thanks, - Brock
   2. Chris Fluit Posted: June 09, 2011 at 12:14 PM (#3849099)
I've found that BB-ref's pitching WAR relies heavily on FIP stats (fielding independent pitching). Farrell had a great K rate (203 for 4th overall and 5th best per 9 innings) and a low WHIP (1.09, 2nd overall and 6th in both walks per 9 and hits per 9). I noticed this last year when Reds and Tigers pitchers like Jim O'Toole, Don Mossi and Jim Bunning had low WAR numbers compared to their IP and ERA+. Mossi and Bunning in particular got nailed for having a great defense behind them (Colavito in left and Kaline in right).
   3. fra paolo Posted: June 09, 2011 at 12:58 PM (#3849108)
My master list is longer than the list published above, and Turk Farrell is on it. He, however, only has 19 Win Shares and for reasons of my own (that have nothing to do with thinking Win Shares is the best system) I use them as my initial guide in making the cut.

One might consider that both systems have an issue with TTO pitchers, and the truth lies somewhere in between. But I don't think I agree with that.
   4. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: June 09, 2011 at 01:05 PM (#3849118)
#1 slot seems to be almost as much of a slam-dunk as last year. It'll be an interesting race between Robinson, Aaron, maybe Mantle for 2-4.
   5. bjhanke Posted: June 09, 2011 at 01:44 PM (#3849138)
Chris - Thanks. That helps a lot. I'm still dicey on the value of FIP, because I'm dicey on pretty much everyone's defensive numbers, including mine (main reason is that they don't agree with each other nearly was well as offensive metrics do). But this makes sense. I'd assume that the expansion 45s (whom I will probably call the Astros all thread) had a bad defense. If you have a bad defense behind you and a low WHIP, and the system really likes your strikeout/walk ratio, I can see where the ranking can get real high.

FRA, your comment is a help, too, because I tend to rely more on WS for defense than most do. However, I'm not familiar with the acronym TTO. What does it mean? Hell, while I'm at it, does anyone know what "bump and "pass" mean when they are comments in a thread? I missed the period when they came into vogue, and haven't been able to figure them out from context.

I'm not sure yet that #1 is a slam-dunk, though I think it probably will be. But Mantle has the lead in two of the columns above, while Mays has the lead in the other two. Mays' margins over Mantle are greater than Mantle's over Mays, but I haven't seen the league adjustments yet. This is the NL's year to expand, although they still have the black player bonus.

Thanks, - Brock
   6. DL from MN Posted: June 09, 2011 at 01:51 PM (#3849143)
TTO - three true outcomes (walk, strikeout, home run)

Bump - a comment meant solely to get the thread to the next page or top of the the list of current threads
Pass - reference to Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract Jeff Bagwell comment
   7. DL from MN Posted: June 09, 2011 at 02:24 PM (#3849164)
1962 Prelim Ballot

1) Willie Mays
2) Frank Robinson - the difference between the two is solely positional adjustment. Robinson was the better hitter, barely.
3) Mickey Mantle - the numbers say his fielding was in decline
4) Hank Aguirre - led the AL in ERA, made 2 all star teams in 1962 (as did many of these guys)
5) Henry Aaron
6) Brooks Robinson
7) Turk Farrell
8) Bob Gibson
9) Warren Spahn
10) Maury Wills

11-15) Don Drysdale, Camilo Pascual, Bob Purkey, Norm Siebern, Eddie Mathews
   8. DL from MN Posted: June 09, 2011 at 02:37 PM (#3849175)
Does Thurs-Wed work well for the ballot thread? It works well for me to end on a Wednesday.
   9. DanG Posted: June 09, 2011 at 04:17 PM (#3849265)
Here's how the DT cards at Baseball Prospectus see the best of 1962:

1962       WARP1  WARP2  WARP3
W
Mays    10.2    9.6    9.6
F
Robinson 9.5    8.8    8.8
H
Aaron    7.8    7.2    7.2
B
Robinson 7.7    6.4    6.4
T
Farrell  7.3    6.4    6.4
B
Gibson   7.1    6.2    6.2
M
Mantle   6.9    5.6    5.6
D
Drysdale 6.9    5.6    5.6
H
Aguirre  6.9    5.5    5.5
M
Wills    6.4    5.7    5.7
B
Purkey   6.7    5.5    5.5
T
Davis    6.4    5.6    5.5 
   10. fra paolo Posted: June 09, 2011 at 04:28 PM (#3849273)
Does BPro use a FIP-type metric in calculating WARP? It does look like it.
   11. DanG Posted: June 09, 2011 at 04:32 PM (#3849277)
Also Warren Spahn 7.5 6.3 6.3
   12. OCF Posted: June 09, 2011 at 04:41 PM (#3849282)
Here's a piece I wrote to amuse a few friends some time around 200, edited down some. This was before bb-ref and lacks many more recent sabermetric features. It's also entirely about offense.

Tommy Davis had 153 RBI in 1962. No one else had this many RBI in any year between 1949 and 1998, so it is a completely mind-boggling number. But how, really, does it compare to other seasons with a similar number of RBI’s? In the 20th century (meaning, in practice, since 1920) there have been 53 seasons of 145 or more RBI. That leaves 35 seasons of 145-159 RBI. Of these 35, 21 were in the years 1922 -1953, 13 were in the years 1970-1999, and Davis was the one in between. The man with 145 RBI in 1953 was Al Rosen, which I never would have guessed. The man with 148 RBI in 1970 was Johnny Bench.

Now, let me compare three "seasons": Tommy Davis's, 1962 season, the average of the 21 seasons of 145-160 before Davis, and the average of the 13 seasons of 145-160 after Davis.

.                  G   AB  H   2B 3B HR BB R   RBI Avg  OBP  Slg
Tommy Davis
1962  163 665 230 27  9 27 33 120 153 .346 .379 .535
Average
1922-1953 152 579 200 36  8 41 91 135 152 .346 .435 .647
Average
1970-1999 157 597 182 33  2 52 81 117 149 .305 .390 .630 


In addition, Davis was 18-6 as a basestealer, compared to 7-5 for the early ones and 8-3 for the late ones.

So Davis's year was not at all typical of years with about that many RBI. It's more games and more at bats than typical, it's only a little over half the home runs, it's barely a third of the walks. If you sort the list of 35 seasons by a number of attributes, Davis’s season is almost always extreme - it sorts to the bottom or the top. To be specific:
Games: No one else played as many as 163 games. The next 4 were 161, 159, 159, 157.
At Bats: Davis's 665 is second to the 670 of Al Simmons, 1932, followed by 652 for Don Mattingly, 1985 and 643 for Sosa, 1998.
Hits: Davis's 230 is third behind 250 for Rogers Hornsby, 1922, and 237 for Joe Medwick, 1937. Hornsby also had 229 in 1929.
Singles: Davis had 167, which is by far the most. The second highest was 148 for Hornsby, 1922, and the third highest was 144 for Simmons, 1932. The average number of singles was 115 for 1922-53 and 94 for 1970-99.
Doubles and Triples: Davis’s totals are not extreme, but the doubles are low.
Home Runs: Davis's 27 is easily the fewest. Next are Medwick and Ted Williams, 1939, at 31. (This was Williams as a 20-year-old rookie.)
Walks: Davis’s 33 is the second fewest, behind Simmons, 1929, with 31. Andres Galarraga, 1996 had 40, Medwick had 41, and Juan Gonzalez, 1998 had 46.
Batting Average: Davis's .346 matches the average of the 1922-1953 group but is higher than any of the 1970-1999 group. The highest of the latter group are Mattingly, 1985, and Rafael Palmiero, 1999, with .324.
On-Base Percentage: Davis’s .379 is below average in this group, but Bench, Galarraga, one of the Griffey years, one of the Simmons years, Ramirez, and Sosa are all lower.
Slugging Percentage: Davis’s .535 is the lowest. The next three are Stephens .539, Simmons, 1932, .548, and Mattingly .567. This is the one I'll focus on below.

Any individual's potential for driving in runs is most simply evaluated by giving that player’s slugging percentage. We controlled for RBI total in this study, giving everyone about 150. As a result, we got many slugging percentages in the mid-.600's. To be specific, of our 35 seasons, we had 19 slugging percentages between .610 and .690, with 9 below .610 and 7 above .690 (7 seasons but only 4 players: Gehrig, Hornsby, McGwire twice, and Ruth three times). This isn't symmetric. If we found a bunch of players with slugging percentages in the mid-.600’s, the average RBI would be well below 150 - probably in the 130's. There are three other things that a player could be or do to enhance his RBI totals. The first is to be durable and to play as many games as possible (which is certainly true of Davis’s 1962 year). The second, which is actually a negative attribute, is to be an impatient hitter who draws few walks. Davis was certainly that, and I’ll expand on it in a moment. The third is to be a "clutch hitter," that is, to hit better with runners on base than with the bases empty. Davis must have been that in 1962. Is it a real skill? See a thousand other arguments.
What about this business of about nonselective, low-walk hitters getting more RBI's but it's a negative trait? It’s certainly a real phenomenon. For the decade of the 1990's, per 162 games played, Juan Gonzalez had the highest RBI rate at 141. Barry Bonds, Frank Thomas, and Jeff Bagwell had "only" 122, 123, and 118. [excised digression about 1987, Jack Clark, and Andre Dawson.]

There are only a few things that a player can do himself to drive in runs, with the most important measured by slugging percentage, but the context around him can also make a big difference. I often talk about ballpark context, but that’s irrelevant to the issue I’m pursuing here. Andres Galarraga's 1996 season, played in a joke ballpark, is an inferior accomplishment compared to the others I'm studying, but he did hit 47 home runs and slug .601, which make his 150 RBI’s plausible. For the raw stats, the RBI totals depend in their own way on context. One aspect is general team context. A team like the 1930 Cubs or 1932 A's or 1999 Indians on which everyone hits scores so many runs that the innings keep turning over and everyone in the lineup gets more plate appearances and more chances with runners on base. You need a team like that to have a year like Hack Wilson's 1930 or Manny Ramirez's 1999. But specific lineup position matters, especially the one or two players in front of the batter in question. Popular myth always looks at the player behind, the "protection", which is just nonsense, while ignoring the real issues in front. It is very bad for RBI's to bat immediately behind a low-OBP home run hitter, but it is quite good to bat behind a Ted Williams - Babe Ruth type with an extremely high OBP. It can be even better to bat just behind a player with a high OBP who never hits home runs. For a singles hitter to have a high number of RBI's - and face it, in this context, Tommy Davis is a singles hitter - you need for the batters ahead to not just be on base but to already be in scoring position. For the singles hitter, it helps greatly to bat behind an extreme base stealer, but preferrably not immediately behind because being the batter during a stolen base attempt is usually ruinous for the batter’s own averages.
What was the overall team context for Davis, the 1962 Dodgers? Dodger Stadium was brand-new and had just opened. I suspect a number of adjustments were made on the stadium during its first year. Quite possibly, it didn't start out as anything like the extreme pitchers park it would become. During the 165 game season (which included a losing three-game playoff with the Giants), the Dodgers scored 842 runs (second in the league). Everyone on the team seemed to be having a good year at the same time. From 1962 to 1963, the league batting average dropped from .261 to .245 and the league ERA dropped from 3.94 to 3.29. The Dodgers offense fell off a cliff, all the way to 6th place at 640 runs scored, while the team ERA fell from a 3rd place 3.52 to a league’s best 2.85. Not coincidentally, Sandy Koufax began the 4-year run on which his legend is based. I’ll get to the batting order context next.
Of the 35 seasons I profiled, Davis had the lowest slugging percentage. Let me show you the next three, two of which count as the two most similar seasons to Davis’s.

