Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Friday, August 11, 2017

Top 20 Greatest Dodgers of all-time according to WAR

According to baseball-reference.com, Fernando pitched in front of more fans than any other pitcher in baseball from 1980 to 1990. That’s true even though Fernando missed six weeks to injury in 1988 and only made two starts in 1980.

Starting Pitchers who Performed in Front of the Most Fans, 1980-1990

1. Fernando Valenzuela … 12,945,716
2. Nolan Ryan … 10,867,110
3. Bob Welch … 10,114,515
4. Jack Morris … 10,096,435
5. Dave Stieb … 10,005,851

No longer interested in this website Posted: August 11, 2017 at 03:56 PM | 61 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: dodgers, don drysdale, jackie robinson, pee wee reese, sandy koufax

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. Mefisto Posted: August 12, 2017 at 09:08 AM (#5511811)
For a team with the Dodgers' record of success, that's a remarkably weak top 20 list.
   2. PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina Posted: August 12, 2017 at 09:16 AM (#5511815)
The Dodgers' decades of success, from Branch Rickey through the 1980s, was built as much on having decent major league players coming out their ears as on having top-shelf superstars.

I've always been fascinated by Dazzy Vance.
   3. Rennie's Tenet Posted: August 12, 2017 at 10:36 AM (#5511827)
The article says it's based "solely on Wins Above Replacement." The first sentence regarding the first player is "I cheated a little and moved Walker from #21 to #20 to include him on the list." Okay.
   4. DaVoice of DaPeople Posted: August 12, 2017 at 10:44 AM (#5511828)
That was a really great article. Bill James-esque, a perfect blend of stats and biography.
   5. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 12, 2017 at 11:03 AM (#5511835)
3. Duke Snider

I’ve written it so many times before that it’s starting to seem like a cliché, but Snider is one of the most underrated players of all-time. He was a five-tool player on one of the greatest teams ever assembled, and he maintained a high level of play for about 15 years....

Among the great left-handed batters, Snider is in a small group that had a wide platoon differential (in other words, lefty hitters who struggled a bit against lefty pitchers). His OPS against RHP was 949, against lefties it was 743.

What the author forgets to mention is that for most of his career Snider benefited from two enormous advantages: Playing 77 games a year in Ebbets Field, taking aim at that park's even shorter version of Fenway's Green Monster; and even more, almost never having to face the very lefthanded pitchers that the author notes that he struggled against, due to the fact that he was the only lefthanded power hitter in the Dodgers' everyday lineup.

One example: In the 9 years that Snider played as a regular in Ebbets Field, from 1949 to 1957, Warren Spahn started but 9 games there, and only 3 after 1950. That was because the righthanded Dodgers cleaned his clock, but Snider only hit .238 against him.

Snider was a terrific all around player and a worthy HoFer, but those two advantages he had served to exaggerate his actual talent level.
   6. Captain Supporter Posted: August 12, 2017 at 11:32 AM (#5511840)
There is no better example of how suspect a stat WAR truly is than Pee Wee Reese's ranking as second best all time Dodger.
   7. DavidFoss Posted: August 12, 2017 at 11:48 AM (#5511844)
There is no better example of how suspect a stat WAR truly is than Pee Wee Reese's ranking as second best all time Dodger.

He had one of the longest Dodger careers -- and was a good-fielding SS on top of that.

Most WAR
name_common         totPA   totWAR  WAR_PA600  
------------------  ------  ------  --------
Pee Wee Reese       9470     66.36      4.20
Duke Snider         7633     65.84      5.18
Jackie Robinson     5804     61.45      6.35
Zack Wheat          9725     59.70      3.68
Willie Davis        8035     54.42      4.06
Ron Cey             6108     47.49      4.67
Gil Hodges          7935     44.43      3.36
Jim Gilliam         8322     40.73      2.94
Steve Garvey        7027     36.42      3.11
Carl Furillo        7022     35.16      3.00
Roy Campanella      4815     34.21      4.26
Dixie Walker        5093     33.47      3.94 


Most PA
name_common         totPA   totWAR  WAR_PA600 
------------------  ------  ------  --------
Zack Wheat          9725     59.70      3.68
Pee Wee Reese       9470     66.36      4.20
Jim Gilliam         8322     40.73      2.94
Willie Davis        8035     54.42      4.06
Bill Russell        8021     31.17      2.33
Gil Hodges          7935     44.43      3.36
Duke Snider         7633     65.84      5.18
Steve Garvey        7027     36.42      3.11
Carl Furillo        7022     35.16      3.00
Maury Wills         6745     31.91      2.84
Eric Karros         6624     11.66      1.06
Ron Cey             6108     47.49      4.67
Jackie Robinson     5804     61.45      6.35 


Most WAR per 600 PA (2000+ PA)
name_common         totPA   totWAR  WAR_PA600 
------------------  ------  ------  --------
Jackie Robinson     5804     61.45      6.35
Mike Piazza         3017     31.90      6.34
Reggie Smith        2055     19.33      5.64
Duke Snider         7633     65.84      5.18
Jack Fournier       2176     18.68      5.15
Dolph Camilli       3606     29.10      4.84
Augie Galan         2568     20.53      4.80
Pedro Guerrero      4089     32.63      4.79
Pete Reiser         2483     19.66      4.75
Ron Cey             6108     47.49      4.67 

   8. Mefisto Posted: August 12, 2017 at 11:56 AM (#5511847)
I always knew the basic point Jolly made, but I just looked it up and was surprised at how big Snider's platoon advantage was. He had 8237 PAs in his career, 7067 (85.8%) against RHP. His OPS versus RHP was .949. Against LHP (14.2% of PAs) his OPS was .743.

To see how unusual that 85.8% is, I checked Snider against Richie Ashburn. Ashburn had 9273 PAs, only 72.1% of them against RHPs and 27.9% v. LHPs. I'm not going to do the full math, but double the percentage of LHPs faced by Snider and I doubt he makes the HOF.
   9. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 12, 2017 at 12:14 PM (#5511853)
Just to be clear, my point wasn't to diminish the value of Snider's career, since whatever his advantages he used them to the Dodgers' great benefit. It was only to note that with a more normal home park, and surrounded by a more normal mix of righthanded and lefthanded batters in the lineup, his overall numbers wouldn't have looked nearly as good. Snider was a HoFer by any normal standard, but he was also the fortunate beneficiary of two highly unusual sets of circumstances, a combination that few if any other players have ever been granted.
   10. LA Podcasting Hombre of Anaheim Posted: August 12, 2017 at 12:24 PM (#5511855)
I suspect that, in this era of LOOGYs, Snider would have fared worse in close-and-late situations. (I actually suspect that's true in general, but I have no actual idea. I should look it up when I get a chance.) Like you said, it's not really a knock on Snider, it's just of real historical interest. Nobody knocks Mel Ott because he got to play in the Polo Grounds. Being a worthy third wheel to Willie and Mickey is nothing to sneeze at.

There's a pretty famous story of the first time Snider got a good look at how deep the right field wall was in Los Angeles, and how gleeful Willie Mays was in pointing that out for him that speaks to just how important that short porch was to Snider.
   11. DavidFoss Posted: August 12, 2017 at 12:34 PM (#5511858)
There's a pretty famous story of the first time Snider got a good look at how deep the right field wall was in Los Angeles, and how gleeful Willie Mays was in pointing that out for him that speaks to just how important that short porch was to Snider.

I was just looking at that.

http://www.andrewclem.com/Baseball/MemorialColiseum.html

Looks like it was Death-Valley-esque in 1958 but more standard after. Ironically, the ridiculous screen situation in LF probably scared away as many LHP's as Snider's teammates did the few years before. Koufax hated pitching there. So, I was checking Sniders H/R splits and they recovered after 1958 for a couple of years before injuries caught up with him.
   12. Mefisto Posted: August 12, 2017 at 12:47 PM (#5511864)
Nobody knocks Mel Ott because he got to play in the Polo Grounds.


Ott's career would have looked different in a different park -- fewer HRs, more 2B and 3B -- but his home OPS was .980 and his road OPS was .918. I wouldn't put him in the same category as Snider.
   13. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 12, 2017 at 12:59 PM (#5511865)
Looks like it was Death-Valley-esque in 1958 but more standard after. Ironically, the ridiculous screen situation in LF probably scared away as many LHP's as Snider's teammates did the few years before. Koufax hated pitching there. So, I was checking Sniders H/R splits and they recovered after 1958 for a couple of years before injuries caught up with him.

Koufax's ERA in his three home parks:

Ebbets Field 4.04

L.A. Coliseum 4.33.**

Dodger Stadium 1.37

The only park where he had a worse ERA than he did in the Coliseum was San Francisco's Seals Stadium, a bandbox park where he posted an 8.68 ERA in two starts.

**His one good year there was in the Dodgers' championship year of 1959, when he went 5 and 2 with a 2.71 ERA, and then lost a 1-0 decision in the 5th game of the World Series.
   14. a bebop a rebop Posted: August 12, 2017 at 01:12 PM (#5511866)
Starting Pitchers who Performed in Front of the Most Fans, 1980-1990


This is an awesome stat.
   15. Walt Davis Posted: August 12, 2017 at 06:12 PM (#5512008)
suspect a stat WAR truly is than Pee Wee Reese's ranking as second best all time Dodger.

There's no better example of how suspect a stat like HR truly is than Eric Karros's ranking at #3 for the Dodgers.

And don't even get me started on pitcher wins which -- can you believe this -- claims that Brickyard Kennedy was better than Koufax and Claude Osteen was better than Kershawn and Fernando. That stat thinks Don Sutton's career was better than Kershaw and Fernando combined!

Stupid baseball counting stats with their counting and stuff.
   16. eric Posted: August 12, 2017 at 07:40 PM (#5512039)
Stupid baseball counting stats with their counting and stuff.


To be fair, WAR is purported to be a stat representing overall player value, whereas wins and HR are not.
   17. Dog on the sidewalk Posted: August 12, 2017 at 07:59 PM (#5512046)
A certain type of overall value, with a low baseline and no consideration given to peak. With an understanding of that, what about Reese's place on the list speaks poorly of WAR as a concept? One can buy that he produced more WAR than Robinson or Snider without considering him to be the better player.
   18. Jose Bautista Bobblehead Day Posted: August 12, 2017 at 08:01 PM (#5512047)
Let's look at Wins Above Average with below-average seasons zeroed out:

Clayton Kershaw 43.9
Duke Snider 39.6
Jackie Robinson 39.3
Dazzy Vance 37.9
Don Drysdale 35.4

Pee Wee Reese 33.4
Nap Rucker 30.7
Zack Wheat 29.6
Orel Hershiser 29.4
Sandy Koufax 29.2

Ron Cey 27.8
Willie Davis 26.1
Mike Piazza 22.9
Don Sutton 21.3
Jeff Pfeffer 21.2

Gil Hodges 20.1
Roy Campanella 19.3
Pedro Guerrero 19.3
Fernando Valenzuela 18.9
Bob Welch 17.7
   19. cardsfanboy Posted: August 12, 2017 at 08:07 PM (#5512049)
To be fair, WAR is purported to be a stat representing overall player value, whereas wins and HR are not.


To be fair, if someone is arguing against someone like Reese ranking by war, shouldn't they at least provide evidence against?

War is a combo counting and a rate stat, it's designed to combine rate with playing time and it does a good job... if you don't like the war version, the waa probably is more inline with your thinking, it's going to provide an advantage for the rate guys over the guys who are healthy or long term players. But it's still the same thing as war, just at a different scale.

Pee Wee Reese played 16 seasons with the dodgers, 13 of them was as an everday starter averaging 148 games a season in a 154 game season. He played gold glove quality defense at shortstop while putting up a career ops+ of 99... that is 2166 games, 9470 pa out of a gold glove quality shortstop over 16 seasons, who hit like an average position player in an era where shortstops didn't hit....

I'm not seeing a stretch here for him being the second best all time Dodger... third place was Duke Snider, a good hitting, average fielding centerfielder, roughly speaking there really is no real difference in war between the two(Reese 66.4 vs Snider 65.8), but waa does give Snider a more noticeable advantage(31.7 vs 37.2), so I could see arguing to flip flop Snider and Reese, and I personally would list Snider over Reese, but we are splitting hairs here.

The fourth guy was Jackie Robinson with a well known short career, and it's a testament to how great of a player he was that he finished fourth, on this list despite playing 5 fewer years as a Dodger than Snider or Reese(and he wasn't that far behind them in war with 61.5--and beat them both in waa with 39.3.)

Etc.... I can see arguments for any of Reese, Snider, Robinson, Wheat, Vance or Drysdale in the top spot.
   20. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: August 12, 2017 at 08:23 PM (#5512057)
Pee Wee Reese played 16 seasons with the dodgers, 13 of them was as an everday starter averaging 148 games a season in a 154 game season. He played gold glove quality defense at shortstop while putting up a career ops+ of 99... that is 2166 games, 9470 pa out of a gold glove quality shortstop over 16 seasons, who hit like an average position player in an era where shortstops didn't hit...


And was an excellent baserunner. And lost 3 prime years to the war. He put up a 5.7 WAR in 1942, and a 6.0 in 1946. It's not unreasonable to say he would have had 80 WAR if not for the war.
   21. cardsfanboy Posted: August 12, 2017 at 08:23 PM (#5512059)
As mentioned above though, it's not really a great list for an organization with the success that they have had... I mean you look at the great organizations of baseball and you have clear number ones or number twos well above anyone here.

NYY Ruth, Gehrig, Dimaggio and Mantle all clearly better than anyone for the Dodgers(even Jeter by war)
STL Musial, Pujols Hornsby and Gibson all better
Bos Williams, Boggs, Yaz and Clemens
Giants Mays, Mathewson, Bonds, Ott.
Tigers Cobb, Kaline, Gehringer, (heck by War both Trammell and Whitaker would beat anyone on the Dodgers)
Reds Bench, Rose and Larkin...

etc...
   22. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: August 12, 2017 at 08:39 PM (#5512072)
As mentioned above though, it's not really a great list for an organization with the success that they have had... I mean you look at the great organizations of baseball and you have clear number ones or number twos well above anyone here.


What would Reese and Robinson look like if not for the war? I already mentioned Reese would likely be over 80. How would a above average hitter, who was an excellent baserunner and excellent fielder with over 2400 games at SS be viewed? Even missing those 3 years he had almost as much WAR as Larkin.

