Saturday, May 18, 2013
Holmes: Where does Miguel Cabrera rank among Tiger greats?
(blog.detroitathletic.com)
Bah! No mention of Em Lindbeck...he was an on-base machine (.000/.500/.000)!
Read More...However, and I know this will irk the legion of Kaline fans out there, Cabrera is a better hitter than #6. He has more power, he pulls the ball better, he goes to the opposite field better, and he is a better RBI man than Al was. It’s not a knock on Kaline, because Cabrera is one of the best hitters to ever play the game. He has a career .320 batting average and his slugging marks are among the best of the last 25 ...
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 >I guess that's fair. In fact, I don't like the valuing of my baseball opinion at 0 and some writer, I don't know, Richard Griffin or somebody, at 1. Should I? Do I, in fact, know nothing at all, while Griffin has perfect wisdom? No? Then, no, I don't like the current system in that sense. I don't like it where all these writers publish stupid things about who belongs in Cooperstown and who doesn't, but I'm the idiot for having an opinion.
I feel like he's making this up. We all discuss the HOF a lot, both on this site and in elsewhere, or in general conversation, etc. Has anyone here ever run into a person who advocated that the HOF "should take the vote away from the baseball writers and simply establish statistical guidelines for a players' election"?
I call ########.
At the very least he's taking an extreme crazy email he received and pretending that it represents the thrust of peoples' criticism of him.
I think voters who believe there is one (say....'3003 hits' or '500 home runs' or '300 wins') shouldn't be voters because they are dumbing things down too much.
If forced to choose between a sabermetric dividing line and the kind of voter noted above, though, I would certainly choose the sabermetric dividing line.
Fixed.
i know this is supposed to be some kind of parody, but it's retarded. it's not smart. it's not funny. it's not witty. it's banter on the level of sarah palin. stop it.
AND ALSO LOLCATS
If anyone would know, it's you.
Clearly Chass likes to just throw out straw men and slap 'em down.
The sad thing is, I was with him on his point about going to work for MLB. It's a valid point, worthy of some discussion, and he undercuts it all by taking yet another swipe at saber folks.
Gee Steagles, you need to relax. Sure it's silly, but it's still fun. #13, nice work
Great thing about Chass is you always know what you are going to get. You can't fault his consistency, that's for sure.
The irony meter just went off the charts.
DB
C'mon Steagles. Reading Murray Chass threads that turn into Mr. President one-downmanship contests is probably the closest you'll ever come to the experience of sitting in on ESPN anchors meeting while they're testing out potential catch phrases. Join the fun and unleash your inner Stuart Scott.
Racist!
So, does anybody want to try and guess what Chass likes to call them?
We have post 216 saying . Post 222 agrees, although my sarcasm detector is pre-intertubes.
Hey, Some of my best friends are rabbits.
C'mon, Steagles isn't that bad.
Not literally, but the open hostility and ridicule directed against "writers" in general, and against using any sort of non-statistical criteria (narrative**, character***, etc.) as the basis for a vote, has been so strongly expressed by many people here that it more or less amounts to the same thing. It hardly a majority sentiment, but it's certainly out there.
**The buzzword for dismissing narrative is usually that narrative is "anecdotal", often supplemented by the charge that contemporary eyewitnesses to a player's strengths didn't know what they were watching.
***with the exception of gambling
So would pushing a vegetable cart.
According to Google translator:
Man, I love google translator.
it's not silly. it's not fun. it's the kind of thing that, were you to hear it on an escalator in the mall, it would drive you beat the red-headed step-child who said it.
the akbar thing--funny
ichiro thing--funny
#6 org--funny
never heard him--funny
this is not. let it die.
this is not. let it die.
MURRAY CHASSISMS >>> NEVER HEAR HIM, MR. PRESIDENT.
there goes any respect I had for you as a humor-standard evaluator. The worst chass thing is still funnier than all the "never heard him's" put together....
In Russia, Yakov Smirnoff riffs endlessly on YOU
i mean, the "never heard him" thing isn't exactly the reason why i think of that, but it reminds me of it all the same.
when i see these things, all i can think is jakovasaur. it's not funny. it's annoying. and if any of you can't see that, you need to lay off your mom's crack.
216 doesn't say that he would replace the BBWAA vote with 62 WAR; only that that's his personal line. (But not really, because he excepts Reggie Smith who had a 63 WAR.)
And later in post 239 he specifically states that 62 WAR is an informal line for him, not the final word:
"I probably should've been more clear but: I use 62 WAR as an informal in/out line, then look at other considerations."
And guess who "simply establishes statistical guidelines for players’ election; the players over the line make it, those under don’t"? Writers. 3000 hits means the player is in.
LOU BROCK AND MURRAY CHASS SEND YOU THEIR "REGARDS," MR. PRESIDENT!!!!
And later in post 239 he specifically states that 62 WAR is an informal line for him, not the final word:
Yeah, but even as an informal line, 62 WAR is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too precise. If you said "60-70 WAR", or "55-65 WAR" then I'd be with you.
But, given the precision involved with things like defense, park factors and replacement level (especially over a 100 year period) 62 WAR means between 55 and 70. People around hear have gone crazy to the point where guys with 60+ WAR are considered "no-brainers" and 50-55 WAR no-hopers, without any thought to the uncertainty.
My favorite poster boy for this is Andruw Jones who's 60 WAR depends on you believing that his D was 10 runs per season better than peak Willie Mays.
IN SOVIET RUSSIA IT'S A TRAP MISTER PRESIDENT
If it's an informal line, what does it matter how precisely it's defined? Particularly if the players, not the number, are setting the line (by looking at the grouping of players and finding where the cutoff exists where players above tend to be Personal Hall of Famers and those below are not).
I suspect Murray got two or three e-mails (out of the thousands of responses his idiocy, and Repoz's friendly links, sparks) from overeager stat enthusiasts and decided that was the stats zealots' take on the Hall of Fame. For as much as we like to ##### about the writer's ballots and results, I don't recall a single poster ever suggesting a hard and fast stat guideline for inclusion.
Page 1 of 2 pages
1 2 >You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.