After a few months’ layoff, a new episode. Subjects:
- Hall of Fame: Shockingly, neither Rany Jazayerli nor Joe Sheehan supports Jack Morris’ candidacy. They both agree that the PED pile-up has rendered the HOF impossible to predict, and that it’d be nice if the Hall elected some living people. Joe suggests that no one whose career ended before 1969 should be eligible for election. (“Michael Bourn, if you just magically transported him back to the 1955 Phillies, would be like a super-pumped Richie Ashburn. He would be one of the best players in baseball.”)
- Yankees: The two discuss the Yanks’ luxury tap maneuverings and the team’s near-term future. They agree that the effort to “reset” the luxury tax makes sense, but (even prior to the Mark Teixeira injury) that the team could be ugly this year. Rany points out that the 2014 Yankees will be spending $77 million of the $189 million soft cap on a non-overwhelming core of Tex/A-Rod/Sabathia/Ichiro, and have a lot more spots to fill. Yankee fan Joe hopes that, if the 2013 team is indeed going to end up bad, it falls out of the race early, making it plausible to “sell.”
- World Baseball Classic: Joe is a convert to the WBC cause. Both agree that, regardless of the WBC’s appeal in America (or the success of the U.S. team), the value of the tournament is that it’s a long-term attempt to increase the international appeal of the sport. Joe suggests that the WBC finals be held in July instead of the All-Star Game.
- Fantasy sleepers: Rany nominates Carl Crawford. Joe is obnoxious about it. Joe nominates Rick Porcello and Eric Hosmer.
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. Shock Posted: March 08, 2013 at 04:19 AM (#4383786)This line of reasoning *really* bothers me. I don't doubt for a second that replacement level athleticism is significantly better, but Albert Pujols has basically the same reflexes as Babe Ruth.
But doesn't that suggest that Pujols would have performed at Ruth's levels if he played in Ruth's time? Pujols is good and all, but no one is claiming he is the best athlete ever like they have for Ruth.
What a random grouping of players. It's neither the highest paid, nor the bad contracts.
So the best player today would be the equal of probably the best player ever? Doesn't that prove Sheehan's point? If replacement level is higher, and some guy is four or five wins better than that, isn't he something like seven or eight better than a significantly worse replacement level?
Edit: coke to jacksone
Re: Michael Bourn in 1955: The answer to the hypothetical is irrelevant to the Hall of Fame. I do agree that a higher percentage of deserving pre-1969 players have been elected compared to the percentage of deserving post-1969 players that have been. And, needless to say, I do hope that some of the 15 or so deserving candidates on the upcoming ballot get in. But I don't think a blanket ban on older players is either fair, or would accomplish much. And if I did, it certainly wouldn't be because modern athletes are better. They are better, but that is not the point of the Hall of Fame, which honors the best players of each era.
But I agree that it's time to kill off some of the VC's. Everybody pre-WW2 has has been picked over for 70 years now. Decide already. If you want, do the same thing as was done with the Negro Leagues and have one final "put em in or live with it" election. Other than Joe and his Super Friends (who had incentive to not elect people), VC's will justify their existence by electing people.
Bourn -- Ashburn is far from a perfect comp. I'm not sure what hey mean by "pumped up" -- Bourn's ISO through age 29 is only 10 points higher than Ashburn's. Meanwhile Ashburn wipes him on BA and OBP. And is replacement level really so much higher that Bourn would have twice his career WAR already? Because that's what he'd need to match Ashburn. Anyway ...
Bourn 26-29: 280/348/378, 12 oWAR, 19 WAR
Ashburn 26-29: 320/416/403, 19 oWAR, 24 WAR
OK, I suppose that's not too extreme -- replacement level is about 2 wins per year higher. So Willie Mays would be only a 110 WAR player today. He might have been pretty good, who knew? :-) That's actually not unreasonable -- Mays = ARod. Aaron somewhere between Chipper and Pujols (projected), Robinson = Edgar, Musial = Chipper, Beltre = Ott and closing in on Schmidt.
Say what?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main