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.
Wouldn't the ball have carried even further in a vacuum?
They don't think of it as 'Coors bolsters hitting X% more than the next park' but instead think of it as 'all hitting numbers in Coors simply can't be trusted.' I don't think this applies to all, or even most, of the electorate.
Player Rfield WAR/pos PA OPS+ SB PosJohn Olerud 102 58.1 9063 129 11 *3DHFred Clarke 91 67.8 9838 133 509 *7/6985Sammy Sosa 85 58.3 9896 128 234 *98D/H7Todd Helton 73 61.3 9366 133 37 *3/H7D9Al Simmons 67 68.6 9518 133 88 *78/H93Zack Wheat 54 59.9 9996 129 205 *7/H89Goose Goslin 50 66.2 9829 128 176 *79/H835Willie Keeler 30 53.6 9553 127 490 *9/54786Jim Rice 24 47.3 9058 128 58 *7D/9H8Vladimir Guerrero 7 59.7 9059 140 181 *9D/H87Bobby Abreu 2 60.5 9926 129 399 *9D7H/8Orlando Cepeda -9 50.2 8698 133 142 *37D/H95Carlos Delgado -65 44.4 8657 138 14 *3D/7H2Jason Giambi -83 51.3 8813 140 20 *3DH7/59
Backspin in air gives "lift" relative to a ball in air with no backspin. However, a true vacuum would provide zero friction and be a much better hitting environment (not to mention how pitchers would no movement on their pitches.)
#12 First -- and I know you're not arguing this -- only an absolute moron argues road stats (and I know we're going to see that kind of moronic argument with a fair degree of frequency). Home games count and if Helton took greater advantage than you'd expect of an extreme hitter's park that has value.
Walker matched Helton with the bat and did just about everything else better,
Except stay in the lineup, which I think is worth noting. Walker had one season with 150 games played, while Helton has nine. Helton has Walker beat by 1300 PAs.
Willie's 138 gets adjusted up to 144 for strike-year fairness.
Stargell was still active for the strike-shortened 1981 season, too, but played in only 38 games, so it's hardly worth adjusting.
Willie's 138 gets adjusted up to 144 for strike-year fairness.
141. You can't assume he would have played every missed game. I adjusted Walker by his game playing rate, not by adding in all lost games.
So did I. In 1972, the Pirates played 155 games. Willie played in 138 out of 155. That looks like he would have played about 144 to me.
How bad a Hall of Fame would we have if we simply let in anyone who reached 60 WAR (50 for catchers)? Doing that would take all the suspense out of the process, but I suspect the list of inductees would compare more than favorably to what we have now.
Jokes aside, I've always thought that 70 WAR would be the best cutoff. Guys above 70 are all beasts.
#14 Far from unusual for a clear HOF to be done as a quality regular in his early 30s.
That gives you 100 guys which is a pretty small hall. Which is fine if that's the goal.
Is that coin flip? Somebody could sim a bunch of games and tell us if one team is really better than the other, I guess.
Beltre has 5+ WAR seasons with 4 different teams. Only 2 other players have done that.
Oooh, Clemens has got to be one. For sure with Toronto, Boston, and Houston. And it seems like one of those Yankees years has to have made it to 5, too.
More seriously, I'm not positive a team of guys who are 80-100 in all-time WAR leaders would beat a team of guys who are 101-121 in the leaderboard.
The original Sheffield - Dick Allen?
not looking for a fight but allen was a better player and had more much more foundation for his grievances with the world
I think you're both underestimating Sheffield as a player (commonly done) and being slightly patronizing by assuming you can speak to his experience of the world (also commonly done).
#14 Far from unusual for a clear HOF to be done as a quality regular in his early 30s. Unless you'd care to argue that (say) Jimmy Foxx isn't a HOFer.
Now if your point is about bulk WAR picked up when a player is just hanging on (say Biggio's end of career) having zip to do with a HOF case, no disagreement here.
His defensive ratings don't pass the sanity check for me. I watched him with the Yankees in his mid to late 30s and he looked fine out there. Obviously how he looks is a poor way to judge defense, but if he deserved his ratings wouldn't he _look_ cartoonishly bad out there?
Now, the values of those outs change depending on game state, but those 49 PO are worth somewhere between 12 and 16 runs (someone who adept at linear weights, etc. can probably provide a more accurate value).
He only had 7 above average seasons
My thanks to Fancypants for the correction. I was looking merely at the value of an out missed (around 0.27) when I should have also included the value of the hit resulting from the missed putout.
Helton has a perfectly viable HOF case, but it runs into a lot of problems that bedevil both his chances of actually making it as well as our assessment of whether he ought to go in.
From the writers' perspective, it's going to take a massive case to overwhelm their distrust of Coors. It seems to me (though I don't have any real proof) that for all the distrust of 'park effects' as a standard factor in judging value, Coors stands as a completely different beast. It's such an extreme effect that it bursts through their lack of interest in assessing context. But because they don't treat park effects as something that can be accounted for, I actually think they seriously overstate how much of a difference Coors makes. They don't think of it as 'Coors bolsters hitting X% more than the next park' but instead think of it as 'all hitting numbers in Coors simply can't be trusted.' I don't think this applies to all, or even most, of the electorate. But I do think there are enough of them who just won't elect a guy whose numbers came in Denver unless he hits like Bonds and is clean as a Boy Scout. Combine that with a lack of gaudy homerun totals, and Helton is almost certain to get locked outside Cooperstown for a very long time.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (1 members)
Page rendered in 3.6589 seconds, 73 querie(s) executed