BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: The Baseball Analysts: Lederer: If Gordon, Then Why Not Grich?

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

The Baseball Analysts: Lederer: If Gordon, Then Why Not Grich?

GG . . . am I a fool without a mind
Or have I merely been too blind to realize? (Lerner-Loewe-Lederer)

As shown, Gordon and Grich had similar batting averages while the latter had a better on-base percentage and the former had a superior slugging average. However, it is important to note that Gordon played during an era of higher offense than Grich. For example, the league-wide, park-adjusted averages during Gordon’s career were .271/.350/.395. The only major difference between Gordon and the league average was in SLG where he out-slugged his fellow players by .071. On the other hand, the league-wide, park-adjusted averages during Grich’s career were .258/.324/.384. Grich outperformed his peers across the board with significant advantages in OBP and SLG.

While Gordon out-OPS’d Grich .823 to .795, Grich actually had a higher OPS+ (which adds context to OPS by adjusting for park factors and league averages) than Gordon (125 to 120). In other words, Grich was 25 percent and Gordon 20 percent better than average when normalized to the league.

Grich (164) also had a higher peak OPS+ than Gordon (155) and had more seasons in the 140s (two to none) and 130s (three to two). Grich, in fact, led the AL in OPS+ in 1981 in a 14-team league whereas Gordon’s highest ranking was fourth in 1942 and 1947 in an 8-team environment.

The bottom line is that Grich had better counting and rate stats, as well as a higher peak, than Gordon.

Repoz Posted: December 10, 2008 at 02:20 AM | 5 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: hall of fame, history

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. AROM Posted: December 10, 2008 at 06:33 AM (#3024619)

I had the same thought about Grich when Gordon was elected. Like Grich, Gordon was a player of subtle skills as opposed to someone who you could point to one outstanding trait, like Reggie's power, Gwynn's bat control, or Ozzie's glove. Both were somewhat lacking in career length (though Lou Whitaker, another similar player, proves that career length doesn't make you a lock). Both were unimpressive in batting average, but gave you power, walks, and good 2B defense.

I think Gordon would have been forgotten if not for Bill James, who made a strong case for him as a better ballplayer than Bobby Doerr. This is the second player who James likely helped, George Davis being another. I hope either James makes the case for Bobby or some other writer with his talent and credibility comes along and does it. And I hope Bobby Grich lives to see it.

2. Steve Treder Posted: December 10, 2008 at 06:49 AM (#3024629)

GG . . . am I a fool without a mind
Or have I merely been too blind to realize?

Thank heaven ... for little G's ...

3. OCF Posted: December 10, 2008 at 07:13 AM (#3024635)

The Hall of Merit ranked Grich as the #1 non-HoF candidate among eligible post-WWII candidate, meaning we like him ahead of Santo. In our annual elections, he was first eligible in 1992, an elect-2 year with fellow new candidates Tom Seaver and Pete Rose. We elected Grich and not Rose that year, although that does in part reflect several voters invoking a clause in our rules that allows a one-year boycott for character issues.

In our positional ranking elections, here's how we had the second basemen:

1. Collins
2. Hornsby
3. Morgan
4. Lajoie
5. Gehringer
6. Robinson
7. Grich
8. Carew
9. Sandberg
10. Frisch
11. Ross Barnes
12. Billy Herman
13. Bid McPhee
14. Hardy Richardson
15. Whitaker
16. Gordon
17. Doerr
18. Frank Grant
19. Cupid Childs
20. Randolph
21. Fox

(though Lou Whitaker, another similar player, proves that career length doesn't make you a lock)

You can see what we thought of Whitaker. Not arguing with "another similar player".

We haven't placed Biggio and Alomar yet. It's clear that our ranking of Grich is placed in part on placing a very high value on his defense.

This is the second player who James likely helped, George Davis being another.

Yet Bill Dahlen still languishes.

4. Slinger Francisco Barrios (Dr. Memory) Posted: December 10, 2008 at 06:11 PM (#3024970)

If Ross Barnes is sitting at 11, I'm not sure one can take that list seriously.

5. AROM Posted: December 10, 2008 at 06:26 PM (#3024994)

Yet Bill Dahlen still languishes.

I'm sure James rates Dahlen highly, but has he ever pushed for his election? He had a long entry in the Historical Baseball Abstract on Davis, making a great case that Davis was a great ballplayer, probably to many readers who previously had no idea who Davis was. With Gordon, I think it was in the Politics of Glory, where he was very favorably compared to Bobby Doerr.

For some of the more recent 2B, Sandberg, Biggio, Alomar, Kent, Whitaker, Randolph; you can very easily change their rank just by slight tweaks of the system you are using.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

The Baseball Analysts: Lederer: If Gordon, Then Why Not Grich?

Reader Comments and Retorts

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics