Take my advice and reread it next week, Mike.
Happy New Year.
Roberto Alomar, 2B (1988-2004) - 1st Year
Kevin Appier, SP (1989-2004) - 1st Year
Albert Belle, LF (1989-2000) - 5th Year
Ellis Burks, CF (1987-2004) - 1st Year
David Cone, SP (1986-2001, 2003) - 2nd Year
Eric Davis, CF (1984-1994, 1996-2001) - 4th Year
Dwight Evans, RF (1972-1991) - 14th Year
Tony Fernandez, SS (1983-1995, 1997-1999, 2001) - 4th Year
Andres Gallaraga, 1B (1985-1998, 2000-2004) - 1st Year
Mark Grace, 1B (1988-2003) - 2nd Year
Orel Hershiser, SP (1983-2000) - 5th Year
Michael Jackson, RP (1986-1999, 2001-2002, 2004) - 1st Year
Eric Karros, 1B (1991-2004) - 1st Year
Ray Lankford, CF (1990-2002, 2004) - 1st Year
Barry Larkin, SS (1986-2004) - 1st Year
Fred Lynn, CF (1974-1990) - 15th Year
Don Mattingly, 1B (1982-1995) - 10th Year
Edgar Martinez, DH (1987-2004) - 1st Year
Fred McGriff, 1B (1986-2004) - 1st Year
Mark McGwire, 1B (1986-2001) - 4th Year
Mark McLemore, 2B (1986-2004) - 1st Year
Jack Morris, SP (1977-1994) - 11th Year
Robb Nen, RP (1993-2002) - 3rd Year
Dave Parker, RF (1973-1991) - 14th Year
Dan Quisenberry, RP (1979-1990) - 15th Year
Willie Randolph, 2B (1975-1992) - 13th Year
Bret Saberhagen, SP (1984-1995, 1997-1999, 2001) - 4th Year
David Segui, 1B (1990-2004) - 1st Year
Lee Smith, RP (1980-1997) - 8th Year
Dave Stieb, SP (1979-1993, 1998) - 7th Year
Darryl Strawberry, RF (1983-1999) - 6th Year
Robin Ventura, 3B (1989-2004) - 1st Year
Fernando Vina, 2B (1993-2004) - 1st Year
Matt Williams, 3B (1987-2003) - 2nd Year
Todd Zeile, 3B (1989-2004) - 1st Year
None of the Above (Blank Ballot)
Take my advice and reread it next week, Mike.
Happy New Year.
Jeez,guys, where's the Christmas spirit? These posts are a lot more enjoyable, in my opinion, when people aren't sniping at each other.
So please take my advice, if you're going to comment on something I've said, be sure you've carefully read what I've actually said, understand the context statements were made in, and then choose your words delicately. Perhaps if you were to go back and do that in this thread, you would see that much of the content of your two posts, in particular the presumptions therein, was off base and ill-founded.
Happy New Year to you as well.
To be fair Paul, I've decided to go respond to your two posts, point by point, referencing the actual record of my posts in this thread where relevant, to demonstrate just how off base and presumptuous your comments were:
As for Killebrew, I've mentioned several players in this thread, but I don't believe Killebrew was ever among them. Maybe someone else did, but if you're attributing it to me, it would be an example of you misreading my comments.
You're also dabbling into oversimplified hyperbole when you bring up pitchers (some might say "gross exaggeration"). A pitcher's role is completely different, and they are exerting themselves in entirely different ways.
And where the heck does your Jorge Posada comment come from? Way back near the beginning of this thread, in trying to think of a good offensive but so-so defensive catcher for purposes talking about how WAR rates defense for catchers, I came up with Jorge Posada. Later I came up with a better example, Mike Piazza, and he's been the subject of much conversation since then, yet you're not inferring any special affinity for him. Think of Posada as my Alpha example and Piazza as the improved Beta version.
As for Posada, I brought up his name once more, in response to Savoy's hypothetical with Piazza on the Rays, to which I responded with a hypothetical with Piazza on the the Rays' rivals, the Yankees and Red Sox, mentioning specifically Jason Varitek, David Ortiz, Hideki Matsui, and Mark Teixeira in addition to Posada. In fact, many players have been brought up, perhaps randomly at times, in the course of this discussion, yet there is no inference about any special affinity for these players. So why single out me with Posada? How is my mentioning Posada any different than Savoy bringing up a random hypothetical about the Rays and John Jaso?
Yes, it is difficut for outsiders ot judge the mix of emotions, but the emotional content is not evident, particularly when it seems that a great deal of context has been overlooked.
Please point out to me exactly where I said WAR does not include a positional adjustment. Was it in post 26 when I said, "I don't think the solution is in punishing the DH, per se, but to make better adjustments for other positions, particularly catcher...In this vein, I think Win Shares does a better job with defense, as it seems to do a better job of adjusting for position." Maybe it's just me, but it seems that statement clearly acknowledges that WAR makes positional adjustments while also clearly indicating my feeling that the adjustments, at least for catcher, aren't good enough (and I also referenced thoughts I had a while back on this very topic when comparing Gabby Hartnett to Gene Tenace, but that seems to have gone overlooked).If you reread it after recognizing that WAR does include a positional adjustment --and it's a 223-run premium for Piazza relative to Martinez, worth about 22 wins-- then you'll see why much of it seems to be a rant from ignorance.