.                   G   AB  H   2B 3B HR BB  R   RBI Avg  OBP  Slg
Tommy Davis
1962   163 665 230 27  9 27  33 120 153 .346 .379 .535
Vern Stephens
1949 155 610 177 31  2 39 101 113 159 .290 .391 .539
Al Simmons
1932    154 670 216 28  9 35  47 144 151 .322 .368 .548
Don Mattingly
1985 159 652 211 48  3 35  56 107 145 .324 .379 .567 


Davis batted either 3rd or 4th in the order. The leadoff hitter, Maury Wills, had an extreme stolen base year of 104-13. His OBP of .349 wasn’t great but it was good enough in context. Wills scored 130 runs. The #2 hitter was Junior Gilliam. On the one hand Gilliam shielded Davis from having to bat during stolen base attempts, but also Gilliam himself had an excellent OBP of .372 while hitting fewer than 5 home runs.

Stephens was in an excellent team context - a Red Sox team that scored a large number of runs playing in Fenway Park - and he must have been batting directly behind Ted Williams. Williams drew 162 walks (tied with McGwire for the second highest of all time) and had an on base percentage of .490. Stephens had one very important difference from Davis, namely that he drew many walks.

Simmons's A's scored 981 runs in 154 games, second only to the Ruth-Gehrig Yankees and 140 runs more than any other team in the majors. The three highest on base percentages in the league were all Philadephia players - Cochrane .459, Foxx .449, and Bishop .446. Simmons must have been batting behind one or two of them.

Mattingly batted 3rd for the Yankees. The leadoff hitter was Rickey Henderson. Rickey played only 143 games but scored 146 runs. Rickey was the greatest leadoff hitter of all time and this might have been his best year. I don’t know who the Yankees had batting in the #2 "Junior Gilliam" position, but if it was Willie Randolph, then Randolph had a .385 on base percentage and no power at all. Mattingly got voted the MVP and that was terrible choice. The best Yankee candidate for the award was surely Henderson, but the award itself probably should have gone to George Brett.

[I finished with evidence that the 1962 NL All-Star outfield should have been the "usual suspect": Robinson, Mays, and Aaron.]
   13. DanG Posted: June 09, 2011 at 04:43 PM (#3849284)
Dick Radatz had his first "monster" season. Top RP in pitching WAR:

Rk           Player WAR ERA+  WHIP   WPA  G GS    IP Age  Tm Lg GF  W  L SV
1       Dick Radatz 4.4  185 1.083 2.870 62  0 124.2  25 BOS AL 53  9  6 24
2          Roy Face 3.4  211 1.011 2.950 63  0  91.0  34 PIT NL 57  8  7 28
3         Dick Hall 2.9  162 1.023 2.230 43  6 118.1  31 BAL AL 14  6  6  6
4         Terry Fox 2.6  239 1.103 3.337 44  0  58.0  26 DET AL 28  3  1 16
5      Eddie Fisher 2.5  127 1.172 1.295 57 12 182.2  25 CHW AL 19  9  5  5
6    Jack Baldschun 2.3  131 1.358 1.545 67  0 112.2  25 PHI NL 49 12  7 13
7      Hoyt Wilhelm 2.2  192 1.054 2.321 52  0  93.0  39 BAL AL 44  7 10 15
8     Frank Baumann 2.2  117 1.279 1.847 40 10 119.2  28 CHW AL 12  7  6  4
9       Chris Short 1.9  113 1.444 0.271 47 12 142.0  24 PHI NL 16 11  9  3
10     Bobby Shantz 1.9  214 1.085 0.479 31  3  78.1  36 TOT NL 19  6  4  4
11     Jim Umbricht 1.8  187 1.015 0.886 34  0  67.0  31 HOU NL 21  4  0  2
12   Ron Perranoski 1.6  126 1.295 2.105 70  0 107.1  26 LAD NL 39  6  6 20 
   14. OCF Posted: June 09, 2011 at 04:57 PM (#3849290)
Now that I do have bb-ref: some batting order corrections.

The 1962 Dodgers batted Tommy Davis 4th, not 3rd. The order went Wills, Gilliam, Willie Davis, Tommy Davis. Willie Davis batted .285/.334/.453 with 103 R and 85 RBI. The thing I don't understand is Gilliam only scoring 83 runs with his .370 OPB in 700 PA in mostly in the #2 spot.

The 1985 Yankees mostly used Ken Griffey, Sr. in the #2 spot, between Henderson and Mattingly, and reasonably often batten Mattingly 2nd, with no one between him and Henderson.

The lineup for the 1949 Red Sox went DiMaggio, Pesky, Williams, Stephens. DiMaggio and Pesky had OPB of .404 and .408, with very little power and Williams was, well Williams, including a .490 OPB. Stephen had a lot of runners on base.

In 1950, the Red Sox mostly kept the same lineup, and the OPB for DiMaggio and Pesky were up to .414 and .437. But Williams only played 89 games. When Williams was out, Stephens stayed in the cleanup spot, with Billy Goodman (.354/.427/.455) batting 3rd.
   15. Best Dressed Chicken in Town Posted: June 09, 2011 at 05:25 PM (#3849300)
I've found that BB-ref's pitching WAR relies heavily on FIP stats (fielding independent pitching).

No, this isn't right. Fangraphs' WAR does that. B-R's is based on actual runs allowed, adjusted by park, defense, and leverage.

In re Turk Farrell, he had terrible defensive support, almost as bad as the Mets' pitchers received. WAR says a replacement pitcher would have allowed 142 runs in Farrell's IP in the Astrodome with an average defense, but because of the bad defense, the replacement would have allowed 155 runs. That's worth another 1.5 WAR or so.

On top of that, Farrell pitched a lot of important relief innings, so his average LI was 1.2 (most SP are at about 1.0). His runs above replacement are therefore worth more.
   16. DL from MN Posted: June 09, 2011 at 08:45 PM (#3849459)
Tom Tresh and Clete Boyer are the only 2 candidates that look like they should get some postseason credit. Mays was pretty pedestrian and Mantle was terrible. Ford pitched okay.
   17. DL from MN Posted: June 09, 2011 at 08:58 PM (#3849478)
John Romano and Tom Haller are probably the top catchers in 1962 but I wouldn't put them in a top 10.
   18. Steve Treder Posted: June 09, 2011 at 08:58 PM (#3849479)
in the Astrodome

Nitpick: the Astrodome hadn't been built yet in 1962. The Colt .45s played in Colt Stadium.
   19. DL from MN Posted: June 09, 2011 at 09:04 PM (#3849483)
McCovey had some pretty great rate stats. What kept him from playing more games in 1962?
   20. DL from MN Posted: June 09, 2011 at 09:07 PM (#3849486)
sunnyday2 Posted: May 11, 2011 at 05:09 PM (#3824553)

I think looking at rate is appropriate in an MMP discussion.



I'm not sure what this was addressing though there was a comment about players who miss time due to military service...but the more obivous scenario is injury, and we will get to address that almost immediately, meaning not 1961, but 1962.

Mickey Mantle, AL MVP by a substantial margin over teammate Bobby Richardson (about a 3-to-2 margin) and 3rd place Harmon Killebrew (by almost 2.5-to-1). Played 123 games as injuries started to catch up with him at age 30. In about 75 percent of a season, he led the league in slugging at .605 and OBA at .488. His traditional triple crown numbers were 30-89-.321, not anywhere close to the league lead in the former 2 categories but 2nd in BA. His 96 runs scored was 6th best.

My personal opinion is Norm Siebern was the MVP that year but WS has Mantle at 33 with Siebern and Brooks and Floyd Robinson at 27.

Of course we are combining the 2 leagues. In the NL, WS has Frank Robinson at 41 but he wasn't the MVP, Maury Wills was with 32. Tommy Davis had 36, Aaron 34, Willie Mays also 41. This of course was the NL's equivalent of 1961--their expansion year. So discount those 41s, especially, like you did Cash's 42.

Overall OBA

Mantle .488
Frank .421
Siebern .412
Aaron 9th at .390

Overall SA

Frank .624
Aaron .618
Mays .615
Mantle .605

OPS+ (Baseball Encyclopedia)

Mantle 198
Frank 172
Aaron 171
Mays 167

I'm not suggesting that Mantle get "credit" for the 39 games he didn't play. I'm just wondering if his value per game was enough higher than everybody else to "merit" some consideration. That and the fact that the Yankees ended up as world champs, which would have been inconceivable for this Yankees team without him.
   21. Steve Treder Posted: June 09, 2011 at 09:16 PM (#3849494)
McCovey had some pretty great rate stats. What kept him from playing more games in 1962?

Alvin Dark's incompetence.
   22. DL from MN Posted: June 09, 2011 at 09:17 PM (#3849496)
Walt Bond was in his 2nd year of being held back by the slow pace of integration in 1962. Good year at AAA and one helluva cup of coffee. Then back to AAA for 1963. Seems like he should have gotten a shot with all the expansion going on.
   23. DL from MN Posted: June 09, 2011 at 09:20 PM (#3849498)
Back to McCovey - you would think the LHB would win the most starts in a platoon. It's not like Kuenn or Cepeda were good fielders.
   24. Mefisto Posted: June 09, 2011 at 09:37 PM (#3849514)
The thing I don't understand is Gilliam only scoring 83 runs with his .370 OPB in 700 PA in mostly in the #2 spot.


Must be all those double plays Willie Davis hit into. :)

Back to McCovey - you would think the LHB would win the most starts in a platoon. It's not like Kuenn or Cepeda were good fielders.


You're overlooking how important BA was considered in those days. Kuehn was a .300 hitter -- that counted for everything to a guy like Al Dark.
   25. DL from MN Posted: June 09, 2011 at 09:48 PM (#3849526)
I have Tommy Davis essentially tied with Eddie Mathews @ 15. I think you can make a good argument for McCovey this year based on managerial misuse but I have a hard time raising him into the top 10. Maybe someone else can convince me a regressed McCovey was better than Norm Siebern in 1962.
   26. Steve Treder Posted: June 09, 2011 at 10:14 PM (#3849543)
Kuehn was a .300 hitter -- that counted for everything to a guy like Al Dark.

Even though McCovey had presented a dramatically better offensive season than Kuenn under Dark in 1961, including hitting for a slightly higher average.

The detailed explanation of why McCovey got so few starts in 1962 was that Dark had converted McCovey from first base to the outfield in '62 (even though Cepeda already had extensive experience in the outfield, and was vastly better-suited to playing out there than McCovey), and Dark was afraid that McCovey's outfield defense (which was off-the-charts awful) would cost more runs than his bat would create. Of course, in 1963 Dark would change his mind about that.

If you get the feeling that I think the Giants won the 1962 pennant despite Dark's managing than because of it, it's only because I do.
   27. Rob_Wood Posted: June 10, 2011 at 01:55 AM (#3849687)
Yes, a good book can be written about how little the SF Giants got out of their talent in the 1960's. The McCovey-Cepeda-Dark triangle was one of the leading reasons for the underachievement.
   28. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: June 10, 2011 at 02:48 AM (#3849749)
Alvin Dark has to be one of the worst managers to win a WS, right?
   29. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: June 10, 2011 at 08:30 AM (#3850038)
You're looking at the wrong column, Fra Paolo. I have Mantle at 7.1 WARP2 in 1962. The 9.7 is on a rate basis (what he projected to in a full season's worth of playing time). Mays is #1 for me.
   30. fra paolo Posted: June 10, 2011 at 02:18 PM (#3850137)
That mistake noted by DanR in 29 needs to be extended to all the DanR numbers. I will see if I can fix it.
   31. fra paolo Posted: June 10, 2011 at 02:48 PM (#3850161)
Rather than risk some kind of damage by editing the above, I have opted instead to post the correction here.

Corrected DanR WARP2 numbers

Mays 8.6
Frank Robinson 8.1
Aaron 7.3
Mantle 7.1
Brooks Robinson 6.5
Drysdale 6.1
Wills 6
Purkey 5.7
Davis 5.6
Siebern 5.4
Mathews 5.4
Callison 5.5
Tresh 5.1
Moran 5.0
Colavito 4.6
Demeter 4.2
Floyd Robinson 4.0
Romano 3.9
Pinson 3.9
Maris 3.8
Runnels 3.8
Skinner 3.8
Alou 3.6
Cepeda 3.5
Cunningham 3.2
Frank Howard 3.1
Wagner 2.8
Killebrew 2.5
   32. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: June 10, 2011 at 06:08 PM (#3850373)
Prelim:

1) Willie Mays
2) Frank Robinson
3) Mickey Mantle
4) Tommy Davis
5) Hank Aaron
6) Maury Wills
7) John Romano
8) Bob Purkey
9) Eddie Mathews
10) Bob Skinner
   33. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: June 10, 2011 at 06:15 PM (#3850379)
#1 slot seems to be almost as much of a slam-dunk as last year.


I don't see that at all. Though I have Mays as numero uno, I can see somebody having Robisnon at the top. It's that close, IMO.

In 1961, however, no one was near Mantle. He truly dominted the majors.
   34. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: June 10, 2011 at 06:46 PM (#3850399)
Revised prelim:

1) Willie Mays
2) Frank Robinson
3) Mickey Mantle
4) Tommy Davis
5) Hank Aaron
6) Maury Wills
7) Hank Aguirre
8) John Romano
9) Bob Purkey
10) Eddie Mathews
   35. DL from MN Posted: June 10, 2011 at 06:49 PM (#3850403)
Hank Aguirre seems like a missed name on the top list. BBREF gives him 6.9 pitching WAR and has him head and shoulders ahead of the rest of the AL. Dan R allots 6.7 WARP2 and ranks him 1st among pitchers ahead of Farrell. There may be a league adjustment I'm ignoring with Dan R's numbers also and the AL is the stronger league.
   36. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: June 10, 2011 at 06:53 PM (#3850405)
In 1961, however, no one was near Mantle. He truly dominted the majors.

"Dominated" was the word I thought I had typed.
   37. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: June 10, 2011 at 07:02 PM (#3850409)
I'm not suggesting that Mantle get "credit" for the 39 games he didn't play. I'm just wondering if his value per game was enough higher than everybody else to "merit" some consideration.


It not only was higher, Marc, but the combination of Mantle's quality and quantity numbers pushes him head and shoulders above anybody else in the AL that year, IMO. AFAIAC, Mantle was the AL MVP, hands down.
   38. DanG Posted: June 10, 2011 at 08:52 PM (#3850496)
Mantle's quality and quantity numbers pushes him head and shoulders above anybody else in the AL that year
The only other AL guy even in the same hemisphere was Kaline - and he missed 61 games.

Hank Aguirre seems like a missed name on the top list. BBREF gives him 6.9 pitching WAR and has him head and shoulders ahead of the rest of the AL.
Interesting thing with BBREF WAR. Aguirre was so dismal at the plate that year (and most others) that he takes a -1.2 hit. Jim Kaat, with 5.2 pitching WAR, had a good year batting and gets 0.5 WAR. Camilo Pascual, with 4.8 pitching WAR, was outstanding at the plate, adding 0.9.

So all three, Aguirre, Kaat and Pascual, had 5.7 WAR in 1962.
   39. Rob_Wood Posted: June 11, 2011 at 02:35 AM (#3850684)
My prelim ballot:

1. Willie Mays
2. Frank Robinson
3. Hank Aaron
4. Tommy Davis
5. Mickey Mantle

6. Don Drysdale
7. Maury Wills
8. Brooks Robinson
9. Bob Purkey
10. Johnny Callison
   40. OCF Posted: June 12, 2011 at 01:55 AM (#3851163)
A list of pitchers, by RA+ PythPat equivalent record. Sorted (each league separately) by equivalent Fibonacci Win Points. Things to note: the most important things this does not include are team defensive support, and the pitcher's own offensive contributions. And the latter - pitcher hitting - covers a huge range with this list of pitchers, from quite good (Gibson and Pascual) to so bad you've got to look it up to believe it (Aguirre). And this is probably not the best measure of RP.

AL:

Aguirre 17-7 (but he was an awful hitter)
Ford 18-11
Kaat 18-12
Pascual 18-11 (plus good hitting)
Herbert 16-10
Radatz 11-3
Roberts 14-8
Terry 19-15
Bunning 16-12
McBride 16-12
Wilhelm 7-3

NL:

Gibson 18-8 (plus good hitting)
Purkey 20-12
Broglio 17-8
Spahn 19-11
Friend 18-11
Koufax 15-7
Shaw 16-9
Drysdale 20-15
Farrell 16-11
Sanford 17-13
Jay 17-13
Marichal 17-13
Face 8-2

BB-ref WAR adjusts Farrell up to a league-leading position, mostly because of the bad Colt .45 defense behind him.

Compared to the 1961 pitchers: we still don't have anyone standing out from the crowd, but the best look a little better. We do have a couple of equivalent 20-game winners in Purkey and Drysdale. Drysdale's IP are way out there. Not sure if I'll vote, but if I do, I'll include at least Gibson and Purkey in the top 10.
   41. OCF Posted: June 12, 2011 at 02:44 AM (#3851178)
I looked at the Rfield column for all of the Houston players in the "Player Value" box on bb-ref. The only player (with a nontrivial number of innings) to have a positive number in that column is Bob Lillis, their 32-year-old SS. There are quite a few different players between -6 and -12. That's the plausibility argument for adjusting Farrell up - but I'm not sure I'm willing to go along with all of it.

Gibson gets adjusted down in WAR for essentially the same reason: in that same Rfield column, Flood is +15 and Boyer +10, with healthy positive numbers for the rest of the infield and no one who mattered negative.
   42. OCF Posted: June 12, 2011 at 03:43 AM (#3851196)
Looking at my old HoM files - what about that offense-only adjusted RC number that I was using, based on a 1999 book? The biggest problem is that I only worked it up for players who were at least of interest on a career base, so I'm not likely to have T. Davis or Callison, or Siebern. But I'll look anyway.

OK, having looked, I do actually have T. Davis and Callison. Here are the numbers I found. First, everyone who is +30 as an outfielder or 1B, +15 otherwise:

F. Robinson 83
Mantle 81
Mays 75
Aaron 68
T. Davis 67
F. Alou 42
F. Howard 40
Mathews 39
Killebrew 38
Maris 38
Cepeda 38
Musial 36
Callison 36
Colavito 35
Kaline 33
Cash 33
B. Robinson 30
W. Davis 29
K. Boyer 24

Then all of the others I happen to have in the database:

Ashburn 20
Schoendienst -2
Hodges 0
Berra -4
Snider 18
Minoso -6
Fox -11
Groat -4
Burgess 26
E. Howard 11
Flood 8
Banks 3
Clemente 16
Aparicio -22
Santo -25
Pinson 26
McAuliffe 6
B. Williams 20
Oliva 2
Powell -2
Fairly 28
Fregosi 3
McCovey 21
Kuenn 21
Stargell 1
Yastrzemski 17

The method was always quite forgiving of time missed - it really likes Frank Chance, for instance. So you see that in Mantle's number. Of course, this is only a starting point - it's not position-adjusted, or league-adjusted, nor is defensive value considered. Throw in position, defense, and league, and it looks like Mays for the top overall spot. But Mantle has a strong case for best of the AL.
   43. OCF Posted: June 12, 2011 at 06:52 AM (#3851228)
For his career, per 1000 PA, Hank Aguirre had 74 hits, 31 walks, 54 sacrifices, and 528 strikeouts.

Two other "cancer bats" to compare to, also per 1000 PA:

Koufax: 87 hits, 50 walks, 41 sacrifices, 450 strikeouts
Chance: 58 hits, 40 walks, 80 sacrifices, 553 strikeouts.

As for power: Aguirre hit 7 doubles and 1 triple over his 447 PA career - that's the highest XBH rate of the three. But Koufax is the only one of the three ever to hit a HR, having 2 of them.

And even in this company, the worst - or at least arguably the worst - year any of the three ever had was Aguirre's 1962. In 80 PA, Aguirre had 2 singles, 1 walk, and 4 sacrifices. The only competition is a smaller-sample year, Koufax's 1957, with one sacrifice but no hits or walks in 27 PA.

Aguirre's 1962 extrapolates per 1000 PA to 25 hits, 13 walks, 50 sacrifices, and 575 strikeouts.
   44. lieiam Posted: June 12, 2011 at 08:23 PM (#3851496)
I'm looking forward to another year on this project. However, I'm having some major computer problems right now so I'm hoping to manage to vote for 1962... Is there a date already for the election? Even if I'm not able to get my computer fully functional I may still be able to get my 1962 vote in...
   45. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: June 12, 2011 at 09:14 PM (#3851524)
Here are my pitching numbers for 1962 (these are WARP1 with no standard deviation adjustment yet):

1. Bob Purkey 8.0
2. Turk Farrell 7.9
3. Bob Gibson 7.8
4. Hank Aguirre 7.3
5. Camilo Pascual 7.2
5. Don Drysdale 7.2
7. Jim Kaat 7.0
8. Ernie Broglio 6.6
9. Bob Friend 6.5
9. Joey Jay 6.5
11. Warren Spahn 6.4
12. Ray Herbert 6.2
12. Whitey Ford 6.2
14. Jim Bunning 6.1
14. Dick Radatz 6.1
16. Bob Shaw 5.4
17. Robin Roberts 5.3
18. Ralph Terry 5.1
19. Jack Sanford 5.0
20. Roy Face 4.9
   46. lieiam Posted: June 13, 2011 at 06:55 PM (#3852180)
Sorry about the question in #44... I just saw you already wrote that the ballot thread will follow in about 3 weeks!
   47. fra paolo Posted: June 14, 2011 at 04:00 AM (#3852627)
I have a method for calculating a Defense-Independent ERA. It is based on some things Clay Davenport wrote about assigning responsibility for runs between pitcher and fielders. Using the method allows one to work out a "DIERA" and a FldgERA.