Jackie Robinson compiled 61 WAR without ever playing a game before his 28th birthday. Now, the all time greats compiled more than 61 for age 28 on, but not that much more. Joe Morgan compiled 27 WAR through age 27, and that does not seem unreasonable for Robinson.

So, with a top 2 of 88 and 80, do the Dodgers still feel like underachievers?
   23. QLE Posted: August 12, 2017 at 08:49 PM (#5512083)
#17- Right, as demonstrated by a tool I fool around with a little, WAR10, as applied to various position players on the Dodgers all-time list:

Robinson: 61.5 WAR
Snider: 60.7 WAR
Reese: 55.1 WAR
Cey: 47.4 WAR
Davis: 47.1 WAR
Hodges: 43.7 WAR
Wheat: 43.1 WAR
Campanella: 34.2 WAR

Looked at this way, the position of Reese as leading the position players is demonstrated as being in good part an effect of his being able to last longer as an elite player- Robinson (for reasons that are hopefully very well known here) had a short career, and Snider feel off a cliff in terms of performance after 1957, while Reese (in spite of missing time due to WWII) managed to have a longer career.

(That said, the players who this method really challenges are Zack Wheat and Willie Davis- two players who both had a few good years, but also a lot of years in which they were somewhat above average that serve to increase their career WAR without aiding any claims of a peak case.)
   24. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: August 12, 2017 at 08:50 PM (#5512086)
So, with a top 2 of 88 and 80, do the Dodgers still feel like underachievers?


Given their success (and the fact that everybody's war heroes get boosted in such an exercise, yes, I think they are in this measurement.
   25. cardsfanboy Posted: August 12, 2017 at 08:55 PM (#5512089)

What would Reese and Robinson look like if not for the war? I already mentioned Reese would likely be over 80. How would a above average hitter, who was an excellent baserunner and excellent fielder with over 2400 games at SS be viewed? Even missing those 3 years he had almost as much WAR as Larkin.

Jackie Robinson compiled 61 WAR without ever playing a game before his 28th birthday. Now, the all time greats compiled more than 61 for age 28 on, but not that much more. Joe Morgan compiled 27 WAR through age 27, and that does not seem unreasonable for Robinson.

So, with a top 2 of 88 and 80, do the Dodgers still feel like underachievers?


I'm not arguing or debating anything on the quality of their players even their careers, but Ted Williams, Mays among others were also involved in the war... Are the Dodgers the only historic organization that has zero players without 90 war for their franchise?

Beyond the ones I mentioned above you have the Pirates with Honus Wagner, Phillies with Schmidt, Cubs with Anson, Braves with Aaron(and Mathews), Orioles with Ripken... etc...This isn't actually a knock, it's just what it was. They have a ton of very good/great players, just not any all time great players who stuck with the team for a long time.
   26. BDC Posted: August 12, 2017 at 09:35 PM (#5512116)
What would Reese and Robinson look like if not for the war?

This is a straightforward question for Reese, who was an established ML regular before WW2, but brings other counterfactuals into play in Robinson's case. Jackie Robinson was a great athlete at junior college and UCLA, but wasn't very good at baseball there, and wasn't pursuing it as a career before he was drafted. There seems little doubt that he could have played Negro League ball in the early '40s if he'd been intent on it from the start, but he simply wasn't.
   27. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: August 12, 2017 at 10:08 PM (#5512138)
Are the Dodgers the only historic organization that has zero players without 90 war for their franchise?

Indians -- Lajoie 79
Chisox-- Appling 74
Cubs have Anson 84 but since 1900 it's Santo with 72
   28. Infinite Yost (Voxter) Posted: August 12, 2017 at 11:22 PM (#5512190)
Notice that those are all perennial also-rans. The Dodgers are one of the 3 or 4 most successful teams in the history of the game.

Almost certainly just dumb luck. The guy who was going to be their monster was Koufax, and he was done at 31.
   29. Don August(us) Cesar Geronimo Berroa Posted: August 12, 2017 at 11:29 PM (#5512196)
I believe Bench leads the Reds with 75 WAR.

Edit. And i am wrong. Rose has 77 WAR with the Reds
   30. cardsfanboy Posted: August 12, 2017 at 11:54 PM (#5512204)
Notice that those are all perennial also-rans. The Dodgers are one of the 3 or 4 most successful teams in the history of the game


Exactly.... you have the Yankees, the absolute clear most successful franchise in the history of mlb...two gaps--- then the Cardinals.... small gap...and depending on your viewpoint, it's the Giants, Dodgers, A's..(and the a's have also a history of being one of the worst franchises...so they are kinda on both sides of the spectrum, in reality, the worst you could list the Dodgers is 4th best franchise over the past 100 years)

Yet somehow they never had a Pujols level talent that past through their organization, even though they have the most rookies of the year by a wide margin, a success cycle in nearly every decade of existence, etc.... They win because they consistently have good quality players throughout their team... I grew up in the early 80's and the Dodgers was by far the team I knew the most about because everyone on their team was good...My Second baseman's glove I used growing up was a Davey Lopes model. Steve Garvey, Ron Cey, Bill Russell, Steve Yeagar, Reggie Smith...even Rick Monday... all names I knew growing up... then you add the Sax, Valenzuela, Piazza, and others...and you would just expect someone somewhere would become something spectacular(with apologies to Piazza who was spectacular)
   31. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: August 13, 2017 at 08:30 AM (#5512264)
Exactly.... you have the Yankees, the absolute clear most successful franchise in the history of mlb...two gaps--- then the Cardinals.... small gap...and depending on your viewpoint, it's the Giants, Dodgers, A's..(and the a's have also a history of being one of the worst franchises...so they are kinda on both sides of the spectrum, in reality, the worst you could list the Dodgers is 4th best franchise over the past 100 years)


If it's the past 100, they're third, behind the Yankees and Cardinals. If it's baseball history, their fourth, between the Giants and the Red Sox (the idea that a twice-moved, nearly 500 games under .500 team is the fourth most successful in the sport's history is ridiculous). But we all know your blind spot.
   32. BDC Posted: August 13, 2017 at 08:52 AM (#5512269)
Everybody's going to rank franchise success (after the Yankees) a little differently. It is interesting to note the span in which the most frequent Series winners did so:

Yankees, 27 in 87 years (1923-2009)
Cardinals, 11 in 86 years (1926-2011)
A's, nine in 80 years (1910-1989)
Giants, eight in 110 years (1905-2014)
Red Sox, eight in 111 years (1903-2013)
Dodgers, six in 34 years (1955-1988)

And of course the Dodgers won their six titles for just two managers.
   33. Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama Posted: August 13, 2017 at 08:54 AM (#5512270)
I believe Bench leads the Reds with 75 WAR.

Edit. And i am wrong. Rose has 77 WAR with the Reds


Frank Robinson had 64 after his age 30 season, then the Reds traded him a "year early". He still had 40+ WAR in him. Some teams never had a 90 WAR players, some were just dumb.
   34. Mefisto Posted: August 13, 2017 at 09:04 AM (#5512272)
I'm not sure what criterion people are using for "most successful franchise", but I don't see any real difference between the Giants and Cards. For that matter, the Dodgers are only a bit behind:

Cards:
Seasons: 136 (1882 to 2017)
Record: 10717-9895, .520 W-L%
Playoff Appearances: 28
Pennants: 23
World Championships: 11

Giants:
Seasons: 135 (1883 to 2017)
Record: 10997-9486, .537 W-L%
Playoff Appearances: 26
Pennants: 23
World Championships: 8

Dodgers:
Seasons: 134 (1884 to 2017)
Record: 10754-9667, .527 W-L%
Playoff Appearances: 30
Pennants: 22
World Championships: 6
   35. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 13, 2017 at 09:51 AM (#5512278)
I think the reason that the Cardinals are often considered more successful than the Giants and the Dodgers is that they have almost twice as many championships as the Dodgers, and that their championships got bunched together in clusters spanning many decades: 3 between 1926 and 1934; 3 between 1942 and 1946; 2 between 1964 and 1967; and 2 between 2006 and 2011. Once they got over that initial hump, their success becomes more evident.

And when most people think about franchises, they begin in 1901 with the advent of the AL. Within that time frame, here are the number of pennants vs. the number of World Championships:

Cardinals: 19 pennants, 11 championships. Longest drought: 25 years, 1901-25
Giants: 20 pennants, 8 championships. Longest drought: 55 years, 1955-2009
Dodgers: 18 pennants, 6 championships. Longest drought: 54 years, 1901-54

Admittedly that's a ring-centric way of looking at it, but it's perspective that many fans share, rightly or wrongly.
   36. Rally Posted: August 13, 2017 at 09:51 AM (#5512279)
I always thought of Pee Wee Reese as sort of like the Alan Trammell of his time. He never had that one big season like 1987, and the park factors push the OPS+ to 99 (Tram was 110) although superficially the stat lines look similar. His advantage was durability, from ages 22-37 you could count on him to play just about every day, unless he was busy killin natzis.

He missed his age 24-26 seasons due to the WAR. At 22 he was at 5.7, and in the 4 years after his return he averaged 6 WAR. So give him those years back and its easy to see his career as 80 WAR, and probably closer to 85. He was never a serious MVP candidate but always regarded as among the most valuable players in the league, from 1946-56 he finished in the top 10 MVP voting 9 times, with a best finish of #5.
   37. BDC Posted: August 13, 2017 at 10:10 AM (#5512283)
unless he was busy killin natzis

Figuratively speaking. Reese was in the Navy during WW2, stateside and in the Pacific, and spent a lot of the war playing and coaching baseball.
   38. Howie Menckel Posted: August 13, 2017 at 10:30 AM (#5512285)
anyone who thinks Duke Snider was UNDERrated should be institutionalized, for many of the reasons stated above.

he was a very great player for five years and a very good one for four before that. I'm ok with him in the HOF (and HOM).

from age 31 on/once he moved to LA, he never once reached 450 PA
   39. Mefisto Posted: August 13, 2017 at 11:36 AM (#5512297)
Jolly, I think those points are fair and reflect the way many people see it. I'd add that the early failures of the Cardinals and Dodgers, like the early successes of the Giants, are beyond the memory of pretty much everyone still alive.

I personally give more credence to (1) regular season success; and (2) number of times making the postseason. I think winning the WS, while a factor, is less meaningful because it's more of a crapshoot. I'd rank the Giants as the second most successful franchise and say the Dodgers and Cards are tied for third.
   40. cardsfanboy Posted: August 13, 2017 at 11:59 AM (#5512300)
Jolly, I think those points are fair and reflect the way many people see it. I'd add that the early failures of the Cardinals and Dodgers, like the early successes of the Giants, are beyond the memory of pretty much everyone still alive.

I personally give more credence to (1) regular season success; and (2) number of times making the postseason. I think winning the WS, while a factor, is less meaningful because it's more of a crapshoot. I'd rank the Giants as the second most successful franchise and say the Dodgers and Cards are tied for third.


It's also about stretches of futility, No Cardinal fan born after 1901 have failed to witness a World Championship by the time they turned 25 years old. On top of that, since 1920, the Cardinals have never had more than two consecutive losing seasons, even when they aren't good, they aren't bad either(Dodgers can say the same if you start in 1937, Giants if you start in 2007). Cardinals finished in last place in 1990, the last time that happened was 1918.(Dodgers can say that also--except it was 1992, and goes back to 1905...Giants if you go 2007 and 1995)


The following stat is based upon post 1913 since that is all pi will allow, it's 105 seasons, including this year. So the Giants are getting screwed by this stat.
Cardinals have 76 seasons .500 or better, 18 seasons over .600. (22 if you go .597 or .590)(I included that last part because to avoid cherry picking an arbitrary number and noticed that the Giants had a few .599/.597)
Dodgers have 74 seasons .500 or better, 17 seasons over .600 (20 if you go with .597)(21 if you go .590)
Giants have 72 seasons .500 or better, 15 seasons over .600(20 if you go with .597) (22 if you go .590)

The Giants, Dodgers and Cardinals all have a claim to being extremely successful franchises, but it just looks like the Cardinals get the tie breakers, especially when you are looking at it from a more modern perspective.
   41. BDC Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:09 PM (#5512307)
No Cardinal fan born after 1901 have failed to witness a World Championship by the time they turned 25 years old

I used to think that Tiger fans were almost equally fortunate. 1935, 1945, 1968, 1984 – not only were they winning their share, and at nice intervals, but those were tense years in US and world history, and kids growing up in Michigan at least had some rosy memories to cultivate during those eras.

Of course now Tiger fans pushing 40 are still waiting …
   42. McCoy Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:41 PM (#5512318)
Ted Williams faced lefties 21.3% of the time in his career. Most lefties back then didn't really have to face a lot of lefties for one reason or another. Stan Musial is kind of the exception to this though as he faced a lefty a whopping 35% of the time.
   43. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 13, 2017 at 12:48 PM (#5512319)
Jolly, I think those points are fair and reflect the way many people see it. I'd add that the early failures of the Cardinals and Dodgers, like the early successes of the Giants, are beyond the memory of pretty much everyone still alive.

I personally give more credence to (1) regular season success; and (2) number of times making the postseason. I think winning the WS, while a factor, is less meaningful because it's more of a crapshoot. I'd rank the Giants as the second most successful franchise and say the Dodgers and Cards are tied for third.


Fair enough, Mark. While I personally lean towards the championship-centric way of looking at franchises, I'm not trying to pretend that this is the only valid perspective. And when you look at it as you do, it is rather remarkable just how similar those three franchises are.

OTOH, IMO the most interesting franchise is The Little Girl With The Curl. I think everyone knows which one I'm talking about here.
   44. cardsfanboy Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:41 PM (#5512341)
Ted Williams faced lefties 21.3% of the time in his career. Most lefties back then didn't really have to face a lot of lefties for one reason or another. Stan Musial is kind of the exception to this though as he faced a lefty a whopping 35% of the time.


Just going from 1944-1959, right handed pitchers threw roughly 71.3% of plate appearances in the majors. In that time frame the platoon splits are missing some data, but based upon the data that they do have, right handed batters faced right handed pitchers 68.7% of the time, and left handed batters faced right handed pitchers 79.3% of the time.... (So 85% isn't that far away from average, but it would amount to about 700 pa more than he did actually face.)