See #73 and #61 for more information about WAR components using the example of six recent stars with equal career ratings for "offense": Tony Gwynn, Mike Piazza, Roberto Alomar, Edgar Martinez, Mark McGwire,and Barry Larkin
As I've said a few times now (you can go back and look), this was a great conversation, but it got to the point where each side was just rehashing the same point. There wasn't a meeting of the minds and it didn't appear that there was going to be one.
So I'll close here by repeating the advice from my previous post, please, if you're going to comment on something I've said, be sure you've carefully read what I've actually said, understand the context statements were made in, and then choose your words delicately. Your inferences and insinuations aren't appreciated, particularly when it's clear that you either haven't read previous posts fully, and/or are taking individual statements out of context.
Now I am really done with this conversation. I'll see you on the pseudo-high road.
I think the discussion ran its course.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010).
Yes it probably has but it has gotten the vote total to 28 and there will probably be 30+ voters when the last minute voters chime in at the end. Which would be the highest vote total in a long time.
I will limit this to the positional adjustment in WAR ratings.
The debit was about -15 runs per year for Martinez as full-time DH, only about -7 per year for Klu and -9 per year for McGwire.
(These are eyeball estimates from data published at bb-ref player pages and those data are integers which may include rounding error. Yet they are accurate enough to reveal that the positional adjustment against 1B is greater per game or per plate appearance recently, for McGwire's leagues, than it was for Kluszewski's leagues. Rounding error and expansion from 154 to 162 games cannot account for the greater estimated debits against McGwire.)
Catchers Jorge Posada and Mike Piazza are credited +86 and +83 runs, or about +8 per year as heavy-duty catchers; perhaps an everyday catcher would get +10 runs. Those career credits +87 and +83 are worth about eight wins --against a career secondbaseman(?) or a utility player who gets positional adjustment near zero. Put another way, Posada and Piazza are credited +226 and +223 runs relative to Martinez because they were behind the plate while he was hanging out in the cozy confines. Those credits are worth about 22 wins relative to Martinez, 22 career WAR.
search "asinine"And where the heck does your Jorge Posada comment come from?
Reread the whole paragraph. It's all about the positional adjustment against DH, whose existence in the WAR rating system Mike doesn't recognize (at least, didn't then recognize). It also shows that Martinez & Posada really touch a nerve (touched a nerve).
Perhaps that will be edited. It's #17. Search "asinine" still works for me now and that paragraph, with some that precede it, still shows what I have described.
Mike confuses (at least, confused) the ratings for fielding, Rfield and dWAR, with the positional adjustment which is incorporated in oWAR as published at bb-ref player pages.
See #61 and #73 for more about the distinction, especially *oRAR* and *dRAR* which represent my transfer of the positional adjustment from "offense" to "defense".
Last edited by Paul Wendt; 12-23-2010 at 11:46 AM.
Consider this my last post to you. Now back to the pseudo high road. Ill look out for you.
I would argue that the positional "penalty" for DH in WAR should be higher. I do believe the penalty is 15 runs which is about a win and a half. A 2 WAR player is considered a starter so basically according to WAR replacement level for a DH is a player who not good enough to be a starter. Personally I think replacement level should be at least at the starter level and probably a little bit more. Every single hitter in baseball can be a DH. There is no real pool of DH specialists that we are drawing from.
Saying that any hitter can DH would be like saying that any position player can play SS or CF. It's theoretically correct but the results would be disasterous for that team.
What would be worse, playing Dave Kingman at SS or letting Ray Oyler DH?
Oyler's career OPS+ is 48. Kingman was actually a 3Bman in 1971, and I would bet that he played some SS as a teenager.
My point is, if you can say that ANY hitter can DH, you can also say that any fielder can play SS or CF.
Yes, there are probably more players that would be well below replacement (fielding) level at SS than hitting level at DH, but there are certainly lots of "hitters" who would be well below replacement level at DH.
Last edited by SavoyBG; 12-23-2010 at 03:26 PM.
And does any of that refute my belief that the "penalty" for being a DH is too low?
I wasn;t trying to refute your belief about the WAR penalty for being a DH anyway,
I was refuting your belief that "any" hitter can be a DH.
Like I said, if "any" hitter can be a DH, than any hitter can also be a SS.
Last edited by SavoyBG; 12-23-2010 at 03:50 PM.
For the record, we're voting on Michael Jackson the pitcher, not the musician.
RIP Dave Niehaus
RIP Gary Moore
--Well in the sense that you could pencil them iun the lineup sure. That they could actually play the position at a major league level is another story. If might be 1,000 people on the planet able to hit major league pitching at an acceptable level. Maybe half of them also have the ability to play major league defense - and even fewer of them who can handle the more demanding defensive slots. So you have a (relatively) huge pool of potential DHs and a much smaller pool at the other positions.
--I agree, but you need to be able to do both to hold down a position for long. That is the small pool of players. My numbers are just a shot in the dark, but the difference in the pool of qualified players should be apparent to anyone.
He could have been a DH, right?
From 1909-1911 in over 900 plate appearances his average OPS+ was 1
This election is closed. We elected Roberto Alomar and Barry Larkin in their first year of eligibility.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010).