Since it is possible to work out an individualized DER, I've added that, too.

Here are some 1962 pitchers:

Pitcher      DIERA   FldgERA     DER    Team
Aguirre       2.67    1.79      .768    DET
Purkey        3.83    2.09      .752    CIN
Gibson        3.39    2.29      .751    StL
Broglio       4.27    2.00      .746    StL
Drysdale      3.06    2.63      .735    LAN
Kaat          3.95    2.49      .733    MIN
Ford          3.45    2.46      .729    NYA
Farrell       3.06    2.97      .729    HOU
Jay           5.00    2.81      .724    CIN
Pascual       3.44    3.20      .723    MIN
Friend        3.42    2.79      .706    PIT 
   48. OCF Posted: June 14, 2011 at 05:35 AM (#3852666)
fra paolo, where are park factors and league offense levels in that? That is, are all of those numbers on the same scale, or if not, what additional adjustments should be made to them?

It surely doesn't include offense, and most years, that wouldn't matter much - but there's such a spread in these pitchers' hitting. All the following is is the numbers from bb-ref, including RAR from that site (measured against average-hitting pitchers?)

Pitcher    OPS+  RAR
Aguirre    
-82   -19
Purkey     
-18    -2
Gibson      71    
+9
Broglio    
-18     0
Drysdale    39    
+3
Kaat        32    
+5
Ford        27    
-3
Farrell     26    
+3
Jay         29    
+5
Pascual     80    
+9
Friend     
-30    -
   49. sunnyday2 Posted: June 14, 2011 at 11:17 AM (#3852712)
Prelim. My ballot is a composite of the rankings from various different systems.

1. Willie Mays. In 1961 it seemed obvious that Frank Robinson was the MVP. I mean, his team won. Nobody seemed to dissent. But in hindsight it seems that Willie Mays was the best player in the NL. In 1962 the Dodgers were the big story. If anybody dissented from the choice of Maury Wills, it was generally to support Tommy Davis. But, hey (or, rather, say hey), Mays' team won the pennant! Where was the respect? I mean, the guy played 159 games, drove in 141 runs, led the league with 40 HR and 382 total bases, and scored 130 runs. Frank Robinson had his best year (by raw numbers) and Mays was clearly better. People talk about Mantle missing out on MVP awards because of unrealistic expectations, etc., but the same certainly could be said of Willie Mays.

2. Frank Robinson. This is, by the way, with a 5 percent discount due to NL expansion.

3. Tommy Davis.

4. Mickey Mantle. Nobody much questioned Mantle's '62 MVP award at the time despite the fact that he missed 39 games. This goes to Mantle's brilliance but also to the weakness of the AL. The AL expansion discount drops to 2.5 percent, and to zero next year.

5. Hank Aaron.

6. Maury Wills. This might be too high.

7. Norm Siebern. For a long time, I had him as the MVP. No more, but still it was a hell of a season.

8. Orlando Cepeda.

9. Harmon Killebrew.

10. Rocky Colavito.

11. Vada Pinson.

12. Floyd Robinson.

13. Don Drysdale.

14. Eddie Matthews.

15. Bob Purkey.
   50. fra paolo Posted: June 14, 2011 at 12:31 PM (#3852736)
OCF, my numbers are only valid in the context of the season (don't compare across ERAs, tee-hee), and are not meant to be an uberstat incorporating the pitchers' batting. My objective is to get some sense of relative contributions of fielding to the different pitchers using something of a 'quick 'n' dirty' method (think Marcel rather than PECOTA).

The difference from proper DIPS ERA is that this attempts to assign a percentage of BABIP to the pitcher, and a percentage to the fielders. I may be barking up completely the wrong tree, using the ratio Davenport assigned in the 2002 Baseball Prospectus. However, my intention is to look at some of these numbers in the context of what my own system of quantifying fielding will show.
   51. Jose Canusee Posted: June 15, 2011 at 03:07 PM (#3853924)
What a season for the Robinson family. Have to say I don't remember Floyd at all. BB-R says he was 10th in AL MVP voting as a 2nd year player in 62.
   52. Nate the Neptunian Posted: June 16, 2011 at 01:36 AM (#3854407)
Here's my consideration set chart for this year. Took me awhile to get it right as I was busy this past week and I had to get around to making some changes to it. Specifically, since last "year", I've added in DanR's WARP1 (including the pitcher values he posted in this thread) and Fangraph's WAR. As before, I ranked each player in MLB for each uber system and then summed the ranks. However, to account for pitchers, since fWAR doesn't have them at all for this year, and DanR's data is only for a subset of pitchers (though that had little effect this year, as no pitcher he didn't provide WARP for made the final top 25, and only two, Donovan and Koufax, even made the top 50), rather than ranking that sum immediately, I derived an average rank based on how many systems they were present in, and then ranked that value.

AL players had their values increased by 5.37% (stolen from DanR's standard deviation work) in all systems, except rWAR, as that has its own league strength adjustment built into the replacement level.

NAME             P   LG  FINAL_RK  BR_WAR  BRWAR_RK  WSAB   WSAB_RK  BG_WAR  BGWAR_RK  BP_WARP1  BPWARP1_RK  WAA   WAA_RK  DR_WARP1  DRWARP1_RK  FG_WAR  FGWAR_RK  AVG_RK 
Willie Mays      CF  NL  1         10.6    1         26.39  2        8.58    1         10.9      1           6.62  1       9.5       1           11.1    1         1.14   
Frank Robinson   RF  NL  2         8.5     3         27.61  1        8.07    2         9.8       2           6.06  2       9         2           8.8     2         2      
Hank Aaron       CF  NL  3         8.8     2         21.04  5        7.08    5         8.3       4           5.32  4       8.1       3           8.7     3         3.71   
Mickey Mantle    CF  AL  4         7.1     5         23.28  3        7.29    4         7.9       6           5.39  3       7.9       5           7.06    6         4.57   
Camilo Pascual   P   AL  5         5.7     14        13.74  18       7.62    3         7.5       8           4.16  11      7.59      9           
--      --        10.26  
Bob Purkey       P   NL  6         6.9     6         16.61  6        5.45    12        6.3       18          3.7   13      8         4           
--      --        10.5   
Tommy Davis      LF  NL  7         6.8     7         22.52  4        5.64    11        6.6       15          4.02  12      6.2       22          6.4     8         11.29  
Jim Kaat         P   AL  8         5.7     14        12.64  27       5.84    10        7.6       7           4.63  6       7.38      10          
--      --        11.9   
Bob Gibson       P   NL  9         6.8     7         12.74  25       6.68    8         6.4       17          4.35  8       7.8       7           
--      --        12.13  
Brooks Robinson  3B  AL  10        5.6     18        13.4   19       5.35    15        8.4       3           3.37  16      7.17      12          7.59    4         12.43  
Don Drysdale     P   NL  11        6       11        12.2   33       7.05    6         7.3       10          4.34  9       7.2       11          
--      --        12.7   
Maury Wills      SS  NL  12        6.1     10        14.79  12       5.36    14        6.2       22          3.31  20      6.7       13          6       13        14.86  
Warren Spahn     P   NL  13        5.1     25        12.79  24       4.82    20        7.2       11          4.67  5       6.4       21          
--      --        15.23  
Hank Aguirre     P   AL  14        5.7     14        15.9   7        6.86    7         7.5       8           2.04  49      7.69      8           
--      --        15.45  
Norm Siebern     1B  AL  15        5.5     20        15.38  8        4.73    22        5.9       26          3.36  17      6.01      24          6.43    7         17.71  
Turk Farrell     P   NL  16        7.6     4         9.99   50       6.04    9         8         5           2.68  31      7.9       6           
--      --        17.82  
Johnny Callison  RF  NL  17        5.6     18        14.71  13       4.64    25        6.3       18          3.21  21      6.1       23          6.2     10        18.29  
Eddie Mathews    3B  NL  18        5.7     14        13.09  22       4.99    18        6.2       22          3.08  23      6         25          6.2     10        19.14  
Ray Herbert      P   AL  19        5       26        11.98  34       4.51    29        6.7       13          4.21  10      6.53      15          
--      --        19.76  
Dick Radatz      P   AL  20        4.2     42        14.85  11       4.83    19        6.4       16          2.21  45      6.43      19          
--      --        23.24  
Whitey Ford      P   AL  21        4.3     40        11.56  40       4.11    37        6         24          4.56  7       6.53      15          
--      --        25.76  
Rocky Colavito   LF  AL  22        5.8     13        13.29  20       4.62    26        4.8       43          2.01  50      5.16      34          7.38    5         27.29  
Bob Friend       P   NL  23        5.4     21        12.4   30       3.44    67        6.7       14          2.56  33      6.5       17          
--      --        28.58  
Bob Shaw         P   NL  24        4.7     31        11.96  35       3.57    61        5.2       33          3.33  19      5.4       30          
--      --        30.73  
Jim Bunning      P   AL  25        4.9     29        11.62  39       5.02    17        6.8       12          1.07  101     6.43      19          
--      --        34.07 
   53. bjhanke Posted: June 16, 2011 at 07:37 AM (#3854622)
I'm going out of town for a few days, and am not sure about the deadline for posting up prelims, so here's a VERY quick and dirty. Usually, my prelims are like pencilled art waiting for inks. This is more like a thumbnail sketch. I didn't provide comments because I haven't done enough work to justify saying anything yet. I'm just registering a preliminary intent to vote. - Brock Hanke

1. Willie Mays
2. Mickey Mantle
3. Frank Robinson
4. Tommy Davis
5. Hank Aaron
6. Bob Purkey
7. Maury Wills
8. Johnny Callison
9. Camilo Pascual
10. Bob Gibson
   54. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: June 16, 2011 at 10:34 AM (#3854642)
Though I have Mays as numero uno, I can see somebody having Robisnon at the top. It's that close, IMO.


I meant more as a matter of voting, than actual domination of the league. You might see a Robinson vote here or there, but I wouldn't be surprised if Mays won out unanimously, too. I did say "almost".
   55. DL from MN Posted: June 16, 2011 at 01:49 PM (#3854711)
The deadline for posting a prelim is 2 days before the election closes.
   56. bjhanke Posted: June 16, 2011 at 05:30 PM (#3854908)
DL - Thanks again. Im probably safe, then. But while I'm at it, I could really use the numbers for the league and expansion effects on league quality. You know, the expansion discount left over in the AL from 1961. The new expansion adjustment for the NL. The differential between the leagues that still remains from integration. Actually, what I'd really LIKE is a single number combining all of these that is just the "multiply all NL accomplishments by X to adjust to the AL.