Edit: actually that first part might be wrong, double checking it from the pitching split...Double checked and it looks like 72.7% of pa was against right handed pitchers. (Pi has some data missing on these splits, but that is in line with the 29% of pitches thrown are lefties that people usually talk about historically)
   45. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:53 PM (#5512345)
Stan Musial is kind of the exception to this though as he faced a lefty a whopping 35% of the time.


Warren Spahn faced the Cardinals more than any other team, 125 times. In contrast, he faced the Dodgers only 77 times. Spahn faced Musial for 100 more PA than any other batter, 353. He faced Snider only 92 times.
   46. cardsfanboy Posted: August 13, 2017 at 01:57 PM (#5512347)
Based upon the data that Pi has from 1940-1964, Cardinals faced Left handed pitching as a team 35% of their plate appearances.
   47. Sunday silence Posted: August 13, 2017 at 03:06 PM (#5512373)
I thought Snider's range numbers in CF were rather lackluster. Compared to Richie Ashburn or Willie Mays there's lots of balls dropping in for XB hits in the dodger outfield, no?
   48. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 13, 2017 at 03:53 PM (#5512391)
Warren Spahn faced the Cardinals more than any other team, 125 times. In contrast, he faced the Dodgers only 77 times.

Spahn figured in the decision in 58 of those games. 13 of them came before Snider was a regular, and 21 of them were after the Dodgers left Brooklyn.

Snider's peak stretch was between 1953 and 1957, when his OPS+ numbers were 1.046. 1.071, 1.046, .997 and .955. During those five years, Spahn started against the Dodgers exactly four times, never in Ebbets Field, and counting two relief appearances, he pitched but a total of 19.0 innings against them. In 1953 Spahn lost an 11 inning decision to the Dodgers in Milwaukee, and in his other three starts during that five year stretch, he lasted a total of 5.2 innings. Needless to say, the only beneficiary of this historic ducking job was Duke Snider.
   49. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: August 13, 2017 at 03:59 PM (#5512401)
1. Fernando Valenzuela … 12,945,716
4. Jack Morris … 10,096,435

Yeah, but more people actually saw Morris than Fernando because everyone knew Morris pitched to the attendance.
   50. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: August 13, 2017 at 05:32 PM (#5512452)
Compared to Richie Ashburn or Willie Mays there's lots of balls dropping in for XB hits in the dodger outfield, no?

that's pretty stiff company, mate
   51. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: August 13, 2017 at 06:14 PM (#5512465)
Compared to Richie Ashburn or Willie Mays there's lots of balls dropping in for XB hits in the dodger outfield, no?

that's pretty stiff company, mate

It's also a bit hard to compare the range of centerfielder with a 480' or 468' CF wall behind him to one where the centerfield wall was only 393' to 376'. It's a bit like trying to compare the range of Carl Yastrzemski to the range of a leftfield who patrolled the old Yankee Stadium or Griffith Stadium.
   52. Tom Nawrocki Posted: August 13, 2017 at 06:44 PM (#5512478)
I thought Snider's range numbers in CF were rather lackluster.


Snider's defensive stats while the Dodgers were in Brooklyn are very good. When they moved to a very odd-shaped park in Los Angeles, they immediately fell through the floor. By the time the Dodgers got back to a more normal park, Snider was 35 years old.
   53. Sunday silence Posted: August 13, 2017 at 09:02 PM (#5512507)
you're right Tom his range looks exceptional up to the last year in Brooklyn. It cratered the first year in LA, I guess a combination of age and whatever the confines of that park, I forget what it was. I must have misrembered, he seems excellent till age 29.
   54. The Honorable Ardo Posted: August 13, 2017 at 09:59 PM (#5512514)
I can absolutely accept Pee Wee Reese as the #2 all-time Dodger. His #1 Similarity Score comp is Edgar Renteria, but Reese was superior. Their era-adjusted offensive profiles are very close - except Reese drew twice as many walks. He was also quite a bit better defensively and on the bases than Edgar.

Duke Snider belongs to a class of players whose raw statistics make him look better than he was, but still easily clears the Hall of Fame/Merit threshold.
   55. Howie Menckel Posted: August 13, 2017 at 11:46 PM (#5512551)
Duke Snider belongs to a class of players whose raw statistics make him look better than he was, but still easily clears the Hall of Fame/Merit threshold.

agreed
   56. Morty Causa Posted: August 14, 2017 at 08:28 AM (#5512591)
Didn't Snider suffer an injury also around the time the team made the move to LA?
   57. DavidFoss Posted: August 14, 2017 at 08:51 AM (#5512596)
Didn't Snider suffer an injury also around the time the team made the move to LA?

