Sorry about post #108. Someone, I believe it was Sean, asked how many WS Jeff Bagwell had in 1994, hence the number 30. However, I for some reason thought that thread was only 100 posts at that time. My bad.

I was referring to my earlier question on whether or not Bagwell's 1994 should be adjusted for the strike. I say he should be credited for 42 win shares that year, even though had there been no strike, he wouldn't have played anymore that season.

What was MLB going to do if a team won both halfs? Anyone remember?

IIRC, they would play the team in their division with the 2nd best overall record.

This poorly thought-out system (gotta manufacture a playoff for the TV money) created the possibility that a team like Texas (with the 2nd best record) might dump a few games to Oakland (first half winner) down the stretch in its race against KC (which had a poor first half) to insure that Oakland finished first ahead of KC. Luckily, the schedule did not create the opportunity for such shenanigans, but it could have happened.

If I remember correctly, MLB was embarrassed by the possibility for dropping games suggested by jimd in post 116 and hastily changed their plans in midstream, so that a team that won both halfs would have faced the second-place team FROM THE SECOND-HALF, rather than the overall second-place team.

Mike Green #111
Actually, understanding 1981 is pretty complex, and quite different from 1994 due to the split season in 1981. Teams that won the very abbreviated first half were essentially playing for nothing in the second half. So, for instance, Goose Gossage had a great first half in 1981 and pitched in extremely high leverage situations as the Yanks won the first half title. After the strike, the Yanks used the second half mostly as tune-up for the playoffs. Goose did not pitch as well nor in situations which were as important.

Beside the incentive structure for teams, the split season required that players return to the field quickly after about two months off. No doubt those who remained in top shape deserve credit; still, that was different.

What Mike says about the Yanks and Goose may pertain as well to the Dodgers and Fernando. Against Houston Montreal and New York in the playoffs, Valenzuela suddenly played very well.

adj OPS+, 100 or better in seasons as a regular
ReggSmith 167 61 57 50 43 43 37 30 28 27 01
DwigEvans 163 56 49 47 37 36 31 25 24 20 15 11 10 10 06 03

Smith leads in this offensive battle - at the start at least, winning each of the 1st 10 seasons (with Evans' extra 6 seasons being of underwhelming value).
Smith also had a 153, a 133, a 125, and a 116 in 250-450 PA, not credited here. Exactly 1500 PA, eyeballing it as maybe the equivalent of a 144 and a 118 if you take two halves and make 'em whole (not exactly scientific, so it's not listed, but it was of value).

Evans is missing a 129 in 265 PA and a 119 in 329 PA, call it a 123.

Take a leap, and in a way, it's:

ReggSmith 167 61 57 50 44 43 43 37 30 28 27 18 01
DwigEvans 163 56 49 47 37 36 31 25 24 23 20 15 11 10 10 06 03

Now Reggie leads in "seasons" 1-12, and Evans' excess gets closer to meaningless.

Big pluses for Evans: He had a ton of PA in all 4 of his best seasons, leading the league in his 163 and 147 seasons.
Reggie's only top 10 PA appearance was a 4th with his 130.

The durability bugaboo keeps adding up, and Evans finishes with 10569 PA and a 127, while Smith has 8050 PA and a 137.

Seems like a good offensive battle, no?
I think I'd give it to Evans, because the small edges in OPS+ get overtaken by the playing time. Or would someone say that Evans had more PA chances because of his team's offensive skills? Maybe that's a good point.

Now, on to defense. I have some feelings on this, but what do other people think?
Evans had 7 Gold Gloves to Smith's 1, of course.

the small edges in OPS+ get overtaken by the playing time. Or would someone say that Evans had more PA chances because of his team's offensive skills? Maybe that's a good point.

Evans enjoyed more plate appearances partly because of his teammates offensive skills, his home ballpark, and his DH league. But he was also more durable as well as longeved. Almost every ubersystem accounts for both points. To account for it in an eclectic system, maybe estimate DH + Fielding games played. In other words, how much of Evans say 15% advantage in plate appearances does the difference in non-pinch games explain? That part is roughly the durability difference.

Anyway, Reggie Smith is one of the star players in our time who is most overrated by Tom Hanrahan's favorite declining series of two digit numbers.

Now, on to defense. I have some feelings on this, but what do other people think?
Evans had 7 Gold Gloves to Smith's 1, of course.

But Smith played over 800 games at CF and not badly.

That's part of my point, Grandma - how do people account for the respective positions, and how much of an edge to either?

Nate Silver has CF as 0.4 wins per season more valuable than corner OF.

Nice tongue-in-cheek, there, Paul....