Thanks, - Brock (I am aware some systems actually do this en passant. For those , I don't need my own adjustment numbers. - Brock Hanke
   57. DL from MN Posted: June 16, 2011 at 07:38 PM (#3855002)
Dan R uses a League Adjustment of .9 for the NL and .951 for the AL to convert to WARP2. There's your ratio.
   58. Nate the Neptunian Posted: June 16, 2011 at 09:01 PM (#3855095)
Right, that's where I get the 5.37% number I adjust the AL's numbers by in #52. Since I figure for the purposes of just putting the leagues on an even footing this year, it's easier to just give a boost to the stronger league, rather than applying an all-time adjustment to both leagues, but it could be done either way.

Anyway, speaking of #52, I found a bug in how I was doing the pitchers' average ranking, so time for a revised chart. It's pretty similar, but there is some movement, e.g. Purkey and Pascual swap places. I'm also trying to cut down on the amount of space the chart takes, so the names of the headers change a bit, but they're all the same columns.

NAME             POS  LG  FINAL_RK  RWAR  RWAR_RK  WSAB   WSAB_RK  GWAR  GWAR_RK  BPWARP1  BPWARP1_RK  WAA   WAA_RK  DRWARP1  DRWARP1_RK  FWAR  FWAR_RK  AVG_RK 
Willie Mays      CF   NL  1         10.6  1        26.39  2        8.58  1        10.9     1           6.62  1       9.5      1           11.1  1        1.14   
Frank Robinson   RF   NL  2         8.5   3        27.61  1        8.07  2        9.8      2           6.06  2       9        2           8.8   2        2      
Hank Aaron       CF   NL  3         8.8   2        21.04  5        7.08  5        8.3      4           5.32  4       8.1      3           8.7   3        3.71   
Mickey Mantle    CF   AL  4         7.1   5        23.28  3        7.29  4        7.9      6           5.39  3       7.9      5           7.06  6        4.57   
Bob Purkey       P    NL  5         6.9   6        16.61  6        5.45  12       6.3      18          3.7   13      8        4           
--    --       9.83   
Camilo Pascual   P    AL  6         5.7   14       13.74  18       7.62  3        7.5      8           4.16  11      7.59     9           
--    --       10.5   
Tommy Davis      LF   NL  7         6.8   7        22.52  4        5.64  11       6.6      15          4.02  12      6.2      22          6.4   8        11.29  
Bob Gibson       P    NL  8         6.8   7        12.74  25       6.68  8        6.4      17          4.35  8       7.8      7           
--    --       12     
Jim Kaat         P    AL  9         5.7   14       12.64  27       5.84  10       7.6      7           4.63  6       7.38     10          
--    --       12.33  
Brooks Robinson  3B   AL  10        5.6   18       13.4   19       5.35  15       8.4      3           3.37  16      7.17     12          7.59  4        12.43  
Don Drysdale     P    NL  11        6     11       12.2   33       7.05  6        7.3      10          4.34  9       7.2      11          
--    --       13.33  
Maury Wills      SS   NL  12        6.1   10       14.79  12       5.36  14       6.2      22          3.31  20      6.7      13          6     13       14.86  
Hank Aguirre     P    AL  13        5.7   14       15.9   7        6.86  7        7.5      8           2.04  49      7.69     8           
--    --       15.5   
Turk Farrell     P    NL  14        7.6   4        9.99   50       6.04  9        8        5           2.68  31      7.9      6           
--    --       17.5   
Warren Spahn     P    NL  15        5.1   25       12.79  24       4.82  20       7.2      11          4.67  5       6.4      21          
--    --       17.67  
Norm Siebern     1B   AL  16        5.5   20       15.38  8        4.73  22       5.9      26          3.36  17      6.01     24          6.43  7        17.71  
Johnny Callison  RF   NL  17        5.6   18       14.71  13       4.64  25       6.3      18          3.21  21      6.1      23          6.2   10       18.29  
Eddie Mathews    3B   NL  18        5.7   14       13.09  22       4.99  18       6.2      22          3.08  23      6        25          6.2   10       19.14  
Ray Herbert      P    AL  19        5     26       11.98  34       4.51  29       6.7      13          4.21  10      6.53     15          
--    --       21.17  
Dick Radatz      P    AL  20        4.2   42       14.85  11       4.83  19       6.4      16          2.21  45      6.43     19          
--    --       25.33  
Whitey Ford      P    AL  21        4.3   40       11.56  40       4.11  37       6        24          4.56  7       6.53     15          
--    --       27.17  
Rocky Colavito   LF   AL  22        5.8   13       13.29  20       4.62  26       4.8      43          2.01  50      5.16     34          7.38  5        27.29  
Bob Friend       P    NL  23        5.4   21       12.4   30       3.44  67       6.7      14          2.56  33      6.5      17          
--    --       30.33  
Ed Charles       3B   AL  24        5     26       9.48   56       3.74  54       6        24          2.87  30      5.48     28          5.27  22       34.29  
Bob Shaw         P    NL  25        4.7   31       11.96  35       3.57  61       5.2      33          3.33  19      5.4      30          
--    --       34.83 
   59. kthejoker Posted: June 16, 2011 at 09:40 PM (#3855145)
The thing I don't understand is Gilliam only scoring 83 runs with his .370 OPB in 702 PA in mostly in the #2 spot.


This kinda interested me, some general observations:

* He had no power (ISO of .065) and mostly was just reaching first base.
* He did his best hitting with 2 outs.
* His 1st inning split was pretty poor, .210/.306/.261 in 158 PAs.
* He walked constantly with Wills on 1st or second and 1 out, and then the Dodgers would play smallball and Willis would score - but not Gilliam.
* He either figured out how to overcome this managerial tic as the season went on, or his luck caught up with him: he scored more runs in August (16) than in June (14) despite reaching base 13 less times (51 vs. 38.)

If he had maintained his August run-scoring pace all year long, he would've scored 100 runs easily.
   60. Nate the Neptunian Posted: June 16, 2011 at 11:46 PM (#3855258)
Now some thoughts on my chart...

That's a lot of pitchers. 13 Pitchers in my top 25 to only 12 position players. That's seems a little odd to me, but I don't have any reason to doubt the numbers. If I increase it to the top 50, it's 22 Pitchers and 28 position players, which seems like a better spread. I guess a lot of pitchers just had good performances this year, even if no one had a truly dominating performance, so the top 4 are still hitters.

Speaking of the top 4, interesting that in this year, where the AL was stronger, the top 3 are NL players. And last year, when the leagues were reversed, the top 2 were AL players. Does does speak to the league adjustment not being enough, or just coincidence? I'm not sure. Though some of the metrics do have Mantle in 3rd, it's not particularly close, consensus-wise, between him and Aaron. If I ignore rWAR, which has its own (very likely wrong) league adjustment, Mantle's average rank becomes 4.5 and Aaron's 4, so that shrinks the difference between them, but not by enough. To get Mantle into 3rd, I'd have to increase the adjustment up to 8.1% (and keep ignoring rWAR), as that would push him past Aaron in DanR's WARP1, where the gap is the closest of the metrics that currently have Aaron ahead. That seems like a lot, and I don't have any evidence that's correct, just that it would satisfy my own gut feeling that the top 3 from the weaker league is a little fishy, so I don't plan on making that move. Just something to keep thinking about as we move on to other years.

Anyway, as for rWAR's league adjustment. It sees the NL as the stronger league. As an example, both Ernie Banks and Eddie Bressoud had 657 PA this year. Banks, in the NL, got 22 replacement runs, while Bressoud only had 18. I believe Alex King noted last year that rWAR calculates its league adjustments on a decade by decade basis, which would explain this. I have no doubt the NL was still the stronger league throughout the 60s, but that doesn't really apply in an expansion for the NL year, I'd think. But I'm not sure of a good way to systematically correct this. Since rWAR only applies the league adjustment to the replacement runs, there isn't a simple % adjustment that can be backed out of the total wins. Really, the % would have to be backed out of Rrep, then WAR be reconstructed based on the new runs total, and then finally the correct league bonus applied. That's a lot more work than I want to do. I think I'm just going to cop out here, and leave rWAR as is, but if it's close between an AL and NL player, and rWAR is making the difference, I'll probably give the AL player the benefit of the doubt. Glancing at the list though, I'm not sure there's really a situation like that in the top 10 or among the players who have a chance to make it. Maybe Gibson and Kaat. I'll have to look at it in closer depth.

No catchers in the top 25, so no worrying about a bonus this year. The top C was Howard at rank 40. Also very few MI in the top 25, with one SS in Wills, and no 2B. In fact, that gives me the idea to post who would be the starting All Stars in my system (without any subjective adjustments, or correcting for rWAR)... The number in parenthesis is their final rank.

AL
C Howard (40)
1B Siebern (16)
2B Moran (41)
SS Bressoud (30)
3B B. Robinson (10)
RF Bob Allison (26)
CF Mantle (4)
LF Colavito (22)
P Pascual (6)

NL
C Dalrymple (67)
1B Bill White (57)
2B Gilliam (60)
SS Wills (12)
3B Mathews (18)
RF F. Robinson (2)
CF Mays (1)
LF Tommy Davis (7)
P Purkey (5)

Some absolute superstars this year, along with some guys who were never really household names. 2B in particular seems pretty weak.
   61. Nate the Neptunian Posted: June 17, 2011 at 12:29 AM (#3855308)
Sunnyday, what do you like about Cepeda and Killebrew this year?

None of the systems I look at liked either very much (Win Shares Above Bench was kindest to both, but still doesn't see either as top 10 material), but that's in part because of their defense. Both TZ and DRA, for instance, think that both players were below average at their leftward on the spectrum positions. My guess is that you're discounting the defensive numbers for both this year, and looking at their offensive performances. But even then I don't see it, as neither is top 10 in OPS+, min. 500 PA, and that's probably the friendliest measure to them.
   62. sunnyday2 Posted: June 17, 2011 at 02:52 AM (#3855541)
Let me leave Cepeda for another day. As for Killebrew:

I would just note that by many reckonings, this was his 3rd most productive season. 48 HR and 126 RBI in 155 games. His OBA was not where it would get to a few years later but .366 would have to be described as respectable, and his SA of .545 was 2nd in the AL, 6th in the majors. His OPS+ was 3rd in the AL, his OB+SA #2. So this was a pretty respectable if somewhat one-dimensional season.

So how do you measure that against some of the other "stars" of 1962--Brooksie and Ed Charles from Nate's list, Bobby Richardson who finished 2nd in the MVP voting, Ed Bressoud and Clete Boyer who rate highly in selected systems? Not to mention all of the pitchers from Nate's list. (Where, btw, is the love for Ralph Terry. His 299 IP and his WHIP compare more than favorably to anybody, vastly better than Ford.) It's easier, of course, to compare him to the Colavitos and Sieberns and even the Floyd Robinsons. I suppose it goes to 1) the obvious weakness of the AL and 2) the stronger NL was, however, in an expansion year and so all of its stars are subject to a bit of a discount. So I dunno--I just don't see that many people who were better than Killebrew.

I am also biased at having witnessed the season live and in color and in real life and no matter what Ed Bressoud did in 1962, he is tainted by the rest of his career, I suppose. Killebrew, meanwhile, was already a star. Girls loved the longball, even then. And nobody really knew that the NL was better, not as long as the Yankees kept winning the World Series.
   63. Nate the Neptunian Posted: June 17, 2011 at 04:25 AM (#3855565)

I would just note that by many reckonings, this was his 3rd most productive season. 48 HR and 126 RBI in 155 games. His OBA was not where it would get to a few years later but .366 would have to be described as respectable, and his SA of .545 was 2nd in the AL, 6th in the majors. His OPS+ was 3rd in the AL, his OB+SA #2. So this was a pretty respectable if somewhat one-dimensional season.


Hmm, yeah. I said neither he nor Cepeda was top 10 in OPS+, min. 500 PA, but that's wrong. He's 9th (as BR figures it) or 10th (as I figure it in my DB... I think I remove pitchers' hitting from the league average differently than BR does, which results in minor discrepancies of a point or two). I was originally looking at lower min. PA and missed that he did get into the top 10 when raising the minimum that high. And most of the guys in front of him are NL players, so he could leapfrog (or stay ahead of), say, Mathews, Skinner and Seibern, who are all very close to him, by that measure with a league adjustment.

So, I do see where you are coming from now. My response would be though, when considering positional worth and defense, he doesn't fare as well. TZ sees him as -10 runs below average between LF and (a little time at) 1B, DRA says -17. Not to mention, that if he hits comparably to, or even a little better than, Mathews, that there's simply more value to a 3B that hits that well than a LF who does.

Also, I have the pitchers doing better than you do currently. While there wasn't a dominating pitcher performance this year, I think there were a lot of good ones. Purkey was 3rd in the majors in IP and had a 143 ERA+ (4th in MLB, min. 162 IP) which was a very good combo. Pascual's performance relies more on his batting numbers to pad his value, but he still did very well once you add that in.

(Where, btw, is the love for Ralph Terry. His 299 IP and his WHIP compare more than favorably to anybody, vastly better than Ford.)


He'd be 38th on the list. rWAR hates his performance, ranking him 75th in MLB. The rest of the systems like him more (sometimes quite a bit more, gWAR has him at 13th), but not enough to get him into the top 25.

He was 2nd in IP, and 3rd in WHIP (min. 162 IP), which are both very good, but he was 21st in ERA+, 28th in RA+, and 38th in FIP+. Some other peripherals for him: 9th in HR/9, (tied for) 1st in BB/9, 33rd in SO/9, and 6th in SO/BB. Good control, but his lack of strike-outs and playing in a pitchers' park (BR has a 95 Pitching Park Factor for Yankee Stadium that year) kills his FIP+.

Not that BR uses that to calculate his rWAR. It looks like it just thinks that, between his park, and the above average Yankees defense that year (which is how BR sees it), a replacement level pitcher would have only given up 33 more runs than he did, in the same playing time, so that doesn't translate into very much WAR. I'm not sure I completely buy that, especially with all the other systems liking him more, but even if I tossed rWAR out he'd only move up a few slots to around 34, so I'm not too concerned about it.
   64. DL from MN Posted: June 17, 2011 at 05:28 PM (#3855876)
McCovey has a strong argument for being better than Cepeda in 1962. It's not really his fault his manager preferred playing Cepeda.

If you look at rate stats only the best players are Mays and Mantle again. If Mantle plays a full season he probably ends up winning another MMP award. The AL looks "down" because Mantle was injured and Norm Cash was as unlucky in 62 as he was lucky in 61. Brooks Robinson shows up and Siebern takes Gentile's place as the 1B having a career year. Pitching shows up again also.
   65. Howie Menckel Posted: June 18, 2011 at 02:10 AM (#3856547)
1962 people of color/Hispanics who are in the Hall of Merit
NL (10) – Marichal, McCovey, Mays, FRobinson, Clemente, Aaron, Gibson, Minoso, Banks, BiWilliams (and Stargell 9 G)
AL - NONE

We haven't elected Cepeda, but he gets votes.
   66. fra paolo Posted: June 20, 2011 at 12:52 PM (#3857621)
Snapshot of a season, 1962 #1

On 9 June 1962 the Tigers faced the Washington Senators for the third game of a five-game series at DC Stadium. (Two doubleheaders in three days!) Hank Aguirre, at 3-2 and a 3.09 ERA was making only his second start of the season: through eight innings Aguirre had held the Senators to a single run. However,the Senators had got good pitching of their own. Tom Cheney, 1-1 with a 3.82 ERA in his fourth start out of eleven appearances so far, had held the Tigers to two runs through nine. In the bottom of the ninth, Aguirre faced the #2 batter in the Washington order, second-baseman Chuck Cottier, who rapped a double to left. Tigers' manager Bob Scheffing pulled Aguirre, and brought in righthander Terry Fox, who had only been with the team since late May, and had last pitched in the first game of a double-header the day before, where he would have earned a save if the rule had existed then. (Since his first appearance with the club on 30 May, Fox had become something of a 'fireman', coming into close games. His ERA was 3.18.) The third batter Fox faced was Johnny Schaive, by which time the Senators had runners on second (pinch runner Claude Osteen, the pitcher) and Cottier. Schaive, a right-handed hitter, smacked a single to centre, driving in Cottier, and tying the game. The Senators went on to win in the bottom of the tenth on a home run by Cottier with a runner on first, off Jerry Casale.

The importance of this game was that the Tigers, who had won 100 games the season before, were three games behind the league-leading Yankees, but also were underperforming their Pythagorean record by about 3/4ths of a game, while the Yankees were overperforming by about 1/4er of a game. It was a tight race, and there were two teams (Minnesota and Cleveland, between the Tigers and the Yankees. But it was also the second loss in a row for the Tigers (having dropped the nightcap the day before) which marked the beginng of a stretch where the Tigers went 1-8 before taking two of three from the Senators at Tiger Stadium. More importantly, the Senators were bottom of the league at this point, fifteen games out, and these were games a team in a pennant chase should win, as were four that followed against a Boston club that was almost ten games out. On 17 June the Tigers were six-and-a-half behind the Indians, who had moved three games ahead of the Yankees. The Yankees had gone 2-7 over the same period (including a win against the Tigers), and in dropping four in Cleveland had lost their lead. The Yankees would never go into such a tailspin again until August, and at the start of that one the Tigers were fourteen games back, and still underperforming against their Pythag.
   67. fra paolo Posted: June 20, 2011 at 01:05 PM (#3857628)
WAR calculates its league adjustments on a decade by decade basis

I missed this whenever Alex King brought it up, but at first glance it makes sense for a uberstat. Like park factors, perhaps one needs multi-year data to get a true sense of league strengths.
   68. DL from MN Posted: June 20, 2011 at 02:48 PM (#3857688)
I understand wanting multi-year data, but why bucket things into decades? Why not take a rolling 3 or 5 year average? That would be preferable to seeing disjoint numbers for years ending in 9 compared to years ending in 0.
   69. Alex King Posted: June 21, 2011 at 05:41 AM (#3858420)
Per the discussion in the 1961 discussion thread, I'm thinking of calculating 1962's AFR using only DRA and SFR (which would mean DRA only for outfielders––for catchers I would still use TZ as the plays bias problem isn't as big an issue). What do you guys think about calculating AFR this way?
   70. Nate the Neptunian Posted: June 21, 2011 at 12:26 PM (#3858469)
I can see using multi-year data in normal circumstances to lessen the impact of flukes. But in a year that we know was unusual due to expansion I don't think it's correct. It would be like using park data for previous years in a year we know the fences were moved in.
   71. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: June 21, 2011 at 01:41 PM (#3858508)
McCovey has a strong argument for being better than Cepeda in 1962. It's not really his fault his manager preferred playing Cepeda.


That's a real slippery slope, though. Do we start rewarding or penalizing pitchers depending on how their managers handle them? How about players who can play a more demanding position at a high level of play instead of the less demanding one they're stuck with?
   72. DL from MN Posted: June 21, 2011 at 06:15 PM (#3858740)
I'll go to an easier but still sticky question - should a leadoff batter be rewarded for putting up numbers in more bulk but a slightly lower rate than a #5 hitter?
   73. DL from MN Posted: June 21, 2011 at 08:21 PM (#3858837)
I'd like to end the 1962 election on 7/13. Ending on Wed is good for me and I don't want it to end just after July 4. We should have a ballot thread around 7/1 and we'll work on getting a 1963 thread up around the same time.
   74. bjhanke Posted: June 21, 2011 at 10:06 PM (#3858889)
DL - I don't know that anyone has responded to your first comment about wanting to end on Wednesdays. I take that to mean that no one has a horrible schedule problem with that (we can always just vote a day early if we have a filled-up Wednesday). So I want to put on the record that, unless someone rises up pretty much right now, your schedule should dictate. If you have a schedule that says "do this on Wednesday", then that's what we should do. You are the one who has to tabulate results. BTW, do you intend to calculate consensus scores? I actually keep track of mine in the HoM, because, although I know I'm off consensus due to my ideas about early baseball, I don't want to get TOO far off. If that happened, I would make an effort to rethink what I was doing. So I'd like them if they are easy for you to do. - Brock Hanke
   75. lieiam Posted: June 21, 2011 at 10:24 PM (#3858893)
I'm still lacking a fully functional computer but have been looking over the numbers listed here and I've noticed some differences and am not sure why...

One difference I've noticed is in the pitcher's numbers in baseball reference version of WAR. The two pitchers in the list at the top of the thread
(Purkey and Drysdale) have numbers of 7.2 & 5.7. However, in post 58 they have numbers of 6.9 & 6.0. I'm assuming this would hold for others pitchers
as well but from what I can tell the other players seem to have the same numbers. [And due to my own computer woes I'm using a library computer so I don't
have the time to look into this further so I'm hoping someone else can].

Another difference I noticed has to do with the Dan R WARP #s. The numbers in post 31 and the numbers in post 58 are different.

Anyway, I very much appreciate various uber-stats getting listed on here... I just wanted to make sure that the numbers are correct.

Thanks!
   76. sunnyday2 Posted: June 22, 2011 at 02:15 AM (#3859144)
The whole subject of "opportunity" is an interesting one. I mean, one of the basic breakthroughs of the Hall of Merit is to not penalize the Negro Leaguers for their lack of opportunity. They do NOT occupy a special corner of the Hall of Merit, they are no different than anybody else.

But as to Cepeda '62 and pitchers with scant innings but good effectiveness and lead off hitters, I think we have generally taken the attitude (with obvious exceptions like Gavy Cravath and precious few others) that indeed their managers were probably not morons and that on those days when they did not play or when they played in the minors, they were probably not quite the players they appeared to be.

Still one can slice this any way one chooses, based on precedent.

But specifically as to lead-off hitters, given the scant credibility lead-off hitters have always had as "all-time greats," I doubt that there are too many cases in point to bedevil us. I mean, Maury Wills will be a case in point and I suspect he will come in somewhere below #1. I can't think of too many who piled up big numbers because of batting #1 who were not legit, but of course I haven't thought about it much.
   77. Nate the Neptunian Posted: June 22, 2011 at 02:45 AM (#3859184)

One difference I've noticed is in the pitcher's numbers in baseball reference version of WAR. The two pitchers in the list at the top of the thread
(Purkey and Drysdale) have numbers of 7.2 & 5.7. However, in post 58 they have numbers of 6.9 & 6.0. I'm assuming this would hold for others pitchers
as well but from what I can tell the other players seem to have the same numbers.


It looks like the numbers at the top of the thread are just listing pitching value for rWAR (for pitchers). Purkey had 7.2 pitcher WAR in '62, but -.2 oWAR and -.1 dWAR for a total of 6.9.


Another difference I noticed has to do with the Dan R WARP #s. The numbers in post 31 and the numbers in post 58 are different.


Fra Paulo lists Dan's WARP2, while I list his WARP1, and then apply a positive adjustment to only the stronger league based on his standard deviation numbers. That's how I handle the other stats, so it's easier for me to do it that way. WARP2, on the other hand, applies an adjustment to both leagues, based on how the standard deviation varies from a historical baseline, I think. I'm sure Dan will correct me if I'm wrong. The numbers will differ, but the order of the players should remain the same.
   78. fra paolo Posted: June 22, 2011 at 03:02 AM (#3859208)
Snapshot of a Season, 1962 #2

The Minnesota Twins were two games behind the league-leading Los Angeles Angels after splitting a double-header with Boston on Independence Day 1962. Since arriving home for a single series home stand, they left again for an east-coast swing, and over the last thirteen days they had gone 7-8. On leaving Boston and returned home to host the Yankees for a three-game series, the start of a long stretch that would see them in Minnesota until 27 July. The race was wide open, and the teams arriving to play at Metropolitan stadium included both the teams that stood between them and the Angels, The Yankees and the Indians, both only a half-game back of the Californians. Minnesota could take control of its destiny with a good homestand here.

Starting for the Indians in the opener against the Yanks was their ace, Camilo Pascual. Pascual had won each of his last four starts, so the Twins had hopes of beginning the long home stand on a high note. Pascual was 12-4 after 18 starts, with an ERA of 3.45. New York was starting Ralph Terry, 11-7 with an ERA of 3.37. It was Terry's 22nd appearance of the season, 21 of them as starts.Pascual got off to a terrible start. Tresh singled, Richardson on a bunt to third signled as well. Maris then hit a home run. The next man up, Mantle, also drilled a home run. Before the first out was recorded, the Twins were down 4-0. When Pascual gave up his fifth run in the top of the fourth, it was enough for Twins' manager Sam Mele, and Pascual was replaced by Lee Stange. Maris and Mantle each hit another home run before the game ended, and the Yankees won 7-5.

The Yankees won Saturday's game 6-3, and Sunday pitted Jim Kaat against Whitey Ford. The young lefthander was 8-8 after 18 starts and 21 total appearances with a 3.93 ERA. He had already hit eleven batters as well. Unlike Pascual he'd dropped each of his last three starts, and in two of them had been knocked out quite early. Ford, 6-4 in sixteen starts with a 2.68 ERA had won four in a row. Ford did not look like he had his stuff in the first, as he gave up a single to Banks, a double to Rollins and a fielder's choice scored Rollins from third. Batting fifth, Killebrew followed with a home run and the Twins had a 3-0 lead. In the top of the fifth, Kaat lost his way a bit. Starting with a home run by Tresh, Kaat then allowed a single to Richardson, a double by Maris and walked Mantle. Lopes then hit a flyball to right that socred Richardson and tied the game at 4-4. The Yankees took the lead in the top of the 7th, when Mantle drove in Richardson with a single, and an error on the throw by rightfielder Allison allowed Maris to score. The Yankees scored another, and were up 7-4. Mele pulled Kaat after the error, and replaced him with George Maranda. Despite a rally in the bottom of the ninth that brought the Twins within one, the Yanks finished on top, 9-8.

At the end of the series the Yankees were on top of the AL by a single game over Cleveland. Minnesota were 4 1/2 back, having blown a good chance not only to knock bank the New Yorkers, but also to run down the Angelenos. Though the Twins would recover to come within two games of the Yankees on 29 August, they had finished their head-to-head series by then, and their fate rested as much in the hands of others as in their own.
   79. fra paolo Posted: June 22, 2011 at 03:16 AM (#3859216)
I forgot to note in that last snapshot that the Yankees were never out of first place for the rest of the season after that series against the Twins. They were tied for first for a couple of days during their next series against the Angels, but never out of first.
   80. Howie Menckel Posted: June 22, 2011 at 04:57 AM (#3859256)
I have my top 5 set (full disclosure, that seems like enough), but will battle through the rest.

Not clear on the timetable.
Do I have to do a preliminary ballot, and if so, by when?
   81. DL from MN Posted: June 22, 2011 at 01:37 PM (#3859357)
Thanks a lot fra paolo, I get to experience NY Yankee losses that I hadn't experienced before. It just reminds me that the older I get the more times I'll get to see the Twins get killed by the Yankees.
   82. DL from MN Posted: June 22, 2011 at 01:39 PM (#3859358)
Howie, do a prelim between now and July 11th
   83. lieiam Posted: June 23, 2011 at 07:50 PM (#3860666)
@Nate the Neptunian re: post 77

Okay, thanks a lot! That certainly clears things up for me!
   84. DL from MN Posted: June 29, 2011 at 05:55 PM (#3865459)
fra paulo - I tried posting a ballot thread and got an access denied. Can you get one up as well as a 1963 discussion thread?
   85. lieiam Posted: June 29, 2011 at 10:20 PM (#3865670)
Here's my preliminary ballot.
It's a combination of various uber-stat systems.
There are still some players I need to get full numbers for, but here it is as of this moment:

1- Willie Mays
2- Frank Robinson
3- Hank Aaron
4- MIckey Mantle
5- Tommy Davis
6- Camilo Pascual
7- Hank Aguirre
8- Brooks Robinson
9- Bob Purkey
10-Don Drysdale
   86. Howie Menckel Posted: July 03, 2011 at 02:17 AM (#3868207)
1. WILLIE MAYS – When Mays hits just like Hank Aaron and Frank Robinson (an incredible trio, btw), he’s unbeatable. He leaves the Giants with two more OF spots to fill with power bats, ideally. This is Willie’s career year in RBI with 141 (next highest, 127, 123, 112). Steals 18 bases in 20 tries just to rub it in.
2. FRANK ROBINSON – His 3rd consecutive year of 1.000+ OPS. Wow. 2nd of 4 straight years leading NL in IBB. Never realized F-Rob only 40+ HR once (hit 39 this year). This is his lone 50+ 2B year. Played 162 games, like Willie. Off-year in SB, 18 for 27. I’ll forgive it.
3. HANK AARON – 45 HR, 128 RBI, 127 R – and led the league in no category, including those. Just the 7th of 10 consecutive 150+ OPS+s ( this one was 170 (his 5th-best career effort). Relentless greatness by these three.
4. MICKEY MANTLE – Wait, he missed 39 games – was he THAT much better than the entire AL? Absolutely. 122 BB in 123 G, and won the OPS+ crown by 196 to 140. The bad knee hampered his defense in ‘62, but not yet convinced that he was a major liability.
5. TOMMY DAVIS – Bizarre season, at age 23. 149 OPS+, goes 141 in 1963 and never exceeds 125 from age 25 on. Winds up with the Seattle Pilots (and Astros) in 1969, the Astros/A’s/Cubs in 1970. 10th in the AL MVP voting in 1973, as the Orioles’ DH at that position was born that year, in spite of no fielding and a 107 OPS+ and missed 25 games. Oh, yes, even aside from the wacky 153 RBI, he was really really good in 1962.
6. MAURY WILLS – This is a preposterous MVP pick, though I fully understand how it happened. And I am not generally dazzled by 100 OPS+ SSs, granting that is a good number for the position. But if you can field well, and you play in 165 regular-season games (ok, he only started 164 of them), and get 759 PA, and you steal a record 104 bases and get caught only 13 times, and your team’s offensive numbers are, well, odd, as if something was happening here – then I have to take you into account, don’t I?
7. BOB PURKEY – The prize-winning lead for the Don Larsen heroics was “The Imperfect Man pitched a perfect game today.” Well, this imperfect man had as perfect a season as a non-entity has ever had. 2nd in IP, 3rd in ERA+, and 18 CG in 37 SP so the 23-5 record isn’t all luck. Only hit .103, but did hit a couple of homers at least.
8. NORM SIEBERN – Yet another guy that we will never mention again. But a 1B with a 140 OPS+ in 162 G, 2nd in the AL. Not confident where I stand on his fielding prowess, but I’ll place him here.
9. EDDIE MATHEWS – Staggers onto my ballot again. Solid, durable player at a non-uber offensive position (nice to have the best hitter in the bigs at a position, isn’t it?)
10. BROOKS ROBINSON – Did not think this season would make my top 10, but so sweet to have a fielder like this at 3B with a 126 OPS+. And other contenders for top 10 had more warts.

Hank Aguirre was 19 IP short of the top 10, and an epically bad hitter. I understand he can be in the top 10, but he just misses for me. Only started 22 games.
Johnny Romano tempted me, quite a hitter for a catcher in the 1960s for the Indians.
Harmon Killebrew, who will be in the annual discussions, spent this season in LF, where a 138 OPS+ is less interesting.
Wish I could have picked Stan The Man. He’s in the discussion at least.
   87. OCF Posted: July 06, 2011 at 05:40 PM (#3870188)
My prelim. No real system, just a lot of seat of the pants stuff, somewhat informed by the stuff I've posted earlier.

1. Mays
2. F. Robinson. 1-2 are close; playing CF (and playing it like Mays) makes a difference.
3. Aaron
4. Mantle: great rates, a little short on playing time
5. B. Robinson: defense
6. T. Davis: not his true talent level, but for one year, he was clutch
7. Wills: an odd year, but he did score runs.
8. Gibson: and not Aguirre because offense counts, too.
9. Mathews: not that different from Killebrew, but his defense was probably better.
10. Purkey

Rather slanted to the NL there.
   88. Nate the Neptunian Posted: July 08, 2011 at 02:33 AM (#3871512)
Here's my prelim. It's not that different than my last chart.