The SABR Bio describes the history of knee problems. His knees had started to bother him a bit as early as the 1955 WS but then:

Duke played 106 games in 1958 as he suffered from a recurrence of knee trouble after a spring training auto accident, a back injury, and an arm strain.
...
With twenty cortisone shots for his ailing knee, Snider played in 126 games in 1959. He was still a fine outfielder, but to take some of the stress off his knee, he began playing in right field and left field, where less running was required.
...
Snider’s career was now winding down. Slowed by knee trouble, he hit only .243 in 1960 and was sent to the bench to make way for youngsters Tommy Davis and Willie Davis.
   58. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: August 14, 2017 at 08:53 AM (#5512598)
Didn't Snider suffer an injury also around the time the team made the move to LA?

from his Bref bio:
"Duke played 106 games in 1958 as he suffered from a recurrence of knee trouble after a spring training auto accident, a back injury, and an arm strain"
   59. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: August 14, 2017 at 09:57 AM (#5512638)
Are the Dodgers the only historic organization that has zero players without 90 war for their franchise?

Indians -- Lajoie 79
Chisox-- Appling 74
Cubs have Anson 84 but since 1900 it's Santo with 72


The Dodgers are surprising in that none of their top franchise guys reached 90 WAR for their total careers, including time played for other franchises. In fact, I am pretty sure they never even had a 70 WAR guy. I know there are guys like Beltre and Pedro who played a few seasons for the Dodgers and easily clear that threshold, but nobody who did it primarily a Dodger.

The Indians had Lajoie, the Cubs had Anson, the White Sox had the majority of Collins' career. Am I missing someone for the Dodgers?
   60. Batman Posted: August 14, 2017 at 10:33 AM (#5512669)
The Dodgers are surprising in that none of their top franchise guys reached 90 WAR for their total careers, including time played for other franchises. In fact, I am pretty sure they never even had a 70 WAR guy. I know there are guys like Beltre and Pedro who played a few seasons for the Dodgers and easily clear that threshold, but nobody who did it primarily a Dodger.
I think you're right. Unless I missed somebody, Don Sutton has the most total WAR for anybody who played most of his career as a Dodger. He had 68.7 pitching WAR, 50.7 of it with LA. His hitting knocked him down to 67.4 overall. Drysdale, Snider, and Reese were within 1 WAR of that though.
   61. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: August 14, 2017 at 11:42 AM (#5512769)
I know there are guys like Beltre and Pedro who played a few seasons for the Dodgers and easily clear that threshold, but nobody who did it primarily a Dodger.

The Indians had Lajoie,

the Indians also had Tris Speaker for half his career--he ended with 133.7 WAR

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Forsch 10 From Navarone (Dayn)
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOTP 11 December, 2017 - GOP strategist: Moore would have 'date with a baseball bat' if he tried dating teens where I grew up
(379 - 6:49am, Dec 12)
Last: Blanks for Nothing, Larvell

NewsblogDerek Jeter's defense of Giancarlo Stanton trade was weak | SI.com
(17 - 6:29am, Dec 12)
Last: Leroy Kincaid

NewsblogThis will be Giancarlo Stanton’s biggest New York adjustment | New York Post
(2 - 5:52am, Dec 12)
Last: Blastin

NewsblogJack Morris, Alan Trammell elected to Hall | MLB.com
(147 - 5:30am, Dec 12)
Last: DavidFoss

NewsblogRyan Thibs has his HOF Ballot Tracker Up and Running!
(348 - 1:44am, Dec 12)
Last: gabrielthursday

Hall of Merit2018 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(331 - 1:32am, Dec 12)
Last: Rob_Wood

NewsblogShohei Ohtani’s Value Has No Precedent | FiveThirtyEight
(35 - 1:26am, Dec 12)
Last: Shredder

NewsblogOT - NBA 2017-2018 Tip-off Thread
(1909 - 12:57am, Dec 12)
Last: Athletic Supporter wants to move your money around

NewsblogTexas Rangers: Shohei Ohtani or not, Rangers still considering nontraditional 6-man, 4-man rotations next season | SportsDay
(13 - 12:44am, Dec 12)
Last: 6 - 4 - 3

NewsblogPeter Gammons: Splashes and notes from the Orlando Winter Meetings - GammonsDaily.com
(12 - 12:43am, Dec 12)
Last: donlock

Gonfalon CubsLooking to next year
(319 - 12:05am, Dec 12)
Last: Walt Davis

Sox TherapyA Container of Milk, A Loaf of Bread and a Dude Who Can Hit Home Runs
(15 - 11:38pm, Dec 11)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Doubles Machine

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 12-11-2017
(21 - 11:21pm, Dec 11)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

NewsblogYankees in talks on Giancarlo Stanton trade
(198 - 9:32pm, Dec 11)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogMets have talked to teams about trading Matt Harvey: sources - NY Daily News
(7 - 6:49pm, Dec 11)
Last: JJ1986

Page rendered in 0.5900 seconds
47 querie(s) executed