User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.2223 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
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.
1. Tim Stauffer, Trot Nixon's Coming (Dan Lee) Posted: October 29, 2010 at 09:36 AM (#3679138)While some think the Giants may become the worst offense to win a World Series, the offense did post a 19.6 WAR this season, much higher than a number of champion offenses.
Who has the lowest WAR offense of a champion?
Who has the highest?
You can cheat by looking here.
Doesn't that include defensive value?
he's below .500 but nowhere near the worst
For the other one, I'll go with the 1906 White Sox and the 1927 Yankees (to be clear, the Yankees are my choice for highest WAR).
Edit: Apparently it's for the 162-game season only. Since the '06 White Sox weren't on the list, I checked them out, and their position players were WAY better than that lowest ranked team on that list.
Then I'd have to guess Leyland.
Edit: Giving it more thought, I'm pretty sure I'm wrong again. But I'll stop guessing now.
you got it
(the thing that surprised me on that list is how far below .500 Tom Kelly ended up)
1988 Dodgers?
he just missed the cut, because he only managed 9 years. But you're right--he has 1243 games with a winning %age of .418. That's the worst of anyone with that many games
(somebody named Jimmy Wilson has 1237 games managed with a %age of .401--he had the Phils and the Cubs in the 30s and 40s)
I'm sure the '88 Dodgers were worse. Who else? The '87 Twins were pretty scrubtastic outside Puckett and Hrbek. And -- didn't the '85 Royals finish last in the AL in runs scored? I'm torn between the Dodgers and Royals.
My Mom and my aunt still choke up 70 years later talking about Hershberger. They were all rabid Reds-loving kids then (Mom was 16 and Aunt Nancy would have been 10) and suicide was pretty much unheard of in their cloisterish German Catholic world.
has anyone figured out if the WAR values he's using include defense? I think they do, which means his title is a bit misleading
duh--its says that in bold letters right in the title (maybe I should learn to read)
I would be interested in seeing how the WAR values of these WS winners compared to that of the losers that year
e.g. 69 and 71 O's vs the Mets and Pirates, and the 85/87 Cards vs the KC's and the Twins
just
fucking
wow
just
#######
wow
But Don Denkinger made up the gap with a 27.54 WPA!
(I kid of course.)
Full data here.
Surprised to see the 2002 Angels so high. I can't really recall who their big hitters were. Salmon and Anderson? David Eckstein? Was it all the productive outs?
Kinda surprised to see the 2001 DBacks so low. But looking it up they were pretty much Luis Gonzalez and that's it. He was over a third of their overall WAR.
to be fair--BRef has the pitching WAR that year as: Royals 24.9 and the Cards at 15.1--so that closes the gap a bit
He wasn't signed off the scrapheap, per se - he was actually one of the Red coaches.
What they really had was a bunch of guys who were pretty good, and only one real hole in the lineup (Bengie Molina, OPS+ 56). Salmon, Anderson, Brad Fullmer, good hitters, and since this also seems to comprise defense, Erstad was a fabulous fielder in those days, and most of the rest of the guys were good or better. They were a similar team, in some respects, to the 2001 Mariners -- not quite as good, a little more BA-dependent, but they were evidence of how a team can win without any huge stars if it avoids having too many giant gaps, as well.
Ernie Lombardi severely twisted his ankle on September 15 while chasing a foul pop-up. His ankle wasn't broken, but Lombardi was hospitalised for ten days. He recovered enough to start Game 3 of the Series on October 7, but was taken out after seven innings. He pinch hit in Game 7 (getting an intentional walk and being removed for a pinch-runner), but those were his only WS appearances.
The Angels were +73 with the bat (and another 20 in other stuff) and +97 on defense.
The 85 Royals were an impressive -73 with the bat. The Giants are at -47 but they have pitchers batting. I think I get -57 for their pitchers so +10 for the batters. I know they didn't win it but the 59 White Sox were -62 with pitchers, their pitchers were -40.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main