1) Willie Mays (Consensus Rank: 1)
2) Frank Robinson (Consensus Rank: 2)
3) Hank Aaron (Consensus Rank: 3 -- Of these three, the uber stats are relatively uniform in having this order. Robinson hit the best of the three, but had the least defensive value. Mays and Aaron hit about the same, and Aaron played more than half his games in CF (and played well there), but he had about 50 less PA than the other two, and Mays, of course, played more CF. So I'm satisfied this is the right order.)
4) Mickey Mantle (Consensus Rank: 4 -- Mantle had far and away the best season by rate (min. 100 PA). A 199 OPS+ to Aaron's 172, .455 wOBA to .425 for Robinson, and so on, in the non-expansion league. But he just missed too much time to be higher than the NL trio.)
5) Camilo Pascual (Consensus Rank: 6)
6) Bob Purkey (Consensus Rank: 5 -- Flipped Pascual and Purkey. If I ignore rWAR, as with backing out the league strength adjustment for the NL, and adding one to the AL, I think they'd be virtually tied, Pascual ends up with the better average in the uber systems. He trails Purkey by about 30 IP, and has a 123 ERA+ to Purkey's 143, but his peripherals are better, the gap in RA+ is much smaller, and he has a much better FIP+. Also, Pascual was a much better hitter, with an 80 OPS+, while Purkey had an -16.)
7) Bob Gibson (Consensus Rank: 8)
8) Jim Kaat (Consensus Rank: 9 -- I was tempted to flip Gibson and Kaat as well, since if I remove rWAR Kaat has the better average. Gibson, however, has the better peripherals and FIP+ though, so I left him ahead.)
9) Tommy Davis (Consensus Rank: 7 -- Flukey year for Davis, but he was somewhere between the 5th and 8th best hitter in MLB, had a ton of PAs, was a pretty good base runner, and was OK defensively at a corner spot.)
10) Brooks Robinson (Consensus Rank: 10 -- Pretty good year at the plate, and well above average defensively.)
11) Don Drysdale (Consensus Rank: 11)
12) Hank Aguirre (Consensus Rank: 13 -- Historically bad hitter, and peripherals don't stand out from the pack.)
13) Maury Wills (Consensus Rank: 12 -- His base-stealing numbers, and success rate, were insane, but he only hit OK, and he was below average defensively.)
14) Turk Farrell (Consensus Rank: 14)
15) Warren Spahn (Consensus Rank: 15)
16) Norm Siebern (Consensus Rank: 16)
17) Johnny Callison (Consensus Rank: 17)
18) Eddie Mathews (Consensus Rank: 18)
19) Ray Herbert (Consensus Rank: 19)
20) Dick Radatz (Consensus Rank: 20)
21) Whitey Ford (Consensus Rank: 21)
22) Rocky Colavito (Consensus Rank: 22)
23) Bob Friend (Consensus Rank: 23)
24) Ed Charles (Consensus Rank: 24)
25) Bob Shaw (Consensus Rank: 25)
   89. fra paolo Posted: July 08, 2011 at 08:52 PM (#3872212)
Skeletal preliminary ballot:

1) Willie Mays
2) Frank Robinson
3) Mickey Mantle
4) Hank Aaron
5) Bob Purkey
6) Maury Wills
7) Don Drysdale
8) Norm Siebern
9) Eddie Mathews
10) Johnny Callison
   90. lieiam Posted: July 09, 2011 at 08:25 PM (#3872968)
I'm continuing to have computer problems at home and after briefly getting access to more stuff the computer is now worse than ever.
Anyway, I've already posted my preliminary top 10 and am hoping to rank down to 20 but need to get access to my spreadsheet again as well as look at a few more
players in the uber stats.
I think John Romano is the only one who has a decent chance to get into my top 10, but I need help to figure that out...
I'm missing John Romano's baseball prospectus WARP1 and Dan R's WARP1.
Could someone (Nate the Neptunian or otherwise) list those numbers here for Romano?
It would be much appreciated!
   91. Alex King Posted: July 10, 2011 at 12:45 AM (#3873174)
Here are the AFR numbers for 1962. Sorry for the delay––I've been pretty busy over the past few weeks. Following the discussion on the 1961 thread, I've removed TZ from AFR, meaning that I'm only using DRA and SFR for infielders, and DRA only for outfielders and catchers.

Player Position SFR DRA AFR
Willie Mays 8 0 13 13
Frank Robinson 7/9 0 9 9
Tommy Davis 5/8/7/9 -4.5 6 5
Hank Aaron 8/9 0 10 10
Mickey Mantle 8/9 0 -17 -17
Maury Wills 6 5.5 -5 0
Johnny Callison 7/8/9 0 28 28
Brooks Robinson 4/6/5 22.9 13 18
Norm Siebern 3 10.4 0 6
Floyd Robinson 7/9 0 0 0
Rocky Colavito 7 0 1 1
Eddie Mathews 5/3 13.2 0 6
John Romano 2 0 -3 -3
Vada Pinson 8 0 -6 -6
Bob Skinner 7 0 -10 -10
Orlando Cepeda 3/7/9 -6.3 -17 -16
Felipe Alou 7/8/9 0 -1 -1
Tom Tresh 6/7 -18.1 -6 -9
Don Demeter 3/5/7/8/9 -21.8 -8 -18
Roger Maris 8/9 0 -6 -6
   92. Alex King Posted: July 10, 2011 at 12:51 AM (#3873182)
John Romano, DanR WARP for 1962: 4.1
   93. Nate the Neptunian Posted: July 10, 2011 at 05:24 PM (#3873580)
Romano should have actually been on the bottom of my chart. He was left out due to a discrepancy in his name between the BB Ref data and other sources (John versus Johnny) that caused him to be missed. Anyway, here he is in my usual format:


NAME           POS  LG  FINAL_RK  RWAR  RWAR_RK  WSAB  WSAB_RK  GWAR  GWAR_RK  BPWARP1  BPWARP1_RK  WAA   WAA_RK  DRWARP1  DRWARP1_RK  FWAR  FWAR_RK  AVG_RK  
Johnny Romano  C    AL  22        4.8   30       14.2  18       5.21  17       4.7      47          3.12  23      4.32     47          6.01  12       27.71 


He was tied with Colavito in average rank, so would push everyone starting with Friend down one. I'll add him to my final ballot, but even with a C bonus he's not going to make my top ten.
   94. Rick A. Posted: July 11, 2011 at 02:01 AM (#3873937)
1962 Prelim ballot

I use a combination of WAR, Win Shares above bench, OPS+, ERA+, IP and FIP with an adjustment based on league strength and league schedule length.
Only 1 pitcher in my top 10, but pitchers did much better than last year in my rankings.

1. Willie Mays - Defense puts him above Frank Robinson.
2. Frank Robinson
3. Hank Aaron - Last years Personal NL MMP player
4. Mickey Mantle - Last years, and this years Personal AL MMP player
5. Tommy Davis - Better than Wills, the Dodgers real MVP
6. Bob Purkey - Good combo of innings and quality
7. Maury Wills - My Davis comment sounds somewhat negative towards Wills but this was a very good year for Wills
8. Don Drysdale - Led league in innings pitched with 314.1.
9. Johnny Callison
10. Norm Siebern

11-15 Hank Aguirre, Eddie Mathews, John Romano, Felipe Alou, Bob Gibson
16-20 Turk Farrell, Brooks Robinson, Warren Spahn, Jim Kaat, Rocky Colavito
   95. Alex King Posted: July 11, 2011 at 07:17 AM (#3874024)
What about Willie Davis?

I left him out of my AFR chart because he hasn't appeared on anyone's lists so far, but Davis was ninth in the majors in rWAR at 6.3. A lot of that is due to his +14 TZ, but DRA has him at +12 for the year. DanR's WARP has Davis a lot lower, mainly because Dan's FWAA has Davis at -0.1, but I think in this case I'd trust DRA over Dan's FWAA. Anyway, Davis looks like he's certainly deserving of more attention, and may wind up making my ballot.

EDIT: I realize this is kind of late in the balloting process to bring up a totally new player, and I don't think Davis is a candidate for the top spot or even the top five. But I still think he deserves at least some consideration.
   96. Al Peterson Posted: July 11, 2011 at 03:13 PM (#3874183)
Sorry life keeps me busier than I'd like. Throw out a prelim before making final.

1961 MMP Prelim Ballot - components to ranking include WAR, WARP, WS, OPS+/ERA+. Looking kinda pitcher heavy this cycle. I've added some fluff stats to player comments just for general interest.

1. Willie Mays - High Leverage statline: .438/.500/.865 Yikes!
2. Frank Robinson - NL Leader in OBP, SLG, IBB, 2B, R. April Batting Average: .186. Started 7th in batting lineup 5 times during the year.
3. Hank Aaron - Statline vs NYMets: .400/.469/.837, 9 HRs in 18 games
4. Mickey Mantle - Get on base to the tune of .486 and you're doing alright. Here due to missed games.
5. Camilo Pascual - Led AL in CG, SHO, and SO while batting .268
6. Tommy Davis - Scary bad defense @ 3B. 32 RBI's in June.
7. Don Drysdale - Cy Young winner tossed an impressive 314 innings.
8. Bob Purkey - 10-1 vs upper division (Giants/Dodgers/Pirates)
9. Jim Kaat - Start of his Gold Glove run (1962-77). 0-3 vs the 60-101 Senators.
10. Hank Aguirre - 4-0 vs. the Orioles: 4 GS, 4 CG, 2 SHO.
11 Brooks Robinson - One of only two years he hit .300. 162 games @ 3b, 11 errors.
12 Bob Gibson - 1st All-Star Game for the Cardinal hurler. More to come from this youngster.
13 Maury Wills - 208 hits, 29 for extra bases. Helps to steal 104.
14 Norm Siebern - Feasted on Red Sox pitching: .348/.452/.725
15 Eddie Mathews - Streaky Hitter: May & August BA < .200, June & July BA > .300

Others: Johnny Callison, Whitey Ford, Turk Ferrell, Warren Spahn, Johnny Romano
   97. Alex King Posted: July 11, 2011 at 10:27 PM (#3874635)
I want to post this before it's too late. I'll add commentary to my final ballot.

1962 Prelim
1. Willie Mays
2. Hank Aaron
3. Frank Robinson
4. Tommy Davis
5. Turk Farrell
6. Bob Purkey
7. Mickey Mantle
8. Johnny Callison
9. Bob Gibson
10. Maury Wills
   98. DL from MN Posted: July 11, 2011 at 11:21 PM (#3874668)
I guess I should clarify what I'm looking for in a "prelim". If you post a list of players you are considering (top 15, etc) in any order at all that is as good as a prelim ballot.
   99. lieiam Posted: July 12, 2011 at 03:12 AM (#3875047)
thanks for the numbers! now i should be able to vote mt top 10 with confidence.
   100. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: July 12, 2011 at 12:09 PM (#3875171)
My listed FWAA are not reliable for pre-1987 seasons--they just reflect the best available statistics in 2005. DRA, TZ and SFR are far, far superior to my hybrid of old BP FRAA and Fielding Win Shares.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Dock Ellis on Acid
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Syndicate

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 1.2515 seconds
49 querie(s) executed